| HOME | SITEMAP | SEARCH | CONTACT | REPORTS | PRESS ARCHIVES |
|
The Need for Human Rights Benchmarks A Human Rights Watch and Afronet Memorandum The World Bank's Consultative Group Meeting on Zambia, Lusaka, July 16 to 18 |
|
|
Zambia, once promoted as a model for democracy in Africa, has in recent years been distinguished by a pattern of ongoing human rights abuses targeting the independent media and the political opposition. Human Rights Watch and Afronet continue to document human rights abuses affecting the independent media, political opposition groups and civil society groups. The slow progress of police reform is a further concern and there is little evidence of measures to halt the use of torture by the police. There are genuine grounds to fear that human rights abuse could dramatically increase as Zambia prepares for multiparty presidential and parliamentary elections in 2001. In the absence of strengthened safeguards, such abuses would undermine the chance of there being a level playing field for the electoral contest. Human Rights Watch and Afronet urge the Consultative Group:
The Consultative Group Meetings and Human Rights
The international community's efforts to press for improved human rights protection and governance have been of critical importance in defending human rights standards in Zambia. For the past two years, bilateral donors have linked Zambia's aid program to progress in economic reform and governance. The bilateral donors can encourage human rights improvements by maintaining governance and human rights performance benchmarks for the release of Balance of Payment support for 2000/2001. There is a well tried and successful record of using such performance benchmarks for Zambia. The World Bank postponed its Consultative Group meeting in December 1997 and told the government that it would only be held when the state of emergency was lifted. At the May 1998 Consultative Group meeting in Paris, donors pledged Balance of Payments support but on condition that Zambia adhere to specific benchmarks, including measures reflecting improved respect for human rights. In an unprecedented move for consultative group meetings, the World Bank's final press statements in 1998 and 1999 specifically mentioned human rights concerns. In May 1999, Zambia's cooperating partners in Paris at the World Bank Consultative Group meeting emphasized the immediate importance of good governance, including the protection of human rights, freedom of the press, fighting corruption, and institutional capacity building. Zambia's external partners disclosed plans to make available at least U.S.$240 million in balance of payment support, as well as an additional U.S. $390 million in project assistance, all to be based on Zambia's satisfactory economic and governance performance. They also agreed that the next Consultative Group meeting would be in Lusaka and that there would be four pre-meetings to assess Zambia's performance. The Zambian government produced a National Capacity Building Program for Good Governance prior to the May 1999 Paris meeting and promised its bilateral donors that it wanted to improve its rights record. The government promised many reforms, but gave no real sense of its priorities and no convincing demonstration of its commitment to good governance. As if to underscore the government's lack of transparency over this initiative, the good governance document only became public after the meeting. The credibility of the good governance document was also weakened by the statements of then finance minister Edith Nawakwi, who on her return from the Paris Consultative Group meeting to Lusaka attacked NGOs who had campaigned for improved human rights standards. The government-controlled print media quickly followed her example and criticized the Zambia Independent Monitoring Team (ZIMT) and Afronet for campaigning for conditions on the release of balance of payments support. This was not the last attack. On January 31, 2000 MMD chairperson for information and publicity Vernon Mwaanga warned that Afronet and ZIMT were a danger to democracy and could face deregistration if they continued "their irresponsible conduct."(1) On February 2, 2000, the minister of information and broadcasting services, Newstead Zimba, warned that the government would take "drastic action" against the Zambia Independent Media Association (ZIMA) and Afronet if they did not end their "betrayal" of Zambia. He said "David Simpson of ZIMA and Mwanajiti of Afronet are behaving like a government of their own or shadow cabinet. They have no mandate whatsoever to want to betray the government in a treacherous manner like the one they have engaged in except maybe the mandate from foreign donors who are directly sponsoring them." He continued: "This is a timely warning to ZIMA and Afronet to work with government in promoting democracy, human rights, and development. Anything other than this will be stretching government too far or else drastic action will be taken against them."(2) The April 1999 good governance document credibility was additionally weakened by the government's efforts later that year, in August 1999, to enact a draconian State Security Bill which would have created conditions amounting to a permanent state of emergency. The bill provided for a suspect to be detained without charge for fourteen days, with the period of detention subject to extension as many times as necessary with the authority of a magistrate. Only after stiff opposition from NGOs and back-bench members of parliament was the bill withdrawn. Early in May 2000, minister of legal affairs Vincent Malambo called a meeting with donors to report back on progress in implementing the government's National Capacity Building Program for Good Governance. Malambo presented a slightly revised document and also discussed the findings of four consultative meetings held in 1999 with the groups consulted on the National Capacity Building Program.(3) The report of the four consultative meeting has not been widely distributed but makes impressive reading.(4) Many of the fundamental human rights challenges that Zambia faces are recognized. The following are some of the key findings:
