Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

was hoped that the work of the seminar might help the committee of experts convened by the OAU by reaching a consensus on the issues relating to the structure of the commission and providing the findings of the seminar to this committee.

Perhaps the two most important issues were thought to be the sequence of events to be followed in establishing human rights instruments and machinery, and the relationship of the commission to the OAU. Alternatives discussed centered around whether the commission should draft a charter which in turn would provide for a convention defining rights and establishing rules and procedures by which the commission would protect human rights, or whether the charter should provide for a commission. Concern was expressed that the commission would be created, but that differences over the scope and provisions of a charter would preclude any progress, as was the case with the OAS. As noted previously the nearunanimity on this point would seem to indicate that this concern was unfounded, and the seminar decided to proceed initially with the establishment of a commission to be followed by the OAU's drafting of a charter. A consensus emerged that the commission should have protective authority as well as promotional, and reflect all instruments relating to human

rights.

As regards the relationship with the OAU, many representatives expressed concern that political realities of the OAU precluded the effective functioning of a commission

dependent on the OAU for its authority or funding, while other delegates attributed the failure of previous efforts to the failure to attach the proposed commission to the OAU. Nevertheless a consensus emerged that a relationship with the OAU was the best way to proceed, and that sufficient safeguards and independence to avoid being "contaminated" could be included to preclude being hamstrung by the politics of the OAU. I was quite amazed at the frankness with which the delegates debated these concerns. The delegates went so far as to recommend the nationals of one country could nominate the nationals of another, out of concern that government might not nominate one of its own highly qualified jurists because his political views may be out of favor. Also discussed was what action to take if a commission member were jailed for positions taken by the commission. Some delegates went so far as to criticize the OAU for having failed in the past to take initiatives in the area of human rights. Within the context of the debate on the relationship with the OAU was concern over what to do with the findings of the seminar.

B. Items I-IV

All delegates viewed the third agenda item

pertain

ing to the appropriate model of the commission as the most important item, and some impatience was shown with the amount of time devoted to defining the role of regional commissions and

representation

-

-

their past experience. The debate on the first two items made clear that the delegates would make far-reaching recommendations calling for a commission with broad ranging authority. There was some debate over an appropriate basis for whether linguistic or geographic and whether there should be sub-commissions organized on a regional basis. It was interesting to me that factors such as population (Egypt and Nigeria by far having the largest) or the vast distances even within regions were not considered highly relevant factors in determining representation.

Serious concern was expressed about insuring that the OAU acted upon the recommendation for establishing a commission. The legal adviser of the OAU had argued that the charter of the OAU did not provide for establishing such a commission and he expressed no view on the need to or desirability of amending the charter. The majority of delegates, however, concluded that the charter provision permitting the establishment of subcommissions was a sufficient basis for establishing the commission. In my opinion despite the legal argument advanced by the OAU representative, the OAU secretariat sensing the political consensus on the need to establish human rights machinery and the interest shown by Dr. Tolbert would be most reluctant to refuse to act on the recommendation on the basis of such a technicality. discussion whether or not the Rapporteur should attend the

There was

meeting of OAU experts, but no consensus emerged other than

the desirability of transmitting the Monrovia Proposal, as the establishment of the commission was denominated, to Dr. Tolbert.

[blocks in formation]

The Monrovia Report and Proposal were finally adopted at a late night session on the final day of the seminar. Although there was some debate over whether the report accurately reflected the record of the debate, there were no serious points of contention which affected the ultimate wording of the proposal or draft report.

In essence the proposal envisions an African Commission composed of 16 experts elected for six year terms by the member states OAU with a full panoply of promotional, protectional and investigative powers. The Commission would be independent, although attached to the OAU organizationally and dependent on the OAU for budgetary and administrative

support.

The proposal will be submitted to Secretary-General Waldheim for transmittal to the OAU Chairman. It is hoped that the OAU will convene its committee of experts to draft the charter, envisioned in its 1979 resolution, as soon as possible and that the council of ministers of the OAU may review both the charter and Monrovia Proposal pertaining to the establishment of the commission in February 1980, with a view to submitting final recommendations to the Heads of State at the OAU summit in July 1980.

V. Observations

It was very apparent to me that if non-governmental agencies are to be welcomed into the debates on human rights in Africa, a concerted effort must be undertaken to establish a basis of operation in Africa. The view existed, whether appropriate or not, that Western-based NGO's simply could not understand the realities of political life in Africa without having a connection to the continent. I would thus urge the League to undertake efforts to develop affiliates there. I believe that Liberia, Senegal, Nigeria, and the states of East Africa would be hospitable to the establishment of such membership organizations.

As noted in the draft report some further liaison work with the OAU is envisioned to define the rules and procedures for participation by NGO's, and I request that the League undertake to ensure participation in these follow-up efforts.

The League could also manifest its interest in and commitment to the furtherance of human rights in Africa by sponsoring or participating in seminars concerned with various human rights issues confronting Africa. In this regard the League might contact UNESCO to determine how it might participate in the research and promotional activities involving human rights in Africa which it contemplates.

I wish to express my very deep personal gratitude to the International League for Human Rights for having had the opportunity to attend the seminar and for having had the honor to represent the League.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »