Yet again, Kenya is facing impending drought, and the drylands are already bearing the brunt. Around 3 million people are currently affected, and it is likely the situation will get worse over the coming months……..
Water and pasture is already in short supply – and as livestock get weaker and their market value decreases, pastoralists have less income to buy food. Malnutrition is rising as families skip meals, take on debts to buy food, and weak cattle are unable to produce vital milk. Families are withdrawing children from school as they migrate with their cattle to find water.
But why does a regular and predictable event like drought always lead to disaster? It’s because too often the response and the media coverage comes too late – after disaster has already struck, when people are hungry and cattle are dying – rather than addressing the issues that make people vulnerable in the first place. Exacerbated by a changing climate, drought is currently inevitable in Kenya. However it is not inevitable that people starve and thousands of animals die as a result.
Why wait until it is too late? With the right action at the right time, hazards such as drought will not always result in disaster, and lives and livelihoods can be saved. The Kenyan government, aid agencies, donors and the media urgently need to re-assess how Kenya deals with drought.
What makes the drylands so vulnerable?
It is not a coincidence that the drylands are the areas most affected by droughts.
Negative perceptions and stereotypes of pastoralist livelihoods persist, with the result that many people believe pastoralism itself increases vulnerability. In fact, pastoralism is a highly adaptable and resilient way of living that makes use of limited natural resources in areas that receive little rainfall. However, there are five key underlying issues that undermine this livelihood. With the right political will, these can be addressed:
1. Failure to invest in the drylands’ economy The economic potential of the drylands – also known as the Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (ASALs) – is enormous. According to Kenyan government figures, the livestock sector contributes about 12 percent of Kenya’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP), 40 percent of the agricultural GDP, and employs 50 percent of the country’s agricultural workforce.
The ASALs support around six million people, or 15 percent of Kenya’s population, yet the government’s budget allocation to the livestock sector is only around one percent of the national budget. While Kenya’s coffee and tea producers receive major support and subsidies, livestock keepers receive comparatively little help. The livestock sector receives only a fifth of agricultural investment, and even within the livestock sector, the ASALs are neglected: While 75 percent of Kenya’s livestock are in the ASALs, they are served by fewer than 10 percent of livestock service staff.
There is little money for development or opening the regions up for investment. Demand for meat and dairy products is increasing nationally and internationally, yet the ASALs are not benefiting from this opportunity.
2. A lack of development and basic services
The ASALs have suffered decades of neglect that have a profound impact on the situation today. These regions are the most under-served in terms of roads and basic services such as water, healthcare, education and electricity. This limits access to national and international markets, and makes people in the drylands more vulnerable to hazards such as droughts and floods.
The drylands are the poorest regions of Kenya. 95 percent of people in Turkana live below the poverty line, compared to a national average of 53 percent. Other ASAL regions such as Marsabit (92%), Mandera (89%) and Wajir (84%) are also far poorer than average.
3. Poor policies, and slow implementation of good ones
Pastoralist communities have adopted their own strategies for coping with the environmental challenges, such as communal land management, seasonal mobility, and the zoning of rangelands for dry and wet season grazing. However, these have been undermined by government policies that have tended to allocate pastoral land – particularly prime dry-season grazing areas – for other uses, such as agriculture, new settlements, game reserves and mining. This has had a devastating impact on pastoralists’ ability to cope with drought.
For example, the Kenyan government has already given tenure rights and ownership of 40,000 hectares of Delta land to the Tana and Athi Rivers Development Authority (TARDA) and the Mumias Sugar Company, to convert the land into a monoculture sugar cane plantation. Over 25,000 people living in 30 villages stand to be evicted from their ancestral land as a result.
While on paper there has been an improvement in recent years in the policies and institutional frameworks for developing the drylands and building the resilience of pastoralist communities, in reality most have not been implemented and drafts have not been finalized. This begs the question, why not?
Some key policies that remain in draft form include: the proposed Disaster Management Policy; the establishment of the Drought/Disaster Management Authority and Contingency Fund; the ASAL Development Policy; and also flagship projects included in the government’s Vision 2030. Without good policies and legal and institutional frameworks, government budget allocation to the drylands is constrained.
4. Late and inappropriate responses
Effectively dealing with drought is possible, but only if we are better prepared. Resources need to be pre-positioned in locations where they are likely to be needed – however this is rarely the case. Often, even when early warning information and contingency plans are available and the drought is predicted well in advance, the response is still late. Accessing government and donor funds in advance of the disaster often takes too long because of the overly slow and bureaucratic procedures – which ultimately costs lives.
Too often the response to drought begins when people run out of food. In fact, there are four phases (see table below) – by putting more emphasis and investment in phases 1 and 2, there is less chance of reaching the emergency phase. Long-term development and emergency aid are two sides of the same coin. This approach is known as Drought Cycle Management, and each of the four phases requires different actions:
Phase Situation Actions needed
1. Normal Good rainfall. Pasture and water available Development: Infrastructure development such as water points, grain reserves, roads and healthcare facilities; Building the capacity of local organisations to lobby and secure their rights
2. Alert/Alarm Pasture deteriorates; depleted water levels Preparedness: Livestock vaccinations and destocking (buying up animals before they get too weak); Stockpiling cereals/grains; repairing old water boreholes
3. Emergency People struggling to find food and water, livestock dying Relief: Food aid; emergency healthcare (for humans and animals); trucking in water
4. Recovery Rainfall – improved pasture and water Reconstruction: Repairing water infrastructure such as dams and boreholes; restocking animals
5. Poor co-ordination at local level While it is vital for effectively managing drought that many different actors play a role – from the government to international NGOs, civil society to donors – the long-term responses are often uncoordinated. This leads to the duplication of interventions, a lack of accurate and comprehensive information sharing, and poor linkages between national and local levels.
While local level structures are in place, currently in the form of the District Steering Groups, line ministries and sectors are often poorly represented and the groups are often not pro-active in communicating and advocating for the right assistance at higher levels. Contingency planning often lacks focus and prioritisation of needs, and without local level contingency funds, ends up being an unattainable wish list rather than a guide to action.
Solutions: Recommendations to the government and donors
The government, donors and humanitarian agencies must tackle the underlying causes of vulnerability to disasters, particularly given the likely increase in frequency and intensity of drought due to climate change. Key recommendations include:
The government should urgently increase investment in the livestock sector, including improving infrastructure and disease control.
The government should redress the unequal provision of basic services and utilities in the ASALs, and ensure development in the region.
The government should prioritise finalising and implementing key draft policies and institutional bodies that would help to better deal with the crisis and long-term needs.
All actors should base their responses on the Drought Cycle Management approach, ensuring that priority is given to preparing in advance for droughts and building communities’ ability to cope, not just responding to emergencies. Governments and donors need to provide long-term flexible funding to ensure this, and provide easily accessible contingency funds.
NGOs should work closely with government and other agencies to develop models of good practice, and ensure these are used and implemented
The government urgently needs to strengthen local level co-ordination, now and for the future, and ensure that government line sectors are engaged in focused and realistic joint preparedness and response planning.
The Regional Learning and Advocacy Programme for Vulnerable Dryland Communities (REGLAP) is a regional project funded by European Commission for Humanitarian Aid (ECHO) under the Drought Cycle Management Decision. It is implemented by a consortium consisting of Oxfam GB, RECONCILE, Cordaid, Care International, Save the Children UK and VSF Belgium.
For more information visit: http://www.oxfamblogs.org/eastafrica/
(edited to suite CISA’s style)
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
OPINION: If The Opposition Won The Ugandan Polls, Would The Kabaka Get The «Federo» He Seeks?
By Dominic Vincent Nkoyoyo*
Looking at the Ugandan political scene, it is clear that the dominant figures in Ugandan politics right now are : Yoweri Museveni the current President and the Kabaka of Buganda Ronald Mutebi. It is also evindent that there is almost endless tension between them!
