An article by one of our McGill Echenberg Fellows – Rebecca Hamilton
A new U.N. report reveals that peacekeepers sent to the Central African Republic took sides in the conflict.
An article by one of our McGill Echenberg Fellows – Rebecca Hamilton
An article by one of our McGill Echenberg Fellows – Damir Hadžić
Having worked briefly in the area of anti-corruption (AC) from a regional perspective (UNODC Vienna), I got engaged with implementing UNDP’s local AC activities in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). Not so long after, I realized how these two postings are worlds apart.
Globally, we have conventions and norms which bind states to improve anti-corruption efforts. Operationally, this is done through monitoring and evaluation mechanisms of various sorts (usually nominated foreign missions during periodic review cycles) which feed findings (based on data generated from meetings) back to custodian institutions of these organizations (e.g. UNODC, Council of Europe, etc.). They are deliberated at high-level meetings and recommendations are issued. Presumption is that countries should follow recommendations to improve shortfalls until the next review cycle appears.
We are happy to announce that the McGill Echenberg Fellows Network is now present on all your favourite social media websites, including Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn.
Join, Follow and Like us now to be the first to find out the latest human rights news, events, scholarships, jobs, but the most importantly to stay updated on the application process for the 2015 McGill Echenberg Global Conference on Human Rights and Leadership!
Also check out the Facebook page of the McGill Centre for Human Rights and Legal Pluralism: https://www.facebook.com/McGillCHRLP
I pulled a Brazilian human rights activist aside, in between cups of Turkish coffee. “The protests aren’t just about transportation; they’re about everything.” I was in Istanbul for five days, for a convening of mass atrocity prevention practitioners, and wanted to grab a quick thought on a recent wave of public protests. Over the course of our conversation, the activist expressed a perfunctory solidarity: with his fellow Brazilians, yes, but also with a global, often divergent, and often nebulous community of youth human rights practitioners. “I think this is an international movement,” he said, without much further explanation.
Solidarity is a difficult idea, one which, in my experience, rarely comes naturally to U.S. human rights activists. Domestic activism rests on a movement’s certainty, and on its ability to plan a path to victory: tactics, campaigns, and strategy, the secular trinity of grassroots mobilization, aspire to the continuous improvement of known outcomes. Solidarity, where applied, sheds the certainties of power; it transfers voice and agency away from the activist, towards the survivor. The Istanbul convening, organized by the U.S.-based Nexus Fund, boasted practitioners and activists from thirty-three countries, six continents. I went as a U.S. practitioner, a recent Georgetown graduate, and an Echenberg Fellow—that last bit, I think, left me poised for the disagreements ahead. The activists didn’t agree on much, but they achieved a singular point of consensus: from a moral, if not strategic perspective, solidarity is the most appropriate posture for Western human rights activists.
One participant, an educator from New York, suggested that, as the mass atrocity prevention community evolves, the plurality of ideas—rather than a common language—should shape the practice of prevention; indeed, each participant possessed their own concept of solidarity, informed by local contexts and personal histories. For many participants, the specific mechanisms of solidarity, particularly between Western activists and their colleagues in the diverse “global South,” remained unclear. Sticky power dynamics often muddle the equation: between donor and grantee, between conflict-free and conflict-affected, between those with public media platforms and those without. When it comes to outcomes, everyone seemed to agree, it’s a not-so-simple matter of broadening voice and allowing for agency, particularly for survivors of mass violence.
The Nexus Fund’s goals, it would appear, in many ways mimic the Echenberg family’s: to broaden transnational communities of conscience, and to strengthen norms of human rights and civilian protection. In both cases, the future is simultaneously random and undetermined; indeed, that’s the objective. For most, we left Istanbul with stronger bonds, but a helpfully foggy notion of the mass atrocity prevention’s future trajectory. In my mind, this is a mark of success: if the community of practice exists, positive outcomes will follow.
Daniel Solomon ~ 2013 McGill Echenberg Fellow
The Young Leaders Forum, affiliated with the Third Echenberg Family Conference on Democracy, Human Rights, and the Fragility of Freedom, was held at McGill University in Montreal, 18-21 March 2013. The Forum assembled 24 exceptional young leaders from across the globe to share ideas and experience, support and inspire each other, and engage with and learn from established world leaders in the field of human rights.
These engaged and empowered leaders and activists join an existing network of over 75 Echenberg Fellows, all leading change and bringing benefit to individuals, societies, and the global community through broad human rights and grassroots initiatives.
This video was conceived, filmed, and edited by Vlad Horondinca (videographer), Teddy Ruge (Forum faciltator), and Marion Sandilands and Louise Lavigne (McGill program coordinators).
Watch the video (5m, Vimeo).
