MAGAZINE

FROM THE EDITOR.

Once a dream, now reality. It seems a tirelessly carried pregnancy of an average baby for years. The idea of this human rights magazine tagged “THE VIEW” was conceived at the inception of Centre for Human Rights Education & Reporting, some years ago. Still the baby refused to be delivered, but kept hanging, disturbing and kicking. Frantically, I was carrying the pregnancy with every hope and enthusiasm. I kept on calling on medical practitioners to know how and what form the delivery would be. Some of my friends abandoned me because of the late delivery while some others kept praying for my safe and quick delivery. Early this year, I was rushed to the labour room by some friends and well wishers who invited gynecologists on call. I was promptly given all necessary medications and encouraged to push harder. Just then, the kord machine rolled and came to a stand still. The midwives collated and stitched the baby. Right there in the printing press. I woke up from the labour rest and saw the bouncing baby that I have just brought to the world. Actually the dream of making this dream a reality was becoming fainting when suddenly there was a divine intervention. Now our child has been born. Like a popular saying, ‘you can not make an omelette without breaking an egg’, this work would not have been a success if not for immeasurable contributions of members of the editorial committee, professional researchers, coordinators of program committees and the entire members of the organization. I sincerely recognize the contributions of our Patron Chief Emmanuel C. Iwuanyanwu for his intellectual and fatherly support throughout our research work.

THE VIEW, a human rights magazine, which is channeled towards enriching and increasing human rights literacy among the populace, has come to stay. The greatest perpetrator of human rights crimes are those who are illiterates about human rights and those who do not know their rights are more vulnerable to having them abused and often lack the language and conceptual framework to effectively advocate for them. The VIEW has come as a bridge linking the people and their fundamental rights. This particular edition is focusing more on human rights education and evaluation of universal declaration of human rights: Nigeria’s score shit during democracy years. Featuring extensively in this edition is global human rights reports on Africa, Americas, Europe and Asia. We also have report on democracy and good governance, human rights and democracy: inseparable twin. I like to acknowledge commitment of our women and child’s rights committee on its successful research and reports on two important issues: female genital mutilation and implications, vesico vaginal fistulae and consequences. Also coming to our long awaiting readers and students of human rights schools are: declaration of the rights of the child, universal declaration of human rights, your right to know, ubuntu perspective on human rights. We are also bringing to you a message tagged Why Human Rights Matter from Irene Khan, Secretary General of Amnesty International. There is an exclusive report on Oru Refugee Camp. Towards the end of pages of every edition, we shall be bringing to you upcoming events and different opportunities. What we owe you is relevant information about human rights and we expect from readers of this magazine to feel the importance of human rights by internalizing human rights values, and integrate them into the way you live. Human rights are our common heritage and their realization depends on the contributions that each and every one of us is willing to make individually and collectively, now and in the future. I like to inform our numerous readers that, this is just an introductory edition; hence we welcome your ideas, observations and commentaries even as we promise to give you all you need to know concerning human rights worldwide in our subsequent editions. We will meet again in the next edition.

EVALUATING THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS: NIGERIA'S SCORE SHIT DURING DEMOCRACY YEARS.

On December 10, 1948, the whole world gave a declaration and commitment to protect and promote human rights by adopting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Nigeria is a signatory to the UDHR. How strictly various governments in Nigeria adheres to the UDHR, how regular have they been reporting human rights? It is important to note at this stage that most conventions and instruments draw their relevance from the UDHR. The preamble of the UDHR states:

"The General Assembly recognizes that the inherent dignity and the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world, human rights should be protected by the rule of law, friendly relations between nations must be fostered, the people of the UN have affirmed their faith in human rights, the dignity and the worth of the human person, the equal rights of men and women are determined to promote social progress, better standards of life and larger freedom and have promise to promote human rights and a common understanding of these rights."

Globally, various governments have done more harm to international treaties; they have dented their countries' images at various fronts and put to peril their cherished roles internationally. The Nigerian government is trying to make amendment, to project a role in observance of human rights. To what extent can we take serious their commitment, remains a fundamental question and yardstick we have to use in evaluating them.

Examining the record of this government brings deferring results. There is no gainsaying that the human rights community looks more relaxed, people can discuss human rights either with favour but, most importantly without fear.

Let us now attempt to fill the score shit and take a tour of their records.

In the first instance freedom of speech is no longer a luxury, as previous governments considered it, but now it is an integral part of our system. Government has also shown some political commitments in support of human rights, there have been consultations with the human rights NGOs not only by the President, but also by other government parastatals and functionaries. Still we are yet to see serious policy formulation to translate resolution of these consultations to actions in order to register government’s commitment.

Be that as it may, we cannot but commend government’ roles with regards to international treaties. The ratification of the status of International Criminal Court (ICC) and the Convention Against Torture, Cruel Inhuman and Degrading Treatments and Punishments (CAT). Though we still need to wait and see how this ratification could practically translate to prosecution and invocation.

We are also aware that the government embarked on constitution review, to be in line with the current democratic setting. We could not but mention the government’s commitment in empowering the National Human Rights Violations and Investigation Commission to function. Meanwhile, we have to say here that the entire country people are still expecting the report of this commission to be published. Though it is after four years now, but the effort will not be appreciated if this is not done.

We also welcome the fact that there have been no executions since return to civil rule and that government has commuted other death sentences. We cannot but commend efforts of our lawmakers by passing into law the rights of the child.

Taking a view look at the other side of the coin might be shocking and alarming.

Death penalty

At least three death sentences were passed by High Courts, and on 27 May 2002 the Supreme Court upheld four death sentences passed by a High Court in Abia State in 1999. There were no executions of people who had been convicted of offences under non-Sharia penal codes.

Sharia-based penal legislation, which provides for mandatory death sentences for extra-marital sex and for murder, continues to be implemented in some states of northern Nigeria. One person was executed for murder and Sharia courts in Bauchi, Kaduna, Jigawa and Niger States passed at least five death sentences for offences related to sexual conduct.

Sani Yakubu Rodi, aged 27, was executed by hanging on 3 January 2002 at Katsina Prison following the expiration of the statutory 30-day period to appeal against the sentence. He had been found guilty in November 2001 by a Sharia court in Katsina of the murder of a woman and her two children.

Amina Lawal, aged 30, was sentenced by stoning to death for adultery by a Sharia court at Bakori, Katsina State. She allegedly confessed at her first trial to having had a child while divorced. On 19 August, 2002 the Sharia Court of Appeal in Funtua, Katsina State, upheld the death sentence. Amina Lawal’s appeal against the sentence to the Upper Sharia Court of Appeal of Katsina was pending for a long time. Amina Lawal’s case was the subject of a worldwide campaign by several non-governmental organizations, including Amnesty International and Centre for Human Rights Education & Reporting, against death sentences and cruel, inhuman or degrading punishments passed by Sharia courts in northern Nigeria. Amina Lawal is now free and lives abroad. The Sharia Court of Appeal of Sokoto State ordered the acquittal of Safiya Yakubu Hussaini, who was facing death sentence by stoning for adultery. She was sentenced to death in October 2001 by a Sharia court in Gwadabawa, Sokoto State. She was not executed due to pressure from governments and non-governmental human rights organizations. Cruel, inhuman and degrading punishments Sharia courts sentenced several people to cruel, inhuman and degrading punishments. Dozens of people were sentenced to have their hands amputated for theft or armed robbery and to flogging for fornication, consumption of alcohol and other offences. The sentences were passed in Sokoto, Zamfara, Kano, Kebbi, Bauchi, Kaduna, Jigawa and other northern states. At least three sentences of flogging or amputation have been carried out in Zamfara and Bauchi States.

