By Judy H. Fitzpatrick
Daily Herald
Sint Maarten
PHILIPSBURG--The Netherlands Antilles flag was lowered in front of the Courthouse at the stroke of midnight Saturday (10th October 2010) and the St. Maarten flag was hoisted to mark symbolically the end of one era and the birth of new Country St. Maarten, rounding off a decade of lobbying, negotiations and agreements.
The folded Netherlands Antilles flag was presented to the St. Maarten Museum to preserve as a symbol of the dismantled Netherlands Antilles.
With the St. Maarten song playing in the background, roars of applause rang out from the crowd that gathered to witness the ceremony when the St. Maarten flag, designed by Roselle “Rosie” Richardson in 1985, was hoisted. This was followed by fireworks and a celebratory mood as officials embraced and congratulated each other on St. Maarten’s increased autonomy.
The national anthem of the Netherlands, the Wilhelmus, the anthem of the Netherlands Antilles, and the St. Maarten song had been played earlier in the ceremony.
Calling the occasion “momentous” and “historical,” former Acting Lt. Governor Reynold Groeneveldt, who was appointed Acting Governor on Sunday, lauded the “dignified manner” in which country status had been achieved without violence – a point echoed by Dutch Justice Minister Ernst Hirsch Ballin during the first Parliament meeting on Sunday.
“This process was always conducted in a dignified and businesslike manner. The negotiations were not easy, but never at any time was there any need for revolt, violence or war, like in some other countries, when it came to the exercise of the right to self-determination by the people of the Caribbean part of the Kingdom,” Groeneveldt told the gathering.
In attendance were local dignitaries, representatives of the United People’s Party/Democratic Party coalition government and the National Alliance, and overseas guests including Hirsch Ballin, Caribbean Community Caricom Deputy Secretary General Lolita Applewhaite, Anguilla’s Chief Minister Hubert Hughes and Minister Walcott Richardson and spouse, and Collectivité of French St. Martin President Frantz Gumbs and St. Martin Préfet Jacques Simmonet.
“Our country has become a beacon of hope for persons from many parts of the world and we must all be very proud of the Netherlands Antilles and what it has meant for us as a people. Nevertheless, the time has come for us to make new arrangements that will go into effect shortly.
“As we embark on another stage in the pursuit of full internal self-government within the Kingdom, we hope that we can continue to count on the support of all the partners in the Kingdom and we look forward to closer ties and more cooperation in mutual benefit of our respective peoples,” Groeneveldt said.
“In 1942, Her Majesty Queen Wilhelmina announced in her speech from London that at the end of World War II the Kingdom would embark on creating a new constitutional order within the Kingdom. After several years of negotiations the Statuut was adopted creating a Kingdom consisting of the Netherlands, the Netherlands Antilles and Suriname.
“Today we are 50 years later, and after much deliberation and negotiation the Kingdom again is being re-formed. During the last 50 years we can be proud of the achievements. As a Country the Netherlands Antilles, we have experienced years of mainly prosperity and growth for our people and also some years in which austerity measures had to taken.” He asked Minister Hirsch Ballin to convey St. Maarten’s “sincere appreciation” to Her Majesty Queen Beatrix and the Dutch government “for the excellent cooperation.”
He also thanked the people of St. Maarten and all those who had served the country the Netherlands Antilles, as well as members of the previous governments, who he said “have worked diligently in the preparation of the new constitutional order, and all those persons who attended the countless meetings and sat for hours and days at the negotiating tables.
“Your efforts and valuable contributions are very much appreciated. As the last [Acting] Lt. Governor performing my final official duties, permit me to say farewell to the Netherlands Antilles and entrust the care and responsibility for the people of this great island nation to the Governor and the government of Country St. Maarten.
“I pray that the people of the new island nation will experience prosperity beyond measure and that our difficult days may be but few, that this country will continue to be the most favourite place on earth for many, and that the people of this country will continue to find special favour with God and be protected from all disasters.”
The ceremony was preceded by a cocktail reception for dignitaries and invited guests at Holland House Beach Hotel. Reporters and photographers were barred from covering the reception.
About an hour before midnight, dignitaries walked from Holland House to the Courthouse, where a large tent had been set up. The Courthouse was decorated in the colours of the St. Maarten flag for the occasion.
St. Maarten Flag
The St. Maarten flag was adopted in June 1985 and was officially hoisted for the first time in front of the Government Administration Building in the same year. The colour red in the flag represents solidarity and courage; while white stands for peace and friendliness and blue represents the environment, such as the skies, beaches and seas.
The coat of arms in the flag depicts the Court House in Philipsburg; the island’s national flower the yellow sage and St. Maarten’s national bird the Brown Pelican in flight with the sun as its backdrop. It also has a silhouette of the border monument and the words "Semper pro grediens” (latin for ‘ever moving forward’) towards the bottom.
16 October 2010
13 October 2010
VANUATU MUM ON WEST PAPUA AT U.N. GENERAL ASSEMBLY
Radio New Zealand International
VANUATU MUM ON WEST PAPUA AT UNITED NATIONS ASSEMBLY
Parliament instructed rights issue be raised
WELLINGTON, New Zealand (RNZI, Oct. 4, 2010) - A spokesman for Vanuatu’s Prime Minister Edward Natapei has confirmed he did not raise the issue of the status of Indonesia’s Papua last week while attending the United Nations General Assembly.
In June, Vanuatu’s parliament unanimously passed a motion, sponsored by Mr. Natapei, to raise issues around the status of Indonesian territories of New Guinea at the UN.
Under the motion, Vanuatu was to request General Assembly support for the International Court of Justice to provide an advisory opinion on the process in which the former Netherlands New Guinea was ceded to Indonesia in the 1960s.
A spokesman for Mr. Natapei said the Prime Minister feels the Papua issue is very sensitive and that it was not the right time to raise it at the UN level. He said it is thought that the issue should be raised at the Melanesian Spearhead Group leaders level first.
However, some MPs say that Mr. Natapei could be held in contempt of Parliament for failing to follow through on the motion.
VANUATU MUM ON WEST PAPUA AT UNITED NATIONS ASSEMBLY
Parliament instructed rights issue be raised
WELLINGTON, New Zealand (RNZI, Oct. 4, 2010) - A spokesman for Vanuatu’s Prime Minister Edward Natapei has confirmed he did not raise the issue of the status of Indonesia’s Papua last week while attending the United Nations General Assembly.
In June, Vanuatu’s parliament unanimously passed a motion, sponsored by Mr. Natapei, to raise issues around the status of Indonesian territories of New Guinea at the UN.
Under the motion, Vanuatu was to request General Assembly support for the International Court of Justice to provide an advisory opinion on the process in which the former Netherlands New Guinea was ceded to Indonesia in the 1960s.
A spokesman for Mr. Natapei said the Prime Minister feels the Papua issue is very sensitive and that it was not the right time to raise it at the UN level. He said it is thought that the issue should be raised at the Melanesian Spearhead Group leaders level first.
However, some MPs say that Mr. Natapei could be held in contempt of Parliament for failing to follow through on the motion.
12 October 2010
Mixed Emotions at very last Antillean Parliament meeting
Dismantling of Five-Island Autonomous Country Complete
by Suzanne Koelega
Daily Herald
Sint Maarten
Monday, 11 October 2010 00:03 .WILLEMSTAD--Feelings of joy and sadness blended at the last meeting of the Antillean Parliament in Willemstad on Saturday morning. Some speakers said they felt the pain of saying goodbye to Country the Netherlands Antilles, while others were happy to enter a new era with the new Countries Curaçao and St. Maarten.
In her last public speech as Prime Minister of the Netherlands Antilles, Emily de Jongh-Elhage spoke of five stars going their own way and five new stars being born. She and several other speakers said saying goodbye to Country the Netherlands Antilles was hard.
Crown Prince Willem-Alexander and Princess Máxima attended the last meeting of the Antillean Parliament, as well as Aruba's Governor Fredis Refunjol and Prime Minister Mike Eman, Dutch caretaker Minister of Defence Eimert van Middelkoop, State Secretary of Home Affairs and Kingdom Relations Ank Bijleveld-Schouten, Chairpersons of the Dutch First and Second Chambers René van der Linden and Gerdi Verbeet, and Chairpersons of the Permanent Committees of Antillean and Aruban Affairs of the First and Second Chambers Marijke Linthorst and Willibrord van Beek.
"Saying farewell is not easy and we will miss each other," said De Jongh-Elhage, who added that the fact that the Netherlands Antilles would cease to exist Saturday midnight would "touch many of us deeply," as it ended an era of being together under one constitutional entity.
"The Netherlands Antilles will cease to exist and a new future will start for Curaçao, St. Maarten, Bonaire, Saba and St. Eustatius. I wish all the citizens of each of the five islands a wonderful future and I am convinced our friendship will never cease to exist and we will keep sustaining each other based on mutual understanding," De Jongh-Elhage said.
Member of Parliament (MP) Glenn Sulvaran of Curaçao's PAR party said saying goodbye was always hard, especially because the islands had been through so much together, taking decisions in the Antillean Parliament. "We wipe off a tear today. Thank you, Netherlands Antilles, for everything that you have done for us," he said. He said there was also a reason for joy with the birth of Countries Curaçao and St. Maarten.
MP Ramonsito Booi created a light moment in the solemn meeting when he gave a spin to the new constitutional status of Bonaire, St. Eustatius and Saba as so-called "public entities" of the Netherlands. He said that actually the Netherlands was becoming part of the Dutch Caribbean, with Kralendijk as the new capital of the Netherlands.
In a more serious tone, Booi said the people of Bonaire weren't and didn't want to be "parasites" living off the good facilities of the rich Netherlands. "We want to work hard to grow and develop," he said.
Eunice Eisden of Curaçao's MAN party said saying goodbye didn't have to hurt. "Country Curaçao marks a new step in the emancipation process of our people. It is a new chance to create our future," she said, wishing the other islands also much success in their endeavours.
Helmin Wiels of Curaçao's Pueblo Soberano party referred to the dismantling of the Netherlands Antilles and the launching of Country Curaçao as "closing one cycle to start another one." He said his party would continue the struggle to reach "the ultimate cycle," independence.
Long-serving MP Faroe Metry of Curaçao's PNP party said the Antillean Parliament hadn't made much use of the right of amendment, to revise draft legislation. He called on the Parliaments of the new Countries Curaçao and St. Maarten not to "rubberstamp" anything and to be critical.
Carlos Monk of Curaçao's Niun Paso Atras party passionately called for Curaçao's independence and almost shouted when he said that freedom of the people was a sacred right. Many in the audience didn't appreciate his manner and many abstained from clapping when he finished his speech.
Gerrit Schotte captured the atmosphere in Parliament well by stating that Saturday was "a day with many emotions." He said he was looking forward to the next day, when Curaçao would be a country. He said the islands were splitting up, but the solid ties remained. Schotte called for closer social and cultural ties between the three Dutch Caribbean countries Curaçao, Aruba and St. Maarten. He suggested establishing representatives on each other's islands in the form of a Curaçao House and St. Maarten House.
Representatives of the Windward Islands who were supposed to address the gathering, Members of Parliament Rodolphe Samuel of the National Alliance St. Maarten, Will Johnson of WIPM Saba and Reginald Zaandam, an independent MP from St. Eustatius, were absent. No reason was given for their absence.
Before officially closing the last meeting, Parliament Chairman Pedro Atacho gave a short overview of the history of the Antillean Parliament and mentioned the names of all MPs of the last Parliament. He wished all entities Godspeed, after which the Antillean anthem was played, with many in the audience softly singing along.
by Suzanne Koelega
Daily Herald
Sint Maarten
Monday, 11 October 2010 00:03 .WILLEMSTAD--Feelings of joy and sadness blended at the last meeting of the Antillean Parliament in Willemstad on Saturday morning. Some speakers said they felt the pain of saying goodbye to Country the Netherlands Antilles, while others were happy to enter a new era with the new Countries Curaçao and St. Maarten.
In her last public speech as Prime Minister of the Netherlands Antilles, Emily de Jongh-Elhage spoke of five stars going their own way and five new stars being born. She and several other speakers said saying goodbye to Country the Netherlands Antilles was hard.
Crown Prince Willem-Alexander and Princess Máxima attended the last meeting of the Antillean Parliament, as well as Aruba's Governor Fredis Refunjol and Prime Minister Mike Eman, Dutch caretaker Minister of Defence Eimert van Middelkoop, State Secretary of Home Affairs and Kingdom Relations Ank Bijleveld-Schouten, Chairpersons of the Dutch First and Second Chambers René van der Linden and Gerdi Verbeet, and Chairpersons of the Permanent Committees of Antillean and Aruban Affairs of the First and Second Chambers Marijke Linthorst and Willibrord van Beek.
"Saying farewell is not easy and we will miss each other," said De Jongh-Elhage, who added that the fact that the Netherlands Antilles would cease to exist Saturday midnight would "touch many of us deeply," as it ended an era of being together under one constitutional entity.
"The Netherlands Antilles will cease to exist and a new future will start for Curaçao, St. Maarten, Bonaire, Saba and St. Eustatius. I wish all the citizens of each of the five islands a wonderful future and I am convinced our friendship will never cease to exist and we will keep sustaining each other based on mutual understanding," De Jongh-Elhage said.
Member of Parliament (MP) Glenn Sulvaran of Curaçao's PAR party said saying goodbye was always hard, especially because the islands had been through so much together, taking decisions in the Antillean Parliament. "We wipe off a tear today. Thank you, Netherlands Antilles, for everything that you have done for us," he said. He said there was also a reason for joy with the birth of Countries Curaçao and St. Maarten.