The cause of this tension is Museveni’s rejection of the Kabaka’s demand for «Federo» ( a federal system of government.) The Ugandan news paper The Monitor of August 17, 2009 in article entitled: Kabaka Renews Federo demand, expresses this tension, «Kabaka Ronald Muwenda Mutebi of Buganda said yesterday that his kingdom will keep demanding a federal system of government, despite President Museveni’s view that debate on the matter is closed.»
The Uganda government owned news paper New Vision, of January 8, 2011 in article entitled, Movement MPs okay King’s Bill also highlights the tension between the Central government and Mengo (the seat of the Buganda government); it says, «The people in Mengo cannot purport to turn themselves into the Parliament of Uganda. The Constitution is clear, as it gives who makes the laws of Uganda, Mengo can send representatives to make petitions, which will be listened to on their merit.» the articles goes on to say, «…the President repeated his earlier comments that the Kabaka does not answer his phone calls since their meeting last year.»
The opposition is now politically exploiting this tension to win the support of Buganda come the elections in February this year! And the Uganda news paper The Monitor of Saturday January 8, 2011 in an article entitled, Opposition parties promise federo as 2011 polls near says, «With promising federal, the opposition is likely to win the support of mainly Buganda kingdom which has for long agitated for the arrangement which Museveni says is similar to the regional tier system his government is pushing.»
But the important question right now for any politically minded person which probably the Kabaka supporters have not asked themselves is : «If the Opposition won this year’s Ugandan elections would the Kabaka get the federo he seeks or demands?» It is true the Opposition parties are promising federo, but we should not forget that it is one thing to make promises and totally another to live up to them! And we all know how empty politicians’ promises can be! Is the Kabaka really sure that if the Opposition won this year’s elections it would give him the federo he demands?
It is not an exaggeration to say that in the whole country it is basically Buganda which is demanding a federal system of government! And it is clear that not all Baganda are behind the Kabaka’s demand for federo. For there are still very many Baganda in Museveni’s NRM!
In my view, I find it politically very difficult to see how the Opposition if it won this year’s elections, would give in to the Kabaka’s demand of federo! If this demand came from every corner of the country, that would put pressure on the Opposition to honour its promise. But it is clear that very few people out side Buganda would support the Kabaka’s federo demand even if a referedum was held on the matter.
For anybody familiar with Ugandan political history knows very well that Buganda does not have a very good reputation among other tribes. During colonial times, Buganda was a very great friend of the British! And it was through and with the help of Buganda that the British conquered the rest of the country and colonized it! So in most parts of Uganda, Buganda is identical or almost identical to the British oppressors! So it is very unlikely that the people there would give support the Kabaka’s demand for federo.
And what makes matters more complicated is that, reading between the lines, behind the federo demand, Buganda is really seeking «secession!» It is very clear that around the time of Uganda’s independence, Buganda never wanted to be part of Uganda. And to this end Buganda sent at least more than one Memoranda to the authorities in Britain! In September 1960, the Kabaka’s Lukiiko or parliament, presented a Memorandum to Queen Elizabeth II seeking Buganda’s independence! This Memorandum in part reads : «The Lukiiko’s Memorandum which explains in detail the constitutional plan for an independent Buganda is being prepared and will shortly be forwarded to Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom. We intend to divide this Memorandum into three main parts : a) Geographical and Historical background of Buganda; b) Buganda’s reasons for going it alone; and c) the Constitutional Plan.» Buganda still wants to go it alone! This should at least in part explain why Museveni cannot accept federo.
Buganda is the most developed region in Uganda and it is in fact the heart of the nation. The Administrative and Commercial Capital Kampala is in Buganda! Which political leader in his senses can accept the secession of the most important part of his country? So in my opinion even if the Opposition won this year’s Uganda elections, it would not give in to the Kabaka’s demand for federo! The Opposition is just exploiting the federo demand just to win the Buganda votes and so get itself in power. But it is unfortunate the Kabaka does not seem to see that they are just playing with him! After getting into power they would tell him exactly what Museveni has told him, «No Federo!»
So it is high time that Buganda woke up from the illusion and dream of federo at least at this point in history! The Kabaka’s political adivisers who advise him to insist on federo are not helping him. They are men seeking their own interests! And unfortunately many of the religious leaders who could have advised him better and also acted as a bridge between him and Museveni, they too appear to be consumed up by the desire for secession instead of unity of the country!
For sure the Kabaka being a citizen of Uganda, all his rights should be respected and he should not suffer any oppression from the Central government. And his complaints should be listened to. But it cannot be expected that every demand he makes has to be granted.
Anyone can see that the secession of Southern Sudan from the North is reasonable given the injustices and oppression suffered by the southerners over the years. But it is very difficult to see how the secession of Buganda from the rest of the country can be justified! If it is just because some Baganda and the Kabaka himself feel that he (the Kabaka) should have political power and restore a sense of pride they had in the past, that is really the wrong reason for divinding the country! No part of the country should be allowed to secede simply because some people want to have political power!
*Dominic Vincent Nkoyoyo, Monastery Val Notre-Dame, Canada.
Looking at the Ugandan political scene, it is clear that the dominant figures in Ugandan politics right now are : Yoweri Museveni the current President and the Kabaka of Buganda Ronald Mutebi. It is also evindent that there is almost endless tension between them!
The cause of this tension is Museveni’s rejection of the Kabaka’s demand for «Federo» ( a federal system of government.) The Ugandan news paper The Monitor of August 17, 2009 in article entitled: Kabaka Renews Federo demand, expresses this tension, «Kabaka Ronald Muwenda Mutebi of Buganda said yesterday that his kingdom will keep demanding a federal system of government, despite President Museveni’s view that debate on the matter is closed.»
The Uganda government owned news paper New Vision, of January 8, 2011 in article entitled, Movement MPs okay King’s Bill also highlights the tension between the Central government and Mengo (the seat of the Buganda government); it says, «The people in Mengo cannot purport to turn themselves into the Parliament of Uganda. The Constitution is clear, as it gives who makes the laws of Uganda, Mengo can send representatives to make petitions, which will be listened to on their merit.» the articles goes on to say, «…the President repeated his earlier comments that the Kabaka does not answer his phone calls since their meeting last year.»
The opposition is now politically exploiting this tension to win the support of Buganda come the elections in February this year! And the Uganda news paper The Monitor of Saturday January 8, 2011 in an article entitled, Opposition parties promise federo as 2011 polls near says, «With promising federal, the opposition is likely to win the support of mainly Buganda kingdom which has for long agitated for the arrangement which Museveni says is similar to the regional tier system his government is pushing.»
But the important question right now for any politically minded person which probably the Kabaka supporters have not asked themselves is : «If the Opposition won this year’s Ugandan elections would the Kabaka get the federo he seeks or demands?» It is true the Opposition parties are promising federo, but we should not forget that it is one thing to make promises and totally another to live up to them! And we all know how empty politicians’ promises can be! Is the Kabaka really sure that if the Opposition won this year’s elections it would give him the federo he demands?
It is not an exaggeration to say that in the whole country it is basically Buganda which is demanding a federal system of government! And it is clear that not all Baganda are behind the Kabaka’s demand for federo. For there are still very many Baganda in Museveni’s NRM!
In my view, I find it politically very difficult to see how the Opposition if it won this year’s elections, would give in to the Kabaka’s demand of federo! If this demand came from every corner of the country, that would put pressure on the Opposition to honour its promise. But it is clear that very few people out side Buganda would support the Kabaka’s federo demand even if a referedum was held on the matter.
For anybody familiar with Ugandan political history knows very well that Buganda does not have a very good reputation among other tribes. During colonial times, Buganda was a very great friend of the British! And it was through and with the help of Buganda that the British conquered the rest of the country and colonized it! So in most parts of Uganda, Buganda is identical or almost identical to the British oppressors! So it is very unlikely that the people there would give support the Kabaka’s demand for federo.
