By Tamara Alfred

Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) says fighting between the Malian armed forces and the Azawad National Liberation Movement (MNLA) has displaced 60,000 people within Mali, not including those who have fled to neighboring countries.

Meanwhile, the UN says that more than 44,000 Malian refugees have crossed into Mauritania, Niger and Burkina Faso.  The majority of the refugees are fleeing the fighting in the north of the country, but others are seeking shelter from ethnic tension and violent demonstrations in cities in the south.

“This is the worst human rights crisis in northern Mali for 20 years,” said Gaetan Mootoo, Amnesty International’s researcher on West Africa.  “The rule of law has been markedly absent in this part of the country for years, and the region could be plunged into chaos if the fighting continues.”

Starting on January 18, dozens of soldiers and fighters were killed in clashes between the Malian armed forces and the MNLA, a Tuareg armed opposition group who says it is fighting for the independence of northern regions in Mali.  The Tuareg rebels began by attacking various army garrisons in the north of Mali.  Violent demonstrations then spread to several southern cities.  Those marches were organized in reaction to what protesters viewed as a “timid” reaction by the authorities against the rebellion, but many degenerated into rioting.

The resurgence in fighting follows two years of relative peace between the government and the Tuareg.

Following the initial attacks, photographs circulated showing the corpses of Malian soldiers with their hands tied behind their backs, prompting the authorities to accuse the MNLA of carrying out extrajudicial executions.  The MNLA denied the allegations, saying the photos were fabricated.

Amnesty International has called for MNLA to reveal the names of any captives they are holding and to allow the Red Cross access to them.  The human rights organization has also asked Malian authorities to charge or release four people, including two women, who were arrested in the northern town of Kidal for their alleged support of the MNLA.

During various demonstrations, the Malian security forces have failed to prevent mobs from attacking homes and properties owned by Tuaregs and other ethnic groups, including Arabs and Mauritanians, living in the capital.  As a result, thousands of Tuaregs and others, targeted because of their lighter skin color, have begun fleeing the country.

Sinegodar, a village located approximately 12 miles from the Mali border, has seen the largest influx of refugees – around 9,000.  Many of the refugees in Sinegodar come from Menaka, a town in northeastern Mali which was first attacked by the rebels on January 17.  Many of the refugees travelled on foot or on donkeys and had not eaten for several days.

“Many of the new arrivals are sleeping in the open and have little access to shelter, clean water, health service and food,” said UNHCR spokesman Adrian Edwards.

“As the influx continues, our teams are stepping up assistance for refugees who have taken refuge in makeshift shelters in villages bordering Mali,” UNHCR spokesperson Melissa Fleming said in a news release.  “Humanitarian assistance is all the more critical because the Sahel region is facing a severe food crisis due to several years of drought.”

Mali’s political parties have jointly called on the government to hold a forum for peace and reconciliation as a way to end the rebellion, while President Amadou Toumani Toure has sought to keep the country from further eruptions.

For more information, please see:

BBC News – Mali: UN warning over refugees fleeing Tuareg rebellion – 18 February 2012

Amnesty International – Mali: Violence in North Causing a Human Rights Crisis – 16 February 2012

BBC News – In pictures: Malians flee Tuareg rebels – 16 February 2012

AllAfrica.com – Mali: Fifty Thousand Flee As Political Parties Call for Dialogue – 10 February 2012

By Zach Waksman
Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa

DAKAR, Senegal – Protests against the eligibility of President Abdoulaye Wade have been a near constant presence in Senegal since Wade was deemed eligible to stand for re-election in late January.  On Sunday, activists seized control of a three-block area in downtown Dakar, the capital, and threw rocks at police summoned to control the activity.  It was the fifth consecutive day of violence related to the upcoming election, in which six people have died.  The election is scheduled for February 26.

Senegal’s constitution has a two-term limit for its president.  Wade, if elected, would be serving his third consecutive term, violating that clause.  Despite this, the Constitutional Council of the West African country ruled that he could run for a third term because he served his first term, which began after his election in 2000, before the rule was enacted.  The Constitutional Council also controversially rejected the candidacy of Youssou N’Dour, who had collected 13,000 signatures of support, more than the required 10,000, stoking further public outcry.

During a February 7 interview with Radio Netherlands Worldwide, Thijs Berman—head of the European Union’s Observer Mission in Senegal—explained that N’Dour’s candidacy was rejected because he had more than 4,000 false signatures that were removed from his total.  He still questioned the decision to remove the popular singer from the ballot due to uncertain procedures.

