The Official Blog of the

Archive for the ‘Human Rights’ Category

World Citizenship: Forerunners of a Great Political Era

In Being a World Citizen, Human Rights, Introductory, United Nations on December 15, 2013 at 8:12 PM

WORLD CITIZENSHIP: FORERUNNERS OF A GREAT POLITICAL ERA

By René Wadlow

As the German sociologist Max Weber wrote just after the First World War, “We shall not succeed in banishing that which besets us — the sorrow of being born too late for a great political era — unless we understand how to become the forerunner of an even greater one”.

Our generation, which came after the events leading to the Second World War, followed by the creation of the United Nations (UN), and then by the ending of Western European colonialism in Asia and Africa, has only been able to make alive the institutions of the earlier generation, but never to the extent that the earlier generation hoped.

This is particularly true within the UN. The generation of the founders in 1945 hoped to modify in depth inter-State relations and the balance-of-power mechanisms which had led to the Second World War.

Max Weber (1964-1920) is recognized as one of the founders of sociology as we know it today.

Max Weber (1964-1920) is recognized as one of the founders of sociology as we know it today.

Yet the balance-of-power was the framework for the 1945-1990 Cold War. While the balance-of-power has now been modified with the disintegration of the USSR, the balance-of-power as a method of international policy-setting has not changed. The United Nations has not been able to modify in depth the balance-of-power framework.

The crisis we face today is not about the administration of the UN but about how to deal with the emerging world society in which there is still poverty and violence with often a lack of willingness to help those in need.

Citizens of the World stress the need for certain common values among all the States and peoples of the world, such as the values set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Such values must be based on a sense of common responsibility for both present and future generations.

In December 1948 Eleanor Roosevelt, widow of U. S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, was truly the driving force behind the adoption by the UN General Assembly of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

In December 1948 Eleanor Roosevelt, widow of U. S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, was truly the driving force behind the adoption by the UN General Assembly of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Through dialogue among world citizens, the foundations for the values of the emerging world society are being set. Dialogue has to do with trust. To have true dialogue, people have to trust each other enough to reveal the deeply held beliefs that lie behind their surface opinions. Then, they can question each other’s assumptions and begin to establish a context for shared thinking and action.

The forerunners of a true world society are at work, setting the foundations of the new era. This leadership will come ever more into the public light.

Prof. René Wadlow is President and Chief Representative to the United Nations Office at Geneva of the Association of World Citizens.

Nelson Mandela and the Struggle for Universal Human Rights

In Africa, Anticolonialism, Being a World Citizen, Current Events, Fighting Racism, Human Rights, International Justice, The Search for Peace, Uncategorized, World Law on December 10, 2013 at 12:43 PM

NELSON MANDELA AND THE STRUGGLE FOR UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS

By René Wadlow

 

It is appropriate that a major part of the commemoration for Nelson Mandela should fall on December 10, the anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Mandela was both a major actor in developing human rights in South Africa and a symbol of the worldwide struggle for the respect of human rights.  Pressure from human rights groups worldwide played an important part in his release from prison in 1990 as well as bringing an end to the deeply entrenched system of apartheid that enforced racial segregation in every aspect of South African life.

The efforts on the part of the Afrikaner-led National Party Government to enforce apartheid and to prevent opposition had led to many violations of human rights in South Africa: limits on press and expression, on the freedom of association, and the right to fair trial. Therefore, the dismantling of the apartheid system was a necessary pre-requisite for the establishment of the rule of law and respect for human rights.

Nelson Mandela led the efforts to end apartheid, a victory without the blood bath that so many had predicted and feared. He led on the path of constructive reconciliation and an inclusive society.

There is still much to do to develop equality of opportunity in South African society.  Years of discrimination, of lack of education and training, of lack of access to resources leave deep structural divides.  However, much has been undertaken, and South Africa has the potential to be an economic and political leader in Africa.

Nelson Mandela is an example of courage and conviction to secure human rights, both in his own country and worldwide, an example of the long and continuing efforts needed for human freedom.

Prof. René Wadlow is President and Chief Representative to the United Nations Office at Geneva of the Association of World Citizens.

 

5583290-la-sante-de-nelson-mandela-s-ameliore-selon-la-presidence


Can Persistent Racism be a Prelude to Genocide?

In Being a World Citizen, Fighting Racism, Human Rights, International Justice, The Search for Peace, United Nations, War Crimes, Women's Rights, World Law on December 9, 2013 at 1:31 PM

CAN PERSISTENT RACISM BE A PRELUDE TO GENOCIDE?

An Interrogation to Mark the Anniversary of the Genocide Convention

By René Wadlow

December 9 is the anniversary of the 1948 Convention on Genocide, signed at the UN General Assembly held in 1948 in Paris. The Genocide Convention was signed the day before the proclamation on December 10, 1948 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The two texts were much influenced by the Second World War. The crimes of Nazi Germany were uppermost in the minds of those who drafted the Convention in order to deal with a new aspect of international law and the laws of war.

The protection of civilians from deliberate mass murder was already in The Hague and Geneva Conventions of international humanitarian law. However, genocide is different from mass murder. Genocide is the most extreme consequences of racial discrimination and ethnic hatred. Genocide has as its aim the destruction, wholly or in part, of national, ethnic, racial or religious group as such. The term was proposed by the legal scholar Raphael Lemkin, drawing on the Greek genos (people or tribe) and the Latin cide (to kill)[i].

