Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Democracy to Order
Democracy to orderBy Ignacio Ramonet
Democracy may have been promoted as the best of all political systems, but it has long been a rare form of actual government. It is difficult for any regime entirely to live up to the democratic ideal that the strong should treat the weak well and that any abuse of power should be genuinely and unreservedly condemned.There are five necessary criteria: open elections; the existence of an organised, free political opposition; acceptance of the principle that power can change hands; the existence of an independent judicial system; and media freedom. Even democratic states that might claim to meet all these, such as France or Britain, for a long time denied women the right to vote and disregarded the rights of their colonial subjects.Despite such difficulties, democracy has become almost universal, initially in the United States during the presidency of Woodrow Wilson (1913-21), and then widely after the end of the cold war and the collapse of the Soviet Union. The end of history was proclaimed, on the grounds that there was no longer anything to prevent all nations one day attaining the twin holy grails of a market economy and representative democracy.But those goals have turned into indisputable dogmas, allowing President George Bush to legitimise military action in Iraq and the use of torture in secret prisons on foreign soil, and to justify the illegal treatment of prisoners in Guantánamo Bay, condemned by a United Nations Commission on Human Rights report and a European parliament resolution.Despite these serious breaches, the US has no qualms about setting itself up as the global arbiter of democratic observance. The Bush administration is in the habit of branding opponents as undemocratic, or even as rogue states and outposts of tyranny. The only way to change is to organise free elections.But with those free elections everything depends upon the outcome. Hugo Chávez has been elected president of Venezuela several times since 1998, under democratic criteria guaranteed by international observers, and will submit again to the ballot in December 2006. Much good may it do him. The US, which sponsored a failed coup in April 2002, continues to attack him, calling him a danger to democracy.Iran, Palestine and Haiti demonstrate that it is no longer enough to be democratically elected. The Iranian election of June 2005 met with worldwide approval. A massive voter turnout was able to choose between candidates representing a wide range of different opinions within the framework of official Islamism. The West’s favoured candidate, Ali Akbar Rafsanjani, fought a brilliant campaign and was expected to win. Nobody mentioned a nuclear threat. But everything changed abruptly after the victory of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has made a series of unacceptable pronouncements about Israel.Iran is being swiftly demonised. Although it has signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and denies any military nuclear ambitions, France’s foreign minister, Philippe Douste-Blazy, recently accused it of pursuing a “secret military nuclear programme” (1). The US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, has already forgotten last year’s election and has asked Congress for $75m to promote democracy in Iran.Much the same has happened in Palestine.Click here to read more about this.
The Debacles of the ICC
The Debacles of the ICC
It is unquestionably that the issuance of the warrant arrest against the Sudanese president Omar Al-Bashir on March 4th, 2009 triggered heated controversy and divided the world into partisans and opponents of the court decision .Equally important, the warrant arrest has brought the court's credibility and impartiality to the fore.Four years after the Room Statute and the adoption of a treaty to establish a permanent court, the ICC found its way to existence and entered into force in July 2009. Pursuant to its establishment in 2002, the court proclaimed that all perpetrators and criminal found guilty, irrespective of their nationality, status or political inclination, should be brought to justice to be held accountable for their violations of international law. In this respect, Kofi Annan,the ex-Secretary General of the UN said: "Our hope is that, by punishing the guilty, the ICC will