Zimbabwean civil rights activist Nellie de Jongh has been speaking to women "behind the wire" at Yarl's Wood Immigration Removal Centre and documenting their lives, the lives of their children, and the conditions under which they are all being kept.
Nellie de Jongh logs her visits and related information on the Web site of the National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns (NCADC), and e-mails an account of what she is seeing and hearing to a growing number of people.
The following narrative is based on her e-mails:
July 20, 2006
Aboubacar Bailey Junior was born on April 16, 2006, in Holloway prison. He served his first 79 days there, and then he was transferred to continue his indefinite sentence at Yarl's Wood. To date, he has served 15 days.
His crime, according to immigration law, is the immigration status of his parents.
Baby Aboubacar suffers from a skin condition that keeps him and his mom awake at night. Doctors are not very helpful because Aboubacar is, first and foremost, an illegal immigrant -- even before he can ever be a child.
At Yarl's Wood, babies are not getting enough to eat. They are suffering from loss of appetite and can hardly eat the food they are provided.
Halama, Aboubacar's mother, said he received better care at Holloway prison. There, breast-feeding mothers got an extra liter of milk in a flask for their babies every night. At Yarl's Wood, they are told there is no extra milk for breast-feeding mothers. They are told to drink a lot of water instead.
Halama said she believes the only reason their babies were treated better in prison was because British nationals were also housed there.
"At Immigration Removal centers we are all foreign nationals, that is why they don't care about our babies," Halama said.
Ayodele Micheal Ode was born on April 17, 2006. He, too, was born in prison and lived there for the first 22 days of his life, before being transferred to Yarl's Wood, where he continues to serve his extended prison sentence. What terrible crime did this baby commit to have already served 93 days in two prisons?
Leatitia Kakmeni Pameni was born on Oct. 12, 2003, and Stacy Leuni Singoue, on Feb. 23, 2005. They were both detained on May 11, 2006. To date, the two siblings have served 68 days in detention. Tomorrow, they will be deported to the Central African Republic.
Princess Solomon was born on Oct. 19, 1997, and Promise Solomon, on Jan. 6, 2004. The two sisters and their mother were detained on May 30, 2006. They have served 50 days in detention to date. Promise's identity card has the following information on the back: "This card is to be carried at all times while you are in the centre and handed in when you leave. The card must be produced on request to Officers to obtain access to the centre facilities."
Promise is two and a half years old. How can she comply with the instructions?
Promise is suffering from ill health. She has had nosebleeds for the past few days. According to Meggy, Promise's mother, the doctor has not been helpful and was unable to reassure her about either of her children's poor health. No thorough examination was carried out.
Meggy has resorted to holding Promise in her arms, over her shoulder, while she sleeps, as she has woken up on several occasions to find the child, her clothing, and her bedding covered in blood. Her worst fear is that Promise will choke to death if she lays her down to sleep.
Aliyah Benoni was born on the June 15, 2006, and is the youngest child on my list. Like Ayodele she, too, was born in prison where she served the first 15 days of her life. She was then transferred to Yarl's Wood on July 5, 2006. She continues to serve her indefinite sentence and has done 15 days. At time of writing, she is only 30 days old.
Molly Ssebatta was born on Oct. 5, 2001. She was detained on July 5, 2006 -- at 5:30 a.m. Molly's speech has been affected since detention. She has no appetite and refuses to eat most days. She wants to go back home, and she misses her friends. She had been detained for 15 days.
Adecokundo Taiwo was born on June 20, 2002, and Adeole Taiwo, on Jan. 13, 2005. They have both spent 15 days behind the wire. According to their mother, before they were snatched in one of the Home Office's infamous dawn raids, the two brothers had been to their doctor and were due for a review, as their doctor had said they had an infection. The mother was very distressed by the attitude of the doctors at Yarl's Wood, who have even turned down her request for Paracetomol. Mostly, the brothers want to know when they will be able to go back home, and to school, to do normal things again.
I am amazed at the courage of some of these parents. Most are fighting back in their own way with noncompliance. They get together, have discussions and meetings, and write letters to the authorities. Working with these women/parents has brought home to me just how terrible immigrants are treated in this country. The fact that innocent babies are born in prison and then transferred to immigration detention centers leaves me very angry indeed.
July 22, 2006
Prisca Kifoula and her three children were detained on July 19, 2006.
She said that she was abused physically, verbally, and racially by the officers who picked them up. She was very distressed and started to take off her clothes. The officers covered the top half of her body with her bath mat. She was driven from Huddersfield to Leeds and then to Bedford with her children, who also became very distressed, as their mother was still naked except for the bath mat.
While in Huddersfield, in her home, she said they pushed her head into the sofa and hurt her arms, which are swollen. She said she couldn't even lift her child up or anything else. I have advised her to make a complaint and ask for a copy in writing. Other detainees confirmed that what she was saying was true.
Judith Mtili has asked if a doctor could see her husband because his blood pressure is very high at the moment.
July 24, 2006
Friday morning, July 21: It is 2 a.m. and I cannot get Prisca, her children and the other families behind the wire out of my mind. Sleep seems but a luxury in the midst of so much human suffering which is totally unnecessary. I am exhausted after spending days speaking to other mothers behind the wire. I am feeling really hopeless at the moment. This family's removal date is July 24, 2006. We have two days to try and do something.
We have lost one family. This is the Solomon family. Remember our little two and a half year old I.D. cardholder? Promise Solomon, and her sister Princess Solomon, their mother managed to resist for 50 days with non-compliance. They were served with a removal order after 6 p.m. and removed at 3 a.m. and taken to the airport the day the report on Britain's youngest prisoners was published.
The Home Office won't only bend its own rules a little. It seems to break every single one.
We only found out in the afternoon that they had gone, as sometimes we cannot get through or are not put through to the women behind the wire.
One of the mothers, who related the whole story to me, said Meggy just broke down and really sobbed. She also told me that there was an elderly lady from the Congo who was very distressed and she was crying and taking her clothes off in the hope that they will leave her alone. She was handcuffed naked and taken together with the Solomon family. This I am sure will be forever imprinted on Princess's and Promise's young minds.
Another family was due to be removed on the July 21, at 6 p.m. I spoke to Leatitia and Stacy's mother in the morning and she was really down. Her solicitor I believe was trying really hard as her friend in Glasgow told me. When I tracked them down at Queen's building [PDF] on a call box number, Queen's building, we think is in terminal 4 and it is a holding center before removals.
I believe the family was with immigration officials. The second, third, fourth and fifth time I tried they could not be found. A few people were good enough to offer to look for them, as they seemed to know who I was talking about. By this time it was almost 5 p.m. This is one of the most dynamic mothers who has resisted deportation for 68 days. I hope from the bottom of my heart that she has managed it again. But that is only simply to buy time or as a colleague put it, the Home Office sees it as simply missing the first bus, but right behind it, the other one will be on time.
On July 19 we got a call about a Congolese mother and children who had been detained. The father was not home, which means he was left behind. We hope that will delay the removal. We had been trying to track them down since the calls but only managed to late Friday afternoon. I spoke to Prisca on the phone for about 20 to 30 minutes. She had guards standing outside her door. When I asked her why they were guarding her she told me that she had threatened to kill herself.
I then proceeded to ask her if the Home Office had paid her and her family a pastoral visit, she did not know what I was talking about and I had to break it down for her. Prisca told me Home office officials came to visit them one month before they were snatched and all they asked for was one of the children's birth certificates. When she asked them why they wanted it, they said they just needed to check on something. The document was returned the next time they went to sign.