MP Ramonsito Booi created a light moment in the solemn meeting when he gave a spin to the new constitutional status of Bonaire, St. Eustatius and Saba as so-called "public entities" of the Netherlands. He said that actually the Netherlands was becoming part of the Dutch Caribbean, with Kralendijk as the new capital of the Netherlands.
In a more serious tone, Booi said the people of Bonaire weren't and didn't want to be "parasites" living off the good facilities of the rich Netherlands. "We want to work hard to grow and develop," he said.
Eunice Eisden of Curaçao's MAN party said saying goodbye didn't have to hurt. "Country Curaçao marks a new step in the emancipation process of our people. It is a new chance to create our future," she said, wishing the other islands also much success in their endeavours.
Helmin Wiels of Curaçao's Pueblo Soberano party referred to the dismantling of the Netherlands Antilles and the launching of Country Curaçao as "closing one cycle to start another one." He said his party would continue the struggle to reach "the ultimate cycle," independence.
Long-serving MP Faroe Metry of Curaçao's PNP party said the Antillean Parliament hadn't made much use of the right of amendment, to revise draft legislation. He called on the Parliaments of the new Countries Curaçao and St. Maarten not to "rubberstamp" anything and to be critical.
Carlos Monk of Curaçao's Niun Paso Atras party passionately called for Curaçao's independence and almost shouted when he said that freedom of the people was a sacred right. Many in the audience didn't appreciate his manner and many abstained from clapping when he finished his speech.
Gerrit Schotte captured the atmosphere in Parliament well by stating that Saturday was "a day with many emotions." He said he was looking forward to the next day, when Curaçao would be a country. He said the islands were splitting up, but the solid ties remained. Schotte called for closer social and cultural ties between the three Dutch Caribbean countries Curaçao, Aruba and St. Maarten. He suggested establishing representatives on each other's islands in the form of a Curaçao House and St. Maarten House.
Representatives of the Windward Islands who were supposed to address the gathering, Members of Parliament Rodolphe Samuel of the National Alliance St. Maarten, Will Johnson of WIPM Saba and Reginald Zaandam, an independent MP from St. Eustatius, were absent. No reason was given for their absence.
Before officially closing the last meeting, Parliament Chairman Pedro Atacho gave a short overview of the history of the Antillean Parliament and mentioned the names of all MPs of the last Parliament. He wished all entities Godspeed, after which the Antillean anthem was played, with many in the audience softly singing along.
11 October 2010
U.N. Special Political Committee Adopts 12 Decolonisation Resolutions
Decolonisation has gone "From Unfinished Agenda to Unattended One," Warns CARICOM.
Sixty-fifth General Assembly
Fourth Committee
7th Meeting (AM)
Fourth Committee Sends 12 Draft Texts to General Assembly on Decolonization,
Including Request for Third International Decade, Concludes Debate on Topic
'United Nations Decolonization Effort in ‘Virtual Inertia'
The Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization), guided by the fundamental and universal principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter, would have the General Assembly declare the period 2011-2020 as the Third International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism, by one of 12 draft texts approved today, capping its general debate on decolonization.
That draft, which also calls upon Member States to intensify their efforts to continue to implement the plan of action for the Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism and use those efforts as the basis for a plan of action for the next Decade, was approved by a recorded vote of 130 in favour and 3 against (Israel, United States, United Kingdom), with 20 abstentions.
The Committee also proposed, in a resolution on the Fiftieth anniversary of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, that the Assembly urge Member States to do their utmost to promote effective measures for the full and speedy implementation of the Declaration in all Non-Self-Governing Territories to which the Declaration applied.
Also by that text, similarly approved by a recorded vote of 150 in favour and 3 against (United States, United Kingdom, Israel) and no abstentions, the Assembly would urge the administering Powers and other Member States to ensure that the activities of foreign economic and other interests in colonial Territories did not run counter to the interests of the inhabitants of those Territories and did not impede the implementation of the Declaration.
The representative of the United Kingdom, explaining his delegation’s opposition to both those texts, said the proposals for the Third International Decade and the Fiftieth anniversary of the Decolonization Declaration were “unacceptable”, as the texts failed to recognize the progress that had been made in the relationship between the United Kingdom and its territories. With regard to the text relating to the Third International decade, his delegation strongly considered the “Special Committee of 24” to be outdated, and believed that the United Nations should devote its resources to more urgent issues.
Five other drafts also required recorded votes for passage. Those texts were on economic and other activities which affect the interests of the peoples of the Non-Self-Governing Territories; and on implementation of the (decolonisation) Declaration by the specialized agencies and the international institutions associated with the United Nations.
Three resolutions and one draft decision on four of the 16 remaining Non-Self-Governing Territories were approved without a vote, as was a resolution on offers by Member States of study and training facilities for inhabitants of Non-Self-Governing Territories. An omnibus resolution on the questions of American Samoa, Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Guam, Montserrat, Pitcairn, Saint Helena, Turks and Caicos Islands, and the United States Virgin Islands was postponed until a later date.
Prior to consideration of the drafts, the Committee wrapped up its general debate on decolonization, begun on 4 October. Jamaica’s representative Ambassador Raymond Wolfe, speaking on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), said it was not so long ago that each of the 14 States in that group had been colonies, having since been decolonized with the United Nations support. However, in recent years, the work of the United Nations remained in a state of “virtual inertia” and was devolving from an “unfinished agenda” to an unattended one.
He went on to say that the United Nations stood at a historical crossroads. While there was a reaffirmation of decolonization in statements and resolutions, this was insufficient if the corresponding mandates were not operationalized.
Zambia’s representative said that it was regrettable that the process of decolonization was still incomplete, leaving the people of the Non-Self-Governing Territories to endure suffering. He urged parties to continue engaging in dialogue in order to achieve a just, lasting and mutually acceptable solution, and expressed the hope that the Organization’s efforts would accelerate the process leading up to self-determination, especially by the people of Western Sahara.
Also speaking to the conflict over Western Sahara, the representative of Algeria said the exercise of the right of self-determination was a permanent axis of his country’s foreign policy. Faithful to its commitments to Africa, he reaffirmed Algeria’s “brotherly solidarity” and pledged support to the inalienable right to self-determination, such as through Security Council resolution 1754 (2007) which aimed to re-launch negotiations to end the impasse and promote dialogue in Western Sahara.
While the differences that had undermined the first four sets of formal negotiations were widely known, Algeria’s speaker welcomed the re-launch of informal negotiations, as long as the parties ascribed to a fair, lasting and mutually acceptable solution. Participating in formal and informal talks, Algeria was fully aware of its responsibilities to the people in the region and in recognition that peace was in everyone’s self-interest. He reiterated his support for expansion of confidence-building measures, as the building of a prosperous Western Sahara was part and parcel of its historical fate.
The representative of Morocco said that prior to submitting its autonomy plan to the Security Council three years ago, Morocco had ensured the plan’s “national legitimacy” by involving representatives of the population and the entire political spectrum in its drafting. Still, he said Algeria and the Polisario persisted in their “business as usual” attitude, putting forth a whole gamut of subterfuges to undermine a fragile and difficult negotiating process.
The Maghreb needed Morocco, just as it needed Algeria, he stressed. The united Maghreb was grounded on respect for the territorial integrity of all, reconciliation, and a sincere commitment to build on a Maghreb edifice that was strong, politically supportive, and capable of taking its rightful place. “We reach out to our Algerian brothers and have made the strategic choice of negotiation to achieve this common future,” he said.
Also speaking in the debate were the representatives of Kenya, India, Libya, South Africa, Ecuador and Uganda.
During consideration of the various draft texts, the representatives Argentina, Belgium (on behalf of the European Union), Fiji, Saint Lucia, and Bolivia spoke in explanation of position.
The detailed press release can be read by clicking here.
Sixty-fifth General Assembly
Fourth Committee
7th Meeting (AM)
Fourth Committee Sends 12 Draft Texts to General Assembly on Decolonization,
Including Request for Third International Decade, Concludes Debate on Topic
'United Nations Decolonization Effort in ‘Virtual Inertia'
The Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization), guided by the fundamental and universal principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter, would have the General Assembly declare the period 2011-2020 as the Third International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism, by one of 12 draft texts approved today, capping its general debate on decolonization.
That draft, which also calls upon Member States to intensify their efforts to continue to implement the plan of action for the Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism and use those efforts as the basis for a plan of action for the next Decade, was approved by a recorded vote of 130 in favour and 3 against (Israel, United States, United Kingdom), with 20 abstentions.
The Committee also proposed, in a resolution on the Fiftieth anniversary of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, that the Assembly urge Member States to do their utmost to promote effective measures for the full and speedy implementation of the Declaration in all Non-Self-Governing Territories to which the Declaration applied.
Also by that text, similarly approved by a recorded vote of 150 in favour and 3 against (United States, United Kingdom, Israel) and no abstentions, the Assembly would urge the administering Powers and other Member States to ensure that the activities of foreign economic and other interests in colonial Territories did not run counter to the interests of the inhabitants of those Territories and did not impede the implementation of the Declaration.
The representative of the United Kingdom, explaining his delegation’s opposition to both those texts, said the proposals for the Third International Decade and the Fiftieth anniversary of the Decolonization Declaration were “unacceptable”, as the texts failed to recognize the progress that had been made in the relationship between the United Kingdom and its territories. With regard to the text relating to the Third International decade, his delegation strongly considered the “Special Committee of 24” to be outdated, and believed that the United Nations should devote its resources to more urgent issues.
Five other drafts also required recorded votes for passage. Those texts were on economic and other activities which affect the interests of the peoples of the Non-Self-Governing Territories; and on implementation of the (decolonisation) Declaration by the specialized agencies and the international institutions associated with the United Nations.
Three resolutions and one draft decision on four of the 16 remaining Non-Self-Governing Territories were approved without a vote, as was a resolution on offers by Member States of study and training facilities for inhabitants of Non-Self-Governing Territories. An omnibus resolution on the questions of American Samoa, Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Guam, Montserrat, Pitcairn, Saint Helena, Turks and Caicos Islands, and the United States Virgin Islands was postponed until a later date.
Prior to consideration of the drafts, the Committee wrapped up its general debate on decolonization, begun on 4 October. Jamaica’s representative Ambassador Raymond Wolfe, speaking on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), said it was not so long ago that each of the 14 States in that group had been colonies, having since been decolonized with the United Nations support. However, in recent years, the work of the United Nations remained in a state of “virtual inertia” and was devolving from an “unfinished agenda” to an unattended one.
He went on to say that the United Nations stood at a historical crossroads. While there was a reaffirmation of decolonization in statements and resolutions, this was insufficient if the corresponding mandates were not operationalized.
Zambia’s representative said that it was regrettable that the process of decolonization was still incomplete, leaving the people of the Non-Self-Governing Territories to endure suffering. He urged parties to continue engaging in dialogue in order to achieve a just, lasting and mutually acceptable solution, and expressed the hope that the Organization’s efforts would accelerate the process leading up to self-determination, especially by the people of Western Sahara.
Also speaking to the conflict over Western Sahara, the representative of Algeria said the exercise of the right of self-determination was a permanent axis of his country’s foreign policy. Faithful to its commitments to Africa, he reaffirmed Algeria’s “brotherly solidarity” and pledged support to the inalienable right to self-determination, such as through Security Council resolution 1754 (2007) which aimed to re-launch negotiations to end the impasse and promote dialogue in Western Sahara.
While the differences that had undermined the first four sets of formal negotiations were widely known, Algeria’s speaker welcomed the re-launch of informal negotiations, as long as the parties ascribed to a fair, lasting and mutually acceptable solution. Participating in formal and informal talks, Algeria was fully aware of its responsibilities to the people in the region and in recognition that peace was in everyone’s self-interest. He reiterated his support for expansion of confidence-building measures, as the building of a prosperous Western Sahara was part and parcel of its historical fate.
The representative of Morocco said that prior to submitting its autonomy plan to the Security Council three years ago, Morocco had ensured the plan’s “national legitimacy” by involving representatives of the population and the entire political spectrum in its drafting. Still, he said Algeria and the Polisario persisted in their “business as usual” attitude, putting forth a whole gamut of subterfuges to undermine a fragile and difficult negotiating process.
The Maghreb needed Morocco, just as it needed Algeria, he stressed. The united Maghreb was grounded on respect for the territorial integrity of all, reconciliation, and a sincere commitment to build on a Maghreb edifice that was strong, politically supportive, and capable of taking its rightful place. “We reach out to our Algerian brothers and have made the strategic choice of negotiation to achieve this common future,” he said.
Also speaking in the debate were the representatives of Kenya, India, Libya, South Africa, Ecuador and Uganda.
During consideration of the various draft texts, the representatives Argentina, Belgium (on behalf of the European Union), Fiji, Saint Lucia, and Bolivia spoke in explanation of position.
The detailed press release can be read by clicking here.
10 October 2010
Turks & Caicos Calls for United Nations Oversight after British Rule Extended
Turks & Caicos Islands Leaders Call for UN Monitoring Team
Your Excellency Chairman Chipaziwa, Committee Members, to you we extend our greetings, I am Alpha Gibbs and I appear here today on behalf of the Turks and Caicos Forum as a follow-up to our appearance on June 22, of this year before the Committee of Twenty Four. Accompanying me at this hearing is Mr. Benjamin Roberts, who served as our designated spokesperson at the June 22 appearance.
Our continuing concern, now, as it was in June, is the blatant unchecked, unmonitored failures of our Administering Power, the United Kingdom in the discharge of its responsibilities for the Non-Self Governing Territory of the Turks and Caicos Islands.
On August 14, 2009 The United Kingdom through an Order in Council suspended significant and critical areas of the duly adopted Constitution of the Turks and Caicos Islands. With this suspension, the following assaults on the Fundamental Human Rights of the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands were unleashed.
1) The duly elected representatives of the people were removed from office.
