Africa's economic revival plan this week received a financial boost from the United Nations aimed at kick-starting the ambitious project more than a year after it was launched.

It has been argued that good governance is an integral element in the creation of the enabling environment of peace, security, the rule of law, legitimacy and stability, in which sustainable human development can be promoted. This paper from the Human Development Report Office (HDRO), UNDP, presents a regional overview of the impact on poor people and disadvantaged groups of the failures of accountability of institutions of governance.

Deputy minister for finance Dr. Gheysilka Adombila Agambila has conceded that despite the president's declaration of zero tolerance for corruption, the government is still groping in the dark in its attempt to deal with the situation.

On Wednesday, 22nd January, 2003, the IMF convened, at its headquarters in Washington, a formidable array of bankers, lawyers, judges, academics and NGOs to discuss and debate its proposals for what will effectively be a new international insolvency framework for sovereign debtors. The IMF's proposal is known as the Sovereign Debt Restructuring Mechanism (SDRM). Jubilee Research says the mechanism will not return countries to viability and will entrench a role for the IMF in international law.

The post apartheid government has greatly expanded water service; but in many rural villages, the resulting water price increases have placed the cost of water beyond the reach of many. The push to lure private companies to buy utilities has led to water shutoffs and the worst cholera epidemic in the nation's history.

Pressure is mounting on Zambian President Levy Mwanawasa to step down and call fresh elections following damaging testimony before the Supreme Court suggesting electoral fraud helped him into office last year.

We are told, day in and day out, that there is only one way forward for the world: globalized free market capitalism. Yet more and more people know, as Harry Shutt points out, that this way lacks all vision for the future of humanity, is empty of social responsibility and environmental care, and will not, he argues, even deliver a stable economy or secure political future.

Is there anybody with data on Uganda's human resource potential and migration of the same from Uganda? I would like to know the consequences of such migration on the development of the nation. For instance how many Uganda graduates are in the UK and USA and how much tax does the UK earn per Ugandan there?

You guys have a great publication. I love your editorials. My husband and I sponsor a conservation program in Africa and your section on grants has given me some excellent leads. You have a great balance of information. Thank you so much.

The African Social Forum held in Addis Ababa earlier this month protested Nepad’s adoption as the economic policy of the African Union and its inclusion in the agreements reached by governments at the World Summit on Sustainable Development. The Forum, which included representation from nearly 50 countries, debated the approach to the African Union. All the participants agreed on the need for African unity, but concern was expressed that the AU was being used as a vehicle for neoliberalism in the form of Nepad. There was agreement to strengthen the African Social Forum, with particular emphasis given to ensuring that it is built from the bottom up.

Noting that Africa has armed itself to the teeth to tackle its raging conflicts, the African Union (AU) on Monday agreed to set up a UN-style Security Council, known as the Peace and Security Council (PSC). However, its formation still has to be ratified.
Related Links:
* Mugabe slams political interference
http://irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=32084
* Critical time for AU summit
http://irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=32059
* AU shuts up shop
http://allafrica.com/stories/200302040514.html

The Ogiek, who number around 20,000, are arguably the largest hunter-gatherer community in Kenya. They have identified themselves as an indigenous people, as defined in Article 1(b) of International Labour Organisation Convention No. 169,1 and the United Nations (UN) and the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights have recognized them as such. This report from Minority Rights International focuses on the displacement of the Ogiek people from their land, their underdevelopment and the threat to their culture. It also assesses the impact on the Ogiek of the loss of their land.

In late 2001, Nairobi's Kibera slum experienced a bloody conflict over rents. By the time the police had brought the fighting under control, 15 people had died while many more were injured. The violent confrontation was to later spill over into Ngu Nyumu in Korogocho slums. The "rent revolt" had an interesting beginning, with the then president Daniel Moi and then minister for energy Raila Odinga, now Minister for Roads and Housing, being accused of being agents provocateur for urging tenants not to pay hiked rents.

