Sub-Saharan Africans in desperate need of evacuation from Libya

It is no secret that following the outbreak of violence against pro-democracy protesters in Libya in February 2011, many states scrambled to evacuate their nationals, but sub-Saharan Africans are still in desperate need of evacuation from the North African country. The prompt evacuation of some nationals from Libya goes to show that some states care about the well-being and safety of their citizens - living both at home and abroad - while others don't.

Human Rights Watch reports that "day after day, some governments are managing to send boats to evacuate thousands of their nationals, but Africans, who are most vulnerable and destitute, are left behind." The organization reveals that sub-Saharan Africans are "at greatest risk" in Libya.

Since the outbreak of unrest, more than 30, 000 Chinese and 10,000 Europeans have been evacuated from Libya. The Philippines, U.S., Morocco, Algeria, Syria and a host of others have also evacuated their nationals to safe ground. Unfortunately, states like Cameroon, Nigeria, Ghana, Ethiopia, Mali, Ivory Coast, Burkina Faso have abandoned their citizens caught in the deadly unrest in Libya.

Sub-Saharan Africans are reportedly targets of abuse and violence in Libya because pro-democracy protesters belief that the repressive Gaddafi regime hired mercenaries from the region to crackdown on demonstrators.

While reading a news release about the plight of sub-Saharan Africans in Libya, I was saddened by the story of two desperate sub-Saharan Africans who tried to board a ship that was evacuating Tunisians from Benghazi. They were apprehended by security forces and beaten with sticks and knives.

This is particularly disturbing because no African Head of State has publicly condemned violations against sub-Saharan Africans in Libya.

Many of these stranded Africans in need of evacuation from Libya come from countries that are relatively stable and rich in resources. For instance, according to CIA World Factbook, Nigeria is a major oil producing nation (2.211 million barrels per day), Cameroon produces 77,310 barrels of oil per day, Ivory Coast, although a recent power struggle is pushing the country to the brink of civil war, is a major producer of cocoa. These countries and many other sub-Saharan African nations can afford evacuation operations (or at least work with countries that have sent ships to Libya), but corruption and misappropriation of state funds have gone a long way to leave innocent citizens stranded and unprotected abroad.

This is testament to the fact that corruption undermines basic rights, including the right to protection and safety.

It is worth reiterating that sub-Saharan Africans are targets of abuse in Libya and are in desperate need of evacuation. Their governments and the international community have an obligation to protect them from persecution. Those who manage to board evacuation ships should not be returned to Libya - where their lives are at risk.

Share

Tweet

Situation in Libya referred to the International Criminal Court

Leader of Libya, Muammar Gaddafi.

On 26 February 2011, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) called for an end to violence against pro-democracy protesters in Libya and imposed sanctions on Libya, including arms embargo, travel ban, as well as asset freeze on the leader of Libya - Muammar Mohammed Abu Minyar Gaddafi, commonly known as Colonel Gadaffi, and some government officials. Above all, and even more significant (in my opinion) is the fact that the Security Council referred the situation in Libya to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The ICC has jurisdiction over the most serious crimes, including genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression, as laid down in Article 5 of the Rome Statute that created the Court.

Article 13(b) of the Statute gives the Court power to exercise jurisdiction over cases referred to the Prosecutor by the UNSC. The February 26 referral is significant because it is an indication that the Council unanimously believes serious crimes within the jurisdiction of the ICC have been committed by the Gaddafi regime against its own people.

Following this referral, the prosecutor of the ICC is expected to open an investigation into the situation in Libya since 15 February 2011 to determine whether crimes under the jurisdiction of the court have been committed, and bring charges against perpetrators.

It is worth recalling that following the outbreak of massive pro-democracy demonstrations in Libya, Colonel Gaddafi, in a televised speech, promised to "cleanse" Libya of pro-democracy demonstrators - "house by house."

Since the outbreak of demonstrations more that one thousand people have lost theirs lives (according to the UN) and the situation in Libya has been described as a "humanitarian crisis."