Most of those convicted under the new penal legislation were from economically deprived backgrounds. In the majority of cases, international standards for fair trial, such as the right to legal representation, were not observed. Floggings and amputations were repeatedly carried out in towns and villages within hours of sentencing.

In March 2002, in a letter to the governors of the 12 states that had introduced Sharia-based penal legislation, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Republic, Chief Bola Ige stated that the new codes were unconstitutional as they were discriminatory on grounds of religion. The Minister stated: “Any Muslim should not be subjected to a punishment more severe than would be imposed on other Nigerians for the same offence”. However, the federal government took no action to change the new penal legislation or prevent its application.

Killings, torture and ill treatment by police Torture still continues as the order of the day at various Police Stations with gross impunity, indiscriminate arrests also go on indefinitely. The loss of confidence in the Police in protecting lives and properties is unabated;

The proliferation of anti-crime operations by the federal police resulted in extra judicial executions, deaths in custody, torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in police detention centres throughout the country. Extra-Judicial Executions has become a norm with the police, we are concerned to hear from many sources, cases of armed robbery suspects instead of being prosecuted have been killed by ordinary vigilante groups taking the law into their hands or by the police. Police anti-robbery squads are widely believed either to release armed robbery suspects uncharged if they are under protection of powerful criminal bosses or to kill them rather than attempt to bring them to justice through the courts. In most cases, the policemen responsible were not brought to justice.

Vigilante brutality and killings Armed vigilante groups, especially in the southwest and southeast, are responsible for killings; acts of torture; cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment; unlawful detention; and “disappearances” of alleged criminals. Some of the groups were tacitly or officially endorsed by state governments to conduct law enforcement functions.

Dozens of people were extra judicially executed in Anambra State by the Anambra State Vigilante Service (AVS), a vigilante group officially endorsed by a law passed in 2000 by the Anambra State House of Assembly. On 24 September Mobile Police officers attacked premises of the AVS in and around Onitsha, Anambra State, and found five illegal detention centres in Ihala, Nnewi, Onitsha, Awka and Ekulubia. At least 100 members of the group were arrested and subsequently released without charge. State-endorsed vigilante groups were also responsible for extra judicial executions, torture and unlawful detention in Abia and Imo States. At least 10 people were publicly killed by the AVS with machetes at Onitsha main market and other locations in the town. Political violence and killings Allegations of politically motivated killings and acts of harassment and intimidation spread throughout the country, with allegations of involvement of individual members of state and local governments and political parties. Political violence was particularly acute in Ebonyi, Bayelsa and Anambra States. Thirteen people were arrested in connection with the assassination of Bola Ige, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Republic. They were charged with murder and complicity in October 2002, State-endorsed armed vigilante groups were responsible for large numbers of extra judicial executions in the southeast, and suspected of involvement in a number of unsolved killings of politicians

Political killings have continued to have its way since the enthronement of civil rule in 1999. Harry Marshal, Barnabas Igwe and his wife, Abigael, Amakiri Dikibo, among others are victims. Loss of lives and properties in Anambra State is on the high side. Niger Delta cannot be forgotten in the history of Nigeria when it comes to arm struggling. Barnabas Igwe, president of the Nigerian Bar Association in Anambra State, and his wife were killed in September 2002 by a group of people armed with machetes. Barnabas Igwe had publicly opposed state-endorsed vigilante groups in Anambra and openly criticized the governor of the state Marshall Harry, National Vice Chairman of the main opposition party, the All Nigeria People’s Party (ANPP), was killed when armed men entered his home in Abuja. Ogbonaya Uche, an ANPP candidate for the Senate, died days after he had been shot by unidentified armed men at his home in Owerri, Imo State. Trial started of 12 detainees charged in October 2002 in connection with the murder of Attorney General and Minister of Justice Bola Ige in December 2001. we are aware that, the wife of the Minister had also died. Meanwhile, up till her death, she totally lost courage in the judiciary system of the country due to the ways and manners the case of his husband’s death was being handled. All the suspects in connection with the murder have been released for lack of substantial evidence. It is good to have it on record that the Attorney General and Minister of Justice in Nigeria was murdered in cold blood and still has not found justice up to the time of this publication.

Impunity

The authorities continue to fail to bring to justice perpetrators of human rights violations. Nigeria continues to foster impunity, failing to bring to justice not only those responsible for human rights violations in Nigeria but also individuals charged with grave offences under international law. Human rights violations by the Nigerian armed forces under the present government, particularly the killing of civilians at Odi, Bayelsa State, in 1999 and in Benue State in 2001, remained uninvestigated.

Impunity for Charles Taylor Former Liberian President Charles Taylor relinquished power and left Liberia for Nigeria with implicit guarantees from the Nigerian government that he would be neither prosecuted in Nigeria nor surrendered to the Special Court in Sierra Leone. An international warrant for his arrest had been issued after he was indicted by the Special Court for war crimes, crimes against humanity and other serious violations of international humanitarian law during Sierra Leone’s internal armed conflict. These crimes included killings, mutilations, rapes and the use of child soldiers by Sierra Leone armed opposition forces that he had supported. President Obasanjo argued that allowing Charles Taylor to travel to Nigeria was in the interest of securing a political settlement to Liberia’s conflict. However, Interpol allowed worldwide circulation of the arrest warrant against Charles Taylor with a view to extradition. Nigerian Coalition on International Criminal Court protested that the Nigerian government had violated its obligations under international law, and call for Charles Taylor to be surrendered to the Special Court or investigated with a view to criminal or extradition proceedings in Nigerian courts were ignored.

Odi and Benue massacres

The event in Odi is still fresh in our minds, where large number of homes and properties were destroyed by the military over several days, and hundreds were forced to flee. No one was brought to justice for the raid by the army in the town of Odi, Bayelsa State, in 1999, in which over 250 unarmed civilians were killed, nor for the killing of more than 200 civilians in Benue State in 2001. The federal government did not apologize officially for the killings and none of the victims or the families of those killed received compensation. A 10-member Judicial Commission of Inquiry was created by the federal government. The commission was mandated to investigate the causes of inter communal violence in Nassarawa, Plateau, Benue and Taraba States, and to set up lasting strategies to secure peace. The commission’s terms of reference did not mention explicitly investigation into the actions of the armed forces in the Benue massacre.

Human Rights Violations Investigation Commission The Human Rights Violations Investigation Commission, known as the Oputa Panel, inaugurated in June 1999 to investigate human rights violations committed between 1966 and the return to civilian rule in May 1999, submitted its final report to President Obasanjo in May. The report was not made public and the government fails to disclose its plans to implement recommendations made by the panel.

Economic interests and human rights in Niger Delta Tension continue to mount in the oil-producing Delta region. There were widespread protests against the oil companies and the federal government on issues such as environmental degradation, lack of compensation, and lack of development assistance to local communities. Permanent deployment of army and navy troops to protect oil companies against “saboteurs” led to a series of clashes between armed forces and local students, youths and activists. Several hundred Ijaw, Itsekiri and Urhobo women staged a peaceful protest outside the operational headquarters of the oil companies Shell and Chevron-Texaco in Warri, Delta State. Some of the women, who said the protests were violently broken up by soldiers and Mobile Police officers, had scars and bruises, which they said had been caused by beatings, floggings and kicking by police and soldiers. African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights made public its ruling in relation to an accusation filed in 1993 by a Nigerian human rights group against the federal government for the violation of the rights of the Ogoni people in Rivers State. The Commission ruled that the Nigerian government had violated several articles of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. It appealed to the government to stop all attacks on Ogoni leaders and communities by the Nigerian security forces; investigate human rights violations in the area; ensure adequate compensation to victims of human rights violations, including relief and resettlement assistance and the clean-up of lands and rivers damaged by oil operations; ensure that appropriate environmental and social impact assessments were prepared for future oil development; and provide information on health and environmental risks of oil operations.