And what makes matters more complicated is that, reading between the lines, behind the federo demand, Buganda is really seeking «secession!» It is very clear that around the time of Uganda’s independence, Buganda never wanted to be part of Uganda. And to this end Buganda sent at least more than one Memoranda to the authorities in Britain! In September 1960, the Kabaka’s Lukiiko or parliament, presented a Memorandum to Queen Elizabeth II seeking Buganda’s independence! This Memorandum in part reads : «The Lukiiko’s Memorandum which explains in detail the constitutional plan for an independent Buganda is being prepared and will shortly be forwarded to Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom. We intend to divide this Memorandum into three main parts : a) Geographical and Historical background of Buganda; b) Buganda’s reasons for going it alone; and c) the Constitutional Plan.» Buganda still wants to go it alone! This should at least in part explain why Museveni cannot accept federo.
Buganda is the most developed region in Uganda and it is in fact the heart of the nation. The Administrative and Commercial Capital Kampala is in Buganda! Which political leader in his senses can accept the secession of the most important part of his country? So in my opinion even if the Opposition won this year’s Uganda elections, it would not give in to the Kabaka’s demand for federo! The Opposition is just exploiting the federo demand just to win the Buganda votes and so get itself in power. But it is unfortunate the Kabaka does not seem to see that they are just playing with him! After getting into power they would tell him exactly what Museveni has told him, «No Federo!»
So it is high time that Buganda woke up from the illusion and dream of federo at least at this point in history! The Kabaka’s political adivisers who advise him to insist on federo are not helping him. They are men seeking their own interests! And unfortunately many of the religious leaders who could have advised him better and also acted as a bridge between him and Museveni, they too appear to be consumed up by the desire for secession instead of unity of the country!
For sure the Kabaka being a citizen of Uganda, all his rights should be respected and he should not suffer any oppression from the Central government. And his complaints should be listened to. But it cannot be expected that every demand he makes has to be granted.
Anyone can see that the secession of Southern Sudan from the North is reasonable given the injustices and oppression suffered by the southerners over the years. But it is very difficult to see how the secession of Buganda from the rest of the country can be justified! If it is just because some Baganda and the Kabaka himself feel that he (the Kabaka) should have political power and restore a sense of pride they had in the past, that is really the wrong reason for divinding the country! No part of the country should be allowed to secede simply because some people want to have political power!
*Dominic Vincent Nkoyoyo, Monastery Val Notre-Dame, Canada.
Monday, December 20, 2010
SEASON’S GREETINGS!
To all our esteemed Subscribers, Readers, Friends and Supporters,
We sincerely thank you for keeping up with our blog throughout 2010
Thank you for all your contributions to CISA’s success this year.
It’s been a great joy serving You, the Church and society in Africa
and beyond.
We pledge to you our unwavering commitment to professional and timely service in the coming year.
We want to wish you all Merry Christmas and a truly blessed year 2011
MERRY CHRISTMAS!
CISA TEAM
We sincerely thank you for keeping up with our blog throughout 2010
Thank you for all your contributions to CISA’s success this year.
It’s been a great joy serving You, the Church and society in Africa
and beyond.
We pledge to you our unwavering commitment to professional and timely service in the coming year.
We want to wish you all Merry Christmas and a truly blessed year 2011
MERRY CHRISTMAS!
CISA TEAM
Friday, December 17, 2010
Consolata Missionaries’ Position on Death Penalty
By Fr. Franco Cellana Regional Superior, Kenya
In its issue No. 126 (Friday, December 10, 2010), CISA carried a “Response to Fr. Bertaina’s case” and from it, the reader may be led to believe that the Consolata Missionaries rejoice at the prospect of a death penalty being carried out. We only recognise the verdict of the High Court of Nairobi delivered by Lady Justice Jessie Lessite against those who were charged with murdering our late missionary Fr. Giuseppe Bertaina IMC, appreciating the course and the steps that the High Court of Nairobi has taken in such a short time to solve the case. We, the Consolata Missionaries in Kenya would, thus, wish to make widely known our position as it was expressed by our General Superior, Fr. Aquiléo Fiorentini and his Council only a few days after the conclusion of the case in the High Court of Kenya.
Official Communiqué from the General Direction of The Consolata Missionary Institute
As regards the press releases concerning the death sentence pronounced against the two persons considered guilty of the murder of Fr. Giuseppe Bertaina IMC in Nairobi (Kenya) on January 19, 2009, the Consolata Missionaries consider it appropriate to make some clarifications.
1. We consider it a positive step that the High Court has taken into consideration and solved this case, contrary to what happened in similar cases never solved like the murders of Fr. Michele Stallone IMC killed at Loyangallani in 1965, Fr. Luigi Graiff IMC killed at Parkati (Baragoi) in 1981, Fr. Luigi Andeni IMC killed at Archer’s Post in 1998 and Bishop Luigi Locati IMC of Isiolo killed in 2005, just to name a few.
2. The Superior General, however, has already sent for filing, in the High Court of Nairobi, a letter in which he requests that the death sentence pronounced by the court against the two persons considered guilty of the murder of our confrere, Fr. Giuseppe Bertaina should not be carried out but rather commuted at most to life imprisonment. As Christians, and even more as missionaries, we are totally against the death penalty, as we are also against every feeling and act of violence.
3. We also consider that, if the death sentence were to be carried out, this would be a great offence to the memory of Fr. Giuseppe Bertaina, who spent all his existence for the life and promotion of the people of Kenya, working with passion and generosity for the formation of several generations of students. It is because of this commitment for life that he met his death and he could not desire anything else but redemption and life.
Fr. Aquileo Fiorentini, General Superior of The Consolata Missionaries Rome, October 28, 2010
In its issue No. 126 (Friday, December 10, 2010), CISA carried a “Response to Fr. Bertaina’s case” and from it, the reader may be led to believe that the Consolata Missionaries rejoice at the prospect of a death penalty being carried out. We only recognise the verdict of the High Court of Nairobi delivered by Lady Justice Jessie Lessite against those who were charged with murdering our late missionary Fr. Giuseppe Bertaina IMC, appreciating the course and the steps that the High Court of Nairobi has taken in such a short time to solve the case. We, the Consolata Missionaries in Kenya would, thus, wish to make widely known our position as it was expressed by our General Superior, Fr. Aquiléo Fiorentini and his Council only a few days after the conclusion of the case in the High Court of Kenya.
Official Communiqué from the General Direction of The Consolata Missionary Institute
As regards the press releases concerning the death sentence pronounced against the two persons considered guilty of the murder of Fr. Giuseppe Bertaina IMC in Nairobi (Kenya) on January 19, 2009, the Consolata Missionaries consider it appropriate to make some clarifications.
1. We consider it a positive step that the High Court has taken into consideration and solved this case, contrary to what happened in similar cases never solved like the murders of Fr. Michele Stallone IMC killed at Loyangallani in 1965, Fr. Luigi Graiff IMC killed at Parkati (Baragoi) in 1981, Fr. Luigi Andeni IMC killed at Archer’s Post in 1998 and Bishop Luigi Locati IMC of Isiolo killed in 2005, just to name a few.
2. The Superior General, however, has already sent for filing, in the High Court of Nairobi, a letter in which he requests that the death sentence pronounced by the court against the two persons considered guilty of the murder of our confrere, Fr. Giuseppe Bertaina should not be carried out but rather commuted at most to life imprisonment. As Christians, and even more as missionaries, we are totally against the death penalty, as we are also against every feeling and act of violence.
3. We also consider that, if the death sentence were to be carried out, this would be a great offence to the memory of Fr. Giuseppe Bertaina, who spent all his existence for the life and promotion of the people of Kenya, working with passion and generosity for the formation of several generations of students. It is because of this commitment for life that he met his death and he could not desire anything else but redemption and life.