Allegations of corruption which New National Party leader Marthinus van Schalkwyk had made against two senior NNP members, as well as a complaint which the Democratic Alliance made against Van Schalkwyk, would be treated similarly, Public Protector Lawrence Mushwana said.

The test for President Olusegun Obasanjo and other candidates in the Nigerian election is to answer critics who say modest progress in areas such as inward investment, tackling corruption and industrial diversification falls well short of the systemic change needed to encourage the development of the private sector and relieve the poverty of most of the country's 120m people.

African Rights questions plans by the Government of Rwanda to release around 30-40,000 genocide detainees on bail. Announced in a Presidential communiqué on 1 January 2003, we fear that this unexpected decision will undermine efforts to deliver justice for the victims and survivors of the 1994 genocide through the gacaca courts.

Genocide suspects who have confessed - but not those accused of leading the killings - , minors who were between 14 and 18 years old during the genocide, elderly prisoners, the chronically ill and “other persons accused of ordinary crimes” will be included in the releases. The measure will apply only “to detainees who run the risk of being imprisoned for longer than provided for under the law”. While it is entirely understandable that the government must seek to prevent illegal detentions and the injustices they entail, we believe that this must be weighed against the potential havoc that the releases could wreak in the administration of genocide justice and that an alternative solution should be sought.

It was clearly stated that the prisoners will remain subject to justice and are merely being offered “provisional liberty”. This is unlikely to reassure genocide survivors and witnesses who will be anxious that the suspects may gain an opportunity to attack their accusers or to evade justice through corruption or by going into hiding or exile. Mass “provisional liberty” represents a foray into the unknown. It is doubtful whether the Ministry of Justice or any other government department could offer assurances as to what the consequences will be. In every aspect of the genocide prosecutions, and from the outset, the Ministry of Justice in Rwanda has been forced to broach uncharted territory and take on overwhelming challenges, but this move is certain only to compound its existing struggles.

Judicial institutions, which are already severely over-stretched, must now hasten to examine the cases of the relevant detainees within a month; this at a time when the nationwide launch of gacaca has brought its own pressures. And as the gacaca courts begin their work, many of them will now face additional and unanticipated practical difficulties. Firstly, the State can no longer guarantee the presence in court of the prisoners who have confessed. In this respect the sole reliable factor in the gacaca trials has been complicated. Even more worrying is the potential for released prisoners, returning to their communities, to intimidate the residents, thereby preventing wider participation in the trials and causing damage and trauma to individuals. Government assurances to increase the provision of counsellors and tighten security in court are to be welcomed, but inevitably cannot safeguard prosecution witnesses and judges in the period before the hearings.

As African Rights' forthcoming report, 'Gacaca Justice: A Shared Responsibility', highlights, the implementation of gacaca is already encumbered by the reluctance of witnesses to name perpetrators and by several logistical problems, including shortcomings and gaps in the law, the inadequacy of some judges (Inyangamugayo) to their task, and dwindling popular attendance in some areas. But crucially, we believe the releases will undermine popular confidence in the process - the very factor upon which, our findings show, the success of gacaca depends. On the basis of our past research upon attitudes to justice, there is every reason to be concerned that the releases will have a negative impact upon all the parties involved in gacaca.

Although these are not the first releases of genocide prisoners, they involve by far the largest numbers to date. Previously the government singled out selected groups of prisoners for unconditional release on humanitarian grounds; these were the elderly, the chronically ill and minors. The fact that this latest batch will also include these groups but apparently on different terms - in that they will be tried - is bound to be a source of confusion.

