THE AFRICAN ECONOMIST VOL

THE AFRICAN ECONOMIST VOL. XII No. 36 May 2005 NEWS

Annan says rights body harming UN

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has accused the UN Human Rights Commission of failing to uphold human rights and said a new, permanent body is needed.

Speaking in Geneva, Mr Annan said the commission was undermining the credibility of the entire UN. Human rights groups say the body's member nations are too concerned with protecting their national interests.

Current members include Sudan, Zimbabwe, China, Russia and Saudi Arabia - all accused of rights abuses.

"We have reached a point at which the commission's declining credibility has cast a shadow on the reputation of the United Nations system," Mr Annan said as he addressed the commission's annual six-week session at its Swiss headquarters.

"Unless we re-make our human rights machinery, we may be unable to renew public confidence in the United Nations itself," he said.

Contents

kofi Annan has Proposed sweeping reforms of the united Nations

Greater status

As part of his programme of UN reforms, Mr Annan wants to create a smaller Human Rights Council, whose members must uphold the highest human rights standards. Mr Annan said the UN needs the new council if it is to prevent appalling suffering occurring around the world. He said the council must be more accountable and more representative.

It would, he explained, allow for a more comprehensive and objective approach, which, in turn, would produce more effective assistance. "The main intergovernmental body concerned with human rights should have a status, authority and capability," Mr. Annan said.

Sudan controversy

The commission was launched in 1946 to uphold human rights worldwide, and has 53 members. Libya chaired the commission in 2003, despite opposition from the US and human rights groups.

In his annual address last year, Mr Annan warned that the conflict in Sudan's province of Darfur bore worrying similarities to the Rwandan genocide.

The commission had before it strong evidence of atrocities being committed in Darfur and of the Sudanese government's involvement in them, but no resolution was passed condemning Sudan. Instead, Sudan was elected to the commission for another year.

There is talk of a resolution this year, but the countries drafting it include Sudan itself and Zimbabwe, also in the spotlight for human rights violations. Activists also want the

commission to condemn the US for its treatment of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan, and at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

"Unless we re-make our human rights machinery, we may be unable to renew public confidence in the united Nations itself "

Kofi Anann

Prince's Mugabe handshake gaffe

Prince Charles has made a diplomatic gaffe on the eve of his wedding, by shaking hands with Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe at the Pope's funeral.

The prince was "caught by surprise" when Mr Mugabe leaned over to greet him, Clarence House said.

Mr. Mugabe sidestepped a European Union travel ban to attend the funeral service in the Vatican. Some politicians condemned Prince Charles' greeting as "stupid" and "not very sensible".

Opponents of Mr Mugabe also condemned his presence at the funeral, with one Euro MP describing it as a "flagrant breach of the EU travel ban".

Prince Charlies was Seated one place away from Mr Mugabe

Mr Mugabe was able to get around the ban because his destination - the Vatican - was an independent sovereign state. Italy also has a long-standing agreement, known as the Concordat, to allow visitors to the Vatican to cross Italian territory, because the Papal state has no airport. This meant Mr. Mugabe was not in breach of the ban by traveling into Italy.

'Abhorrent' regime

Prince Charles was seated one place away from the Zimbabwean President during the funeral.

A Clarence House spokesman said the prince "finds the current Zimbabwean regime abhorrent" and "was not in a position to avoid shaking Mr Mugabe's hand". The spokesman added: "He has supported the Zimbabwe Defence and Aid Fund which works with those being oppressed by the regime.

"This is yet Another failure of the establishment ...to be sensitive enough about how to respond to this man "

Glenys Kinnock MEP

"The prince also recently met Pius Ncube, the Archbishop of Bulawayo, and an outspoken critic of the government."

Frail hope emerges from Ivorian deal

The dramatic declaration of a permanent end tohostilities in Ivory Coast, the crowning glory of the Pretoria summit, might suggest there is real hope for an end to a two-and-a-half-year-old civil war.

Ivorian President Laurent Gbagbo's comment that the three-and-a-half day meeting in South Africa was "not just another summit" reinforces that hope - and also provides a clue to why no one should start celebrating just yet. Since a failed coup attempt turned into a rebellion in September 2002, summit after meeting after talks have punctuated the Ivorian peace process.