Now that the deadly situation in Libya has been referred to the ICC, the Prosecutor should move quickly - investigate the alleged atrocities committed by Gaddafi's regime against pro-democracy demonstrators and charge those responsible for grave crimes in Libya.

Historically, all 15 members of the UNSC backed Resolution 1970 (2011) that imposed sanctions on the Libyan regime and referred the situation in the country to the ICC.

This is only the second time the UNSC has made a referral to the ICC. The first was the referral of the situation in Darfur, Sudan in March 2005 that culminated in the indictment of President Omar Hassan al- Bashir of Sudan for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

Gaddafi has been in power for 41 years - since 1969

Share

Tweet

Colonel Kibibi Mutware jailed for mass rape in DR Congo

Lieutenant Colonel Kibibi Mutware. Source: BBC.

Yesterday 21 February 2011, a mobile military court convicted and sentenced Lieutenant Colonel Kibibi Mutware and some of his comrades to jail for mass rape in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DR Congo).

According to UN News Centre, Lieutenant Colonel Kibibi Mutware was found guilty for crimes against humanity and jailed - for his role in mass rape that took place in Fizi on 1 January 2011 - when the Colonel deployed troops to loot, brutalize civilians and commit mass rape in the village of Fizi in eastern DR Congo.

The military Court sentenced Lieutenant Colonel Mutware to 20 years behind bars. Five other soldiers under Kibibi Mutware's command were also slammed with jail sentences in connection with the mass rape in Fizi.

This is good news, and of course - a victory for human rights and the rule of law.

The conviction of a commanding military officer for his role in mass rape and other atrocities against civilians sends an unequivocal message that crimes against civilians are unacceptable and perpetrators - irrespective of position of responsibility or rank - will have their day in court and bear the full weight of the law.

DR Congo has been termed the worst place to be a woman  and "rape capital of the world" because of frequent systematic mass rapes and other forms of violence against women and girls. The imprisonment of Colonel Kibibi Mutware signals an end to decades of impunity for rape in DR Congo.

More than 60 women were raped during the military operation under the leadership of Colonel Kibibi Mutware on 1 January, and 49 women testified in court.

Share

Tweet

Syria: Stop child abuse and torture by school teachers

A story on France 24 reminded me about the so-called "school corporal punishment" - institutionalized abuse and brutalisation suffered by pupils and school children in the hands of abusive teachers in many parts of the world. The story puts 2 abusive teachers in Syria in the spotlight, and resounds the urgent need to stop child abuse and torture by school teachers in Syria and beyond.

Two female teachers in Syria were caught on video - brutalising pupils entrusted to their care. As you'd expect in this age of information technology, the dramatic video was posted on the  internet and puts the Syria's educational system into question. WATCH...



Incidentally, tomorrow - 5 October - is World's Teacher's Day. Should this calibre of teachers be honored on this symbolic day?

Make no mistake - child abuse and torture by teachers is not only a Syrian problem. The ordeal prevails in many other countries. 

I'm no stranger to school corporal punishment. As a matter of fact, in high school, I was asked to participate in a debate. I vividly remember the debate question: "Should corporal punishment be allowed in boarding schools?" It's worth mentioning that at the time, there were people - students and teachers - who had very strong opinions both for and against corporal punishment.

Widespread occurrence by no means justifies child abuse by school teachers.

The Syrian Arab Republic is party to the Convention of the Rights of the child, which it ratified on 15 July 1993. The State therefore has a legal obligation under international law to protect children from all forms of "physical or mental" violence, including abuse and torture by school teachers. The 2 teachers caught in the above video should, by all means, be identified and brought to justice. Impunity in this widely publicized case would send across a wrong message.

*Photo of school kids in Syria: Gibbz Cadiz.

Share

Tweet

Help Uganda's forgotten children

Children in a camp in north-eastern Uganda: The Guardian.

Today, I watched a video titled "The Compelling Story of The Forgotten Children." The video tells the story of abduction, torture, sexual slavery and rape meted out by rebels against thousands of children in Northern Uganda. The video urged me to help Uganda's forgotten children by simply telling their story. Perhaps this would make a difference.

