Winter 2012 Vol

CIDA cuts and delays hurt aid programs • Des femmes prennent le volant à Riyad Canada’s magazine on global rights and justice Working for a better world A career in international justice Chaining the mentally ill Kalahari Bushmen Their fight to return home The jailing of Afghan women Fairtrade gold - ethical, ecological, local Upstream Journal Winter 2012 Vol. 24 No. 2 1 Bushmen children in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve, Botswana, pictured here in front of a water borehole that was capped by the government nine years ago. Water was made inaccessible, and hunting illegal, as the government encouraged development of tourism and mining in the natural reserve and forced the Bushmen out. The borehole was recently re-opened, following a court victory by the Bushmen. Photos courtesy of Survival International. Editor’s note: This image is a composite of two photos - one of the capped borehole and one of children from the community that could no longer live there. Check the inside back cover for another photo - this time with children actually at the re-opened borehole. 2 Upstream Journal Winter 2012 Vol. 24 No. 2 In this issue: Kalahari Bushmen fight to return home 5 The jailing of Afghan women 9 Chaining the mentally ill 13 Fairtrade gold 16 Des femmes prennent le volant à Riyad 17 Sri Lanka - no justice, no accountability 21 Cover: Gana Bushman at Molapo in the Central Eye on Ottawa 23 Kalahari Game Reserve, Botswana. Photo: Fiona Watson/Survival International CIDA cuts and delays hurt aid programs New funding for NGOs that partner with mining companies Eye on the World Bank and IMF 26 The new World Bank strategy on energy - is it enough? Coal projects prove problematic World Bank funds repressive Belarus regime New program may be setback to safeguards Working for a better world 30 A career in international justice Of debt and gold - Ernie’s opinion 32 The Upstream Journal is published 4 times a year. About this paper: Our thanks to our volunteer and intern writers, and to the The Upstream Journal is printed on photographers who contributed their work. For information on 100% recycled paper with a high post- submitting articles or other material, contact the editor. consumer content. Upstream Journal Winter 2012 Vol. 24 No. 2 3 FROM THE EDITOR... Dear readers, Our cover story this time is about indigenous people of the Kalahari, and their fight for recognition and protection of their rights. They want to live in their traditional territory, and the government wants them out so it can pursue tourism and mining opportunities. As is often the case, mining interests are competing with the rights of indigenous people. So what are we to make of the government funding partnerships between development groups and mining companies, and human rights considerations are not included? Indeed, none of the development groups has shown any interest in the rights of indigenous people. CIDA has committed $5.7 million to partners IAMGOLD and Plan Canada for “one of the largest public-private partnerships with an extractive company in CIDA’s history,” as IAMGOLD’s press statement says. CIDA is also giving about half a million dollars each to two other projects that have World University Service of Canada (WUSC) part- nered with Rio Tinto Alcan and World Vision Canada with Barrick Gold. Other NGOs are concerned that Canadian foreign aid policy will continue to emphasize private sector engagement in extractive industries, and that resource-rich countries can expect more attention – and money -from CIDA in the years to come, at the expense of aid programs elsewhere. According to the most recent financial statements provided to Revenue Canada, these three groups were already getting serious funding from the federal government - Plan International Canada got $6.4 million, World Vision Canada $13 million and WUSC $12 million. Other NGOs aren’t doing as well (see “Eye on Ottawa,” page 23). In a joint response to media reports that questioned the ethics of this funding, the three NGOs claimed to have an expertise that will ensure “maximum benefits” from their engagement with mining companies. “As long- term partners of local communities and governments in such countries, WUSC, World Vision, and Plan are sharing well-developed best practices with mining companies and local developing country governments. Moreover, by engaging mining companies at the highest levels, we are working to help raise the bar on corporate social responsibility standards for future mining operations.” What “best practice” did they mean? The bar has already been raised on corporate social responsibility, with the growing acceptance of the need for “free, prior and informed consent” of local indigenous people before mining operations can begin, for example. Recently adopted as policy by the private sector division of the World Bank, this concept is