|
Get AfricaFocus Bulletin by e-mail!
Print this page
|
Note: This document is from the archive of the Africa Policy E-Journal, published
by the Africa Policy Information Center (APIC) from 1995 to 2001 and by Africa Action
from 2001 to 2003. APIC was merged into Africa Action in 2001. Please note that many outdated links in this archived
document may not work.
|
Africa: Gender and NEPAD, 2
Africa: Gender and NEPAD, 2
Date distributed (ymd): 021104
Document reposted by Africa Action
Africa Policy Electronic Distribution List: an information
service provided by AFRICA ACTION (incorporating the Africa
Policy Information Center, The Africa Fund, and the American
Committee on Africa). Find more information for action for
Africa at http://www.africaaction.org
+++++++++++++++++++++Document Profile+++++++++++++++++++++
Region: Continent-Wide
Issue Areas: +gender/women+ +political/rights+
+economy/development+
SUMMARY CONTENTS:
"NEPAD is better understood as being in the category of empty
lip-service to principles of gender equality. In principle NEPAD is
much in favour of equal rights for women, but in practice it
proposes almost nothing in the form of action to realise these
principles."
This is the bottom-line conclusion from this paper by Sara
Hlupekile Longwe (sararoy@zamnet.zm)
on how women's gender issues
(i.e. women's human rights) have been ignored in the framework for
African development adopted by African countries under the acronym
NEPAD (New Partnership for Africa's Development). The author is a
feminist consultant and chairperson of the African Women's
Development and Communications Network (FEMNET).
Web: http://www.africaonline.co.ke/femnet
The paper was presented at an NGO-Forum, 14-16 October 2002,
organised by the African Centre for Democracy and Human Rights
Studies (ACDHRS), Banjul, The Gambia, in preparation for the 32nd
Session of the African Commission on African Human and Peoples'
Rights (ACAHPR), Banjul, 17-23 October 2002. The text was
distributed by the author on the NEPAD-Forum discussion organized
by FEMNET (
http://lists.kabissa.org/mailman/listinfo/nepad-forum).
Because of the importance of this document, and the strong and
clear critique it presents, we are reposting the full text, in two
postings. The full text as a Word attachment is also available in
the archive of the nepad-forum mailing list at the URL above.
+++++++++++++++++end profile++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NEPAD Reluctance to Address Gender Issues
Sara Hlupekile Longwe, Feminist Consultant
11 October 2002
[continued from part 1]
Goals (under the NEPAD heading of Sustainable Development in the
21st Century).
Despite the fine expression of gender principles, NEPAD's
expression of gender goals is very vague and lacking. There is an
overall 'long term objective' to 'promote the role of women
in all activities' , which is vague to the point of
meaninglessness. There is a 'goal' to 'make progress towards gender
equality and empowering women by eliminating gender disparities in
the enrolment in primary and secondary education by 2005'.
This latter goal of 'gender equality and empowering women' is not
merely a goal, but also includes the intervention strategy of more
schooling for women. There is no explanation of how the
intervention relates to the goal, let alone the relevance of this
strategy in societies where women are up against barriers of
legalized discrimination.
From the earlier expression of fine principles, the goals have
faded away to almost nothing, with no observable logical
connection. Completely missing from the goals is any intention to
increase women's representation in parliament, government and top
decision making positions. This is despite clear commitments both
in the African Platform (para. 105f) and in the Beijing Platform
(para.182) which endorses the UN Economic and Social Council
guideline of 30% women in top decision making positions
Intervention Strategies (to be found in the NEPAD sections on
Conditions for Sustainable Development and Sectoral Priorities).
Here there is absolutely no gender element suggested in any of the
three 'initiatives' on Peace and Security, Democracy and Political
Governance or Economic and Corporate Governance. But since NEPAD
identified no gender issues or goals in these areas, perhaps it is
not surprising that NEPAD can now find no strategies since there
are no issues to address, and no goals to pursue!