bring some comfort to the surviving victims and to the communities that have been targeted. More important, we hope it will deter future war criminals, and bring nearer the day when no ruler, no State, no junta and no army anywhere will be able to abuse human rights with impunity."We applauded its establishment and eventually aspired that peace, due justice, rule of law and respect for the fundamental human rights would spread in the world. Nevertheless, our aspirations quickly went to ashes and we felt that we were building castles in the sand .Briefly stated, Bush together with his henchmen, Colin Powell,Gondoleeza Rice and Donald Rumsfield , orchestrated the most deplorable and unprecedented crimes in Iraq. They waged a barbarian war against a peaceful country in the name of bringing democracy and freedom to the Iraqi people. The result on the ground is a fake democracy soaked in the blood of innocent people. As such, the long-waited-for freedom, democracy, stability and peace have become no more than a wishful-thinking for Iraqis.The 29-day war waged on Lebanon by Israel in 2006 was another flagrant infringement of all international law conventions. The some scenario took place lately .The same aggressors but against different victim and in a different battlefield. Israel waged a merciless 22-day war, against defenseless and unarmed people, using the most destructive and sophisticated weapons in hope to inflict the maximum sufferance on people. In fact, it is needless to restate the resounding destruction and indelible wounds that this war left behind.Albeit, it is with much regret to say that none of the perpetrators of the above stated crimes was held accountable. As very often, they went unpunished and rewarded impunity.a. A late awakening
After its long hibernation and its blind-eye attitude towards the aforesaid grave crimes, the ICC, in show of bravado, issued a warrant arrest for President Omar al-Bashir of Sudan on seven counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity for his role in massive atrocities in Darfur. The court's decision and the speed by which it relayed the arrest raises many questions and puts the court's credibility at test. According to international law, aren't the crimes stated above war crimes par excellence. Richard Dicker, director of Human Rights Watch's International Justice Program, claims that: "the International Criminal court is Pro-victim, not Anti – or Anti-Arab African. The pursuit of justice for serious international crimes wherever they are committed is vital". Such declarations may seem promising if they truly reflect the reality. Nowadays, many powerful non-African perpetrators systematically go unpunished for their crimes.The court's decision may hold some credibility if indeed there is no double-standard approach to justice. How can we trust a court's decision while the same court applies a deaf –ear and blind –eye attitudes towards other cases where justice is highly needed?At Doha's Summit, Omar Al-Bashir was warmly welcomed by most Arab leaders. Such welcome then can be seen as a refusal of the court's decision on the part of the Arab leaders' although such rejection was not really substantiated by clear unanimous declaration. The final communiqué of the Arab Summit made no reference to this refusal or to the overall on-going procedures of the court. The presence of Ban kimon, Secretary General of the UN, in a summit where there is someone who is wanted by the international community even further voids the seriousness of the UN vis-a vis this case. In the same vein, Obama's envoy of Scot Gration in hope to establish partnership and build stronger bilateral relationship with Sudan is another sign that the USA is not genuinely convinced by the court's decision. Otherwise how can a country such as USA look for partnership with someone who is allegedly wanted by the International Court?Against this backdrop, we may unhesitatingly conclude that the court has precipitated in taking such decision. A reappraisal in its approach is urgently needed at least for face saving. The court also needs to adhere to its core principle of non-discrimination and impartiality in addressing legal allegations. The Arab countries need to ratify the convention establishing the ICC. In doing so, the Arab's opinion or stand in such international legal matter can bear weight and hence yield influence.
