Why Club doesn’t work any more

THIS YEAR’S COMMONWEALTH Heads of Government Meeting takes place in the 60th anniversary year of the organisation.

For the past six decades, notably since the 1970s, every such meeting has seen the Commonwealth taking progressive stands on human rights.

Eighteen years ago, at the 1991 summit in Harare, the Commonwealth reiterated past promises and enshrined them in the Harare Declaration as a “fundamental political value” of the Commonwealth.

Four years later in 1995 the summit in New Zealand created the Millbrook Action Plan to operationalise the Commonwealth’s fundamental values, and ushered in the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) which is mandated to act on persistent violations of the Commonwealth’s fundamental values.

Fourteen years have passed since then, yet much of the Commonwealth, which contains about a third of the world’s population, is still bedevilled by egregious human rights violations.

Upholding human rights commitments is a fundamental imperative for any partnership that aspires to create equitability and sustainability in the future.

The Commonwealth’s record in this regard is disheartening. For example, while the 2007 summit in Kampala and the 1999 Law Ministers Meeting underlined the importance of Access to Information, so far, only 15 Commonwealth countries have access to information laws in place.

In 1997, the summit at Edinburgh expressed the belief that an International Criminal Court (ICC) would be an important development in the international promotion of the rule of law, yet 23 Commonwealth countries are yet to ratify or acceed to the Rome Statute.

Two years ago in Kampala, the heads of government pledged to end impunity for perpetrators of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

Throughout 2008 and most of 2009 allegations of serious human rights violations were made against Sri Lanka, and the way it conducted its campaign against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam.

YET DESPITE THESE DOUBTS, THE country continued to sit as a Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group member for a third consecutive term against the decision of the 1999 summit in Durban that countries should be allowed to sit on CMAG for only two consecutive terms.

However, the Commonwealth’s own meetings are yet to achieve even the degree of transparency and civil society participation that has become the norm at the United Nations and other intergovernmental organisations.

In the meanwhile, the civil society in Commonwealth countries continues to suffer. Human rights defenders in particular find their activities restricted and curtailed by sometimes subtle, sometimes draconian legal regulations that target their ability to engage in activities to promote and protect human rights.

Drawing attention to human rights violations, calling for change through peaceful assembly and documenting and disseminating information on human rights violations are central to the work of human rights defenders, yet these activities are often criminalised in the Commonwealth.

The latest outburst from the President of the Gambia calling for human rights defenders to be killed, indicates what civil society in the Commonwealth has to deal with. As yet, reaction from the Commonwealth to this has ranged from muted to non-existent.

On October 21, as in years past, the Committee of the Whole met in London to set the agenda for CHOGM. It is of utmost importance that this committee focuses on human rights commitments.

Benchmarking and reporting mechanisms which have so far been scanty in the Commonwealth may be useful in such an endeavour, as well as providing a standard against which applications can be objectively assessed.

Mr Ilango is a consultant, Human Rights Advocacy Programme, CHRI.