Mass deaths are not genocide. The largest number of deaths since the end of the Second World War was the failure of Chinese agricultural policies between 1958 and 1962 with over 20 million deaths, but the aim was not to destroy the Chinese as a people. Likewise, the destructive famine in Ukraine 1932-1933 with its seven million dead had a political motivation to reduce opposition but not to destroy the Ukrainians as a people. The United States-led war in Vietnam killed some two million Vietnamese, but the aim was not to destroy the Vietnamese as a people.

Genocide in the sense of a desire to eliminate a people has nearly always a metaphysical aspect as well as deep-seated racism. This was clear in the Nazi desire to eliminate Jews, first by forced emigration from Europe and, when emigration was not possible, by physical destruction.

With the horrendous Jewish Holocaust committed by Nazi Germany in mind, on December 9, 1948 the UN General Assembly made genocide the subject matter of the very first human rights instrument created by the World organization, one day before even the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by the Assembly in Paris.

With the horrendous Jewish Holocaust committed by Nazi Germany during World War II in mind, on December 9, 1948 the UN General Assembly made genocide the subject matter of the very first human rights instrument created by the World organization, one day before even the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by the Assembly in Paris.

We see a desire to destroy totally certain tribes in the Darfur conflict in Sudan that did not exist in the much longer and more deadly North-South Sudan Civil War (1956-1972, 1982-2005). Darfur tribes are usually defined by “blood lines” — marriage and thus procreation is limited to a certain population, either within the tribe or with certain other groups with which marriage relations have been created over a period of time. Thus children born of rape — considered ‘Janjaweed babies ‘— after the government-sponsored Janjaweed militias— are left to die or are abandoned. The raped women are often banished or ostracized. By attacking both the aged, holders of traditional knowledge, and the young of child-bearing age, the aim of the destruction of the continuity of a tribal group is clear.

We find the same pattern in some of the fighting in the eastern provinces of the Democratic Republic of Congo where not only are women raped but their sexual organs are destroyed so that they will not be able to reproduce.

Thanks to the efforts of Raphael Lemkin, the international community does have a legal instrument to deal with genocide and punish perpetrators whenever necessary. The only trouble is that in this day and age, "genocide" has still not become an anachronism in global affairs.

Thanks to the efforts of Raphael Lemkin, the international community does have a legal instrument to deal with genocide and punish the perpetrators thereof. It is a shame, though, that in this day and age, “genocide” has still not become an anachronism in global affairs.

Article VIII of the Genocide Conventions provides that “Any Contracting Party may call upon the Competent Organs of the United Nations to take such action under the Charter of the UN as they consider appropriate for the prevention and suppression of acts of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III”. Unfortunately no State has ever done so.

Thus we need to look more closely at the ways in which deep-set racism and constant and repeated accusations against a religious, ethnic or social category can be a prelude to genocide.

 

Prof. René Wadlow is President and Chief Representative to the United Nations Office at Geneva of the Association of World Citizens.

 

[i] Raphael Lemkin, Axis Rule in Occupied Europe (Washington: Carnegie Endowment for World Peace, 1944)

For good overviews see:

Walliman and Dobkowski (Eds), Genocide and the Modern Age (New York: Greenwood Press, 1987)

F. Chalk, K. Jonassohn, The History and Sociology of Genocide (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990)

G.J. Andreopoulos (Ed), Genocide Conceptual and Historical Dimensions Philadelphia (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1994)

Samantha Power, A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide (New York: Basic Books, 2002)

John Tirman, The Death of Others (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011)

J’étais là

In Being a World Citizen, Current Events, Fighting Racism, Human Rights, Solidarity on December 2, 2013 at 11:24 AM

J’ETAIS LA

Par Bernard Henry

Samedi 30 novembre 2013. Me voici de retour chez moi à Suresnes. Je viens de participer à la Grande Marche contre le Racisme organisée à Paris par un certain nombre d’associations, dont Amnesty International avec laquelle j’ai moi-même marché.

On nous avait dit de ne pas aller marcher à Paris, car cette marche ne serait qu’une manœuvre de diversion du Parti Socialiste pour cacher les mauvais résultats de l’action du Gouvernement. On nous avait encore dit, du côté du Front National et des islamistes, extrêmes qui comme toujours se rejoignent, qu’il était « inutile » d’aller ainsi marcher – comme quoi il est toujours « utile », en tout état de cause, de se demander à qui profite le crime, en l’occurrence le racisme.

Moi-même, j’étais sollicité pour deux autres événements aujourd’hui, et avec la marche, cela m’en faisait trois parmi lesquels il me fallait choisir.

Je n’ai pas choisi, tout au long de mon existence, de subir des injures et des attaques sur le fait que je sois handicapé, ou que je sois juif, ou que je sois d’origine étrangère (du côté maternel, ce qui explique mon nom français car seul mon père l’était). Celle que j’aime, ses enfants d’une précédente union et nombre de mes ami(e)s n’ont pas choisi non plus de subir les mêmes choses parce que leur peau est plus mate, leur nom plus difficile à prononcer et leur appétit mis entre parenthèses en journée pendant un mois chaque été.