Rachid ElalaouiJeddah ,Saudi Arabiamailrachid27@yahoo.comM.A in Human Right and DemocratizationGent University, Belgium
It is unquestionably that the issuance of the warrant arrest against the Sudanese president Omar Al-Bashir on March 4th, 2009 triggered heated controversy and divided the world into partisans and opponents of the court decision .Equally important, the warrant arrest has brought the court's credibility and impartiality to the fore.Four years after the Room Statute and the adoption of a treaty to establish a permanent court, the ICC found its way to existence and entered into force in July 2009. Pursuant to its establishment in 2002, the court proclaimed that all perpetrators and criminal found guilty, irrespective of their nationality, status or political inclination, should be brought to justice to be held accountable for their violations of international law. In this respect, Kofi Annan,the ex-Secretary General of the UN said: "Our hope is that, by punishing the guilty, the ICC will bring some comfort to the surviving victims and to the communities that have been targeted. More important, we hope it will deter future war criminals, and bring nearer the day when no ruler, no State, no junta and no army anywhere will be able to abuse human rights with impunity."We applauded its establishment and eventually aspired that peace, due justice, rule of law and respect for the fundamental human rights would spread in the world. Nevertheless, our aspirations quickly went to ashes and we felt that we were building castles in the sand .Briefly stated, Bush together with his henchmen, Colin Powell,Gondoleeza Rice and Donald Rumsfield , orchestrated the most deplorable and unprecedented crimes in Iraq. They waged a barbarian war against a peaceful country in the name of bringing democracy and freedom to the Iraqi people. The result on the ground is a fake democracy soaked in the blood of innocent people. As such, the long-waited-for freedom, democracy, stability and peace have become no more than a wishful-thinking for Iraqis.The 29-day war waged on Lebanon by Israel in 2006 was another flagrant infringement of all international law conventions. The some scenario took place lately .The same aggressors but against different victim and in a different battlefield. Israel waged a merciless 22-day war, against defenseless and unarmed people, using the most destructive and sophisticated weapons in hope to inflict the maximum sufferance on people. In fact, it is needless to restate the resounding destruction and indelible wounds that this war left behind.Albeit, it is with much regret to say that none of the perpetrators of the above stated crimes was held accountable. As very often, they went unpunished and rewarded impunity.a. A late awakening
After its long hibernation and its blind-eye attitude towards the aforesaid grave crimes, the ICC, in show of bravado, issued a warrant arrest for President Omar al-Bashir of Sudan on seven counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity for his role in massive atrocities in Darfur. The court's decision and the speed by which it relayed the arrest raises many questions and puts the court's credibility at test. According to international law, aren't the crimes stated above war crimes par excellence. Richard Dicker, director of Human Rights Watch's International Justice Program, claims that: "the International Criminal court is Pro-victim, not Anti – or Anti-Arab African. The pursuit of justice for serious international crimes wherever they are committed is vital". Such declarations may seem promising if they truly reflect the reality. Nowadays, many powerful non-African perpetrators systematically go unpunished for their crimes.The court's decision may hold some credibility if indeed there is no double-standard approach to justice. How can we trust a court's decision while the same court applies a deaf –ear and blind –eye attitudes towards other cases where justice is highly needed?At Doha's Summit, Omar Al-Bashir was warmly welcomed by most Arab leaders. Such welcome then can be seen as a refusal of the court's decision on the part of the Arab leaders' although such rejection was not really substantiated by clear unanimous declaration. The final communiqué of the Arab Summit made no reference to this refusal or to the overall on-going procedures of the court. The presence of Ban kimon, Secretary General of the UN, in a summit where there is someone who is wanted by the international community even further voids the seriousness of the UN vis-a vis this case. In the same vein, Obama's envoy of Scot Gration in hope to establish partnership and build stronger bilateral relationship with Sudan is another sign that the USA is not genuinely convinced by the court's decision. Otherwise how can a country such as USA look for partnership with someone who is allegedly wanted by the International Court?Against this backdrop, we may unhesitatingly conclude that the court has precipitated in taking such decision. A reappraisal in its approach is urgently needed at least for face saving. The court also needs to adhere to its core principle of non-discrimination and impartiality in addressing legal allegations. The Arab countries need to ratify the convention establishing the ICC. In doing so, the Arab's opinion or stand in such international legal matter can bear weight and hence yield influence.
Rachid ElalaouiJeddah ,Saudi Arabiamailrachid27@yahoo.comM.A in Human Right and DemocratizationGent University, Belgium
How could the European Framework Convention, in a Moroccan context ease the increasing tension between the State and the Minority Rights Movement?