2) The Parliament was disbanded.
3) The native born Deputy Governor was removed from office and no replacement has been hired.
4) A UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office career civil servant was appointed Governor with the responsibility to administer the governmental and administrative affairs of the Territory. This Governor is now attempting to execute the total and combined functions previously administered by a Premier and six cabinet ministers of government.
5) Alien consultants are hired into every Government Department and are not engaged in the mentoring or in the capacity building of the talent pool of the native born salaried civil servants. Instead these consultants work in isolated pools without interaction of local counterparts.
6) An alien consultant has been hired to develop recommendations for Constitutional and Electoral Reforms in the Turks and Caicos.
7) On that fateful date on August 14, 2009, the Governor arbitrarily announced that July 2011, was established as the date for the return to parliamentary democracy in Turks and Caicos.
8) One year one month and one week later on September 21, 2010, Henry Bellingham, the UK Parliamentary Secretary of State and Minister for the Overseas Territories announced that elections in Turks and Caicos will not be held until the following preconditions are met:
a) Public finances are firmly set on the path of a balanced budget within three years.
b) More work is undertaken to stabilize the economy.
c) Preparations are made for elections in light of the outcome of the constitutional and electoral
reform process.
d) The reform process is embedded.
e) Further progress is made in the criminal investigations recommended by the Commission of Inquiry.
The above preconditions are arguably quite vague and highly subjective and not sufficiently defined so as to be measurable or quantifiable in any manner. As yet there has not been a publication of `The Reforms' nor a timetable for their implementation. The criminal trials are not expected to commence until October of 2011.
Your Excellency,
We contend that the attainment of a balanced budget and progress along the pathway of a vibrant economy are noble objectives, but the achievement of either or both of these objectives are not and will never be acceptable reasons for the disenfranchisement of an entire people. The attainment of the stated random and ill defined objectives is not an acceptable reason for the suspension of constitutional democracy.
The declaration by Henry Bellingham is in direct contradiction of UN Declaration 1514 (XV) of December 1960 and constitutes a denial of the fundamental human rights of the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands. Declaration 1514 (XV) object 3 declares that `Inadequacy of political, economic, social or educational preparedness should never serve as a pretext for delaying independence' In our case we take leave to substitute the word independence with the phrase parliamentary democracy.
Your Excellency,
We herein request, that this Fourth Committee inquire of and demand of your member State, the United Kingdom, an explanation of their assault on the human rights of the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands and further require of the United Kingdom, that it present to the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands a timetable for the development and implementation of a meaningful and defined plan with objective benchmarks and measurable milestones for the return of parliamentary democracy to the Turks and Caicos Islands; and that the development of such plans shall incorporate the expressed and informed wishes of the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands.
Your Excellency
On November 22, 1988, the UN General Assembly adopted resolution 43/47 entitled "International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism" and part of that resolution in Part II paragraph 7 reads: `The United Nations, in cooperation with the Administering Powers, should ensure that all acts of self determination are preceded by adequate and unbiased campaigns of political education.' We do declare that we have never witnessed any acts of political education executed by the Administering Power in the Turks and Caicos Islands.
We contend that during this period of direct rule by the Administering Power, therein lies an ideal opportunity during which time unbiased political education can occur. Should this unbiased political education occur, the process of electoral reform and the subsequent retention and sustainability of such reforms would be greatly enhanced and native born parliamentarians and administrators will have an opportunity to be better prepared for their eventual roles as representatives of the people.
The United Nations On December 8, 2000 declared the period 2001 through 2010 the Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism and we in the Turks and Caicos Islands in the twilight of this decade are currently made to feel as if we are being re-colonized by the United Kingdom.
The native born population are experiencing a state of siege and heightened frustration and have developed the fear that their rights and their ability to control their destiny is under assault and will be further attacked by the recommendations of the alien Consultant for Constitutional and Electoral Reform. This fear has its foundation in one of the early recommendations of the consultant, which states that non-citizens of the Turks and Caicos Islands should be granted the right to vote, merely on the basis of length of residency within the Territory. This recommendation, Your Excellency, is another example of the disregard for the fundamental human rights of the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands.
Your Excellency,
Section III paragraph 10 of the November 22, 1998 resolution goes on to state:
`Administering Powers should take the necessary measures to promote the political, economic, social cultural and educational advancement of the peoples of the Non-Self¬Governing Territories thereby facilitating their exercise of the right to self-determination and should continue to provide the United Nations with information in accordance with Article 73 (e) of the Charter of the United Nations.'
We contend that the Administering Power of the Turks and Caicos has failed in meeting this recommended action. The UK has not only failed in advancing the Territory but has also failed in its oversight responsibility.
The prior Constitution of the Turks and Caicos and the recommendations for a new Constitution gives excessive powers to the UK appointed Governor. The Governor's office has responsibility for `good governance and oversight' however the immediate past Governor failed miserably in this regard and as we know, this past Governor has not been included as a subject for inquiry, as has been the lot of the native born elected political leaders, who will likely become the subject of criminal proceedings.
We will in no way offer an excuse for any party or entity but we decry the apparent inequity in the application of judicial and administrative corrections. It is our contention that the UK should launch an Inquiry into the failures of the responsible officers of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the prior Governor as it relates to the discharge of their responsibilities for the Turks and Caicos Islands.
After four centuries of neglect and disinterest the UK seems to be taking the approach that it can in a mere twenty-four months design and gift wrap for the Turks and Caicos a perfect set of reforms and policies which will transform the Territory into a well run democracy, free of corruption and enjoying balanced budgets into perpetuity. This is all to be achieved while excluding the native born people of the Turks and Caicos. Islands from any involvement in the development and design of the reforms.
We cannot conceptualize how any reform so designed and formulated is expected to be sustainable by the existing civil service and known political leadership, if they are not intricately engaged in its design and development. The current approach by the UK leaves us to speculate that part of the `reform plan' is the displacement of the native born population from its prior position of political leadership and supplant it with non-native groups.
In 1999, The UK published a White Paper entitled Progress through Partnership for the Overseas Territories. We see no evidence of a partnership arrangement in the current approach.
We request that the United Nations through its various Organs and Committees establish a monitoring team to provide some oversight and hold the UK accountable to its obligations to the Non-Self Governing Territory of the Turks and Caicos Islands. Without such oversight, we fear that our rights will be restricted, our people marginalized and our heritage lost.
We thank you for the opportunity to present our Petition.
Statement of the Turks and Caicos Forum
Presented to the United Nations Special Political and Decolonisation Committee
(Fourth Committee)
delivered by Alpha Gibbs
5th October 2010
EmaiI: TCForum2001@gmail.com
Your Excellency Chairman Chipaziwa, Committee Members, to you we extend our greetings, I am Alpha Gibbs and I appear here today on behalf of the Turks and Caicos Forum as a follow-up to our appearance on June 22, of this year before the Committee of Twenty Four. Accompanying me at this hearing is Mr. Benjamin Roberts, who served as our designated spokesperson at the June 22 appearance.
Our continuing concern, now, as it was in June, is the blatant unchecked, unmonitored failures of our Administering Power, the United Kingdom in the discharge of its responsibilities for the Non-Self Governing Territory of the Turks and Caicos Islands.
On August 14, 2009 The United Kingdom through an Order in Council suspended significant and critical areas of the duly adopted Constitution of the Turks and Caicos Islands. With this suspension, the following assaults on the Fundamental Human Rights of the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands were unleashed.
1) The duly elected representatives of the people were removed from office.
2) The Parliament was disbanded.
3) The native born Deputy Governor was removed from office and no replacement has been hired.
4) A UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office career civil servant was appointed Governor with the responsibility to administer the governmental and administrative affairs of the Territory. This Governor is now attempting to execute the total and combined functions previously administered by a Premier and six cabinet ministers of government.
5) Alien consultants are hired into every Government Department and are not engaged in the mentoring or in the capacity building of the talent pool of the native born salaried civil servants. Instead these consultants work in isolated pools without interaction of local counterparts.
6) An alien consultant has been hired to develop recommendations for Constitutional and Electoral Reforms in the Turks and Caicos.
7) On that fateful date on August 14, 2009, the Governor arbitrarily announced that July 2011, was established as the date for the return to parliamentary democracy in Turks and Caicos.
8) One year one month and one week later on September 21, 2010, Henry Bellingham, the UK Parliamentary Secretary of State and Minister for the Overseas Territories announced that elections in Turks and Caicos will not be held until the following preconditions are met:
a) Public finances are firmly set on the path of a balanced budget within three years.
b) More work is undertaken to stabilize the economy.
c) Preparations are made for elections in light of the outcome of the constitutional and electoral
reform process.
d) The reform process is embedded.
e) Further progress is made in the criminal investigations recommended by the Commission of Inquiry.
The above preconditions are arguably quite vague and highly subjective and not sufficiently defined so as to be measurable or quantifiable in any manner. As yet there has not been a publication of `The Reforms' nor a timetable for their implementation. The criminal trials are not expected to commence until October of 2011.
Your Excellency,
We contend that the attainment of a balanced budget and progress along the pathway of a vibrant economy are noble objectives, but the achievement of either or both of these objectives are not and will never be acceptable reasons for the disenfranchisement of an entire people. The attainment of the stated random and ill defined objectives is not an acceptable reason for the suspension of constitutional democracy.
The declaration by Henry Bellingham is in direct contradiction of UN Declaration 1514 (XV) of December 1960 and constitutes a denial of the fundamental human rights of the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands. Declaration 1514 (XV) object 3 declares that `Inadequacy of political, economic, social or educational preparedness should never serve as a pretext for delaying independence' In our case we take leave to substitute the word independence with the phrase parliamentary democracy.
Your Excellency,
We herein request, that this Fourth Committee inquire of and demand of your member State, the United Kingdom, an explanation of their assault on the human rights of the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands and further require of the United Kingdom, that it present to the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands a timetable for the development and implementation of a meaningful and defined plan with objective benchmarks and measurable milestones for the return of parliamentary democracy to the Turks and Caicos Islands; and that the development of such plans shall incorporate the expressed and informed wishes of the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands.
Your Excellency
On November 22, 1988, the UN General Assembly adopted resolution 43/47 entitled "International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism" and part of that resolution in Part II paragraph 7 reads: `The United Nations, in cooperation with the Administering Powers, should ensure that all acts of self determination are preceded by adequate and unbiased campaigns of political education.' We do declare that we have never witnessed any acts of political education executed by the Administering Power in the Turks and Caicos Islands.
We contend that during this period of direct rule by the Administering Power, therein lies an ideal opportunity during which time unbiased political education can occur. Should this unbiased political education occur, the process of electoral reform and the subsequent retention and sustainability of such reforms would be greatly enhanced and native born parliamentarians and administrators will have an opportunity to be better prepared for their eventual roles as representatives of the people.
The United Nations On December 8, 2000 declared the period 2001 through 2010 the Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism and we in the Turks and Caicos Islands in the twilight of this decade are currently made to feel as if we are being re-colonized by the United Kingdom.
The native born population are experiencing a state of siege and heightened frustration and have developed the fear that their rights and their ability to control their destiny is under assault and will be further attacked by the recommendations of the alien Consultant for Constitutional and Electoral Reform. This fear has its foundation in one of the early recommendations of the consultant, which states that non-citizens of the Turks and Caicos Islands should be granted the right to vote, merely on the basis of length of residency within the Territory. This recommendation, Your Excellency, is another example of the disregard for the fundamental human rights of the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands.
Your Excellency,
Section III paragraph 10 of the November 22, 1998 resolution goes on to state:
`Administering Powers should take the necessary measures to promote the political, economic, social cultural and educational advancement of the peoples of the Non-Self¬Governing Territories thereby facilitating their exercise of the right to self-determination and should continue to provide the United Nations with information in accordance with Article 73 (e) of the Charter of the United Nations.'
We contend that the Administering Power of the Turks and Caicos has failed in meeting this recommended action. The UK has not only failed in advancing the Territory but has also failed in its oversight responsibility.
The prior Constitution of the Turks and Caicos and the recommendations for a new Constitution gives excessive powers to the UK appointed Governor. The Governor's office has responsibility for `good governance and oversight' however the immediate past Governor failed miserably in this regard and as we know, this past Governor has not been included as a subject for inquiry, as has been the lot of the native born elected political leaders, who will likely become the subject of criminal proceedings.
We will in no way offer an excuse for any party or entity but we decry the apparent inequity in the application of judicial and administrative corrections. It is our contention that the UK should launch an Inquiry into the failures of the responsible officers of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the prior Governor as it relates to the discharge of their responsibilities for the Turks and Caicos Islands.
After four centuries of neglect and disinterest the UK seems to be taking the approach that it can in a mere twenty-four months design and gift wrap for the Turks and Caicos a perfect set of reforms and policies which will transform the Territory into a well run democracy, free of corruption and enjoying balanced budgets into perpetuity. This is all to be achieved while excluding the native born people of the Turks and Caicos. Islands from any involvement in the development and design of the reforms.
We cannot conceptualize how any reform so designed and formulated is expected to be sustainable by the existing civil service and known political leadership, if they are not intricately engaged in its design and development. The current approach by the UK leaves us to speculate that part of the `reform plan' is the displacement of the native born population from its prior position of political leadership and supplant it with non-native groups.
In 1999, The UK published a White Paper entitled Progress through Partnership for the Overseas Territories. We see no evidence of a partnership arrangement in the current approach.
We request that the United Nations through its various Organs and Committees establish a monitoring team to provide some oversight and hold the UK accountable to its obligations to the Non-Self Governing Territory of the Turks and Caicos Islands. Without such oversight, we fear that our rights will be restricted, our people marginalized and our heritage lost.
We thank you for the opportunity to present our Petition.
