Grievances as a Public Good

BY Margaux Hall 

This summer, I made a project visit to a government clinic in northern Sierra Leone. It is a clinic pretty much in name only, being constructed as 1-bedroom living quarters for a teacher and subsequently converted into a health facility. The nurse took me on a tour, pointing out the problems: a broken scale to weigh infants, no waiting room for early stages of labor, animals grazing and
leaving waste by the clinic entrance, missing IV materials and drugs, to name just a few. She then turned to me, visibly frustrated, and asked what I would recommend. I asked her if she had tried complaining. “You want me to report my boss to human rights?!” she responded, incredulously. Her assistants at the clinic broke out in laughter. How could she possibly complain up the chain of command?

When I first started working on accountability projects in Sierra Leone in 2011, I jokingly told colleagues that my goal was to contribute to a culture of complaining in the country. My words were in jest, but the spirit behind them was not. Witnessing a range of systemic breakdowns in health delivery, at all levels, I sensed a deep need for citizens and service providers to formulate and direct their grievances. I started to view grievances as a type of public good—a service provided for the benefit and well-being of all members of a community.

There are a range of reasons for this. A single grievance can, if acted upon, lead to dramatic change—IV supplies may save the life of a woman in labor. Grievances also show the government that citizens expect it to deliver services. This has not always been the case in Sierra Leone where citizen-state relations have suffered historic breakdowns, and where NGOs have often filled gaps. And when aggregated, grievances can help government set priorities and revise and improve policy.

As the Justice for the Poor program has worked with the government to design and implement interventions to improve accountability for health services, we have charted our progress, in part, by measuring the number of complaints filed, as well as the ways in which they are resolved (or not). I have seen firsthand the barriers to people complaining. Entitlements aren’t clear so people don’t even know what they can rightfully complain about. Individuals like the nurse fear that government won’t respond or, even worse, will retaliate by denying promotions or transfers to more accessible urban locations. And certain grievances are too complex for individuals or communities to tackle on their own—they need agents to represent their interests.

If grievances are a public good, then what might be some ways to remove these obstacles?

• Clarify and broadcast individuals’ rights and/or duties. Donors frequently emphasize that individuals must know their rights before they demand them. Yet, we often under-invest in helping government develop and disseminate coherent, practical, and clear policy. As just one example, our Justice for the Poor team has spent the past year working closely with government to clearly articulate rights under the President’s Free Health Care Initiative and how those rights fit into the broader health policy landscape. These are not simple issues to resolve, but if the landscape is unclear to government, we should not expect it to make sense to citizens, nurses, or their agents.

• Strengthen existing complaints channels. Donors often focus on project-specific grievance redress mechanisms (GRMs). Indeed, a World Bank social accountability human development portfolio review completed last year identified GRMs in 23% of Bank-funded projects containing social accountability elements, but these GRMs had a predominantly inward focus—on making sure the project works well. Can we move towards strengthening existing accountability mechanisms (such as administrative complaints offices or ombuds persons) that will live long after a project (and its GRM) has closed?

• Consider structured processes, like community compacts, that can frame complaints as collective community concerns to mitigate fears of individual retaliation and facilitate communities and service providers acting together to prompt change.

• Use agents of the complainant (paralegals, chiefs, community accountability committees, or otherwise) who have enhanced information, skills, or authority, and yet some independence from the service deliverer, to take up complaints involving large power imbalances or broader structural breakdowns.

As we’ve tested these theories in Sierra Leone, we have seen evidence of other, relational ways in which grievances can serve as a public good. Community members have reported that they are happier with the quality of services after complaining. Nurses and community members have forged stronger bonds and have starting working together, even when their complaints have been initially directed at one another.

I discussed this possibility with the nurse—how her complaint might actually be a good for the community. We triaged her concerns and brainstormed ways in which she could work with the community to resolve issues like animals grazing near the clinic, as well as ways in which she might safely complain up the chain of command and engage others to act as her agent in so doing. She seemed cynical, but less so—the laughter, for one, had ceased. She committed to taking a first step as a complainant: she noted there was a powerful town chief dedicated to development; she would visit him the next day and voice her concerns.

Source: blogs.worldbank.org

UK: British Somali Charities urge PM Cameroon to Help Maintain Remittance Lifeline

SRDF PRESS RELEASE


London - A group of more than 40 charities led by British Somalis based in the UK have today written to Prime Minister David Cameron urging him to help save a crucial lifeline to one of the poorest countries in the world.

Remittances play a critical role in supporting the recovery and re-development of Somalia. Globally it is estimated that around $1.3 billion is sent in remittances by the Somali diaspora to the country every year, which is significantly more than the combined international humanitarian aid budget for the country.

