Back Issues

Featured this week

2006-06-22

FEATURED: Ahmed C Motala reviews 20 years of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights
COMMENT AND ANALYSIS:
- The Darfur Peace Agreement was signed on May 5. Laurie Nathan provides an insiders view
- World Refugee Day was marked on June 20. A new report examines the plight of refugees in Egypt
- Has South Africa signed away its health sector?
LETTERS: Calling for the release of Mariam Denton Nee Jack in The Gambia
PAN-AFRICAN POSTCARD: Violence has ripped through Mogadishu. But who are the real terrorists? Asks Tajudeen Abdul Raheem
BLOGGING AFRICA: Sokari Ekine rounds up the African blogosphere
BOOKS AND ARTS: How to start a Pan-African newspaper, with Shailja Patel
AFRICAN UNION MONITOR: African Union Monitor blog reactivated
CONFLICT AND EMERGENCIES: News from Ethiopia, Sudan and Somalia
HUMAN RIGHTS: Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture enters into force
WOMEN AND GENDER: AU calls for end to FGM
REFUGEES AND FORCED MIGRATION: Refugees demand answers on Burundi camp massacre
ELECTIONS AND GOVERNANCE: Calm returns to Guinea
DEVELOPMENT: China vs US over Africa?
HEALTH AND HIV/AIDS: An exceptional World Health Assembly
EDUCATION: Protests at university closure in Niger
ENVIRONMENT: WHO claims environmental exposure cause 25% of deaths
LAND AND LAND RIGHTS: Farm dwellers take action in South Africa
MEDIA AND FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: Lessons in democracy and the press
INTERNET AND TECHNOLOGY: Rural women in the wired world
PLUS: e-Newsletters and Mailings Lists; Fundraising and Useful Resources; Courses, Seminars and Workshops; Jobs.

* Read the recent special edition on trade and justice by clicking on http://www.pambazuka.org/en/issue/257 Comment by sending mail to editor@pambazuka.org or online at www.pambazuka.org

Pambazuka News seeks Online News Editor

2006-06-22

Pambazuka News, the electronic weekly newsletter and website focusing on social justice issues in Africa, is seeking an ONLINE NEWS EDITOR. You will be a forward thinking and independent person with a strong background in journalism and experience and/or a strong interest in the power of the internet for information delivery and campaigning.

Responsibilities will include: Assuming responsibility for the weekly production of Pambazuka News, including the coordination of editorial support staff; Editing, proofing, researching and posting content online in line with weekly production deadlines; Maintaining a contacts list and editorial diary, including research and commissioning of articles to ensure coverage of key events and issues; Research and writing of comment and analysis items on events and issues related to Africa; Participating in strategic and development issues that relate to editorial content, future development and editorial staff and interns; Completion of necessary administrative tasks. For the full job advertisement, please click on the following: http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/jobs/35339 or write to info AT fahamu.org

Celebrating Two Decades of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights

2006-06-22

Ahmed C Motala

The African Charter of Human and Peoples’ Rights came into force in 1986, making 2006 the 20th year of its existence. As African heads of state prepare to meet in Banjul, The Gambia for the 7th African Union Summit, Ahmed C Motala evaluates the successes and failures of The Charter for the protection and promotion of human rights on the continent.


The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the African Charter) was adopted on 27th June 1981 by the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), predecessor to the African Union (AU), at its Assembly of Heads of States and Government in Nairobi, Kenya. This year marks the twentieth anniversary of the entry into force of the African Charter, which came into force in October 1986. Some commentators have hailed the African Charter as a progressive document that, amongst others, recognises the indivisibility of civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights, distinct from other international human rights treaties. The African Charter was also the first human rights treaty to refer to the right to development, although it did not define this right. Others have criticised the African Charter for its many shortcomings, in particular its ‘claw-back’ clauses, which make certain rights subject to domestic law. For example, Article 9(2) of the African Charter states: “Every individual shall have the right to express and disseminate opinions within the law.” Other rights such as the right to privacy do not feature in the African Charter and some rights including the right to fair trial are inadequately defined.

The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (African Commission), the body created under the African Charter to monitor compliance by states with the treaty, currently functions in an environment plagued by civil wars in several countries including Sudan, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo and Chad. Serious human rights violations continue throughout the continent from Egypt to Equatorial Guinea and Ethiopia. The phenomenon of coup d'état and counter coups continue to haunt many countries. Measures adopted by governments throughout Africa to counter terrorism make serious inroads into long-standing human rights values. A growing commitment to human rights by a handful of progressive countries including Mali, Benin and South Africa on the other hand offer some optimism that the continent is intent on improving its human rights record.

At the time of the drafting and adoption of the African Charter the OAU Charter entrenched the central principle of State sovereignty and non-interference in domestic affairs. This principle prevented the OAU and African States from intervening to prevent serious human rights violations including the massacre of civilians by dictators such as Idi Amin of Uganda, Emperor Bokassa of Central African Republic, Mengistu Haile Mariam of Ethiopia, Valentine Strasser of Liberia, Hissene Habre of Chad and Samuel Doe of Liberia. In fact, former dictators such as Mengistu and Habre continue to enjoy the hospitality of Zimababwe and Senegal respectively, with both States refusing to extradite them to stand trial for international crimes.

After its creation, the African Commission too failed to deal effectively with some of the most serious human rights violations committed on the continent, most recently the genocide in Rwanda. Being a creation of the OAU, and now reporting to the AU, the African Commission has been hampered, amongst others, by the lack of political will and initiative of its political masters to deal with serious human rights violations. After all, the dictators and human rights violators have been part of the same club of heads of states to which the African Commission was required to submit its annual report, which included information on serious violations of human rights.

With the establishment of the African Union, on paper at least there is a stronger commitment to human rights. The objectives of the AU as enshrined in its Constitutive Act include “to promote and protect human and peoples’ rights in accordance with the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and other relevant human rights instruments”. The AU is also based, amongst others on the principle of “respect for democratic principles, human rights, the rule of law and good governance”. The key question is whether the values enshrined in the Constitutive Act are implemented by AU member states or the institutions of the AU? There is little evidence to suggest that the AU is willing to hold member states accountable for human rights violations. Zimbabwe is a case in point. Despite the African Commission presenting a report to the AU Assembly in July 2004 on the human rights situation in Zimbabwe and recommending measures to be taken to redress the situation, the Assembly failed to hold the Zimbabwean authorities accountable. Instead, it took cognisance of Zimbabwe’s objections that it had not had an opportunity to comment on the report and delayed the adoption of the African Commission’s annual report for six months.

However, the Peace and Security Council seems to have acted with considerable resolve in attending to conflict situations. In trying to address the conflict in the Darfur region of western Sudan, the Council authorised the deployment of an AU peace-keeping mission against the wishes of the Sudanese Government of President Omar El Bashir. The Constitutive Act has narrowed the ambit of state sovereignty by stipulating “the right of the Union to intervene in a Member State pursuant to a decision of the Assembly in respect of grave circumstances, namely: war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity”. This right of intervention was the consequence of the severe criticism of the OAU for its failure to act in the face of the genocide in Rwanda. It is encouraging to see that the AU is willing to act in accordance with its right of intervention, even against the wishes of the member state concerned. Whether the AU Mission in Sudan has been effective in reducing human rights violations is the subject of another article.

How has the African Commission fared over the last two decades? An analysis of the work of the African Commission would show considerable progress over the last twenty years. However there also have been many obstacles that have hampered its work and consequent effectiveness on the continent.

The African Commission rendered numerous decisions on complaints filed before it, primarily by NGOs. These decisions have been against a range of countries including Egypt, Algeria, Sudan, Malawi, Nigeria, Cameroon and Botswana. Its jurisprudence has improved considerably over the years with recent decisions being well-reasoned. However, the African Commission would have to improve its decisions considerably if it expects the newly established African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights to uphold its decisions. The current staff of the African Commission comprises of dedicated but inexperienced lawyers. Without skilled litigators and experienced legal researchers on its permanent staff, the African Commission is not likely to improve its decisions to a level that would be to the satisfaction of the African Court. Unfortunately most States have ignored the rulings of the African Commission and its parent body the AU Assembly has failed dismally to hold these states accountable. As long as African States that are the subject of such complaints ignore the decisions of the African Commission, its status as the main body on the African continent responsible for the protection and promotion of human rights would remain minimal.

The mandate of the African Commission includes formulating and laying down rules upon which African States may base their legislation. In this regard the African Commission has made considerable contribution by adopting a range of principles and guidelines. These include: Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression in Africa, Guidelines and Measures for the Prohibition and Prevention of Torture, Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment in Africa and Principles and Guidelines on Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa. The intrinsic value of these pronouncements by the African Commission is that they articulate standards that are of pertinence to the situation prevailing in African countries. Regrettably there is little evidence that African States have considered these declarations in the development of their own legislative framework.

The African Commission has been plagued by inconsistency in its performance, which has been dependent on its composition. The effectiveness of the treaty body depends on the independence and impartiality of the Commissioners. Disappointingly, African States have undermined the independence of the African Commission by nominating and electing Commissioners whose independence was compromised or who were perceived to lack independence by virtue of their position in their government. Over the last twenty years various Commissioners have held positions of ministers, attorney-generals, ambassadors and advisers to their president. This has not only coloured the perception of the African Commission but has resulted in it lacking initiative to tackle some of the most serious human rights violations facing African countries. One example is that of the African Commission’s Special Rapporteur on Extra-judicial Executions whose appointment came on the eve of genocide in Rwanda in April 1994. During his tenure he failed to investigate the events in Rwanda or to visit the country. During his tenure at the African Commission the incumbent was the diplomatic representative of his country in Ankara and subsequently in Geneva.