De même, Christiane Taubira, Ministre de la Justice, Garde des Sceaux, ne s’est vue laisser aucun choix lorsque d’aucuns l’ont comparée à un animal parce qu’elle a la peau noire, si courageux de leurs idées qu’ils ont parfois envoyé le faire à leur place leurs enfants dont ils ont ainsi pollué l’esprit. Même les Nations Unies ont condamné ces attaques contre elle[i].

Dans l’émission Envoyé Spécial de France 2, une candidate investie pour les prochaines municipales par le Front National, parti français d’extrême droite, a montré avec fierté un odieux montage photo de sa composition dans lequel elle compare la Ministre française de la Justice à un singe parce qu’elle est de couleur noire.

Dans l’émission Envoyé Spécial de France 2, une candidate investie pour les prochaines municipales par le Front National, parti français d’extrême droite, a montré avec fierté un odieux montage photo de sa composition dans lequel elle compare la Ministre française de la Justice à un singe parce qu’elle est de couleur noire.

Il n’était donc qu’un seul endroit où je pouvais et devais me trouver aujourd’hui, et cet endroit, c’était l’espace qui sépare la Place de la République de la Place de la Bastille à Paris, cet espace qui a accueilli la Grande Marche contre le Racisme.

Abraham Lincoln, le Président des Etats-Unis qui a aboli l’esclavage dans son pays, ayant payé de sa vie son courage politique, a dit un jour : « On peut tromper quelques personnes pendant quelques temps ; on peut tromper tout le monde pendant quelques temps ; mais on ne peut pas tromper tout le monde tout le temps ».

En matière de lutte contre le racisme, Lincoln reste une référence dans l’histoire américaine et mondiale. Si les Etats-Unis ont cessé de prendre pour acquis qu’un être humain pouvait être la propriété d’un autre en raison de sa seule couleur de peau, c’est grâce à lui.

Dans l’opinion publique française, les discours racistes ont acquis au cours des derniers mois une popularité inquiétante. Mais la résistance existe et n’a pas peur de s’afficher.

Dans l’opinion publique française, les discours racistes ont acquis au cours des derniers mois une popularité inquiétante. Mais la résistance existe et n’a pas peur de s’afficher.

Aujourd’hui, la France connaît à nouveau, comme avant la Seconde Guerre Mondiale puis dans les années 1950, une montée de l’insanité raciste et des agressions envers celles et ceux qui ne ressemblent pas à la majorité. La Grande Marche contre le Racisme de cet après-midi a démontré que la population n’était pas unanime, loin s’en faut, à suivre ce mouvement de folie.

Elle réagit. Nous réagissons, toutes et tous ensemble. Nous disons non au racisme, non à la fatalité historique qui vouerait la France à la haine de l’autre. Mais pour capital qu’il était d’y prendre part, cette marche n’est en tout et pour tout qu’un instant. Elle n’est pas une finalité.

C’est chaque jour qu’il faut agir, c’est ensemble qu’il faut agir. C’est ainsi que les tenants de la haine comme instrument politique finiront par comprendre que leurs intrigues ne seront pas couronnées de succès.

C’est ce qu’avait compris, cent ans après Lincoln aux Etats-Unis, Martin Luther King, lui aussi assassiné parce qu’il voulait mettre fin au racisme dans son pays. Le Révérend savait combien l’inaction, le renoncement, le fatalisme étaient nuisibles à la lutte contre le sectarisme et l’injustice. Parmi ses nombreuses maximes passées à la postérité, il y a celle-ci :

« A la fin, nous nous souviendrons non pas des mots de nos ennemis, mais des silences de nos amis. »

« On ne peut pas continuer comme ça », ai-je entendu Geneviève Garrigos, Présidente d’Amnesty International France, déclarer à une journaliste de BFM TV. J’étais là. Je l’ai entendue le dire à deux mètres de moi. J’étais là, quand d’autres l’auront entendue plus tard à la télévision. Si par bonheur, Geneviève les a convaincus, qu’ils passent à l’action à leur tour, sans quoi encore plus tard, peut-être, sera trop tard.

Bernard Henry est Officier des Relations Extérieures du Bureau de Représentation auprès de l’Office des Nations Unies à Genève de l’Association of World Citizens.


Violences contre les femmes : Des murs qui emprisonnent

In Human Rights, International Justice, Solidarity, United Nations, Women's Rights, World Law on November 25, 2013 at 10:57 PM

VIOLENCES CONTRE LES FEMMES : DES MURS QUI EMPRISONNENT

Par René Wadlow

 

Lorsque, dans son discours de lauréat du Prix Nobel de la Paix (1974), Sean McBride (1904-1988) a cité, aux côtés du développement et de l’acceptation des armes nucléaires sans discernement, l’utilisation d’armes chimiques et d’assassinats politiques comme les signes d’un « écroulement presque total de la moralité publique et privée dans pratiquement tous les secteurs des relations entre les êtres humains », il a mis l’accent sur le thème qui lui était le plus cher : la nécessité d’actions non-gouvernementales visant à assurer la survie.

Même si McBride avait servi en qualité de Ministre irlandais des Affaires Etrangères entre 1948 et 1951 et joué en cela un rôle important dans la création du Conseil de l’Europe, c’est bien en tant que dirigeant d’une organisation non-gouvernementale (ONG) qu’il a apposé sa marque dans l’histoire – en tant que premier président du Comité Exécutif d’Amnesty International (1961-1974), Secrétaire Général de la Commission international des Juristes (1963-1970) et Président du Bureau international de la Paix. C’est dans le cadre de ses efforts pour mettre en lumière l’usage répandu de la torture que nous avions commencé à travailler ensemble à Genève. Il dénonçait des techniques de torture « qui faisaient passer la poucette et le rack du Moyen Age pour des jouets d’enfants ».