being expanded by the UN as part of its program to safeguard forests. The requirement of consent – not just consultation – reflects the progress of rights-based development thinking that puts local people first, and is the result of years of campaigning by human rights organizations. Yet searches of the three NGO web sites show no references to the need for this consent whatsoever. Indeed, their web sites have nothing to say about the rights of indigenous people at all, despite numerous examples of tension, conflict and rights violations when mining takes place in their communities. As the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous people described in his 2011 report, “The growing awareness of the impact of extractive industries on the rights of indigenous peoples is further raised by the con- cerns expressed... that these projects and industries are becoming the greatest challenges to the exercise of the rights of indigenous peoples. This situation is further evidenced by the lack of understanding of basic minimum standards on the effects of extractive industries affecting indigenous peoples and about the role and responsibility of the State to ensure protection of their rights.” Will the millions of dollars CIDA is giving these NGOs really be a help to communities facing the “greatest challenges” to their rights? The experience of the Bushmen is an example of what happens when those rights are ignored. Derek MacCuish 1-514-933-6797 [email protected] 4 Upstream Journal Winter 2012 Vol. 24 No. 2 Kalahari Bushmen fight to return home Rapporteur James Anaya investigated the situation BY SARA ESPINAL HENAO he concluded that the experiences of the Bushmen show otherwise. In practice, he says, people were virtually forced out of their land by government he lives of the Bushmen of Botswana authorities in three clearances. changed dramatically thirty years ago This is also the view of Jumanda Gakelebone, T with the discovery of more than three a Bushman activist and member of the grass-roots billion dollars’ worth of diamonds in the advocacy organization First People of the Kalahari. Kalahari Desert. Their home, now part of the When I reached him by telephone in Bot- Kalahari Reserve, is in the middle of the richest swana, he described the lack of options his people diamond producing area in the world. were given. “If you come and tell people that they Authorities began relocating the Bushmen into have to move, you’re not giving them an option. settlements outside the Central Kalahari, argu- You’re telling them where you want them to go. ing that the Bushmen were depleting the reserve’s The Bushmen of the Central Kalahari were given natural resources, that their lifestyle was no longer a certain period to move. And the trucks started consistent with the developmental objectives of coming and loading them out of the reserve. the reserve, and that it was cost-inefficient for the Authorities were not going to give them services government to provide services to the community. unless they moved to the resettlement camps. They The government said that these relocations were were pushed. They were forced.” voluntary and occurred only after consultations According to Anaya and Gakelebone, the gov- and public meetings. However, when UN Special ernment stopped providing food rations, health Upstream Journal Winter 2012 Vol. 24 No. 2 5 services and schooling. People were trucked away, their homes dismantled and their livestock confis- cated. The government forbade them to hunt in the reserve without a license, but then did not issue any. Most importantly, the government capped the Mothomelo borehole, which provided the Bushmen with water, and removed the borehole’s pump. The Bushmen are the indigenous people of Two hundred and thirty-nine Bushmen joined Southern Africa. Having once occupied the whole in taking the government to court in 2002. Four region, just 100,000 remain today in Botswana, years later they won the right to return, but little Namibia, South Africa and Angola. actually changed. Although the court ruling allowed The Central Kalahari Game Reserve in Botswana the Bushmen to return home, only those named as was established by the government in 1961 “to plaintiffs in the court case were allowed back. The protect wildlife resources and reserve sufficient government said that the ruling did not compel it to land for traditional use by hunter-gatherer allow access to water, and kept the hunting restric- communities of the Central Kalahari.” It is the tions in place. traditional territory of 5,000 Gana, Gwi and Tsila Without access to food and water in their reserve, Bushmen (and their neighbours the Bakgalagadi). many of the Bushmen stay in resettlement camps. Those that try to live in the reserve depend on erratic rains, melons, roots, and rain-filled depressions in the sand that they call “pans” for water.

Load more