They fear that the decision made by Barclays Bank executives in London to close the business accounts of over 80 money service businesses (MSBs) would be a national and regional disaster for Somalia and would undoubtedly escalate the ongoing humanitarian crisis in the country. At present 4 million children across Somalia are without education services. Most of the schools and health care services rely heavily on money being sent from diaspora members. Statistics show that 60% of the annual income of a family in Somalia is through money service transfers, thus the effects of this being taken away would be devastating

The coalition of 41 charities led by British Somalis is calling on Barclays to extend the deadline set for the closure of the accounts. They also urge the British Government to support the commitments they made at the London Somalia Conference in May and find a solution - before the deadline set by Barclays - which is reasonable and fair for banks, MSBs, humanitarian NGOs and most importantly the Somali people; so that Somalia can look to the future with the support of their families and loved ones here in the UK.

"We call on the Government to act decisively and expeditiously if it is to avoid yet another humanitarian crisis in Somalia. The deadline set by Barclays is fast approaching. The Prime Minister must encourage Barclays to extend the deadline for closing the accounts of Somali MSBs by 12 months whilst we look at working together to ensure a lasting solution can be identified", said Mukthar Behi, Chairman, Somali Relief and Development Forum.

*** Ends ***

Addendum

• The Somali Relief and Development Forum is an umbrella organisation supporting Somali-led charities registered in the UK. We work through our membership organisations to provide a platform for relief and development projects and advocacy.

• There are up to 300,000 Somalis living in the UK – the largest expatriate Somali community outside of the Horn of Africa. In February this year, Foreign Secretary William Hague gave a stark reminder of the great reliance Somalia has on overseas remittances: "Somalis worldwide provide more than $1 billion in remittances back to Somalia each year – more than the international community provides in aid," he said. "We want to see a Somalia that is stable, where the basic needs of its population are met, and that is able to begin to build its economy and its future."

• On 16 September, the British Government is hosting a meeting to discuss about the effects of Barclays' decision on remittances. It will chaired by Alan Duncan MP, Minister of State for International Development.

• On 16 September, the European Union (EU) and Somalia will also be co-hosting a High Level Conference on "A New Deal for Somalia" in Brussels. The Conference's underlying objective is to sustain the positive momentum in Somalia, to ensure that the country stays on the path to stability, peace and brings prosperity to its people.

• On 8 May Barclays announced it was removing banking services from 80 money service businesses in the UK.

• On 27 June, Somali President, H.E. Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, issued a plea to find a way forward and for Barclays Bank to retain the service whilst working together with the Somali and UK Governments to remain compliant in monitoring transfer funds and improving procedures that tackle financial crime, a stated commitment of the new Federal Government of Somali.

• On 27 August, Rushanara Ali MP led a delegation that delivered a petition with 25,500 signatures to 10 Downing Street calling on the Prime Minister to throw a lifeline to families in developing countries by taking urgent action on this issue. The petition was signed and endorsed by Mo Farah, and was delivered by MPs and chief executives of money-transfer companies, campaigners and hundreds of activists on the day.

• On 9 September, eight aid agencies called on Barclays Bank to scrap plans to sever money transfer accounts. They include Oxfam, Care International and WorldVision.

For further information please contact Saira Niazi at saira.niazi@srdf.org.uk,


Somali Relief and Development Forum

SRDF @Charity Hub, 7th Floor Westgate House, London W5 1YY

Website: www.srdf.org.uk  Email: info@srdf.org.uk

Registered Charity: 1143208

Somaliland university gains international recognition

by Matthew Newsome

British, Canadian and African universities have been partnering with the University of Hargeisa, in the breakaway state of Somaliland, to boost the institution’s international credibility and the recognition of its qualifications.

Although international recognition has yet to be conferred on Somaliland since it separated from Somalia in 1991, its largest university – which has 6,500 students and is located in the capital city of Hargeisa – has been seeking foreign partners to supply higher education to Somaliland students.

In early 2013, Hargeisa University signed an agreement with Scotland’s Heriot-Watt University, in terms of which the Edinburgh-based university would accept Hargeisa's degrees and diplomas as valid qualifications.

The deal also involved Heriot-Watt helping to invigilate Hargeisa’s distance learning examinations, and offering scholarships to Hargeisa students.

“Our latest agreement with Heriot-Watt University, for it to invigilate our distance learning exams, really helps to give our efforts recognition, which we hope will lead to increased levels of acceptance of our students wishing to study overseas,” Dr Abdi Hussein Gass, president of the University of Hargeisa, told University World News.

This followed an October 2012 decision by the University of Cambridge to recognise educational certificates from Somaliland.

And Hargeisa medical students have been helped since 2006 by King's College London. For instance, they have their final exams monitored and administered by King's College London’s school of medicine.

These initiatives have helped to improve Hargeisa University’s credibility, encouraging other international universities to collaborate with its staff and students – it has 200 teaching staff.

Contributing to development

Among the most popular courses currently offered by the University of Hargeisa are bachelor degrees in business administration, medicine, law and engineering.