Fr. Aquileo Fiorentini, General Superior of The Consolata Missionaries Rome, October 28, 2010
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Ivory Coast must not be allowed to slip Back into Chaos
Recent political developments in Ivory Coast are very worrying and alarming. They are creating a very dangerous and explosive situation in which our brothers and sisters in this country could easily lose their lives and property. This calls therefore for a quick and rapid action from the African Union and the International community to prevent Ivory Coast from sliding back into chaos and bloodshed. Action must be taken now.
A brief political history of Ivory Coast (Côte d’Ivoire) demonstrates how explosive the situation in which this country finds itself right now is.
In 1960 Ivory Coast got its independence from its colonial power France. And while the north of the country is predominantly Muslim and the south predominantly Christian, under the powerful and wise leadership of Houphouet-Boigny who ruled the country from 1960 until his death in 1993, Ivory Coast remained united, stable and economically very prosperous.
In 1990 in an effort to democratize the country, Houphouet-Boigny legalized political opposition parties. In his first contested election Houphouet-Boigny won, beating out Laurent Gbagbo the candidate from Ivorian Popular Front (IPF.)
When Houphouet-Boigny died in 1993 he was succeeded by Henri Konan Bedei. And the political problems we have in Ivory Coast now could be traced back to this man! The reason being that before the 1995 presidential elections he placed restrictions on opposition party candidates forcing the opposition parties to boycott! And as it usually happens in Africa he «won» the elections!
The next presidential elections were to take place in 2000; unfortunately before they did the country experienced its first military coup! General Guei on 25 December, 1999 ousted Bedie! With Guei in power the political problems and tensions increased in the country. He promised to hold elections late in 2000. But he established through the Supreme Court which he controlled the criteria that all candidates had to have two Ivorian parents and have never held a nationality of another country.
Mr. Alassane Ouattara who was Prime Minister under Houphouet-Boigny was the candidate of the party: Rassemblement des Republicains (RDR.) The Supreme Court controlled by Guei disqualified him when it announced that his mother was from Burkina Faso! His party boycotted and the race remained between Guei and Laurent Gbagbo of (FIP.) But when according to the initial results Guei sensed that Laurent Gbagbo was winning, he stopped the whole process, disbanded the Electoral Commission and declared himself the winner!
Within hours, just as it happened in Kenya in 2007, a bloody fight broke out. Crowds of Gbagbo’s supporters took to the streets and attacked the guards protecting the presidential palace. Many soldiers joined the crowds to fight the Junta government forcing Guei to flee! And Gbagbo was declared President.
But having been excluded from the elections, crowds ot Ouattara’s supporters also took to the streets calling for fresh elections. Unfortunately hundreds of them were killed by forces loyal to the new government of Gbagbo and FIP youth who attacked them! Ouattara who did not want to see more bloodshed called for peace and recognized the Gbagbo presidency.
On 19 September, 2002 while President Gbagbo was in Italy civil war that divided the country into two (North and South) broke out! Troops who were to be demobilised mutinied, launching attacks in a number of cities. The government lost control of the north to the rebel forces who made their strong hold in the northern city of Bouake. To save his life Ouattara took refuge in the French embassy. France sent in its troops to prevent the rebels from capturing Abidjan!
In January 2003, Gbagbo and the rebel leaders agreed to form a government of national unity. And on 28 November 2010 presidential elections were held. The Independent Electoral Commission declared Ouattara winner. The International Observers also confirmed that Ouattara was the winner. But Gbagbo contested the result! And the Constitution Council which is controlled by him, declared him winner! Both Gbagbo and Ouattara have been inaugurated as president. So right now Ivory Coast has two Presidents! This creates a very dangerous and deadly situation for all our brothers and sisters in that country.
But the European Union, the United Nations and many countries have recognized Ouattara as the winner. US President Obama also recognizes Ouattara as the winner and he sent him congratulations. But the Ivory Coast military leaders are backing Gbagbo, which militarily makes him a very dangerous man!
The African Union appointed former South African President Thabo Mbeki to mediate between Gbagbo and Ouattara. And on 5 December he arrived in Abidjan.
While it is good and commendable that AU has already sent in Mbeki to mediate, given the history of this country and that Gbagbo has the backing of the army, mere political nagotions will not force him to step down. And he should. Because the Independent Electoral Commission which alone has the power to declare the winner, declared Ouattara the winner and not him. And the more the situation goes on like this without a solution the more dangerous it becomes.
Since the United Nations, the European Union, The United States of America and many other nations have already recognized Ouattara as the new President of Ivory Coast, we must no longer sit back waiting to see what is going to happen. It is clear what is going to happen is bloodshed and already several people have been killed!
For the 1994 genocide in Rwanda the whole world stands condemned, because we waited for so long while the situation was getting out of control by the hour. By the time the world woke up, nearly a million people had been slaughtered and lost their lives. This must not be allowed to happen again.
So the African Union should already be mobilising well trained troops and amassing them with sophisticated weaponry in the neighbouring countries of Ghana, Liberia and Guinea. From here if need be, they can swiftly enter into the country to stop bloodshed and carnage. And their presence nearby would put pressure on Gbagbo to step down.
African Armies should be there to protect the lives of Africans and not just be kept by their respective governments in their barracks. According to available reports : Nigeria has approximately 167,000 military and paramilitary personnel, South Africa has approximately 34,000 military and paramilitary personnel, Ghana has a very small army of about 7,000 personnel but one of the most professional up date armies in West Africa, Cameroon has approximately 38,000 military personnel, Kenya has approximately 100,000 military and paramilitary personnel. So the African Union cannot claim that it has no soldiers to send to protect the people in Ivory Coast from senseless death.
Ugandan and Burundian soldiers are doing a very good job in Somalia for the sake of all Africans and in fact for the sake of the whole world in trying to contain Al shaabab. So other African nations should provide troops to contain Gbagbo.
Apart from the African Union, I appeal to USA and the European Union to send some of their war ships near the Ivorian coast, to send a clear sign to Gbagbo that he should put jokes away and step down. He should not joke with the lives of the people of Ivory Coast putting them in danger of death. I also appeal to all nations to cut their diplomatic ties with the Gbagbo government. I believe all this pressure will force him to step down.
Dominic Vincent Nkoyoyo
Monastery Val Notre-Dame, Canada.
Views expressed in this section do not necessarily represent the opinions of CISA.
A brief political history of Ivory Coast (Côte d’Ivoire) demonstrates how explosive the situation in which this country finds itself right now is.
In 1960 Ivory Coast got its independence from its colonial power France. And while the north of the country is predominantly Muslim and the south predominantly Christian, under the powerful and wise leadership of Houphouet-Boigny who ruled the country from 1960 until his death in 1993, Ivory Coast remained united, stable and economically very prosperous.
In 1990 in an effort to democratize the country, Houphouet-Boigny legalized political opposition parties. In his first contested election Houphouet-Boigny won, beating out Laurent Gbagbo the candidate from Ivorian Popular Front (IPF.)
When Houphouet-Boigny died in 1993 he was succeeded by Henri Konan Bedei. And the political problems we have in Ivory Coast now could be traced back to this man! The reason being that before the 1995 presidential elections he placed restrictions on opposition party candidates forcing the opposition parties to boycott! And as it usually happens in Africa he «won» the elections!
The next presidential elections were to take place in 2000; unfortunately before they did the country experienced its first military coup! General Guei on 25 December, 1999 ousted Bedie! With Guei in power the political problems and tensions increased in the country. He promised to hold elections late in 2000. But he established through the Supreme Court which he controlled the criteria that all candidates had to have two Ivorian parents and have never held a nationality of another country.