COMMUNAL AND RELIGIOUS CRISIS

Communal and religious crises are also in escalation. The Ife Modakeke crisis consumed more than enough lifes, The Sharia crisis in Kaduna was also a pointer to this fact, Kano, Plateau and Adamawa states can not claim innocent in this. In all we have not witnessed serious government commitment in addressing these issues.

ILLEGAL ARREST OF HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS

Despite the fact that the country practices democracy as a form of government which allows among others freedom of expression and the press, right to peaceful assembly and association, right to freedom of movement. All these though well articulated in the constitution of Nigeria still have constituted to the arrest of human rights defenders in the country. Some of these people are: Gani Fawehinmi, Wole Soyinka, Femi Falana, and Femi Aborisade.

Conclusively we believe that this government, which has shown that it has a fundamental commitment to human rights and freedoms, needs to address the above concerns and should articulate its vision of the place of human rights in government policies in the coming years. While we welcome the more open environment in which human rights activists can operate, we believe that the government needs to formulate and publicize a programme of action on human rights to demonstrate its commitment in the long-term to the establishment of a human rights culture in Nigeria.

HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION: A NEED OR NECESSITY?

“Human rights are the rights a person has simply because he or she is a human being”. It also refers to the basic and fundamental rights guaranteed to an individual. Human rights belong to all persons equally, universally and without any limitation. Human rights had existed since the beginning of the world. These rights were later embodied in a document known as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. Today millions of people in the world are ignorant or lack knowledge about their rights as embodied in the UDHR, a universal document that preaches respect for human rights. It is the primary responsibility of states to educate their citizens of their rights. This duty had ignorantly been avoided by the states, reasons unknown while bearing in mind that the state is greatly involved in the violation of these rights.

Education is said to be the best legacy to bequeath to a child. It is the pride of a nation. It remains the most important way of developing and inculcating human rights awareness and protection. In order to achieve the foregoing, Human Rights Education can be seen as a way of imbibing and propagating human rights norms and principles in the Nigeria society. It should be noted that the greatest perpetrator of human rights crimes are those who are illiterates about human rights.

Considering the importance of this education to the society, Centre for Human Rights Education & Reporting is oblige to seek support for the introduction of Human Rights Education in Nigerian schools. One major step of achieving this, is to develop a school curriculum on Human Rights Education, this would serve as a guide on how to teach human rights education.

Human rights are both inspirational and practical. Its principle holds up the vision of free, just and peaceful world and set minimum standards for how individuals and institutions everywhere should treat people. Human rights also empower people with a framework for action when those minimum standards are not met, for people still have human rights even if the laws or those in power do not recognize or protect them.

We experience our human rights everyday when we worship according to our belief, or choose not to worship at all; when we debate and criticize government policies; when we join a trade union; when we travel to other parts of the country or overseas. Although we usually take these actions for granted, people both here and in other countries do not enjoy all these liberties equally. Human rights violations also occur everyday in this country when a parent abuses a child, when a family is homeless, when a school provides inadequate education, when women are not treated equally with men or when one person steals from another.

Human Rights Education as a Human Right Education in human rights is itself fundamental human rights and also a responsibility. The preamble to the UDHR exhort “every individual and every organ in the society” to strive by teaching and educating to promote respect for these rights and freedom. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights declares that a government “may not stand in the way of people learning about the rights”.

Human Rights Education is all learning that develops in the knowledge, skills and values of human rights. The United Nation decade for Human Rights Education has defined human rights education as “training, dissemination and information effort aimed at the building of a universal culture of human rights through the impacting of knowledge and skills and the molding of attitudes which are directed to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedom, the full development of the human personality and the sense of its dignity, the promotion of understanding, respect, gender equality and friendship among all nations, indigenous people and racial, national, ethnic, religious and linguistic groups, the enabling of all persons to participate effectively in a free society. Although news reports refer to human rights everyday in Nigeria, “human rights literacy” is not wide spread in the country. Students of International Relations, Mass Communication or political science may study human rights in a university setting, but most people receive no education, formally or informally about human rights. Even human rights activists usually acquire their knowledge and skill by self-teaching and direct experience.

Human Rights Education promotes democratic principles. It examines human rights issues without bias and from diverse perspective through a variety of educational practices.

Human Rights Education helps to develop the communication skills and informed critical thinking essential to democracy. It provides multi cultural and historical perspective on the universal struggle for justice and dignity.

Human Rights Education engages the heart as well as the mind. It challenges students to ask what human rights mean to them personally and encourage them to translate caring into informed, and non-violent action.

Human Rights Education affirms the interdependence of the human family. It promotes understanding of the complex global forces that create abuses, as well as the ways in which abuses can be abolished and avoided.

When people say, “I have got my rights,” they usually think of those civil and political rights, which include freedom of assembly, freedom of worship, and the right to a fair trial. Few, however, realize that social, economic and cultural rights such as health care, housing, or a living wage are also human rights guaranteed in the UDHR.

People who do not know their rights are more vulnerable to having them abused and often lack the language and conceptual framework to effectively advocate for them. Growing consensus around the world recognizes education for, and about human rights as essential. It can contribute to the building of free, just and peaceful societies. Human rights education is also increasingly recognized as an effective strategy to prevent human rights abuses.

Integral to learning about one’s human rights is learning about the responsibilities that accompany all rights. Just as human rights belong to both individual and society as a whole, the responsibility to respect, defend and promote human rights is both individual and collective. The preamble of the UDHR, for example, calls not only on governments to promote human rights, but also on “every individual and every organ of society”. Human rights education provides the knowledge and awareness needed to meet this responsibility.

The responsibilities of all citizens in a democratic society are inseparable from the responsibility to promote human rights. To flourish, both democracy and human rights require people’s active participation. Human rights education includes learning the skills of advocacy, to speak and act every day in the name of human rights.

Human Rights Education also provides a basis for conflict resolution and the promotion of social order. Rights themselves often clash, such as when one person’s commitment to public safety conflicts with another’s freedom of expression. As a value system based on respect and the equality and dignity of all people, human rights can create a frame work for analyzing and resolving such differences. Human rights education also teaches the skills of negotiation, mediation and consensus building.

Human Rights Education teaches both about human rights and for human rights. Its goal is to help people understand human rights, value human rights and take responsibility for respecting, defending and promoting human rights. An important outcome of human rights education is empowerment, a process through which people and communities increase their control of their own lives and the decisions that affect them. The ultimate goal about human rights education is people working together to bring about human rights, justice and dignity for all.

Education for human rights helps people feel the importance of human rights, internalize human rights values, and integrate them into the way they live, these human rights values and attitudes include nurturing respect for others, self-esteem and hope, understanding the nature of human dignity and respecting the dignity of others, empathizing with those whose rights are violated and feeling a sense of solidarity with them, recognizing that the enjoyment of human rights by all citizens is a precondition to a just and humane society, perceiving the human rights dimension of civil, social, political, economic and cultural issues and conflicts both in Nigeria and other countries, valuing non violence and believing that cooperation is better that conflict.

Education for human rights also gives people a sense of responsibility for respecting and defending human rights and empowers them through skills to take appropriate action. These skills for action include recognizing that human rights may be promoted and defended on an individual, collective and institutional level, developing critical understanding of life situations, analyzing situations in moral terms, realizing that unjust situations can be improved, recognizing a personal and social stake in the defense of human rights, analyzing factors that cause human rights violations, knowing about and being able to use global, regional, national and local human rights instruments and mechanisms for the protection of human rights, strategizing appropriate responses to injustice, acting to promote and defend human rights.

