The second Quarterly Meeting for 2009 of the Executive Committee of the Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA) was held on Saturday, June 27, 2009. The following concerns dominated discussions.
1. Sexual Offences
New and up-dated legislation comes into being in Guyana (and most other countries) due to pressure and influence mobilized by sectors of the society with an interest in the issue. In the case of reform of Sexual Offences legislation the issue was driven by a strong coalition of civil society mobilized by organizations such as the GHRA, Red Thread and Help & Shelter in conjunction with the Ministry of Human Services. Since the beginning of 2009, however, the momentum behind the reform has been hampered by the unwillingness of the Government to make the draft legislation available to civil society. For the past eight months several efforts by the GHRA to secure copies of the draft have failed.
Parallel with Government indifference to approving the reformed legislation, front pages of newspapers, including the state media, have maintained daily revelations of sexual offences committed during 2009. Nauseating as these cases may be, we need to bear in mind they represent only a fraction of the actual violence taking place against women and girls. Two recent well-publicized sexual offences involving school-girls only attracted charges because of media publicity. In neither case was the charge related to the actual sexual offences because the current sexual offences laws do not cover grooming. Indifference to sexual violence against women and girls reflects the day-to-day combination of ignorance, inefficiency and corruption demonstrated by the agencies responsible for the administration of justice. This is not only a problem of ‘bad apples’ and corrupt individuals. This is systemic, institutionalised violation. The message to females in Guyana 2009 is that you don’t matter enough. The lack of action by the authorities contrasts sharply with the following recommendations made by the UN Committee Against Torture in 2006 in response to the Guyana Initial Report to the Committee: “(a) Establish and promote an effective mechanism for receiving complaints of sexual violence, including in custodial facilities; (b) Ensure that law enforcement personnel are instructed on the absolute prohibition of violence and rape in custody as a form of torture as well as trained to deal with charges of sexual violence; (c) Carry out prompt, impartial and effective investigations, try the perpetrators of such acts and, when convicted, impose appropriate sentences, and adequately compensate victims; (d) Ensure that the complainant and witnesses are protected against all ill-treatment and intimidation as a consequence of the complaint or any evidence given; (e) Establish a monitoring mechanism to investigate and deal with cases of sexual violence in the country.” …….
The Executive Committee agreed to write to the Director of Public Prosecution concerning a number of recent sexual violence cases not being properly addressed.
2. Expulsion of Guyanese from Barbados
Without questioning the Barbados government’s right to exercise authority to remove illegal immigrants, the manner in which this authority is being exercised is inexcusable, unnecessary and a grave abuse of the rights to due process of those being deported. The action to remove illegal immigrants is being used by the Barbadian Government to stir nationalist and racial animosity against Guyanese and other immigrants and by the Barbadian police to justify abusive acts against them. This behaviour needs to be evaluated in the context of a society which in more prosperous times was happy to turn a blind eye to cheap labour, legal or illegal.
Unacceptable behaviour by the Barbados authorities against Guyanese immigrants is a long- standing problem. On several occasions, the latest recorded being in 2001, the GHRA had occasion to protest over inhuman treatment of Guyanese women by Barbados immigration at Grantley Adams airport and on a previous occasion over the removal of Guyanese passengers from an aircraft while legitimately transiting through the same airport.
Unfortunately the Guyanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs neither on previous occasions, nor the present, has found it convenient to pursue the matter vigorously. Half-hearted formalities have been preferred to dignified and firm demands for explanations.
No doubt official reticence is tinged with recognition of the indirect responsibility of the Government of Guyana for failing to create the conditions for Guyanese to live and work in reasonable expectation of prosperity here in Guyana. Convincing large sections of the population that they have little future in Guyana is not peculiar to the present Government. As the following excerpt from a publication of twenty-five years ago illustrates, it is a long-standing feature of Guyana’s political system:
“ Suriname authorities have deported several thousand Guyanese illegally residing in Suriname. Mass deportations were carried out in which people were dragged from their homes during the night or from their workplaces, frequently not allowed to dress and herded into a large bond in Nickerie…Nine deaths have occurred during the largest of these deportation exercises in February. In June two deportees drowned as they tried to escape from a launch which was returning 69 deportees to Springlands. Suriname authorities have turned a blind eye to Guyanese working in the sugar and rice industries because domestic labour was not attracted to that kind of work. Deportees were forced to leave their homes and possessions without any security precautions by the military personnel in charge of the deportations.”
(GHRA Guyana Human Rights Report 1985 p.13 )
3. Lack of Accountability in Public Life
The rule of law in Guyana is systematically undermined in the following areas:
Since the beginning of the year the Government has been continuously struggling to justify its unwillingness to investigate the apparent involvement of highly- placed people in drug criminality in Guyana which has produced a series of high-profile trials in the United States, but not a single indictable charge against anyone here in Guyana.
Weak or non-existent regulatory mechanisms are unable to investigate a catalogue of financial and business transaction involving:
o the loss or diversion of large amounts of public funds,
o selective prosecution of large-scale customs fraud,
o sale of public assets at indefensibly low prices to political cronies;
o failure to channel revenue into the Consolidated Fund
Failure to complete official enquiries into:
o Instances of torture by the GDF
o The deaths of two inmates in the Georgetown Prison
o Brutality and torture in Wakenaam by the Joint Services.
4. REDD Consultations
Following reports from members of the Executive who have attended consultations and other meetings on the Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD), some of the concerns expressed included:
Identifying community rotation practices with ‘slash-and-burn techniques’ banned by REDD.
Lack of clarity over the conditions or standards required to secure Norwegian support for a REDD programme. Of the 144 REDD initiatives being developed in various countries only one country submission to the UN Framework Convention for Climate Change (that of Touvalu) has made community-managed forests (ie. indigenous rights) a binding part of the REDD agreement.
Scepticism over Governmental assurances in view of current practices in mining prompted by the concessions (since rescinded) of over 70 claims in the Rewa river (Region 1) and the appearance in recent months of 6 ‘cutter-heads’ (missile dredges) (owned by one Brazilian) in the Barama River area of Region 1, along with two other Guyanese-owned dredges.
Uncertainty over the implications of the concept that the REDD is a ‘developmental’ not an ‘environmental’ initiative.
Moreover, a recent international review of Guyana identified the following obstacles to wholeheartedly embracing the REDD as a development blueprint for Guyana at the present time as:
Human rights infractions
Lack of land tenure
Lack of free prior and informed consent
Weak enforcement of existing environmental laws
Minimal mention of mining and infrastructure development impacts
Minimal risk analysis
In light of these reports the Executive Committee agreed to be guided in its approach to REDD by Clause 6 of the Anchorage Declaration of the Indigenous Peoples’ Global Summit on Climate Change signed on April 14th 2009 which states:
“ 6 All initiatives under the REDD must secure the recognition and implementation of the human rights of Indigenous peoples, including security of land tenure, ownership, recognition of land title according to traditional ways, uses and customary laws and the multiple benefits of forest for climate, ecosystems and Peoples, before taking any action”.
5. 30th Anniversary of the Guyana Human Rights Association
Since October 17th. 2009 marks the 30th Anniversary of the Guyana Human Rights Association, the Executive Committee discussed various possible activities to be developed to commemorate the event. A Working Group for the 30th. Anniversary is to be established.
Executive Committee, GHRA
June 29, 2009