Minister Malambo met on June 19 with a number of NGOs to discuss their participation in the July consultative group meeting. A Steering Committee of twelve NGOs, including Afronet, the Jesuit Centre for Theological Reflection, and the Zambia Independent Monitoring Team (ZIMT) agreed to draft papers on debt, poverty, economics, governance and, political governance and gender which will be presented at the consultative group meeting. A National Forum of NGOs met in Lusaka on July 10 to agree on the final texts. A pre-consultative group meeting on governance issues will be held on July 16 at which NGOs have been invited to present their findings. The consultative group meeting will be held in Lusaka at the Mulungushi conference center on July 17 and 18. Human Rights Watch and Afronet in particular want to draw attention to three issues that should be priorities for action over the next year: freedom of assembly and association, freedom of expression, and action against torture. We recommend that the bilateral donors closely scrutinize the government's implementation of its promises to deal with these serious and recurring human rights abuses.(5) Freedom of Assembly and Association Under Zambia's Public Order Act, any group of citizens wishing to hold a public demonstration must notify the police seven days before the demonstration. However, the police have abused the law and arbitrarily determined when a gathering can or cannot take place. Breaches of the law's provisions on unlawful assembly carry a maximum sentence of seven years.(6) On May 7, 2000, Inspector-General Sailus Ngangula said that police would still continue to arrest people holding processions without permits since disregarding the Public Order Act could create anarchy in Zambia.(7) Opposition parties, NGOs and other civic interest groups have regularly been denied permission to assemble or had their meetings canceled on public security grounds. The ruling MMD, in contrast, continued to hold meetings, rallies, and pro-government demonstrations without permits.
Freedom of Expression In 1992, shortly after the MMD's election victory, the Ministry of Information appointed a Media Reform Committee to carry out an audit of Zambian laws affecting press freedom. Twenty-six laws were identified by the committee as inconsistent with freedom of expression. However, no action has been taken since then to implement the recommendations of the committee.(20) Attacks on freedom of expression by the Zambian authorities have continued since May 1999. The most important are:
Action Against Torture Teddy Nondo continued to serve as deputy director of the Drug Enforcement Commission despite accusations that he tortured suspects in 1997. The Human Rights Commission recommended, in its March 30, 1998 report on allegations of torture of detainees following the 1997 coup attempt, that officers accused of the offense of torture - including Nondo- be retired in the public interest but advised against instituting criminal proceedings. Article 15 of the Zambian Constitution forbids torture. After some foot dragging, the government withdrew the reservations it had entered upon becoming a party to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment on February 19, 1999. At the May 1999 Consultative Group meeting the Zambian government, was again urged to take swift and decisive action on alleged human rights violations associated with police interrogations and accusations of torture in the aftermath of the October 1997 coup attempt. A Commission of Inquiry headed by High Court Judge Japhet Banda began hearings in late 1999, following Banda's sentencing to death of fifty-nine of those accused in relation to the coup attempt. All those named in the Human Rights Commission torture report denied the charge during hearings. The Commission of Inquiry presented its completed report to President Chiluba in late July but the report's findings have not been made public. Reports of police torture continue. For example, on July 26, 1999 Makeni police detained and severely tortured Beatrice Nchimunya of John Laing Compound. Nchimunya was suspected of having stolen South African Rand 400 ($40). Records at the University Teaching Hospital, as signed by Dr. S.P. Lungu, indicate "multiple bruises and hematomas on the left and right shoulders, right sub-scapular area, left forearm and right thigh with laceration and left side of face." The doctor concluded that his findings were consistent with allegations that the patient was whipped with a sjambok (whip) by two police officers at Makeni police station. Although Nchimunya, accompanied by Afronet and Zambia Civic Education Association representatives, subsequently confronted the officers (later identified as Nyimbiri and Mfuzi), who refused to disclose their names saying only that the chief of Criminal Investigations at the station would be able to disclose their names. The chief of Criminal Investigations in turn refused to disclose the names of the two officers without seeking permission from Lusaka Division Commanding Officer, Bernard Mayonda. The names were eventually released, and in July 1999 police officers Nyimbiri and Mfuzi, accused of torturing Nchimunya, were arrested and charged with unlawful wounding. On September 13, 1999 Afronet sent a query to Bernard Mayonda and Police Public Relations Officer Alex Chilufya, inquiring into progress in the prosecution of the two officers implicated in the Nchimunya case had gone.(26) Police have released no information in this regard to date. 1. Post (Lusaka), February 1, 2000. 2. Ministry of Information and Broadcasting Services, "Press Release," February 2, 2000. 3. Th e substance is mostly the same as the "Good Governance"document presented to donors in April 1999 although there is some new text. The cover is the same although the original typed date (28 April 1999) has been crossed out and written over by hand with 14 April 2000.
