Below is a moving testimony from John, a Ugandan gay man:

Uganda is one of the African countries which treats its gay people worse than it treats even animals. Your family can disown you and they call you all sorts of names and sometimes the family can see you as curse. The police cannot protect you; even when you try to explain no- one listens. The only thing that can help here is money, which can make the police listen, but for how long? That’s the question. The public is also against gay people and this makes it hard as you have no-one to talk to and this makes the situation worse as you feel the whole world is against you.  The government does not take any notice if you are alive or not, and they think you are worse than a pig, as they phrase it.  When you are in prison you are beaten up by the prison officers and inmates.  They can do all sorts of things and if you are a lesbian, they can let men rape you and if you are a gay man they push things inside you saying that this is what you want.

Gay people in Uganda are not allowed medical treatment and no one wants to help you as they think you can pass it on. Young gay people find it hard as they may not be allowed to go to school, their families disown them and there is no one to help; even if there is someone to help, they are scared because they will put their own life in danger. It’s hard to get a job in Uganda when you are gay, because no- one wants to employ you and, even if you have the money to start your own business, still no- one will come to get anything from you.  To sum up, gay life in Uganda is so hard and as time goes on it becomes harder.  I wish the Ugandan people could really understand that this is not something you copy from someone.  I have never had any problems with anyone, and I have helped many people in need, but no- one can see that side of me because, when they know I’m gay, no one wants to know me any more.  I wish I could change but I cannot, so I have to live in fear, with no family, just an isolated life.  Hopefully one day the Ugandan people will open their eyes if they find a gay person in their families.

In an interview with a Kenyan LGBT and human rights activist, the RCS hears the plight of the gay community in Kenya and Uganda and the potential role the Commonwealth could play in alleviating their problems. The interviewee claims she was attacked and ejected by Ugandan police officers from the 2007 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Kampala, on account of her sexuality.

On the plight of the gay community in Kenya and Uganda and what the future holds

“There is a lot of homophobia within Kenya and Uganda. The Kenyan and Ugandan constitutions explicitly criminalise same-sex relationships and sexual encounters. In Kenya you can get fourteen years in prison. There is a lot of resistance. What we have managed to achieve so far is the integration of public health services for gay men, and slowly now incorporating gay women; so on reproductive rights, they are slowly trying to recognise and acknowledge the rights of LGBTI persons. But on issues of the legal context, there hasn’t been any fundamental change.

I like to believe it is only a matter of time before we can have the sodomy laws repealed, and the reality on the ground is that Kenya is currently going through a constitutional review process and civil society has tried as much as possible to highlight the plight of homosexuals. It’s a long process, but as much as we’ve been struggling, there have been opportunities to continuously create visibility on issues of LGBTI persons in Kenya. At the end of the day, there is so much resistance that the amount of work we put in, no matter how much it is, is still pushed back by the extent of homophobia informed by religion and culture and just by ignorance of issues of sexuality.”

On the potential role of the Commonwealth in the sphere of LGBTI Rights

“The Commonwealth as an international organisation should be a space where all these issues are highlighted and given the same hearing. The discussion of violations of human rights of LGBTI persons and women in the Commonwealth, is something that needs to go beyond just recognising the vulnerability of that woman, to securing safety for the promotion of women’s human rights.

I think also that the Commonwealth should take it upon itself to have an easier format for understanding its processes. For grass-roots activists, it seems like such a puzzle to work with the Commonwealth. We don’t understand what the entities are, what the structures are, we don’t understand the procedures of working with the Commonwealth.

I think it is very important that the Commonwealth, as well as the reaching out to civil-society networks it already does, builds capacity and assists on the ground to make it easier to report human-rights violations.”

This conversation-starter is written by Anna Feuchtwang, Chief Executive of EveryChild.