The lack of adequate resources has considerably hampered the work of the African Commission. The annual budget allocated by the AU for 2005 was US$1,142,051, considerably less than some large national NGOs. This despite repeated resolutions adopted by the AU Assembly urging that the African Commission has to be provided with adequate resources. The African Commission has had to rely on assistance from foreign donors including the European Union and individual European governments. This should be a source of embarrassment to the African Union that it is unable to provide sufficient resources to its primary human rights body. It also calls into question the commitment of the AU and its member states to the protection and promotion of human rights on the continent.

The protection of human rights in Africa will be enhanced by the establishment of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (African Court). The eleven judges of the African Court were elected at the AU Assembly in January this year and are to be sworn in at the forthcoming Assembly at the beginning of July 2006. With the African Court having the authority to hand down binding decisions and the Executive Council of the AU being required to monitor implementation of the decisions, the protection of human rights on the continent is likely to improve. However, errant states are only likely to fully implement its decisions if the Executive Council is willing to take measures against states that fail or delay in applying the decision of the African Court. Lack of resources is likely to plague the African Court too unless the AU establishes the voluntary human rights fund recommended by the First AU Ministerial Conference on Human Rights held in Kigali in May 2003 and African states make considerable contributions to that fund.

We are at the dawn of a new era in the protection of human rights. Establishment of the African Court is only the first step in the journey through this era. Much still has to be done in the identification of a suitable location for the African Court, in the provision of adequate facilities and resources and in recruitment of suitably qualified and experienced staff. In all of this and in the effective functioning of the African Court the political support of the AU and its member states is of the utmost importance.

African states bear considerable responsibility for the protection of human rights. Domestic institutions including national human rights commissions and courts should bear the primary duty for the protection of human rights. The establishment and strengthening of an independent judiciary in each African state and respect of and adherence to the decisions of the national courts is of vital importance. The regional system of human rights protection only becomes relevant where the national courts either fail to protect human rights or in instances where the state ignores the decisions of its own courts.

* Ahmed C Motala is Executive Director of the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation

* Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

The Darfur Peace Agreement: Which way forward?

2006-06-22

Laurie Nathan, formerly the head of the Centre for Conflict Resolution in Cape Town, was a member of the African Union (AU) mediation team based in Abuja that facilitated negotiations for the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA). In this interview he offers some perspectives on the negotiations and the Agreement.


Pambazuka News: Many analysts and observers have warned that the ceasefire promised by the DPA is unlikely to be attained. What are the main problems in this regard?

Laurie Nathan: The most obvious problem is that the Agreement has not been signed by all the armed groups in Darfur. Two of the rebel movements that participated in the AU mediation – the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) and the faction of the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army (SLM/A) that is headed by Abdul Wahid Mohammed al-Nur – refused to sign. The Agreement concluded on 5 May was endorsed only by the Sudanese government and the SLM/A faction headed by Minni Minawi. Abdul Wahid is the rebel leader with the most popular support in Darfur. Without his endorsement of the Agreement, there is little prospect of a lasting peace. [Note from Pambazuka News editors: Subsequent to this interview, reports indicate that some groups have now committed to the terms of the agreement. See http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=53837 for further details.]

In addition, there are numerous armed groups in Darfur that were not present at the Abuja negotiations. Most significantly, these groups include the Janjaweed, the rampaging militia that have been responsible for so much of the death and destruction in the region and that are used by the government to crush the rebels and their communities.

It should also be recalled that the government, JEM and the SLM/A have signed several humanitarian ceasefire agreements over the past two years and then violated these agreements repeatedly and egregiously. This constitutes fair warning of the possibility of further violations, especially if the signatories are not genuinely committed to the new agreement.

Another huge problem is that the AU peacekeeping mission in Darfur is hopelessly ill-equipped to oversee the ceasefire and protect civilians from attacks by government, militia, rebels and bandits. The AU has roughly 7,000 troops when it needs, according to the AU Force Commander, as many as 60,000 troops to cover inhospitable badlands the size of France.

Pambazuka News: Do you think the signatories are genuinely committed to the new agreement?

One of the most remarkable things about the Abuja peace process was that, for months on end, the negotiating parties were unable or unwilling to engage in serious negotiations. They made no effort to accommodate each other’s positions and showed no interest in trying to forge common ground. None of them was willing to make concessions to its opponents. There was no bargaining, let alone collaborative problem-solving.

Instead, the parties spent their time reiterating their demands ad nauseum, rejecting the positions of their opponents, trading accusations and recriminations, grandstanding for the benefit of the international observers and attempting to win support for their positions from the mediators. In the midst of this immensely frustrating experience, the head of the AU mediation team, Sam Ibok, was quoted as saying that “our experience over the past sixteen months had led us to conclude that there is neither good faith nor commitment on the part of any of the Parties”.

In light of all this, one of the most important points about the DPA is that it is not by any stretch of the imagination a negotiated settlement. It is a document which was drawn up by the mediators and which the Sudanese government and Minni Minawi signed under pressure from sections of the international community. The final draft of the text prepared by the mediators was presented to the parties on a take-it-or-leave-it basis five days before the final deadline of 30 April set by the AU Peace and Security Council.

The government and Minawi evidently believed that their interests would not be served by refusing to sign the document and being portrayed as spoilers. In the absence of real negotiations and hard-won concessions, however, none of the Sudanese parties has any sense of ownership of the Agreement and it is therefore unlikely that they are committed to it.

Several commentators have pointed out that the DPA contains more compromises on the part of the rebels than on the part of the government, particularly in relation to power sharing. (A summary and critique of the DPA appeared in the Sudan Tribune on 3 May; see www.sudantribune.com/article_impr.php3?id_article=15343.)

It needs to be remembered though that all successful negotiated settlements in the context of civil war entail compromises. No party can ever get everything it wants. Yet a settlement stands a good chance of enduring if all the parties and their constituencies believe that it is sufficiently just. So the problem with the DPA is not the fact that it contains compromises. The problem is that the compromises were crafted by the mediators and were not a product of agreements negotiated by the parties.

Pambazuka News: Why were the parties in Abuja so intransigent?

There were several reasons. First, in all deadly conflicts there is a high level of hatred and mistrust among the belligerents. This is a powerful barrier to dialogue and negotiations, which require at least some trust and a willingness to co-operate with one’s enemy. Consequently, the primary job of the mediator is to build the parties’ confidence in each other and in the process of negotiations. This did not happen in Abuja, where there was no thawing of enmity.

More specifically, the Sudanese government believes that the rebel movements are not worthy military, political and negotiating opponents and therefore does not take them seriously. The government is convinced that the rebels are not representative of the people of Darfur, pose little military threat and are too divided to ever achieve a unified negotiating posture.

From the perspective of the rebels, the government is a perfidious, evil regime that has repeatedly broken its promises and reneged on peace agreements. In addition, the government has enormous wealth and power while the rebels have neither wealth nor power. Therefore the government can and must make substantial concessions whereas the rebel movements and their constituencies have nothing to give up.

Second, the divisions within the rebel alliance inhibited progress in the Abuja negotiations. There were serious differences between JEM and the SLM/A; as noted above, the SLM/A itself is split into two factions; and there are deep divisions within the Abdul Wahid faction, some of whose members attempted to oust him as their leader during the peace talks. As a result, the rebels were unable to speak with one voice and at a certain point even refused to meet in the same room.

These divisions naturally reduced the scope for flexibility. When the rebels came to the negotiating table with fixed positions that had been thrashed out in their caucus meetings, they had no mandate to negotiate. Their mandate was simply to put forward a consensus position. Any consideration of flexibility required a return to protracted discussion in caucus and the hardliners invariably prevailed over the moderates.

Third, the balance of power was such that it reinforced intransigence on all sides. The rebel bodies lacked military and intellectual weight and were confronted by a relatively strong and sophisticated adversary. They were intimidated by many of the concepts associated with ceasefire arrangements, such as assembly and demobilisation, and they were frightened of being outmanoeuvred in the negotiations. They were especially scared of agreeing to anything that might weaken them militarily and make them vulnerable to government attack.

Intransigence is typically the refuge of weak parties in negotiations. Perversely, it is also an option commonly taken by very strong parties that do not feel threatened and see no need to offer concessions.

Fourth, most of the parties in Abuja appeared to view the battlefield as the strategic arena of conflict; the negotiations were simply a tactical arena. The SLM/A faction led by Minni Minawi seemed to believe that its interests would be best served through a war of manoeuvre against the militarily weaker faction of Abdul Wahid.

The government, on the other hand, seemed to believe that its interests would be best served through a war of attrition. It was not under any military threat from the rebels. Nor was it incurring any significant military costs since it relied on the Janjaweed as a proxy force. Moreover, the rebels were busy fighting each other. The government was much more concerned about hostilities with neighbouring Chad and was determined to avoid any military restrictions in a peace agreement with the rebels.

Only Abdul Wahid, who was taking a hammering in the field from the government, the Janjaweed and Minawi, appeared to believe that his interests lay in a negotiated settlement. But the settlement had to satisfy the political and economic needs of his constituency in Darfur and he was convinced that the Darfur Peace Agreement did not achieve this.

Pambazuka News: Can you say something about the international pressure you referred to earlier?

Laurie Nathan: For various reasons the international community did not apply strong pressure on the parties, relying instead on a weak form of ‘deadline diplomacy’. The UN, the AU and foreign powers repeatedly set unrealistically short deadlines for the conclusion of an agreement and, when these were not met, set new and equally unrealistic deadlines.

The deadline diplomacy was meant to constitute pressure on the parties and convey the international community’s seriousness about resolving the conflict. But since the deadlines came and went without any negative repercussions for the parties, they were not an effective form of pressure and they undermined the seriousness of the international community.

Unlike the parties, however, the AU mediators were obliged to heed the deadlines set by their political masters and donors. This had several negative consequences. For example, the deadline diplomacy inhibited the development of a meaningful mediation strategy and plan. If the talks were always due to end in a matter of weeks, there was no point in preparing a plan of action for the following six months. The external pressure stifled a programmatic effort to build momentum over time and led instead to an ad hoc approach that proceeded in fits and starts.