Human Rights Education is not a subject that can be learnt or studied at a distance. We should not just learn about the universal declaration, about racial injustice, or about homelessness without also being challenged to think about what it all means for us personally. We must ask ourselves, “How does this relate to the way we live our lives?” The answers to this question will tell us much about how effectively we have taken human rights. In pursuit of this, our human rights organization will work in collaboration with states and federal government of Nigeria on the production of a curriculum and introduction of Human Rights Education in schools.

GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS VIEWS

Americas

Despite the commitments made by governments at the Organization of American States (OAS) Special Conference on Hemispheric Security in October and other forums, human rights in the region continued to be sacrificed in the name of “security”. Most governments interpreted the concept of security narrowly, failing to address effectively the threat to human security posed by hunger, poverty, disease, environmental degradation and other such factors. National security and ‘war on terror’ The US-led “war on terror” continued to be waged using indiscriminate and disproportionate means. Hundreds of foreign nationals remained in prolonged indefinite detention without charge or trial in US custody outside the US mainland. Most of those detained as so-called “enemy combatants” were held without any form of judicial process; for a handful, the only way out of their legal black hole appeared to be through grossly unfair trials before military commissions. Authoritative worldwide opinion condemned the blatant disregard for international and US constitutional standards by the USA. Many of the measures taken by the US authorities in the wake of the 11 September 2001 attacks undermined the fabric of international law. Other aspects of US security policy, including the threat in July to cut off military aid to 35 countries for refusing to guarantee US nationals immunity before the International Criminal Court, threatened to have a similarly corrosive effect on the international rule of law. The security policies pursued by the Colombian government since 2002 continued to exacerbate the already severe human rights and humanitarian crises, during which thousands of civilians have been killed, have “disappeared” or been kidnapped by the armed forces, army-backed paramilitaries or armed opposition groups. New security measures sidestepped constitutional guarantees and granted broad powers to the military to deal with public order issues. Initiatives such as the creation of an army of “peasant soldiers” and a civilian informers’ network risked dragging civilians further into the conflict. “Anti-terrorism” legislation adopted in Guyana and proposed in the Bahamas extended the scope of the death penalty and included dangerously broad definitions of “terrorism”. In March, the Cuban authorities detained scores of dissidents accused of conspiring with the USA and seeking to subvert the Cuban system; prior to this, the USA had named Cuba on a list of seven states accused of “sponsoring terrorism” and some US officials had accused Cuba of researching biological weapons and providing technology to “other rogue states”. Seventy-five activists were tried unfairly and sentenced to up to 28 years in prison. The Cuban government sought to justify its unprecedented crack-down as a necessary response to the threat to its national security posed by the USA. After reviewing the available trial documentation for the 75, AI considered them to be prisoners of conscience and called for their immediate and unconditional release.

Political insecurity and the rule of law Political, economic and social crises in several countries laid bare the fragile foundations of the rule of law and the faltering process of democratic consolidation in the region. Deteriorating economic and social conditions in Bolivia prompted mass demonstrations, sparked by the signing of coca eradication agreements with the USA, and plans to export Bolivia’s natural gas via Chile. Civil unrest left more than 80 people dead, many as a result of apparently excessive use of force by police, and forced the President out of office. Haiti was on the verge of being ungovernable. An impasse between President Jean Bertrand Aristide and opposition groups stalled implementation of a framework sponsored by the OAS for elections due in 2003, threatening a void in governance as parliamentarians’ mandates were set to lapse in early January 2004. Meanwhile, economic conditions in the poorest country in the continent deteriorated further and politically motivated violence escalated. Political polarization also continued to destabilize Venezuela. A national stoppage organized by the opposition virtually shut down the country but failed to force President Hugo Chávez, who survived a coup attempt in 2002, out of office. International mediation led to a commitment to resolve the political crisis through peaceful means. However, few steps were taken to bring to justice those responsible for the killings committed during the failed coup. In other countries, some progress was made towards restoring faith in the administration of justice. President Néstor Kirchner took office in Argentina in May and embarked on reforming state institutions such as the police and judiciary. In Brazil, newly elected President Luis Inácio Lula da Silva set out detailed and long-term plans for public security reform, including human rights standards, in an attempt to combat high levels of crime and stem systematic human rights violations. In Mexico, a human rights study carried out as part of the government’s cooperation agreement with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights included recommendations for structural reform and committed the government to drawing up a national human rights program. Efforts across the region to combat impunity for gross human rights violations committed in previous decades gained momentum in 2003. In Argentina, some of the legal barriers to the investigation and prosecution of “disappearances” and other human rights violations were lifted and former high-ranking members of the military faced charges at home and abroad. In Chile, plans for dealing with the legacy of human rights violations under military rule were announced, including the transfer of ongoing cases from military to civilian courts, although the proposals included granting immunity to certain perpetrators of abuses. In Mexico, the Special Prosecutor investigating abuses during the “dirty war” in the 1970s and 1980s issued at least three arrest warrants for officers implicated in “disappearances”. A Paraguayan court ordered the arrest of former President Alfredo Stroessner in connection with a case of torture and killing in 1974, and a law was passed creating a Truth and Justice Commission to examine human rights violations under the Stroessner government. The Peruvian Truth and Reconciliation Commission called for justice and reparation for families of the thousands of victims of killings and “disappearances” between 1980 and 2000 by the armed forces and armed opposition groups. In Uruguay, the Peace Commission’s report on “disappearances” under military rule concluded that 26 “disappeared” Uruguayans had died under torture. Killings under military rule in Suriname were also under investigation, both by the Surinamese courts and before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Less progress was made, however, in tackling the legacy of more recent conflicts in Central America. El Salvador’s National Assembly failed to support ongoing efforts by relatives and non-governmental organizations to uncover the fate of children who “disappeared” during the 1980-1991 conflict. In Guatemala, witnesses and human rights defenders attempting to bring to justice those responsible for the widespread abuses during the 30-year civil conflict were among the main targets of threats, attacks and killings. The recommendations of the Historical Clarification Commission, which concluded in 1999 that genocide had been committed, had still not been implemented, and General Ríos Montt, Head of State at the height of the genocide, was allowed to run for President in the November elections, despite being constitutionally barred. Corruption, parallel power structures and the failure to assert effective civilian control over the military remained serious threats to human rights and the rule of law in Guatemala and elsewhere in the region. Military and police jurisdiction over human rights cases also remained an obstacle to justice in Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador and Mexico.

Economic insecurity

The pace of regional and sub-regional economic integration increased, in part due to vigorous efforts by the USA to pursue its trade liberalization agenda through the adoption of multilateral and bilateral free trade agreements. Disagreements over aspects such as agricultural subsidies and anti-dumping policies led a number of governments in the region to mount an increasing challenge to the US free trade agenda. Promoted as a vehicle for alleviating poverty and boosting development, the proposed Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA) and other similar agreements prompted skeptical and hostile responses from many sectors of civil society wary of their impact on economic, social and cultural rights, including labour rights, access to health and public services, and rights related to the environment. Large demonstrations against the FTAA and agreements with international financial institutions in countries including the Dominican Republic and the USA were met by indiscriminate use of force by police. States of emergency were declared in parts of Peru and Ecuador to contain civil unrest regarding economic policies in the region. The economic situation in Latin America and the Caribbean remained dire, with 220 million people – 43 per cent of the population – living in poverty and one in five in extreme poverty, according to the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. Poverty had a disproportionate impact on women and children – one in five children under the age of five was chronically malnourished. Unequal land distribution, plunging export commodity prices and other structural causes of poverty remained to be addressed. Indigenous, environmental and peasant farmers’ groups campaigning against exploitative resource extraction by transnational companies or defending their land rights faced increased risks to their safety in Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Paraguay and elsewhere.