On the 20^th November 2009, the U.N. General Assembly welcomed by consensus the Guidelines on the Alternative Care of Children, exactly 20 years on from the adoption of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). The Guidelines provide urgently needed guidance on how governments can develop family- based alternatives to institutional care and provide services to help keep vulnerable families together.

It will be essential for the Commonwealth to encourage its member states, which have all ratified the UNCRC, to develop action plans for the full implementation of these guidelines which involve the participation of children, families and communities.  Such action plans should not narrowly focus on child- care reform, but extend to ensure, firstly, that children without parental care are considered in social protection programmes, and, secondly,  the delivery of basic services. 

The guidelines are an essential enhancement to the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, particularly in light of the findings of a new report by EveryChild that reveals there are at least 24 million children in the world who are growing up without parental care and, due to the global recession, their number is rising rapidly. It is time to recognise the right of every child in the Commonwealth to grow up in a loving family environment.

Activist Peter Tatchell tells the Commonwealth Conversation that the criminalisation of homosexuality is not consistent with the Commonwealths values of human rights and democracy.

Tatchell gained international celebrity for his attempted citizens arrest of Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe in 1999 and 2001 on charges of torture and other human rights abuses.

Transcript:

Over 70 countries still criminalise homosexuality in all circumstances, with penalties ranging from a few years jail to life imprisonment and even execution.

More than half of these countries are members of the Commonwealth, and their anti-gay laws were originally imposed on those nations during the period of British colonial rule. They are not authentic national laws, they are imposed by imperialism.

I find it very strange that these now independent nations have retained the anti-gay laws that were imposed upon them by their former colonial masters. That is not consistent with national sovereignty and independence.

It?s also quite shocking that these countries have these homophobic laws because the Commonwealth is committed to democracy and human rights.

Persecuting and discriminating against citizens because of their sexuality or gender identification is not consistent with human rights. Moreover, all of these countries have signed international human rights declarations, pledging to observe equal treatment and non-discrimination. And those international instruments do not discriminate. They say that everyone in every country is entitled to equal rights and protection against discrimination.

Yet, in so many Commonwealth countries, we find that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people are consistently and often viciously persecuted.

In a country like Uganda, male homosexuality is punishable by life imprisonment. In Nigeria it’s 14 years hard labour. And in the Islamic areas gay people can be stoned to death. In Jamaica it’s 10 years hard labour. In Malaysia it’s up to 20 years imprisonment.

These laws are all relics of colonialism. They are from the 19^th century. They have no place in a modern 21^st century state - and I just hope the Commonwealth will recognise that action needs to be taken so that all its member states conform to the principles or democracy and human rights. That they all give their lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender citizens full equality before the law.

We are not saying they should approve of homosexuality; we are not saying they should endorse, or encourage it - we are simply saying do not persecute your gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender citizens.

Rev Rowland Jide Macaulay, Director and Founder of the House Of Rainbow has responded to Tatchell’s comments:

To coincide with the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Trinidad and Tobago – Peter Tatchell has written an open letter to the Commonwealth Secretary General, lamenting the state of LGBTI rights in the Commonwealth.

Your Excellency,

Warmest greetings!

I am writing to inquire what the Commonwealth is doing to defend the human rights of millions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Commonwealth citizens who are sufffering great persecution on account of their sexuality and gender variance and identity.

Sadly, I can find no evidence that senior Commonwealth leaders are doing anything significant and public, despite the fact that many Commonwealth member states are actively persecuting their LGBT citizens with oppressive, discriminatory laws, which result in grave human rights violations, including arrest, torture, rape, imprisonment and extra-judicial murder.

This homophobic and transphobic persecution is in breach of international humanitarian law.

As Comonwealth Secretary-General, you are entrusted to defend and promote the Commonwealth’s humanitarian values.

What action do you propose to take at the forthcoming Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Trinidad and Tobago from 27 to 29 November, to address the issue of homophobic and transphobic persecution by Commonwealth member states?

I appeal to you to take a stand for justice and equality – to show true leadership and make your mark for human rights.