Mr. Alassane Ouattara who was Prime Minister under Houphouet-Boigny was the candidate of the party: Rassemblement des Republicains (RDR.) The Supreme Court controlled by Guei disqualified him when it announced that his mother was from Burkina Faso! His party boycotted and the race remained between Guei and Laurent Gbagbo of (FIP.) But when according to the initial results Guei sensed that Laurent Gbagbo was winning, he stopped the whole process, disbanded the Electoral Commission and declared himself the winner!
Within hours, just as it happened in Kenya in 2007, a bloody fight broke out. Crowds of Gbagbo’s supporters took to the streets and attacked the guards protecting the presidential palace. Many soldiers joined the crowds to fight the Junta government forcing Guei to flee! And Gbagbo was declared President.
But having been excluded from the elections, crowds ot Ouattara’s supporters also took to the streets calling for fresh elections. Unfortunately hundreds of them were killed by forces loyal to the new government of Gbagbo and FIP youth who attacked them! Ouattara who did not want to see more bloodshed called for peace and recognized the Gbagbo presidency.
On 19 September, 2002 while President Gbagbo was in Italy civil war that divided the country into two (North and South) broke out! Troops who were to be demobilised mutinied, launching attacks in a number of cities. The government lost control of the north to the rebel forces who made their strong hold in the northern city of Bouake. To save his life Ouattara took refuge in the French embassy. France sent in its troops to prevent the rebels from capturing Abidjan!
In January 2003, Gbagbo and the rebel leaders agreed to form a government of national unity. And on 28 November 2010 presidential elections were held. The Independent Electoral Commission declared Ouattara winner. The International Observers also confirmed that Ouattara was the winner. But Gbagbo contested the result! And the Constitution Council which is controlled by him, declared him winner! Both Gbagbo and Ouattara have been inaugurated as president. So right now Ivory Coast has two Presidents! This creates a very dangerous and deadly situation for all our brothers and sisters in that country.
But the European Union, the United Nations and many countries have recognized Ouattara as the winner. US President Obama also recognizes Ouattara as the winner and he sent him congratulations. But the Ivory Coast military leaders are backing Gbagbo, which militarily makes him a very dangerous man!
The African Union appointed former South African President Thabo Mbeki to mediate between Gbagbo and Ouattara. And on 5 December he arrived in Abidjan.
While it is good and commendable that AU has already sent in Mbeki to mediate, given the history of this country and that Gbagbo has the backing of the army, mere political nagotions will not force him to step down. And he should. Because the Independent Electoral Commission which alone has the power to declare the winner, declared Ouattara the winner and not him. And the more the situation goes on like this without a solution the more dangerous it becomes.
Since the United Nations, the European Union, The United States of America and many other nations have already recognized Ouattara as the new President of Ivory Coast, we must no longer sit back waiting to see what is going to happen. It is clear what is going to happen is bloodshed and already several people have been killed!
For the 1994 genocide in Rwanda the whole world stands condemned, because we waited for so long while the situation was getting out of control by the hour. By the time the world woke up, nearly a million people had been slaughtered and lost their lives. This must not be allowed to happen again.
So the African Union should already be mobilising well trained troops and amassing them with sophisticated weaponry in the neighbouring countries of Ghana, Liberia and Guinea. From here if need be, they can swiftly enter into the country to stop bloodshed and carnage. And their presence nearby would put pressure on Gbagbo to step down.
African Armies should be there to protect the lives of Africans and not just be kept by their respective governments in their barracks. According to available reports : Nigeria has approximately 167,000 military and paramilitary personnel, South Africa has approximately 34,000 military and paramilitary personnel, Ghana has a very small army of about 7,000 personnel but one of the most professional up date armies in West Africa, Cameroon has approximately 38,000 military personnel, Kenya has approximately 100,000 military and paramilitary personnel. So the African Union cannot claim that it has no soldiers to send to protect the people in Ivory Coast from senseless death.
Ugandan and Burundian soldiers are doing a very good job in Somalia for the sake of all Africans and in fact for the sake of the whole world in trying to contain Al shaabab. So other African nations should provide troops to contain Gbagbo.
Apart from the African Union, I appeal to USA and the European Union to send some of their war ships near the Ivorian coast, to send a clear sign to Gbagbo that he should put jokes away and step down. He should not joke with the lives of the people of Ivory Coast putting them in danger of death. I also appeal to all nations to cut their diplomatic ties with the Gbagbo government. I believe all this pressure will force him to step down.
Dominic Vincent Nkoyoyo
Monastery Val Notre-Dame, Canada.
Views expressed in this section do not necessarily represent the opinions of CISA.
Friday, December 10, 2010
Has Universal Access to HIV/AIDS Treatment been realized?
Paul Odhiambo*
“The battle against AIDS ought to be everyone’s battle... I too ask pastoral workers to bring to their brothers and sisters affected by AIDS all possible material, moral and spiritual comfort. I urgently ask the world’s scientists and political leaders, moved by the love and respect due to every human person, to use every means available in order to put an end to this scourge,” (Ecclesia in Africa, Pope John Paul II) On December 1, the international community observed the 23rd World AIDS Day.
Since 1988, the World AIDS Day has been commemorated annually in order to increase awareness about the HIV/AIDS endemic. World AIDS Day’ activities are also meant to re-energize the fight against prejudices, discrimination and stigmatization associated with the HIV/ AIDS scourge. In addition, World AIDS Day is an occasion to continue educating the general populace about HIV and AIDS so that the public could play a critical role in the prevention of new infections and also to manage effectively the treatment and care of those infected and to provide necessary support and care to those affected by the AIDS pandemic. The World AIDS Day theme for 2010 was: Universal access and human rights. From time to time, world leaders have acknowledged that the universal access to HIV and AIDS treatment, prevention, care and support are fundamental human rights.
Former Zambian President Dr Kenneth Kaunda (R) is an activist in the anti-HIV/AIDS campaign while Goal 6 of the Millennium Development Goals aims at combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases, targets 6A and 6B deal with HIV/AIDS pandemic. Target 6B is specifically about the universal access to treatment for HIV/AIDS for all those who need it by 2010.
When the United Nations launched the Millennium Declaration in 2000, the world leaders had a great ambition that infected people would be able to access and afford the HIV/AIDS treatment by 2010. Why hasn’t this target been realized? What are national leaders doing to ensure that people’s rights to access antiretroviral drugs and other medical services are achieved? How are other members of the society responding to the needs of both infected and affected persons? How do churches, other faiths and various organizations working with people living with HIV/AIDS envisage holistic treatment to ensure that the dignity of infected people is upheld?
In the Service of Faith and the Promotion of Justice, December 4, 2010 According to UNAIDS Report (2010), there were 33.3 million people living with HIV at the end of 2009 compared with 26.2 million in 1999. The estimated number of children living with HIV at the end of 2009 was 2.5 million. In sub-Saharan Africa, the estimated number of people living with HIV was 22.5 million in 2009, comprising 68% of the global total. The estimated 1.3 million people who died of HIV/AIDS related ailments last year in sub-Saharan Africa comprised 72% of the global total deaths of 1.8 million.
Southern Africa is the most severely affected region of Africa by the HIV/AIDS epidemic accounting for 11.3 million in 2009. An estimated 34% of HIV infected people globally reside in ten countries in Southern Africa region. Nonetheless, there has been relative decline of HIV prevalence in East Africa since 2000. Between 2004 and 2008, HIV prevalence decreased in Tanzania by 3.4%. In Kenya, HIV prevalence fell from about 16% in the 1990s to 5% in 2006. The HIV prevalence in Uganda has generally stabilized at between 6.5% and 7.0%. On the other hand, the HIV incidence in Rwanda has been estimated at 3% since 2005.