Social insecurity and discrimination Against this backdrop, crime and social insecurity reached alarming proportions. Both rural and urban society remained riven by social exclusion and discrimination based on factors such as class, race and gender. In many countries, the insecurity generated by high levels of crime and deepening inequality resulted in increased tolerance of repressive policing by both governments and the public at large. In Brazil, entire communities of the urban poor appeared to be targeted by police as scapegoats for the failure of broader public security policies. Torture and ill-treatment by police and prison officers remained endemic in Brazil, and a frequent tool of law enforcement in numerous countries across the region. In Jamaica, where levels of armed violence were extremely high, police brutality and unlawful killings were commonplace. The death penalty continued to be imposed in the USA and Caribbean, and the USA stood in shameful isolation by executing child offenders. In Latin America, Cuba resumed executions and there were occasional proposals to reintroduce the death penalty in response to rising levels of crime. Studies by UN experts on racism and indigenous peoples in 2003 highlighted the marginalization and lack of access to justice of indigenous people and others facing ethnic discrimination in countries such as Bolivia, Guyana and Mexico. The impunity surrounding the murder and abduction of hundreds of women and girls in the state of Chihuahua, Mexico, highlighted the obstacles to justice faced by women at risk of violence in the community and home. Similar gender-based killings were reported in other parts of Mexico and Central America. Women’s rights activists across the region highlighted the barriers that prevented legislation on violence against women from offering real protection in practice. Sexual violence against women, including rape and mutilation, were used as a weapon of war in Colombia’s armed conflict. Cases of violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, including by police, were also documented in several countries. Street children continued to be seen as easy targets of government measures to combat crime. An anti-gang law was adopted in El Salvador with apparent disregard for the requirements of national law and international standards, while in Argentina there were reports of torture and ill-treatment of minors, including street children, by police. Despite well-publicized initiatives by the Honduran authorities to halt the killing of street children, few of those responsible for the killings were brought to justice. Refugees and migrants escaping conflict and insecurity faced further human rights abuses. Those fleeing the Colombian conflict encountered discrimination and lack of protection in neighbouring countries. Detention and ill-treatment of refugees and migrants from Haiti were reported in the USA, Canada and several Caribbean countries, while countries including Canada, Uruguay and the USA continued to return non-nationals to countries where they were at risk of torture and other violations.

Action for human rights
An element of hope in an otherwise bleak landscape was the regionalization and increasing strength of social movements and other civil society actors seeking to respond to key threats to human security in the region. Movements working for women’s rights, for the rights of indigenous people, environmentalists and sexual rights activists were among those whose voice emerged with increased prominence. Like other human right defenders, they faced an array of threats and obstacles, including fabricated criminal charges. Countries where attacks on human rights defenders were widespread included Brazil, Colombia, Cuba and Guatemala. Forums such as the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil, in January opened up new spaces for regionally coordinated human rights activism. The regional media remained relatively free, despite concentrated ownership and sporadic attacks on media workers in some countries. The OAS provided an important forum for collective action and the promotion of human rights throughout the region, with the Inter-American human rights system playing a crucial role in monitoring violations, challenging impunity and analysing current human rights challenges such as poverty and insecurity. At global forums such as the UN Security Council, the General Assembly, the Commission on Human Rights and the World Trade Organization, countries including Brazil and Mexico emerged as an increasingly effective counter-balance to the regional superpower on issues ranging from trade and the war on Iraq, to international justice and other human rights issues. As the year ended, there was hope that fresh leadership in the region might promote more effective action for human rights and security, based on a renewed understanding that these two concepts are not incompatible but indivisible and interdependent.

Europe and Central Asia

Governments across Europe and Central Asia continued to use the so-called “war on terror” to undermine human rights in the name of security. Among the steps taken by governments were regressive moves on “anti-terrorist” legislation, attacks on refugee protection, and restrictions on freedom of association and expression. Simplistic rhetoric about security, immigration and asylum, together with an upsurge in populism, bolstered racism and discriminatory practices towards minorities across the region. The lack of political will shown by the European Union (EU) to confront human rights violations within its own borders was increasingly disturbing, particularly in light of the planned accession of 10 new member states in 2004. Those responsible for violations, including torture or ill-treatment, continued to enjoy impunity.

‘War on terror’

Under the auspices of combating “terrorism” governments continued to undermine human rights in law and practice. By the end of the year, 14 foreign nationals who could not be deported remained interned in the United Kingdom (UK) under legislation that allowed for indefinite detention without charge or trial, principally on the basis of secret evidence. Those detained in the UK under “anti-terrorism” legislation were held in high-security facilities under severely restricted regimes.

Spain continued to ignore long-standing recommendations by various international bodies to introduce greater safeguards for suspects held under “anti-terrorist” legislation, and indeed planned to more than double the time, which certain people could be held incommunicado. A judge also closed the only entirely Basque-language newspaper and 10 people associated with it were held under “anti-terrorist” legislation in moves that appeared to be injurious to the right to freedom of expression.

The authorities in Uzbekistan used the “war on terror” to justify a continuing clampdown on religious and political dissent. At least 6,000 political prisoners remained in jail there and members of independent Islamic congregations were among those who faced detention and intimidation. In Turkmenistan, a wave of repression continued, following an alleged assassination attempt in November 2002 on the President, with scores of people convicted after blatantly unfair trials amid credible allegations of torture and ill treatment.

Government efforts to limit asylum provisions and immigration benefited from the new language of “national security” and “counter-terrorism”, with an emphasis on control rather than protection. In Italy, for example, there were fears that some asylum-seekers were forced to return to countries where they risked grave human rights violations and that some individuals, expelled on grounds that they posed a danger to national security and public order, had no opportunity to challenge the decision in fair proceedings. The human rights perspective remained lacking from the thinking of the EU on asylum, which continued to promote a further sealing off of the EU at the expense of international protection obligations.

Racism

Racism, discrimination and intolerance, including anti-Semitism and Islamophobia, continued to be a major concern across the region. Manifestations included institutional racism in the spheres of economic, social and cultural rights.

Discrimination against Roma was widespread in many states in the region, often affecting virtually all areas of life including access to education, housing, employment and social services.

Many people seeking to return home after being displaced by war in the western Balkans faced discrimination on ethnic grounds, particularly with regard to accessing employment, education and health care. This acted as a barrier against the return and reintegration of minorities.

Racist application of citizenship laws in the Russian Federation meant that certain ethnic minority groups – including members of the Meskhetian population in one region – remained effectively stateless, and as such were denied access to pensions, child benefits and higher education.

Racism continued as a backdrop to human rights abuses by law enforcement officials in the administration of justice. Reports of race-related ill-treatment by law enforcement officials came from a distressingly wide range of states, including Belgium, Bulgaria, France, Greece, Italy, Poland, the Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia and Spain. There was also a lack of due diligence by some states in investigating and prosecuting assaults by private actors on minorities, ethnic as well as religious. In Georgia, for example, religious minorities continued to face harassment, intimidation and violent attacks, while the police failed to provide adequate protection for those targeted or show vigour in prosecuting those allegedly responsible.

Lack of human rights protection
Torture and ill-treatment were reported from across the region, including in Albania, Moldova, Romania and Serbia and Montenegro, where reports of such treatment were common and credible. In Turkey, torture and ill-treatment in police detention remained a matter of grave concern, despite some positive legislative reforms. In Germany, an intense public debate on the permissible use of torture occurred after it emerged that a senior police officer had ordered a subordinate to use force against a criminal suspect. Some states, such as Belgium, Italy and Switzerland, lacked fundamental safeguards against ill-treatment in police custody.