Author:Rachid ElalaouiMA in Human Rights and Democratisation
Aware of the need of incorporating its work within the framework of the international organizations of which it has become an active and dynamic member, the Kingdom of Morocco fully adheres to the principles, rights and obligations arising from the charters of such organizations, as it reaffirms its determination to abide by the universally recognized human rights.The preamble of the Moroccan Constitution[1]During the last two decades the protection of minority rights has substantially occupied a very important position within the discourse of many of the international human rights instruments. Similarly, in Morocco the issue of rights of minorities has gained substantial attention, much of it shedding more heat than light. Nowadays in Morocco ‘the Berber Cultural awakening’ is one of the issues hotly debated locally; it is even seen as a migraine for the political stakeholders and its antidote is still a long way off in absence of any genuine political will. In fact, the growing demands by the Berber population for greater cultural recognition of their heritage have weighed heavily on the monarchy and on the whole political system throughout the 1990s and into the 21st century to the extent it created tensions and mistrust in the whole society. In 1990, six Moroccan associations published ‘the Agadir charter ‘calling for recognition of Amazigh language[2], the recognition of Amazigh language and culture. In 1993 during the International Conference on Human Rights in Geneva, several Amazigh Associations published and distributed a ‘memorandum ‘by which they denounced the policy of coercive assimilation practice against the Amazigh‘s identity, culture and language[3].Crucially enough, “in March 2000, representative of the Amazigh group submitted to the government a ‘Berber Manifesto’. It called on the State to recognize Tamazight in schools, and licence a Berber television station”[4]Therefore, within this heated context that does not bode well, an attempt to adopt the Framework Convention as potential antidote to the already mentioned tension could be one justification behind choosing this topic. Similarly, it has been proved that the non-discriminatory clauses that are included in almost all the previous international human rights instruments fail to properly guarantee equal treatments to minority groups who are very often discriminated against. Henceforth; special comprehensive measures of protection is needed to ensure equality in the enjoyment of rights by all individuals irrespective of their linguistic, religion or ethnic identity. Interestingly, the framework Convention could properly serve that purpose. It needs to be emphasized that this convention which entered into force on 15 February 1998 marks an unprecedented leap in the history of human civilization as it comes to consolidate previous international instruments relating to minorities and to provide the most comprehensive codification of the rights of minority groups yet attempted on international level. In brief, the Convention is a holistic package deal; it is an important milestone the first ever legally binding multilateral instrument providing an efficient benchmark for the legislation of States willing to adopt it domestically to reconsider its treatments vis-a vis minority groups. In the same manner, the preambular paragraph of this states “Considering that a pluralist and genuinely democratic society should not only respect the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious identity of each person belonging to a national minority, but also create appropriate conditions enabling them to express, preserve and develop this identity.” [5]On this background, this Framework Convention remains a document worthy to wholly incorporate in the Moroccan national legislation in order to abate the tension between the government and all the governed under the Moroccan territory. After all, this convention comes to cater for the protection of the citizen’s rights mainly the minority groups. Its adoption by the Moroccan State will send a message that the State is truly complying by its international obligations as stated in the preamble of the constitution and that its policy as lauded through the national media is not a policy of nice words but of action.
Nevertheless, focus will be on some articles of the Convention and to demonstrate how could these articles if truly incorporated on the national level soften the tension between the Moroccan State and the Berber Minority Rights Movement .Crucially enough, It is already stated above that the Convention is an indivisible package deal and focus on these articles is not meant to undermine its whole content. In fact, it is with much regret to highlight that the tension between the Moroccan authorities and the Minority rights movement is not promising and is aggravating day after day .Thus, failing to take practical measures on the part of the State to the rightful demands of the movement, will destabilize the whole Moroccan Society. For example, last Month on 2nd February 2007 the Moroccan authority didn’t allow the Amazigh minority movement to organize their general meeting in the conference room of Marrakech .The organizers then were obliged to hold it in the open air in front of the conference room and under a cold weather.[6]However, if the Framework Convention (FC) is adopted such an event will not find room in country heralding to be democratic. Article 7 of the (FC) states that:
The parties shall ensure respect for the right of everyone belonging to a national minority to freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of association, freedom of expression, and freedom of expression, and freedom of thought, conscious and religion.Worse still, at the police registries where Moroccans go to officially designate their children’s' names, non-Arab names of Amazigh or Berber origin are not accepted. In doing so, the Amazigh minority is denied the right to identity which is a fundamental right and even the right to choice. Imposing names on people is undoubtedly anti-human rights behaviour.Jalali Saib, a leading activist who teaches at Rabat University, maintains that marginalizing Berber names “is a case of trying to completely eradicate any Berber heritage”. Article 11 /1 of the (FC) states that:The Parties undertake to recognise that every person belonging to a national minority has the right to use his or her surname (patronym) and first names in the minority language and the right to official recognition of them, according to modalities provided for in their legal system.Still, the minority rights movement in Morocco incessantly asks the authorities to grant them the right to have a TV station that broadcasts in a language they understand but this right is denied. As far as TV broadcasting is concerned in Morocco there is one government-affiliated channel, 2M, broadcasts a mix of Arabic and French. The other, RTM, broadcasts predominantly in Arabic, with only 5 to 10 minutes a day of news in Berber. Such discriminatory behaviour on the part of the Moroccan government serves nothing but aggravates and deepens the already heated tension between the State and the minority right movement. Notwithstanding, if the state incorporates the (FC) in its domestic legislation it will be incumbent upon the State to adopt measure “in order to facilitate access to the media for persons belonging to national minorities “.[7]Unsurprising enough, the problem of the minority rights as seen through the above samples is surmountable if there is indeed a true political will. Keeping the problem unsolved will benefit none in Morocco. Very often reports released by Amnesty International or human rights Watch about Morocco concerning this minority rights are bleak and tarnish the image of Morocco internationally. Such reports will raise questions to credibility of the democratisation process that the State is heralding through the media and even to the king Mohammed IV promises to his people. In one of his Speech Delivered When Sealing Dahir Setting up Royal Institute of the Amazigh Culture (IRCAM)(17 October 2001) , he declares that Morocco is “endeavouring to develop, on this side of the Mediterranean, an area where democracy is growing and thriving and where human rights are also governed by the logic of economic considerations”.[8]The latter institute is set up; on one hand as an attempt to reclaim Amazigh culture as part oft he national community, and on the other hand to partially calm down the increasing demand of the Amazigh movement for constitutionalized recognition of their culture. In an alternative report submitted to the committee of the elimination of racial discrimination (CERD), the Amazigh movement stated that “by creating (IRCAM), Morocco did nothing more than deny the long-awaited consitutionalization of Tamazight, which would give it its rightful place in the fundamental law of the country”[9]Giving this background, it is not surprising to reaffirm that in granting the minorities their due rights, the state is not granting charity or privileges to this group but complying with its international obligations. Although very often the state defends itself by saying such matter is an internal affair, but this claim will not shield it from its international responsibility; In 1993 Vienna International conference on human rights, unanimously all the participant states declared that human rights is an international concern. Morocco is a state party to the international Convention of Civil and Political Rights .Article 27 of this Convention safeguards the minority rights. Therefore, The Moroccan government should look at these rights from a right-based approach and not from a charity-based perspective. Thus, the Moroccan state is totally responsible for the implementation of minority rights. The State should make sure that its constitutional legislations comply with the international law. Also, minority rights shouldn’t be seen as a threat or a dividing factor but seen as an added value that adds to the richness of society; tolerance to diversity is crucial in any given democratic society as best expressed in the preamble of the Framework Convention. It declares that “creation of a climate of tolerance and dialogue is necessary to enable cultural diversity to be a source and a factor, not of division, but of enrichment for each society”[10].At the end of the day, change is not impossible .There are always means and ways that if seriously adopted could bring substantial change. The adoption of the Framework Convention is but one way to achieve that change .As matter of fact, change in human rights field doesn’t come overnight but at the sametime is not impossible as expressed by Prof Gudmundur Alfredson in one of his lectures related to minority rights. What do we need is a true political will on the part of the leaders, perseverance and advocacy on the part of the civil society through its active NGOs .The latter can use the content of the Framework Convention to stimulate discussions on minority issues on a national level. In the same vein, NGOs can pressure the government to incorporate its provisions in the domestic constitution and can also work to increase public awareness of the country’s commitments under international obligations.In a word, I do remain convinced that keeping this issue of minorities unsolved, will do much harm to the image of Morocco in the international arena. And no true Moroccan would like his or her country to be blacklisted and singled out and be a subject to naming and shaming. Yet, one way to avoid this is to incorporate the Framework Convention in the Constitution and apply its provisions in good faith. Therefore, adopting a true democratic constitution whose provisions are in harmony with all other international instrument is the only way to satisfy the demands of the Amazigh rights movement. To put it bluntly, the establishment of a solid constitution is a precondition for the enjoyment of all human rights as best expressed by Prof. Abdullah Ahmed An-N’im, a true humanist and a dedicated activist:[1] A copy of the constitution available at the website Moroccan ministry of communication:www.mincom.gov.ma/English/generalities/state_at/constitution[2] Roughly in Morocco 40 % of the population speak Berber yet only Arabic is the official language recognized in the constitution. Amazigh and Berber are used here interchangeably.