Sean McBride, un authentique héros de la défense des Droits de l'Homme.

Sean McBride, un authentique héros de la défense des Droits de l’Homme.

Il critiquait particulièrement la torture et la violence à l’encontre des femmes. Il avait été élevé en grande partie par sa mère, l’actrice et militante nationaliste irlandaise Maud Gonne. Son père, John McBride, avait été pendu par les Britanniques pour sa participation à l’insurrection de Pâques en 1916, quand Sean avait douze ans. La violence contre les femmes était donc doublement injuste – parce qu’il s’agissait de violence et parce que les femmes devaient être respectées.

Quand Sean McBride, au travers d’Amnesty International, a soulevé pour la première fois la question de la torture à la Commission des Droits de l’Homme de l’ONU, les représentants des divers gouvernements ont répondu que la torture pouvait arriver occasionnellement – il y a toujours bien des policiers ou des gardiens de prison à la main lourde – mais que la torture était rare et jamais employée en tout cas au titre de politique gouvernementale officielle. Cependant, une fois que la question a été soulevée et reprise par les représentants d’autres ONG, il est devenu clair que la torture était généralisée, à travers les différentes cultures et les différents systèmes politiques eux-mêmes. En fin de compte, la Commission des Droits de l’Homme des Nations Unies a nommé un Rapporteur spécial pour la Torture et mis en place un moyen systématique d’examiner les plaintes de torture.

Pareillement, c’est pour beaucoup cette façon de faire qui a été utilisée pour faire naître une prise une conscience au sujet des violences contre les femmes. Quand la question a été soulevée pour la première fois par les représentants d’ONG, les gouvernements ont répondu là encore que la violence contre les femmes existait en effet, mais qu’elle était rare ou n’était en tout et pour tout qu’une « violence conjugale », ce qui faisait que les gouvernements ne pouvaient intervenir si la police n’agissait pas la première.

Toutefois, des preuves émanant du monde entier furent présentées par les ONG qui établissaient que la violence contre les femmes atteignait un niveau alarmant. La violence contre les femmes est une agression contre leur intégrité physique, et aussi contre leur dignité. Comme l’ont souligné les représentants des ONG, nous devons mettre l’accent sur l’universalité de la violence contre les femmes, sur la multiplicité des formes qu’elle prend et sur les façons dont la violence, ainsi que la discrimination, que subissent les femmes, et de manière plus large le système de domination basé sur l’asservissement et l’inégalité, fonctionnent en lien direct les uns avec les autres.

‘La violence contre les femmes’, de Gaetano Salerno, 80x60cm, 2013.

‘La violence contre les femmes’, de Gaetano Salerno, 80x60cm, 2013.

En réponse à cette abondance de preuves, l’Assemblée générale de l’ONU a proclamé le 25 novembre Journée internationale pour l’Elimination de la Violence contre les Femmes. La valeur d’une telle « Journée » spéciale est qu’elle offre un moment pour analyser une question donnée puis de remobilisation pour prendre des mesures tout à la fois à court terme et sur une durée plus longue.

Tout à la fois au niveau international de l’ONU et au niveau national, des programmes ont été créés en vue d’assurer l’égalité pour les femmes et la promotion des femmes dans tous les domaines. La violence physique envers les femmes a fait l’objet d’une attention de plus en plus importante, des centres pour les femmes battues ont été créés et l’on s’est aussi penché sur la question de trafic de femmes. Il a été souvent redit qu’il était nécessaire d’assurer l’éducation, la formation, la santé, la promotion de l’emploi, et l’insertion des femmes afin que celles-ci puissent participer de manière pleine et effective au processus du développement dans la société.

Les violences envers les femmes, encore et toujours un fléau mondial. (c) Wikipédia

Les violences envers les femmes, encore et toujours un fléau mondial. (c) Wikipédia

Mais l’inégalité perdure, et les murs qui emprisonnent les femmes sont toujours debout. En ce 25 novembre, cette journée pour l’élimination de la violence contre les femmes, il nous faut regarder de près les différentes formes de violences qui font que de telles murailles, à travers le temps, demeurent en place.

Le Professeur René Wadlow est Président et Représentant en Chef  auprès de l’Office des Nations Unies à Genève de l’Association of World Citizens.


Violence Against Women: Walls That Imprison

In Human Rights, International Justice, Solidarity, United Nations, Women's Rights, World Law on November 24, 2013 at 6:32 PM

VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN: WALLS THAT IMPRISON

By René Wadlow

When in his Nobel Peace Prize address (1974), Sean MacBride (1904-1988) cited torture along with the development and acceptance of indiscriminate nuclear weapons, the use of chemical weapons, and political assassination as signs of a “near total collapse of public and private morality in practically every sector of human relationship”, he stressed his central theme: the necessity of nongovernmental actions to ensure survival.