4. Report of the Consultative Process with the Stakeholders Held on the National Capacity Building Program for Good
Governance for Zambia (Lusaka: Ministry of Legal Affairs, October 8, 1999).
5. See, Human Rights Watch, Memorandum to the Consultative Group Meeting on Zambia (Paris, May 27-28, 1999), www.hrw.org/press/1999/zambia-memo.htm; "Zambia: No Model for Democracy. Continuing Human Rights Violations," A Human Rights Watch Short Report, May 1998, vol.10, no.2 (A); Afronet, Zambia: Human Rights Report 1999 (Lusaka: Afronet, 1999).
6. The previous Public Order Act punished participants of illegal demonstrations with a maximum sentence of five years imprisonment; this was increased in February 1996 to seven years despite a landmark judgment by the Chief Justice in 1996, that the restrictions on public assembly were repressive, and that the law should be reformed (see, Christine Muundika and Seven Otfers V The People, 1996).
7. Times of Zambia (Lusaka), May 8, 2000.
8. Times of Zambia (Lusaka), January 14, 2000; Human Rights Watch interview with doctors, Lusaka, May 2000.
9. Ibid; Human Rights interview with police, May 2000.
10. Times of Zambia (Lusaka), January 18, 2000; Interview with UPND publicity and information chairperson Love Mtesa,
Lusaka, May 25, 2000.
11. Times of Zambia (Lusaka), January 18, 2000; Lawyers Nellie Mutti and Sakwiba Sikota, Lusaka, May 24 and 25, 2000.
12. Zambia Daily Mail (Lusaka), February 1, 2000.
13. Post (Lusaka), January 31, 2000.
14. Press Release, "Denial of Permits," HRC/PR/04/2000, February 4, 2000.
15. Human Rights Watch interview with police, May 24, 2000.
16. Ibid.
17. Afronet interviews, Lusaka, July 2000.
18. UPND press statement, "UPND Conemns [sic] MMD government for cancelling UPND rallies," June 17, 2000.
19. UPND press statement, "Denial of Police Permits in Sesheke," July 12, 2000.
20. Article 19, the Media Institute of Southern Africa and the Freedom of Expression Institute, Zambia (Media Law and Practice in Southern Africa Series, No.7, February 1998).
21. Human Rights Watch was present at this hearing at the High Court and observed the proceedings.
22. Interview with Alphonsius Hamachila, Lusaka, May 24, 2000.
23. Information provided by Ngande Mwanajiti Afronet's Excutive Director, Lusaka, May 24, 2000.
24. Letter from Ticklay to Human Rights Watch, February 2, 2000 and interview, London, June 23, 2000; Post (Lusaka)
December 28, 1999; Copies of deportation papers in Human Rights Watch's possession. Because of this deportation the Human Rights Commission called on the government to establish an independent Deportation and Immigration Appeals Tribunal. Interview with chair of Human Rights Commission, Lombe Chibesakunda, London, April 18, 2000. See also, Post (Lusaka), January 11, 2000. Ticklay's wife, Aisha, wants to join her husband in Britain and is seeking termination benefits from her employee of twenty years, the state-run ZESCO. However, despite many requests she has received no reply from management. The use of exile or deportation as a tool to silence critical voices has been used before by the MMD government. (See, Amnesty International, Zambia. Forcible Exile to Supress Dissent, Afr 63/04/97, November 13, 1997).
25. Information provided by ZIMA; Post (Lusaka), May 12, 2000.
26. Afronet, Zambia: Human Rights Report 1999 (Lusaka: Afronet, 1999) pp.41-42.
|