The university has also just introduced a nursing degree, with a key aim being to improve Somaliland’s maternal healthcare, according to Gass. “In order to reduce infant mortality and improve the health of mothers it is necessary to upgrade the skills of our undergraduate students,” he said.

Somaliland’s social care sector is expected to benefit in future thanks to a new agreement between Hargeisa and Ottawa. Canada’s Carleton University is launching a new social work programme this month, helping Hargeisa to improve its teaching materials, and offering cooperation in research projects and opportunities to exchange staff and students.

In early 2013, Hargeisa signed a similar agreement with Kenyatta University, Kenya’s second largest institution, for the future recognition of its qualifications. Kenyatta also agreed to make applications on behalf of Hargeisa for funding from European Union capacity-building programmes – which Somaliland universities cannot currently access because of the region’s unrecognised legal status.

“The University of Hargeisa appreciates assistance to help continually improve our standards as a competitive East African institution,” Gass told University World News.

One of the greatest deterrents for potential foreign investors in Somaliland is the dearth of domestic professionals able to implement financial reporting in line with international standards.

A new partnership between the university and the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants, or ACCA – the global body for professional accountants – aims to help improve business conditions in Somaliland.

The university joined ACCA in 2011 and now has the authority to certify accountants from Somalia and Somaliland through a campus-based ACCA exam centre. “By joining the ACCA international body for examinations, the University of Hargeisa has an important role to play in developing Somaliland’s capacity for financial reporting,” said Gass.

Challenges

Despite these advances, the expansion of the university’s educational programmes has been challenged by a lack of resources, partly because of the international community’s failure to recognise the breakaway region as a country independent from Somalia, despite that fact that it has exercised de facto independence since 1991.

Subsequently, the country has also been ineligible for financial support from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

“Libraries are poorly equipped to meet the current educational and research needs: there is a shortage of educational materials, computers, furniture and small teacher-student conference rooms,” commented Gass.

“The lack of recognition has created problems for the whole country with the lack of aid, finance and insurance. No lecturers are going to go to Somalia, which Somaliland is [part of] officially,” said Richard Sills, chair of the Darlington Gacmadhere Foundation in the UK, which promotes educational opportunities for Somalilanders.

Over and above steps towards international recognition, what Hargeisa really needs is comprehensive recognition of its work and courses.

Gass explained: “Our students cannot attend most international universities because University of Hargeisa degrees are not recognised by many international universities.

Eid Ali Ahmed, a UK-based special advisor and consultant to Hargeisa, added: “It is difficult, or not even feasible, to have visiting professors and lecturers from international universities. If scholarships are secured for students and lecturers, it would be difficult to obtain visas to travel.”

The university has a limited annual scholarship programme, for 30 students. The Somaliland government contributes USD16,000 to this annually, while the university is expected to generate an additional USD55,000 each year. The outstanding amount is to be generated by the university’s fundraising efforts.

The most important thing is to keep contact with the international university community, said Richard Sills of Darlington Gacmadhere.

“The international community can help universities in Somaliland like Hargeisa by setting up exchange lecturers and by having exams set by international universities. This raises standards and the exam results would also be more likely to be recognised overseas.”

Despite the challenges that come with being a university in involuntary exile from the rest of the world, the mood on campus is positive.

“The future of Hargeisa University appears brighter because of the new wave of partnerships with foreign universities. The momentum we have is increasing and we are confident it will generate more learning opportunities for our students,” said Gass.

Int'l Criminal Court Kenya Case: The Prosecutor v. William Samoei Ruto and Joshua Arap Sang - Watch Documentary Video

'In the Courtroom' programme -- Ruto and Sang trial opens, 10-11 September 2013

Situation: Situation in the Republic of Kenya
Case: The Prosecutor v. William Samoei Ruto and Joshua Arap Sang

The trial in the case The Prosecutor v. William Samoei Ruto and Joshua Arap Sang opened on 10 September 2013, in the presence of the accused. Mr Ruto and Mr Sang are accused of crimes against humanity (murder, deportation or forcible transfer of population and persecution) allegedly committed in Kenya in the context of the 2007-2008 post-election violence. The trial is being heard by Trial Chamber V(a), which is composed of Judges Chile Eboe-Osuji (presiding), Olga Herrera Carbuccia and Robert Fremr.

In this edition of the 'In the Courtroom' programme: the opening of the trial, from 10 to 11 September. During these hearings, the charges against the accused were read and Presiding Judge was satisfied that the accused understood the nature of the charges. Both accused pleaded not guilty to the charges. The Prosecution, Defense and Legal Representative of Victims gave opening statements, and Mr Sang also addressed the Court.

Background: Kenya ratified the Rome Statute on 15 March 2005, becoming a State Party. On 31 March 2010, Pre-Trial Chamber II authorised the Prosecutor to open an investigation proprio motu in the situation in the Republic of Kenya, in relation to the 2007-2008 post-election violence in that country.