The deadline diplomacy also caused the mediators to proceed with a haste that is incompatible with effective peacemaking. The only sustainable solution to a civil war is a settlement shaped and embraced by the protagonists. The mediator’s job is to help them overcome their enmity and mistrust, build their confidence in negotiations and facilitate dialogue, bargaining and co-operative problem-solving. This requires protracted efforts and immense patience.

In Darfur, as in all civil wars, there are compelling humanitarian reasons for wanting to secure a settlement quickly. But there is never a quick fix. These wars are social phenomena whose causes, dynamics and contested issues are multiple, complex and intractable. The difficulty of resolution is compounded greatly by the parties’ mutual hatred and suspicion. In these circumstances, short-cuts are cul-de-sacs.

In summary, the deadline diplomacy that put intense pressure on the mediators and no real pressure on the disputant parties was patently flawed.

Pambazuka News: Are there any positive aspects of the peace agreement in relation to a ceasefire and protection of civilians?

Laurie Nathan: The DPA’s provisions on security are very good. The Agreement provides for government to demobilise the Janjaweed by mid-October. It also provides for disarming other militia and for a staggered withdrawal of government and rebel forces in a process of disengagement and redeployment into defensive positions.

This process would lead to the creation of demilitarised buffer zones around the camps that house internally displaced people, and the AU troops would monitor and patrol the zones. In addition, the Agreement strengthens the authority of the AU Force Commander, particularly in relation to ceasefire violations, and provides for punitive action in the event of transgressions.

But of course the success of these provisions depends firstly on the will of the parties and secondly on the strengthening of the AU’s force levels in Darfur. Neither of these conditions looks likely to be met in the immediate future.

Pambazuka News: What is the way forward?

Laurie Nathan: The most serious international pressure has to be brought to bear on Khartoum. The Sudanese government is responsible for the historical marginalisation that gave rise to the rebellion in Darfur and for unleashing waves of destruction and ethnic cleansing by the Janjaweed militia. The government is by far the strongest party and the most able to make concessions that would unblock the impasse.

Since the massacres in Darfur seem likely to continue long into the future, the greatest imperative is to strengthen the force levels, funding and resources of the AU peacekeeping mission and to move decisively to transform this mission into a UN operation with a robust mandate to protect civilians.

Pambazuka News: If our readers want more information on the Darfur crisis, where should they look?

Laurie Nathan: The Sudan Tribune is possibly the best source of up-to-date news (www.sudantribune.com). For analysis, the reports of the International Crisis Group and Human Rights Watch are superb (www.crisisgroup.org and www.hrw.org The Darfur Relief and Documentation Centre has an excellent website (www.darfurcentre.ch). I would also strongly recommend “Darfur: A Short History of a Long War” by Julie Flint and Alex de Waal.

* Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

The tragedy of Mustafa Mahmoud Park

Summary of report from Force Migration Review

2006-06-22

Patrick Burnett

"I was not aware of anything until they were hitting me. I think there were five policemen for every refugee. When we started to defend ourselves, there were many more coming. They came and attacked. I saw one person I knew. They were beating him and when he fell down, they broke his neck. One of the police broke his neck with his baton. One pregnant woman also died in the same place." – An interview with a demonstrator, as quoted in a report compiled by the Forced Migration and Refugee Studies unit at the American University in Cairo.

On 29 September 2005, Sudanese refugees began gathering at Mustafa Mahmoud Park in central Cairo for a protest that eventually swelled to between 1,800 to 2,500 protestors and lasted for three months until it was broken up by Egyptian security forces in the early hours of December 30. The protestors were demanding refugee status interviews, a clearer and transparent process, protection from the Sudanese government, protection of the vulnerable and investigation of detentions and mission persons. Egyptian security operatives forcefully ended the protest, an action that resulted in the death of 27 refugees and asylum seekers and the injuring of hundreds.

A new report compiled by the Forced Migration and Refugee Studies unit at the American University in Cairo and released this month, details the origins of the protest and the aftermath of its violent end on December 30. Entitled “A Tragedy of Failures and False Expectations”, it ends with recommendations to the parties involved. Coming as it does in a month when the world marks World Refugee Day, the report will be of interest firstly to those who followed the unprecedented protest and secondly to all interested in the rights of refugees.

Describing the situation in the park during the three months of the protest, the report states that although protestors were faced with obvious discomfort, there was an “unprecedented” level of community and solidarity in the park where the protest was held, situated near to the UNHCR offices. Meals were prepared in a communal kitchen, money was pooled to buy food and impromptu shops sprung up around the park. Art lessons and puppet shows were held for children.

But in the early hours of December 30, Egyptian security operatives moved in without warning, resulting in death, injury and detentions that lasted several weeks. The report says: "There are some indications that the level of violence was unplanned, or at least that not all security officers were enthusiastic participants in the mayhem. Two bystanders reported plainclothes officers shouting at low-ranking police to stop the beating but being ignored." The report describes the scene after the park was cleared as one of "stunned silence and desolation". "Hundreds of blankets and suitcases are strewn all over the park. Other private belongings, such as notebooks, family pictures, children's toys, and blue and yellow refugee identity cards, are scattered on the ground."

But the report is not only concerned with the events of December 30, but rather with what caused the protest. It intends not to assign responsibility, but to promote understanding of why the protest happened, what the issues were, and how similar tragedies can be avoided.

As such, the historical background provided in the report is extremely useful, describing how the first wave of Sudanese came to Egypt in 1955 as a result of the beginning of civil war. This continued into the mid 1980s, says the report. Further outbreaks of war led to more Sudanese arriving in Egypt in 1983. Most recently, the conflict in Darfur had led to a further exodus from Sudan. Egypt thus became a recipient country for refugees who were firstly in need of refuge from war and secondly seeking to be resettled in third countries, explains the report.

Responsibility for these people fell to UNHCR, whose Cairo office eventually developed one of the largest resettlement operations in the world, says the report. However – and this is where the problem comes in - only about 25 percent had the expectation of resettlement met, leaving them stuck in an Egypt often hostile to their needs. Acute problems detailed in the report relate to work, housing, education, public health and racist attitudes towards refugees and asylum seekers.

A more immediate catalyst to the protest came as a result of the 2004 ceasefire between the government of Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Army. The report explains that UNHCR suspended Refugee Status Determination (RSD) procedures for all Sudanese asylum seekers, instead providing applicants with yellow asylum seeker cards that provided temporary protection against forced repatriation. This decision, reviewed every six months, was based on the argument that this was a better method than possible rejection of applicants on the basis of a change in their country of origin. "Sudanese asylum seekers were deeply disappointed and worried by UNHCR's decision, especially as it put a heavy damper on their hopes for resettlement and relegated them to a longer waiting period under difficult conditions in Egypt," says the report.

It was these factors, contends the report, that combined to create frustration amongst the Sudanese refugee community in Egypt. "Their decision to sit in at Mustafa Mahmoud Park and to demand fundamental changes in their circumstances should have come as no surprise."

In terms of its comments and recommendations, the report highlights the role of all three of the major actors – the Egyptian government, the UNHCR and the leaders of the protest – for failing to prevent the events of December 30. "A series of failures on the part of the Egyptian government and UNHCR, combined with unrealistic expectations and grave miscalculations on the part of the demonstrators and their leaders, resulted in the tragedies of the forced eviction. This is a complicated story with many actors, each of whom bears some level of responsibility for the unnecessary deaths of so many people, including 12 children, and the physical injuries and psychological damage to hundreds more."

According to the report, Egyptian security used "excessive and disproportionate force in removing the protesters, leaving no alternatives or avenues for escape". The use of "indiscriminate violence" and lack of immediate medical attention was a matter for Egyptian and international human rights organizations to pursue. "With attention focused on asylum seekers and refugees, and the issue discussed openly in the People's Assembly, this may be an opportune time for the government to seriously consider the passage of domestic legislation to detail and systematize Egypt's obligations under the 1951 and OAU refugee conventions, as well as to make its policies and procedures clear. Without transparency and clarity, asylum seekers and refugees cannot access services, and this translates into frustration that could lead to a repeat of the protest strategy."

Turning to UNHCR, the report says that despite its mandate being the protection of refugees and asylum seekers, the agency had adopted a "hostile and confrontational attitude” towards the protestors. The attitude of UNHCR had served to confirm the protesters' grievances and frustrations. "UNHCR took a number of grave risks concerning the safety of the population in the park. It must accept accountability for a number of failures and miscalculations that, at least indirectly, led to the tragic results."

Perhaps surprisingly, the leaders of the protest and the protesters themselves also come in for criticism. The report says: "The protesters remained adamant about their demands throughout the three months and refused to accept any compromise that may have ended the protest, such as that offered by UNHCR in the failed December 17 agreement. While the protest leaders did accept and sign the agreement with UNHCR, dissenting voices within the park succeeded in overturning the decision, despite warnings from supporters and friends, and convinced others to continue the protest."

In conclusion, the report notes that if a similar situation is to be averted, the same problems and issues that led to the protest need to be addressed through long term solutions. "These issues include problems of communication and trust, the provision of adequate services that make life livable even in limbo, and a redefinition of responsibilities and roles," said the report

* The full 68 page report is available at http://www.aucegypt.edu/academic/fmrs/documents/FMRSReportonRefugeeProtest.pdf

* To read an article detailing the response of UNHCR to the report, visit http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=53856

* Previous Pambazuka News articles:

- Sudanese refugees in Cairo: we'll wait here, we'll die here
http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category//29957
- Compounding the tragedy of 30 December in Cairo
http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/32772
- Remembering the massacre in Mustapha Mahmoud Park
http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/features/31111

* Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

The GATS and South Africa's National Health Act: A Cautionary Tale

2006-06-22

South Africa's new health legislation, the National Health Act 61 of 2003, designed to tackle the public health crisis and the HIV/Aids pandemic, conflicts with binding commitments made by the former apartheid regime under the World Trade Organization's General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). This illegitimate trade treaty makes meeting the health needs of most South Africans far more difficult, says a new report released by the South African Municipal Workers Union and the Municipal Services Project.