In other states, such as Greece, Macedonia, Portugal and Spain, there were reports of reckless or excessive use of firearms, sometimes resulting in deaths. In several countries, conditions in prisons as well as in detention facilities holding asylum-seekers and unauthorized immigrants, were cruel and degrading. In some states, people with mental disabilities were treated inhumanely – in social care homes in Bulgaria, and through the use of cage beds in the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovakia. Many states lacked independent scrutiny mechanisms to address such violations, a problem compounded by the continued failure to accept accountability at EU level for human rights observance by member states.

In some states impunity for human rights violations continued. In Turkey, the ratio of prosecutions of members of the security forces to complaints of torture and ill-treatment filed by members of the public continued to be pitifully low. Russian Federation security forces continued to act with virtual impunity in the conflict in the Chechen Republic, amid ongoing reports of their involvement in torture and “disappearances”. Continued impunity for wartime violations remained a concern in the western Balkans. Although some people suspected of war crimes were transferred to the custody of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, others continued to evade arrest, some apparently protected by authorities in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia and Serbia and Montenegro.

Thousands of “disappearances” that occurred during the 1992-1995 war remained unresolved. Although there were some domestic prosecutions for war crimes, lack of political will and deficiencies in the domestic justice systems led to continued widespread impunity.

In Belarus, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, dissent from official policies in civic, religious and political life was systematically and often brutally repressed. Human rights defenders in a number of countries faced threats and detention, including in Turkey where a range of laws and regulations was used to frustrate their activity, and in Azerbaijan where a campaign by the state-sponsored media against several prominent human rights defenders culminated in violent attacks on their offices and raised fears for their safety and that of their families. In both these countries, as well as in other states such as Italy, Greece and Switzerland, police were reported to have used excessive force against demonstrators.

The lack of effective redress for human rights violations in countries in Europe compounded concerns about proposals under consideration which would have the effect of curtailing redress available at the regional level in the European Court of Human Rights. Member states of the Council of Europe proposed adding new admissibility criteria to the only international human rights court where individuals enjoy the right of direct petition.

Violence against women
Human rights violations against women and girls continued across the region. In the context of trafficking and forced prostitution, there were concerns that victims were being failed by the judicial systems in source, transit and destination countries. Domestic violence was also an entrenched problem across Europe and Central Asia, from Belgium to the Russian Federation. Contributory factors included states regarding domestic violence as belonging to the “private sphere”; a lack of legal provisions in some states specifically prohibiting or criminalizing domestic violence; a lack of specialist police units and training; insufficient provisions to provide protection to victims; and court decisions which did not always reflect the gravity of such offences.

Death penalty
There were some positive moves on the death penalty during the year. Armenia abolished capital punishment in peacetime, Kazakstan announced a moratorium on executions pending legislation on abolition, and Kyrgyzstan maintained its moratorium on executions. Tajikistan, while retaining the death penalty, reduced its scope. However, in recent years Tajikistan and the two other retentionist states in the region, Belarus and Uzbekistan, have continued to carry out executions. The level of executions was believed to be particularly high in Uzbekistan, where scores of people have been executed in recent years after unfair trials, frequently amid allegations of torture, and with corruption an integral part of the investigation, trial and appeal in such cases. In Belarus, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, the clemency process and executions themselves were shrouded in secrecy, compounding the punishment inflicted not only on the prisoners but also on their families.

Executions took place in secret, with family members and friends denied the chance to say goodbye; in many cases families were not told for months whether their relative was alive or had been executed. They were also not told where their loved one was buried. None of these three countries published comprehensive statistics on their use of the death penalty.

Action for human rights
Although human rights remained under attack across the region, action to promote and protect fundamental rights continued. Many voices highlighted that human rights and security are not incompatible, but indivisible and interdependent.

Human rights defenders continued their work despite harassment, intimidation and detention. Social movements responded to a range of human rights concerns in the region, bringing together activists across borders, with forums such as the Second European Social Forum in Paris, France, in November providing opportunities for regional coordination of popular activism. Strong regional intergovernmental bodies, including the Council of Europe and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, continued to play key roles in promoting and protecting human rights.

DEMOCRACY AND GOOD GOVERNANCE

All democracies strive to respect and protect the human rights of citizens. Human rights mean those values that reflect respect for human life and human dignity. Democracy emphasizes the value of every human being. Examples of human rights include right to freedom of expression and the press, right to life, right to dignity of human person, right to personal liberty, right to fair hearing, right to private and family life, right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, right to peaceful assembly and association, right to freedom of movement, right to freedom from discrimination, right to acquire and own immovable property anywhere in the country, the right to equality, right to a fair trial and the right to basic education and health care.

Although the majority of the people rule in a democracy, the rights of the minority must be protected. Minorities may form an ‘opposition’ and organize to promote ideas different from the majority. People who are not in power must be allowed to organize and speak out. Individual citizens must also learn to be tolerant to views, beliefs and politics different to their own.

Democratic societies emphasize the principle that all people are equal. All people have a right to be treated equally and have equal opportunity. Equality means that all individuals are valued equally, have equal opportunities. Individuals and groups have the right to have different cultures, languages and beliefs and may not be discriminated against because of their race, religion, gender or sexual orientation.

Participation is the key role of citizens in democracy. It is not only their right, it is their duty. Citizen participation builds a better democracy. Citizens get to choose their leaders in local, state and national government elections. They can join and play a role in community organizations, labour unions and cultural groups. They can also express their opinions through the media and peaceful protest. Citizens have the right and duty to vote in elections, stand for election, attend community or civic meetings, become members of private or political organizations, debate issues and even organize rally and protest in non-violent manners.

Many democratic countries have a bill of right to protect the people against abuse of power. A bill of rights is a list of rights and freedoms guaranteed to all people in the country. When a bill of rights becomes part of a country’s constitution, the courts have the power to enforce these rights. A bill of rights limits the power of government and may also impose duties on individuals and organizations.

In a democracy, no one is above the law, not even a governor or an elected president. This is called the Rule of Law. It means that everyone must obey the law and be held accountable if they break it. Democracy also insists that the law be equally, fairly and consistently enforced. This is referred to as ‘due process of law’.

One-way citizens express their will is by electing officials to represent them in national, state and local government structures. Democracy insists that these elected officials are chosen and peacefully removed from office in a free and fair manner in regular elections. Intimidation, corruption and threats to citizens during or before an election are against the principles of democracy. For free and fair elections to occur most adult citizens should have the right to stand for government office and obstacles should not exist which make it difficult for people to vote. Elections should be held regularly.

In a democracy, elected and appointed officials have to be responsible for the actions and be accountable to the people who elected them. Officials must make decisions and perform their duties according to the will and wishes of the people they represent, not for themselves. It is the duty of individuals and organizations to ensure the government is held accountable by investigating allegations of corruption and abuse of power.

For government to be accountable, the people must know what is happening in the country. A transparent government holds public meetings and allows citizens to attend. In a democracy, the press and the people are able to get information about what decisions are being made, by whom and why. The government must make information available and citizens must be able to understand and act on this information.

In democratic elections, there are winners and losers. Often the losers in an election believe so strongly that their party or candidate is the best one, that they refuse to accept the results of the election. This is against democratic principles. The consequences of not accepting the results of an election may be a government that is ineffective and cannot make decisions.

In a multi-party system as in Nigeria, more than one political party can participate in elections and play a role in government. Multi-party allows for opposition to the party, which wins the election. This provides different viewpoints on issues and gives voters a choice of candidates, parties and policies to vote for.