During your keynote speech, and in other CHOGM forums, I respectfully request you to:

1. Make it clear that the Commonwealth’s commitment to human rights includes respect for the human rights of LGBT people, and that persecution on the grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity violates the Commonwealth principles of equality and non-discrimination and violates the principles of universal human rights, as enshrined in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

2. Call on Commonwealth member states to end the criminalisation of homosexuality, protect LGBT people against discrimination, harassment and violence, and recognise and consult with LGBT welfare and human rights organisations.

In particular, I request you to lobby the government of Uganda to withdraw the new Anti-Homosexuality Bill and cease its attacks on the human rights of LGBT Ugandans.

I regret that I need to make these requests. I realise that you have not been long in your post. But I hope that having had these issues drawn to your attention you will rise to the challenge and pursue them.

Some of the key principles of the Commonwealth are equality, non-discrimination, opportunity for all, liberty of the individual and human dignity.
http://www.thecommonwealth.org/Internal/191086/191247/the_commonwealth/
http://www.thecommonwealth.org/files/36123/FileName/harare.pdf

In the case of LGBT people, these principles are routinely violated by nearly all Commonwealth countries. They are violated with impunity and without rebuke by the leaders of the Commonwealth.

I am surprised that the Commonwealth’s most senior figures, such as yourself, are not, as far as I know, doing anything serious to dissuade the many member states which continue to outlaw consenting adult same-sex relations, which take no action against homophobic and transphobic violence, which deny gay and bisexual men safer sex education and HIV advice, and which fail to give LGBT people protection against discrimination in jobs, housing, education, health care and provision of good and services.

It is extremely disappointing that the Commonwealth leadership appears to not regard LGBT rights as human rights and that it has neglected to protect LGBT citizens in the Commonwealth family of nations. This inaction is de facto collusion with victimisation.

Around 80 countries worldwide continue to outlaw homosexuality, with penalties ranging from one year’s jail to life imprisonment – and even execution. More than half of these countries were former British colonies. Most are members of the Commonwealth.

Of the 53 Commonwealth member states, over 40 still criminalise same-sex relations, mostly under anti-gay laws that were originally imposed by the British government in the nineteenth century, during the period of colonial rule. These homophobic colonialist laws, which were retained after independence, are wrecking the lives of LGBT people throughout the Commonwealth. They criminalise otherwise law-abiding citizens and contribute to a hostile social atmosphere which demonises LGBT people as unnatural, abnormal and criminal. This renders LGBT people liable to blackmail, imprisonment, mob violence, rejection by their families, excommunication from their faith, eviction from their homes, dismissal from their jobs and this makes them high risk for depression, mental illness and suicide. Such rampant bigotry and ill-treatment of other human beings is a stain on the Commonwealth.

One of the worst current examples of a homophobic Commonwealth country is Uganda.
The Anti-Homosexuality Bill, currently under consideration by the Ugandan parliament, proposes the death penalty for “aggravated homosexuality…(and) serial offenders,” including same-sex acts involving people with HIV.
http://www.newvision.co.ug/D/8/12/697859

It imposes a sentence of life imprisonment for merely touching a person with the intent to have homosexual relations. Membership of gay organisations and funding for them, advocacy of gay human rights and the provision of condoms or safer sex advice to gay people will result in up to seven years jail for “promoting” homosexuality. Failing to report violators to the police within 24 hours will incur three years behind bars. Astonishingly, the new legislation will also apply to Ugandans who commit these ‘crimes’ while living abroad, in countries where such behaviour is not a criminal offence.

See this appeal against the bill by Human Rights Watch and other human rights defenders:
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/10/15/uganda-anti-homosexuality-bill-threatens-liberties-and-human-rights-defenders

See this briefing by the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission:
http://www.iglhrc.org/cgi-bin/iowa/article/takeaction/globalactionalerts/989.html

The Ugandan bill violates the equality and non-discrimination provisions of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Uganda is a signatory. These breaches of international humanitarian commitments set a dangerous precedent which undermines the right to privacy and to individual liberty and thereby threatens the human rights of all Ugandans.
http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/z1afchar.htm
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm

The Anti-Homosexuality Bill has been condemned by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, International Commission of Jurists and the World AIDS Campaign.