South Africa’s new flagship health legislation, designed to combat a daunting and urgent public health crisis, conflicts with legally binding commitments the former apartheid regime negotiated under the World Trade Organization’s (WTO’s) General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS).

This trade treaty conflict threatens to undermine the much-needed legislation and, if left unresolved, would make meeting the health needs of the majority of the population far more difficult.South Africa’s dilemma should serve as a world-wide warning that health policy-makers, governments and citizens need to be far more attentive to negotiations that are now underway in Geneva to expand the reach of the GATS.

South Africa’s National Health Act (NHA) aims to remedy past injustices by creating a more uniform and egalitarian national health care system. It is the current government’s chief legislative response to continuing health care challenges in a country where the social and economic costs of the worsening HIV/AIDS pandemic have greatly exacerbated the structural problems inherited from the apartheid era. Scarce health resources are still disproportionately directed to rich and urban citizens. South Africa’s National Health Act (NHA) aims to remedy past injustices by creating a more uniform and egalitarian national health care system.

The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) is no ordinary trade treaty. It is exceptionally complex and broad in scope. It aims to expand international commerce by restricting government measures that impede the ability of foreign companies and investors to maximise profit by supplying services, including health services. Once a national government agrees to cover a particular service sector under the GATS, this “specific commitment” binds all future governments, under threat of punitive trade sanctions.

This is the difficult situation in which the current South African government finds itself. In 1994, South Africa made GATS commitments covering a huge swath of the country’s health services. Almost all human health services delivered outside of hospitals by doctors, dentists, nurses, midwives and other health professions are directly and explicitly covered. However, these commitments are not classified under health but under the Professional Services sub-sector of Business Services. This bizarre classification system, together with the commitments having been made by the apartheid regime some 10 years before the drafting of the National Health Act probably explains why both South African trade and health officials denied for so long that the country’s health services are covered under the GATS.

The conflicts between South Africa’s health legislation and the international services treaty are substantial. In general, public planning policies that allocate health resources more equitably between urban and rural areas, between rich and poor people, and between public and private sectors conflict with the GATS prohibitions against limiting the numbers or activities of private sector service providers.

In particular, the NHA’s “certificate of need” system conflicts with the GATS Market Access rule (Article XVI). This system is the legislation’s primary policy instrument, requiring all health establishments to acquire a “certificate of need” in order to operate. The legislation gives the health minister the authority to grant or refuse certificates based on community needs, and to set conditions on certificates, such as requiring health establishments to service poorly-served regions or populations, or to train community health care professionals.

These basic measures, which are moderate and typical by world health policy standards, conflict with GATS Article XVI:2. This GATS provision explicitly prohibits the application of such “economic needs tests” to the approval of new facilities or the expansion of existing health establishments. The GATS also threatens the health legislation and related policies in other ways. The application of the GATS National Treatment rules (Article XVII) to all health sectors and sub-sectors listed in the South African schedule of commitments creates a host of regulatory issues and problems. Community-based control and decision-making, local training and technology transfer options, directed health care subsidies and incentives, and black economic empowerment policies are all at risk.

GATS negotiations are currently underway on Domestic Regulation (GATS Article VI:4). If these negotiations result, as planned, in new restrictions on non-discriminatory government regulation, the apartheid-era commitments covering health services would create further problematic conflicts with the National Health Act.

The approaches embodied in South Africa’s current health policies and its GATS commitments are incompatible. The government can choose either to conform to legally binding, but illegitimate, treaty commitments made by apartheid-era negotiators, or it can implement the NHA and related policies to try to achieve a more equitable health care system. The existing inequities within the health care system are in need of urgent reform. There is also an overarching responsibility, enshrined in South Africa’s now democratic constitution, for the state to protect health and other basic human rights. Accordingly, the morally and constitutionally valid way for the government to resolve these conflicts is to bring the country’s GATS commitments into conformity with South Africa’s health policy imperatives.

Failure to resolve this trade treaty issue promptly could, over time, divert effort and scarce resources from the central task of health care reform. It would enable foreign for-profit health service corporations, through their home governments, to launch GATS challenges that could thwart the implementation of the National Health Act and related policies.

There are several possible options for dealing with the GATS problem. One option is for South Africa to implement the National Health Act as planned, and deal with any potential GATS issues as they arise. This “wait-and-see” approach is, however, unlikely to be effective over time. Due to the stark inconsistency between the NHA and the GATS, disputes are to be expected. Losing such a case would expose South Africa to the threat of trade sanctions targeted against the country’s key exports.

Another option is for South Africa to withdraw its GATS commitments covering health services. This approach would resolve the immediate GATS threat to the NHA. A drawback, however, is that South Africa would be required to negotiate increased GATS coverage in other sectors to compensate affected WTO member governments for their service suppliers’ lost “market access” in health services.

A third, more ambitious approach would begin with the withdrawal of the GATS commitments. This would be accompanied by the South African government leading or participating in collective action by like-minded governments and citizen movements to tackle the threats that the GATS poses to progressive health policies. This would be consistent with the GATS and similar treaties being fundamentally changed to address the basic incompatibility between their commercializing imperatives and policies to realise health as a human right for all. The GATS is corrosive to a variety of public service systems and to regulation in the public interest.

Instead of the current negotiations to broaden and deepen GATS coverage, there needs to be a thorough assessment of the treaty’s defects from a health policy and public interest perspective, and joint international action for concrete changes to remedy its structural flaws. Bringing South Africa’s GATS obligations into line with its new national health legislation should be viewed as a necessary first step towards the vital goal of creating more democratic international governance frameworks for human and social development. Instead of the current negotiations to broaden and deepen GATS coverage, there needs to be an assessment of the treaty’s defects and joint international action to create more democratic international governance frameworks.

South Africa’s predicament is a cautionary tale. All the evidence suggests that the drafters of the Health Act either did not know about the country’s health commitments under GATS or had forgotten about them. The officials who knew about GATS resided in South Africa’s Department of Trade & Industry. But they knew nothing about the Health Act until it had already passed through parliament and were alerted to the problem by the South African Municipal Workers' Union (Samwu). These same trade officials now publicly accuse Samwu of being “unpatriotic” in bringing public attention to the conflict between GATS and the National Health Act.

* This is a summary of a report "The GATS and South Africa's National Health Act: A Cautionary Tale" based on a research project commissioned by the South African Municipal Workers Union and the Municipal Services Project, published in June 2006. Contact Jeff Rudin of Samwu (jeff@samwu.org.za) for more information or a copy of the report.

* Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

Somalia: Who are the real terrorists?

2006-06-21

Tajudeen Abdul Raheem

Tajudeed Abdul Raheem asks who the real terrorists are in Mogadishu: Those who have held the people to ransom for two decades or those who have chased them away?


When a people have suffered for a long time under a dictatorship the tendency is to declare that nothing could be worse than what they were experiencing. Lived experience does teach a different lesson. No matter how bad the situation is it could always be worse. But the opposite is also true. No matter how good it is it can always be better.

Who would have thought that the jubilations at the exit of Somalia's long term dictator, Mohammed Siad Barre, in 1991 would quickly turn into a prolonged nightmare for his compatriots who have not known peace or even enjoyed the protection of a legitimate government since then. Siad Barre lies reburied in Mogadishu after his body was returned from Nigeria where his life ended peacefully after being given a 'safe haven' by the Nigerian government. The country he led with 'iron fists' and 'velvet tongue' for more than two decades is wasted and wasting between different pretenders to Barre's crown, who are all warlords well-equipped to destroy states but possess no skills for building a nation.

Somalia also tragically epitomises a number of contradictions for those of us who proclaim 'African solutions to African problems' and Pan Africanism, rightly eschewing external meddling by imperialist powers in African affairs but sometimes ambiguous about the sub imperialist meddling of fellow African states. One, is our loyalty to a state or to peoples? The state of Somalia has collapsed and probably may never be one state again, but somehow the international system has kept it existing because it remains the unit of discussion whether at the AU or UN. Somali peoples, like all victims of colonialism, are divided among many countries: Kenya, Ethiopia and Djibouti in addition to Somalia itself. In Somalia itself the south is claiming to be Somaliland while Puntland is also claiming to be independent of both Somalia and Djibouti. Though the Somali state has collapsed the Somali people continue to exist.

Two, it is not about fixing the Somali state but actually looking at it beyond the colonial borders and finding a regional solution to it. It points to federal and con-federal arrangements of the East and Horn of African states. But this logical political conclusion challenges the basis of all our states. That is why even the laudable work of the IGAD states backed by the AU and supported by genuine friends of Africa internationally is falling short of achieving peace and stability in Somalia and the region. They are looking at it as a Somali problem (and a hard dose of prejudice of them being 'difficult' Muslims prone to clan violence) instead of being a Pan African problem.

If we respond to it boldly it will not be limited to Somalis. It will address the historical problems of being part of but not belonging, of many arbitrarily nationalities across this continent: Banyarwanda, Banyamulenge, Bafumbira, Ewes, Ja luos, Ba samia, Hausa, Yoruba, Tswana, Basuto, Tigre, to mention just a few. But it will also change the map of Africa. It is the lack of political will to face the inevitable that is making our leaders engage in half-measures that often give disproportionate influence to war lords at our negotiating tables. IGAD states did a great job in patiently facilitating and negotiating for peace in Somalia, leading to the formation of the transitional government two years ago. However the reality now is that that government has been overtaken by major political developments. To insist on it and deal with it as though it is a normal government risks making not just the TFG but also the IGADD and the AU irrelevant in resolving the Somali issue.

There are a number of reasons for this. First, though the TFG is the result of tortuous and complex negotiations that seemed all-inclusive, the warlords had more power and influence in the shape of it. Their crimes, many of them qualifying as 'crimes against humanity' were rewarded with impunity.