Democratic societies try to prevent any elected official or group of people from misusing or abusing their power. One of the most common abuses of power is corruption. Democratic government is structured to limit the powers of the branches of government; for example, to have independent courts and agencies with power to act against any illegal action by an elected official or branch of government.

Economic freedom means that the government allows some private ownership of property and businesses, and that the people are allowed to choose their own work and join labour unions. It is generally accepted that free markets should exist in a democracy and the state should not totally control the economy.

DEMOCRACY & HUMAN RIGHTS – INSEPARABLE TWIN
Human Rights are generally accepted principles of fairness and justice or universal moral rights that belong equally to all people because they are human beings, regardless of their sex, race, colour, language, nationality, national origin, class or political beliefs.

With rights come duties and responsibilities, example of a citizen’s duty in bill of rights are right to equality which has a duty to treat others equally, i.e. not discriminate. Right to healthy environment brings duty to conserve environment. (i.e. not litter). Rights to freedom and security, duty to uphold the rule of law. Right to vote, duty to exercise that right. Freedom of expression, duty not to violate the rights of others through that expression. Citizens participate in a democratic system of government by voting in elections, nominating candidates, attending meetings, form interest and lobby groups. Paying taxes and services. Peaceful protest and petitions. Citizens participate in elections by voting in elections, stand as candidate, nominate candidate, nominate candidates, attend meetings, campaign for political party, express opinions through newspapers, work in voting station. Examples of the abuse of power include bribery and corruption, police brutality, nepotism, state violence, illegal actions by government officials.

How government can check the abuse of powers include separation of powers, bill of rights, the rule of law, a public protector, commissions of enquiry, international pressure, allowing press freedom and strong civil society. Some of the rights linked to the economic freedom include right to work, right to strike; right to choose profession; right to join a union; right to fair labour practice. Some of the rights linked to equality include right to equal and fair treatment, freedom from discrimination, freedom of association, right to language, culture, religion of choice, right to basic education and health care, freedom of movement and residence.

Some of the methods that might be used to bring about political tolerance in society include responsible actions and statements by politicians, discipline and restraint by party supporters, stable political environment, awareness of democratic principles and practice through education and information. Example of transparency in government include public hearings, televised parliamentary debates, free press, access to state documents, access to national and state parliaments and local city council meetings.

Why human rights matter
AI's Secretary General - Irene Khan © AI A message from Irene Khan, Amnesty International’s Secretary General

On 19 August 2003 the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Sergio Vieira de Mello, was killed in a bomb attack on the UN building in Baghdad, almost 10 years after the Office of the High Commissioner was established to uphold and promote human rights.

As one of the most prominent international human rights defenders lay dying in the rubble, the world had good cause to ponder how the legitimacy and credibility of the UN could have been eroded to such a fatal degree. Bypassed in the Iraq war and marginalized in its aftermath, discredited by its perceived vulnerability to pressure from powerful states, the UN seemed virtually paralyzed in its efforts to hold states to account for their adherence to international law and their performance on human rights.

It was easy at that moment to wonder whether the events of 2003 had also dealt a mortal blow to the vision of global justice and universal human rights that first inspired the creation of global institutions such as the UN. If human rights are used as a cloak by governments to put on or cast away according to political expediency, can the international community of states be trusted to bring about that vision? And what can the international community of citizens do to rescue human rights from the rubble?

The answer came the same week that the UN office was bombed, when a group of women in Mexico won the first step towards achieving justice for their murdered daughters. Marginalized and poor, they had fought for 10 years to get that far but, finally, they compelled Mexican President Vicente Fox and the federal authorities to intervene. I was with the mothers of Ciudad Juárez when the news of this breakthrough came through. I will never forget the joy on the faces of the women and their gratitude to the thousands of people around the world whose efforts had helped bring about change. A worldwide web of international solidarity had globalized their struggle. Looking at them, I saw how much can be achieved for human rights through the dynamic virtual space of global civil society.

The challenges facing the global movement for human rights today are stark. As activists, we must confront the threat posed by callous, cruel and criminal acts of armed groups and individuals. We must resist the backlash against human rights created by the single-minded pursuit of a global security doctrine that has deeply divided the world. We must campaign to redress the failure of governments and the international community to deliver on social and economic justice.

The Baghdad tragedy was a clear reminder (though by no means the only one) of the global threat posed by those who are ready to use any means to further their political objectives. We condemn their acts unequivocally. They are guilty of abuse of human rights and violation of international humanitarian law, sometimes amounting to crimes against humanity and war crimes. They must be brought to trial but – and here we part company with some governments – in accordance with standards of international law. Human rights are for the best of us and the worst of us, for the guilty as well as the innocent. Denial of fair trial is an abuse of rights and risks converting perpetrators into martyrs. This is why we call for Saddam Hussein to be tried in accordance with international standards. This is why we oppose military commissions for the detainees at the US naval base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, that fail to meet international standards.

There is no path to sustainable security except through respect for human rights. The global security agenda promulgated by the US Administration is bankrupt of vision and bereft of principle. Sacrificing human rights in the name of security at home, turning a blind eye to abuses abroad, and using pre-emptive military force where and when it chooses have neither increased security nor ensured liberty.

Look at the growing insurgency in Iraq, the increasing anarchy in Afghanistan, the unending spiral of violence in the Middle East, the spate of suicide bombings in crowded cities around the world. Think of the continued repression of the Uighurs in China and the Islamists in Egypt. Imagine the scale and scope of the impunity that has marked gross violations of human rights and humanitarian law in the “forgotten” conflicts in Chechnya, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Nepal – forgotten, that is, by all except those who daily suffer their worst effects.

Double speak brings disrepute to human rights but, sadly, it is a common phenomenon. The USA and its allies purported to fight the war in Iraq to protect human rights – but openly eroded human rights to win the “war on terror”. The war in Iraq was launched ostensibly to reduce the threat of weapons of mass destruction, yet the world is awash with small arms and conventional weapons that kill more than half a million people a year. To make matters worse, in the name of combating the so-called “war on terror”, many countries have relaxed controls on exports to governments that are known to have appalling human rights records, among them Colombia, Indonesia, Israel and Pakistan. The uncontrolled trade in arms puts us all at greater risk in peace and war.

Iraq and the “war on terror” have obscured the greatest human rights challenge of our times. According to some sources, developing countries spend about US$22 billion a year on weapons and, for $10 billion dollars a year, they would achieve universal primary education. These statistics hide a huge scandal: the failed promise to attack extreme poverty and address gross economic and social injustice.

According to some analysts, there is a real risk that the targets of UN Millennium Development Goals – such as the reduction of child and maternal mortality, getting all children to primary school, halving the number of people with no access to clean water – will not be achieved because international attention and resources have been diverted to the “war on terror”.

The poor and the marginalized are most commonly denied justice and would benefit most from the fair application of the rule of law and human rights. Yet despite the increasing discourse on the indivisibility of human rights, in reality economic, social and cultural rights are neglected, reducing human rights to a theoretical construct for the vast majority of the world’s population. It is no mere coincidence that, in the Iraq war, the protection of oil wells appears to have been given greater priority than the protection of hospitals.

Nor is it surprising that big business can do what it wants and get away with it, or choose not to do what it ought to do by claiming that it has no clear legal responsibility or accountability for human rights. The UN Human Rights Norms for Business, approved in 2003, are an important step towards corporate accountability but, sadly, have come under concerted attack by companies and governments.

Against this backdrop of abuse and impunity, hypocrisy and double standards, what can we do to make human rights matter?