The following video is truly a compelling revelation of an untold story that has not received a fair share of international attention. It's a story of gross violations of children's rights in the armed conflict in Northern Uganda. WATCH...



Northern Uganda has been engulfed in civil war since the 1980s. The civil war was sparked by a rebellion against the Ugandan government under the leadership of President Yoweri Museveni. The rebellion is led by two rebel groups - the Lord's Resistance Army (LRD) based in Northern Uganda and the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF) based in western Uganda.

LRA Leader - Joseph Kony.

It is worth mentioning that the ADF has reportedly lost steam, while the LRA, under the leadership of Joseph Kony, remains the main rebel group with a reputation of perpetrating the most heinous crimes against civilians in Northern Uganda. Victims of the war face rape, abduction, torture, mutilation, the worst forms of child labour, just to name a few.

In 2005, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant against Joseph Kony and 4 other LRA commanders, on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

After watching "The Compelling Story of The Forgotten Children," you must be convinced that the children of Northern Uganda are truly forgotten and are in desperate need of all the help you can provide; no matter how small. Visit www.worldhelp.net and lend a helping hand.

Although the LRA reportedly stopped atttacks in northern Uganda in 2006, stability in the region is fragile.

The perpetrators of violence against children in Uganda, including Joseph Kony are still at large. It remains to be seen whether justice will take its course.

Share

Tweet

UN report: Israel violated international law during flotilla raid

Photo of Israeli soldier boarding the Mavi Marmara, by IsraelIMFA

Israeli forces intercepted a humanitarian aid flotilla on 31 May 2010 in a military mission that shocked the international community, including humanitarians and human rights activists around the world. The military mission left 9 people dead aboard the Mavi Marmara, a ship that was carrying humanitarian aid bound for Gaza. In its defense, Israel invoked the right to defend and secure its borders and condemned the attempt by the flotilla to break the Gaza blockade. Following the incident, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) ordered an investigation into the flotilla raid and an independent fact-finding mission was established by the Human Rights Council to investigate the incident.

On 22 September 2010, the fact-finding mission issued a report of the application of international law during the raid. The report concludes that Israel violated international humanitarian and human rights law during the interception of the aid flotilla in May.

In a vital part of the report (Part IV) which dwells on accountability and effective remedy, the mission notes that victims of the flotilla raid have the right to effective remedy and reparations, and hopes that Israel honors its obligations under international law and bring perpetrators of the violation to justice.

On 1 June 2010, in an article about Israel's right to defend and secure borders, I concluded that Israeli commandos used disproportionate force during the mission and should be held accountable for the lives lost during the interception of the aid flotilla. Israel is party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and therefore has a legal obligation under international law to hold perpetrators accountable and compensate victims of the flotilla raid.

It remains to be seen whether Israeli authorities will bring those responsible for the violation of humanitarian and human rights law during the flotilla raid to justice.

Read the complete 56-page report (in pdf) published on the Human Rights Council website, here.

A defiant Israel argues that the report is biased.

Share

Tweet

Chad fails to execute Arrest Warrant against Omar al-Bashir

The President of Sudan, Omar al-Bashir, in a show of defiance, visited Chad and walked free, despite a standing arrest warrant against him, issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) at the Hague. The President is suspected of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Darfur. In March 2009, the ICC issued an arrest warrant against President al-Bashir, for war crimes and crimes against humanity, and on 12 July 2010, the court, in line with Article 58(6) of the Rome Statute, modified the arrest warrant, adding genocide to list of hideous crimes allegedly committed by al-Bashir in Darfur. Less than two weeks after the second arrest warrant was issued, President al-Bashir made a controversial official visit to neighboring Chad, ignoring an international call for his arrest upon arrival in Chad.

On Thursday 22 July 2010, Omar al-Bashir arrived Chad on an official visit and walked free, as the government of Chad failed to execute the arrest warrant against the visiting Head of State.