08 October 2010
Virgin Islands Activist Calls for Reconciliation on Slavery
Presentation to the United Nations Special Political and Decolonisation Committee
Edward L. Browne
Global Human Rights Activist and Historian
United States Virgin Islands
Mr. Chairman,
I am again honored to be here today to discuss what I and many other Virgin Islanders consider the continued colonial relationship that exist between the United States of America and the United States Virgin Islands.
Mr. Chairman, last year for the second time, I came before this distinguish body and I told everyone in attendance that King Frederick VII of Denmark in a royal decree on August 18, 1853 sanctioned a serfdom system of slavery that existed up until March 31, 1917. I also informed the members of this body that the Danish inhabitants primarily people of black African descent were not emancipated by King Christian X of Denmark or by President of the United States Woodrow Wilson before the official transfer of the Danish West Indian Islands took place.
Mr. Chairman since that speech, I have continued to collect information to support my position. Recently, I came across a confidential letter written by former Secretary of State Robert Lansing to the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations William J. Stone dated August 22, 1916. In the letter, Secretary Lansing states that in this connection, it should be borne in mind that the Danish subjects in the islands have had no voice in the proposed transfer of the sovereignty of the islands to the United States, and that many inconveniences must necessarily result to them if they retain Danish allegiance after the transfer.
Also on March 31, 2010, during transfer day ceremonies held on the island of St. Thomas, Soren Blak, Danish consul general to St. Thomas is quoted as making the following remarks. “The pages of history have turned with the realization that history should not repeat itself.” “You don’t sell a people and a culture.” “You do not enslave humanity, but those mistakes were made a 100 years ago and don’t excuse the fact that things are not getting better today.”
Again, I would like to state that there are still individuals alive today who were born in the Danish West Indian Islands before the transfer of the islands to the United States, and this is one of the reasons why this issue is so relevant at the present moment. With that being said, I would like to thank Soren Blak for taking the first step in bringing about healing and reconciliation between the people of Denmark and the Virgin Islands, and I would urge the governments of Denmark, the United States of America, and the United States Virgin Islands to embrace what I have titled “The Five Pillars of Reconciliation ” and do whatever is needed to finally bring closure to this very painful situation.
To my friends from Guam, I would ask you to continue to channel your energies in telling the world about the atrocities that were done to your elders by both the Japanese and American governments during World War II. I would also humbly ask the Japanese government to do what is right and seek total reconciliation with the people of Guam to include discussing the issue of reparations. History should never be forgotten and saying sorry and then providing repair in my opinion is the highest form of honor.
Hopefully, if the Japanese government can finally address the issue of reparations with the people of Guam then maybe there can finally be true dialogue and reconciliation between Japan and the United States over the attack on Pearl Harbor and the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The world does not need any more nuclear weapons instead what our humanity needs according to words used by Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan is “courageous change towards peace”.
In closing, I would like to state that it is obvious that the United Nations is not a perfect institution, and it is confronted with many different challenges; however, the United Nations has brought hope to the hopeless, provided a voice to the voiceless and continues to inspire billions around the world to create a brighter tomorrow. I live in a nation that continues to treat me like a second class citizen, but from 2008 this committee has allowed me to tell and show the world that I am a first class human being, and for that I would like to thank this committee. One day, colonialism in all of its forms will come to an end and there will be no more non-self governing territories, and when that day comes what a better world we will all live in. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the moment.
Edward L. Browne
Global Human Rights Activist and Historian
United States Virgin Islands
Mr. Chairman,
I am again honored to be here today to discuss what I and many other Virgin Islanders consider the continued colonial relationship that exist between the United States of America and the United States Virgin Islands.
Mr. Chairman, last year for the second time, I came before this distinguish body and I told everyone in attendance that King Frederick VII of Denmark in a royal decree on August 18, 1853 sanctioned a serfdom system of slavery that existed up until March 31, 1917. I also informed the members of this body that the Danish inhabitants primarily people of black African descent were not emancipated by King Christian X of Denmark or by President of the United States Woodrow Wilson before the official transfer of the Danish West Indian Islands took place.
Mr. Chairman since that speech, I have continued to collect information to support my position. Recently, I came across a confidential letter written by former Secretary of State Robert Lansing to the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations William J. Stone dated August 22, 1916. In the letter, Secretary Lansing states that in this connection, it should be borne in mind that the Danish subjects in the islands have had no voice in the proposed transfer of the sovereignty of the islands to the United States, and that many inconveniences must necessarily result to them if they retain Danish allegiance after the transfer.
Also on March 31, 2010, during transfer day ceremonies held on the island of St. Thomas, Soren Blak, Danish consul general to St. Thomas is quoted as making the following remarks. “The pages of history have turned with the realization that history should not repeat itself.” “You don’t sell a people and a culture.” “You do not enslave humanity, but those mistakes were made a 100 years ago and don’t excuse the fact that things are not getting better today.”
Again, I would like to state that there are still individuals alive today who were born in the Danish West Indian Islands before the transfer of the islands to the United States, and this is one of the reasons why this issue is so relevant at the present moment. With that being said, I would like to thank Soren Blak for taking the first step in bringing about healing and reconciliation between the people of Denmark and the Virgin Islands, and I would urge the governments of Denmark, the United States of America, and the United States Virgin Islands to embrace what I have titled “The Five Pillars of Reconciliation ” and do whatever is needed to finally bring closure to this very painful situation.
To my friends from Guam, I would ask you to continue to channel your energies in telling the world about the atrocities that were done to your elders by both the Japanese and American governments during World War II. I would also humbly ask the Japanese government to do what is right and seek total reconciliation with the people of Guam to include discussing the issue of reparations. History should never be forgotten and saying sorry and then providing repair in my opinion is the highest form of honor.
Hopefully, if the Japanese government can finally address the issue of reparations with the people of Guam then maybe there can finally be true dialogue and reconciliation between Japan and the United States over the attack on Pearl Harbor and the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The world does not need any more nuclear weapons instead what our humanity needs according to words used by Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan is “courageous change towards peace”.
In closing, I would like to state that it is obvious that the United Nations is not a perfect institution, and it is confronted with many different challenges; however, the United Nations has brought hope to the hopeless, provided a voice to the voiceless and continues to inspire billions around the world to create a brighter tomorrow. I live in a nation that continues to treat me like a second class citizen, but from 2008 this committee has allowed me to tell and show the world that I am a first class human being, and for that I would like to thank this committee. One day, colonialism in all of its forms will come to an end and there will be no more non-self governing territories, and when that day comes what a better world we will all live in. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the moment.
06 October 2010
Innovative Plan for International Decolonisation Proposed to UN
Proposal Presented to UN Special Political Committee
An innovative plan to complete the decolonisation process for the remaining small island non self-governing territories worldwide has been recommended to the United Nations. The plan of action for a new International Decade for the Completion of the Decolonisation Mandate, initially introduced to the UN Decolonisation Committee last June, was presented in a 5th October 2010 presentation to the United Nations Special Political and Decolonisation Committee (Fourth Committee) by Dr. Carlyle Corbin, international advisor on governance and multilateral diplomacy. Corbin has served as an expert to United Nations Caribbean and Pacific regional seminars on decolonisation throughout since 1990. He is the former Minister of State for External Affairs of the US Virgin Islands Government. The full written statement follows:
Statement of Dr. Carlyle Corbin
International Advisor on Governance and Multilateral Diplomacy
to the United Nations Special Political and Decolonisation Committee
United Nations Headquarters, New York, N.Y.
5th October 2010
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Permit me to extend my personal congratulations on your election to chair the Fourth Committee which deals with an interesting mix of political issues, not the least of which is the contemporary colonial question. The success of your country, Zimbabwe, in defeating colonialism, with wide international support, remains an important milestone in the history of the struggle for freedom and democratic governance in Africa and her diaspora.
As one of the independent experts participating in the Pacific Regional Seminar in Noumea last May, I join in expressing appreciation to President of New Caledonia, H.E. Philippe Gomes, for the excellent facilities and amenities provided for those important deliberations. I also congratulate President Gomes for his statement earlier this afternoon which provided an important perspective on the ongoing self-determination process in that territory.
Mr. Chairman,
The small island non self-governing territories in the Caribbean are, by and large, the remnants of the trans-Atlantic slave trade. These are countries of the African diaspora which have yet to exercise their inalienable right to self-determination. Contemporary colonialism is, therefore, very much alive in the Caribbean - as well as in the Pacific - even as these dependency arrangements have become increasingly complex, sophisticated and sometimes even devious.
The impact of globalisation, climate change, the global financial crisis, geo-strategic considerations, among other issues, have all served to slow the pace of decolonisation of these territories. These have often served as the basis for seeking to legitimise the dependency status through either creative interpretations of what constitutes self-government, or by simply ignoring the UN’s role in the process altogether.
But, make no mistake, the present dependency models, however sophisticated, are still in violation of the principle of self-determination, and are wholly inconsistent with democratic governance. Self-determination is a fundamental human right which has not been exercised by the people of these territories despite the UN Charter, General Assembly resolutions and human rights instruments which guarantee this right under international law. This should be borne in mind as the United Nations in 2010 observes its 50th anniversary of the Decolonisation Declaration, as Africa reflects on a half-century of independence, and as Asia and the Pacific commemorate their respective successes in the achievement of full self-government with the concerted attention of the United Nations.
Mr. Chairman,
This year marks the end of the Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism, and provides the international community with an opportunity to take stock of how the decolonisation process has fared. To this end, I have conducted during several analyses on the implementation of the Declaration during the first and second International Decades at the request of various chairs of the Decolonisation Committee for consideration by member States.
The 2010 analysis reviewed the implementation of decolonisation resolutions, examined UN assistance to the territories, and assessed any collaboration which may have been initiated with relevant human rights bodies pursuant to the General Assembly. The analysis also examined activities of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues aimed at the self-determination of the indigenous peoples in the territories, particularly in the Pacific, and activities of civil society in trying to refocus international attention on decolonisation.
The results of these analyses were presented at the UN regional seminars, and at the regular sessions of the Special Committee on Decolonisation during the first and second International Decades. The conclusion of the 2010 review is that much remains to be done in fulfilling the decolonisation mandate. That only one territory (Timor Leste) has been decolonised since the independence of Namibia two decades ago is testament to this fact.
The 2010 analysis recommended an updated plan of action (attached) for the authorisation of a third International Decade, with primary focus on implementation of the actions called for by the Assembly. It was concluded that there is nothing wrong with the resolutions which have been finely tuned over the years. The role of member states of my own Caribbean region in devising these targeted actions is especially commended, and is a testament to the awareness of the ties which bind the people of the Caribbean irrespective of varying levels of political development Ands constitutional advancement.
But it is the implementation of these resolutions that very much remains the weak point. Clearly, the selective enforcement of UN resolutions is a consistent concern which hinders the international process, and especially works against developing countries. The non self-governing territories are similarly affected, and they have limited opportunity to express their concerns.
It was concluded that for implementation of the decolonization mandate to succeed, new methods of work, including special mechanisms such as those employed by the human rights bodies, should be introduced as a matter of urgency. The consistent adoption of the same resolutions year-after-year without implementation renders them less effective over time.
Mr. Chairman,
The 2010 analysis also concluded that self-governance indicators should be utilised in determining whether these territories have met the recognised threshold of self-government. The use of indicators was questioned at the Special Committee, but clarification was not possible under the Committee’s procedures. I will offer that clarification now.
Governance indicators are routinely used by UNDP to assess the extent of compliance with democratic governance practices. Other UN bodies also use such methods. Self-governance indicators which are being finalized by an expert group from Caribbean and Pacific territories which will serve to organise the existing decolonisation mandates, systematically, comprehensively and scientifically as a method of assessing whether the territories have met basic minimum standards of self-government long established in UN resolutions. Whilst each territory should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, there must be some standard against which such a review is made. Otherwise, the effectiveness of this approach would have limited meaning. These self-governance indictors will be made available to the relevant committees of the United Nations, as well as various regional organisations.
Mr. Chairman,
The 2010 analysis of the decolonisation process makes the following point:
“There appears to be a clear difference in perception as to what constitutes success. The adoption of resolutions (alone) and the de-listing of territories from UN review do not constitute success. The actual achievement of full self-government by the peoples of the territories is the real success. The de-listing is the afterthought. It is not, and cannot be perceived, as the goal...Unless this gap of perception is closed, and actual implementation initiated in earnest, it is questionable whether actual decolonisation could win out over the legitimisation of colonial reform that would invariably place the UN stamp of approval on contemporary colonial governance (resulting in)… a premature end to the self-determination process, without (actually) achieving self-determination. Such a development would deleteriously affect millions of people in non self-governing territories worldwide.”
Accordingly, a new International Decade can only succeed if such innovative measures as those suggested in the 2010 Analysis, and other relevant procedures are instituted. I end with the conclusion of my report to the Special Committee on Decolonisation last June:
“…It was Martin King who said that “progress does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability.” For us to make real progress to achieve decolonisation, the United Nations system needs to adapt to incorporate new ideas, while remaining absolutely true to the principles of self-determination and subsequent decolonisation of the peoples of our remaining territories. The United Nations… needs to seriously examine whether its method of work is an impediment to that progress, as many of the territories have concluded (the short allotted time of four minutes for those who have travelled half-way across the world is illustrative).
"As it has been said, the price of doing the same thing, year after year, is far greater than the price of change. This is so if the results of the “repetition of process” do not yield the desired result. Accordingly, a new decade with a revitalized plan of action is vital in this regard, with specific focus on implementation of the existing mandate through innovative means. The present method of work has not succeeded in the implementation of the mandate which remains as valid today as it has been over the twenty-year period of the two international decades for the eradication of colonialism."