Obviously the authors of NEPAD have not referred to the Beijing
Platform for Action, which at para 190 and 191 lists no less than
nineteen alternative strategies that can be used to increase the
proportion of women in decision making positions in politics and
economic governance. One of these suggested strategies asks
governments to 'Take positive action to build a critical mass of
women leaders, executives and managers in strategic decision making
positions.' Another strategy is concerned with 'Taking measures,
including in electoral systems, that encourage political parties
to integrate women in elective and non-elective positions in the
same proportion and at the same levels as men'.
The only NEPAD Goal which is gender oriented (para 68) provided an
intervention strategy for closing gender gaps in school enrolment.
But when we look under the Education strategies (para 120-125) we
find that this intervention strategy has gone missing there are
no objectives nor activities with which to implement the strategy.
Without going further with this analysis, it is clear that the
NEPAD interest in gender issues has now entirely evaporated. What
started out with fine statements of principles of gender equality
has now faded away to nothing.
NEPAD is better understood as being in the category of empty
lip-service to principles of gender equality. In principle NEPAD is
much in favour of equal rights for women, but in practice it
proposes almost nothing in the form of action to realise these
principles. Absolutely nothing is proposed in the areas of
democracy, good governance and human rights, which are not only
crucial for women's advancement, but which are supposed to be
NEPAD's priority area of interest! NEPAD's introductory statements
on gender equality therefore prove to be nothing more than window
dressing, lip service and hot air. They are not followed by any
identification of the gender issues in these areas, let alone the
formulation of goals and objectives to address gender issues in
these areas.
5 Male Dominated Management of NEPAD and the African Union
Since NEPAD is lacking in gender oriented objectives, there is
obviously very limited relevance in any discussion on whether the
management system has the necessary skills or organisation to
pursue gender oriented objectives (see also the discussion of
Management System in Section 4, above).
The discussion of gender oriented management would become relevant
only if NEPAD could be radically revised to include gender oriented
objectives related to the main goals focused on democracy and human
rights. In this case, appropriate gender oriented management would
become relevant.
Probably because NEPAD was formulated before the agreement on the
Constitutive Act of the African Union, NEPAD says nothing definite
about the management system for its implementation, and no
management system or institutional structure is proposed. It is
merely stated that 'the heads of state promoting NEPAD will advise
the AU on an appropriate mechanism for its implementation' (para.
198). In the meantime, there is to be a 'Heads of State
Implementation Committee' to identify strategic issues and review
progress (para. 200-201). Obviously this Implementation Committee,
of five heads of state, would be a formula for male domination of
management.
However, now that the African Union has been formed, we may presume
that NEPAD would be managed by some distribution of
responsibilities, as yet to be set out, within the organs of the
Union. Therefore we now look at the main organs of the Union, which
are as follows:
1 The Assembly, composed of Heads of States and Governments
2 The Executive Council, composed of Ministers of Foreign Affairs
or other ministers or officials designated by their governments
3 Seven Specialised Technical Committees, reporting to the
Executive Council, and composed of government ministers or senior
officials
4 The Pan-African Parliament, whose functions and membership are
as yet undetermined
5 The Commission, acting as the Secretariat of the Union
Obviously, by present definition of its membership, the Assembly,
Executive Council and Specialised Technical Committees, will all
will be extremely male dominated, reflecting the male domination of
the national institutions from which these organs draw their
membership.
Despite this structural male domination of the Union management,
there has been a strange claim that there was agreement on 50%
female participation at the AU Heads of State meeting in Durban in
July 2002. A newsletter of the Femmes Africa Solidarite claims
that: "It is thanks to the Senegalese delegation to the AU, headed
by President Abdulaye, that upon his intervention advocating for
the African Women, the President did not face any opposition from
his peers on the gender parity proposal recommending 50%
participation of women in all AU organs."
If this 'lack of opposition' is to be interpreted as consent (which
would seem to be a big IF), then perhaps the agreement was for
membership of the Commission and other purely adminstrative organs
whose functions are yet to be determined, and whose members are yet
to be appointed. If so, the usefulness of such gender parity in
membership faces two obstacles. Firstly, gender parity does not in
itself necessarily bring an understanding of feminist principles
and policies. Secondly, an administrative body by definition -
does not make policy, but merely implements policy determined at
the political level, which in this case seems well set to remain
patriarchal and male dominated for the foreseeable future.