Watch Documentary Video

On the world's largest arms fair, surveillance technologies and UK export controls

A protester takes part in a demonstration outside the Houses of Parliament in London against the Defence Security Equipment International (DSEI) arms fair, 12 September 2013

This week in London, the world's largest arms fair DSEI rolled into town, bringing together some of the world's most sophisticated killing and torture equipment with some of the world's worst human rights abusers. On sale this year was also some of the UK's premier lawful interception and surveillance technology.

Considering the forum in which these technologies are being sold, and the caliber of customers looking to buy it, you would think that the sale of such technology from the UK is regulated in a similar way to the military equipment also on offer.

But that isn't so. The international market in communications surveillance, monitoring and interception technology is dangerously under-regulated. Authoritarian governments that commit human rights abuses regularly get access to gear that enables them to spy on their population's communications. Yet, shockingly, there is very little at the moment stopping companies on show at DSEI selling surveillance equipment to repressive regimes.

Such controls are already in place to control the trade in military goods in the EU where there is a risk the goods will be used for human rights abuses. While being far from perfect, these controls at least allow for governmental oversight over the arms trade and through this a level of democratic accountability. Given that surveillance technology has the same if not more potential to enable human rights abuses, it is right that the trade is controlled and that the export control system be used as a central element within this.

A troubled few months

Recent revelations concerning the UK's export system have however raised some important questions. The UK has set itself the inherently complex task of being both a human rights advocate on the global stage and its sixth largest arms seller - a fact that has attracted heavy criticism recently. Far from ensuring that military technology doesn't end up in the hands of tyrants, critics argue that the UK is systematically arming some of the worst human rights abusers in the world.

Back in July, a bi-partisan committee of MPs slammed the UK government for approving over £12 billion worth of UK military and dual-use equipment for export to 27 countries classified as human rights abusers by the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Such countries include Zimbabwe, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Belarus, Yemen and Burma.

The resulting controversy had barely dissipated before UK BIS, the department responsible for export controls, issued a press release announcing that as a result of European action it was to ban the export of military and dual-use equipment to post-coup Egypt - a decision also requiring it to revoke some 49 extant licenses.

Not less than a week had passed however, when it was revealed that the department had in 2012 authorised the transfer of precursor chemicals to Syria that could be used in weapons programs, some 10 months after the civil war began. It was a chilling indictment by itself, but was made significantly more worrying considering that it came only days after the UK parliament narrowly decided against military intervention in ostensible response to the use of chemical weapons. The fact that the Secretary of State responsible for export controls is alleged to have subsequently provided contradictory evidence about the incident did little to help the situation.

The main lesson that is to be learnt from all of this is clear: the UK needs to exercise far wiser and longer-term judgment over its exports of controlled goods.

Need for urgent action

The debate concerning such transfers is only allowed to happen because the equipment in question was controlled, decisions on approvals were published and because the UK has a robust civil society and media sector able to hold the system to account.

This is not the case with surveillance technology since most of which is not subject to export control in the UK, even though it often goes to repressive regimes. For example, the German-based and British-owned surveillance company Utimaco, were caught providing the snooping technology to Assad's security services before war broke out, while documents obtained in the midst of the Egyptian Revolution in 2011 show a sales contract for surveillance technology between the security services there and the British spy company Gamma.

Despite these technologies being sold to governments with poor human rights records, no one could be held properly accountable for their export. The only way to do so is to ensure that such equipment is within scope of control.

Transfers of equipment containing cryptographic technology

Cryptographic technology does however fall within export control lists, the trade of which governments are keen to regulate. These controls are essentially designed to guarantee continued government access to worldwide personal communications. They also inadvertently mean that some products, such as Gamma's FinFisher, which allows users to hack and snoop through computers and mobile phones, require an approval for export. However, this is merely because FinFisher contains cryptography - not because it can be used as a tool for targeting and repression.

The UK, through its trade champion UKTI, has made the export of sophisticated ICT technology requiring cryptography a priority given its undoubted strength in the sector and the current economic climate. Between 2008 and the beginning of this year, the UK approved some £1.18 billion worth of equipment employing cryptographic technology in single licenses to the 27 countries that the UK FCO currently deems as 'of the most concern' in terms of human rights. Since 2008 and prior to the Syrian Civil War, over £4 million worth of equipment employing cryptography in single licenses was approved for export to Syria. Over £28 million worth of similarly classified equipment was approved for export to Egypt since 2008, including £387,787 worth since the uprising began in January 2011.

Given the propensity of the UK to approve the sale of controlled equipment to human rights abusers, some serious questions arise out of this. For instance, what was this equipment for, and could these approvals to these sensitive destinations have allowed the transfer of equipment enabling repression? There is an undoubted need for the UK government to go much further in its transparency efforts to allow for its decisions and policies to be held to democratic account.