The next time she heard from the Home Office was the battering of her front door and the police shouting, "Open up! It's the police!" This is every asylum seeker's most dreaded moment that you live and relive. Any loud knock is enough to shatter one's nerves.
When Prisca opened the door, the Home Office bullies bulldozed their way in, with such force, eight or ten of them, two women who immediately went up to the children to try to keep them calm while the home bullies were laying in on Prisca. What can anyone expect a mother who is half-asleep to do? All I would be thinking of is protecting my children in any way I can.
She said as she was trying to resist them an Asian and a white man were insulting her, calling her all sorts of names. They even told her she came to sell herself in this country.
She said they physically, verbally and racially abused her. She was so distraught she took off her clothes begging them to spare her and her children's lives. Prisca was handcuffed naked and to insult her even further these Home Office thugs took her bath mat and used it to cover just her top half. She said her children were brought in; to sit next to their handcuffed naked mother.
The Home Office thugs drove them from Huddersfield to Leeds and then all the way to Yarl's Wood still naked with a just bath mat covering only her top half. This appears to be what Home Office must resort to meet their 5-year target: strip mothers, parents and their children of all pride and dignity. One wonders what else they will be resorting to towards the end of their unreasonable target if they are doing this in the first year.
Prisca said her children cried most of the way to Yarl's Wood. When she arrived she complained about the abuse she and her children had suffered. Her hands were swollen and still are. I have had confirmation of this from two other parents.
Prisca said, "I can not even pick up my youngest child to try to comfort him as my arms are too painful."
All she was given was paracetamol, the Yarl's Wood wonder drug that is a cure for every detainee's illness.
She said that the one man who was on duty when she arrived was very helpful and appeared to be kind but she has not seen him again since. She says she is so depressed and cannot stop crying. The children are so traumatized that even when she cries when they are sleep, they all wake up and start crying too.
She says, "I just can't take this it would be better if they kill me or I die."
I know I keep saying women or mothers, but believe you me there are some fathers too, one of these fathers has been in Yarl's Wood for 20 plus months, he has amazing strength and is so good natured. I tease him endlessly about being the veteran detainee. He has a great sense of humor. When I am feeling really down after taking down a few stories, our veteran detainee keeps a smile on my face. We even manage to have a laugh. He is my translator and right hand man. It's really touching how he runs around getting the new arrivals settled in and counseling them in his own way. When I am really worried about someone, my veteran brother says, "Don't worry, sister. I will go and talk to them and sort everything out."
Two pregnant mothers who gave birth in prison were arrested on arrival as they were traveling on false documents, both were trying to get to Canada before they were detained, despite claiming asylum they were still imprisoned, when they and their babies had served their prison sentence they then started serving their indefinite immigration sentences, one mother said she has only been for her first interview and is waiting for her appeal hearing. I can only relate these stories as they are given to me. I have a good relationship with most of these parents and I have no reason to disbelieve them.
July 27, 2006
The parents of 16 families incarcerated in Yarl's Wood IRC have refused their morning meal, they have also refused to send their children to either the school or the nursery.
I have just spoken to some of the parents refusing food and they are saying they can no longer take life behind the wire. Their main concern is their children. They want to know what crimes their children have committed to be incarcerated indefinitely.
These parents came together to discuss the issue of the detention of their children yesterday evening and decided within the hour that they should make their feelings public and that a hunger strike would be the best way to emphasize the plight of their children. Starting at breakfast time this morning they have refused to eat.
One parent said for those of us who have been granted judicial review, we are still being held as the Home Office has said they would like to make more enquires. This parent went on further to say that: "It is like they have put us in a small box, with the intention of forcing us to go back to our countries which are not safe."
"As I am on medication that I need to take with food I have stopped taking any medication. We are tired of being treated less than human beings. The ill treatment of our wives and children must stop. They deserve to be treated with human dignity."
One of the mothers said she saw three staff holding and questioning a little boy about why he was not going to school.
Another said: "We want the Home Office to hear us and free us, I don't understand how some people are freed without bail and some have to obtain bail."
After reading Anne Owers's report on Yarl's Wood, which was published yesterday, I am not surprised that the parents have taken action.
Yarl's Wood has seen many hunger strikes since it opened and I doubt this will be the last one.
July 28, 2006 [Listen to podcast]
The hunger strike by the parents of children detained at Yarl's Wood is still solid this morning.
One of the mothers I have just spoken to says that none of the parents took their children to breakfast this morning and will probably keep their children away from lunch and supper.
Children in detention are the forgotten children, often snatched before dawn and imprisoned indefinitely. Somewhere this side of the wire are friends and teachers all wondering what has happened to these children and their parents.
Since last Thursday, the following has happened:
Aboubacar Bailey Junior made bail yesterday after 100 days in detention
Brothers Adecokundo Taiwo and Adeole Taiwo are still in detention. The children's health, welfare and lack of appetite are an ongoing concern for mom, who suffers with joint pains and depression. She says all she was ever given was paracetomol. The children still want to know when they can go back home to their friends and school.
Aliyah, our youngest little detainee, is still doing time. She was born on June 15, 2006. She has also just spent a day in hospital because of constipation. Her mom said it is because of the poor diet. She is a breast-feeding mom and she says she is terrified to stop breast-feeding.
Her mother has concerns about hygiene issues at Yarl's Wood IRC.
When I asked mom about where the baby was born, she said she was rushed to hospital from prison and then taken back to prison four hours after Aliyah was born. She said she has no family or friends in the U.K. as she was detained while in transit to Canada to join her sister. She was imprisoned for carrying false documents. Despite seeking asylum and being refused she said she has only used up her one appeal, "but it appears they would like to keep me here indefinitely. No second appeal date has been set."
Leatitia, Stacy, Princess, and Promise have been deported. I don't know if all these children had received their anti-malarials before being put on the plane. If not their lives will be in danger, as they will have no natural immunity against malaria, Africa's biggest killer of children. Their removal makes me very, very angry.
I have spoken to all the parents and questioned them about pastoral visits, not one of them knew what I was talking about.
Pastoral visits are part of the Immigration and Nationality Directorate's family removals policy to prepare families for removal. Pastoral visits provide for the gathering of information regarding the circumstances of the family concerned and ensure that important issues such as medical or special needs are taken into account when deciding on arrest, detention, transportation and/or removal.
Africa seems to be the Home Office's flavor of the month for deportees at present.
One of the main medical needs of children, pregnant mothers, and adults being returned to any country in Africa, especially sub-Saharan Africa, is immunization against malaria. The Home Office, to the best of my knowledge, does not inform the families of the need for anti-malarials. In order for most families to get the anti-malarials, they have to take out or threaten to take out injunction orders against the Home Office.
Anne Owers published her report on Yarl's Wood on Wednesday of this week. I personally feel she has understated the facts. The people she talked about in her report and the people I have talked to over the last fortnight, could be interchanged. Nothing has improved that I can see and I personally feel things have got worse. There is definitely a lack of "duty of care" towards the children and parents currently incarcerated in Yarl's Wood IRC.
Aug 1, 2006
Six parents at Yarl's Wood IRC are still on hunger strike.
I have been speaking to them daily and have noticed their voices are getting weaker and they have told me that they feel very ill.
When I asked how long they intend to continue, they said until the Home Office comes and talks to them.
Baby Aliyah has just spent another day in hospital as she's had a high temperature since Friday. Her mom's fears for Aliyah's well-being have been doubled by the outbreak of chicken pox at the center. They have a bail hearing on Friday. Hope they get free.
