Dialogue in Pursuit of Development - Are you looking for one of ...

234
Introductory course for human rights activists in Malawi
In 1995, the first two-week human rights training course for institutions in
civil society was held, with the participation of the Law Commissioner, the
newly appointed Ombudsman and a number of organisations. This was allegedly
the first of its kind ever in Malawi since the end of the Banda dictatorship,
which led to the adoption of the new multi-party system and a
Constitution rich in human rights principles. However, the Bill of Rights
contains only civil and political rights, while economic and social as well as
vulnerable groups’ rights are located in a separate chapter entitled Principles
of National Policy, which in contrast are not legally enforceable. One course
participant was extremely bitter because of this, maintaining that it, for instance,
meant that disabled persons’ rights were not sufficiently ensured
and which prevented his organisation from taking effective action on the
basis of the Constitution. After a while it was suggested to him that he
might take a different approach, and instead focus on the fact that the Constitution
did, in fact, mention the rights of the disabled, in this way distinguishing
itself from most other contemporary Constitutions. He could then
consider approaching the government and encourage it to acknowledge that
it had taken upon itself obligations in this area, while offering the assistance
of his organisation in their implementation, for instance by drawing up action
plans and providing public information. In this way the key national
human rights document and its formulation would serve as a very constructive
starting point and basis for dialogue between government and civil
society.
Basic questions and assumptions
One of the first issues we must examine in relation to human rights aid and
development, i.e. based on the fulfilment of standards formulated in the global,
regional or national documents mentioned above, is: Who initiates and
carries out the dialogue? As the cases outlined above show, the initiative can
come from two different sides, either from the donor, or from human rights
actors in a developing country representing government or civil society.
The background for the first scenario is the fact that over the last decade
donors have increasingly incorporated human rights as a pre-condition, i.e.
as a negative criterion, for development assistance. Therefore, a government
may decide that human rights conditions are not sufficiently acceptable to
warrant a continuation of development aid to a particular country. This is
indeed the most drastic solution, and usually such a decision will (and ought
to) be preceded by first attempting to address the issue through negotiation.
The donor country or institution may ask for improvement, while the
state being criticised will naturally wish to take a position of defence, often
attempting to explain this with a reference to the particular circumstances
in which it finds itself.