The areas of policy for the Executive Council and its Technical
Committees are divided along purely along traditional sectoral
lines:
Rural economy and agriculture; Monetary and financial affairs;
Trade, customs and immigration; Industry, science, technology,
energy, natural resources and environment; Transport, communication
and tourism; Health, labour and social affairs; Education, culture
and human resources;
In other words, there is no designation for the policy area of
democracy, human rights and good governance, which is supposed to
be a main area of interest of NEPAD. By the same token there is no
place to put the management of implementation of policy on women's
rights.
As with NEPAD itself, the Constitutive Act of the Union shows
ambivalence and contradiction on the subject of gender equality.
Whereas one of its 'principles' (in Article 4) is 'the promotion of
gender equality', another principle is 'non-interference by any
member state in the internal affairs of another'. And for
patriarchal men, the question of 'how we treat our women' is
definitely an internal matter, even at the domestic level, never
mind the national level!
Given this principle of non-interference in internal affairs, it is
difficult to see how the representative of any one state could
bring up the question of discrimination against women in another
state, or indeed bring up any human rights issue obtaining in
another state. And perhaps we may presume that a state
representative is not likely to raise an issue of a transgression
against human rights in their own state!
Given the above considerations, we may conclude that if NEPAD were
to include objectives to address gender issues, then the African
Union would not be the right organisation to implement it. However,
since NEPAD does not include any significant gender oriented
objectives, and none in the area of democracy and human rights, it
would seem that both NEPAD and the African Union are well matched
patriarchal bedfellows.
6 Governmental Reluctance to Address Gender Issues
The pattern of gender fade-away exhibited by NEPAD is nothing new.
In fact it is very typical and representative of what may commonly
be found in development plans in Africa, of both governments and
development agencies. There is a pervasive problem that development
agencies and national governments exhibit a lack of political will
in addressing gender policies. Instead there tends to be much vague
lip-service, involving ill-defined phrases such as
'gender-sensitive' and 'gender-aware implementation' of development
programmes, when in practice these programmes neither identify nor
intend to address the important gender issues which affect all
women in Africa. Instead their programmes employ 'watering down'
strategies that serve to overlook, sideline or compartmentalize
gender policy imperatives.
Underlying this failure to properly implement gender policies is a
quiet but determined patriarchal opposition to policies of gender
equality that is pervasive within development agencies, and amongst
the government bureaucracies of 'developing' countries. Only when
we are able to recognize and analyse the obstructive strategies of
patriarchal opposition, shall we be able to devise the alternative
and counter strategie1s to deal with this sort of opposition.
7 The Patriarchal Paradigm
All of the countries of the African Union, to varying degrees, are
patriarchal societies, with male dominated governments that adhere
faithfully to patriarchal values of male supremacy.
Clearly the authors of NEPAD are severely gender blind. We may
explain this blindness as being of a particular and well defined
form, which we may term as paradigmic patriarchal blindness. It is
evident that the authors do not see, and do not want to see, any
form of gender discrimination. Their whole interpretation of gender
issues, such as it is, seems to have no societal or structural
dimension. They do not seem to live in the same world of legalized,
traditional and institutionalised gender discrimination that is
actually the world inhabited by women in Africa. In all of NEPAD's
preliminary description of the problem situations to be addressed
by NEPAD, there is no mention of any gender issue. Even where the
document presents a weakly gender oriented goal, we find that this
objective is directed at a problem which has not been previously
mentioned.
It is this patriarchal paradigm which can nicely explain the
absence of any mention of gender issues in the discussion of
democracy and human rights. Of course it could be that the authors
deliberately removed the connection between gender and democracy,
or deliberately avoided it. But more likely they simply could not
see the connection. The clue to this interpretation may be found in
the phrase 'promoting the role of women by reinforcing their
capacity ' (NEPAD para 49, emphasis added). The vocabulary is very
revealing of the mind set of the authors. 'Promoting the role of
women' is a well worn phrase which insultingly suggests that women
are not sufficiently 'playing their part' in the development
process! Women need to be 'integrated in development'!