This legislation is, however, merely the latest in a series of state-sponsored persecutions of LGBT Ugandans, often at the behest of Christian leaders who are aided and funded by right-wing evangelical churches in the US.

Typical is what happened to gay rights advocate Kizza Musinguzi. He was jailed in 2004 and subjected to four months of forced labour, water torture, beatings and rape.

Any Ugandan who speaks out against anti-gay violence faces dire consequences. A heterosexual Anglican bishop, Christopher Ssenyonjo, was expelled from the Church of Uganda for defending the human rights of LGBT people.

In recent years, the Ugandan government has passed a law banning same-sex civil marriage, fined Radio Simba for broadcasting a discussion of LGBT issues, and expelled a UN AIDS agency director for meeting with LGBT campaigners.

Similar homophobic persecution is happening in other Commonwealth nations, including Nigeria and The Gambia, where President Yahya Jammeh has called for sexual cleansing. He has promised “stricter laws than Iran” on homosexuality, and has begun his witchunt by ordering gay people to leave the country and threatening to “cut off the head” of any homosexual who remains. It is truly shocking that the Commonwealth leadership has not condemned such murderous threats.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7416536.stm

While I realise that you are very busy, I would be most grateful if you could respond to my appeal for your intervention before the commencement of CHOGM.

Wishing you a successful CHOGM.

Yours faithfully,

Peter Tatchell

OutRage! – The LGBT Human Rights Campaign – London, UK

Human Rights Spokesperson for the Green Party of England & Wales

This post is taken from an article written by R. Iniyan Ilango, a consultant with the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative. The full article is found here.

He writes that, despite almost every CHOGM since the 1970s making a strong commitment to human rights, the association has consistently failed to fulfil its promises:

“While the 2007 CHOGM at Kampala and the 1999 Law Ministers Meeting underlined the importance of access to information, so far only 15 Commonwealth countries have access to information laws in place.

Twelve years ago in 1997, the CHOGM at Edinburgh expressed the belief that the International Criminal Court (ICC) would be an important development in the international promotion of the rule of law, yet 23 Commonwealth countries have yet to ratify or accede to the Rome Statute.

Two years ago in 2007 at Kampala, the heads of government pledged to end impunity for perpetrators of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Throughout 2008 and most of 2009 numerous allegations of serious international humanitarian law violations were made against Sri Lanka… despite these doubts the country continued to sit as a CMAG member.

The 1999 CHOGM at Durban, the 2002 CHOGM at Coolum, the 2003 CHOGM at Abuja, the 2005 CHOGM at Malta and the 2007 CHOGM at Kampala have all reiterated the importance of civil society participation. However…Human rights defenders in particular find their activities restricted and curtailed by sometimes subtle, sometimes draconian, legal regulations that target their ability to engage in activities to promote and protect human rights.”

He concludes:

“2009 to 2011 is a historic time for the Commonwealth as 2009 marks the 60th anniversary of the organisation and 2011 marks the 20th anniversary of the Harare Declaration, and the Commonwealth should use this period to demonstrate that its human rights promises really do hold water.”

In an article published on Tuesday 20th October 2009, in Caribbean Net News, Maja Daruwala, Executive Director of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative has called for CMAG reform to be top of the agenda at the Trinidad CHOGM. CMAG is the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group – the Commonwealth watchdog on human rights abuses.

