Alpha Oumar Konare, the Chairperson of the African Union (AU), urged the approval of African diplomatic passports on Wednesday at the opening of the 9th ordinary session of the AU Executive Council in Banjul. Mr Konare stated that “this is a major decision that we need to take, which also meets African populations’ expectations in the implementation of the agreement for the free movement of people and goods”. The Chairperson of the au regreted that some African countries impose visa requirements on heads of state and government or African Foreign ministers and asserted that it was “inadmissible”. He assured that the issuing of these documents would be “strictly monitored”.

Demos describes itself as a 'think tank for everyday democracy' which is not linked to any political party but was recently described by a columnist for a leading British paper as "the New Labour's thinktank of choice" (http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1797573,00.html).

The pamphlet comes as a response to recent activity which has raised the profile of science and technology on the international development agenda. including the UN Millenium Development Goals and the recommendations of the 2005 Commission for Africa.

The first of the three 'global science races' described in the pamphlet is 'the race to the top of the global economy' which takes as a model the explosive growth of the Asian Tigers and the Indian and Chinese economies. This pitches development as a process of modernisation; thus African countries will 'leapfrog' their way out of poverty by "creating incentives and promoting an enabling environment for foreign direct investment is one of the most important mechanisms for building technological capacity" (http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/reports/tf_science.htm).

This is a view seemingly endorsed by Calestous Juma, the Kenyan Professor of the Practice of International Development at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government. In a recent publication entitled 'Going for Growth: Science, Technology and Innovation in Africa' he called for a rethinking of the African economic landscape to "..focus on the role of knowledge as a basis for economic transformation. Doing so will entail placing policy emphasis on emerging opportunities such as renewing infra-structure, building human capabilities, stimulating business development, and increasing participation in the global economy. These areas should provide a firm foundation upon which to base international partnerships." (http://bcsia.ksg.harvard.edu/BCSIA_content/documents/GoingforGrowth_AMEN...)

The second race is the 'Universal fix' which the authors describe as 'breakthroughs in science and technology that will have a direct and widespread impact on poverty. These are the types of breakthroughs that are exemplified by the Grand Challenges in Global Health (http://www.gcgh.org/) which is funded by the wealth of Bill Gates (currently standing at around $50 billion). Examples of these 'fixes' are treatments for diseases such as malaria. This approach is often characterised by public/private partnerships and views development as a common moral reponsibility.

The slow race to citizens' solutions advocated by the reports authors takes a different road. Its approach is informed by participatory approaches to development; "Rather than being viewed as passive beneficiaries of trickle-down development or technology transfer,in this race,citizens are seen as knowledgeable, active and centrally involved in both the ‘upstream’ choice and design of technologies,and their ‘downstream’delivery and regulation."

Such an approach means reconceptualising innovation to involve a 'systems approach' which engages multiple actors and rethinks the cultural and social relationships that will enable a technology to work and impact on poverty reduction. This approach requires interdisciplinary research and 'bottom-up' problem definitions.

The importance of access and ownership in what is described as a 'privatised' world of research and development is another aspect of the 'slow race'. This privatised world has resulted in a 90:10 gap in which only 10% of the overall world health research budget is spent on diseases which affect 90% of the world's population (http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/0,,contentMDK...). Some public/private partnerships are seen as a viable response to the squeeze on public sector finances caused by structural adjustment programmes. Mobile phone technology is cited as a private sector development which can be of genuine benefit to the poor.

Engaging citizens in debates to shape decisions about technology is seen as a vital part of the 'slow race'. The pamphlet's authors stress the need for public engagement in debates about science and technology and cite the success of the Treatment Action Campaign in South Africa as an example of a "campaign to assert the rights of citizens to scientific knowledge".

At the pamphlet's launch in London last week, Dr John Mugabe, the Director of the NEPAD Office of Science and Technology, spoke of the need to get African governments involved in science and technology policies and to create a political culture in which citizen's commissions might operate effectively. He spoke of how new models of public private partnerships with small and medium sized enterprises will offer power gains to the poor.

Dr Suman Sahai, the convener of the Gene Campaign (http://www.genecampaign.org/), which is dedicated to protecting the genetic resources of the South and the rights of farming and tribal communities, critiqued the view of genetic technologies as a 'universal fix' for poverty and hunger. The story of the nutritionally enhanced 'golden rice' which was pitched as a cure for widespread vitamin A deficiency exemplifies this, and on the Gene Campaign website she describes how "...the poor blind children that were held up as the reason why Golden Rice was being developed do not seem to be part of the discourse anymore" (http://genecampaign.org/News/golden-rice.htm). This is a view echoed by Mariam Mayet from the African Centre for Biodiversity, when she spoke to Pambazuka News of how African countries have been subject to pressure to accept GM food; "In May 2003, when Sudan banned the import of GM food aid, it was forced to issue a series of temporary waivers enabling food aid shipments to the country to continue while alternatives were found" (http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/34804).

Several people raised the issue of how effective citizen engagement in public decision making about science can be in politically repressive environments. Dr John Mugabe spoke of the need to create a political culture in Africa in which 'citizen's juries' on science and technology might operate effectively.

The issues raised in the pamphlet are of global importance and the authors are to be congratulated for making the pamphlet available under an 'open access' licence, thus encouraging debate and conversation around these vital sigues (http://www.demos.co.uk/catalogue/theslowrace/).

Yet it is unfortunate that the authors did not spend more time on the significant challenges posed by climate change as a major threat to humanity and on the opportunities offered by information and communication technologies both as a tool for economic development and for participatory approaches to development.