The banality of export controls

There's no denying that the UK does take its commitments to human rights seriously, and it does operate one of the most rigorous export control systems in the world. However, it doesn't mean that the Government won't arm some of the most rights-abusing regimes in the world in the name of national security, geo-political interests and profit. What's urgently needed is a reassessment of whether allowing the transfer of strategic goods to rights-abusing destinations demands too much of a sacrifice on human rights and poses too grave a risk to the UK's own interests, given the repeated tendency such goods have to later be used against the them. While Prime Minister Cameron has made no secret of his desire to promote the UK arms trade across the globe in the past, perhaps recent revelations will now underline the need for such a debate.

At the moment, however, the fact that there are no controls on the export of surveillance technologies in the first place make these arguments moot, despite the fact that these technologies have the ability to empower authoritarian regimes in the same way as the traditional arms trade does. It is only once such controls are in place that any discussion surrounding the UK Government's foreign policy decisions and priorities can be had.

The UK has avoided unilateral action and said that it will pursue international efforts to bring the market into regulation at a meeting of the intergovernmental Wassenaar Arrangement, a multi-lateral export regime, in December 2013. Despite the fact that this comes too late to have effect on the technology on sale at DSEI this week, this will provide an opportunity for the UK to take the first step. Let's hope they do just that.

Source: ifex.org

Madaarka Caalamiga ah ee Hargeysa oo laga hirgeliyay Ilayska Tamarta Hawada

Korontadani waxay u suurtogelinaysaa in Diyaaraduhu Habeenimada soo degi karaan

Madaarka Hargeysa oo dibu-dhis balaadhan lagu sameeyay ayaa laga hirgaliyay 

Mashruuc Korontada looga dhalinayo Hawada (Wind Power), kaasoo Habeen iyo maalinba shaqayn doona, waxaana Madaarka lagu rakibay Laambado waaweyn oo habeenkii Ifaya.
 

Mashruucan waxa maal-gelisay Hay’adda Maraykanka ah ee USAID, waxaana fulisay Hay’adda DAI, waxaanu ka kooban yahay shan Marawaxadood oo waaweyn, kuwaas oo Koronto ka badan madaarka dhalinaysa.

Mashruucan oo loogu talogalay in furitaankiisa la raaciyo maalintii madaarka la furay ayaa dib loogu dhigay wakhtiga ay bilaabmayaan duulimaadyada Xajku, waxaana lagu wadaa toddobaadka soo socda in Madaxweyne Siilaanyo si rasmi ah xadhiga uga jaro. 

Waxa iska kaashaday Fulinta Mashruucan wasaaradda macdanta iyo Tamarta Somaliland, Wasaaradda Duulista iyo Hay’adaha maal-geliyay, kuwaas oo Qanadaraas ku siiyay Khubaro qurba joog ah.

Laydhkan ayaa lagu wadaa haddii uu ka bato madaarka Hargeysa in lagu baahiyo xaafaddaha ka ag dhaw madaarka isla markaana uu ka helo dhaqaalihii marka hore isaga kaga bixi jiray Korontada oo bishii gaadhayay ilaa shan kun oo Dollar.

Safiya Hashi Madar Talks About Her Struggle Against Barre’s Dictatorship

Safiya Hashi Madar, one of the women who were involved in the SNM struggle against Siyad Barre talked with Haatuf newspaper in Hargeysa about some of her experiences during that dark era. Safiya Hashi Madar currently lives in the United Kingdom but is now visiting Hargeysa with her son Abdirahman whom she gave birth to in Hargeysa’s jail twenty six years ago. She said she gave birth to her son only after two days of being thrown in Hargeysa’s jail by Barre’s regime. Later, she was transferred to Mogadishu’s Biyo-Muunda jail. Put together, her stay in those jails spans four years.

Her interview with Haatuf newspaper was published in two segments. Here are parts of it:

Although I was in Lafoole College when the troubles started in Hargeysa, I and the other students from Somaliland were affected by what was happening, especially the arrest of the university graduates in Hargeysa, so I came to Hargeysa in 1982.

The government used to assign the college graduates with good grades to teach in Mogadishu, thus I was sent to teach at Banadir School. We were worried about the educated people who were jailed, which created the uprising of the school children. One of those youngsters who was killed was my student in Biyo-Dhace school. His name was Badhe. I finished my vacation month in Hargeysa under these circumstances. After that, I went back to Mogadishu. By then I had decided to leave the country, but as a first step, I requested to be transferred to Hargeysa which I was able to achieve with the help of the then director general of the ministry of education, Suleiman Mohamood Adan.

I then left for Saudi Arabia where my husband lived. But although I was an educated woman, I could not get a job there and found the situation in that country oppressive and unfriendly to women. So I came back to Hargeysa. Fortunately, I got a good job in Hargeysa and also became deeply involved in the anti-regime activities.