[3] See the alternative report entitled the Amazigh Issue in Morocco submitted to the (CERD) available at www.tamazgha.fr[4] Middle East Review of International Affairs, Vol.7, N° 3 (2003)[5] Avalable at. : www. europa.eu[6] www.amzighworld.org/human_rights/morocco/index.php[7] Article 9/4 of The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities[8] The whole speech available at : www.mincom.gov.ma/english/generalities/speech2001/institute _amazigh_culture[9] The Amazigh Issue in Morocco is an alternative report submitted to the CERD by Tamazgha For the defense of the rights of the Amazigh accessible at :www.tamazgha.fr
[10] Stated in the preamble of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities
Aware of the need of incorporating its work within the framework of the international organizations of which it has become an active and dynamic member, the Kingdom of Morocco fully adheres to the principles, rights and obligations arising from the charters of such organizations, as it reaffirms its determination to abide by the universally recognized human rights.The preamble of the Moroccan Constitution[1]During the last two decades the protection of minority rights has substantially occupied a very important position within the discourse of many of the international human rights instruments. Similarly, in Morocco the issue of rights of minorities has gained substantial attention, much of it shedding more heat than light. Nowadays in Morocco ‘the Berber Cultural awakening’ is one of the issues hotly debated locally; it is even seen as a migraine for the political stakeholders and its antidote is still a long way off in absence of any genuine political will. In fact, the growing demands by the Berber population for greater cultural recognition of their heritage have weighed heavily on the monarchy and on the whole political system throughout the 1990s and into the 21st century to the extent it created tensions and mistrust in the whole society. In 1990, six Moroccan associations published ‘the Agadir charter ‘calling for recognition of Amazigh language[2], the recognition of Amazigh language and culture. In 1993 during the International Conference on Human Rights in Geneva, several Amazigh Associations published and distributed a ‘memorandum ‘by which they denounced the policy of coercive assimilation practice against the Amazigh‘s identity, culture and language[3].Crucially enough, “in March 2000, representative of the Amazigh group submitted to the government a ‘Berber Manifesto’. It called on the State to recognize Tamazight in schools, and licence a Berber television station”[4]Therefore, within this heated context that does not bode well, an attempt to adopt the Framework Convention as potential antidote to the already mentioned tension could be one justification behind choosing this topic. Similarly, it has been proved that the non-discriminatory clauses that are included in almost all the previous international human rights instruments fail to properly guarantee equal treatments to minority groups who are very often discriminated against. Henceforth; special comprehensive measures of protection is needed to ensure equality in the enjoyment of rights by all individuals irrespective of their linguistic, religion or ethnic identity. Interestingly, the framework Convention could properly serve that purpose. It needs to be emphasized that this convention which entered into force on 15 February 1998 marks an unprecedented leap in the history of human civilization as it comes to consolidate previous international instruments relating to minorities and to provide the most comprehensive codification of the rights of minority groups yet attempted on international level. In brief, the Convention is a holistic package deal; it is an important milestone the first ever legally binding multilateral instrument providing an efficient benchmark for the legislation of States willing to adopt it domestically to reconsider its treatments vis-a vis minority groups. In the same manner, the preambular paragraph of this states “Considering that a pluralist and genuinely democratic society should not only respect the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious identity of each person belonging to a national minority, but also create appropriate conditions enabling them to express, preserve and develop this identity.” [5]On this background, this Framework Convention remains a document worthy to wholly incorporate in the Moroccan national legislation in order to abate the tension between the government and all the governed under the Moroccan territory. After all, this convention comes to cater for the protection of the citizen’s rights mainly the minority groups. Its adoption by the Moroccan State will send a message that the State is truly complying by its international obligations as stated in the preamble of the constitution and that its policy as lauded through the national media is not a policy of nice words but of action.