Today, CMAG must be able to deal quickly and unequivocally with situations of constant threats to human rights values by Commonwealth states and open challenges encapsulated in statements like the latest one by President Jammeh of the Gambia where he is unequivocal in his opposition to the Commonwealth’s fundamental political values when he declares on the eve of his departure to New York for the UN General Assembly meeting:

“I will kill anyone, who wants to destabilize this country. If you think that you can collaborate with so called human rights defenders, and get away with it, you must be living in a dream world. I will kill you, and nothing will come out of it. We are not going to condone people posing as human rights defenders to the detriment of the country. If you are affiliated with any human rights group, be rest assured that your security and personal safety would not be guaranteed by my Government. We are ready to kill saboteurs.”

While CMAG has its share of successes, lately there have instances where it has not lived up to expectations. For example in the case of Sri Lanka, reports of large scale civilian deaths, impunity and stifling of human rights in Sri Lanka continued to emerge throughout 2008 and 2009 but CMAG has refused to put Sri Lanka in its agenda. The additional irony is that Sri Lanka itself continues to serve as a member of CMAG during this period for a third consecutive (two year) term contrary to the 1999 Durban Communiqué that limits a country to a maximum of two consecutive terms.

CMAG has also been silent on other parts of the Commonwealth, for instance during the post election violence in Kenya in 2007, when freedom of assembly was curtailed in Malaysia in 2007, and for a long while on the Gambia where many basic human rights are heavily curtailed.

It is worrying to note that the CMAG has by and by interpreted its mandate very narrowly to focus only on the un-constitutional overthrow of governments albeit selectively. While my organisation welcomes the recent suspension of Fiji from the Commonwealth as well as the earlier suspension of Pakistan in 2007, CMAG’s non-action on Bangladesh when there was an army backed government in 2006 has left political activists and civil society organisations monitoring CMAG meetings wondering about its yardsticks.

Most of the countries of the Commonwealth still criminalize sexual acts between consenting adults of the same sex and other forms of sexual orientation, gender identity and expression. These laws, introduced in most Commonwealth countries in the 18^th century, are heritage of the colonial period, as recently highlighted by the High Court of Delhi, India, in the judgment that struck down section 377 of the Indian penal code punishing sexual activities ‘against the order of nature.’

In 1994 the Human Rights Committee in Toonen v. Australia established that such kind of criminal provisions violate the principle of non discrimination and the right to privacy as enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, therefore constituting a violation of basic human rights as recognized by international law.

Similarly, other criminal provisions introduced in the same period by the colonial power punish non-normative expression of gender, such as provisions criminalizing cross-dressing, as exists in Guyana, for example, where there was a series of crackdowns against male-to-female transgender persons for cross-dressing in February of this year. In some countries, despite national and international campaigns on non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity and expression by human rights activists, further legislatures and laws are being introduced to criminalize non-normative behaviors and identities.

As human rights activists have witnessed in the recent years, these provisions have constituted the pretext for any form of human rights violation based on individuals real or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity or expression, such as arbitrary arrests, police abuses, infringement of the right to fair trial, limitation to the right to freedom of association and assembly, inhuman and degrading treatment, among others. Such laws have been proven to negatively impact HIV/AIDS education and prevention.

Crackdowns against individuals, human rights activists or civil society organizations in several Commonwealth countries further raise concerns in terms of respect of individuals’ human rights and freedom of association, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity and expression.

What do you think the role of the Commonwealth should be in ensuring that fundamental human rights of every individual are protected and to redress a sensitive issue that, for historical reasons, mostly affects Commonwealth countries?

The recent imprisonment of six journalists including a nursing mother of eight-month-old baby in the Gambia is indeed a stark reminder to the fact that press freedom is under siege in the tiny West African nation.

On August 6th 2009, a Gambian High Court slammed 4-year-jail term against the journalists after the trial that many people believed was highly influenced by President Yahya Jammeh and his government. The journalists’ only crime was to issue and run a press release that the government argued defamed President Jammeh.