French Peacekeepers have repeatedly come under attack in Abidjan

The Ivorian political classes have met in Lome, Kleber in France, and in Accra on several occasions.

Agreements have been signed in Marcoussis, a centre for Rugby in the Paris suburbs, and in Accra - most notably the Accra Three accord of July last year. And if Ivory Coast is still in crisis, that means the terms of those agreements have not been respected.

Emerging pattern

So what are the significant steps taken by Pretoria, and how likely are they to be respected?

First it should be noted that the agreement, and South African President Thabo Mbeki's mediation, have been saluted by all, from the major Ivorian politicians to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan and the former colonial power, France.

President Gbagbo has pushed for disarmament in the north

The fact that this is an African agreement already gives it an advantage over Marcoussis, which was French-brokered and thus immediately discredited in many Ivorian eyes. If one takes the five major Ivorian leaders - President Gbagbo,

main opposition figures Henri Konan Bedie and Alassane Ouattara, rebel leader Guillaume Soro and Prime Minister Seydou Diarra - at their word, they are all happy with what was decided at Pretoria.

Nevertheless, past experience shows that what Ivorian leaders sign up to at conferences, and what they then do once they get back home, are often two wildly separate things.

President Gbagbo's enemies, in particular, say that a pattern has emerged: The president agrees to make a concession, then there is a "spontaneous popular reaction" on the streets of Abidjan and he shrugs his shoulders and says he cannot go against the will of the people.

Disarmament aim

Perhaps worryingly, the Pretoria agreement does not seem to include measures of coercion.

There is no mention of applying UN sanctions for those who move away from the spirit of the text, for example, though this must still be on the cards. Despite this problem, there is no doubt that President Mbeki has made a substantial number of breakthroughs.

If everything goes to plan, militias loyal to President Gbagbo will be disarmed shortly and a meeting between the loyalist army and the military of the New Forces rebels on 14 April will mark the beginning of disarmament.

Getting the New Forces to lay down their weapons had been President Gbagbo's main aim before Pretoria, particularly after the rebels missed a number of deadlines to do just that.

In return, the president seems to have made concessions on a large number of issues. Laws on nationality and identity are to be reworked, the Independent Electoral Commission is to include more members from the New Forces, and the RDR, the party of Mr Ouattara, is to receive funding despite having no deputies, following its boycott of the last legislative elections.

Integration challenge

There is no doubt the president's supporters are not happy with what their leader signed up to in Pretoria. Militia leader Pastor Gammi, whose MILOCI organization broke the ceasefire in February this year by attacking the rebel-held town of Logouale, has already called Pretoria a "joke", and threatened to go on the offensive.

The New Forces too have their doubts, particularly about the conditions in which they are to lay down their weapons. "I don't trust Gbagbo," the deputy commander of the New Forces military, Issiaka Ouattara or Wattao, told the BBC. "He says one thing and does another. We want a republican army we can all belong too, but it will be difficult."

Integrating former rebels and loyalists, who were exchanging bullets not so long ago, into one post-crisis army will certainly be a huge challenge. But that is perhaps looking too far into the future.

Presidency problem

The Pretoria summit has left one huge issue still dominating the horizon, casting a large shadow over any talk of peace. Eligibility to run for president has been at the heart of this crisis, and indeed of all Ivorian politics, at least since northern opposition leader Alassane Ouattara was stopped from running for president in 2000 on the grounds that both his parents were not Ivorian. President Mbeki decided not to cast an immediate verdict on this issue, on which the Ivorian peace process stands or falls.

The South African president will see Nigerian leader Olusegun Obasanjo and Kofi Annan before making his decision, which should come within the week. If he says Ouattara can run, President Gbagbo's supporters, and indeed many others, are likely to react furiously.

If President Mbeki says Ouattara should not be a candidate, the unarmed opposition will be livid, and there is a strong chance the New Forces will refuse to lay down their weapons.

For all the good news coming out of Pretoria, Ivory Coast's complicated crisis is a long way from being resolved.

Home / UP