The enhancement of HIV treatment in the last few years has had positive progress in reducing HIV prevalence in a number of countries. According to 2010 UNAIDS Report 37% of adult and children living with HIV were under antiretroviral therapy in Eastern and Southern African regions by the end of 2009 compared to only 2% seven years ago. In Kenya, AIDS-related deaths decreased by 29% between 2002 and 2007. An estimated 370,000 children contracted HIV during the pre-natal and breastfeeding in 2009. This is a decline compared to 500,000 children who contracted HIV in 2001. It has been observed that access to services aimed at halting mother- to-child transmission has contributed considerably to the decline of HIV prevalence among the newborns.
Though statistics have shown that concerted efforts in the last two decades have led to considerable prevention of new infections and improved HIV treatment, care and support, national governments and other stakeholders must remain vigilant to avoid “complex epidemic of complacency and AIDS fatigue” (Kelly, 2010).
Due to complacency, increases in HIV incidence among the youth have been observed in developed countries where the HIV prevalence had been low. Michael J. Kelly observes that complacency might lead to denial that HIV/AIDS needs exceptional response in low prevalence country because the government in such country might not see the need to mobilize special information, awareness-raising and protective measures to combat HIV/AIDS. A success in controlling new infections and adequate provision of HIV treatment in a high prevalence country can also lead to complacency if stakeholders are “satisfied” with the gains made in containing the HIV/AIDS pandemic hence they are “reluctant” to sustain an aggressive campaign to reduce further or eliminate altogether the HIV/AIDS scourge. It is, therefore, critical that all efforts against HIV/AIDS must be concerted so that complacency does not undermine the gains achieved against the debilitating disease.
The treatment of HIV/AIDS cannot be complete without good nutrition. According to Mombe (2008), nutritional therapy can contribute to the overall well being of HIV/AIDS patients. Good nutrition helps the body to fight HIV by ensuring a better quality of life for patients and their families. Similarly, Kelly (2010) observes that nutritional interventions should go hand in hand with the provision of antiretroviral drugs. It is an open secret that malnutrition makes people living with HIV/AIDS more vulnerable to opportunistic infections. The government and other stakeholders should ensure that people living with the HIV/AIDS get adequate nutritional care and support.
While new constitutions in our countries incorporate economic and social rights in their respective Bill of Rights, the realization of these rights is still elusive to many people in developing countries. Accessibility to clean and adequate water and adequate food is still a nightmare to a substantial number of people living with HIV/AIDS.
Universal access to treatment, care and support may not be realized wholly if nutritional therapy is inadequate. It has also been observed that people living with HIV/AIDS need emotional, psychological and spiritual support as they undergo medical treatment (Kenya Episcopal Conference Catholic Secretariat Commission for Education, 2005). HIV/AIDS patients often experience fear, anger, anguish, loneliness, stigma, discrimination, rejection, judgemental attitudes, hostility and the like.
Kelly (2010) observes that stigma and discrimination are powerful forces that can demean HIV/AIDS patients hence making it difficult to deal effectively with the disease. Though efforts have been made to mitigate these challenges through counselling… In the Service of Faith and the Promotion of Justice December 2010 5 selling, home-based care and spiritual accompaniment from religious people, health workers and other members of the community, a lot has to be done so that the dignity of people living with HIV/AIDS is respected.
Since every human being is created in God’s image and like, all persons have worth and dignity rooted simply in who they are, not what they do or what they have achieved (Overberg, 2003).
In their Pastoral Letter entitled: The AIDS pandemic and Its Impact on Our People (1999), the Catholic bishops in Kenya emphasized that all Christians should overcome any prejudice they feel towards AIDS patients. They reiterated that people should not look down upon those who suffer from HIV/AIDS. In addition, the Church leaders extended their support to “all valid and ethical scientific efforts to find ways of controlling the disease...” stressing that these efforts should ensure that the dignity of human person is respected.
Orobator (2005) observes that the Church, as a community of faith, is appropriately suited to offer spiritual and pastoral response to the people who have been infected and affected by HIV/AIDS. He underlines that the challenges facing people living with HIV/AIDS call for not only medical intervention but also spiritual and pastoral response that could include “direct counselling and... sacramental ministries.”
Orobator further submits that the care for HIV/AIDS patients is manifested in a variety of ministries within the Church. Other studies have also shown that spiritual support offers a great source of comfort and strength to people living with HIV/AIDS (Machyo, 2002).
For the universal access to treatment, care and support to be realized, organizations working on the HIV/AIDS prevalence and all other people of goodwill should show their solidarity with those living with HIV/ AIDS by ensuring that they are able to access spiritual support and pastoral case. According to Overberg (2003) solidarity leads to immediate care, education and to changing social structures.
Our solidarity with the AIDS patients should encompass all aspects of their treatment and the provision of their basic needs. It is important to note that many people living with HIV/AIDS are still not accessing ART due to several factors.
Even where a considerable number of people in Africa get HIV treatment, there are concerns about the finan…In the Service of Faith and the Promotion of Justice December 62010.. Cial sustainability of antiretroviral treatment programmes since they tend to rely on external aid (Kelly, 2010).
If the world powers could pay more attention to the promotion of human development and protection of life, then more resources could still be channelled towards the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria despite the economic crisis experienced in the last few years. The Church, other faiths, social movements, NGOs, private sector, social justice activists must continue with the campaign for integral treatment so that more people can access and afford ART and other services. Indeed the following message of the bishops is still valid today: Ways should be found to make medicines which lessen the impact of the disease and which lengthen life and improve its quality available and affordable to the poorer countries of the world.
We call upon pharmaceutical companies to match their right to compensation with the great human need and the scant resources available to our people (Kenya Episcopal Conference, 1999).
The whole world must unite and sustain the fight against the HIV/AIDS pandemic. International institutions that make decisions affecting lives of people across the globe should ensure that their policies are pro-poor people who often lack resources to access and afford basic needs. It is critical that national governments and other actors engaged in the fight against HIV/AIDS devise mechanisms, strategies and approaches that aim at holistic treatment of HIV/AIDS patients.
More efforts are still needed towards prevention of new infections. Universal access to treatment, prevention, support and care is possible if we all stand up and take measures that inspired by our respect for human life and dignity!
*The writer is the Programme Coordinator (Media Community and Voice) at Jesuit Hakimani Centre, Kenya.
Views expressed in this section do not necessarily represent the opinions of CISA.
“The battle against AIDS ought to be everyone’s battle... I too ask pastoral workers to bring to their brothers and sisters affected by AIDS all possible material, moral and spiritual comfort. I urgently ask the world’s scientists and political leaders, moved by the love and respect due to every human person, to use every means available in order to put an end to this scourge,” (Ecclesia in Africa, Pope John Paul II) On December 1, the international community observed the 23rd World AIDS Day.
Since 1988, the World AIDS Day has been commemorated annually in order to increase awareness about the HIV/AIDS endemic. World AIDS Day’ activities are also meant to re-energize the fight against prejudices, discrimination and stigmatization associated with the HIV/ AIDS scourge. In addition, World AIDS Day is an occasion to continue educating the general populace about HIV and AIDS so that the public could play a critical role in the prevention of new infections and also to manage effectively the treatment and care of those infected and to provide necessary support and care to those affected by the AIDS pandemic. The World AIDS Day theme for 2010 was: Universal access and human rights. From time to time, world leaders have acknowledged that the universal access to HIV and AIDS treatment, prevention, care and support are fundamental human rights.
Former Zambian President Dr Kenneth Kaunda (R) is an activist in the anti-HIV/AIDS campaign while Goal 6 of the Millennium Development Goals aims at combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases, targets 6A and 6B deal with HIV/AIDS pandemic. Target 6B is specifically about the universal access to treatment for HIV/AIDS for all those who need it by 2010.