Relations between Gambian government and journalists especially those holding opposing/critical views are not cordial to say the least. President Jammeh and his officials continue to intimidate, harass and persecute such media practitioners leading to climate of fear. Among the many press freedom violations and attacks against journalists are the following:

Unresolved murder cases: The December 2004 cold-blooded murder of Deyda Hydara, the former managing editor of Banjul-based ‘Point’ newspaper, remains unresolved. The killers are still at large and there is yet to be any serious investigations into the matter for over four years now. Another case involving journalist Omar Barrow who was gunned down in April 2000 along with 12 protesting students also remained unresolved.

Disappearance: Chief Ebrima Manneh a reporter with ‘Daily Observer’ newspaper has been missing since July 2006. Rights groups said he was kidnapped by agents of Gambia?s notorious National Intelligence Agency (NIA).

Wrongful arrests/detentions: These are now part of the daily struggle for journalists in the Gambia. Scores of them have been arrested, detained and in many cases subjected to torture and degrading conditions. Among those recently arrested and detained are – Pap Saine, (Managing editor) and Modou Sanyang, (senior reporter) of ‘Point newspaper’ as well as Halifa Sallah, of privately-owned ‘Foroyaa’ newspaper.

Exiled Journalists: Many journalists including the author of this report have been forced into exile. In July 2007, I was chased and harassed by agents of Gambia’s notorious National Intelligence Agency (NIA) forcing me to flee my home country and thereby joining a long list of Gambian exiled journalists. As a journalist in exile some of us have faced many problems such as lack of security /protection, the risk of being pursued by government agents, as well as all sorts of family problems resulting from disconnect

What the Commonwealth should do: I expect and call on the Commonwealth to do more by intervening in the unfortunate Gambian situation with a view to getting government change its negative attitude and policies towards the media. Commonwealth should further assist in getting Gambian authorities respect press freedom and human rights in general as well as find ways of assisting the many journalists who have been forced into exiled and are suffering as a result of their work and belief in press freedom and freedom of expression in general.

On the day Fiji is fully suspended from the Commonwealth, Dr. Mere Tuisalalo Samisoni, legal elected member of Lami Open Consituency in 2006, gives her thoughts:

The reasons put forward by Bainimarama for carrying out his 2006 coup provide a good parallel of Fiji’s post-coup state of instability. His justifications have been wandering all over Fiji’s political landscape and represent the height of insincerity.

These started off in 2004 with (1) ‘national security’ to get the military on side. Once that was ?done? he moved on to (2) ‘corruption’, to get the general public on side. Then when that did not work, he moved to (3) ‘multi-ethnicity’ or race, to at least keep his Indian-Fijian coup support intact. It then morphed over to (4) the Role of the Military as he began to fill the ‘civil’ service with Military Officers for their loyalty. When the lies of 2006 and the treason of April 2009 began to cause rifts amongst the troops, he again re-invented the 2006 coup as (5) the only ‘intervention’ that could right the wrongs of the killing of loyalists in the November 2000 Mutiny. Meanwhile, the public rationale for the coup has now moved on to (6) the need to fix the purported ‘damage’ of the past 20 years of alleged ‘divide and rule’ government policies (none of which has been named or explained).

The real reason for the 2006 coup is of course completely different, and is well known to people like former Police Commissioner Hughes who had the evidence to expose it in 2006, before soldiers were sent to arrest him.
The problem for institutions like the Commonwealth is that they require honesty, legality, co-operation and good faith, to be able to achieve much. It is evident from the above that the Commonwealth is unlikely to get any such thing from the Fiji Regime whose interest in subjects other than its own survival and self-preservation, are easily expendable.

Kaye Whiteman, a writer and journalist and former Director of Information at the Commonwealth Secretariat says more needs to be done to prevent abuse of media freedoms in the Commonwealth.

Following on my ’starter’ on July 30, let me go into greater detail on the matter of freedom of expression, one area in which the Commonwealth could engage to sharpen its somewhat bland image. I am aware that, for an organisation which is an association of states, and therefore of governments, this poses a number of problems, but we also have to be mindful that it is a ‘Commonwealth of peoples’.