It is worth mentioning that prior to the visit, human rights groups called on the government of Chad - a Member State of the ICC - to arrest Omar al-Bashir in line with its obligation under the Rome Statute, but the unprecedented calls to arrest the most-wanted Head of State, Omar al-Bashir, fell on deft ears.

No doubt, Chad has gone down in history as the first Member State of the ICC to fail to fulfil its duty under Article 59(1) and Part IX of the Rome Statute. The government of Chad failed to execute an arrest warrant issued by the court, and to comply with a request to cooperate with the court to bring al-Bashir to the Hague to face trial for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. 

There are fears that the arrest of President al-Bashir in Chad would distabilized the fragile peace in the region. Until recently Chad accused Sudan for harboring rebels that threaten its peace, and Sudan, on the other hand, accused Chad for supporting rebel groups that mastermind the conflict in Darfur - a conflict that, according to the UN, has claimed 300,000 lives.

Now that Chad has failed to execute an arrest warrant issued by the ICC against Omar al-Bashir, one question remains unanswered: Does the ICC have what it takes to bring suspects of international crimes to justice?

Of course, with a well written statute, the ICC has what it takes to bring perpetrators of the most hideous crimes against humanity to justice, but the statute can only be executed with unconditional international cooperation. Chad's failure to cooperate with the ICC goes a long way to embolden perpetrators of crimes that fall within the jurisdiction of the court.

*Photo: Wikipedia.

Share

Tweet

Israel: Right to defend and Secure Borders?

May 31, 2010 went down in history as the day Israeli naval forces intercepted a flotilla (small fleet) of ships in international waters. The flotilla was bound for Gaza and was determined to break the Gaza blockade - in a bid to deliver humanitarian aid to a people in need. According to Aljazeera, at least 19 people were killed and many wounded (UN reports that 9 people were killed) when armed Israeli commandos descended on one of the ships - the Mavi Marmara. The question is - does the storming of the flotilla have anything to do with Israel's right to defend itself and secure its borders?

You would agree that over the years, Israel has repeatedly asserted its right to defend itself and secure its borders. This, no doubt, is Israel's famous justification for using excessive force in military operations that more often than not result in civilian casualties.

Like many people, you are probably wonder why the government of Israel is so suspicious and "obsessed" with defending and securing its borders. To feed your curiosity, I did a little research and found a video clip that clears the doubts. WATCH...



Israel unconditionally has the right to defend and secure its borders. But this right comes with obligations to respect basic principles of international law.

Since Israeli commandos intercepted the flotilla, Israel has been on the headlines - for all the wrong reasons. The international community has condemned the action, with strong words from Palestine, Iran, Turkey, France, Britain, Italy, Germany, just to name a few. The European Union, Arab League and the Vatican also issued statements against the attack. Ban Ki-moon, United Nations Secretary General, was "shocked" by the tragedy and condemned Israel's action.

It is worth mentioning that the White House was more cautious in its statement: "The United States deeply regrets the loss of life and injuries sustained, and is currently working to understand the circumstances surrounding this tragedy."

Personally, I understand Israel's security concerns and respect its right to defend and secure its borders. But the flotilla incident left me with no doubt that Israel used disproportionate force against humanitarians in international waters. Israel should be held accountable! No civilian should die on a humanitarian mission to deliver aid to a people in need. Israel should exercise restraint in the assertion of its right to defend itself and secure its borders.

It is fair to say - the activists would have simply used "authorised channels" to deliver the much needed aid to Gaza. The loss of innocent lives was preventable.

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has ordered an investigation into the flotilla raid.

UPDATE - UN Report: Israel violated international law during flotilla raid.

Share

Tweet

Significant Human Rights Instruments

On Friday April 23, 2010, I received a question from Migrant Tales: besides the UN Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), what are the other significant human rights instruments? Before I answer the question, permit me to shed some light on the UDHR.