We can show that human rights offer a powerful and compelling vision of a better and fairer world, and form the basis of a concrete plan of how to get there. They bring hope to women like Amina Lawal in Nigeria whose death sentence was set aside as a result of the massive support her case generated. They provide a tool to human rights defenders like Valdenia Paulino to fight her battles against police brutality in the favelas of São Paulo in Brazil. They give voice to the powerless: the prisoner of conscience, the prisoner of violence, and the prisoner of poverty.

In times of uncertainty the world needs not only to fight against global threats, but also to fight for global justice. Human rights are a banner to mobilize people globally in the cause of justice and truth. Thanks to the work of thousands of activists in Latin America, the tide is turning against impunity in that region. Despite the crusade by the USA to undermine international justice and ensure global immunity from prosecution for its citizens, the International Criminal Court appointed its prosecutor and began its work in earnest. Slowly, the courts in the USA and the United Kingdom have begun to scrutinize government attempts to restrict human rights in their “war on terror”.

Human rights promise the certainty of equality and equity to millions of women around the world. Recent legislative changes in the status of women in Morocco will open a new chapter in gender equity in the region. Recognizing the power of human rights to universalize the struggle of women, members of Amnesty International are joining hands with women’s rights activists and many others to campaign globally to stop violence against women. We call on leaders, organizations and individuals to make a public pledge to change themselves and to abolish laws, systems and attitudes that allow violence against women to flourish.

Human rights are about changing the world for the better. Using the powerful message of human rights, Amnesty International has launched a joint campaign with Oxfam and the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA) to achieve global control of small arms. To those who say this will not work, we point to the coalitions that led to the banning of landmines and the creation of the International Criminal Court. Combining public pressure and government support, we are determined to bring about change.

We celebrate these and other gains in this report, but we have not allowed them to obscure the very real challenges that persist. We live in a dangerous and divided world where the relevance of human rights is daily put to the test, the legitimacy of activists is questioned, and the “accountability gap” of governments, international institutions, armed groups and corporate actors is growing. It is precisely in such a world that we need a bigger humanity that will say, “This has to stop. Things must change”.

There is no stronger international community than global civil society. Through its members and allies in the human rights movement, Amnesty International is committed to reviving and revitalizing the vision of human rights as a powerful tool for concrete change. Through the voices and visions of millions of men and women, we will carry the message of human rights forward.

THE DEPLORABLE STATE OF AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL IN NIGERIA

Amnesty International as a global human rights organization was found in 1961 by a British Lawyer, Peter Beneson who was inspired by his wholehearted willingness to defend the rights of 2 Portuguese students whose rights were unnecessarily being violated in a British University. This human inspiration gradually generated immensely and extensively into global engagement named Amnesty International with its members and branches all over the world with the aim of fighting various human rights violations and injustice worldwide. It has its international secretariat in London.

This global outfit as gone a long way not only to condemn human rights violations all over the world but to seek possible redress to various injustices. It is an impartial non-governmental organization, which operates without any influence of language, race, religion, position, background or origin of any individual or group of people. It is independent of any political creed or government in any part of the world.

Amnesty International has impacted upon every part of the world especially during crises, wars, natural disasters and inhuman governments policies. The organization builds its mandates on all relevant national and international recognized charters and treaties worldwide which give utmost credence to human values and dignity aimed at making life peaceful and worthy of living for human beings.

Amnesty International extends its programmes of human rights campaigns and outreach works all over the world including Nigeria, the populous African Nations in the late 70s by the missionary who settled in Calabar. This movement was moved to Ibadan where it was for decades before it finally relocated to Lagos in 1995 for proper restructuring, reorganization and development most especially in the areas of membership recruitment and development.

The Nigerian Section of Amnesty International was operating directly under the auspices and instructions of its international secretariat and all its activities including campaign and outreach work, group development, recruitment and retention, remuneration of staff, maintenance of national secretariat and all other human rights activities and programmes were being funded by the secretariat in London. These and more brought the section into limelight and in no time became a household name among other prominent NGOs in the country. Within some years of operation in Lagos, it has recruited thousands of members spread across the nation. It has established groups and pre pre groups in almost all the entire 36 states of the federation. Everybody that came across with this organization fell in love and developed immeasurable interest and appreciation of its missions, mandates and programmes in entirety.

Since its inception in Nigeria, the organization has contributed immensely to the liberation of peoples’ rights while relevant reports of violations of all kinds were recorded and made available to the outside world for global reaction and condemnation as being recommended by the international secretariat. Vital contributions of the organization were noticeable during the struggle for democratic rule in Nigeria. There were records of human rights violations during the reigns of military dictators, which were adequately tackled and addressed by this worldwide human rights oriented organization.

Torture and other inhuman treatments of suspected persons by security agents were exposed and condemned while victims were enlightened of their rights, which is a personal property that can never be borrowed or stolen by anyone. Nigeria polity became reasonable, advanced and peaceful as a result of enlightenment programmes put together by Amnesty International, which made Nigeria a respectable entity among other African Nations where rules of law and respect for human rights are being propagated and practiced.

With these numerous achievements, the organization not only in Nigeria made itself a unique non-governmental organization responsible for total condemnation of human rights violations without any limitation.

Events however took a shocking turn for Amnesty International in Nigeria. The section, which in the past was a formidable force in the struggle against violations of human rights of all kinds in the country, suddenly collapsed and could no longer get itself together again.

The section has virtually recorded no meaningful achievement in recent times since the international secretariat has either partially or totally withdrawn the status given to the Nigerian section.

It is indeed sad and disheartening to witness this sudden change of good fortune of the section into an absolute inactivity and gradual fading away of the section among other prominent NGOs in Nigeria.

However, some local groups of the section are doing all within their disposal to maintain the name AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL and to give it the recognition it deserves. But these local groups can only do but little to safe the section from total collapse except urgent actions is taken to rescue the drowning section.

The international secretariat should therefore see reason to resuscitate the dying section in order to boost human rights campaign and protection not only in Nigeria but also in Africa as a whole. It is not gainsaying that since the beginning of inactivity of the section, human rights violations and abuses are on the increase and this will definitely do more harm to the international secretariat’s records, profiles and achievements because Nigeria as the largest and most populous African Nation deserves a more viable Amnesty International Section. The past must be forgotten and focus on the future in the name of human and people’s rights.

We are not unaware of the past activities, which might have led to the withdrawal of the section’s status by its international headquarters in London. Notwithstanding, considering the past, present and future implications of not having a section of Amnesty International in Nigeria being the most populous and the giant of Africa, it is as good as not having any section in Africa as a continent. The International Headquarters of Amnesty International is implored to take urgent actions in raising a viable section of Amnesty International in Nigeria once again. The agenda setting should be appropriately considered in doing this again. Nigerian section can still reclaim its position amidst other human rights organizations in the country if properly guided and put to line of actions by the headquarters.

Considering the principles of the organization among which is tagged “work on country rule” which does not allow members of the organization to take up cases of human rights violations in their country, it is felt that the headquarters should find an alternative to this rule to make the sections more relevant in their various countries. If the impact of an organization is not felt within its environment, it gives room to doubt its relevance and importance in that particular environment. Amnesty International cannot be meaningful in Africa without the most interesting country, Nigeria where violations and abuses of human rights are recorded everyday. Amnesty International is mostly needed not because there are no human rights inclined organizations in the country, but for the uniqueness of its mandates and missions.

YOUR RIGHT TO KNOW

The Right to Liberty

Everyone has the right to personal liberty. An arrest or detention is permissible only if carried out in accordance with the law. It must not be arbitrary and can only be carried out by authorized personnel. People charged with a criminal offence should not normally be held in detention pending trial.