Molly Sebbatta is four and a half years old and she's now spent 26 days in detention. She is suffering. Her mom, Agnes, says Molly's speech is deteriorating and she is bed-wetting, which never happened at home. She has also started wetting herself during the day. This family too has had two removal directions and are still being detained.
One family who have been detained since early July is made up of a father, a mother (both refusing food) and two daughters. They have had removal directions set twice. The dates have come and gone and they are still being detained. They applied for bail and were refused because the adjudicator said he could not release them since removal directions had been set.
As I will be visiting some of the parents for the next two days, I phoned the booking office at Yarl's Wood and was told that there was an outbreak of chicken pox and I could come at my own risk. When I enquired from a good number of parents about the outbreak, some had been told about it but others heard about it from me for the first time.
NHS Direct says chicken pox is a highly contagious virus, with an incubation period of 15 to 20 days. Chickenpox is most contagious the day before the rash appears and until the blisters are all dry and crusted over (usually about five days). If you have chickenpox you should avoid contact with pregnant women who have not had chickenpox, newborn babies and people with a low immune system -- for example, those with cancer or advanced H.I.V. -- as these people can't fight infection as well as those with a healthy immune system.
As a result of the outbreak Yarl's Wood will not receive any new detainees until August 21.
I have just spoken to Mia and she says the reason she and Aliyah have not been released is due to accommodation and the fact that she does not have an address to go to in the U.K. She has said besides her befriender, there is no one else she knows.
The other mothers who were in the same situation with her have since been released and put in hostels.
She is very concerned about Aliyah's well being. Aliyah spent a day in hospital last week and then yesterday she spent another day in hospital due to a cold. Mia is concerned about the outbreak of chicken pox and the effect it could have on her baby who is only five weeks old.
She has said her solicitor has applied, on her behalf, for accommodation from the National Asylum Support Service. She has tried endlessly to get in touch with her solicitor but has not been able to get through to her. She is not sure if the solicitor is away or not.
September 8, 2006
When children behind the wire start to call Yarl's Wood Immigration Removal Centre "home," it clearly shows that their perception of living in Yarl's Wood is that they have lived there a long time.
Six-year-old Molly Ssebatta spent six weeks in detention with her mother.
Three attempts to remove them failed. On getting back to Yarl's Wood the third time, Molly said to her mum: "We are home."
Molly's mother said the family was released after the resident social worker's intervention. In the Family Welfare Assessment Weekly Review, the social worker wrote that Molly continues to show, signs of increasing institutionalization.
Sisters Annarose, Joanne and their parents Judith and Juslain were released on Aug. 3, from Yarl's Wood IRC.
They went back to their home in Dudley where they had been snatched from only to find that they were no longer tenants and the house had been boarded up.
The Refugee Council found them emergency accommodation in Birmingham, which was one room.
When I first spoke to Judith after their release she said to me: "Can you hear how happy the children are?"
"Free at last," Judith said. "Even though the four of us are still living in one room since our release, it is better than that prison Yarl's Wood."
Annarose, the eldest is still suffering because of her experiences of detention. I regularly meet with the family, and we have to be careful about mentioning the Home Office and Yarl's Wood as she becomes very distressed.
Joanne is just a toddler, a mere two and half years old. What is most disturbing is that every time she sees a policeman, traffic warden or anyone in security uniform or if the word "search" is mentioned, she lifts up her arms to be body-searched as this was the norm at Yarl's Wood, where body-searches on the girl child and mothers are carried out by both male and female officers.
Another thing that Joan does regularly is, when she hears a phone ring she shouts out, "244." When she picks up the phone she says, "244," which was the family's room, pager and I.D. number to obtain meals, and receive phone calls and other services.
I have witnessed some of Joanne's behaviors and it's enough to make me weep.
How can such things happen in what is supposed to be a civilized society?
I have just been speaking to Judith and Juslain who have told me they are being dispersed again, this time to Cardiff.
For Annarose to start another school she needs her birth certificate. The family went to Annarose's old school on the hope of getting a copy.
Judith said when Annarose heard that they were going to Dudley, she was so excited as she thought she would be going back to her old school to be with her friends.
When mom told her that it was only to fetch her birth certificate, she said to her mother: "Please let me go back to my old school."
Can you imagine what it must be like to a nine-year-old who loved her school, teacher and friends to go back to a school she can never again attend?
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
Wednesday, 3 January 2007
Saturday, 30 December 2006
Saddam Hussein’s Execution Is A War Crime
Saddam Hussein was killed before dawn, under cover of darkness, on Dec. 30.
Before his execution, Saddam Hussein was a prisoner of war and as a prisoner of war, he was entitled to fair and humane treatment as well as protection from summary execution.
None of these things happened.
Saddam was captured by U.S. soldiers on Dec. 13, 2003. In itself, this act alone made him a prisoner of war because he was part of Iraqi army’s chain of command and before his capture, he wore a military uniform and bore arms openly.
But instead of treating him with the dignity and respect that should be accorded to prisoners of war, the United States handed him over to an Iraqi government whose legitimacy is questionable knowing that there was a strong possibility that government would execute him.
The Third Geneva Convention is supposed to protect captured military personnel. It is supposed to protect prisoners of war like Saddam Hussein.
The convention makes it illegal to torture prisoners.
Article 3 of the convention prohibits: "Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture."
It also prohibits: "The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples."
And just like the motives of the war on Iraq, the independence and impartiality of the court which sentenced Saddam Hussein to death is questionable.
Malcolm Smart, Amnesty International's Director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme described Saddam's trial as "a shabby affair, marred by serious flaws that call into question the capacity of the tribunal, as currently established, to administer justice fairly, in conformity with international standards."
Saddam's experience before the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal (SICT) was cruel and it was torture.
In its November 2006 report, "Judging Dujail: The First Trial Before the Iraqi High Tribunal," Human Rights Watch identified serious flaws with the proceedings.
For a year after his arrest, Saddam was denied access to legal counsel. Witnesses and defence lawyers died because the tribunal would not, or could not, protect them -- and, throughout the trial, the tribunal routinely ignored complaints from Saddam Hussein's lawyers about the proceedings.
Saddam's defense team was also only allowed two weeks, instead of 30 days, in which to read and respond to the trial judgment and when they did file an appeal against the sentence, it took the Iraqi Appeals Chamber less than 21 days to quash the appeal.
Richard Dicker, Director of Human Rights Watch's International Justice Program said: "It defies imagination that the Appeals Chamber could have thoroughly reviewed the 300-page judgment and the defense's written arguments in less than three weeks' time."
He described the appeals process as "even more flawed than the trial."
Manfred Nowak, the United Nations' Special Investigator on Torture, strongly opposed the way Saddam's trial was conducted.
"This would be a good chance for bringing Saddam Hussein to a truly independent court and we now have the International Criminal Court," he said.
.
Novak opposed the sentence that had been meted out at the end of the trial.
"Even a person like Saddam Hussein should not be sentenced to death," he said.
And yet for George Bush was okay for the Iraqi government to kill Saddam.
Article 3 of the Third Geneva Convention also prohibits "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment."
And yet the world has seen an unkempt Saddam Hussein emerging from the bunker in which he had been hiding and the world has seen him in his underwear.
The way the Iraqi government orchestrated Saddam Hussein's trial as well and executed him also contravenes Articles 10, 12, 13, 20, 23 and 84 of the Third Geneva Convention and it makes a mockery of international law and of some of the most basic and fundamental human rights like the right to a fair trial and the right to life.
The Bush administration could still have stopped the Iraqi government from executing Saddam Hussein because U.S. troops were guarding him right up to the time of his death.