After attending, speaking and assisting at the 3rd installment of the Echenberg Conference on Human Rights, Dr. Alan Huynh returned home to some excellent news. Alan has been awarded an Australian Leadership award by ADC Forum. The awards are given to young leaders for their work across a spectrum of Australian life such as the economy, culture environment and community, and for their demonstrated vision for Australia’s future. Alan will be receiving his award on April 22 at the ADC Future Summit in Melbourne, Australia.
The Australian Davos Connection is a non-political, not-for-profit leadership organisation which brings together leaders from business, government, the public sector, academia and the broader community to improve their understanding of key issues affecting Australia. You can read more about their aspirations and initiatives here: http://adcforum.org/about-adc-forum/
Originally written for and posted on Tufts/World Peace Foundation website (April 2012) here.
“A people who do not preserve their memory are people who have forfeited their history… there is a need for the preservation of the materials and spiritual properties by which memory is invested. Acceptance of its burdens and triumphs, or better still, its actuality, the simple fact of its anterior existence and its validity for its time.”
– Wole Soyinka
In October 2011, 16 officials of the former military government of Ethiopia (1974-1991), who were convicted of genocide and crimes against humanity, among other crimes, were released after serving 20 years in prison. Their release followed a generous pardon granted by the Ethiopian president commuting the death penalty to life imprisonment. Some are still behind bars, while many others like former president Colonel Mengistu Haile-Mariam, convicted in absentia, remain at large.
Earlier in the year, in the name of “forgiveness”, Ethiopian religious leaders, appointing themselves as peace brokers, implored for people to move past the history of that era and support the release of the officials. The attempt was quickly disrupted with a massive public uproar that decried the attempt as insensitive and contemptuous to the thousands of victims, survivors and the public at large.
What seemed like an outburst of mass emotion brought to the spotlight an issue that rarely makes it to the official public discourse in Ethiopia: the legacy of the massive human rights abuses committed by the military regime. For twenty years, the long and protracted trials have only received marginal attention, leaving the impression that the violent chapter of that era is a thing of the past.
With rumors of the eventual release of the former Ministers, victim and survivors associations pleaded with the government and religious officials to have their voices heard. Mainstream and social media outlets were swamped with debates on both sides of the spectrum, supporting and challenging the possible release of the officials. Many asked for the officials to publicly apologize for the crimes they committed, for admission of guilt and an expression of contrition as a condition for their release. Others supported a “forgive and forget” approach. Despite the controversy and much to the consternation of those opposing the release, the officials were freed in a process that cleverly combined law, politics and a total disregard of public opinion.
The public controversy that ensued was a testament to the collective pain and trauma that the nation had endured and perhaps continues to endure to this day. It was in a sense a rude awakening and painful reminder of the violent history and the division that continues to define the narrative of this nation.
It all began in September 1974, when one of the world’s oldest monarchies came to an abrupt end. The internationally celebrated Emperor Haile Selassie was overthrown by a military coup d’etat. A military junta assumed political power and declared Ethiopia under the control of Provisional Military government — the Derg. Within months, the Derg launched a campaign of mass execution that began with a massacre of 60 senior government officials of the Emperor. By 1976, Mengistu Haile-Mariam, leader of the Derg, unleashed a reign of terror officially named the “Red Terror” and systematically eliminated all its real and imagined political opponents, through summary executions, forced disappearance and mass imprisonment. Under an iron fist, Mengistu ruled the country for 17 years until its overthrow by the rebel forces of the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) in May 1991.
Left behind was a society scarred by the darkest period in Ethiopia’s modern history; a massive and systematic elimination of human lives, and essentially, one of the gravest human rights violations that has occurred in the history of the nation.
While many of the officials were soon apprehended, Mengistu fled to Zimbabwe, where he still remains a fugitive. Opting for a domestic solution, the succeeding government, soon named the Transitional Government of Ethiopia (TGE) established the Special Prosecutors Office (SPO) primarily to investigate and prosecute the human rights violations of the former regime. It went on to file charges against 5,000 alleged leaders and perpetrators of the atrocities.
In a trial that lasted for almost two decades, thousands, including former ministers and a head of state, were charged and eventually convicted of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. While there are several and multi-layered criticisms of the judicial process, from “justice delayed” to “justice denied” and “victor’s justice”, the trials were exemplary in attempting to deal with mass atrocities of past regimes and to ensure justice and accountability.
But the prosecution and conviction of the officials was a far cry from the society’s quest for truth, forgiveness and national reconciliation in post-Red Terror Ethiopia. The singularly state-led approach to justice, through the prosecution and conviction of perpetrators, left victims alienated and disenfranchised from the societal healing that was needed following 17 years of brutal dictatorship. Prosecutions on their own rarely provide victims and a suffering society a complete approach to justice for past atrocities. Relying solely on formal legal action failed to fully address victims’ needs and exposed serious limitations in the legitimacy of the judicial process.
