Human Rights Watch (Washington, DC)
29 June 2009
document
Mr Thabo Mbeki, Chairperson
African Union High-Level Panel on Darfur
African Union
Your Excellency,
We wish to express our thanks to the African Union High-Level Panel on Darfur (AUPD) for its request for the views of Human Rights Watch on:
(i) What can and should be done urgently to conclude a comprehensive and inclusive Darfur peace agreement?;
(ii) What processes and institutions should be put in place to address the challenge of reconciliation and healing arising from the conflict in Darfur?; and
(iii) What steps should be taken to address the challenge of justice and the suppression of impunity, again arising from the conflict in Darfur?
Established in 1978, Human Rights Watch is known for its accurate fact-finding, impartial reporting, and effective advocacy, often in partnership with local human rights groups. Each year, Human Rights Watch publishes more than 100 reports on human rights conditions in some 80 countries. Human Rights Watch has worked in Africa since 1988, and on Sudan since 1998. In Sudan we have extensively documented and reported on human rights issues across the country, including the North-South conflict and implementation of the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement, human rights abuses related to oil development, and on the crisis in Darfur. Human Rights Watch continues to conduct regular research missions to Sudan and neighboring countries and has extensive contacts both in and outside Sudan.
Since 2003, Human Rights Watch has published 17 major reports on Sudan and Darfur, as well as some 250 other documents. We also published a 753-page book in 2003,"Sudan, Oil and Human Rights," which documented the links between natural-resource exploitation and human rights abuses in Sudan.
Below we have set out our responses to the three issues on which the Panel has sought input: peace, reconciliation and healing, and accountability. However the three issues are, as the Panel has stated, deeply interconnected and mutually interdependent. History has shown repeatedly, including within Sudan, that peace without justice is rarely sustainable, and Human Rights Watch has every reason to believe this would be the case in Darfur.
(i) A Comprehensive and Inclusive Peace Agreement
All sectors and groups in Darfur should have a voice in peace negotiations, and any peace agreement should address the needs of the people of Darfur. Any peace agreement should include mechanisms that ensure the protection of human rights as well as accountability for past and any future abuses, and commitments from all sides to ensure security for civilians. The agreement should also include commitments by all sides to protecting human rights as set out in international human rights law and in Sudan's Interim National Constitution.
Inclusivity
Any strategy for securing a peace agreement for Sudan should ensure that not only all significant rebel factions, but that the people of Darfur are represented in a way that ensures they are able to express their wishes freely and in safety. Currently the only significant negotiations in relation to Darfur are the - now suspended - talks between the government and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM). While a ceasefire between these two parties could reduce the risk to civilians from clashes between them, it is essential that this process does not result in another peace deal, such as the May 2006 Darfur Peace Agreement, which represents neither the agreement of key rebel factions nor the interests of the people of Darfur.
Accountability
Any peace agreement should provide for perpetrators of the most serious crimes in violation of international law to face justice before courts that meet international fair trial standards, including through proceedings before the International Criminal Court.
International law obligates states to investigate and prosecute war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Human Rights Watch research over the past 20 years in many different countries has demonstrated that a decision to ignore atrocities and to reinforce a culture of impunity may carry a high price. In addition, rather than impede negotiations or a transition to peace as many anticipate, remaining firm on justice can yield short- and long-term benefits, while justice's predicted negative consequences often do not come to pass. Human Rights Watch research both in Sudan and elsewhere has demonstrated that peace agreements that fail to provide for accountability not only lessen the chances of that peace being sustainable, they encourage further atrocities.
During the more than two decades of conflict, Sudanese government forces and government-backed militia committed massive human rights violations against civilians in the south. Southern forces also committed serious abuses. While these were very well documented, in the Naivasha negotiations that preceded the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2005, the mediators failed to press for inclusion of provisions for accountability. Human Right Watch stated at the time that:
By failing to put accountability and human rights high up on the Naivasha negotiating agenda, the "Troika"--the United States, Britain and Norway--mediators unwittingly encouraged government officials in Khartoum to believe that they could wage war against civilians in Darfur with impunity.[1]
This warning was ignored, and as a result the Khartoum government secured de facto immunity for their strategy of fighting insurgents by deploying abusive militias to attack civilians in Southern Sudan. As was predicted, the government continued to deploy similar tactics in response to the insurgency in Darfur.
Protection of civilians
As documented by Human Rights Watch and many others, civilians have borne the brunt of the violence in Darfur over the last six years. Since the Darfur conflict started, hundreds of Darfuris have told Human Rights Watch researchers that without a dramatic improvement in security and an end to violence against civilians, there is little hope of lasting peace and a return to normal life for the people in Darfur. The UN secretary-general reported in his June 9, 2009 report that even while talks continued in Qatar in May 2009, JEM and pro-government armed groups clashed repeatedly in North Darfur, causing hundreds of civilians to flee; and civilians were killed in crossfire between government soldiers and police, and between government forces and Arab militia.[2] The African Union-United Nations peacekeeping force (UNAMID) reported at least 12 incidents of sexual and gender based violence against 34 victims, the majority of whom described their attackers as dressed in military uniforms.[3] Human Rights Watch research on the underreporting of sexual violence in Darfur indicates that this is a fraction of the number of such attacks that actually occurred.
All parties to the conflict should urgently recommit to fulfilling their obligations to protect civilians. This will require not only reining in abuses by armed forces, allied militia and rebel soldiers, but also facilitating full deployment of UNAMID and full access of aid organizations to all those in need.
The realization of fundamental human rights for the people of Darfur
Long-term peace and security will not be possible in Darfur without addressing the root causes and drivers of the conflict, including the Sudanese government's continued marginalization and abuse of a large part of the population of Darfur, including those of Arab origin.
Despite repeated commitments by Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir and others in the majority National Congress Party to address many of these issues, and the enshrinement of international human rights standards in Sudan's Interim National Constitution, such commitments have not translated into real change on the ground.
Instead, while government and rebel forces continue to physically attack civilians, government authorities have increasingly cracked down on other rights, including freedom of speech and association. The February 2009 Human Rights Watch report, "It's an Everyday Battle - Censorship and Harassment of Journalists and Human Rights Defenders in Sudan," documented how since mid-2008 government security forces have stepped up harassment, arbitrary arrest and detention and other abuse of human rights defenders and others who seek to speak out about the situation in Darfur. Sudan's Government of National Unity (GNU) has also closed key Sudanese human rights organizations since the ICC issued an arrest warrant for President al-Bashir in March 2009.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