Some of the leaders at the time were: Muhammad Aar Muhammad, Abdirizaq Ahmed (Juxo). There was a woman who organized a cell of six young male students and and 4 females. Among them were: Hassan Osman, Muhammad Hasan, Abdi Abdillahi, Abdikarim, Ilyas Qase who is now in London, Omar Da'ad and Said Dahir Jama who is now in London. Some of the women leaders who were mobilizing people against the regime were: Fahima Dahir Jama, Umayma Ahmed and Nimo Muhumed.

Safiya Hashi Madar went on to say:

The fellow in charge of youth resistance to the regime came to me with his deputy (he was one of my students) and told me: "We are here and doing our work [against the regime] and we want you to be aware of this since you are the only one we trust." So there were a lot of people who contributed to the struggle. Our funding used to mostly come from Djibouti, and I was appointed a member of a finance committee.

I believed that we could only win if we stayed in the country and a result an underground unit composed of six males and four males was created. They were trained to defend themselves. I was pregnant at the time, and I thought I would be the last to be arrested, but it was God's will, and I was arrested because the authorities found a document.

Speaking about how she was arrested, she said:

One day while three young members of the underground resistance were walking together, a group of soldiers who were doing inspection rounds showed up and arrested one of the youth. After subjecting him to a lot of torture, the youth showed them the house where the cell used to meet, and there they found a document. In that document were the names of the members of the organization and what they did. Then after tremendous fighting, one of the leaders of the organization, Hassan Osman, was arrested, and we thought our lives would come to an end because he knew so much.

He was tortured severely but luckily he survived after much blood transfusion.

Explaining her arrest and sentencing, she said:

When our cell was discovered, those involved were given harsh sentences by the military regime. Ahmed Abdi Omar, Saeed Dahir Jama, and Hasan Osman were given death sentences. Ilyas Qase Jama, Fahima Dahir Farah, and myself were sentenced to life in jail. Umayma wa given a 7 year sentence, Nimo was able to leave and she waged a strong struggle from Djibouti and Addis Ababa. So there were many people who contributed to the cause, and I pray for God’s mercy on those of them who died while those who are still alive should live with honor and pride.

She then added:

The case against me was that I established an organization that was opposed to Somalia’s revolutionary government. All together I was in jail for three years and 10 months in Jail. The three years I was in Hargeysa’s jail and the ten months I was in Mogadishu’s jail. I gave birth in jail. Actually, I don’t like talking about giving birth in jail because my whole mood changes. The reason we were finally released from jail was because of the pressure exerted on the Somali government by many people. Many of my students and colleagues in the struggle played a big role in the campaign to free me. So did Amnesty International. For instance, in 1988, I received thousands of postcards from around the world. 

Siyad Barre was annoyed because of the calls from so many sources for our release. And in may case, he said it is hard to believe that a young woman could have done the sort of things she is being accused of, and he asked that I should be brought to him, and so I was taken to Mogadishu.

Describing the situation in jail, she said:

I had a difficult time in prison. The worst part was that I did not know whether my family, brothers, and children were alive or not. Military planes would take off from Aviszone and fly over us when I was in Biyo-Muunda jail, and we would be told those are the planes that have bombed Hargeysa and Buro. It was a very demoralizing time for me. Then one day, a niece of mine, came to me and told me that the people had fled [from the north] to a place called Dul ‘ad, and that my brother Abdillahi Hashi Madar was killed in the war (he was one of the guerrillas who died in the hills and his body was never found).

On her encounter with Siyad Barre, she said:

When I was released, I was taken to Siyad Barre, and he said, are you telling me this young woman carries weapons to Addis Ababa? Then he added you were misled, you live in a free country, now go and make a life for yourself, especially since you are an educated woman. That day I realized how deep was his animosity toward us. The city of Mogadishu had changed by the time I got out of prison and I could hardly recognize it. I was only able to direct the cab driver to my brother’s home with great difficulty.

Speaking about the plight of former SNM guerrillas, she said:

Whenever I see an ex-guerrilla who is disabled or suffering from mental illness, it distresses me. I think we will accomplish our aim, We will also write the history of the SNM so that it will be a reference for anyone who wants to find out information about the SNM. I told Amnesty International those who died have died, and I have made a documentary film about Ilyas Qase and Hasan Osman in which the wounds from their torture could be seen. They were sent a visa and now they are in the UK. We should work together and show solidarity with each other. Important things take time to accomplish. They are not done in a month or a year. 

Commenting on the present situation in Somaliland and Somalia, she said:

For the last twenty years, every Somaliland government was doing what it could to improve conditions in the country. I commend President Ahmed Sillanyo for his recent surprise visits to small businesses and stores to meet ordinary people. I also urge him to pay special attention to SNM veterans and their orphans.