Nevertheless, focus will be on some articles of the Convention and to demonstrate how could these articles if truly incorporated on the national level soften the tension between the Moroccan State and the Berber Minority Rights Movement .Crucially enough, It is already stated above that the Convention is an indivisible package deal and focus on these articles is not meant to undermine its whole content. In fact, it is with much regret to highlight that the tension between the Moroccan authorities and the Minority rights movement is not promising and is aggravating day after day .Thus, failing to take practical measures on the part of the State to the rightful demands of the movement, will destabilize the whole Moroccan Society. For example, last Month on 2nd February 2007 the Moroccan authority didn’t allow the Amazigh minority movement to organize their general meeting in the conference room of Marrakech .The organizers then were obliged to hold it in the open air in front of the conference room and under a cold weather.[6]However, if the Framework Convention (FC) is adopted such an event will not find room in country heralding to be democratic. Article 7 of the (FC) states that:
The parties shall ensure respect for the right of everyone belonging to a national minority to freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of association, freedom of expression, and freedom of expression, and freedom of thought, conscious and religion.Worse still, at the police registries where Moroccans go to officially designate their children’s' names, non-Arab names of Amazigh or Berber origin are not accepted. In doing so, the Amazigh minority is denied the right to identity which is a fundamental right and even the right to choice. Imposing names on people is undoubtedly anti-human rights behaviour.Jalali Saib, a leading activist who teaches at Rabat University, maintains that marginalizing Berber names “is a case of trying to completely eradicate any Berber heritage”. Article 11 /1 of the (FC) states that:The Parties undertake to recognise that every person belonging to a national minority has the right to use his or her surname (patronym) and first names in the minority language and the right to official recognition of them, according to modalities provided for in their legal system.Still, the minority rights movement in Morocco incessantly asks the authorities to grant them the right to have a TV station that broadcasts in a language they understand but this right is denied. As far as TV broadcasting is concerned in Morocco there is one government-affiliated channel, 2M, broadcasts a mix of Arabic and French. The other, RTM, broadcasts predominantly in Arabic, with only 5 to 10 minutes a day of news in Berber. Such discriminatory behaviour on the part of the Moroccan government serves nothing but aggravates and deepens the already heated tension between the State and the minority right movement. Notwithstanding, if the state incorporates the (FC) in its domestic legislation it will be incumbent upon the State to adopt measure “in order to facilitate access to the media for persons belonging to national minorities “.[7]Unsurprising enough, the problem of the minority rights as seen through the above samples is surmountable if there is indeed a true political will. Keeping the problem unsolved will benefit none in Morocco. Very often reports released by Amnesty International or human rights Watch about Morocco concerning this minority rights are bleak and tarnish the image of Morocco internationally. Such reports will raise questions to credibility of the democratisation process that the State is heralding through the media and even to the king Mohammed IV promises to his people. In one of his Speech Delivered When Sealing Dahir Setting up Royal Institute of the Amazigh Culture (IRCAM)(17 October 2001) , he declares that Morocco is “endeavouring to develop, on this side of the Mediterranean, an area where democracy is growing and thriving and where human rights are also governed by the logic of economic considerations”.