The atrocities of the Derg, meticulously documented by the regime itself, were uncovered and used by the SPO for purposes of the trials. Research and analysis of the political, social and historical underpinnings of the revolution were made, albeit inadequately, by social and political historians. But little is known about the perpetrators and the extent of individual criminal responsibility. Even less attention was given to the construction of memory, the establishment of truth, forgiveness and national reconciliation. A plethora of evidence, unearthed and accumulated by the SPO was only used for the consumption of the prosecutors.
The mandate of the SPO, beyond the prosecution and conviction of the alleged criminals, was also “to educate the people of Ethiopia and make them aware of the offences in order to prevent the recurrence of such a system of government.” Perhaps overwhelmed by the enormous task of prosecuting thousands of individuals, the mandate of the office expired before it even attempted to carry out any form of public education. Buried with the office were millions of paper documents, audio and video footages and witness accounts of the crimes and cruelties of the military government. Once again, the gates to the construction and preservation of truth and the collective memory were closed.
Several victim associations and civic society organizations established after the fall of the Derg only served to maintain the friendships of their members. Challenges of capacity and finance, division, inter-committee conflicts and personal rifts barred these groups from playing any meaningful role in the construction of truth and memory of that era. And the sole edifice paying tribute to the victims of that regime, the Red Terror Martyr’s Memorial Museum, itself embroiled in scandals of financial embezzlement and corruption, was a failed exercise at memorialization. The reconstruction of truth, the process of uncovering individual criminal responsibility, community participation, society healing and preservation of a national memory that was seen in post-apartheid South Africa or post-genocide Rwanda was missing in Ethiopia. The fierce debate and public controversy that ensued in 2011 was a testament to this vacuum – a vacuum that dialogue, truth telling and reconciliation could only have addressed. Questions of justice, memory, truth, forgiveness and reconciliation in post Red Terror Ethiopia are left lingering in the minds victims and survivors who continue to suffer from the scars of that era.
The former officials may have been punished for the crimes they committed, but society was neither compensated with the truth nor given the opportunity to learn and forgive.
The truth, as far as the Ethiopian public is concerned, remains between the perpetrators and the prosecutors.
Ethiopian government spokesman, Shimles Kemal, speaking on the release of the Dergue officials and seemingly on behalf of the Ethiopian people, told Reuters “Ethiopia has come to terms with its past.”
Has it really?
We are very pleased to announce that the 2013 McGill Echenberg Young Leaders have been selected. As always, this year’s pool of candidates was very strong. We were very happy to receive applications from a great range of regions – some 60 countries in total – including Macedonia, Kyrgyzstan and Myanmar. In the end, a panel of young professionals selected 25 exceptional candidates to become the 2013 Young Leaders.
We are also pleased to announce that all 25 candidates have confirmed their attendance. We look forward to working with these individuals, who hail from all corners of the globe and who will bring a wealth of experience to the fellowship. From internationally published journalists, Masters and PhD candidates to grassroots organizers and participants in and commentators on the Arab Spring, we expect great things from this diverse group of individuals.
Please follow this link to view the Young Leaders’ bios: http://efchr.mcgill.ca/2013/eng/young.php
Read Rebecca Hamilton’s latest piece on South Sudan: Birthing a Nation: How America was sold on South Sudan. It is part of a Reuters series this week on the birth of South Sudan.
This book is for those who know a little about Joseph Kony and the Lord’s Resistance Army, and want to know more.
Invisible Children’s Kony 2012 has become the most viral video ever. Concerned citizens around the world, from middle school students to celebrities like Oprah and Justin Bieber, watched the film and shared it with their friends. It has now been viewed more than 87 million times.
That success was soon met by a critical backlash. Critics nearly as varied as the campaign’s supporters pointed out that Invisible Children was offering an oversimplified, even misleading narrative. They faulted the campaign for failing to provide a context for the LRA conflict, and pointed out that the video portrayed Africans as either helpless victims, or heartless killers.
This book is both a collection of that criticism, and a constructive response to it. The authors each wrote a short essay offering information that they felt was missing from the video, or explaining how they thought the campaign could be improved.
The first several chapters provide historical and political context. Adam Branch, Daniel Kalinaki, and Ayesha Nibbe explain the roots of the conflict, and how it has persisted for so many years. Alex Little and Patrick Wegner discuss various attempts to end the conflict through peace negotiations, ICC arrest warrants, and military operations, and why they have not been successful.
Later chapters consider the ethics and effectiveness of awareness campaigns like Kony 2012. Glenna Gordon and Jina Moore draw on their experiences as journalists to critique the video’s portrayal of Africa and the people who live there. Rebecca Hamilton, Laura Seay, Kate Cronin-Furman, and Amanda Taub examine the weakness of “awareness” advocacy. Alanna Shaikh explains the ethical dangers of bad aid work. Teddy Ruge offers a different view of Africa, as a place of dynamic innovation instead of violence and helplessness. And youth activist Sam Menefee-Libey describes his frustration with the tone and substance of the campaign meant to target his generation.
Also, a bit out of date, but here’s a link to a radio interview with Hamilton on Kony 2012 from early March.