“We have requested transparency from the Constitutional Council in its decision to approve or reject candidatures,” Berman said.  “We have also requested that each candidate be given access to his/her application information, to the reason why it was approved or rejected. I think such transparency is lacking and one can therefore understand Youssou N’Dour’s anger.”

The mission has also requested that the country’s Electoral Affairs Ministry provide information regarding the distribution of voter cards.

Wade, who is officially stated to be 85 but could be as old as 90, is still in the race.  His continued presence is drawing concern from the international community because of his age and Senegal’s role in the region.  It is the only West African country whose government has never been toppled by a military coup.  Locally, the belief is that he is attempting to set up a “‘monarchical devolution’ of the presidency” to his son Karim.  Karim has an allocation of one quarter of the national budget for his use as a “Super Minister” of multiple jurisdictions.

This most recent round of protests has taken on a more violent tone.  On Wednesday, dissidents attempted to hold an illegal march in Dakar, which led police to fire tear gas and rubber bullets in an attempt to disperse them.  Several buildings were set on fire, and a policeman is said to have been killed during the ensuing unrest.  Friday drew more anger after an attempt to break up a protest outside a mosque disrupted prayers.  Police used grenade launchers to propel tear gas canisters down the street, only to have one of them hit a wall of the mosque.  Interior Minister Ousmane Ngom apologized for the incident, which he characterized as a “police blunder,” on Sunday.

“I would like to present, in my personal name and on behalf of the highest authorities of national police, our most sincere apologies to the caliph” of the Tidiane brotherhood (Senegal’s largest) and his followers, he told the Senegalese Press Agency (APS).  He also recommended against holding new rallies near mosques.

That urging did not stop youths from gathering outside the same mosque on Sunday and throwing stones and other projectiles at police, while screaming “Allah Akbar” and “There is no God but Allah.”  Neither phrase is heard much in the country, which is almost 90% Muslim.  Senegal has taken on a largely secular identity.

“I’m worried — yes. What I’m seeing here could really degenerate into another kind of situation, a religious one,” said Moustapha Faye, a young member of the Mouride Muslim brotherhood, the second largest in Senegal, as he observed the situation from a safe position. “We must absolutely avoid violence.”

One of the main opposition groups is the M23 coalition with whom N’Dour has campaigned after his candidacy was rejected.  The group’s main goal is to force Wade out of the race.  Once its members accomplish that mission, they would then begin their own separate campaigns.  The other main organization is Y’en a Marre (We are fed up!), a strong youth-based group that has done an outstanding job of mobilizing people.  More than 20 such groups exist and their leaders have been subjected to threats, attempts at corruption, and even arrests.

“It is good to see such social involvement and political activism from young people. I cannot comment on their participation, or on their agenda,” said an encouraged Berman.  “But I think it is good for Senegal that the youth is so involved.”

Whether Berman’s belief is accurate may depend on the results of the upcoming election.

For more information, please see:

AllAfrica — Senegal: New Protest Planned as Election Looms — 20 February 2012

BBC — Senegal Apology amid Protests against Abdoulaye Wade — 20 February 2012

New York Times — Senegal Protests Grow before Presidential Vote — 19 February 2012

Daily Nation — Senegal: EU Urges Transparency in Voter Registration — 17 February 2012

Senegambia News — Senegalese 2012 Presidential Election, Where Are We Now? — 17 February 2012

AllAfrica — West Africa: Berman – “Lack of Transparency in Senegal” — 7 February 2012

By Zach Waksman
Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa

JOHANNESBURG, South Africa – Hundreds of men and women crowded parts of Central Johannesburg on Friday to take part in a march proclaiming their right to wear miniskirts.  The protest was staged by the Africa National Congress Women’s League (ANCWL) to call for an end to gender-based violence and sexual harassment.

The rally was precipitated by an incident in December in which two women at a taxi stop on Noord Street that was caught on camera.  Male drivers at the stop taunted two women about their clothing.  Others groped them and grabbed at their clothing while others took pictures.  One of the two was wearing a miniskirt, and the other had a visible bra strap.  The victim’s identities have not been disclosed, and no arrests have been made as of yet.  An investigation is underway.

In many parts of South Africa, which has one of the world’s highest occurrences of rape, men still believe that women should not wear clothing that is too revealing.  An incident similar to the one from December took place at the Noord Street stop three years ago, when Nwabisa Ngcukana was stripped and molested for wearing a miniskirt; nobody was arrested. Five years ago, the township of Umlazi, located near Durban, banned women from wearing trousers.  That July, a woman was stripped naked and had her home burned down for it.

Organizers of the march told the BBC that its goal was to put a stop to “patriarchal views still entrenched in parts of South Africa’s society.”  ANCWL Spokeswoman Troy Martens called the event one intended to start a country-wide debate regarding abuse of women.