It is unclear what the Iraqi government is hoping to achieve by executing Saddam Hussein. It is also unclear what the Bush administration is hoping to achieve by allowing this to happen.
One thing that is clear is that the two parties have turned Saddam Hussein into a martyr and that now, more than at any other time, during the conflict in Iraq, Saddam Hussein will more actively inspire militants to fight against occupation forces as well as the present Iraqi government and any similar governments in Iraq.
Another thing that is clear is that in executing, facilitating and allowing Saddam Hussein to be executed, the Bush administration, together with the present Iraqi government have committed a war crime. They have violated the rules of war which, among other things, prohibit the ill-treatment, execution of, or use of capital punishment on prisoners of war.
Before his execution, Saddam Hussein was a prisoner of war and as a prisoner of war, he was entitled to fair and humane treatment as well as protection from summary execution.
None of these things happened.
Saddam was captured by U.S. soldiers on Dec. 13, 2003. In itself, this act alone made him a prisoner of war because he was part of Iraqi army’s chain of command and before his capture, he wore a military uniform and bore arms openly.
But instead of treating him with the dignity and respect that should be accorded to prisoners of war, the United States handed him over to an Iraqi government whose legitimacy is questionable knowing that there was a strong possibility that government would execute him.
The Third Geneva Convention is supposed to protect captured military personnel. It is supposed to protect prisoners of war like Saddam Hussein.
The convention makes it illegal to torture prisoners.
Article 3 of the convention prohibits: "Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture."
It also prohibits: "The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples."
And just like the motives of the war on Iraq, the independence and impartiality of the court which sentenced Saddam Hussein to death is questionable.
Malcolm Smart, Amnesty International's Director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme described Saddam's trial as "a shabby affair, marred by serious flaws that call into question the capacity of the tribunal, as currently established, to administer justice fairly, in conformity with international standards."
Saddam's experience before the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal (SICT) was cruel and it was torture.
In its November 2006 report, "Judging Dujail: The First Trial Before the Iraqi High Tribunal," Human Rights Watch identified serious flaws with the proceedings.
For a year after his arrest, Saddam was denied access to legal counsel. Witnesses and defence lawyers died because the tribunal would not, or could not, protect them -- and, throughout the trial, the tribunal routinely ignored complaints from Saddam Hussein's lawyers about the proceedings.
Saddam's defense team was also only allowed two weeks, instead of 30 days, in which to read and respond to the trial judgment and when they did file an appeal against the sentence, it took the Iraqi Appeals Chamber less than 21 days to quash the appeal.
Richard Dicker, Director of Human Rights Watch's International Justice Program said: "It defies imagination that the Appeals Chamber could have thoroughly reviewed the 300-page judgment and the defense's written arguments in less than three weeks' time."
He described the appeals process as "even more flawed than the trial."
Manfred Nowak, the United Nations' Special Investigator on Torture, strongly opposed the way Saddam's trial was conducted.
"This would be a good chance for bringing Saddam Hussein to a truly independent court and we now have the International Criminal Court," he said.
.
Novak opposed the sentence that had been meted out at the end of the trial.
"Even a person like Saddam Hussein should not be sentenced to death," he said.
And yet for George Bush was okay for the Iraqi government to kill Saddam.
Article 3 of the Third Geneva Convention also prohibits "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment."
And yet the world has seen an unkempt Saddam Hussein emerging from the bunker in which he had been hiding and the world has seen him in his underwear.
The way the Iraqi government orchestrated Saddam Hussein's trial as well and executed him also contravenes Articles 10, 12, 13, 20, 23 and 84 of the Third Geneva Convention and it makes a mockery of international law and of some of the most basic and fundamental human rights like the right to a fair trial and the right to life.
The Bush administration could still have stopped the Iraqi government from executing Saddam Hussein because U.S. troops were guarding him right up to the time of his death.
It is unclear what the Iraqi government is hoping to achieve by executing Saddam Hussein. It is also unclear what the Bush administration is hoping to achieve by allowing this to happen.
One thing that is clear is that the two parties have turned Saddam Hussein into a martyr and that now, more than at any other time, during the conflict in Iraq, Saddam Hussein will more actively inspire militants to fight against occupation forces as well as the present Iraqi government and any similar governments in Iraq.
Another thing that is clear is that in executing, facilitating and allowing Saddam Hussein to be executed, the Bush administration, together with the present Iraqi government have committed a war crime. They have violated the rules of war which, among other things, prohibit the ill-treatment, execution of, or use of capital punishment on prisoners of war.
Friday, 3 November 2006
Refugees, Uncertainty and the Absence of Control
Claire Smith is an occupational therapy lecturer at the University of Teesside in the North East of England. She also works with health care providers and assists them to develop skills in meeting the mental health needs of refugees.
For the past two years, she has also been working as a psychological therapist at the Personal Medical Services General Practice, "Arrival," which provides primary health care to people seeking asylum and refugees who live in the North Tees Primary Care Trust area.
She has spoken at national and international conferences on "lifespan issues" for refugees as well as on the importance of social capital and the need to increase opportunities for refugees.
In an e-mail interview with Ambrose Musiyiwa, which took place between Sept. 19 and Nov. 2, Claire Smith talked about the work she has been doing and about the challenges faced by health care providers in meeting the mental health needs of refugees.
***
Musiyiwa: You work with health care providers, asylum seekers, as well as refugees. How did it all begin?
I undertook a Masters in Counseling at the University of Durham, which I completed in 1999, and I joined the occupational therapy teaching team at the University of Teesside. I have been teaching on a range of issues, particularly practice skills around communication and mental health. I have spoken at conferences on issues around trauma and social exclusion.
Which conferences were these and what did you speak on?
I spoke at the fourth World Congress of the World Federation for Mental Health in Oslo on "lifespan issues" for refugees (specifically the sense that the experience of asylum interrupts adulthood and stops people engaging with all the really important tasks of adulthood, like work and family life).
I have also spoken at occupational therapy conferences and for MIND and Diverse Minds, encouraging staff to increase opportunities for refugees and on the importance of social capital.
You have been doing a lot of work with health care providers. How did that start?
About three and a half years ago, I saw an advert for a post for a development worker to develop skills in meeting the mental health needs of refugees. The post was funded by Health Action Zone monies, and coordinated by an organization called Alliance Psychological Services, who have the contracts to provide psychological therapies locally in primary care. I was successful at interview and took the post in addition to part time teaching at the University, delivering workshops for staff from a wide range of backgrounds — school nurses, midwives, therapists, reception staff, etc.
The workshops were designed to provide general information about asylum issues — focusing on myth busting and [on creating] a realistic impression of the challenges faced by refugees in the local area.
What are some of the myths about asylum seekers and refugees? Where do the myths come from and how prevalent are they?
The myths are mostly generated by ignorance and misinformation — and they often hinge around refugee entitlement, genuineness of claims, perceived threat, etc.
Locally there was a lot of grumbling about benefits and services, assuming that refugees got all sorts of extras, when in fact they receive far less than people thought. Much of this is created by negative media stereotypes, but also by the fact that this is an area of low ethnic density and local people were unfamiliar with people from different cultural backgrounds.
I think the prevalence of this myth-based thinking is quite high, and runs through large sections of the population. Even some people who wish to be sympathetic are anxious about some of the issues, and for others, refugees have become scapegoats.
Most people are able to change their minds if they are better informed, but others will hold fast to their beliefs because they serve some other purpose for them.
What was the reception to the workshops you were running like?