More revealing, however, is the phrase 'reinforcing their
capacity'. Here is the main clue to the patriarchal paradigmic
mind-set. Women's lesser role and subordinate position arise from
their lesser capacity! Therefore they need more education and
training! It is no accident that the only significant gender
oriented objective in all of NEPAD is concerned with gender
equality in access to schooling. Not a word about the unequal
gender division of labour, or that women are already doing most of
the developmental work, or that women come up against barriers of
gender discrimination which give the lion's share of the rewards to
men, and the lion's share of unpaid work to women! How is more
schooling going to alter that? Where schools teach female
submission, it will make things worse!
NEPAD is a statement written by male heads of governments who are,
in varying degrees, staunchly patriarchal. In their home countries
these governments tend to represent male interests, and defend the
patriarchal status quo. Should we then be surprised if NEPAD has
little recognition of gender issues, and even smaller intention to
address them? More important, what are the strategies if indeed
they can be found - by which these representatives of patriarchy
may be persuaded to adopt feminist policies?
This present assessment serves to draw attention to the large gap
between the situation of institutionalised gender injustice in
Africa, and governments' intention to do anything much about it.
This lack of intention stands in stark contradiction to their own
declared interest in democracy and human rights.
8 Conclusion: Towards Strategies of Action
The commitment to 'ensure the elimination of every discrimination
against women' (African Charter, Article 18.3) has been with us
since it was adopted by OAU member states in 1981 twenty-one
years ago. This commitment has awesome implications, and implies a
massive reform of statutory law, customary law and administrative
practice in every African country. It also implies the introduction
of anti-discrimination legislation, to outlaw all practices that
discriminate against women. What has been our progress since then?
What have African governments done to end the discriminatory laws
enacted and administered by themselves?
And does the formation of the African Union indicate a sudden
seriousness to implement this principle of gender equality?
Unfortunately, the analysis of this paper indicates that NEPAD and
the African Union both clearly exhibit a continuation of exactly
the same pattern, of expressing fine sounding principles which do
not lead to any subsequent action. Nor do they lead to proposals
for action, or the prospect of action, or even an administrative
framework which might enable action.
It is hoped that the analysis of this paper will serve to dispel
any foolish illusion that African governments, as presently
constituted, are likely to pursue policies concerned with equal
rights for women irrespective of how much they claim to commit
themselves to the principles of democracy, good governance and
human rights, especially for the purpose of collecting donor
funding.
If strategies of action for women's rights are based on the
benevolence and generosity of males, to voluntarily give away their
present domination and privilege, then it is based on complete
folly. Equal rights of oppressed peoples are never given; they
always have to be taken.
Strategies of action have to be based on a proper and realistic
assessment of the present situation, and the obstacles. It also has
to be based on an assessment of the weakness in the position of
those who hold power. This paper itself exposes one such weakness,
in the ideological contradiction and hypocrisy of governments which
claim to adhere to a particular set of democratic principles
applicable to all, but actually do the opposite when their
sectional interests are threatened.
Such understanding is the beginning of strategising. How does the
women's movement get together and challenge patriarchal government
on particular issues? How can patriarchal government be pushed to
international embarrassment by exposure of ideological
contradiction between word and deed on women's rights. Where are
the more general issues, which lend themselves to a general African
women's coalition for action? Which are the issues where women,
despite their socialisation into patriarchal belief, can
nonetheless readily see that they are being discriminated against
and oppressed? Where are the possibilities of North-South alliances
within the sisterhood, for support from others who have already won
some of these battles? Which are the development agencies, whether
bilateral or NGO, which can be conscripted to the side of the
battle for women's rights? Can progress on women's advancement be
made a conditionality in granting development aid to patriarchal
governments?
We need to discuss these strategic issues of patriarchal
opposition, instead of basing our discussion on some starry eyed
belief that men will voluntarily relinquish their privileges.
This material is being reposted for wider distribution by
Africa Action (incorporating the Africa Policy Information
Center, The Africa Fund, and the American Committee on Africa).
Africa Action's information services provide accessible
information and analysis in order to promote U.S. and
international policies toward Africa that advance economic,
political and social justice and the full spectrum of human rights.
|