The Commonwealth played an exceptional role in furthering the political emancipation of both Zimbabwe and South Africa in the last quarter of the 20th century, which highlighted its unique qualities and potential as an international agent of freedom. It was a role that led directly to the Harare Declaration of 1991 on democracy and human rights: the fine words on Southern Africa had to have a more universal application if the Commonwealth was to continue to be taken seriously.

This manifesto was honed and developed into direct action with the 1995 crisis over Nigeria and the Saro Wiwa execution, which coincided with the Auckland CHOGM and the Millbrook Declaration that set up the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG). Some see this as the single most important political function the organisation has at the moment, giving some measure of teeth to Commonwealth activity, normally only influence-based. CMAG has, after some early successes in its positions against illegal governments and military regimes, shown contradictions and limitations, in the face of serious abuses by civilian administrations.

This was what led to the inclusion in the Coolum Declaration (2002) of a commitment to ‘freedom of expression’ as a human right. In pursuit of the recommendations of the High Level Review Report Of that year, Coolum tried to set out a ‘clear set of procedures’ for the Secretary-General and the Chairperson in Office under which CMAG can address ?serious or persistent? violations of the Harare Principles, going beyond the unconstitutional overthrow of member governments. But although we are told issues affecting non-military regimes have been sometimes discussed informally, or ‘below the line’, or in connection with the increasingly important ‘good offices’ function of the Secretary-General, the Coolum procedures have not yet been officially invoked. The concentration of CMAG of late has been more on the cases of Pakistan and Fiji.

There may well now be a case for reviving the Secretariat-generated idea of a more comprehensive reinforced mandate for CMAG to cover certain serious shortcomings of non-military governments that had been aired in 1999, but were rejected at the Durban CHOGM. Too many governments felt affected to be comfortable with such a mandate extension.

The 1999 proposals included, significantly, the banning of opposition media as a legitimate subject for consideration by CMAG ministers, although at that stage the Commonwealth had still to embrace freedom of expression. While a clearly identified pillar of democracy, media freedom is often downplayed because of the nervousness it engenders. After Coolum, the Abuja Declaration of Democracy of 2003 also included among democratic objectives ‘the right to information’, but it seems that the issue of the media is a sleeping dog that many would prefer to let lie.

The case for pressing the matter rests on evidence that the situation of independent media in a number of Commonwealth countries is deteriorating, without the organisation itself paying much interest. It has often been left to outfits like Reporters Without Borders and the Committee to Protect Journalists to mobilise international campaigns, especially in countries where the murder of journalists has gone unpunished, like Sri Lanka and the Gambia. The Commonwealth Journalists Association and the Commonwealth Press Union (now being reconstituted as the Commonwealth Press Union Media Trust) do, however, have an honourable record of protesting without making an impact on the Commonwealth as a whole.

How can this be done ‘While it hard for the Commonwealth to promote the idea of journalists as ‘human rights defenders’, if you are going to have a democracy, the media must, for better or worse, be allowed to do their work free from intimidation and fear. On the one hand, in the Coolum procedures, the organisation already has the means to raise the issue, should there be the political will. On the other hand, a more frontal approach, mobilising all Commonwealth media and human rights organisations, with significant and soberly collated evidence of abuses, and perhaps using the Commonwealth Peoples’ Forum prior to the Trinidad CHOGM as a spearhead, could be worth trying in the hope of arousing opinion.

The recent condemnation by Secretary-General Sharma of press censorship by the military regime in Fiji (prior to its suspension) marked a small but welcome breakthrough on this subject, highlighting an issue that the Commonwealth, whatever the difficulties, has an obligation to confront.

Kaye Whiteman
Writer and journalist: Former Director of Information, Commonwealth secretariat; currently a Committee Member, Commonwealth Journalists Association, UK Branch.