I was greatly encouraged by the fact that many people were genuinely keen and willing to help — but aware that they felt deskilled and were concerned that their abilities were unsuitable for meeting the needs of the clients. The key things seemed to be the fear of making a mistake with cultural needs, (as ours is an area of very limited ethnic diversity) and feeling overwhelmed by the wealth of need.
The main aim of the workshops was to allow staff to feel enabled, and to encourage them to use their transferable skills.
You have also been actively involved in the Personal Medical Services (P.M.S.) General Practice. What is the P.M.S. General Practice?
The P.M.S. practices were set up as a pilot project to permit more flexibility at primary care level, and stands for Personal Medical Services (as opposed to General Medical Services).
They were to offer new, tailored and creative approaches in areas of deprivation or complex needs — to be more flexible and to instigate change, and have often been used to provide specific care to particular groups.
There are a number of P.M.S. practices specifically for refugees, heroin users and other groups who may have complex needs.
How did your involvement with P.M.S. start and what do you do there?
The therapy post at our local P.M.S. General Practice, "Arrival," became available and I was approached to take it. The Arrival practice, opened in Stockton-on- Tees in April 2003 and it provides primary health care to people seeking asylum and refugees living in the North Tees Primary Care Trust area. It currently has about 650 patients, around half of whom are from Africa and half from the Middle East.
I have been there for two and a bit years, working one day a week as a psychological therapist (obviously, using both my occupational therapy and my counseling background). I am based within the practice, taking referrals from other team members, and providing individual therapies.
As an occupational and psychological therapist, what would you say are your main concerns?
I am keen to promote the potential for therapy with refugees and people seeking asylum and have spoken at national and international conferences on a number of facets of refugee work.
I started with the "feel the fear" stuff, encouraging people to get involved and use their skills, then I have been looking at social capital theory and refugees and now at adulthood and lifespan issues. I want colleagues from a range of disciplines to see potential and be keen to help, and to look at tapping into the resourcefulness of their clients rather than feeling overwhelmed. Some of the biggest challenges my clients face are around how to "live" in the short term, with such a difficult past, an impoverished and isolated present, and a future that is so totally unknown.
The primary challenges [they face] seem to be practical — managing day to day in an unfamiliar environment with little money and very limited support. Beyond that though I think there are huge difficulties associated with living long term with an uncertain future, adjustment and acculturation, managing loss (personal, social, cultural), building a necessary social network, finding occupational opportunities, and engaging with the natural tasks associated with their stage in the lifespan.
The people I see struggle endlessly to put the past behind them. Tormented by intrusive and often horrific memories and enormous loss, they struggle with the impoverished and isolated life in the here-and-now and they are moving towards the total unknown. This is particularly destructive — most of us kid ourselves that we know what the future holds, and have some control over it, but refugees can have no such illusions. For them they can't be sure whether to invest in life in this country or hold back for fear of losing anything they establish here.
Are these challenges peculiar to refugees and asylum seekers or are they also found in the general population where you are working?
Most of the challenges are found, in part, with any population (particularly from my experience of working in mental health) — but the uncertainty and the absence of control is something that is certainly greater for refugees (to my mind).
In previous work I may have been looking at exactly the same kind of issues — and people may have a host of barriers to better mental health — but here I have a huge barrier that is immovable by me, and over which the client has no control — the asylum decision. This is unusual and specific and leaves [the] client, and me, in a passive position (exactly where I don't want us to be, therapeutically).
Under current U.K. legislation, asylum seekers can only seek permission to work if their claim remains outstanding for longer than 12 months without a decision being made on it and providing the reason for the delay cannot be attributable to the asylum seeker. Those whose applications for asylum have failed are not allowed to work. What effect does this have on mental health, and why is it important for asylum seekers to be allowed to work?
I think this is one of the most destructive aspects of current policy. There is evidence from past experience in Sweden that suggests that engaging with the labor market is of great value and has better outcomes than psychological therapies in maintaining good mental health. People face the crushing experience of waiting day to day for [a] decision to be made about their future, without any real sense of productivity, and anything gainful to occupy their time. Most feel that they are wasting their critical early adult years, and feel a sense of disgrace at having to accept money from N.A.S.S. [the National Asylum Support Service] when they are well and able to work for their own money.
This article has also been featured on OhmyNews International and the World Press Review.
Monday, 23 October 2006
[Interview_1]: John Nyamande, Zimbabwean opposition political party activstween Mugabe's Regime And White Rule
John Nyamande is a veteran in Zimbabwe's struggle for independence.
He has been a political activist since the 1960s when he joined ZAPU as a youth member.
Nyamande has worked as a teacher in inner London schools in the U.K.; in rural and urban Zimbabwean schools during and after the war of liberation; and as a deputy head teacher in Zimbabwe of a school that had an enrollment of over 1200 pupils and 42 members of staff.
Currently, Nyamande chairs the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) Gray's Branch, in Essex in the United Kingdom.
In an email interview, which took place between Sept. 5 and Oct. 18, John Nyamande spoke about the things that compelled him to become a political activist.
How would you describe the current situation in Zimbabwe?
It is really pathetic and sad that Zimbabwe, which was once a breadbasket of Southern Africa, is now a basket case of Southern Africa. Any reasonable person cannot deny that. I remember very well that after independence in 1980, a Zimbabwe dollar was equivalent to a British pound and was stronger than the South African Rand. Was Rhodesia Front managing the economy better than ZANU (PF)? What was happening? Good management is not about color. Look at developing countries like South Africa. They co-exist.
Why do you think things are as they stand in the country?
Obviously it's management of the economy by ZANU (PF). It's scandal after scandal swept under the carpet. We had the Willowvale scandal, War Victims Compensation Fund, Government Tender Board, the housing scheme, foreign exchange, multiple farm owners and many other scandals.
In my view, [President] Robert Mugabe has encouraged this to happen. He should have nipped this in the bud, shamed and fired a lot from the government for non-performance. Zimbabwe has an abundance of qualified and capable managers who are now in the Diaspora serving other governments. Surely how can someone serve effectively for 25 years as a minister?
I strongly believe that it's Mugabe who doesn't let some of these guys leave the government for reasons best known to himself.
Will things improve?
All Zimbabweans should learn to forgive and come together and discuss the roadmap to normalcy. The issue is political as well as economical. You cannot separate the two. Things have run down. Look at public transport, health, education, and parastatals. Most parastatals are being run by retired army personnel. Why is Zimbabwe militarizing? There is something wrong that needs correcting.
The recent AIT ruling on A.A. allows the British government to resume forced deportations to Zimbabwe. What are your views on this?
Deportations to Zimbabwe at the moment should not be encouraged. There is more than 75 percent unemployment in Zimbabwe at the moment. People need to survive. Two reasons why Zimbabweans are here at present: economical and political.
Those who can work and are law-abiding migrants should be allowed to work. Zimbabweans are hard workers and are known even here for that. They have a significant contribution to make to the economy of this country.
Those who are here on political reasons should definitely not be forced back to Zimbabwe. MDC (U.K.) branches have got databases of their membership and there is no reason why they should be forced back. The (U.K.) representative can always provide proof of this if required by Home office.
What made you to join ZAPU in the 1960s?
I was compelled to join ZAPU in the 1960s because of racial segregation. There were different laws for blacks and whites in education, health, labor, housing etc. Can you believe that my father used to put his bottle of brandy under the bed because only white people were allowed to enjoy this drink? Black people were not allowed to have businesses in the central business district. My uncle who was working in South Africa then, married a Xhosa woman who looked white. When he came home to Rusape with her, he was arrested because the laws did not allow blacks to marry whites. My family in Makoni District had been moved from the rich red soils near Nyazura to the sandy soils further down to make way for white farmers. All this social injustice puzzled me and forced me join Zapu, which was being led by people like Joshua Nkomo, James Chikerema, Josiah Chinamano, Robert Mugabe and others.