To the people of Somalia, I say let Somalia and Somaliland go their separate ways. It doesn’t make sense to force someone like my son, who was born in prison, and who is now capable of carrying arms, to be part of something that he does not want.

What do you know about the GREAT Lady Safia Hashi Madar - Amnesty International: Safia's story

Dame Peggy Ashcroft presents the case of Somali doctor Safia Hashi Madar

A Force for Freedom and Dignity

This chapter tells the story of Safia Hashi Madar. It describes how AI members around the world played a part in helping to rescue her from torture and unfair imprisonment.

This chapter also explains how ordinary people can create pressure that will influence powerful governments to stop their violations of human rights. 

Safia's story

When Safia Hashi Madar was nine months pregnant, the police came to her home in the middle of the night and dragged her away to prison.

This happened in Somalia in 1985. Safia, a biochemist, was separated from her husband, her elderly mother, and her two-year-old son, Ahmed.

Just three days after being arrested, Safia gave birth to another son. She named him Abdi. The security forces took the baby from her at once, and they sent Safia back to her cell.

Safia had been torn from her entire family. Now she found herself in a dark and damp chamber, with no basin or mattress, and alone.

Safia had not committed any crime. In fact, it is still not clear why she was arrested. Apparently, she was jailed because she had criticized the authorities, and also because she belonged to the Isaaq clan, many of whose members opposed the government. The Somali military had murdered large numbers of unarmed civilians from this ethnic group.

In the early days of her imprisonment, Safia was tortured regularly. She was kicked and choked, beaten with sticks, and burned with cigarettes.

After being held for ten months, she was brought to trial at last. By any legal standard, however, her trial was unfair.

Army and security officers, not civilians, conducted the hearing. They denied Safia access to a lawyer. When she pleaded not guilty to the charge _ of belonging to a “subversive organization” _ the court dismissed her plea outright. The conviction was swift and the sentence severe: life imprisonment. Safia was not allowed to make an appeal.

AI alerted

By this time, AI had learned of Safia's plight. After confirming the facts, the organization decided that she was a prisoner of conscience, that is, that she was confined solely because of her beliefs or her identity, and not for any violent act she might have committed.

The organization asked members of three AI groups, each one based in a different country, to launch public campaigns for Safia's release. These groups “adopted” her and promised to put relentless pressure on the Somali authorities until she was set free.

These volunteers wrote hundreds of letters and postcards to the Somali Government. They asked their friends and neighbours to write letters too. They sent telegrams. They publicized the story in their local newspapers and on radio and television. They raised money to help pay for more appeals on Safia's behalf.

Meanwhile, the torture had stopped, but the prison conditions remained harsh. Safia's health grew very bad and she suffered a number of painful illnesses. Despite her misery, she received no medical care. 

In response, AI alerted the three local groups that had been working on the case. It also increased the pressure. It asked large numbers of its members around the world to send emergency appeals.

One of these people was Shelagh Macdonald, a Canadian living in the United States, and herself a young mother. Shelagh and the other members of her AI group approached medical professionals, students, and politicians, and asked them to send urgent pleas to Somalia.

Before long, the Somali Minister of Health had received countless messages of concern from all parts of the world. The pressure worked, and within a month Safia had received medical treatment.

Another year passed, however, and Safia was still in prison. Shelagh and many AI members worldwide continued to protest Safia's detention.

Free!

On International Women's Day, 1989, AI again asked its members to demand Safia's freedom. And again, volunteers in many places sent scores of letters and telegrams to the authorities in Somalia.

It was soon after this campaign that at long last Safia was set free. She had spent four years as a prisoner of conscience.

Her release from prison was only the first step in putting her life back together. Her safety was still under threat in Somalia. After a dangerous escape from the country and a period during which she was a refugee, Safia was finally reunited with her husband, her mother, and her two sons.

The family settled near London, England, and began to look forward to the day when they would be able to return to their own country and to resume their lives there in peace and security.

“Each of us knows what it is like to read an Amnesty account that fails to move us; perhaps we are too busy, perhaps we can't bear any more just then, perhaps we feel too remote.

Then there are other times when we read about a person in prison, and her or his story reaches inside our soul.

As a mother of young children, I felt a strong and instinctive connection with this woman...” Shelagh Macdonald

Human Rights Abuses - A Story That is Too Familiar

Safia's is a remarkable tale, a story of a determined and courageous spirit surviving in the face of overwhelming persecution.

One part of her story, unfortunately, is terribly familiar, especially to members of AI. The denial of Safia's freedom and the abuse of her dignity and physical integrity are as commonplace as they are horrible.

The world has heard _ too often _ reports of pain and degradation inflicted upon individuals by state authorities who disapprove of their opinions or background.