[8]The latter institute is set up; on one hand as an attempt to reclaim Amazigh culture as part oft he national community, and on the other hand to partially calm down the increasing demand of the Amazigh movement for constitutionalized recognition of their culture. In an alternative report submitted to the committee of the elimination of racial discrimination (CERD), the Amazigh movement stated that “by creating (IRCAM), Morocco did nothing more than deny the long-awaited consitutionalization of Tamazight, which would give it its rightful place in the fundamental law of the country”[9]Giving this background, it is not surprising to reaffirm that in granting the minorities their due rights, the state is not granting charity or privileges to this group but complying with its international obligations. Although very often the state defends itself by saying such matter is an internal affair, but this claim will not shield it from its international responsibility; In 1993 Vienna International conference on human rights, unanimously all the participant states declared that human rights is an international concern. Morocco is a state party to the international Convention of Civil and Political Rights .Article 27 of this Convention safeguards the minority rights. Therefore, The Moroccan government should look at these rights from a right-based approach and not from a charity-based perspective. Thus, the Moroccan state is totally responsible for the implementation of minority rights. The State should make sure that its constitutional legislations comply with the international law. Also, minority rights shouldn’t be seen as a threat or a dividing factor but seen as an added value that adds to the richness of society; tolerance to diversity is crucial in any given democratic society as best expressed in the preamble of the Framework Convention. It declares that “creation of a climate of tolerance and dialogue is necessary to enable cultural diversity to be a source and a factor, not of division, but of enrichment for each society”[10].At the end of the day, change is not impossible .There are always means and ways that if seriously adopted could bring substantial change. The adoption of the Framework Convention is but one way to achieve that change .As matter of fact, change in human rights field doesn’t come overnight but at the sametime is not impossible as expressed by Prof Gudmundur Alfredson in one of his lectures related to minority rights. What do we need is a true political will on the part of the leaders, perseverance and advocacy on the part of the civil society through its active NGOs .The latter can use the content of the Framework Convention to stimulate discussions on minority issues on a national level. In the same vein, NGOs can pressure the government to incorporate its provisions in the domestic constitution and can also work to increase public awareness of the country’s commitments under international obligations.In a word, I do remain convinced that keeping this issue of minorities unsolved, will do much harm to the image of Morocco in the international arena. And no true Moroccan would like his or her country to be blacklisted and singled out and be a subject to naming and shaming. Yet, one way to avoid this is to incorporate the Framework Convention in the Constitution and apply its provisions in good faith. Therefore, adopting a true democratic constitution whose provisions are in harmony with all other international instrument is the only way to satisfy the demands of the Amazigh rights movement. To put it bluntly, the establishment of a solid constitution is a precondition for the enjoyment of all human rights as best expressed by Prof. Abdullah Ahmed An-N’im, a true humanist and a dedicated activist:[1] A copy of the constitution available at the website Moroccan ministry of communication:www.mincom.gov.ma/English/generalities/state_at/constitution[2] Roughly in Morocco 40 % of the population speak Berber yet only Arabic is the official language recognized in the constitution. Amazigh and Berber are used here interchangeably.[3] See the alternative report entitled the Amazigh Issue in Morocco submitted to the (CERD) available at www.tamazgha.fr[4] Middle East Review of International Affairs, Vol.7, N° 3 (2003)[5] Avalable at. : www. europa.eu[6] www.amzighworld.org/human_rights/morocco/index.php[7] Article 9/4 of The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities[8] The whole speech available at : www.mincom.gov.ma/english/generalities/speech2001/institute _amazigh_culture[9] The Amazigh Issue in Morocco is an alternative report submitted to the CERD by Tamazgha For the defense of the rights of the Amazigh accessible at :www.tamazgha.fr
[10] Stated in the preamble of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Common Phrasal verbs: The term phrasal verb refers to a verb and a preposition which together have a special meaning. Usually we can fig...