Following the Second World War and outrageous human rights violations that shocked mankind, such as the state-sponsored extermination of Jews by Nazi-Germany (holocaust), the United Nations General Assembly adopted the UDHR on December 1948. The Declaration was adopted partly in a bid to limit states violations of the inalienable rights of individuals. It is worth noting that the UDHR is merely a declaration, hence it is not legally binding on states. In a bid to make the rights laid down in the UDHR binding, other significant human rights instruments (conventions), which are legally binding on all states that ratify them, were adopted. The question at this point is - what are the other significant human rights instruments?

Besides the UDHR, other significant human rights instruments include the following:

• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). It was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 1966. The ICCPR is monitored the Human Rights Committee. Individuals within the borders of member states of the ICCPR can submit complaints of human rights violations to the Committee.
• International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) - adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 1966. It is monitored by the United Nations Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights.
• Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) - adopted in December 1979. It is monitored by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women.
• Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), adopted on December 1984. It is monitored by the Committee against Torture.
• Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), adopted in December 1965. The Convention is monitored by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.
• Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on November 1989. It is monitored by the Committee on the Rights of the Child.
• International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families.* It was adopted in 1990 and came into force on July 2003. The Convention is monitored by the Committee on Migrant Workers.

The International Labour Organization (ILO) has also adopted a couple of significant human rights instruments, including:

• Forced Labour Convention, adopted by the General Conference of the International Labour Organization, in June 1930.
• Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948.
• Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949.
• Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, adopted in June 1957.
• Discrimination (Employment and Occupation Convention ), 1958
• Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999.

Significant regional human rights instruments include.

• African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. It is overseen by the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights.
• European Convention on Human Rights, drafted in November 1950 in Rome.
• American Convention on Human Rights, adopted by adopted by countries in the Americas in 1969.

No doubt - the 1949 Geneva Conventions are also significant human rights instruments.

While it is true that the above list of human rights instruments is far from being exhaustive - it is also true that the list contains the significant human rights instruments that are often invoked.

* I hope my [cyberspace] friend - columnist and blogger at Migrant Tales can "push" Finland to ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families. Follow his blog - Migrant Tales.

Share

Tweet

Citizenship for 1972 Burundian Refugees!

As far back as 1972, many Burundians - men, women and children, fled their homes in Burundi to seek refuge in neighboring Tanzania. The refugees were fleeing from a civil war marked by ethnic mass-killings, that left an estimated 200,000 people dead. Upon arrival in Tanzania, they were settled in three settlements in western Tanzania - Katumba, Nishamo and Ulyankulu. Tens of thousands of refugees - dubbed "1972 Burundian refugees", have inhabited these settlements since 1972. On April 15, 2010, Tanzania's Home Affairs Minister announced that the government of Tanzania have naturalized and granted citizenship to 162,000 "1972 Burundian refugees".

This is a landmark decision and a milestone in the global effort to protect refugees! According to the UN Refugee Agency, Tanzania is the first country to naturalise, in a single move, such a large number of refugees protected by the agency. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees - António Guterres welcomed the decision and expressed "deep gratitude and appreciation" to the government of Tanzania. He called on other nations with refugee populations to make a move in the same direction.

No individual should permanently bear a refugee status!

The naturalization process of the "1972 Burundi refugees" started in 2008 (36 years after the refugees left their homeland) and comes in the wake of moves by the Tanzanian and Burundian governments to shut down the three refugee settlements of Katumba, Nishamo and Ulyankulu, and provide the long-standing refugees with opportunities of becoming Tanzanian citizens or returning to Burundi to take part in the "reconstruction of the country".

It is worth mentioning that about 53,600 Burundian refugees in Tanzania decided to return to Burundi, while the majority (80%) would like to remain in Tanzania. This is understood because many of the refugees were born and raised in Tanzania. Consequently, many have little or no ties to Burundi.

The new citizens of Tanzania will now live among the general population and enjoy the full rights of citizenship. The government of Tanzania has a firm commitment to integrate the new citizens into mainstream society.

According to IRIN - a project of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Tanzania hosts about 110,000 refugees from Burundi and 96,000 refugees from the D.R. Congo, in UNHCR camps.

Share

Tweet