*****
ANNEX
Proposed Plan of Action for International Decade for the Full Implementation
of the Decolonization Mandate (2011-2020)
INTRODUCTION
1. The ultimate goal of the International Decade for the Full Implementation of the Decolonization Mandate should be the full implementation of the Decolonization Declaration through the exercise of the right to self-determination, including independence, consistent with Resolutions 1514 (XV) and Resolution 1541 (XV) through the exercise of the right to self-determination by the peoples of the remaining Non Self-Governing Territories in accordance with all relevant resolutions and decisions of the General Assembly, including the principles contained in the Declaration, in furtherance of the realization of democratic governance, and through a proactive approach to the full implementation of the actions called for in the present plan of action.
I. ACTION AT THE INTERNATIONAL LEVEL
2. The international community, including administering Powers which administer Non Self-Governing Territories, other member States, the United Nations system of organizations, regional and other intergovernmental organizations, as well as and non-governmental organizations, should coordinate their efforts to assist the peoples of the Non Self-Governing Territories in their progress towards exercising their inalienable right to self-determination and full decolonization, and to this end, should actively participate in the implementation of the present Plan of Action.
3. The international community should ensure that its decisions in United Nations and other intergovernmental organisations are in furtherance of the actions called for in the international mandate on decolonization, including those contained in relevant United Nations resolutions, as well as those outlined in the present Plan of Action.
4. The international community should seek to enable the peoples of the Non Self-Governing Territories to exercise their inalienable right to self-determination, which is a fundamental human right, and to decide their future political status with complete knowledge and awareness of the full range of legitimate political options available to them, including independence. In that context, particular emphasis should be placed on the dissemination of information to the Non Self-Governing Territories on the functioning of contemporary models of full political equality.
5. The international community should ensure that all political exercises relating to self-determination are carried out in an atmosphere free from intimidation and external interference, and allow for the open expression of the interest and aspirations of the peoples of the remaining Non Self-Governing Territories irrespective of factors such as size, geographical location, size of population or availability of economic resources. In this connection, particular emphasis should be placed on providing the necessary assistance from the international community, as appropriate, to facilitate a successful exercise of self-determination.
II. ACTION AT THE UNITED NATIONS LEVEL
6. The Member States of the United Nations, including those States which administer territories, as well as the United Nations system, should take all necessary steps to facilitate the exercise of self-determination in the Non Self-Governing Territories. In this connection, the United Nations, in consultation with the administering powers, should ensure that the peoples of the Non Self-Governing Territories are made fully aware of the political status options available to them through increased and sustained contact with the elected leaders, with educational institutions and civil society organizations in the territories, and with the peoples themselves.
7. The United Nations Department of Public Information should intensify its dissemination of information on the decolonization process, in conjunction with the political education programmes as outlined in paragraph 8, and should utilize civil society institutions, United Nations Information Centres, tertiary institutions in the territories, media outlets and government information services, as well as experts on decolonization, in the dissemination process.
8. The Electoral Affairs Division of the Department of Political Affairs in consultation with the Special Committee other relevant United Nations bodies, the territorial governments and the administering Powers, should develop adequate and unbiased political education programmes for the Territories in order to heighten the awareness among the people of the territories of their inalienable right to self-determination in conformity with the legitimate political status options consist with relevant resolutions of the United Nations. In this connection, these programmes should precede a genuine act of self-determination which should be exercised in each territory, conducted by or under observation of the United Nations, as appropriate, not later than 31 December 2020, in accordance with principles contained in the Decolonisation Declaration and all relevant resolutions and decisions of the General Assembly.
9. The relevant United Nations bodies, including its specialized agencies and other organizations of the United Nations system, should examine and review conditions in each of the Non Self-Governing Territories so as to take appropriate measures to accelerate progress in the economic, social and governance sectors, consistent with relevant United Nations resolutions. In this connection, the United Nations should formulate programmes of assistance to the remaining Non Self-Governing Territories, and facilitate the participation of the territories in relevant programmes and activities of the United Nations system, as well as through membership, associate membership or observer status, within the framework of the mandates of the organization concerned, in order to enhance the economic and administrative capacity of the Non Self-Governing Territories.
10. The Secretary-General, or his Special Representative, should visit each of the Non Self-Governing Territories as early as possible during the Decade and report thereon to the General Assembly, and the Secretary-General should expand the reports on implementation of the decolonisation mandate, called for by the Assembly, with focus on the actions taken by the United Nations system.
III. ACTION BY THE ADMINISTERING POWERS
11. Administering Powers should take the necessary measures to promote the political, economic, social, cultural and educational advancement of the people of the Non-Self-Governing Territories thereby strengthening their capacity to exercise their inalienable right to self-determination, should provide the United Nations with comprehensive information in accordance with Article 73 (e) of the Charter; and should report annually to the General Assembly on all necessary measures taken to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions in accordance with Article 73 (b) of the Charter.
12. Administering Powers should ensure that the exercises of the right of self-determination for the peoples of the Non Self-Governing Territories is not affected by changes in the demographic composition of the Territories under their administration as a result of the displacement of the peoples of the Territories.
13. Administering Powers should implement measures aimed at ensuring the ownership and control of the natural resources of the Non Self-Governing territories, including marine and property resources, by the people of the territories, and should assist the territories in the development of mechanisms aimed at conserving those natural resources and preserving the environment of the territories.
14. Administering Powers should enact measures to assist the peoples of the Non-Self-Governing Territories in achieving the maximum possible level of economic self-reliance, environmental protection, and social and educational development. In this connection, Administering Powers should facilitate the participation of the territories in relevant United Nations programmes in these respective spheres.
15. Administering Powers should consider, as a matter of urgency, the resumption of formal cooperation with the Special Committee through an interactive dialogue with the Member States of the Committee in formal and informal sessions, in order to provide the Special Committee with the opportunity to hear, first hand, the perspective of the Administering Powers on the self-determination process leading to the decolonisation of the Non Self-Governing Territories under their administration.
16. Administering Powers should facilitate, in accordance with all relevant resolutions and decisions of the General Assembly, and taking into account Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960 and resolution 1541 (XV) of 15 December 1960, the participation of Territories under their administration in the programmes and activities of the specialized agencies and other organizations within the United Nations system, as well as in United Nations bodies on decolonization including, in particular, the Special Committee on Decolonization, as well as regional and international organizations.
17. Administering Powers should facilitate the dispatch of United Nations visiting and special missions to each of the remaining non self-governing territories, at the request of, and in cooperation with, the Special Committee on Decolonisation, and in conjunction with the relevant United Nations bodies at regular intervals.
18. Administering Powers should refrain from military activities in Non Self-Governing territories which may adversely affect the rights and interests of the people concerned, and which may create health and environmental hazards.
IV. ACTION BY THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON DECOLONIZATION
19. The Special Committee on Decolonization should organize regional seminars on an annual basis, alternating between the Caribbean and Pacific regions, to review the progress achieved in the implementation of the plan of action, with the participation of the peoples of the Non-Self-Governing Territories, their elected and appointed representatives, the administering Powers, Member States, regional organizations, specialized agencies, non-governmental organizations and regional and international experts. In this connection, the primary focus of the regional seminars should be to hear the views of the representatives of the territorial governments and institutions, as well as the regional experts.
20. The Special Committee should continue to examine the situation with regard to political, economic and social developments in all Non Self-Governing Territories. In this connection, the Decolonization Unit should enhance the Working Papers on each Non Self-Governing Territory, for the consideration of the Special Committee, to include a broader range of information sources, and to group the working papers according to their respective regions in order to facilitate more analysis of cross-cutting and thematic decolonization issues by member States, consistent with the recommendation of the 2007 Report of the Office of Internal Oversight Services on the in-depth evaluation of political affairs.
21. The Special Committee shall establish a timetable for the dispatch of four visiting missions per year to Non Self-Governing Territories. In this connection, the Special Committee should seek, as a matter of priority, the full concurrence of the administering Powers with regard to the dispatch of the missions, and the participation and support of relevant United Nations agencies, in particular the United Nations Development Programme and the relevant United Nations regional commissions, in providing substantive support to the missions.
22. The Special Committee, with the cooperation of the administering Powers, should make every effort to facilitate and encourage the participation of representatives of Non-Self-Governing Territories in the Special Committee itself, and in other United Nations bodies which deal with self-determination and decolonization, in particular the Special Political and Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee), the Third Committee and the relevant human rights bodies.
23. The Special Committee should begin a constructive work programme, on a case-by-case basis, to include an examination of the political and constitutional framework of each Territory including constitutional rights and sovereignty issues, and an assessment of the socio-economic situation to inform the political education programme in advance of the act of self-determination.
24. The Special Committee should develop a formal programme of collaboration with other United Nations bodies which also address self-determination and decolonization issues, in particular the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), the Human Rights Council and the Human Rights Committee, within the framework of their respective mandates with the aim of exchanging information, consistent with relevant United Nations resolutions.
VI. ACTION BY INDEPENDENT EXPERT
25. The Independent Expert, as confirmed by the Special Committee on Decolonization, should conduct a critical analysis of the progress and extent of the achievement towards self-government in each of the Non Self-Governing Territories, and an independent assessment of the economic and social situation in the territories, with specific focus on the small island territories under review of the Special Committee.
26. The Independent Expert should finalize the Self-Governance Indicators for consideration in the assessment of the level of self-government in the remaining territories to identify where deficiencies exist in the present political arrangements, and to make appropriate recommendations for consideration of the Special Committee.
27. The Independent Expert should present an annual report to the Special Committee on Decolonization, and should engage in an interactive dialogue with member States at the beginning of the substantive session of the Special Committee each year on the self-determination and decolonisation processes in each of the remaining territories.
28. The Independent Expert should provide substantive support to the visiting missions of the Special Committee, and should conduct fact-finding missions to individual territories, as appropriate, subject to the availability of resources, including external resources.
VII. COORDINATION, REVIEW, APPRAISAL AND REPORTING
29. The Special Committee, in consultation with the Department of Political Affairs and the Office of the Secretary-General should coordinate the plan of action of the International Decade to Implement the Decolonization Mandate.
30. The Special Committee should submit annually to the General Assembly an analytical report containing:
(a) A review and appraisal of the activities undertaken in connection with the Decade.
(b) Suggestions and recommendations.
31. The Secretary-General should submit to the General Assembly a comprehensive annual report on action taken, as well as on suggestions and trends that emerge from the implementation of the plan of action.
32. The Secretary-General should submit to the General Assembly at its 70th session a mid-term report on the implementation of the plan of action, and a final report on implementation of the International Decade at its 75th session.
04 October 2010
CARICOM and Bermuda Condemn UK over Turks & Caicos Islands
Turks and Caicos Islands Sun
By Hayden Boyce
SUN Publisher & Editor-in-Chief
The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and the Premier of Bermuda, Dr. Ewart Brown, have condemned the United Kingdom’s (UK) decision to indefinitely postpone elections which were scheduled to be held in the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) in July, 2011.
In a statement released on September 30, CARICOM stated it was greatly concerned with the recent decision of the British Government to postpone general elections in the TCI. The regional body called for direct rule to be replaced by self rule in this British Overseas Territory, and for a return to democracy for the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands, which has been an Associate Member of CARICOM since July 1991.
Noting that this decision will result in the continuation of the imposition of direct rule from London for an undetermined period and, consequently, in a delay in the return to constitutional government, CARICOM added: “This recent disquieting development reinforces the view of the Caribbean Community that the imposition of direct rule is totally at odds with the development of good governance, including improved fiscal and administrative management, in the Turks and Caicos Islands – the professed aim of the policy of the British Government.”
“That objective,” CARICOM added, “cannot be met by the continued disenfranchisement of the Turks and Caicos Islanders, by the denial of their inalienable right to shape their own future nor by the artificial widening of the voter base. Good political and fiscal governance cannot be handed down. Its nature and contours have to be moulded by the people of the territory.”
Established on August 1, 1973, CARICOM’s 15 members now comprise Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Montserrat, St. Lucia, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago. The Associate members are Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands and Turks and Caicos Islands.
Meantime, Bermuda’s Premier Dr. Brown, who is a close friend of former TCI Premier Michael Misick, said he was “deeply saddened by the continuing, dreadful delay in restoring full democratic rights to the people of Turks and Caicos Islands.”
In a media statement, Brown said: “Historically governments and government leaders throughout the world that have taken the step of suspending free, democratic elections have been roundly condemned and sanctioned. If this were to occur in Zimbabwe for example, the world and the UK government in particular would refer to the move as barbaric and characterize its government as a cruel dictatorship.
The Premier continued, “Bermudians and the people of Turks and Caicos share deep historical and familial ties and it is my fervent hope that free elections and a government duly elected by the people will be quickly restored to that country.”
Last month the UK Minister for Overseas Territories, Henry Bellingham, during a visit to the TCI, said that the delay would allow time for further important work to take place on public financial management and good governance reform on the island and will allow for the reforms to become fully embedded.
"The UK Government has considered all the Interim Government’s work over the past 12 months; all the challenges that remain, not least economic stability; and, taking all of these factors into account, we have decided that the elections will not take place in July 2011,” he said.
Sections of the TCI Constitution were suspended on August 14, 2009 following a Commission of Inquiry report into allegations of corruption in the country.
By Hayden Boyce
SUN Publisher & Editor-in-Chief
The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and the Premier of Bermuda, Dr. Ewart Brown, have condemned the United Kingdom’s (UK) decision to indefinitely postpone elections which were scheduled to be held in the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) in July, 2011.
In a statement released on September 30, CARICOM stated it was greatly concerned with the recent decision of the British Government to postpone general elections in the TCI. The regional body called for direct rule to be replaced by self rule in this British Overseas Territory, and for a return to democracy for the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands, which has been an Associate Member of CARICOM since July 1991.
