Washington, D.C. — Delegates to the National Summit on Africa worked late into the night Saturday debating last minute amendments to the "National Policy Plan of Action" and voting up or down - mostly down - last minute additions to the lengthy policy document that will be approved on Sunday and distributed as recommendations to policy makers here.
Seated under tall signs designating their individual state delegations, some fifty delegates in the Economic Development deliberative section listened as the chair of the session introduced a resolution imploring the U.S. to avoid "tariff escalations" that deny African goods access to U.S. markets. That proposal, like many others, was defeated in a show of hands by delegates who argued the substance of this provision was already in the document and, although the clock showed it was already 10:00pm, the chair of the session introduced the next proposal from the California delegation.
And so it went in a succession of meeting rooms. In the deliberative session on Democracy and Human Rights several attempts were made to delete references to slavery in Mauritania (all defeated), but delegates did vote to remove a paragraph calling for the summit process to continue. Delegates in the deliberative session on Sustainable Development voted, earlier in the day, to delete language that supported the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act trade bill, although the same legislation was endorsed in the Economic Development session.
continued on page three Delegates continued from page one Throughout the day there was some confusion about what precisely the final document was for and some question about what impact it could have, but there was also enthusiasm for the issues. "This is too important for us not to consider; we must present this to the government people here in Washington," said one delegate, arguing for inclusion of a point on the importance of negotiating free trade accords with Africa although several others had already been voted down. "To have this many people interested and concerned all over the nation is great," said Wayne Fredericks, a Ford Motor Company lobbyist and long-time Africanist, who was sitting in on the Economic Policy debate.
But not all the debate was in the rooms reserved for the official deliberations, and some veteran organizers expressed sharp reservations about the process. Several prominent delegates and members of the Summit board of directors circulated a petition late in the day challenging what they characterized as the lack of democracy, transparency and accountability in the policy debates. "We are extremely concerned that the process has been organized in violation of many of the core values that motivate and drive our efforts to promote social, economic, environmental and political justice in Africa, "wrote the group in a declaration and petition titled "Where is the Dialogue in the National Summit on Africa?" In addition to questioning the Summit's decision- making process, the declaration criticizes what it characterizes as a bias towards "corporate friendly" policies rather than those that support African workers and environmental groups." There are core issues that are blatantly absent in the process and in the plan of action and this seems to be an appropriate tool to raise those concerns," explained Vicki Ferguson of the Advocacy Network for Africa, a coalition of 163 Africa-focused organizations in the United States that helped draft the petition.
"I think it is very important for all of the energy [here] to be used in a proper manner," said Africa Fund Executive Director Jennifer Davis in explaining why she helped organize and signed the document. "Having [Kenyan] President Daniel arap Moi as chief African spokesman was a total violation of everybody who supports human rights. Taking money from Chevron was a violation of decisions taken earlier in the summit process and of the people who are struggling in the Niger Delta" - a reference to the impoverished Nigerian oil- producing area where economic and human rights activists have been organizing against environmental degradation and the siphoning off of regional resources.
Petition supporter Mark Harrison, a staff member with the United Methodist Church Washington office, noted that he was particularly concerned about the absence of African civil society groups within the summit process. The declaration specifically calls for "a full evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses" of the Summit process to date before any decision is made to continue the National Summit on Africa after this meeting.
Other delegates who were still working late last night were critical of the petitioners. A representative from the Mid-West, who asked that his name not be used, disagreed strongly with the delegates who were gathering signatures. "This is not the right time and it leaves people with a negative feeling. A lot of people worked hard on this and I am sure any mistakes can be easily be fixed the next time," he said. A delegate from New Jersey added that he would not sign the document because he believes the State delegations will continue to gather and work, regardless of whether the National Summit Secretariat in Washington goes on.
But not all of the discussions were this friendly. Aleah Bacquie, a delegate from New York, said she was threatened with expulsion from the building for distributing the petition in a session of the deliberative process on the subject of Democracy and Human Rights. Bacquie and National Summit Staff members engaged in a heated debate outside the session for several minutes. Summit staff insisted that, while delegates were entitled to their views, there was a policy against handing out printed materials within the deliberative process. Bacquie countered that materials on the Jubilee 2000 movement and other issues had been circulated in several workshops.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Many of those who signed the petition said they were working for, and seeking to build, a greater constituency for Africa in this country but are concerned that the history of the Summit and what they called a pattern of undemocratic actions by the Summit Secretariat made them wary of continuing on the path established by this process. Ray Almeida, who works at the non-profit organization Bread for the World but signed the critique as an individual, said he was "profoundly moved" by the spirit of those who attended the Summit and yet feared that the process might leave people who attended feeling used by the organizers. "We want to be partners in the process of evaluating this before anybody spends five more cents on it," he said.
Asked to comment on the document, National Summit Research Director Monde Muyangwa declined, saying she had not had time to read the petition.