Two, precisely because they were rewarded instead of them changing their old ways they continued business as usual in Mogadishu, trying to gain advantage over each other. That's why the TFG has metamorphosed from a refugee government based in Kenya into an internally displaced government first hosted by the warlord, Mohammed Dheere, in Jowhar, but now relocated to Baidoa, and why the interim president, Abdulahi Yusuf, is being hosted by yet another war lord.

Three, while the TFG enjoys the diplomatic and political recognition of the AU and internationally, it does not seem to enjoy popular legitimacy and it is unable to impose its legal authority at home. Can the world force Somalis to accept a government that is ineffective and doomed to remain ineffectual? This is the context which some of the neighbours of Somalia and global geo-political power mongers are exploiting. While officially publicly offering support for the TFG their actions have helped to undermine and erode its fragile legitimacy. Chief among these are the US and Ethiopia.

The militias in Mogadishu have used both countries' unprincipled alliances in Somali politics and their obsession with 'Islamic fundamentalism' to gain support. Meanwhile Somalis fed up with the militias and wanting a 'law and order' environment and a guarantee of personal and group security for their lives and property turn to their culture, traditional structures and religion. The Union of Islamic Courts led by an ordinary teacher Sheikh Sharif Sheik Ahmed, is the umbrella under which ordinary Somalis have united to get rid of militias and warlords backed by various foreign interests. The ease with which they have moved from Mogadishu to other areas of the country should caution us from joining the sponsors of defeated and fleeing warlords who call them yet another 'Muslim fundamentalist' group. They are giving indications of being a popular movement . As yet they are unclear of their purpose as a government and probably ill-equipped to govern a modern state but they are able to bring security and peace based on notions of Islamic rule of Law and social justice. They have rendered the TFG a dead horse. For how long are we going to be insisting that Somalis ride this dead horse?

What is now happening in Mogadishu, Beledweyne and other cities is quite similar to what has happened in Somaliland, where a coalition of similar Islamist forces (up to now not recognised by any other state in the world) have managed to maintain peace and security based on a mixture of cultural order and conservative Islamic values. Neighbours and other foreigners should not be allowed to hide their sub imperialist and imperialist interests behind support for the TFG . There are reports (denied by Addis Ababa) that Ethiopia has sent troops to Baidoa and is arming the TFG, while the Americans have also denied supporting the defeated and fleeing warlords. Two of them, Bashir Rage and Sudi Yallaow, were allegedly rescued by American marines off the coast of Somalia while they were fleeing. Another war lord, Mohamed Abdi Qanyare is reported to have fled to El-Dheere while his name sake Mohammed Dheere is reported to have fled to Addis Ababa.

Meanwhile the other warlords in Mogadishu, Hussein Aideed and Ali Ato, have willingly surrended themselves to the Union of Islamic courts, hoping to join 'the storm' thy could not stop. Ato reportedly compared the highly successful routing of all the warlords by the Islamists to being 'hit by hurricane'.

As the AU meets in Banjul, Gambia next week our leaders have to reflect very seriously on the admittedly difficult challenges posed by the latest twist in the tragedy of Somalia. The IGADD states and the AU need to be sufficiently flexible and nuanced in handling this new situation. It is possible that the Union of Islamic courts may cooperate with the TFG but as long as the TFG does not insist on formal legalism. The TFG could also use the Union to build a popular legitimacy if they are seen to be cooperating. So far the Union has not been imposing leaders - rather they ask all the residents to choose their leaders to work with the new order. In some cases, significantly in Mogadishu itself, where people have opted for the leader put there by the TFG, the Union has not refused to honor that choice, hence the mayor of Mogadishu remains the same.

There needs to be clarity as to who will have sanctions imposed on them. Is it those who are now restoring order or the fleeing former warlords? If the AU encourages Ethiopia, the USA and other meddlers to continue to arm the TFG in the name of being the legitimate government it will be fueling more death and destruction and giving the fleeing warlords a new lease of life. For decades, the Somali state has been formed and reformed and deformed around the interests of various militarised local elites and various external geo-political interests. Now the voice of the people of Somalia seem to be coming out loud and clear. So the fundamental question is: Are you for the state or the people? Who are the terrorists in Somalia? Those who have held the people to ransom for two decades or those who have chased them away?

* Dr Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem is General-Secretary of the Pan African Movement, Kampala (Uganda) and Co-Director of Justice Africa

* Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

Discussing colour

2006-06-20

Ryon Christie

Africa needs to be made more aware of the potentially damaging media related stuff that its people are readily importing from countries like America, the western world's biggest exporter of media related stuff. The sort of stuff they should be looking out for goes like this: Whenever there is a role in the media setting, like one of America’s most popular TV acting related program or film, and the part requires a black woman who is attractive or seductive then they will use a light skinned woman, in some cases they've just used someone who is mixed race instead. But if she is supposed to be unattractive, old or obese then they will use someone who is dark skinned and with typical black features. Whilst men don't usually suffer from such requirements, it’s a system that is saying that this practice is perfectly acceptable.

The R&B and Rap scene is worse because they produce tons of music videos each month and its always the case that most of the black women in those videos are unofficially required to be light skinned or almost European looking or both.

It’s not something that we can ignore easily for some African countries already have some sort of unofficial media related colour hierarchy system from slavery and colonial times that some of their women are subject to, so some of the women in those regions will have problems. We can't possibly believe that everything that comes from the west is good and beneficial for us, because all societies have good and bad points, even if they are rich.

Gambia: Support the release of Mariam Denton Nee Jack!

2006-06-21

http://www.petitiononline.com/gambian/petition.html]

Mariam Denton Nee Jack, a prominent human rights lawyer, has been detained now for 2 months in The Gambia without lawful charges. Please help us voice our concern to the Head of State! Please help her by signing the petition below. This letter will then be sent to the Head of State in The Gambia. Your support is greatly needed. Please pass this on to everyone you know.

'People need to know who we are': Tom Gitaa and Mshale

2006-06-19

Shailja Patel

Tom Gitaa, Kenyan immigrant to the U.S. and founder of Mshale, the African community newspaper based in Minneapolis, talks to Shailja Patel about the ethos behind the newspaper and its impact on the immigrant community there.


It's been a hectic weekend so far for Tom Gitaa, and it's not even Saturday afternoon yet. "I work 24 hours," says the publisher of Mshale, the African community newspaper based in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Begun in 1994, as a 2-page photocopied newsletter, Mshale is now a free monthly paper, covering news and issues relevant to the pan-African immigrant community. 15,000 copies a month are distributed through the Northeastern US states of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, North Dakota, and South Dakota.

Gitaa is also the host and presenter of Talking Drum, a current affairs talk show on ABN- America (African Broadcasting Network). ABN airs on Channel 749 Dish Network. He has just returned from a trip to Gambia, to set up local production operations for ABN's coverage of the upcoming AU summit. On his schedule this morning was an interview with the visiting Moroccan ambassador to the US. At midnight last night, Gitaa learned that a pipe had burst at ABN's studio, requiring a flurry of calls to relocate the meeting to the presidential suite at a downtown hotel. After this interview with me, it's back to Mshale's offices to work on the paper for the rest of the day, before heading out to cover a community event this evening. All in a day's work for Gitaa, who says that what drives him is: "the satisfaction of finishing something and seeing that others benefit from it."

Gitaa was born and raised in Mombasa, Kenya. He arrived in the US in 1990 to study business and marketing in college. His career in publishing began when he and two fellow-students, Peter Kegode and Edward Kariuki, noticed the dearth of news from the continent available to Africans in America. This was before the internet media revolution. They began to compile a weekly newsletter which they distributed to other Africans in the local community.

"In 1994, it was a 2-page printed compilation, mailed out to 30 subscribers at $8 / month. After 6 months, we had 80 subscribers at $10 / month, and the newsletter had grown to 4 - 6 pages. 1997 was the turning point. That was when the Kenya Nation newspaper came online. So people no longer needed Mshale to get their news. We switched our content to analysis instead, but didn't fly. Subscriptions were flat for 6 months.

"Then we noticed that the greatest response we got was to local news about the African community here, which no other media was reporting. Any coverage of Africa or Africans in American newspapers presented us as exotic and bizarre. I realized I could do a better job of explaining who we are in this place. Why not do a profile of this taxi driver from Ghana struggling to feed his family? Or that Somali woman who has opened a boutique?

"As a business major, looking at the demographic, I could see this was a growing market. In 1990, there were 20,000 African immigrants in Minnesota. In 2006, there were 80,000, according to state census. My personal estimate is that the number is closer to 100,000. Apparently, Minnesota has the largest population of Somalis outside Somalia - it used to be Toronto, but now Minnesota has taken over.

"In November 2001, we put out our first free edition in newsprint."

What is Gitaa's take on the state of media in Africa?

"Quality is rising. Democratization needs supporting instruments - free press, free speech, free airwaves. There have been complaints that freeing the airwaves from state monopolies has led to a bombardment of mediocre pop culture products from the west. But for me, the key question is - are the airwaves free? Can we say what we need to say? Then we will grow and develop towards it."

What media models did he look to in Mshale's development?

"African American community media, and the alternative press. Their experience is somewhat different from ours, but the business model - advertiser-driven free newspapers - is effective. The subscriber-driven model we began with is a tough model one. A large portion of our readership are student-workers, meaning Africans working to put themselves through college. Or newly arrived immigrants. They move frequently, and they are hard to keep track of for mailing out copies and renewing subscriptions."

It is only in the last year that Gitaa has been able to quit his day-job in marketing, and focus full-time on Mshale. He still wears multiple hats, as publisher, editor, marketing director, reporter. Inevitably, there are conflicts of interest between the different roles.

"My goal as we grow is to separate the editorial role and the publishing role as our funding allows. A lot of advertisers don't understand why it's important to have separation between editorial content and ad content.

