 | Read full English text 7 pages / 160 KB |
“We must be very clear on one fact: growth cannot always generate equality. Growth does what it does, which is growth. It is thereafter the responsibility of public policy to provide the necessary responses ensuring that the benefits from growth are, as much as possible, shared equitably.”
Relating to the question
of informal settlements, whether they should be razed or upgraded:
“..the minister says the government cannot do anything about it (ed. note. a large slum) because the people are adamant to be relocated. They want cheap housing close to the industrial areas where they earn a living. Besides, Non-Governmental Organisations encourage the squatters so they can keep advocating for them and making money from international donor agencies.”
These
statements were made in May 2008 at the African Development Bank’s Annual
Meeting in Maputo, Mozambique. The first was made by Dr. Donald Kaberuka,
President of African Development Bank, and the second in a press interview by a
Kenyan Minister.
Both are shocking to the extent that they clearly subordinate respect for basic human rights to economic development “imperatives”. That of the Bank’s President is even more shocking in that it clearly ignores years of policy research in the academic world and by the World Bank and others that demonstrates the importance to social cohesion and to people’s economic wellbeing of the type of economic development chosen. It must be mentioned, however, that these statements were in contrast to many others at the Meeting underlining the need to fight poverty and inequality and respect human rights.
As shocking as
they are, those two statements illustrate two challenges to ensuring respect
for all human rights that are found in many countries throughout the world and
that are fostered, in part, by a very specific development theory based on
unfettered markets that ignore human rights.
The first challenge is the view that economic growth is good in itself and should be viewed in isolation from other values, when it has been clearly established that the kind of economic growth selected can, in fact, create poverty and inequality.
The second maintains that valuable development projects are stymied by the claims of people to have basic rights respected and thus by implication that development must override their rights. In both, the human person’s rights are subordinated to other interests.
The very negative consequences of these two approaches have been clearly illustrated by OMCT in its work on the economic, social and cultural root causes of torture and other forms of violence. Macro-economic policies that neglect human rights cannot avoid leading to increased poverty and inequality. This poverty and inequality leads people to demand respect for their rights and this, in turn, is met with violence, including torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and widespread state repression. Tragically, this violence and repression leads to more poverty and inequality; it is a vicious circle.
Individual projects in the area of mining, dam building, clearance of informal settlements and the establishment of economic export zones outside protective legislation also lead all too often to violations of the basic human rights of the poorest sectors of society. Here again, peaceful protests and resistance are often met with violent repression and that violence has a serious negative impact on living conditions.
Unfortunately, this can lead much further. In countries like Uzbekistan, Egypt and the Philippines, reports by the UN and other organisations have explicitly linked the desperation of some to increased poverty and inequality and the lack of avenues for peaceful opposition to armed rebellion.
| Tweet |
English
Spanish