When the United Nations launched the Millennium Declaration in 2000, the world leaders had a great ambition that infected people would be able to access and afford the HIV/AIDS treatment by 2010. Why hasn’t this target been realized? What are national leaders doing to ensure that people’s rights to access antiretroviral drugs and other medical services are achieved? How are other members of the society responding to the needs of both infected and affected persons? How do churches, other faiths and various organizations working with people living with HIV/AIDS envisage holistic treatment to ensure that the dignity of infected people is upheld?
In the Service of Faith and the Promotion of Justice, December 4, 2010 According to UNAIDS Report (2010), there were 33.3 million people living with HIV at the end of 2009 compared with 26.2 million in 1999. The estimated number of children living with HIV at the end of 2009 was 2.5 million. In sub-Saharan Africa, the estimated number of people living with HIV was 22.5 million in 2009, comprising 68% of the global total. The estimated 1.3 million people who died of HIV/AIDS related ailments last year in sub-Saharan Africa comprised 72% of the global total deaths of 1.8 million.
Southern Africa is the most severely affected region of Africa by the HIV/AIDS epidemic accounting for 11.3 million in 2009. An estimated 34% of HIV infected people globally reside in ten countries in Southern Africa region. Nonetheless, there has been relative decline of HIV prevalence in East Africa since 2000. Between 2004 and 2008, HIV prevalence decreased in Tanzania by 3.4%. In Kenya, HIV prevalence fell from about 16% in the 1990s to 5% in 2006. The HIV prevalence in Uganda has generally stabilized at between 6.5% and 7.0%. On the other hand, the HIV incidence in Rwanda has been estimated at 3% since 2005.
The enhancement of HIV treatment in the last few years has had positive progress in reducing HIV prevalence in a number of countries. According to 2010 UNAIDS Report 37% of adult and children living with HIV were under antiretroviral therapy in Eastern and Southern African regions by the end of 2009 compared to only 2% seven years ago. In Kenya, AIDS-related deaths decreased by 29% between 2002 and 2007. An estimated 370,000 children contracted HIV during the pre-natal and breastfeeding in 2009. This is a decline compared to 500,000 children who contracted HIV in 2001. It has been observed that access to services aimed at halting mother- to-child transmission has contributed considerably to the decline of HIV prevalence among the newborns.
Though statistics have shown that concerted efforts in the last two decades have led to considerable prevention of new infections and improved HIV treatment, care and support, national governments and other stakeholders must remain vigilant to avoid “complex epidemic of complacency and AIDS fatigue” (Kelly, 2010).
Due to complacency, increases in HIV incidence among the youth have been observed in developed countries where the HIV prevalence had been low. Michael J. Kelly observes that complacency might lead to denial that HIV/AIDS needs exceptional response in low prevalence country because the government in such country might not see the need to mobilize special information, awareness-raising and protective measures to combat HIV/AIDS. A success in controlling new infections and adequate provision of HIV treatment in a high prevalence country can also lead to complacency if stakeholders are “satisfied” with the gains made in containing the HIV/AIDS pandemic hence they are “reluctant” to sustain an aggressive campaign to reduce further or eliminate altogether the HIV/AIDS scourge. It is, therefore, critical that all efforts against HIV/AIDS must be concerted so that complacency does not undermine the gains achieved against the debilitating disease.
The treatment of HIV/AIDS cannot be complete without good nutrition. According to Mombe (2008), nutritional therapy can contribute to the overall well being of HIV/AIDS patients. Good nutrition helps the body to fight HIV by ensuring a better quality of life for patients and their families. Similarly, Kelly (2010) observes that nutritional interventions should go hand in hand with the provision of antiretroviral drugs. It is an open secret that malnutrition makes people living with HIV/AIDS more vulnerable to opportunistic infections. The government and other stakeholders should ensure that people living with the HIV/AIDS get adequate nutritional care and support.
While new constitutions in our countries incorporate economic and social rights in their respective Bill of Rights, the realization of these rights is still elusive to many people in developing countries. Accessibility to clean and adequate water and adequate food is still a nightmare to a substantial number of people living with HIV/AIDS.
Universal access to treatment, care and support may not be realized wholly if nutritional therapy is inadequate. It has also been observed that people living with HIV/AIDS need emotional, psychological and spiritual support as they undergo medical treatment (Kenya Episcopal Conference Catholic Secretariat Commission for Education, 2005). HIV/AIDS patients often experience fear, anger, anguish, loneliness, stigma, discrimination, rejection, judgemental attitudes, hostility and the like.
Kelly (2010) observes that stigma and discrimination are powerful forces that can demean HIV/AIDS patients hence making it difficult to deal effectively with the disease. Though efforts have been made to mitigate these challenges through counselling… In the Service of Faith and the Promotion of Justice December 2010 5 selling, home-based care and spiritual accompaniment from religious people, health workers and other members of the community, a lot has to be done so that the dignity of people living with HIV/AIDS is respected.
Since every human being is created in God’s image and like, all persons have worth and dignity rooted simply in who they are, not what they do or what they have achieved (Overberg, 2003).
In their Pastoral Letter entitled: The AIDS pandemic and Its Impact on Our People (1999), the Catholic bishops in Kenya emphasized that all Christians should overcome any prejudice they feel towards AIDS patients. They reiterated that people should not look down upon those who suffer from HIV/AIDS. In addition, the Church leaders extended their support to “all valid and ethical scientific efforts to find ways of controlling the disease...” stressing that these efforts should ensure that the dignity of human person is respected.
Orobator (2005) observes that the Church, as a community of faith, is appropriately suited to offer spiritual and pastoral response to the people who have been infected and affected by HIV/AIDS. He underlines that the challenges facing people living with HIV/AIDS call for not only medical intervention but also spiritual and pastoral response that could include “direct counselling and... sacramental ministries.”
Orobator further submits that the care for HIV/AIDS patients is manifested in a variety of ministries within the Church. Other studies have also shown that spiritual support offers a great source of comfort and strength to people living with HIV/AIDS (Machyo, 2002).
For the universal access to treatment, care and support to be realized, organizations working on the HIV/AIDS prevalence and all other people of goodwill should show their solidarity with those living with HIV/ AIDS by ensuring that they are able to access spiritual support and pastoral case. According to Overberg (2003) solidarity leads to immediate care, education and to changing social structures.
Our solidarity with the AIDS patients should encompass all aspects of their treatment and the provision of their basic needs. It is important to note that many people living with HIV/AIDS are still not accessing ART due to several factors.
Even where a considerable number of people in Africa get HIV treatment, there are concerns about the finan…In the Service of Faith and the Promotion of Justice December 62010.. Cial sustainability of antiretroviral treatment programmes since they tend to rely on external aid (Kelly, 2010).
If the world powers could pay more attention to the promotion of human development and protection of life, then more resources could still be channelled towards the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria despite the economic crisis experienced in the last few years. The Church, other faiths, social movements, NGOs, private sector, social justice activists must continue with the campaign for integral treatment so that more people can access and afford ART and other services. Indeed the following message of the bishops is still valid today: Ways should be found to make medicines which lessen the impact of the disease and which lengthen life and improve its quality available and affordable to the poorer countries of the world.
We call upon pharmaceutical companies to match their right to compensation with the great human need and the scant resources available to our people (Kenya Episcopal Conference, 1999).
The whole world must unite and sustain the fight against the HIV/AIDS pandemic. International institutions that make decisions affecting lives of people across the globe should ensure that their policies are pro-poor people who often lack resources to access and afford basic needs. It is critical that national governments and other actors engaged in the fight against HIV/AIDS devise mechanisms, strategies and approaches that aim at holistic treatment of HIV/AIDS patients.
More efforts are still needed towards prevention of new infections. Universal access to treatment, prevention, support and care is possible if we all stand up and take measures that inspired by our respect for human life and dignity!
*The writer is the Programme Coordinator (Media Community and Voice) at Jesuit Hakimani Centre, Kenya.
Views expressed in this section do not necessarily represent the opinions of CISA.