Noting that this decision will result in the continuation of the imposition of direct rule from London for an undetermined period and, consequently, in a delay in the return to constitutional government, CARICOM added: “This recent disquieting development reinforces the view of the Caribbean Community that the imposition of direct rule is totally at odds with the development of good governance, including improved fiscal and administrative management, in the Turks and Caicos Islands – the professed aim of the policy of the British Government.”
“That objective,” CARICOM added, “cannot be met by the continued disenfranchisement of the Turks and Caicos Islanders, by the denial of their inalienable right to shape their own future nor by the artificial widening of the voter base. Good political and fiscal governance cannot be handed down. Its nature and contours have to be moulded by the people of the territory.”
Established on August 1, 1973, CARICOM’s 15 members now comprise Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Montserrat, St. Lucia, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago. The Associate members are Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands and Turks and Caicos Islands.
Meantime, Bermuda’s Premier Dr. Brown, who is a close friend of former TCI Premier Michael Misick, said he was “deeply saddened by the continuing, dreadful delay in restoring full democratic rights to the people of Turks and Caicos Islands.”
In a media statement, Brown said: “Historically governments and government leaders throughout the world that have taken the step of suspending free, democratic elections have been roundly condemned and sanctioned. If this were to occur in Zimbabwe for example, the world and the UK government in particular would refer to the move as barbaric and characterize its government as a cruel dictatorship.
The Premier continued, “Bermudians and the people of Turks and Caicos share deep historical and familial ties and it is my fervent hope that free elections and a government duly elected by the people will be quickly restored to that country.”
Last month the UK Minister for Overseas Territories, Henry Bellingham, during a visit to the TCI, said that the delay would allow time for further important work to take place on public financial management and good governance reform on the island and will allow for the reforms to become fully embedded.
"The UK Government has considered all the Interim Government’s work over the past 12 months; all the challenges that remain, not least economic stability; and, taking all of these factors into account, we have decided that the elections will not take place in July 2011,” he said.
Sections of the TCI Constitution were suspended on August 14, 2009 following a Commission of Inquiry report into allegations of corruption in the country.
*****
29 September 2010
Les collectivités de l’outre-mer et la coopération institutionnelle régionale et internationale
Discours prononcé mercredi 25 août 2010 au Marie-Luce Penchard,
ministre chargée de l’Outre-mer
Mesdames et Messieurs les Ambassadeurs,
Je reprends la parole pour introduire notre troisième thème, « les collectivités de l’outre-mer et la coopération institutionnelle régionale et internationale ».
La coopération régionale apparaît en effet comme une dimension incontournable du développement des Outre-mers, et de leur affirmation identitaire ; en outre, on constate une volonté de renforcement de leurs compétences internationales. Parallèlement, les Outre-mers constituent des pôles d’influence française, et peuvent servir en quelque sorte de « point d’appui régional » à l’influence française.
Comment développer ce rôle, tout en assurant la cohérence de la parole de la France à l’étranger ? Je suggère quatre pistes de réflexion :
D’abord confier chaque fois que cela est possible la responsabilité de la délégation française à un élu ultramarin proche. C’est ce que nous venons de faire avec le Directeur d’Asie, M. Paul Jean-Ortiz, en offrant successivement au Sénateur Louechkote la responsabilité de la délégation française à la dernière réunion du « post Forum du Pacifique », puis au Député Frogier celle de mener notre délégation aux cérémonies anniversaire de l’indépendance du Vanuatu. Je crois, sous le contrôle de nos ambassadeurs concernés que cela a été une bonne décision. Je crois que cette présence dynamise le rôle de l’ambassadeur et offre une véritable plus-value car l’élu concerné apporte avec lui son réseau régional. Je souhaite entendre votre opinion sur ce point.
Ensuite, renforcer le rôle des Commissions mixtes. Plusieurs ont été créées cette année et je remercie tout particulièrement Mme Elisabeth Béton-Delègue, la Directrice des Amériques, pour le travail effectué en la matière. D’autres peuvent être créées, je pense à Sint Marteen. Des sous-commissions nous sont aussi réclamées, je pense au « Conseil du fleuve Oyapock », sur le modèle du « Conseil du fleuve Maroni .
Troisième piste de réflexion, le renforcement des relations entre les ambassades et les préfectures. Je sais que beaucoup a été fait. Je remercie en particulier Stéphane Gompertz, le Directeur d’Afrique, pour avoir organisé, avec l’ambassadeur Leyssene, la réunion régionale des ambassadeurs de l’océan indien et la conférence de coopération régionale à La Réunion, symboliquement au sein même du Conseil Régional. Je crois que nous pouvons également suivre l’exemple de notre ambassade à Port au Prince, qui a programmé à la rentrée des réunions auprès des CCI de Guadeloupe et de Martinique pour les informer sur les marchés potentiels liés à la reconstruction à Haïti. Il nous faudra aussi travailler à faciliter la représentation des collectivités au sein même des ambassades. Les conventions visant à gérer l’arrivée de ces nouveaux agents sont en cours de finalisation, et j’en remercie tout particulièrement Stéphane Romatet, le Directeur Général de l’Administration du Quai d’Orsay , comme ses services, qui réfléchissent actuellement à la partie « formation » de ces nouveaux agents.
Quatrième piste de réflexion, travailler à une meilleure intégration de nos collectivités au sein des organisations régionales. Les perspectives principales me semblent les suivantes :
La Guadeloupe et la Martinique pourraient faire acte de candidature à l’OECS (Organisation des États de la Caraïbe Orientale), auprès de laquelle la France est désormais accréditée à travers notre ambassade à Sainte-Lucie. Depuis le nouveau statut, deux territoires de l’outre-mer britanniques sont devenus membres associés, statut qui me paraît recommandable.
La Guyane pourrait, le cas échéant délégation de la France, faire acte de candidature auprès de l’OTCA, organisation du traité de coopération amazonien.
Les cinq collectivités territoriales des Antilles-Guyane pourraient faire acte de candidature à la Communauté des Caraïbes, CARICOM. Je souhaite entendre vos recommandations sur ce point.
En ce qui concerne l’Association des États de la Caraïbe (AEC), dont la France est membre associé, au titre de la Guadeloupe, de la Guyane, de la Martinique, et, depuis janvier 2010, de Saint-Barthélemy et de Saint-Martin, je souhaiterais qu’une sorte de « présidence tournante » de notre délégation soit établie entre nos collectivités.
la Nouvelle Calédonie pourrait voir sa position renforcée au sein du « Forum des Iles du Pacifique » ainsi que du « Fer de lance ». La Polynésie pourrait solliciter une évolution parallèle.
Enfin, le rehaussement de notre représentation au sein du COMESA et de l’IOR/ARC ne manquera pas d’impacter sur la Réunion et Mayotte, France de l’océan indien.
Voilà très rapidement brossées quelques pistes de réflexion sur « les collectivités d’outre-mer et l’international ». Vous avez la parole.
Seul le prononcé fait foi
ministre chargée de l’Outre-mer
Mesdames et Messieurs les Ambassadeurs,
Je reprends la parole pour introduire notre troisième thème, « les collectivités de l’outre-mer et la coopération institutionnelle régionale et internationale ».
La coopération régionale apparaît en effet comme une dimension incontournable du développement des Outre-mers, et de leur affirmation identitaire ; en outre, on constate une volonté de renforcement de leurs compétences internationales. Parallèlement, les Outre-mers constituent des pôles d’influence française, et peuvent servir en quelque sorte de « point d’appui régional » à l’influence française.
Comment développer ce rôle, tout en assurant la cohérence de la parole de la France à l’étranger ? Je suggère quatre pistes de réflexion :
D’abord confier chaque fois que cela est possible la responsabilité de la délégation française à un élu ultramarin proche. C’est ce que nous venons de faire avec le Directeur d’Asie, M. Paul Jean-Ortiz, en offrant successivement au Sénateur Louechkote la responsabilité de la délégation française à la dernière réunion du « post Forum du Pacifique », puis au Député Frogier celle de mener notre délégation aux cérémonies anniversaire de l’indépendance du Vanuatu. Je crois, sous le contrôle de nos ambassadeurs concernés que cela a été une bonne décision. Je crois que cette présence dynamise le rôle de l’ambassadeur et offre une véritable plus-value car l’élu concerné apporte avec lui son réseau régional. Je souhaite entendre votre opinion sur ce point.
Ensuite, renforcer le rôle des Commissions mixtes. Plusieurs ont été créées cette année et je remercie tout particulièrement Mme Elisabeth Béton-Delègue, la Directrice des Amériques, pour le travail effectué en la matière. D’autres peuvent être créées, je pense à Sint Marteen. Des sous-commissions nous sont aussi réclamées, je pense au « Conseil du fleuve Oyapock », sur le modèle du « Conseil du fleuve Maroni .
Troisième piste de réflexion, le renforcement des relations entre les ambassades et les préfectures. Je sais que beaucoup a été fait. Je remercie en particulier Stéphane Gompertz, le Directeur d’Afrique, pour avoir organisé, avec l’ambassadeur Leyssene, la réunion régionale des ambassadeurs de l’océan indien et la conférence de coopération régionale à La Réunion, symboliquement au sein même du Conseil Régional. Je crois que nous pouvons également suivre l’exemple de notre ambassade à Port au Prince, qui a programmé à la rentrée des réunions auprès des CCI de Guadeloupe et de Martinique pour les informer sur les marchés potentiels liés à la reconstruction à Haïti. Il nous faudra aussi travailler à faciliter la représentation des collectivités au sein même des ambassades. Les conventions visant à gérer l’arrivée de ces nouveaux agents sont en cours de finalisation, et j’en remercie tout particulièrement Stéphane Romatet, le Directeur Général de l’Administration du Quai d’Orsay , comme ses services, qui réfléchissent actuellement à la partie « formation » de ces nouveaux agents.
Quatrième piste de réflexion, travailler à une meilleure intégration de nos collectivités au sein des organisations régionales. Les perspectives principales me semblent les suivantes :
La Guadeloupe et la Martinique pourraient faire acte de candidature à l’OECS (Organisation des États de la Caraïbe Orientale), auprès de laquelle la France est désormais accréditée à travers notre ambassade à Sainte-Lucie. Depuis le nouveau statut, deux territoires de l’outre-mer britanniques sont devenus membres associés, statut qui me paraît recommandable.
La Guyane pourrait, le cas échéant délégation de la France, faire acte de candidature auprès de l’OTCA, organisation du traité de coopération amazonien.
Les cinq collectivités territoriales des Antilles-Guyane pourraient faire acte de candidature à la Communauté des Caraïbes, CARICOM. Je souhaite entendre vos recommandations sur ce point.
En ce qui concerne l’Association des États de la Caraïbe (AEC), dont la France est membre associé, au titre de la Guadeloupe, de la Guyane, de la Martinique, et, depuis janvier 2010, de Saint-Barthélemy et de Saint-Martin, je souhaiterais qu’une sorte de « présidence tournante » de notre délégation soit établie entre nos collectivités.
la Nouvelle Calédonie pourrait voir sa position renforcée au sein du « Forum des Iles du Pacifique » ainsi que du « Fer de lance ». La Polynésie pourrait solliciter une évolution parallèle.
Enfin, le rehaussement de notre représentation au sein du COMESA et de l’IOR/ARC ne manquera pas d’impacter sur la Réunion et Mayotte, France de l’océan indien.
Voilà très rapidement brossées quelques pistes de réflexion sur « les collectivités d’outre-mer et l’international ». Vous avez la parole.
Seul le prononcé fait foi
24 September 2010
Addressing the special needs of the most vulnerable
Summary of United Nations Round Table 5
High Level Plenary Meeting of the 65th Session of the General Assembly on the Millennium Development Goals
Dr. the Hon. W. Baldwin Spencer
Prime Minister
Antigua and Barbuda
Mr. President, Excellencies, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen,
I am honoured to present a summary of the discussion in Round Table 5 on Addressing the needs of the most vulnerable.
* It was observed that that the promotion and protection of human rights is a prerequisite for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. We must spare no effort to advance equality and non-discrimination with regards to gender, age, disability, ethnicity, geographical location, and HIV/AIDS status.
* It was noted that to answer the question of who the most vulnerable are and what are the causes of their vulnerability we need more disaggregated data.
* The representatives of small island developing states and landlocked countries pointed out their special vulnerability to climate change, natural disasters, high costs of energy and transportation. To fight climate change more investments should be made in mitigation and adaptation mechanisms, reducing dependency on fossil fuels and investment in renewable energies.
* The international community is urged to assist vulnerable countries: least developed countries, landlocked developing countries, small island developing states in addressing their specific needs and development challenges. Urgent action must focus on effective aid and trade policies; fulfilling of all ODA commitments and further mobilization of financial resources for development, including capacity building and technology transfer.
* Countries in conflict and post-conflict situations are especially vulnerable and in need of renewed focus on peace-building, including
consolidation of state institutions and assistance to internally displaced people and refugees.
* Member States recognize that ensuring equitable access to economic opportunities and social services for the poor and those in vulnerable situations is vital for the achievement of the MDGs. We should devote adequate resources to tackle basic sources of vulnerability, such as lack of access to adequate nutrition, education, skills training, health services and decent jobs. More efforts are needed to ensure access to financial services, including microfinance, credit and insurance for all, and especially those in vulnerable situations.
* Governments also underscore that comprehensive systems of social protection are essential to reduce inequality and vulnerability and achieve development goals as well as shield those most vulnerable in times of economic crises. Some also noted that conditional and unconditional cash transfers can be effective in vulnerability reduction.
* More international cooperation is needed to support policies and programmes to reduce vulnerability of people living with HIV/AIDS through prevention, treatment, care and support strategies, including special efforts to address stigmatization and discrimination.
* Vulnerable groups, especially women and minorities should be empowered and represented in national parliaments and included in the development process.