“The 16 days of activism against women and children is clearly not enough! We need a sustained year-long campaign and dedication from authorities that brings men on board to put an end to this social scourge,” she said.

Several top officials in both the national government and the Gauteng province attended.  Lulu Xingwana, the country’s Minister of Women, Children and People with Disabilities, was among the participants.  She wore a skirt, but not a mini.  During the event, she threatened to shut down the Noord Street stop if the drivers did not improve their behavior.

“No one has the right to (commit) corrective rape. Rape is rape,” Xingwana said.  “Real men don’t rape women, real men love and respect women.”

Gauteng premier Nomvula Mokonyane was also present.  If the abuse continued, she said that nobody could enjoy human rights.  Taxi drivers needed to be particularly strong in spearheading the human rights movement.

“It is their duty to respect human rights… taxi drivers, taxi commuters: no one should allow violence against women and children,” she said. “As women, we are proud of our bodies, we are proud of our miniskirts.”

Participants waved signs reading various slogans, such as “I am proud of my miniskirt.”  Many danced for the cameras.  Most viewers supported the event, including men.

“It has nothing to do with culture, it is about the working class struggle and [teaching] the masses about human rights,” said one male viewer.

The march ended outside Johannesburg’s High Court building, where the ANCWL delivered a memorandum of grievances to the equality court.  Upon arrival, it was met by Justice Minister Jeff Radebe, who signed a memorandum of understanding pledging that the justice system would support fight against violence toward women and children, adding that those who tried to control fashion were not freedom fighters.

“The struggle for freedom has always been the struggle for human rights, the struggle for women’s empowerment,” Radebe said.  He then said he came to the event “because I like miniskirts,” drawing laughter and applause from the assembled crowd.

For more information, please see:

BBC — South Africa Mini-Skirt March in Protest over Attacks — 17 February 2012

IOL — Mini Skirts Paralyse Joburg — 17 February 2012

Mail & Guardian — ANC Women’s League March for Rights — 17 February 2012

Sowetan — Minister to Join Mini-Skirt March — 17 February 2012

Times (Johannesburg) — People Gather for Miniskirt March — 17 February 2012

BBC — Anger at SA Trouser “Ban” — 26 July 2007

By Zach Waksman
Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa

KHARTOUM, Sudan – Sudan and South Sudan signed a non-aggression agreement regarding their disputed border on Friday.  The pact, signed after negotiations in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, is a first step toward reaching and maintaining a lasting peace in an area that has been wracked by conflict for decades.

According to the deal, both sides agreed to “respect for each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity” and to “refrain from launching any attack, including bombardment.”  It also creates a system to monitor the border and provide a forum for complaints if the incursions continue. Thabo Mbeki, the former president of South Africa who served as the African Union’s chief negotiator, warned both sides to adhere to the pact’s terms.

“We are very serious … it is the responsibility of both sides to act now,” he said.

Ever since South Sudan became independent last July, the border region has been the site of nearly continuous conflict both between countries and within.  The two nations have accused each other of backing militias.  What has really driven this situation has been a dispute over the distribution of oil through a pipeline that crosses the disputed boundary.  Three-fourths of the oil-rich region’s wealth lay in the south, but the pipeline runs through the north.

As part of the ongoing argument, South Sudan shut down its oil production last month, which might cripple both countries’ economies.  Though oil provides up approximately 98% of its total revenue, South Sudan has taken this path in an effort to force concessions from its neighbor to the north.  It claims Sudan has stolen more than $815 million worth of crude oil.  In response, Sudan says it did so in order to pay off debts owed to it.

South Sudan claims that it will only continue its production once “all the deals are signed.”  In the meantime, Juba has threatened to cease production for years while it builds a new pipeline that runs through Kenya.  That pipeline has drawn skepticism as to its feasibility for many reasons, including that it would go through an area that is considered a war zone.

Progress on the oil issue has been minimal, though negotiations were expected to continue on Saturday.  The lack of speed drew concern from Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations, calling for “both countries to make the necessary compromises…that will guarantee a peaceful and prosperous future for both nations.”  In response to Ban’s statement, Sudanese negotiator Sabir Hassan said that Khartoum was more than willing to make concessions, but the South’s emotional responses had made finding common ground difficult.

“If you give them two choices, they’ll choose the one that hurts the north, not the one that helps the south,” Hassan told the New York Times.  Of course, negotiators from the south think the same of the north, exasperating the problem.

Despite the agreement reached Friday, few expect true peace anytime soon.  Improvement is not anticipated, even with means of discussion now available.  To some, peace would be nothing short of a pipe dream.