Although MacBride had served as the Irish Foreign Minister from 1948 to 1951 and played an important role in the creation of the Council of Europe, it was as a non-governmental organization leader that he made his full mark: as an early chair of the Amnesty International Executive Committee (1961-1974), as Secretary General of the International Commission of Jurists (1963-1970) and as chair of the International Peace Bureau.  It was in his efforts to highlight the wide use of torture that we started to work together in Geneva.  He denounced torture techniques “that make the medieval thumb screw and rack look like children’s toys”.

Sean McBride, a true hero of the defense of human rights.

Sean McBride, a true hero of the defense of human rights.

He was particularly critical of torture and violence against women.  He had been largely raised by his mother, the actress and Irish nationalist Maud Gonne. His father, John MacBride, was hanged by the British for his participation in the 1916 Easter uprising when Sean was 12.  Violence against women was doubly unjust: because it was violence and because women were to be respected.

When Sean MacBride through Amnesty International first raised the issue of torture in the United Nations (UN) Commission on Human Rights, the government representatives replied that torture might happen occasionally — there are always some brutal policemen or prison guards — but torture is rare and never a government policy. However, once the issue was raised and taken up by other NGO representatives, it became clear that torture is widespread, in different cultures and in different political systems.  Finally, the UN Commission on Human Rights named a Special Rapporteur on Torture and developed a systematic way of looking at torture complaints.

Likewise, it has largely been the same pattern for raising awareness of violence against women. When the issue was first raised by representatives of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), governments replied that violence against women exists but is rare or that it is “domestic violence” and governments cannot act unless there are actions taken by the police.

However, worldwide evidence was presented by NGOs that violence against women exists to an alarming degree. Violence against women is an attack upon their bodily integrity and their dignity.  As NGO representatives stressed, we need to place an emphasis on the universality of violence against women, the multiplicity of its forms and the ways in which violence, discrimination against women, and the broader system of domination based on subordination and inequality are inter-related.

"Violence against women", by Gaetano Salerno, 80x60cm, 2013.

‘Violence against women’, by Gaetano Salerno, 80x60cm, 2013.

In a response to the evidence, the UN General Assembly has set 25 November as the UN-proclaimed International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. The value of a special “Day” is that it serves as a time of analysis of an issue and then of rededication to take both short-term and longer-range measures.

Both at the international UN level and at the national level, there have been programs devoted to the equality of women and to the promotion of women in all fields.  There has been growing attention to physical violence against women, the creation of centers for battered women and attention given to the trafficking of women.  It has often been repeated that it is necessary to ensure the education, training, good health, employment promotion, and integration of women so that they can participate fully and effectively in the development process.

Violence against women, a global scourge. (c) Wikipedia

Violence against women, an enduring global scourge. (c) Wikipedia

Yet inequality continues, and walls still exist that imprison women. On November 25, this day for the elimination of violence against women, we need to look at the different forms of violence which keep such wall in place.

Prof. René Wadlow is President and Chief Representative to the United Nations Office at Geneva of the Association of World Citizens.

The UN and the Disappearing State of the Central African Republic

In Africa, Anticolonialism, Conflict Resolution, Current Events, Democracy, Human Rights, International Justice, The Search for Peace, United Nations, War Crimes, World Law on November 22, 2013 at 10:36 AM

THE UN AND THE DISAPPEARING STATE OF THE CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC

By René Wadlow

In a November 19, 2013 statement to the United Nations (UN) Security Council, the Secretary General, Mr. Ban Ki-moon, warned that communal violence in the Central African Republic (CAR) was spiraling out of control and backed the possibility of an armed UN peacekeeping force to complement the civilian UN staff, the Integrated Peacebuilding Office in the Central African Republic (BINUCA).

The UN faces a double task in the CAR. There is the immediate problem of violence among tribal-based militias in the absence of a national army or central government security forces. The militias basically pit the north of the country against the south. In addition, there are other militias from the Democratic Republic of the Congo which use the CAR as a “safe haven” and live off the land by looting villages. There are also segments of the Lord’s Resistance Army, largely from the Acholi tribes of northern Uganda who also use the CAR as a safe area looting as they move about.

In the absence of a standing UN peacekeeping force, UN peacekeepers would have to be redeployed from the eastern areas of the Democratic Republic of Congo, an area also torn apart by fighting among different militias and an incompetent Congolese national army. Although the UN forces have been in the Congo for a number of years, it is only in the last couple of months that they have had a mandate to be active in a military way and have started to make an impact on the security situation. By deploying UN troops away from the Congo, there is a danger that the security progress made will fade away.

The longer range task of the UN, the peacebuilding effort, is to create a national administration which provides services beyond the capital city, Bangui. This is the aim of the BINUCA, but its work is largely impossible in the light of the ongoing violence. The challenge is “State-building” which was not done during the colonial period by France.

The area covered by the current State had no pre-colonial common history, but was incorporated into French Equatorial Africa when it could have been as easily part of the Belgium Congo or added to Uganda as part of British East Africa.

Oubangui-Chari as it was then known was the poor cousin of French Equatorial Africa (AEF) whose administrative center was Brazzaville, Congo, with Gabon as the natural resource base. The Cameroon, although legally a League of Nations Mandate, was basically part of AEF. Oubangui-Chari was used as an “exile post” for African civil servants considered “trouble makers”. French colonial administrators also considered Oubangui-Chari as a posting in exile, a place to get away from as soon as possible. Schools were few, and secondary school students were sent away to Brazzaville.