"For example, we may have as a major advertiser the owners / managers of a large apartment complex with a lot of African immigrant tenants. Our readership make up one of their key markets. If we receive reports that African tenants are being mistreated, we dispatch a reporter to investigate. S/he will speak to the tenants, speak to the complex managers, draw her conclusions and write a report. We run the report. The next thing we know, the media buyer for this company is on the phone to me:

"Mr. Gitaa, we don't like the way you put things in the article that you ran on the complex. It showed our client in a negative light."

"Next edition - no ad from this client. And if they are one of our two Fortune 500 advertisers, then that may prompt the second Fortune 500 company to take its ad elsewhere.

"Our business model is ad-driven. Ads are our revenue.

"That's where you say: "You know what? Keep your money." As publisher, I am accountable to the African immigrant community. My focus is whatever impacts that community. We will not do anything that will not serve that community well.

"This is what makes readers respect you - when they can see you lost money, but you did not let it influence the content of the paper. It is a difficult choice - you risk going out of business. It's the perpetual dilemma of the publisher.”

Has Mshale also come up against divisions and internal conflicts within the African community?

"Yes, several times. There are deep internal rifts within the immigrant community. When we reported on a few Somali women who are successful entrepreneurs in Minneapolis, it provoked deep animosity from some senior leaders within the community. We were just telling the success story of our people, but their reaction was very derogatory."

Given these rifts, and the diversity of African immigrants - across socio-economic groups, class, nationality, origin - can one even speak usefully of a pan-African immigrant community with common interests?

"You are correct about the diversity. But from my years of building Mshale, I see 3 uniting interests across these differences.

"First is the issue of immigration. All immigrants from Africa, whatever their socio-economic status, wherever they come from, are interested in creating a legislative climate that supports their rights to build a life here, and allows the possibility to bring their families here. They are all equally affected by anti-immigrant sentiment and the conservative ideology of closed borders.

"The most-read page of Mshale is the immigration page. It is written by the legal counsel of Blackwell Igbanugo - the largest black-operated law firm in the US. The leading partner, Eugene Igbanugo, was one of the first advertisers in the initial Mshale newsletter, and since then, there has not been a single issue of Mshale that has not carried their ad.

"The second uniting interest is that of self-development. We all arrive here with a common work ethic, the drive to take advantage of opportunities to realize our dreams. We are all aspiring. But we don't shut our eyes to the need for social support systems and networks, the understanding that people need a hand up to get on their feet.

"I believe in the capitalist system. I come from a family of business people. I can say that it works. But I don't understand, for example, the public outcry over the welfare system from the Republicans. If you look at the big picture, the US welfare system takes less than 1% of the federal budget!

"We are a pan-African newspaper. I take that seriously. I get frustrated with other community papers / media that present themselves as "Pan African", yet 80% of the content is skewed towards a particular region. If you call yourself Pan African, then represent every region of Africa. At Mshale, we try to be a model of broad coverage across every region and segment of the African immigrant community."

Does he see community media such as Mshale having an impact on the coverage of Africa and Africans in mainstream American media?

"Many of our readers are journalists and editors from mainstream media outlets. They use Mshale as the gauge, the barometer of what's going on in the African community here. They read it to stay on top of that niche.

"Our website is an archive of information, and is often used as a resource for research about the African immigrant community. We also field calls frequently from those seeking knowledge on particular countries, regions or communities, for business or study. We have become a reference source on Africa."

Looking back over the 12 years from the inception of Mshale to it's current burgeoning success, what does Gitaa see as the key to successful community publishing?

"Relationship building. In the beginning, when we were just 3 people with no track record, it was very hard to establish credibility, to get interviews. No one knew who we were. But with persistence, and steady presence, they get to know you and to respect what you are doing. We now have very strong relationships with the International Leadership Institute (a leading African American organization that brings notable Africans to the US) and the Minneapolis International Centre (which hosts tours of visiting Heads of State and world figures). They call us whenever something relevant to Mshale is on their calendar.

"All the local immigrant community associations know they can count on us. If they let us know what they are doing, we will give them coverage.

"Mshale tells the African immigrant community that whatever direction we go in in this country, we don't need to forget how we look at ourselves. We need to make sure people know who we are."

www.mshale.com
www.abnamerica.com

* Shailja Patel is an Asian African poet and theater artist. Visit her at www.shailja.com

* Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

South Africa: Hope in a suitcase

2006-06-20

http://www.ipsnews.net/africa/nota.asp?idnews=33639

Glynis Clacherty, a South African researcher, initiated an art therapy programme for unaccompanied refugee children called the Suitcase Project, five years ago. Children from Ethiopia, the DRC, Rwanda, Burundi and Angola have taken part in the programme, which has enabled them to decorate suitcases in a way that reflects their experiences.

South Africa: New book - Social movements in post-Apartheid South Africa

2006-06-21

http://www.ukzn.ac.za/ccs

Voices of Protest: Social Movements in Post-Apartheid South Africa,. Editors: Richard Ballard, Adam Habib, Imraan Valodia. Publisher: UKZN Press

Tanzania: New Shivji book

2006-06-21

This book of 90 critical and thought-provoking essays, selected from over 150 written between 1990 and 2005 in three different newspapers, captures the richness of Shivji’s contributions as a public intellectual. It deals with the period when Tanzania under external pressures from donors and financial institutions was forced down the road of neo-liberalism.
Let the People Speak: Tanzania Down the Road to Neo-Liberalism
Issa G. Shivji
Africa: US$25.00, 12500CFA; Elsewhere: £16.95 /$32.50
"This is an extraordinary record of one country's descent into
'neo-liberalism', which roughly translated means socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor. Issa Shivji's shrewd eye concentrates on Tanzania, but his stories could be from almost anywhere in Africa, if not the world."
John Pilger

This book of 90 critical and thought-provoking essays, selected from over 150 written between 1990 and 2005 in three different newspapers, captures the richness of Shivji’s contributions as a public intellectual. It deals with the period when Tanzania under external pressures from donors and financial institutions was forced down the road of neo-liberalism. The local compradorial elites whose economic appetites had been suppressed under Nyerere’s radical nationalism now openly flexed muscles to get a place under the capitalist sun as nationalism, radical or otherwise, was abandoned, and neo-liberalism uncritically embraced.

The essays are on varied subjects ranging from the politics of multi-party, the strains and stresses of the Union with Zanzibar, the deep-seated extra-constitutional behaviour of the ruling elite to the hopes, fears and resistance of the working people. In these essays, contemporary Tanzanian history is recorded in sweeping journalistic strokes without burying the commitment of a critical public intellectual in turgid scholarship. As a warning on the slippery slope that neo-liberalism constitutes, Let the People Speak will echo in many an African country. Hence the salience and relevance of Shivj’s renewed call for the resurrection of a radical, people driven Pan-Africanism.

For orders:

Africa

Publications and Dissemination
CODESRIA
Avenue Cheikh Anta Diop x Canal IV
BP 3304, Dakar 18524 Senegal
Email: codesria@codesria.sn / publications@codesria.sn
Web: www.codesria.org

Rest of the world:

African Books Collective
Unit 13 Kings Meadow
Ferry Hinksey Road
Oxford, OX2, ODP, UK
Email: abc@africanbookscollective.com
Web: www.africanbookscollective.com

More...

The week in the blogosphere

2006-06-21

Sokari Ekine

EthioPundit (http://ethiopundit.blogspot.com/2006/06/catch-up.html) comments on “ethnic, religious and tribal politics” in Ethiopia, Eritrea and Tigray. For Ethiopundit the issue is “dead” and questions whether the “TPLF represents the interests of Tigrayans or that the OLF represents the interests of Oromos”.

“Without cooperation as well as competition by the Oromo or Tigray or Amhara et al, Ethiopia would not exist today and of course would simply cease to exist in the future. Without them and others it will all fall apart into so many unviable mini-states whose destiny would be failure and suffering for tens of millions…To imagine that further bantustanization would benefit anyone or that any tribal liberation front actually speaks for the people that it is named after is simply absurd.”

Zimbabwean group blog, Enough is Enough (http://enoughzimbabwe.org/coltarts-procrastinated-decision-evidence-of-a-crippling-pandemic/) comments on David Coltarts decision on his political future. Enough is Enough believes the decision is one that is common in Zimbabwe, placing person before duty and what he calls “cheap politics”.

“Zimbabwe's politicians have a complex [task] regardless of what part or party faction they belong; they take themselves way too seriously. Mr. Coltart's actions over the last few months illustrate my point well…Our politicians make decisions that have national and global ramifications without so much as batting an eyelid, yet [when] it comes to their personal involvement in politics, they take a much more cautious approach. They are in politics for their stomachs and enlarged egos, they haven't given their lives over to their convictions.”

Chippla's Weblog (http://chippla.blogspot.com/2006/06/bakassia-future-uncertain.html) continues his second part of an in depth report on the Bakassa Peninsula, a small piece of land claimed by both Nigeria and Cameroon. In 2002 the International Court of Justice ordered Nigeria to hand back Bakassa to Cameroon and recently President Obasanjo agreed to abide by the decision of the court.

“While one is left uncertain about what Nigerians think about their government's decision to hand over Bakassi (I am unaware of any opinion polls), the feelings of most Bakassi residents are well known. Mainstream media reports indicate that they see themselves as Nigerians (what else would you expect - Bakassi has been ruled as part of the Nigerian Republic for decades) and would want to see the Nigerian government reject the ICJ ruling.”

Chippla goes on to comment on the arbitrary borders of African countries drawn by the colonial government and asks:

“Is Bakassi a part of Cameroon? Given the arbitrary borders of most African nation-states, such a question might seem difficult to answer. But this old map seems to clearly indicate that Bakassi was governed as a part of German Kamerun. Well, so were Mubi and Uba, according to the map. But today, Mubi and Uba constitute part of Adamawa State in northeastern Nigeria. By the way, Cameroon also has a province called Adamawa (spelt Adamaoua) which borders Adamawa and Taraba States in Nigeria.”

