---

---

Africa: Leaders Divided on Rights, Says Amnesty Chief

Helen Kilbey

14 December 2007

---

interview

Cape Town — A group of international figures gathered in Cape Town this week to launch a new global campaign for human rights. One of them was Irene Khan, who as secretary-general of Amnesty International leads one of the world's most prominent mass-based human rights groups. She spoke to AllAfrica's Helen Kilbey.

Zimbabwe has been in the international spotlight as a result of President Robert Mugabe's presence at the Africa-Europe summit and the resulting boycott by British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. Should Mugabe have been banned from the conference?

Well, Amnesty International has just had a delegation come out of Zimbabwe, where they spent six weeks or so meeting with activists, with people who have been victims of torture, of arbitrary detention, people who have been attacked, thrown into prison, including women activists who have been handled in a very rough way and who continue to live under threat.

It's very clear that the situation is worsening, and worsening in a dangerous way, because this political oppression is taking place against a background of a failing economy and most ordinary Zimbabweans are no longer able to meet their basic needs. Given this desperate situation, it is important that the international community adopt a common stand against Zimbabwe, and this is where we see a particular responsibility on the SADC [Southern African Development Community] countries – on the southern African neighbours of Zimbabwe.

We know that behind the scenes there is quiet diplomacy going on but we would like to see the results of that diplomacy now, because people are suffering. The police in particular are acting with impunity. There is legislation on security and information that is being deliberately misused and abused, and it's all being done with the authority of the government. This simply is unacceptable.

What do you think the SADC countries should be doing?

The SADC countries need to ratchet up their pressure, and they need to do it not just behind doors but openly so that world public opinion can be mobilised behind African voices, behind African leadership. It's very important that the world be seen to stand behind African leaders on a problem that is very much on African soil; but the African leaders then have a responsibility openly to take the leadership role.

There was quite fierce debate on whether Zimbabwe should even be discussed, with the SADC countries saying they would not go to Lisbon to discuss Zimbabwe, and others arguing that it should have taken a central place on the agenda. Should Zimbabwe have been on the agenda?

We think the SADC countries should show solidarity on the issue of human rights abuse in Zimbabwe; that they need to stand behind the people of Zimbabwe as strongly as they stood behind the issue of whether or not Zimbabwe should be going to the Europe-Africa summit.

It's very important that human rights are put at the forefront of the political dialogue. At the moment there is a lot of concern about the economy, about trade issues, about equal dialogue between Africans and the European Union; but at the centre of that debate must be equal concern on the side of African leaders as well as European leaders about the human rights of the people of Zimbabwe.

We don't think that the human rights issues are getting the attention they deserve. There must be explicit mention of human rights issues at every international gathering. Human rights are not a luxury for good times, or to be put to one side while other issues get discussed; if human rights are not made part of the political dialogue... the economic discussions, then the people's rights will be affected. In the context of Zimbabwe, we are talking about economic and social rights as well as political and civil rights.

Are these failures of African countries specific to the Zimbabwe situation, or are they indicative of a wider inability to address human rights issues on the continent?

Well, I would say that Zimbabwe is one example. There have been other situations where African leaders have come together – the African Union is very much engaged in seeking to resolve the situation in Sudan, for instance. So on the positive side I would say that African political leaders are taking steps; but on the negative side I would say that they are still not coherent on a common response.

They are still far too divided, particularly on issues of African solidarity. When do they stand behind African leaders and when do they speak out? There is far too much tendency to allow their solidarity to become a shield behind which governments who are perpetrating human rights abuses then hide.

Why do you think this is the case?

This is not just a problem for Africa. Around the world, governments are grappling with their responsibility domestically to uphold rights, and internationally also to be accountable for human rights. This is an evolutionary process where governments are still trying to appreciate fully that human rights are not just an issue of domestic policies but also an issue of foreign policy.

How do you stand up for human rights internationally without seeming to be in conflict with your neighbours? That's a big challenge for African countries, for Asian countries, for countries in Latin America and in other parts of the world, even Western countries – the European Union, for example, is not very vocal about the abuse of human rights – Guantánamo – or [they] have belatedly come to it. European countries have actually colluded with the United States in promoting torture and renditions of terror suspects.

What we see is a natural tendency of governments to allow political expediency to supersede human rights, and what we are saying is that it's precisely those kinds of policies that are creating problems. You only have to look around the world and you see the conflicts, you see the crises, you see the tension arising because governments consistently fail to live up to their human rights obligations – not just domestically, but also in foreign policy.

What we would like to see is governments of Africa, of Asia, of Latin America, who have lived through experiences of colonisation – who have lived through experiences of oppression and repression and come out of those situations – take a stronger stand on human rights because their own experience tells them that's the way to stability and security.

Amnesty International's 2007 report mentions the newly-created African Court on Human and People's Rights, which I understand is to be merged with the yet-to-be-created African Court of Justice. What role do you see this body playing in Africa, and how effective do you think it will be?

It's very interesting to see the way in which regional African institutions are being developed, because it's an indication that African leaders recognise their regional responsibilities. In that sense we think it's a positive step.

But we also recognise that it's going to be a very tough job to make sure there are sufficient financial and human resources to make these institutions work. At the end of the day, institutions are only as good as the political commitment behind them, and we have seen far too many institutions created and then not sufficient goodwill, sufficient political determination coming behind those institutions. Our concern is to make sure that African governments, when they create these institutions, actually stand behind them.

We have seen African governments actually take – in the context of Darfur – very courageous decisions: to send out African Union troops, to cooperate with the AU, with the United Nations. Unfortunately, much more needs to be done in Darfur by the international community, not just by the African states. I would like to see that kind of positive example also coming into the issue of justice.

Africa has a history of human rights abuses, of past abuses for which there has been no justice, and this is an opportunity to show that African institutions can provide justice and that the people of Africa don't only have to wait for international institutions.

Read comments. Write your own.

---