There was only one political figure of standing who emerged from Oubangui-Chari, Barthelemy Boganda (1910-1959). He was the first Roman Catholic priest ordained in 1938. After the Second World War, he was elected to serve in the French Parliament as a member of the Catholic-influenced MRP Party, although he was stripped of his priesthood for going into politics and also for marrying his legislative assistant.

Boganda advocated keeping the AEF together as a federation of independent States knowing that Oubangui-Chari was the poorest of the AEF States and most in need of help from its neighbours. Unfortunately, he was killed in a plane crash on the eve of independence, and with him disappeared all enlightened leadership.

However, his stature in the political life of Oubangui-Chari was such that political power passed on to two cousins, David Dacko, first President of the independent Central African Republic and then Jean-Bedel Bokassa in 1965 who changed the name of the country to Central African Empire and ruled (or misruled) as Bokassa 1er. His dreams of being a new Napoleon was ended in 1979 by a French military intervention after Bokassa had too visibly killed young school children who were protesting.

Jean-Bedel Bokassa aka Bokassa the First, the man who would be emperor – even if it meant reigning over scorched earth.

Jean-Bedel Bokassa aka Bokassa the First, the man who would be emperor – even if it meant reigning over scorched earth.

Since Bokassa, all pretext of a unified administration has disappeared. General Kolingba, Ange-Felix Patassé, followed by Francois Bozizé were considered “Head of State”, but the State had no visible administration. Bozizé was overthrown in March 2013 by Michel Djotodia and his Seleka (alliance in the Sango language) militia. The Alliance has now been dissolved by Djotodia but replaced by nothing. A fact-finding mission sent by the UN Human Rights Council concluded that “both the forces of the former government of President Bozizé and the non-State armed group Seleka committed serious violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law during the conflict”.

Creating order from disorder is a difficult task, especially as the pre-colonial tribal structures no longer function. There were very few inter-tribal mechanisms to settle disputes in any case. The State-building process merits close attention. Somalia remains a good example of the difficulties. The UN faces real challenges in the Central African Republic and requires help from national governments and NGOs.

Politically, Africa has always been a continent of many dramas. Hopefully, if the international community finally decides to take quick, decisive action at last, the Central African Republic will not be just another name on the list.

Politically, Africa has always been a continent of many dramas. Hopefully, if the international community finally decides to take quick, decisive action, the Central African Republic will not be just another name on the list.

René Wadlow is the President and Chief Representative to the United Nations Office at Geneva of the Association of World Citizens.


Is the UN Trying to Legalize Prostitution Worldwide?

In Current Events, Human Rights, International Justice, United Nations, Women's Rights, World Law on October 15, 2013 at 7:13 PM

IS THE UN TRYING TO LEGALIZE PROSTITUTION WORLDWIDE?

By Bernard Henry

In February 2012 Claude Guéant, the then Minister of Interior of France, caused a stir in the country by stating that “Not all civilizations are equal”, adding that one of the yardsticks against which a society could be viewed as “civilized” was “the subservience of women”[i].

For months, Guéant had spoken out almost obsessively against Islam, even branding all of France’s Muslim population “a problem” once. That latest statement was thus just another attack on a community heavily targeted by Guéant’s party, the Union for a Popular Movement (UMP), to attract voters from the anti-Muslim extreme right National Front. Eventually, President Nicolas Sarkozy and the UMP were defeated at the polls in May 2012 by Socialist Party candidate François Hollande. As for the National Front, it scored a historic 17% and was able to deprive Sarkozy of its much-needed support for the second round.

Guéant’s statement was nonsensical in many ways, not least because the subservience of women is anything but a matter of allegedly unequal civilizations. As the Charter of the United Nations has provided from the very start, and as was recalled by the Beijing Conference in 1995, women’s rights are by essence a global issue, never to be rescinded because of cultural or other differences between societies.

Then, just what is to be deducted from the proposal by two United Nations (UN) agencies to simply legalize, throughout the world, prostitution and everything that goes with it?

This is not a joke. In a September 20 appeal to the UN leadership[ii], the New York-based women’s rights organization Equality Now expressed concern about the recommendations contained in the Global Commission on HIV and the Law’s report HIV and the Law: Risks, Rights and Health (2012), published by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), and the report Sex Work and the Law in Asia and the Pacific (2012), backed by the UNDP, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS).

In these two reports, Equality Now wrote, the UN agencies tell Member States that “in order to support efforts to reduce HIV/AIDS and to promote the human rights of people in prostitution, all aspects of the commercial sex industry should be decriminalized, including pimping, brothel-keeping and the purchase of sex”. The organization denounces these recommendations as being “in direct opposition to international human rights standards,” adding that these “also largely ignore the experiences and views of survivors of prostitution and sex trafficking.”

Direct opposition to human rights standards is right. When it comes to women’s rights, the international legal instrument of reference is the UN’s own Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). And CEDAW’s Article 6 provides, “States Parties shall take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to suppress all forms of traffic in women and exploitation of prostitution of women.” Not quite what the two reports suggest, indeed.

Besides the letter of the law, evidence on the ground, too, does not seem to support the UN agencies’ claims. As Equality Now further recalls, “[I]n 2000 Nongovernmental Organizations and sex trafficking survivors worked to ensure that the UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children (the “UN Trafficking Protocol”) defined trafficking to reflect the wide variety of sex trafficking survivors’ experiences”.