Black Looks (http://www.blacklooks.org/2006/06/the_asylum_game.html) remembers World Refugee Day by publishing the outcome of “The Asylum Game” which replicates the “dangers, the perils the reality faced by migrants trying to reach Europe (in this case Norway) from Liberia and Iran”. The game is in Norwegian and a friend details her experience of “trying” to seek asylum in Norway from Liberia.

“I seek asylum and am rejected. I cheat and try the wheel of fortune again, and after about five tries I am finally granted asylum. I realize that I am no longer 26 years old, I am now over 30 and have to start my life over. I also realize that I am one of the lucky ones that actually made it. I cheated more than 15 times.”

Sotho (http://sotho.blogsome.com/2006/06/20/why-is-africa-poor/) writes on why he thinks Africa is poor. He first introduces some current thoughts on the answer:

“Africa is economically poor. Some Afri-philes and some Africans sometimes blame colonialism as part of the reason why the continent is economically poor. Afri-phobes insist that after half a century of freedom from colonialism, that particular excuse is no longer valid, and that we need to look elsewhere. Some people suggest that Africa is poor because Africans are inferior to other races.”

He concludes however that Africa is waking up and ends with a suggested list of “musts” for Africa to succeed in turning things around.

“As far as I'm concerned, the continent had to go through a period of realising its own worth, in order to be able to produce goods and do business in its own image and right, as only it knows how.”

Rantings of a Sandmonkey (http://www.sandmonkey.org/2006/06/20/anti-ghana-ism-redux) comments on the ongoing “anti-Ghana-ism” taking place in Egypt following their win and flying of the Israeli flag by a Ghanaian team member.

He runs through some of the Egyptian press headlines:

"Egyptians supported the Ghanaian team all the way until the 82nd minute, and regretted it after the Israeli flag (waving)," screamed a bold red headline in the independent daily Al-Masry al-Yom Monday. "As soon as the referee blew his whistle to start the match, Egyptians were out enthusiastically, almost hysterically supporting Ghana, until defender John Paintsil took out the Israeli flag," read the paper's front page article.

The live commentator on the Arab satellite channel broadcasting all World Cup matches in the region abruptly cut short his trademark "goooaaaaaaal" when Paintsil brought out the flag. "What are you doing, man?" the bewildered commentator said.

Apparently the real reason is many Ghanaians go through Israeli football training camps! And "the training program for these children starts every morning with a salute to the Israeli flag," Mestekawi claimed. So the questions are: Ghanaians please explain this Israeli flag flying business and why are your children saluting the Israeli flag every morning?

* Sokari Ekine produces the blog Black Looks, www.blacklooks.org

* Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org

Africa: AU Monitor site reactivated

2006-06-21

The AU-MONITOR site has been reactivated! To keep up with the latest news and information from Banjul, please go to:

http://www.pambazuka.org/aumonitor/index.php

This site has been established by Fahamu to provide regular feedback to African civil society organisations on what is happening with the African Union. In the immediate period we'll be uploading regular news from the summit in Banjul, The Gambia.

The Gambia: Ensuring Compliance with African and International Standards on Rights

2006-06-22

http://www.pambazuka.org/aumonitor/index.php?/site/comments/strengthening_civil_society_ensuring_compliance_with_african_and_internatio/

The Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa, in collaboration with the Open Society Justice Initiative, AfriMAP, and Partnership Africa Canada, will be holding a civil society event entitled Strengthening Civil Society: Ensuring Compliance with African and International Standards on Human Rights and Good Governance, prior to the African Union Summit in Banjul, Gambia from June 26 – 28, 2006.

The Gambia: Unifem to participate in pre-summit meet

2006-06-22

http://www.pambazuka.org/aumonitor/index.php?/site/comments/unifem_to_participate_in_pre_summmit_womens_forum/

UNIFEM will be participating in the Pre-Summit Women’s Forum, and will make a presentation together with AU on our experiences of implementing 1325 and supporting Darfurian Women’s participation in the Abuja Peace Talks. Funmi Balogun Alexander will represent us at this meeting.

Africa: End female genital mutilation, says African Union

2006-06-19

http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=53992

The Africa Union has urged its member states to put an end to the practice of female genital mutilation, saying the ritual traumatised millions of girls and women on the continent.

Global: Making the links between gender and trade

2006-06-19

http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/news/BRIDGEtrade.html

Global trade negotiations bring to mind impenetrable technical discussions on macro-economic policy between trade ministers. The WTO Ministerial meeting in Hong Kong last December was seen as the last opportunity to get agreement among the 148 member countries on the Doha Round. But the meeting at Hong Kong again failed to reach resolution and six months on there has been little progress.

Swaziland: Uproar as gender pendulum swings

2006-06-19

http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=53965

A group of men took to the streets in protest after a number of well-publicised incidents reported attacks by women, but some analysts say the real scare is the changing role of women in society. But some social analysts felt Swazi men were less concerned about random acts of violence by women against men than the evolution of women's role in society.

Africa: UN call to fight violence against youngsters

2006-06-19

http://allafrica.com/stories/200606160648.html

Children in emergencies are at particular risk of gender-based violence given their limited ability to protect themselves and the disruption of family and community protection. "It is hard to think of an act against girls and young women that can be more damaging or enduring than sexual violence," UNICEF Executive Director Ann M. Veneman said. "Sexual violence is also a major factor in the spread of HIV/AIDS, which is having a devastating impact on children, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa."

Africa: Refugee girls miss out on learning, play - UN

2006-06-20

http://www.alertnet.org/thefacts/reliefresources/115080621723.htm

Many refugee girls and young women miss out on education for practical reasons such as a lack of separate toilets, but making simple improvements to camp schools can encourage more to attend, the UN deputy high commissioner for refugees has said. "It's a bit of a myth that the obstacles to girls' education are cultural or religious. It's often as much a simple thing that can be easily removed, like privacy in toilets.”

Mozambique: A study of migrant women in Mozambique

2006-06-20

http://migration.wits.ac.za/raimundopaper.pdf

This paper discusses the issue of migrant women and women's integration in Maputo within the context of the new trends of female migration. For a year about fifty women were interviewed in Maputo as well as in the Niassa province. The objective of this study is to demonstrate that women's migration has occurred within problematic decisions and choices for movement influenced by women's emancipation, SAPs and global trends in Mozambique and in the world economy.

Nigeria: CLO slams removal of rights commission boss

2006-06-22

http://www.thisdayonline.com/nview.php?id=51136

Civil Liberties Organisation (CLO) has condemned the removal and redeployment of the Executive Secretary of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), Mr. Bukhari Bello. A statement by CLO President, Mr. Titus Mann, said: "The removal of Mr. Bello is coming on the heels of the statements purportedly made by him criticising government on issues of human rights abuses, attack on press freedom, the most recent being the arrest and detention of Mr. Gbenga Aruleba of the African Independent Television (AIT) and on the issue of the defeated third term bid of the Obasanjo government."

Zimbabwe: Govt launches another clean-up operation

2006-06-19

http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=53995

As winter sets in, the Zimbabwean government has launched another operation to purge the capital, Harare, of "illegal" homes and market stalls in an effort to "clean" the city.

Burundi: Former child soldiers languish in custody

2006-06-19

http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2006/06/15/burund13554.htm

The Burundian government is detaining rather than rehabilitating former child soldiers associated with the rebel National Liberation Forces, Human Rights Watch said in a briefing paper released on the annual Day of the African Child.

Global: Who is Really Committed to Human Rights?

2006-06-21

The global fight against the practice of torture received a major boost on 23rd May, when Honduras and Bolivia simultaneously ratified the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture (OPCAT). This means that OPCAT will formally enter into force this coming Thursday, 22nd June since it now has the twenty ratifications necessary for it to come into effect. This news was greeted with satisfaction by the Director of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI), Ms. Maja Daruwala. "The practice of torture is shockingly widespread all over the Commonwealth, and OCPAT can be a major weapon in fighting this scourge," she stated.
* See http://www.hrea.org/erc/Library/display.php?doc_id=2112&category_id=38&category_type=3&group=Human%20rights%20treaties%20and%20other%20instruments for more details on the Protocol.
Who is Really Committed to Human Rights?

Press Release
Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative

The global fight against the practice of torture received a major boost on
23rd May, when Honduras and Bolivia simultaneously ratified the Optional
Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture (OPCAT). This means that OPCAT
will formally enter into force this coming Thursday, 22nd June since it now
has the twenty ratifications necessary for it to come into effect. This news
was greeted with satisfaction by the Director of the Commonwealth Human
Rights Initiative (CHRI), Ms. Maja Daruwala. “The practice of torture is
shockingly widespread all over the Commonwealth, and OCPAT can be a major
weapon in fighting this scourge, ” she stated.

OPCAT aims to prevent torture and other forms of ill-treatment through a
system of regular visits to places of detention by independent international
and national bodies. The serious need for this instrument has been fuelled
by several recent cases of torture which have been reported in various parts
of the world - including countries which traditionally have a positive human
rights record. The war on terror is being used to lower human rights
standards and justify practices which amount to torture in detention centres
or in the pursuit of extracting evidence.

Ms. Daruwala expressed extreme disappointment by the fact that, to date,
only four Commonwealth countries have ratified the OPCAT and expressed her
hope that more countries will follow soon. “The commitment of countries
towards human rights is clear from their signing and ratification of UN
treaties,” Ms. Daruwala stated. She also expressed her concern that so few
countries have signed and ratified the majority of major UN human rights
treaties and that many countries fail to fulfil their commitment to the
treaty bodies even when the treaties are signed and ratified.