What was the environment like then?
The environment was bad. The [system was designed in such a way that] black people were to serve the whites who were the masters. The majority of people were meant to learn the 3Rs. That is, Reading Writing and Arithmetic. Urban schools were run by the government and rural schools were set up by the missionaries who did a commendable job indeed. The urban schools were meant to produce teachers, nurses and clerks. Those who chose law like the late Herbert Chitepo and Dr. Tichafa Parirenyatwa had to struggle and do it outside Zimbabwe. This class of people was to support the masters who had set up their industries in the towns. The rural folk, where the majority of the blacks lived, were supposed to work on the white farms. They were not supposed to have gone above lower primary, which was standard three. The majority of poor people were marginalized. However, most people working in towns were able to buy basic foodstuffs.
Are there any similarities between conditions in the 1960s, when you first became politically active, and now?
Oh, yes, there are. The majority of people in Zimbabwe are still marginalized. There is no respect for basic human rights. There is no freedom of speech, association, and movement etc. [The Public Order and Security Act] POSA, [the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Amendment Act] AIPPA and other restrictive laws in place now. In the 60s it was all about "Freedom Kwacha" and "the soil."
But today land has been distributed to members of the ruling party only.
In the 60s there were black informers, drawn from the Police Reserve. Chiefs were politicized and used to denounce the political leadership. Jeremiah Sikireta Chirau and Kayisa Ndiweni are examples of some the Chiefs who were used by the Government to denounce and crush the voice of the people. They were also members of the Rhodesia Senate.
Today we have the Green Bombers who are known because of their notoriety. The ZANU P.F. government has plenty of informers in the villages who report to the [Central Intelligence Organisation] CIO.
Lastly, Nationalist leaders like Robert Mugabe, Joshua Nkomo, Maurice Nyagumbo, Enos Nkala, James Chikerema Eddison Sithole and many others were detained at Wha Wha by the Smith Regime. The ZANU government is doing the same and has done the same to people like Muzorewa, Ndabaningi Sithole, Dumiso Dabengwa, Lookout Masuku and many others.
Why these similarities?
People in government have overstayed and have gone past their expiry date. They have forgotten the founding principles and values of the political parties and liberation movements of the country, ZANU and ZAPU. People have died for this beautiful country and they need to be honored.
What are some of the differences?
Although we were oppressed, families could afford a meal. Public transport was by far better. Trains ran between Harare and Mutare and between Harare and Bulawayo beautifully. At one time Rhodesia Railways ran a railcar between Harare and Mutare in less than four hours. It was a fantastic mode of transport. Municipalities had enviable social service amenities in the townships. At the Stodart Hall in Mbare, who doesn't know Mr. Roberts? He was inspirational in setting up the George Hartley Swimming Pools, and the C.S. Davies swimming pool in Highfields. After school clubs were plenty. All that is no more with our own black government. It's sad. Everyone is now selling for survival. To make it even worse, these vendors have been driven out in the name of "cleaning" up the mess.
In the 1970s, you left ZAPU and joined the UANC. What did you find appealing about the UANC?
I joined UANC in 1973, when I was training as a teacher. The war was at its height and the two main political parties had been banned and were operating externally. UANC was formed to mobilize, educate and support the war that was being fought. UANC had its base in the churches especially the United Methodist Church, where Bishop Muzorewa belonged. The party was able to unite Zimbabweans across the political divide. People had one vision, of liberating Zimbabwe. UANC helped so many young boys and girls to cross into Mozambique, Botswana or Zambia for guerilla training. The party supported the guerillas with food and clothing and so many of their members were arrested for collaborating with the "boys." UANC played a big and supportive role during the struggle. What happened during Zimbabwe-Rhodesia was something different.
How was it different from ZAPU?
ZAPU and ZANU did not see eye to eye and used the tribal card although some people deny this. UANC was less tribalistic than the other two. It was a church driven organization. Members feared God.
In 1994, you joined ZANU PF. What led to this?
I had just completed my studies in England, and I said: "Why can't I go back to Zimbabwe and be part of the agents of change in developing the country?" At that time the focus was development and there was no need for opposition.
And why did you leave ZANU P.F. to join the MDC in 1999?
The economy of the country was fast shrinking and the party did not want to listen to constructive criticism at all. I became unpopular within ZANU P.F. for asking the reason why certain things were being done. I finally quit when MDC was born in September 1999.
When you were teaching in the rural and urban schools during the war of liberation in Zimbabwe, did you experience any form of harassment or persecution by any group that was involved in the conflict?
I left Bindura, where I was teaching, in a huff because the security forces were after my life, for supporting the guerillas with food and clothing. Teachers were conduits of information between the rural and urban structures of UANC and the People's Movement led by Dr. Tsvarayi. This was an internal structure of ZANU, which was beginning to distance itself from UANC because there were signs that the war was coming to a conclusion. ZANU P.F. was positioning itself for government.
How were teachers viewed in the communities they worked in?
Before independence, Teachers were viewed as leaders, advisers and earned a lot of respect and dignity from the communities they served. The salaries they received were decent and most could afford to buy a car and send children to boarding school.
Today it's totally the opposite. Teachers have been turned to paupers and are a miserable sight. Most teachers have resorted to engaging in second activities to supplement their meager salaries. They travel to neighboring countries to buy goods for resale. Others sell sweets, bananas, and cool drinks at school during break time.
At present, teachers in Zimbabwe are being routinely subjected to what can only be described as persecution and harassment. Some have endured beatings and others have lost their lives at the hands of agents of the state and/or ZANU P.F. Why is this so?
Teachers advise the communities they serve especially in the rural areas. They are being intimidated to stop them from advising the communities they serve. They are seen as knowledgeable in the daily affairs of the country.
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
He has been a political activist since the 1960s when he joined ZAPU as a youth member.
Nyamande has worked as a teacher in inner London schools in the U.K.; in rural and urban Zimbabwean schools during and after the war of liberation; and as a deputy head teacher in Zimbabwe of a school that had an enrollment of over 1200 pupils and 42 members of staff.
Currently, Nyamande chairs the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) Gray's Branch, in Essex in the United Kingdom.
In an email interview, which took place between Sept. 5 and Oct. 18, John Nyamande spoke about the things that compelled him to become a political activist.
How would you describe the current situation in Zimbabwe?
It is really pathetic and sad that Zimbabwe, which was once a breadbasket of Southern Africa, is now a basket case of Southern Africa. Any reasonable person cannot deny that. I remember very well that after independence in 1980, a Zimbabwe dollar was equivalent to a British pound and was stronger than the South African Rand. Was Rhodesia Front managing the economy better than ZANU (PF)? What was happening? Good management is not about color. Look at developing countries like South Africa. They co-exist.
Why do you think things are as they stand in the country?
Obviously it's management of the economy by ZANU (PF). It's scandal after scandal swept under the carpet. We had the Willowvale scandal, War Victims Compensation Fund, Government Tender Board, the housing scheme, foreign exchange, multiple farm owners and many other scandals.
In my view, [President] Robert Mugabe has encouraged this to happen. He should have nipped this in the bud, shamed and fired a lot from the government for non-performance. Zimbabwe has an abundance of qualified and capable managers who are now in the Diaspora serving other governments. Surely how can someone serve effectively for 25 years as a minister?