In addition, a debate needs to be had around the issues of how citizen's participation can work effectively in politically repressive environments and how multinational corporations can be held to account when, as Nnimmo Bassey recently described in Pambazuka News, "Oil corporations such as Shell and Chevron, who are major players in the Niger Delta, have admitted to contributing to corruption and violence/civil unrest in the Niger Delta." (http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/34801).

"The Slow Race - Making technology work for the poor" is a new pamphlet published jointly by the British 'think tank' Demos and the Institute of Development Studies.

Human rights groups in Nigeria are in an uproar over the unconstitutional removal of the Executive Secretary of the National Human Rights Commission. Mr. Bukhari Bello. Over 30 groups have made their stance clear, arguing that not only does this undermine the country’s constitutionalism, but it also subverts the rights of Nigerians.

Sequel to the removal of Mr. Bukhari Bello, by Federal Government as Executive Secretary of National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), International Human Rights bodies including Open Society Initiative for West Africa (OSIWA) yesterday (26 June) said they have withdrawn support from the National Human Rights Commission.

Meanwhile, 30 Nigerian civil society organisations have released separate complaints to Judge Louise Arbour, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, and Mrs. Salamata Sawadogo, Chairperson of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights calling for the restoration of Bello to his position, an urgent international investigation of the independence of institutions for the protection of human rights in Nigeria, including the judiciary and the National Human Rights Commission and suspension of Nigeria from consultative relations with both bodies if the government fails to rescind its actions.

On Monday, the Attorney-General of the Federation and Justice Minister, Chief Bayo Ojo, SAN, issued a letter to Bello, informing him of his removal as head of the commission.

The Minister said government was displeased with his criticisms of harassment and intimidation of journalists by the security services and denunciation by African National Human Rights Institutions of recent attempt at tenure extension and America’s role at Guatanamo Bay.

Mr. Bello is the Chairperson, Co-ordinating Committee of African National Human Rights Institutions.

They noted with dismay that the redeployment of Bello came at the time when the United Nations Human Rights Council is holding its inaugural meeting adding that Nigeria is one of the 47 elected members to the council based on its pledge to respect the promotion and protection of the rights of its citizens in general, as well as support the strengthening and independence of the National Human Rights Commission.

Condemning the action, Mr. Chidi Anselm Odinkalu, Director of the Africa Programme, Open Society Justice Initiative contended that the statements issued by Bello were in capacity as Chairperson, Co-ordinating Committee of African National Human Rights Institutions and that it was a collective decision of all the council members. “The Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria has run carts and horses through the Paris Principles. They have undermined stability of tenure of the members of the Commission, compromised the Commission’s institutional efficacy and independence, and chosen to subvert the protection of human rights in Nigeria. The High Commis-sioner for Human Rights and the African Commission cannot stand idly by while these happen,” he said.

Speaking at the joint press conference, Dr. Nana Tanko, Executive Director of OSIWA said: “Nigeria is supposed to be in the forefront for respect of constitutionalism in the continent. Now they have set a bad precedence what is expected of other African Countries that are looking up to it? “For any democracy to work, the protection and promotion of the citizenry is very crucial. Issues should be looked at beyond individuals. “The action of Nigerian government by removing Bello negates all the work that has been done over the years in the area of Human Rights in Africa. If such removal must be done, due process must be followed. We have done a lot to support the National Human Rights Commission over the years but at this point we have no choice but to withdraw our support. We can’t imagine doing all that we have been doing and the government comes and makes a nonsense of all we have done.”

Chinonye Obiagwu, Co-ordinator of the Legal Defence and Aid Project (LEDAP), observed: “We are appalled at the treatment of Mr. Bukhari Bello. This is not just an issue about Mr. Bello. It is about the rule of law, due process, and proper governance. “If we allow this to go unchallenged, it is going to be a return to anarchy. This is a call to the trenches. It is very clear that government is no longer sensitive to constructive decision-making. We ask all members of civil society to suspend collaborative activities with the Federal Ministry of Justice until it makes clear that it will no longer interfere with the National Human Rights Commission.” Obiagwu pointed out that the Abacha government, which established the NHRC, appointed Mohammed Tabir, who was very critical of their policies, but never removed him.

He revealed that for the past five years a bill to amend the NHRC Act to give it more powers and remove government control has been pending at the National Assembly.

The groups contend that: “In taking this decision, the Justice Minister did not notify or consult with the Chairperson or other members of the Council of the National Human Rights Commission. On Monday, 19 June, the Chairperson of the Commission, Honourable Justice Anthony Igu promptly visited the Justice Minister to protest this interference in the independence of the NHRC and to affirm that the allegations on the basis of which the Attorney-General claimed to have acted fell firmly within the remit of the Executive Secretary and were done at all times on the instructions of the Council of the NHRC. “Principle 3(a)(iv) of the Paris Principles, A/Res/48/138, requires the establishment of National Human Rights Commissions for the purpose of ‘drawing the attention of the government to situations in any part of the country where human rights are violated and making proposals to it for initiatives to put an end to such situations and, where necessary, expressing an opinion on the positions and reactions of the government.’ “Principle 6 of the Paris Principles requires governments to ‘ensure a stable mandate for the members of the national institution, without which there can be no real independence.’ “In Article 26 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which is domestic law in Nigeria, the government of Nigeria undertakes to ‘guarantee the independence of ….appropriate national institutions entrusted with the promotion and protection of the rights and freedoms guaranteed in the Charter.’”

For further details see:

* Please send comments to [email protected] or comment online at www.pambazuka.org