“I, personally, expect full-fledged war,” said Mariam al-Sadiq al-Mahdi, a leading opposition politician in Khartoum, Sudan’s capital. “This is like the previews before a film.”

For more information, please see:

Al Jazeera — Sudan and S. Sudan Sign Non-Aggression Pact — 11 February 2012

BBC — Sudan and South Sudan Sign Peace Pact, Says Thabo Mbeki — 11 February 2012

Sudan — Khartoum and Juba Sign Non-Aggression Pact — 11 February 2012

New York Times — Sudans’ Oil Feud Risks Shattering a Fragile Peace — 10 February 2012

By Zach Waksman
Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa

KAMPALA, Uganda – A bill that would impose the death penalty for “repeat offenders” of homosexual acts was introduced to Parliament in Uganda on Tuesday.  The proposed statute, previously introduced in 2009 and shelved last May, drew widespread criticism from international human rights groups and would criminalize other acts of behavior involving homosexuality.

MP David Bahati, leader of the ruling party, reintroduced the bill, but said that the language referring to the death penalty would be removed, in favor of lifetime imprisonment.  That sentence would apply to anyone caught engaging in homosexual acts for the second time as well as for gay sex where one partner is a minor or has HIV.  If passed, it would also have the effect of making the mere discussion of homosexuality or knowingly renting property to a homosexuality a crime.  The first reading in Parliament reportedly drew applause within the chamber.

Uganda is a conservative country that has already banned homosexual behavior, making it one of more than 80 nations to do so.  According to a press release from the Uganda Media Centre (UMC), “the main provisions of this bill were designed to stem the issue of defilement and rape which in the minds of [Ugandans] is a more pressing and urgent matter that needs to be addressed.”  Despite the UMC’s claim, the bill’s reintroduction quickly drew scorn from world leaders, including U.S. President Barack Obama, who called it “odious.”

Amnesty International, a leading human rights organization, was quick to condemn the bill and encouraged the Parliament to reject it in its entirety so as not to “legislate hate.  “

“It’s alarming and disappointing that Uganda’s Parliament will once again consider the Anti-Homosexuality Bill,” said Michelle Kagari, Deputy Africa Programme Director at Amnesty International.  “If passed, it would represent a grave assault on the human rights of all Ugandans, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.”

Though hailed within Parliament, others in Uganda were less than enthusiastic about the bill’s reintroduction.  On Friday, James Tumusiime wrote an editorial urging citizens to fight it in The Observer, making reference to recent incidents in Malawi and India, where groups of people attempted to impose their own culture by interfering with other people’s rights to live as they saw fit.

“Bahati’s bill makes it imperative to speak out now because once it is enacted, an article like this might be interpreted as ‘promoting homosexuality,’ an offence under the proposed law,” he explained.

Similarly, Pepe Julian Onziema, a gay rights activist with Sexual Minorities Uganda, considered the bill dangerous for promoting homophobia.  She told the BBC World News that the country is already facing increased reports of harassment based on sexual orientation.

“Being in jail in Uganda is as good as the death penalty,” she said.  “What I’m worried about most is not even the police coming to arrest me, it’s my neighbour attacking me – it’s the motorbike cyclist [taxi] refusing to take me to a destination. I’ll be killed before I reached my destination.”

In response to these concerns, the UMC said that the government does not back the bill.

“What many of these critics fail to convey is the bill itself was introduced by a back bencher.  It does not form part of the government’s legislative programme and it does not enjoy the support of the Prime Minister or the Cabinet,” the press release said.  “However as Uganda is a constitutional democracy, it is appropriate that if a private members bill is presented to parliament it be debated.”

The bill’s likelihood of passage is unknown.  While anti-homosexuality might be strong, the parliamentary contingent that favors it is small, but vocal.  The ramifications, however are much greater.  It might be a small, but significant step toward a less tolerant country. Tumusime feared the worst.

“[Bahati] may not realise it, but his bill is driving Uganda down the path of bigotry and intolerance. If the MPs legislate against homosexuality today, what will stop them legislating about mini-skirts, leggings, nose pins or G-strings tomorrow?” he asked.

For more information, please see:

The Observer — Today It’s Homo-sexuality, tomorrow it is G-Strings — 10 February 2012

BBC — Uganda Anti-Gay Bill “Not Backed by Government” — 09 February 2012

Al Jazeera — Uganda Anti-Gay Bill Back in Parliament — 08 February 2012

Uganda Media Center — Response to International Criticism of Debate on Anti-Homosexual Bill — 08 February 2012

Amnesty International — Uganda: Anti-Homosexuality Bill “a Grave Assault on Human Rights” — 07 February 2012