The UN Trafficking Protocol’s definition, Equality Now stresses, was the result of years of discussion and negotiation by countries and reflects a carefully drawn political consensus that should not be challenged by UN agencies. Yet the two reports disturbingly recommend revising and narrowing the definition. Should this recommendation be adopted, many victims would lose all chances of being recognized as victims of sex trafficking and their traffickers would now enjoy legal impunity for their crimes.

Sex trafficking and prostitution – two scourges that would soon be gone if there were no buyers in the first place. So why is the United Nations calling for the removal of domestic laws that make them illegal?

Sex trafficking and prostitution – two scourges that would soon be gone if there were no buyers in the first place. So why is the United Nations calling for the removal of domestic laws against them?

Ironically, in a report issued in September, UNDP, UNFPA, UN Women and UN Volunteers actually established a direct link between rape perpetration and the purchase of commercial sex, noting that both stem from gender inequality. So why are UNDP and UNFPA now advocating the decriminalization of prostitution – and accordingly the inherent decriminalization of rape?

When it comes to protecting the rights of people in prostitution, including the right to health – especially to protection from HIV – safety and freedom from violence and exploitation, throwing in the towel and letting both pimps and customers walk away with their dirty business is obviously not the way.

On September 30 the AWC issued an appeal to the UN, in line with Equality Now’s own recommendations, urging the World organization to clarify its position on the decriminalization of prostitution in all its aspects and ensure that the future development of policies and programs affecting people in the commercial sex industry includes the views of survivors and groups working on the issue.

In the Preamble to the UN Charter, “[T]he peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women”. There can be no equality between human beings when a man can officially buy another man as a slave, all right. Now what kind of equality can there be between a man and a woman when the latter can officially be rented for sex? We would very much like an answer.

Bernard Henry is the External Relations Officer of the Representative Office to the United Nations in Geneva of the Association of World Citizens.

 

[i] Al Jazeera, « Sarkozy ally says all civilisations not equal », February 5, 2012.


New Fires Relight in Eastern Congo

In Africa, Conflict Resolution, Current Events, Human Rights, International Justice, The Search for Peace, United Nations, World Law on August 25, 2013 at 4:25 PM

NEW FIRES RELIGHT IN EASTERN CONGO

By René Wadlow

In a message of August 24, 2013 addressed to United Nations (UN) Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, the Association of World Citizens (AWC) highlighted that the Democratic Republic of Congo’s eastern capital of North Kivu Province, Goma, had been shelled for the past three days, including Saturday 24.

The shelling seems to be a continuation of the struggle for power and wealth between heavily-armed rebels, called the March 23 Movement (M23) and the Congolese central government’s army – the Democratic Republic of Congo Armed Forces (FARDC).

This struggle with ever-changing groups began in 1996, two years after the genocide in Rwanda which led to a refugee influx into eastern Congo.  From 1998 to 2003, the area was the scene of fighting between forces of at least six countries – Congo, Rwanda, Burundi, Uganda, Kenya, and Tanzania.

A fighter with the M23 Movement.

A fighter with the M23 Movement.

Since the end of the international fighting, the area has been divided into what can be called “mafia clans” running protection rackets and trying to make a profit from minerals, timber, food supplies for the UN forces and humanitarian nongovernmental organizations present. A deep and deadly struggle for influence is being played out in the shadows with an ever-changing cast of characters.

The UN has a large and expensive peacekeeping group in the area, the MONUC, but with uneven results.  UN forces are seen by the local population as favorable to the far-away incompetent central government.  The M23 is widely considered to be favored by the government of Rwanda.

UN peacekeeping troops are generally effective when there is peace to keep. However what is required today in eastern Congo is not so much more soldiers under UN command as reconciliation bridge-builders, persons who are able to restore relations among the ethnic groups of the area.  The UN, national governments, and non-governmental organizations need to develop bridge-building teams who can help to strengthen local efforts at conflict resolution and re-establishing community relations.

World Citizens were among those in the early 1950s who stressed the need to create UN peacekeeping forces with soldiers especially trained for such a task.  Today a new type of world civil servant is needed – those who in areas of tension and conflict can undertake the slow but important task of restoring confidence among peoples in conflict, establishing contacts and looking for ways to build upon common interests.

There is only so much the MONUC mission can do to keep the peace and assist the civilian population in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

There is only so much the MONUC mission can do to keep the peace and assist the civilian population in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

As the militias and “mafia clans” have proliferated, rivalries, particularly over land tenure and use have become a key source of conflict.  With the breakdown of society, there was a parallel breakdown of local, traditional conflict reduction mechanisms.  The precolonial tribal society had been too weakened during the colonial period to return to precolonial forms of governance.  Post-colonial administration had never been put into place, and so the result was a void of social rules and mechanisms for dispute settlement.

In particular, disputes over land became critical.  Land tenure issues have always been complex.  Land is often thought of as belonging to the ethnic community and is given to clans or to individuals for their use, sometimes for a given period, sometimes for several lifetimes if the land is continually cultivated.  The rules of land tenure often differ from one ethnic group to another, even a small distance apart. Traditionally, clan chiefs would be called upon to settle land disputes, often by compromises, so win-win solutions were often found. With the large displacement of people, land disputes have become frequent, and clan chiefs have often disappeared or lost their function as judges.