* Vulnerability in context of peace-negotiations was also noted. Special needs of Palestinian refugees merit special attention.
* In conclusion, we all agree that without addressing the special needs of the most vulnerable countries and people MDGs cannot be achieved.
Thank You Very Much.
High Level Plenary Meeting of the 65th Session of the General Assembly on the Millennium Development Goals
Dr. the Hon. W. Baldwin Spencer
Prime Minister
Antigua and Barbuda
Mr. President, Excellencies, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen,
I am honoured to present a summary of the discussion in Round Table 5 on Addressing the needs of the most vulnerable.
* It was observed that that the promotion and protection of human rights is a prerequisite for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. We must spare no effort to advance equality and non-discrimination with regards to gender, age, disability, ethnicity, geographical location, and HIV/AIDS status.
* It was noted that to answer the question of who the most vulnerable are and what are the causes of their vulnerability we need more disaggregated data.
* The representatives of small island developing states and landlocked countries pointed out their special vulnerability to climate change, natural disasters, high costs of energy and transportation. To fight climate change more investments should be made in mitigation and adaptation mechanisms, reducing dependency on fossil fuels and investment in renewable energies.
* The international community is urged to assist vulnerable countries: least developed countries, landlocked developing countries, small island developing states in addressing their specific needs and development challenges. Urgent action must focus on effective aid and trade policies; fulfilling of all ODA commitments and further mobilization of financial resources for development, including capacity building and technology transfer.
* Countries in conflict and post-conflict situations are especially vulnerable and in need of renewed focus on peace-building, including
consolidation of state institutions and assistance to internally displaced people and refugees.
* Member States recognize that ensuring equitable access to economic opportunities and social services for the poor and those in vulnerable situations is vital for the achievement of the MDGs. We should devote adequate resources to tackle basic sources of vulnerability, such as lack of access to adequate nutrition, education, skills training, health services and decent jobs. More efforts are needed to ensure access to financial services, including microfinance, credit and insurance for all, and especially those in vulnerable situations.
* Governments also underscore that comprehensive systems of social protection are essential to reduce inequality and vulnerability and achieve development goals as well as shield those most vulnerable in times of economic crises. Some also noted that conditional and unconditional cash transfers can be effective in vulnerability reduction.
* More international cooperation is needed to support policies and programmes to reduce vulnerability of people living with HIV/AIDS through prevention, treatment, care and support strategies, including special efforts to address stigmatization and discrimination.
* Vulnerable groups, especially women and minorities should be empowered and represented in national parliaments and included in the development process.
* Vulnerability in context of peace-negotiations was also noted. Special needs of Palestinian refugees merit special attention.
* In conclusion, we all agree that without addressing the special needs of the most vulnerable countries and people MDGs cannot be achieved.
Thank You Very Much.
21 September 2010
Independent Analysis Concludes Decolonisation Remains Unfinished Agenda of the United Nations
Comprehensive Study Shows Limited Progress in Carrying Out the Decolonisation Mandate
An independent Analysis of the Implementation of the United Nations Decolonisation Mandate during the Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism (2001 – 2010) has concluded that whilst the United Nations has adopted a series of significant recommendations over the last two decades to bring the contemporary colonial era to a close, the implementation of these measures adopted by the nations of the world leave much to be desired. The study noted that the lack of follow-through is the most important impediment to bringing "new millenium colonialism" to a close. The United Nations formlly lists sixteen non self-governing territories comprised of island dependencies in the Caribbean and Pacific, as well as several under sovereignty dispute. Only two territories since 1990- Namibia and Timor Leste - have exercised their inalienable right to self-determination and subsequet decolonisation.
The study was conducted by Independent Expert on Governance and Multilateral Diplomacy Dr. Carlyle Corbin who delivered the initial findings to the United Nations Pacific Regional Seminar on Decolonisation which met in Noumea, Kanaky (New Caledonia) last May. The full and updated analysis has been published in the September 2010 edition of Overseas Territories Report (Vol. IX No. 5). The following Introduction to the analysis was made available to OTR.
The full analysis is available from overseasreview@yahoo.com .
An independent Analysis of the Implementation of the United Nations Decolonisation Mandate during the Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism (2001 – 2010) has concluded that whilst the United Nations has adopted a series of significant recommendations over the last two decades to bring the contemporary colonial era to a close, the implementation of these measures adopted by the nations of the world leave much to be desired. The study noted that the lack of follow-through is the most important impediment to bringing "new millenium colonialism" to a close. The United Nations formlly lists sixteen non self-governing territories comprised of island dependencies in the Caribbean and Pacific, as well as several under sovereignty dispute. Only two territories since 1990- Namibia and Timor Leste - have exercised their inalienable right to self-determination and subsequet decolonisation.
The study was conducted by Independent Expert on Governance and Multilateral Diplomacy Dr. Carlyle Corbin who delivered the initial findings to the United Nations Pacific Regional Seminar on Decolonisation which met in Noumea, Kanaky (New Caledonia) last May. The full and updated analysis has been published in the September 2010 edition of Overseas Territories Report (Vol. IX No. 5). The following Introduction to the analysis was made available to OTR.
Introduction
The Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism (IDEC) is scheduled to expire at the end of 2010, coinciding with the fiftieth anniversary of the landmark Decolonisation Declaration [Resolution 1514 (XV)] , and Resolution 1541 (XV) which defined the minimum international standards of full self-government through the three legitimate political status alternatives of independence, free association with an independent States and integration into an independent State.
The present analysis serves as an update to the “Mid-Term Assessment of the Level of Implementation of the Plan of Action of the Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism” (Canuoan Assessment Paper) delivered to the Caribbean Regional Seminar on the Implementation of the Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism: mid term review, follow-up, and priorities for action which convened in Canouan, St. Vincent and the Grenadines in 2005.
The assessment on the implementation of the mandate of the First International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism over the period (1991-2000), was presented to the United Nations Pacific and Caribbean Regional Seminar(s) to Review the Political, Economic and Social Conditions in the Small Island Non-Self-Governing Territories which convened in Majuro, Marshall Islands in 2000, and to the Caribbean regional seminar which met in La Habana, Cuba in 2001, respectively. The Majuro and Havana Assessments were utilised in support of the adoption of the Second IDEC.
The present analysis identifies the legislative authority in undertaking the international decolonisation mandate during the second IDEC (2001-2010), as established in relevant resolutions of the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). Additionally, the recommendations of the Caribbean and Pacific regional seminars were examined since the actions called for largely emanated from governmental and civil society representatives of the non self-governing territories themselves. The regional seminars themselves emerged as the most successful and consistent activity of the two plans of action for the first and second decades.
Within this framework, the paper also explores the level of implementation of the actions called for by the United Nations system, including the Special Committee on Decolonisation, the wider UN system including its UN specialised agencies, the administering Powers and relevant intergovernmental organisations and civil society.
The overall intention of the paper is to assess the level of compliance to date with the international mandate undertaken by the relevant stakeholders, consistent with recognised international standards, and to offer future strategies to be taken for the way forward.
The full analysis is available from overseasreview@yahoo.com .
14 September 2010
Major Conference on Small Islands to Convene at United Nations Headquarters
Most Overseas Countries & Territories Eligible to Participate
United Nations member States will undertake a 5-year review of the Mauritius Strategy for the Further Implementation of the Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States at the beginning of the 65th Session of the UN General Assembly. The session will convene for two days on 24-25 September 2010.
Those overseas countries and territories (OCTs) which are associate members of the United Nations regional economic commissions are eligible for participation in the conference in the capacity of official observer providing for full participation in the proceedings including the right to address the session from the podium, and participation in all other events consistent with established practice. The legislative authority for the participation of the OCTs in the conference is U.N. General Assembly 64/199 of 21 December 2009 which:
"Invites the participation of associate members of regional commissions in the high-level review, subject to the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, and in the preparatory process thereof, as observers, in the same capacity specified for their participation at the International Meeting to Review the Implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States, held in Mauritius from 10 to 14 January 2005."
The category of participation of "Associate Members of Regional Economic Commissions" in United Nations world conferences and special sessions of the General Assembly was initiated by the associate members of ECLAC in the run-up to the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), otherwise known as the Earth Summit. The result was the establishment of a mechanism through which the overseas countries and territories (OCTs) could engage the international debate on issues in the economic and social sphere as it directly affects them. It should be noted that for those OCTs whose international relations are controlled by an administering power, the eligibility criteria for participation of the territories has been adopted by consensus in the UN General Assembly with the support of the cosmopolitan countries.
Several United Nations studies were undertaken to bring to light modalities for the participation of OCTs in the UN world conferences, and in the wider United Nations system, respectively. These studies serve as a blueprint for participation.
Governments of associate member countries of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) and the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) are urged to communicate their interest in participation to the United Nations Department of General Assembly and ECOSOC Affairs, or alternatively to contact their respective regional commission offices in Trinidad and Tobago (for the Caribbean), and Fiji (for the Pacific) for further information.
United Nations member States will undertake a 5-year review of the Mauritius Strategy for the Further Implementation of the Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States at the beginning of the 65th Session of the UN General Assembly. The session will convene for two days on 24-25 September 2010.
Those overseas countries and territories (OCTs) which are associate members of the United Nations regional economic commissions are eligible for participation in the conference in the capacity of official observer providing for full participation in the proceedings including the right to address the session from the podium, and participation in all other events consistent with established practice. The legislative authority for the participation of the OCTs in the conference is U.N. General Assembly 64/199 of 21 December 2009 which:
"Invites the participation of associate members of regional commissions in the high-level review, subject to the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, and in the preparatory process thereof, as observers, in the same capacity specified for their participation at the International Meeting to Review the Implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States, held in Mauritius from 10 to 14 January 2005."
Eligible Associate Member Countries
Anguilla
Aruba
(Bermuda) 1/
British Virgin Islands
Cayman Islands
Montserrat
Netherlands Antilles
Netherlands Antilles
Puerto Rico
(Turks & Caicos) 2/
US Virgin Islands
American Samoa
Cook Islands
French Polynesia
Guam
New Caledonia
Niue
Northern Mariana Islands
Tokelau 1/
1/ Territory is not an associate member of a UN regional economic commission
2/ Due to suspension of elected government eligibility for participation is in question.
*****
The genesis of participation of the associate member countries in United Nations world conferences emerged from the Working Group of Non-Independent Caribbean Countries (NICCs) of the Caribbean Development & Cooperation Committee (a subsidary body of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean) dating to the early 1990s. The category of participation of "Associate Members of Regional Economic Commissions" in United Nations world conferences and special sessions of the General Assembly was initiated by the associate members of ECLAC in the run-up to the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), otherwise known as the Earth Summit. The result was the establishment of a mechanism through which the overseas countries and territories (OCTs) could engage the international debate on issues in the economic and social sphere as it directly affects them. It should be noted that for those OCTs whose international relations are controlled by an administering power, the eligibility criteria for participation of the territories has been adopted by consensus in the UN General Assembly with the support of the cosmopolitan countries.
Several United Nations studies were undertaken to bring to light modalities for the participation of OCTs in the UN world conferences, and in the wider United Nations system, respectively. These studies serve as a blueprint for participation.
Governments of associate member countries of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) and the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) are urged to communicate their interest in participation to the United Nations Department of General Assembly and ECOSOC Affairs, or alternatively to contact their respective regional commission offices in Trinidad and Tobago (for the Caribbean), and Fiji (for the Pacific) for further information.
13 September 2010
For Chile, Colossal Trouble On Easter Island (Rapa Nui)
Annie Murphy
National Public Radio
Easter Island's ancient stone statues number nearly 1,000 and stand like sentries on the dramatic landscape. The descendants of the indigenous Rapanui people who made the carvings have a dispute with Chile over land and rights. The monumental statues of Easter Island have made the isolated island, more than 2,000 miles off the coast of Chile, an international tourist destination that carries the U.N. designation as a World Heritage Site. But the modern-day descendants of the people who made those ancient statues, the indigenous Rapanui, have a conflict with the Chilean state.
When Chile took over in the late 19th century, the Rapanui were pushed off their lands. Several thousand Rapanui still live on Easter Island, but they say outsiders now control the island, including its lucrative tourism industry.
On a breathtaking rocky point that juts out into sapphire-blue water, the Hanga Roa Hotel is a luxury eco-resort and spa — at least, it was supposed to be until the Hito clan took it over.
On a recent day, dozens of men, women and children were camped out on the lobby's couches. They evicted hotel staff, and they cook traditional Rapanui food on outdoor fires. Santi Hitorangi, a member of the Rapanui (pronounced rap-ah-NEW-ee), said he started this chain of events by planting a garden next to the hotel, which sits on land that used to belong to his clan.
Decades ago, the property was acquired by the government, and then traded between private owners. By law, only Rapanui can own land on Easter Island. But the law is not strictly enforced. Hitorangi said the Rapanui want to recover ownership of the entire island. When charges were pressed against Hitorangi, he went to the U.S., where he is now based.
"First and foremost is the title to the land, because there you have the right to determine local politics, to represent the Rapanui people, the Rapanui interests, culture," he said by phone from his home in Goshen, N.Y. "Bear in mind that the presence of the colonial government of Chile in Rapanui has one main purpose — to assimilate us to them."
The Rapanui are the original inhabitants of this windswept piece of grass, rock and sand. Geographically, Easter Island is part of Polynesia. It is home to nearly 1,000 mysterious statues called moai, positioned across the island like sentries amid a dramatic setting of volcanic stone cliffs above the ocean. When Chile laid claim to the island just over a century ago, it simply corralled the Rapanui into the island's one town, the village of Hanga Roa, and leased the rest to a sheep farm. It wasn't until the 1960s that the Rapanui became Chilean citizens.