“Early and wholehearted ratification of human rights treaties establishes a
country's credentials as a responsible member of the community of nations.
As well as the legal obligations that come with ratifying a treaty, doing so
can also be the spur to put in place effective systems to further human
rights compliance,” Ms. Daruwala said. “It also sends a strong signal down
the line that there is assured political will to protect and promote human
rights.”

Unfortunately, many Commonwealth countries are dragging their feet,
particularly in ratifying the two central treaties, the International
Covenant on Economic, Cultural and Social Rights (CECSR) and the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). There is also
a disappointing record when it comes to the Convention Against Torture
(CAT) - only half of the Commonwealth countries have signed on to it, so the
rest cannot sign and ratify OPCAT since this requires prior ratification of
the CAT. Ms. Daruwala pointed out that “it is not only ratification that is
important but also ensuring that the commitment to human rights is not
watered down through reservations which allow states to avoid certain
provisions in a treaty.”

Ms. Daruwala emphasised that a number of Commonwealth countries have
recently pledged their commitment towards human rights when announcing their
candidacies to the new UN Human Rights Council. The commitments made in
these pledges included the signing and ratification of major human rights
treaties. “It is vital that commitments towards the international community
are kept and it is the duty of civil society around the globe to monitor
countries in the fulfilment of these commitments,” Ms. Daruwala said. “It is
disappointing that only two of the Commonwealth countries who have been
recently elected to the Human Rights Council have, to date, ratified the
OPCAT. We hope that all member countries will ratify such treaties in the
near future”.

The poor record of so many Commonwealth countries with regards signing and
ratification of treaties has not gone unnoticed by the Commonwealth
Secretary-General, the Rt. Hon Donald McKinnon. At the Commonwealth Human
Rights Forum in Malta last November, McKinnon stated: "I have been strongly
encouraging those members which have not yet signed these two conventions
[the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights] to review
their positions." He also noted that in the future, full membership of the
Commonwealth may be dependent on ratifying such treaties.

“We hope that appropriate international attention is given to the signing
and ratification of major international treaties in order to bring about
consistent high standards for human rights on a global scale,” Ms. Daruwala
concluded. “We hope that civil society and the international community in
general step up their efforts to encourage countries to sign and ratify core
treaties and thus make governments accountable to their own people as well
as to the international community in general.”

Press release issued by the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative
The Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) is an independent,
non-partisan, international NGO working for the practical realisation of
human rights in the countries of the Commonwealth:
www.humanrightsinitiative.org <http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org>

For further information please contact Ms. Maja Daruwala, Director of CHRI:
Tel: +91 9810 199 745 or email: majadhun@vsnl.com <mailto:majadhun@vsnl.com>


Kind Regards,
Aditi

Aditi Datta
Media and Communications Officer
B-117, Sarvodaya Enclave, Second Floor
New Delhi 110017 INDIA
www.humanrightsinitiative.org

More...

West Africa: Hague Trial Must Be Accessible to West Africans

2006-06-21

With the transfer of Charles Taylor to The Hague for trial, the UN-backed war crimes court for Sierra Leone and its donors must ensure that the former Liberian president’s trial remains accessible to the people of West Africa, Human Rights Watch said in a briefing paper this week.
Hague Trial Must Be Accessible to West Africans

(New York, June 21, 2006) -- With the transfer of Charles Taylor to The Hague for trial, the U.N.-backed war crimes court for Sierra Leone and its donors must ensure that the former Liberian president’s trial remains accessible to the people of West Africa, Human Rights Watch said today in a briefing paper.

Taylor arrived in The Hague on Tuesday from Freetown, where the Special Court for Sierra Leone is headquartered. He is charged by the Special Court with war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other serious violations of international humanitarian law during the 11-year civil war in Sierra Leone. The trial in The Hague will be conducted by the Special Court using the facilities of the International Criminal Court.

Human Rights Watch has issued a briefing paper on the relocation of Taylor’s trial to The Hague. The 15-page briefing paper provides:

* Background on the Special Court for Sierra Leone and Charles Taylor’s alleged crimes;
* Analysis of the implications of moving Taylor’s trial outside Sierra Leone; and
* Recommendations to ensure that the trial in The Hague is made accessible to West Africans.

“Now that Taylor is in The Hague, there is a real risk that his trial will feel distant and less meaningful to the people most affected by the crimes,” said Richard Dicker, director of Human Rights Watch’s International Justice Program. “The court will need to ensure the trial is accessible to people in Sierra Leone and across West Africa.”

To make Taylor’s trial in The Hague accessible in Sierra Leone, the Special Court should implement robust outreach activities such as video and audio summaries of the trial for dissemination throughout the country. The Special Court should also make live broadcasts of the trial available at the court premises in Freetown. Additionally, the court should ensure that representatives of Sierra Leone’s media, nongovernmental organizations, and other sectors of the society, such as paramount chiefs, are able to observe Taylor’s trial in The Hague. Human Rights Watch called on the court’s donors to provide funding for these critical outreach activities.

“The Special Court has done a tremendous job so far in reaching out to Sierra Leoneans about its work,” said Elise Keppler, counsel for Human Rights Watch’s International Justice Program. “But for intensified outreach to ensure Taylor’s trial in The Hague resonates in West Africa, donors will need to step up and provide the court with more funding.”

Donors must also provide funding to cover other costs associated with holding Taylor’s trial in The Hague. These include logistical and technical costs. Funding must further be provided to ensure the Special Court can successfully complete the rest of its work in Freetown.

Background

The Special Court for Sierra Leone was set up in 2002 to try those “bearing the greatest responsibility” for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during Sierra Leone’s armed conflict. The crimes include killings, mutilations, rape and other forms of sexual violence, sexual slavery, the recruitment and use of child soldiers, abduction, and the use of forced labor by armed groups.

The Special Court has indicted Taylor for war crimes (murder, pillage, outrages upon personal dignity, cruel treatment, terrorizing civilians), crimes against humanity (murder, mutilation, rape, enslavement, sexual slavery), and other serious violations of international humanitarian law (use of child soldiers) in the course of Sierra Leone’s armed conflict. The indictment alleges that Taylor, as president of Liberia, provided training and financing to the main rebel group in Sierra Leone, the Revolutionary United Front (RUF). Taylor was allegedly the rebel group’s main backer, providing logistical and military support to the rebels and benefiting greatly from the diamonds extracted in rebel-held areas.

On March 29, Taylor was surrendered to the Special Court. The court immediately requested to relocate Taylor’s trial from Freetown to The Hague due to security concerns. On June 15, the United Kingdom announced it intends to provide detention facilities for Taylor if convicted. This satisfied the key outstanding condition of the Dutch government to hosting the trial. The next day, the Security Council on June 16 passed a resolution providing a legal basis for the transfer.

Initially forced to rely on voluntary contributions, the Special Court has faced constant financial shortfalls. The United Nations provided some financial assistance to the court, but this does not cover all of the court costs. Donors made additional pledges at a funding conference in late September 2005. However, these are insufficient to cover operations for 2006 and beyond.

Human Rights Watch Press release

More...

West Africa: Traditional adoption can be “living hell”

2006-06-19

http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=53871

“I was four when I was left in the care of my uncle, who was childless. While I was small everything was fine, but when I turned nine my living hell began. I was no longer a child of the house, I was a slave of the house,” said Souleymane. Now 16 and dressed in rags, the sad-looking boy whose right hand is missing three fingers breaks into tears on recalling those years.

The Gambia: Country suspended from Millennium Challenge Corporation

2006-06-21

http://www.thegambiajournal.com/artman/publish/article_1226.shtml

The board of directors of the US Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) suspended the Gambia's eligibility for MCC assistance June 16, citing a pattern of actions inconsistent with MCC's selection criteria. The board based its decision on documented evidence of human rights abuses in the country and increased restrictions on political rights, civil liberties and press freedom by the government, as well as worsening economic policies and diminishing anti-corruption efforts, an MCC statement said.

Sudan: Torture of political activist in Khartoum

2006-06-21

http://www.soatsudan.org

The Sudan Organisation Against Torture reports that on 12 June 2006 at 12:30pm, five men allegedly working for the security forces detained Omar Altaj Al-Nageeb, (25 yrs), a recent medical graduate from Omdurman Islamic University, Omdurman. Mr. Al-Nageeb was detained whilst distributing flyers in support of students suspended from the University for Non Payment of tuition fees.

Egypt: Blogger's life in danger after 3 weeks of torture

2006-06-19

http://www.ifex.org/en/content/view/full/75102/

In a 15 June 2006 communiqué submitted to the public prosecutor, the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information holds the Interior Ministry totally responsible for the life and health condition of blogger and prisoner of opinion Mohammad Al-Sharqawi. HRinfo demands that the public prosecutor require the Interior Ministry to allow Al-Sharqawi to be admitted to hospital, where he could receive necessary medical care for injuries resulting from torture, particularly injuries to his hips and left arm.

Chad: Fears for fleeing refugees

2006-06-19

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5086968.stm

More than 10,000 Chadians have fled to Sudan's war-torn Darfur region in the last month, the international medical charity Medecins Sans Frontieres says. They have been escaping attacks reported to have been carried out by men on horseback and camels.

Zambia: Zambia to revoke status of Rwanda refugees

2006-06-20

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/africa/article_1173973.php

Zambia has started the process to revoke the status of an estimated 6,000 Rwandan refugees that fled from the genocide in 1994, the Zambian Ministry of Home Affairs announced. The announcement comes amid threats by the UNHCR to send back 10,000 refugees from the DRC illegally settled on Zambia's northern border with the vast central African state following complaints from the Zambian government.

Uganda: Northern IDPs to be resettled, says gov't

2006-06-19

http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=53982

Uganda plans to spend US$10 million to resettle internally displaced persons in northern Uganda, where a 20-year war against the rebel Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) has forced almost two million people out of their homes.

Uganda: The slow road home

2006-06-20

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/fromthefield/222031/115080579894.htm

With more than 300,000 IDPs in Kitgum district alone, living conditions in the camps are crowded and degrading. Huts are spaced