Many people have left villages near main roads to live in relative safety far from roads. They have had to move several times and to re-clear land for planting.  Local markets have been destroyed.  Social organizations such as churches have been disbanded, and family links, which provide the African “safety net” have been destroyed by death and displacement.  What trust existed between groups has been largely replaced by fear.  A few people are making money from the disorder by plundering natural resources, but economic injustice and deprivation remain the order of the day.

There is a short-term need to bring the current fighting to a negotiated end, but future security is closely linked to the ways in which land tenure and land use issues are settled.

René Wadlow is President and Chief Representative to the United Nations Office at Geneva of the Association of World Citizens.


Sergio Vieira de Mello, un héros des Droits de l’Homme

In Being a World Citizen, Human Rights, Middle East & North Africa, The Search for Peace, United Nations, World Law on August 18, 2013 at 10:01 PM

SERGIO VIEIRA DE MELLO, UN HEROS DES DROITS DE L’HOMME

Par Bernard Henry

Il y a dix ans jour pour jour, le 19 août 2003, Sergio Vieira de Mello trouvait la mort dans l’attentat contre l’Hôtel Canal à Bagdad.

Citoyen brésilien, francophone de culture, Sergio Vieira de Mello s’était imposé au plus haut du système de l’ONU comme un incontournable des missions de maintien de la paix et de nation-building, dans ces années 1990 qui avaient vu la redistribution des cartes au niveau mondial et l’émergence de nouvelles urgences dans des pays où les conflits gelés par la Guerre Froide avaient repris leurs droits.

Après s’être illustré aux côtés de Bernard Kouchner au Kosovo, Sergio Vieira de Mello avait pris la suite de l’ancienne Présidente irlandaise Mary Robinson au poste de Haut Commissaire des Nations Unies pour les Droits de l’Homme, couronnement d’une carrière consacrée exclusivement à ce domaine dans diverses instances onusiennes, en particulier au sein du Haut Commissariat des Nations Unies pour les Réfugiés.

Devenu Haut Commissaire, Sergio Vieira de Mello n’a pas ménagé ses efforts pour renforcer un Haut Commissariat encore jeune et mal armé pour réagir rapidement aux atteintes aux Droits de l’Homme qui lui étaient signalées. Il aimait le contact et la coopération étroite avec les représentants d’organisations non-gouvernementales, dont l’AWC.

Après que la « coalition » menée par les Etats-Unis a envahi l’Irak en mars 2003, court-circuitant le Conseil de Sécurité de l’ONU et prétendant rechercher des armes de destruction massives qu’aurait détenu le régime de Saddam Hussein, il a bien fallu que Washington et ses alliés admettent deux évidences. D’une part, les fameuses armes de destruction massive qu’une entrée en force en Irak permettrait à coup sûr de trouver, là où les experts internationaux affirmaient pourtant dès 2002 qu’elles n’existaient pas, n’avaient plus été fabriquées en Irak depuis au moins dix ans et n’existaient effectivement pas. D’autre part, malgré sa victoire militaire, la « coalition » sans existence légale qui occupait l’Irak avait balayé l’ONU d’un revers de main un peu rapide et avait maintenant besoin, comble de l’ironie, de l’assistance de l’Organisation mondiale pour rétablir une légitimité de droit dans le pays.

C’est Sergio Vieira de Mello, lauréat de fraîche date du Prix des Droits de l’Homme des Nations Unies, qui fut choisi comme Représentant spécial du Secrétaire Général – à l’époque Kofi Annan – en Irak, tout en conservant, fait exceptionnel, sa charge de Haut Commissaire aux Droits de l’Homme.

Le mardi 19 août 2003, en début d’après-midi, un camion chargé d’explosifs détruit l’Hôtel Canal à Bagdad, devenu siège de la mission des Nations Unies dans le pays. Sergio Vieira de Mello est grièvement touché, et faute par les secours de pouvoir le sortir à temps des débris, il succombe à ses blessures. L’attaque est revendiquée par Abou Moussab al-Zarqaoui, chef d’Al-Qaïda en Irak, dont l’un des lieutenants, Abou Omar al-Kurdi, directement impliqué dans l’attentat, sera arrêté en 2005.

Inhumé le 28 août 2003, Sergio Vieira de Mello repose au Cimetière des Rois à Genève, ville abritant les Hauts Commissariats de l’ONU pour les Réfugiés et aux Droits de l’Homme.

Aucun Défenseur des Droits de l’Homme ne cherche à être un héros, et s’il le fait, il a tort. Certains le deviennent, contre leur gré, sans s’y attendre. Et le premier héros des Droits de l’Homme de ce siècle encore jeune, c’est Sergio Vieira de Mello.

Après la mort de Sergio Vieira de Mello, l'ONU lui a dédié un mémorial, en l'occurrence un buste qui orne l'entrée du siège du Haut Commissariat des Nations Unies pour les Droits de l'Homme.

Après la mort de Sergio Vieira de Mello, l’ONU lui a dédié un mémorial, en l’occurrence un buste qui orne l’entrée du siège du Haut Commissariat des Nations Unies pour les Droits de l’Homme à Genève. Un hommage mérité à ce grand serviteur des Droits de l’Homme et de la paix.

Bernard Henry est Officier des Relations Extérieures du Bureau de Représentation auprès de l’Office des Nations Unies à Genève de l’Association of World Citizens.