Today, the village has a steady stream of tourists, which means it has electricity and water. Many Rapanui work in tourism and live in small cement or wood houses topped by metal roofs. Some still use horses to get around and do work.
For a tourist, Easter Island can feel like paradise — beautiful scenery, warm climate and world-class archaeological sites. The Rapanui are fine with tourists coming to their island. It is the unchecked flow of Chileans they are upset about.
Angela Tuki is part of the clan that has taken over the Hanga Roa Hotel. "We're tired of explaining everything to the state. Everything they do here goes badly. Especially immigration — it's not immigration, it's an invasion," she said. "Since there's no border between the island and the mainland, the state doesn't listen to us as a distinct ethnic group." The Hito clan has taken over the one hotel, but dozens of other properties in town are being occupied by other clans with ancestral claims.
The island's governor resigned because of the situation. Interim Gov. Jorge Miranda — who is from mainland Chile — said the Rapanui can't just expect the current government to solve century-old problems. "Unfortunately it's true that there were abuses and human rights violations. But it happened in another context, under another administration. We have good intentions to dialogue and resolve this problem peacefully," he said. But many Rapanui have lost faith in the Chilean government and don't even identify themselves as Chilean.
Tihi Tuki, a member of the clan occupying the Hanga Roa Hotel, wears fatigues as if in combat and has a topknot of rust-colored hair. Tuki spent years collecting garbage in town and said he quit because he felt like a servant to Chile. He tattooed the word "trash" on his right hand in Rapanui, so he wouldn't forget the experience. Now he plays music, does woodworking and finds odd jobs. Tuki lives in a shelter made of salvaged metal near Anakena Beach, an isolated cove on the north end of the island. It is also a popular spot for tourists. "I'm the heir to this place; this has nothing to do with the Chilean government. And I'm going to occupy the land that rightfully belongs to me," Tuki said.
But the Rapanui face big challenges and constant setbacks. Police recently evicted the Hito clan from the Hanga Roa Hotel. And the clan went right back and reoccupied it.
National Public Radio
Easter Island's ancient stone statues number nearly 1,000 and stand like sentries on the dramatic landscape. The descendants of the indigenous Rapanui people who made the carvings have a dispute with Chile over land and rights. The monumental statues of Easter Island have made the isolated island, more than 2,000 miles off the coast of Chile, an international tourist destination that carries the U.N. designation as a World Heritage Site. But the modern-day descendants of the people who made those ancient statues, the indigenous Rapanui, have a conflict with the Chilean state.
When Chile took over in the late 19th century, the Rapanui were pushed off their lands. Several thousand Rapanui still live on Easter Island, but they say outsiders now control the island, including its lucrative tourism industry.
On a breathtaking rocky point that juts out into sapphire-blue water, the Hanga Roa Hotel is a luxury eco-resort and spa — at least, it was supposed to be until the Hito clan took it over.
On a recent day, dozens of men, women and children were camped out on the lobby's couches. They evicted hotel staff, and they cook traditional Rapanui food on outdoor fires. Santi Hitorangi, a member of the Rapanui (pronounced rap-ah-NEW-ee), said he started this chain of events by planting a garden next to the hotel, which sits on land that used to belong to his clan.
Decades ago, the property was acquired by the government, and then traded between private owners. By law, only Rapanui can own land on Easter Island. But the law is not strictly enforced. Hitorangi said the Rapanui want to recover ownership of the entire island. When charges were pressed against Hitorangi, he went to the U.S., where he is now based.
"First and foremost is the title to the land, because there you have the right to determine local politics, to represent the Rapanui people, the Rapanui interests, culture," he said by phone from his home in Goshen, N.Y. "Bear in mind that the presence of the colonial government of Chile in Rapanui has one main purpose — to assimilate us to them."
The Rapanui are the original inhabitants of this windswept piece of grass, rock and sand. Geographically, Easter Island is part of Polynesia. It is home to nearly 1,000 mysterious statues called moai, positioned across the island like sentries amid a dramatic setting of volcanic stone cliffs above the ocean. When Chile laid claim to the island just over a century ago, it simply corralled the Rapanui into the island's one town, the village of Hanga Roa, and leased the rest to a sheep farm. It wasn't until the 1960s that the Rapanui became Chilean citizens.
Today, the village has a steady stream of tourists, which means it has electricity and water. Many Rapanui work in tourism and live in small cement or wood houses topped by metal roofs. Some still use horses to get around and do work.
For a tourist, Easter Island can feel like paradise — beautiful scenery, warm climate and world-class archaeological sites. The Rapanui are fine with tourists coming to their island. It is the unchecked flow of Chileans they are upset about.
Angela Tuki is part of the clan that has taken over the Hanga Roa Hotel. "We're tired of explaining everything to the state. Everything they do here goes badly. Especially immigration — it's not immigration, it's an invasion," she said. "Since there's no border between the island and the mainland, the state doesn't listen to us as a distinct ethnic group." The Hito clan has taken over the one hotel, but dozens of other properties in town are being occupied by other clans with ancestral claims.
The island's governor resigned because of the situation. Interim Gov. Jorge Miranda — who is from mainland Chile — said the Rapanui can't just expect the current government to solve century-old problems. "Unfortunately it's true that there were abuses and human rights violations. But it happened in another context, under another administration. We have good intentions to dialogue and resolve this problem peacefully," he said. But many Rapanui have lost faith in the Chilean government and don't even identify themselves as Chilean.
Tihi Tuki, a member of the clan occupying the Hanga Roa Hotel, wears fatigues as if in combat and has a topknot of rust-colored hair. Tuki spent years collecting garbage in town and said he quit because he felt like a servant to Chile. He tattooed the word "trash" on his right hand in Rapanui, so he wouldn't forget the experience. Now he plays music, does woodworking and finds odd jobs. Tuki lives in a shelter made of salvaged metal near Anakena Beach, an isolated cove on the north end of the island. It is also a popular spot for tourists. "I'm the heir to this place; this has nothing to do with the Chilean government. And I'm going to occupy the land that rightfully belongs to me," Tuki said.
But the Rapanui face big challenges and constant setbacks. Police recently evicted the Hito clan from the Hanga Roa Hotel. And the clan went right back and reoccupied it.
10 September 2010
Muere el independentista Juan Mari Brás
La Raza
Muere el independentista Juan Mari Brás
San Juan/INS
El histórico dirigente independentista puertorriqueño Juan Mari Brás falleció a eso de la 1:45 de la madrugada de hoy a los 83 años de edad tras una prolongada convalecencia en su hogar, confirmó a la agencia Inter News Service su yerno Enrique Estrada.
“Murió tranquilo en su hogar”, dijo Estrada, casado con Rosa Mari Pesquera, al indicar que en el transcurso del día se ofrecerán detalles de los funerales. El deceso de Mari Brás se produjo en su hogar en San Juan, donde convaleció el último año bajo el cuidado de su esposa Marta Brás.
El dirigente político ostentaba la ciudadanía puertorriqueña después de una ardua batalla legal que se originó cuando en 1994 se presentó a la embajada de Estados Unidos en Venezuela a renunciar la ciudadanía estadounidense, que Washington impuso a los boricuas en 1917.
Fue uno de los fundadores principales en 1959 del Movimiento Pro Independencia (MPI) de Puerto Rico, inspirado en la triunfante Revolución Cubana, que en 1971 devino en el Partido Socialista Puertorriqueño (PSP), marxista-leninista), del que fuera secretario general.
Ya en 1946 había participado en la fundación del Partido Independentista Puertorriqueño (PIP), del cual se distanció al radicalizar su visión revolucionaria inspirado en la figura del triunfante líder cubano Fidel Castro, a quien ya había conocido en su época universitaria durante un viaje a La Habana.
Expulsado de la Universidad de Puerto Rico (UPR) por participar en la huelga estudiantil de 1948, debió marchar a Estados Unidos a proseguir estudios en Florida Southern College, en el estado de la Florida.
En 1954 se graduó de abogado en la Escuela de Leyes de la American University, en la capital estadounidense, tras haber sido expulsado de la George Washington University durante la persecución anticomunista del senador Joseph McCarthy.
Mari Brás, a la par con el MPI, fue fundador junto al periodista y sindicalista César Andreu Iglesias del periódico izquierdista Claridad, que se continúa publicando como propulsor de la independencia puertorriqueña.
La salud del líder izquierdista comenzó a complicarse tras sufrir una caída el 31 de mayo de 2009 en su residencia en el sector Dulces Labios, en la occidental municipalidad de Mayagüez, donde había nacido el 2 de diciembre de 1926.
Debido a esa caída en octubre de ese año fue sometido a una intervención quirúrgica en la cabeza en el Centro Médico en Río Piedras, la que estuvo a cargo del doctor Eric Carro, con el propósito de succionarle unos hematomas subdurales que le causaban presión cerebral.Mari Brás salió airoso de esa cirugía, pero en diciembre de 2009 estuvo bajo cuidado intensivo en el hospital Bella Vista de Mayagüez a causa de una pulmonía. En esa oportunidad, los médicos le han descubierto un nódulo en el pulmón izquierdo, que le trajo otras complicaciones de salud.
El líder izquierdista murió con la profunda tristeza, recordó su yerno Estrada, de que jamás se esclareció quiénes estuvieron en 1976 detrás del asesinato de uno de sus hijos, Santiago (Chagui) Mari Pesquera. Para entonces Mari Brás, que en 1973 se había convertido en el primer independentista puertorriqueño en hablar en las Naciones Unidas, se encontraba inmerso en la campaña eleccionaria, ya que era candidato a la gobernación de Puerto Rico por el PSP.
En diciembre de 2009, su hija Rosa Mari Pesquera, portavoz de la Comisión por la Verdad y la Justicia, presentó documentos desclasificados del Negociado Federal de Investigaciones (FBI) que ubican a los exiliados cubanos Reynol Rodríguez González y Frank Eulalio Castro Paz en una conspiración para asesinar a Mari Brás.
Also see: Muere histórico líder independentista puertorriqueño Juan Mari Brás
Juan Mari Bras Biography
Muere el independentista Juan Mari Brás
San Juan/INS
El histórico dirigente independentista puertorriqueño Juan Mari Brás falleció a eso de la 1:45 de la madrugada de hoy a los 83 años de edad tras una prolongada convalecencia en su hogar, confirmó a la agencia Inter News Service su yerno Enrique Estrada.
“Murió tranquilo en su hogar”, dijo Estrada, casado con Rosa Mari Pesquera, al indicar que en el transcurso del día se ofrecerán detalles de los funerales. El deceso de Mari Brás se produjo en su hogar en San Juan, donde convaleció el último año bajo el cuidado de su esposa Marta Brás.
El dirigente político ostentaba la ciudadanía puertorriqueña después de una ardua batalla legal que se originó cuando en 1994 se presentó a la embajada de Estados Unidos en Venezuela a renunciar la ciudadanía estadounidense, que Washington impuso a los boricuas en 1917.
Fue uno de los fundadores principales en 1959 del Movimiento Pro Independencia (MPI) de Puerto Rico, inspirado en la triunfante Revolución Cubana, que en 1971 devino en el Partido Socialista Puertorriqueño (PSP), marxista-leninista), del que fuera secretario general.
Ya en 1946 había participado en la fundación del Partido Independentista Puertorriqueño (PIP), del cual se distanció al radicalizar su visión revolucionaria inspirado en la figura del triunfante líder cubano Fidel Castro, a quien ya había conocido en su época universitaria durante un viaje a La Habana.
Expulsado de la Universidad de Puerto Rico (UPR) por participar en la huelga estudiantil de 1948, debió marchar a Estados Unidos a proseguir estudios en Florida Southern College, en el estado de la Florida.
En 1954 se graduó de abogado en la Escuela de Leyes de la American University, en la capital estadounidense, tras haber sido expulsado de la George Washington University durante la persecución anticomunista del senador Joseph McCarthy.
Mari Brás, a la par con el MPI, fue fundador junto al periodista y sindicalista César Andreu Iglesias del periódico izquierdista Claridad, que se continúa publicando como propulsor de la independencia puertorriqueña.
La salud del líder izquierdista comenzó a complicarse tras sufrir una caída el 31 de mayo de 2009 en su residencia en el sector Dulces Labios, en la occidental municipalidad de Mayagüez, donde había nacido el 2 de diciembre de 1926.
Debido a esa caída en octubre de ese año fue sometido a una intervención quirúrgica en la cabeza en el Centro Médico en Río Piedras, la que estuvo a cargo del doctor Eric Carro, con el propósito de succionarle unos hematomas subdurales que le causaban presión cerebral.Mari Brás salió airoso de esa cirugía, pero en diciembre de 2009 estuvo bajo cuidado intensivo en el hospital Bella Vista de Mayagüez a causa de una pulmonía. En esa oportunidad, los médicos le han descubierto un nódulo en el pulmón izquierdo, que le trajo otras complicaciones de salud.
El líder izquierdista murió con la profunda tristeza, recordó su yerno Estrada, de que jamás se esclareció quiénes estuvieron en 1976 detrás del asesinato de uno de sus hijos, Santiago (Chagui) Mari Pesquera. Para entonces Mari Brás, que en 1973 se había convertido en el primer independentista puertorriqueño en hablar en las Naciones Unidas, se encontraba inmerso en la campaña eleccionaria, ya que era candidato a la gobernación de Puerto Rico por el PSP.
En diciembre de 2009, su hija Rosa Mari Pesquera, portavoz de la Comisión por la Verdad y la Justicia, presentó documentos desclasificados del Negociado Federal de Investigaciones (FBI) que ubican a los exiliados cubanos Reynol Rodríguez González y Frank Eulalio Castro Paz en una conspiración para asesinar a Mari Brás.
Also see: Muere histórico líder independentista puertorriqueño Juan Mari Brás
Juan Mari Bras Biography
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)