Response to the Late Fr Bertaina’s Case
Dear Editor,
Greetings in the Lord. I want to thank you for the report of the case of Fr. Bertaina, a Consolata Missionary (IMC) (October 23, 2010). It is rare to find an ending to such a case involving a missionary. There are a number of cases that still have not been solved after many years. These still await the truth being made known. And so, I would like to say I am happy to read about the arrest of those responsible for the death of Fr. Bertaina, ICM.
I know that the Consolata Fathers and Brothers had an important role in making sure that the police carried out their duties responsibly. They were also instrumental in finding those responsible for the crime. Without their persistence on behalf of their brother I doubt we would be reading any news of this case today.
It seems that this case has come to a speedy conclusion, perhaps also because of the interest of various important people who were watching this case closely. Your article indicates a recognition that the wheel of justice grinds slowly. These interested parties made sure that the case of Fr. Bertaina did not get put on a shelf somewhere.
It is the final sentence of the article, however, that causes me sadness. In that sentence you claim that in the case of Fr. Bertaina the wheel of justice delivers. But what you say it delivers in the body of the article is not justice, but death. Perhaps it is ironic that the opening title to the article says that two of the perpetrators are to receive life imprisonment. By the end of the article it is clear that they are actually to receive death. To rejoice over the sentence of death for two people in Kenya is not so good even if they are criminals. As we know as Catholics, it is not enough to have justice. There also needs to be mercy.
It is not easy for us to think of mercy and forgiveness when a terrible crime has been committed, but this is the nobler act than vengeance. Nor does this mean that justice is denied or ignored. A sentence of death reduced to life in prison still respects justice. Jesus did not ask for death for those who were killing him. When one has real power they don’t need to make their importance felt. They can show true power by granting mercy. He also instructed his disciples not to seek revenge or the eye for an eye, but to be ready to forgive and to love.
In the Book of Wisdom we read that God’s ways of dealing with sinners is not to destroy all at once, but to punish in order to bring about repentance and conversion and to help his people to do the same (Wis 2:22-3:22). The example of Jesus is a fuller revelation of this power of God. Nor is mercy granted because one deserves it. If they deserve it, then it is not mercy, but justice. Mercy is granted because the one who has the power to grant it is living at a higher moral plane.
Kenya is in need of such examples of mercy. There are too many examples of meeting out even more punishment than is allowed. The desire for swift justice often leads to the death of those who don’t deserve it based on their crimes. We see this in the case of mob justice on our streets when a person is killed for stealing. When the justice system is certain of the guilt of criminals, then mercy is needed to temper justice. The Church should be there to ask for it as a witness to the dignity of all people, even those who do not know what they are doing, as Jesus puts it. The actions of the two accused in the case of Fr. Bertaina do not “scare away mercy,” as the judge may have said, but call for it all the more.
The Consolata Missionary community has born witness to the inspiration of their name and forgiven these criminals. The justice system should look to their example as to how to act. Criminals are not hindered from killing by the threat of the death penalty, nor is a society ennobled by the killing of any of its citizens. Fr. Bertaina, ICM consecrated his life to bearing witness to the compassion of God. How ironic that the two perpetrators of his death should be treated in a way which does not show compassion.
There have been a number of missionaries who have been killed or attacked in Kenya over the years. There is a great desire for this to end. There is also a desire for the killing of many Kenyans to end as well. This requires a justice system that performs properly at all levels. As this happens there will be more who are captured, tried, and found guilty for their crimes and given the death penalty. The disciples of Jesus will be called upon to recognize the need for repentance and conversion of those who are guilty. A willingness to forgive and to be merciful will help this to happen without removing justice. It will lead to a more noble and Christian society which respects the dignity of all people even criminals.
Let us rejoice in the finding of one lost sheep and the conversion of one sinner rather than the death of those who are violent. Let us rejoice in love which is stronger than death. Let us seek justice tempered with mercy.
In the love and mercy of Christ,
Fr. Daudi Adiletta, OP, Chair of the Religious Superiors Conference of Kenya.
Greetings in the Lord. I want to thank you for the report of the case of Fr. Bertaina, a Consolata Missionary (IMC) (October 23, 2010). It is rare to find an ending to such a case involving a missionary. There are a number of cases that still have not been solved after many years. These still await the truth being made known. And so, I would like to say I am happy to read about the arrest of those responsible for the death of Fr. Bertaina, ICM.
I know that the Consolata Fathers and Brothers had an important role in making sure that the police carried out their duties responsibly. They were also instrumental in finding those responsible for the crime. Without their persistence on behalf of their brother I doubt we would be reading any news of this case today.
It seems that this case has come to a speedy conclusion, perhaps also because of the interest of various important people who were watching this case closely. Your article indicates a recognition that the wheel of justice grinds slowly. These interested parties made sure that the case of Fr. Bertaina did not get put on a shelf somewhere.
It is the final sentence of the article, however, that causes me sadness. In that sentence you claim that in the case of Fr. Bertaina the wheel of justice delivers. But what you say it delivers in the body of the article is not justice, but death. Perhaps it is ironic that the opening title to the article says that two of the perpetrators are to receive life imprisonment. By the end of the article it is clear that they are actually to receive death. To rejoice over the sentence of death for two people in Kenya is not so good even if they are criminals. As we know as Catholics, it is not enough to have justice. There also needs to be mercy.
It is not easy for us to think of mercy and forgiveness when a terrible crime has been committed, but this is the nobler act than vengeance. Nor does this mean that justice is denied or ignored. A sentence of death reduced to life in prison still respects justice. Jesus did not ask for death for those who were killing him. When one has real power they don’t need to make their importance felt. They can show true power by granting mercy. He also instructed his disciples not to seek revenge or the eye for an eye, but to be ready to forgive and to love.
In the Book of Wisdom we read that God’s ways of dealing with sinners is not to destroy all at once, but to punish in order to bring about repentance and conversion and to help his people to do the same (Wis 2:22-3:22). The example of Jesus is a fuller revelation of this power of God. Nor is mercy granted because one deserves it. If they deserve it, then it is not mercy, but justice. Mercy is granted because the one who has the power to grant it is living at a higher moral plane.
Kenya is in need of such examples of mercy. There are too many examples of meeting out even more punishment than is allowed. The desire for swift justice often leads to the death of those who don’t deserve it based on their crimes. We see this in the case of mob justice on our streets when a person is killed for stealing. When the justice system is certain of the guilt of criminals, then mercy is needed to temper justice. The Church should be there to ask for it as a witness to the dignity of all people, even those who do not know what they are doing, as Jesus puts it. The actions of the two accused in the case of Fr. Bertaina do not “scare away mercy,” as the judge may have said, but call for it all the more.
The Consolata Missionary community has born witness to the inspiration of their name and forgiven these criminals. The justice system should look to their example as to how to act. Criminals are not hindered from killing by the threat of the death penalty, nor is a society ennobled by the killing of any of its citizens. Fr. Bertaina, ICM consecrated his life to bearing witness to the compassion of God. How ironic that the two perpetrators of his death should be treated in a way which does not show compassion.
There have been a number of missionaries who have been killed or attacked in Kenya over the years. There is a great desire for this to end. There is also a desire for the killing of many Kenyans to end as well. This requires a justice system that performs properly at all levels. As this happens there will be more who are captured, tried, and found guilty for their crimes and given the death penalty. The disciples of Jesus will be called upon to recognize the need for repentance and conversion of those who are guilty. A willingness to forgive and to be merciful will help this to happen without removing justice. It will lead to a more noble and Christian society which respects the dignity of all people even criminals.
Let us rejoice in the finding of one lost sheep and the conversion of one sinner rather than the death of those who are violent. Let us rejoice in love which is stronger than death. Let us seek justice tempered with mercy.
In the love and mercy of Christ,
Fr. Daudi Adiletta, OP, Chair of the Religious Superiors Conference of Kenya.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)