I strongly believe that it's Mugabe who doesn't let some of these guys leave the government for reasons best known to himself.
Will things improve?
All Zimbabweans should learn to forgive and come together and discuss the roadmap to normalcy. The issue is political as well as economical. You cannot separate the two. Things have run down. Look at public transport, health, education, and parastatals. Most parastatals are being run by retired army personnel. Why is Zimbabwe militarizing? There is something wrong that needs correcting.
The recent AIT ruling on A.A. allows the British government to resume forced deportations to Zimbabwe. What are your views on this?
Deportations to Zimbabwe at the moment should not be encouraged. There is more than 75 percent unemployment in Zimbabwe at the moment. People need to survive. Two reasons why Zimbabweans are here at present: economical and political.
Those who can work and are law-abiding migrants should be allowed to work. Zimbabweans are hard workers and are known even here for that. They have a significant contribution to make to the economy of this country.
Those who are here on political reasons should definitely not be forced back to Zimbabwe. MDC (U.K.) branches have got databases of their membership and there is no reason why they should be forced back. The (U.K.) representative can always provide proof of this if required by Home office.
What made you to join ZAPU in the 1960s?
I was compelled to join ZAPU in the 1960s because of racial segregation. There were different laws for blacks and whites in education, health, labor, housing etc. Can you believe that my father used to put his bottle of brandy under the bed because only white people were allowed to enjoy this drink? Black people were not allowed to have businesses in the central business district. My uncle who was working in South Africa then, married a Xhosa woman who looked white. When he came home to Rusape with her, he was arrested because the laws did not allow blacks to marry whites. My family in Makoni District had been moved from the rich red soils near Nyazura to the sandy soils further down to make way for white farmers. All this social injustice puzzled me and forced me join Zapu, which was being led by people like Joshua Nkomo, James Chikerema, Josiah Chinamano, Robert Mugabe and others.
What was the environment like then?
The environment was bad. The [system was designed in such a way that] black people were to serve the whites who were the masters. The majority of people were meant to learn the 3Rs. That is, Reading Writing and Arithmetic. Urban schools were run by the government and rural schools were set up by the missionaries who did a commendable job indeed. The urban schools were meant to produce teachers, nurses and clerks. Those who chose law like the late Herbert Chitepo and Dr. Tichafa Parirenyatwa had to struggle and do it outside Zimbabwe. This class of people was to support the masters who had set up their industries in the towns. The rural folk, where the majority of the blacks lived, were supposed to work on the white farms. They were not supposed to have gone above lower primary, which was standard three. The majority of poor people were marginalized. However, most people working in towns were able to buy basic foodstuffs.
Are there any similarities between conditions in the 1960s, when you first became politically active, and now?
Oh, yes, there are. The majority of people in Zimbabwe are still marginalized. There is no respect for basic human rights. There is no freedom of speech, association, and movement etc. [The Public Order and Security Act] POSA, [the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Amendment Act] AIPPA and other restrictive laws in place now. In the 60s it was all about "Freedom Kwacha" and "the soil."
But today land has been distributed to members of the ruling party only.
In the 60s there were black informers, drawn from the Police Reserve. Chiefs were politicized and used to denounce the political leadership. Jeremiah Sikireta Chirau and Kayisa Ndiweni are examples of some the Chiefs who were used by the Government to denounce and crush the voice of the people. They were also members of the Rhodesia Senate.
Today we have the Green Bombers who are known because of their notoriety. The ZANU P.F. government has plenty of informers in the villages who report to the [Central Intelligence Organisation] CIO.
Lastly, Nationalist leaders like Robert Mugabe, Joshua Nkomo, Maurice Nyagumbo, Enos Nkala, James Chikerema Eddison Sithole and many others were detained at Wha Wha by the Smith Regime. The ZANU government is doing the same and has done the same to people like Muzorewa, Ndabaningi Sithole, Dumiso Dabengwa, Lookout Masuku and many others.
Why these similarities?
People in government have overstayed and have gone past their expiry date. They have forgotten the founding principles and values of the political parties and liberation movements of the country, ZANU and ZAPU. People have died for this beautiful country and they need to be honored.
What are some of the differences?
Although we were oppressed, families could afford a meal. Public transport was by far better. Trains ran between Harare and Mutare and between Harare and Bulawayo beautifully. At one time Rhodesia Railways ran a railcar between Harare and Mutare in less than four hours. It was a fantastic mode of transport. Municipalities had enviable social service amenities in the townships. At the Stodart Hall in Mbare, who doesn't know Mr. Roberts? He was inspirational in setting up the George Hartley Swimming Pools, and the C.S. Davies swimming pool in Highfields. After school clubs were plenty. All that is no more with our own black government. It's sad. Everyone is now selling for survival. To make it even worse, these vendors have been driven out in the name of "cleaning" up the mess.
In the 1970s, you left ZAPU and joined the UANC. What did you find appealing about the UANC?
I joined UANC in 1973, when I was training as a teacher. The war was at its height and the two main political parties had been banned and were operating externally. UANC was formed to mobilize, educate and support the war that was being fought. UANC had its base in the churches especially the United Methodist Church, where Bishop Muzorewa belonged. The party was able to unite Zimbabweans across the political divide. People had one vision, of liberating Zimbabwe. UANC helped so many young boys and girls to cross into Mozambique, Botswana or Zambia for guerilla training. The party supported the guerillas with food and clothing and so many of their members were arrested for collaborating with the "boys." UANC played a big and supportive role during the struggle. What happened during Zimbabwe-Rhodesia was something different.
How was it different from ZAPU?
ZAPU and ZANU did not see eye to eye and used the tribal card although some people deny this. UANC was less tribalistic than the other two. It was a church driven organization. Members feared God.
In 1994, you joined ZANU PF. What led to this?
I had just completed my studies in England, and I said: "Why can't I go back to Zimbabwe and be part of the agents of change in developing the country?" At that time the focus was development and there was no need for opposition.
And why did you leave ZANU P.F. to join the MDC in 1999?
The economy of the country was fast shrinking and the party did not want to listen to constructive criticism at all. I became unpopular within ZANU P.F. for asking the reason why certain things were being done. I finally quit when MDC was born in September 1999.
When you were teaching in the rural and urban schools during the war of liberation in Zimbabwe, did you experience any form of harassment or persecution by any group that was involved in the conflict?
I left Bindura, where I was teaching, in a huff because the security forces were after my life, for supporting the guerillas with food and clothing. Teachers were conduits of information between the rural and urban structures of UANC and the People's Movement led by Dr. Tsvarayi. This was an internal structure of ZANU, which was beginning to distance itself from UANC because there were signs that the war was coming to a conclusion. ZANU P.F. was positioning itself for government.
How were teachers viewed in the communities they worked in?
Before independence, Teachers were viewed as leaders, advisers and earned a lot of respect and dignity from the communities they served. The salaries they received were decent and most could afford to buy a car and send children to boarding school.
Today it's totally the opposite. Teachers have been turned to paupers and are a miserable sight. Most teachers have resorted to engaging in second activities to supplement their meager salaries. They travel to neighboring countries to buy goods for resale. Others sell sweets, bananas, and cool drinks at school during break time.
At present, teachers in Zimbabwe are being routinely subjected to what can only be described as persecution and harassment. Some have endured beatings and others have lost their lives at the hands of agents of the state and/or ZANU P.F. Why is this so?
Teachers advise the communities they serve especially in the rural areas. They are being intimidated to stop them from advising the communities they serve. They are seen as knowledgeable in the daily affairs of the country.