Reactions among detainees to these earlier releases, as detailed in African Rights' June 2000-report: 'Confessing to Genocide', give some indication as to how this latest development will be received by them. At the time, prisoners and justice officials alike voiced near unanimous opposition to the release of elderly prisoners, arguing that many of them had led the slaughter, influencing the youth. Furthermore, the selective releases encouraged the hope among detainees that if they maintained their silence, the economic burden of imprisoning them would eventually ensure wholesale releases. This was a major obstacle to the functioning of the confession and guilty plea procedure, as it was implemented prior to gacaca. Gacaca gained a better reception as detainees anticipated much more lenient treatment and speedier trials. They are bound to have felt frustration at the delays so far and the releases will relieve this for some. But rather than prompting others to genuine confession it may be that they will encourage opportunism, with prisoners offering partial or inaccurate confessions simply in the hope of immediate release. Overwhelmingly, the releases will reinforce the perception that the government lacks the capacity to properly administer genocide justice.

There have already been substantial inconsistencies in genocide prosecutions due to the introduction, first, of the confession and guilty plea procedure and, secondly, gacaca. It is logical that the government should seek to harmonise the system by, as the President suggested, “affording” prisoners who confessed prior to gacaca “the advantages available to those who confess under the law establishing gacaca courts”. But the current situation of some 120,000 prisoners in Rwanda's prison has persisted for years and with it an understanding of the time constraints involved. It is unfortunate that there have been delays in launching gacaca nationwide and this is almost certainly at the root of the problem. But nothing was done to prepare people or the gacaca courts for the possibility of imminent releases on this scale. Any sense that the government is wavering in its commitment to implement the gacaca system in its original form will create public uncertainty and weaken resolve.

It is only six months ago that the first 12 pilot sectors began to implement the gacaca system. The sectors where the work is most advanced have just reached the stage of gathering the information necessary for categorising suspects. The witnesses who remain to be called include detainees who have confessed. A very large number of them may have given only superficial or partial accounts and fear being denounced for the crimes they have failed to reveal. Gacaca itself was introduced, in large part, because the confession and guilty plea procedure introduced in 1996 did not accelerate the pace of justice as hoped. It took time and considerable human resources to establish the veracity and comprehensive nature of prisoners' confessions, a process that slowed down the course of justice. Only after detainees have had the opportunity to confront the residents on the hills will it be possible to establish whether their confessions were full and sincere. If they are able to go home now, they will have the time to influence the outcome of their cases.

The communiqué will also undoubtedly affect the independence of the gacaca judges. These judges are not operating in a vacuum, but in a given social and political environment. Whatever the arguments to the contrary, in reality it will be extremely difficult for these judges to send back to prison thousands of detainees which the State has already taken the decision to free, especially in a country where respect for authority is deeply ingrained.

Moreover, in 'Gacaca Justice', African Rights emphasises that there is still no firm consensus about past wrongs and agreement about the meaning and purpose of justice initiatives in Rwanda. We suggest that the participatory nature of gacaca holds out the possibility of depoliticising the issue by placing it openly in the civil arena. The communiqué to release prisoners will have profound implications for the workings of the gacaca courts, and the sudden momentous decision will catch them unprepared. African Rights hopes the Government of Rwanda will pause and reflect how best to convince the people of Rwanda that genocide justice is a civil and moral enterprise rather than a political initiative or a lottery.

* African Rights – Working for Justice, is a rights advocacy organisation working in Rwanda. Email: [email]rights@rwanda1.com

Related Link:
* More genocide suspects released
editor@pambazuka.org

The United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) has welcomed South Africa's $20 million donation for the agency's emergency food operation for southern Africa.

Infrastructure development projects annually displace over ten million people. Dams, mines, urban renewal projects, water and sewage pipelines, roads and railways all lead to the loss of residence and livelihoods. Do the resettlement guidelines formulated by governments and donors address the serious socio-economic consequences? Are displaced people sufficiently consulted, compensated or assisted by resettlement schemes?

By all appearances, migration has stepped up in the past two decades. Is it correct to say that migration is one of the problems of globalisation? What effect does this movement have on local economic growth? Does it contribute to sustainability in any way?

I think the Newsletter is a welcome and long overdue perspective on NGOs. My students in the "NGOs and Africa" course will love it. Thanks.

Dr. J. Ayo Langley
Department of African Studies, Howard University, Washington DC, United States