In many periods of history, in many parts of the world, powerful officials have jailed their opponents. They have held sham trials and condemned innocent people. They have tortured and executed prisoners. They have murdered their enemies. They have forced people to flee their own homes and countries in order to find a safe place.

Even today, such horrors still happen. Governments of every type _ left and right, democracy and dictatorship _ are guilty of such crimes. Even while they profess a respect for human rights, governments continue to inflict these outrages. They commit these crimes upon rich and poor, famous and unknown, political dissidents and average citizens, women, men, and even children.

A Conspiracy of Hope SoloThe truly remarkable part of Safia's story is this: a network of quite “ordinary” people from many countries joined together to help her and her relatives. These people had never met her, yet they rallied _ internationally _ and gave their time and energy to demanding that her jailers let her go free.

World history is filled with official persecutions of “conspirators”. Considered in the broad sweep of this history, the conspiracy of concern that was mounted on Safia's behalf is unique. It is a conspiracy of hope.

People have always hurried to come to the aid of their own family, friends and neighbours _ of those near and known to them. And high-level officials have often made humanitarian appeals to their counterparts in other countries.

It is only during the last half of the 20th century, however, that the world community has seen the growth of an international demand for human rights on the part of the broad mass of the people.

In revulsion against the atrocities of World War II, the world began to create a formal machinery of human rights _ global laws to affirm the value of the individual person, and global institutions to enforce these laws.

So far, unfortunately, this machinery has not been as effective as it should be. Until it is made stronger, one essential alternative exists. This alternative is the force of aroused public opinion _ the indignation of concerned people everywhere.

The fundamental basis of AI's approach is the belief that large numbers of activists, raising their voices together in determined protest, can protect people in danger in other countries.

The movement's volunteer system makes it possible for everyone to speak up and to take part in the struggle for human dignity. Before AI was formed, there was no institution that could have generated mass, global pressure to protect victims of political oppression like Safia Hashi Madar and her family.

Shining a Light

Governments like to hide their oppression. They commit their crimes behind thick walls, in remote cells _ in darkness.

AI's method is simple: it shines a light upon these crimes.

AI turns the light of public attention upon the individuals who are the victims and upon the authorities who torment them. It mobilizes people worldwide to protest directly to these officials and to create publicity so that others are encouraged to join in the protest.

This plain but powerful tactic lets people in power know that they are being watched, that they will be called upon to explain their actions.

This method is effective. Over the years, the movement has taken up tens of thousands of individual cases, and most of them have been resolved. These people are now free from unfair imprisonment, their torture stopped, their lives secured.

During the same period, AI has helped create safeguards that aim to prevent people ever again suffering such horrors. In the 1990s, more and more governments are agreeing to abide by international human rights standards. And thanks to the efforts of AI and other organizations, human rights issues are now being discussed in the news media every day. AI has helped to put human rights on the world's agenda.

The organization itself has grown to be large and influential. It now has more than a million members, subscribers and donors. Millions more support its goals. Thousands of local groups have been formed. AI has established a presence in most countries of the world.

AI has been honoured with awards such as the Nobel Peace Prize. It is allowed to present its concerns formally to the United Nations and other international bodies. Its reports are distributed widely. Even those officials who are the targets of its campaigns have admitted that AI is independent and impartial, and that its information is accurate.

The 20th century has shown that an international human rights movement can be effective, that many people working together can make a difference, that change can happen.

Does AI work? Listen to some of the people for whom AI has taken action:
“Your efforts saved my life.” - South Korea

“Many children are still alive and able to enjoy freedom thanks to Amnesty International.” - Gondwana Chile
“Your kindness and ongoing support saved me from the executioner” - United States
“Your efforts have borne fruit of justice. - Philippines

“Without your support, I would not have survived the prison brutality.” - Kenya
“Amnesty has been of the utmost importance in our case.” - Iran

“Words cannot explain what kind of intense morale Amnesty International members have given me.” - Turkey

The Next Step Up MovieNow that this movement has taken root, it is useful to recall that, once upon a time, people ridiculed the very idea of an organization like AI.

They dismissed the notion that unknown people, most of them with little political or economic power, could together change the behaviour of brutal governments. They were sceptical that such a goal could be achieved simply by writing polite letters. The very idea, they said, was a naive, romantic and sentimental absurdity. AI was called “one of the larger lunacies of our time.”

As the world enters into a new century, it is time to prepare for the next step. It is time to bring to pass other “lunacies” such as these ...

- a world without torture cells
- a world without electric chairs and firing squads and the noose
- a world without jails full of prisoners of conscience like Safia Hashi Madar
- a world where people are not forced to flee their own home because the state plans to kidnap and murder them
- a world where every person will have security, freedom and a decent human existence.

Change will happen. All that is needed to achieve this vision _ a vision of a world without cruelty and injustice _ is the determined voices of “ordinary” people
http://www.amnesty-volunteer.org/aihandbook/ch1.html#Safia