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
Wednesday, 9 August 2006
An Interview with Human Rghts Lawyer Steve Symonds
The Refugee Legal Centre (RLC) was formed in 1992 and is an independent not-for-profit organization. It is Britain's largest charity provider of legal representation and advice to asylum seekers.
The RLC provides legal advice and representation for those seeking protection under international and national human rights and asylum law. It delivers training and other support to those giving advice and representation in such cases and seeks to promote the interests of refugees and asylum seekers individually and collectively through law and public policy.
Recently, the RLC has been representing Zimbabwean asylum seekers in their bid to convince the Home Office to spare them from President Robert Mugabe's increasingly repressive and brutal regime.
In an email-interview in July, Steve Symonds, a legal officer with the RLC spoke to Ambrose Musiyiwa about the organization, the role he plays in it and the challenges asylum seekers and refugees face in the United Kingdom.
What is the Refugee Legal Centre? Who does the center work with and what does the work involve?
The RLC is the U.K.'s largest charity provider of legal representation and advice to asylum-seekers. The representation and advice we provide is essentially, at present, restricted to assisting asylum-seekers to understand and pursue, where there is merit, their claim for asylum under the Refugee Convention or Article 3 of the European Convention (as incorporated into U.K. law by the Human Rights Act 1998).
Occasionally, we will assist with some wider human rights and immigration matters relating to an asylum-seeker's application to be granted status in the U.K. and the immediate consequences that may follow on from a grant of status -- for example, seeking to be reunited with family; or obtaining travel documentation.
What is your role in the organization and how did you first get involved with it?
I am a Legal Officer. Essentially, this means I am one of a small team to lawyers, who provide advice and legal support to those who provide legal advice and representation to our large client group.
I also undertake my own casework, which is generally restricted to the more advanced stages of the appeal process in the U.K.'s immigration tribunal [which is] called the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal. I joined the organisation in 1999.
In fact, I have been providing free representation before a number of tribunals through a number of charities, sometimes as a paid worker and sometimes as a volunteer -- including those dealing with employment, social security and asylum law -- since 1994, shortly after I completed my legal vocational training as a barrister.
I have through this time developed a strong personal commitment towards the provision of legal advice and representation to individuals before courts and tribunals where basic rights and needs are in issue, and where often the individual is culturally, linguistically, educationally and economically at serious disadvantage in seeking to present and protect those rights and needs.
What would you say are the greatest challenges you, as an individual and as an organization, are facing in the work that you are doing? And, how are you dealing with those challenges?
There are substantial pressures due to a mix of under-resourcing, very short time limits, often changing and sometimes not especially coherent policy changes and a general distrust of asylum-seekers among many decision-makers, policy makers and the public at large.
In the main, the RLC continues to focus on its advice and representation work. However, it has made substantial changes to its working practices in an effort to cut costs (there being a general pressure from the Legal Services Commission, across the legal sector, upon those providing legal services under legal aid).
Seeking to provide informed, expert and effective advice and representation in these circumstances has become increasingly difficult for the RLC, as many legal service providers, of late.
Do you have any contact with asylum seekers who are in detention? What are the conditions under which they are being held?
We represent several detained clients. Conditions in detention vary, though much work on this has been done by Her Majesty's Inspectors of Prisons in recent years. More information is available from the Bail for Immigration Detainees.
The UNHCR has accused British politicians and some sections of the media of scapegoating asylum seekers and refugees. What are your comments on this? What needs to be done to change this?
There is a great deal of confusion in much public debate (whether in the media or in political debate) around asylum-seekers and refugees.
If this issue is to be managed effectively and fairly, there are broadly two changes, which I would look for.
Firstly, politicians (and broadcasters and writers) need to understand and reflect an understanding of these issues in leading this debate -- rather than habitually blurring issues of immigration, refugee protection, human rights law, security etc. That also would require both media and ministers to refrain from knee-jerk reactions to particular judgments, which fail to understand or at times attempt to understand the terms or effect of the judgment.
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
The RLC provides legal advice and representation for those seeking protection under international and national human rights and asylum law. It delivers training and other support to those giving advice and representation in such cases and seeks to promote the interests of refugees and asylum seekers individually and collectively through law and public policy.
Recently, the RLC has been representing Zimbabwean asylum seekers in their bid to convince the Home Office to spare them from President Robert Mugabe's increasingly repressive and brutal regime.
In an email-interview in July, Steve Symonds, a legal officer with the RLC spoke to Ambrose Musiyiwa about the organization, the role he plays in it and the challenges asylum seekers and refugees face in the United Kingdom.
What is the Refugee Legal Centre? Who does the center work with and what does the work involve?
The RLC is the U.K.'s largest charity provider of legal representation and advice to asylum-seekers. The representation and advice we provide is essentially, at present, restricted to assisting asylum-seekers to understand and pursue, where there is merit, their claim for asylum under the Refugee Convention or Article 3 of the European Convention (as incorporated into U.K. law by the Human Rights Act 1998).
Occasionally, we will assist with some wider human rights and immigration matters relating to an asylum-seeker's application to be granted status in the U.K. and the immediate consequences that may follow on from a grant of status -- for example, seeking to be reunited with family; or obtaining travel documentation.
What is your role in the organization and how did you first get involved with it?
I am a Legal Officer. Essentially, this means I am one of a small team to lawyers, who provide advice and legal support to those who provide legal advice and representation to our large client group.
I also undertake my own casework, which is generally restricted to the more advanced stages of the appeal process in the U.K.'s immigration tribunal [which is] called the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal. I joined the organisation in 1999.
In fact, I have been providing free representation before a number of tribunals through a number of charities, sometimes as a paid worker and sometimes as a volunteer -- including those dealing with employment, social security and asylum law -- since 1994, shortly after I completed my legal vocational training as a barrister.
I have through this time developed a strong personal commitment towards the provision of legal advice and representation to individuals before courts and tribunals where basic rights and needs are in issue, and where often the individual is culturally, linguistically, educationally and economically at serious disadvantage in seeking to present and protect those rights and needs.
What would you say are the greatest challenges you, as an individual and as an organization, are facing in the work that you are doing? And, how are you dealing with those challenges?
There are substantial pressures due to a mix of under-resourcing, very short time limits, often changing and sometimes not especially coherent policy changes and a general distrust of asylum-seekers among many decision-makers, policy makers and the public at large.
In the main, the RLC continues to focus on its advice and representation work. However, it has made substantial changes to its working practices in an effort to cut costs (there being a general pressure from the Legal Services Commission, across the legal sector, upon those providing legal services under legal aid).
Seeking to provide informed, expert and effective advice and representation in these circumstances has become increasingly difficult for the RLC, as many legal service providers, of late.
Do you have any contact with asylum seekers who are in detention? What are the conditions under which they are being held?
We represent several detained clients. Conditions in detention vary, though much work on this has been done by Her Majesty's Inspectors of Prisons in recent years. More information is available from the Bail for Immigration Detainees.
The UNHCR has accused British politicians and some sections of the media of scapegoating asylum seekers and refugees. What are your comments on this? What needs to be done to change this?
There is a great deal of confusion in much public debate (whether in the media or in political debate) around asylum-seekers and refugees.
If this issue is to be managed effectively and fairly, there are broadly two changes, which I would look for.
Firstly, politicians (and broadcasters and writers) need to understand and reflect an understanding of these issues in leading this debate -- rather than habitually blurring issues of immigration, refugee protection, human rights law, security etc. That also would require both media and ministers to refrain from knee-jerk reactions to particular judgments, which fail to understand or at times attempt to understand the terms or effect of the judgment.
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)