Human Rights Watch Archives

August 1, 2011

Hepatitis Taking a Toll in Millions, WHO

Medical experts are calling for global action to tackle the viruses that cause the liver disease hepatitis.

The first worldwide estimates in drug users show 10 million have hepatitis C while 1.3 million have hepatitis B.

Writing in the Lancet, experts say only a fraction of those who could benefit are receiving antiviral drugs.

Only one in five infants around the world are vaccinated against hepatitis B at birth, they say.

The figures, published in the Lancet, show about 67% of injecting drug users in the world have been exposed to hepatitis C, while around 10% have come into contact with hepatitis B.

In the UK, around half of injecting drug users have been infected with the hepatitis C virus, while the rate for exposure to hepatitis B is 9% – the highest in western Europe.

The research was led by Prof Louisa Degenhardt of the Centre for Population Health, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia, and Paul Nelson from the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre at the University of New South Wales.

They say: “The public-health response to blood-borne virus transmission in injecting drug users has mainly centred on HIV.

“Maintenance and strengthening of the response to HIV in injecting drug users remains crucial, but the significance of viral hepatitis needs to receive greater attention than it does at present.”

Commenting on the study in the Lancet, Dr Joseph Amon, of Human Rights Watch, New York City, US, said: “This study provides us with a first step and powerful data to draw attention to the problem of viral hepatitis in people who use drugs.

“The next step is to challenge governments to act, and hold them accountable for implementation of rights-respecting and evidence-based programmes.”

Health risks

Hepatitis is caused by five main viruses – A, B and C, and, more rarely D and E.

Hepatitis B is the most common, and can be passed from mother to baby at birth or in early childhood as well as through contaminated injections or injected drug use.

Hepatitis C is also spread through using unsterile needles and less commonly through unsafe sex or sharing razors or toothbrushes.

March 29, 2011April 6, 2011

The Wal-Mart Question Finally Hits Africa: South Africa Should Ensure Robust Scrutiny of The Deal

The next two months remain crucial in the history of foreign direct investment in South Africa. Wal Mart, the US retail giant is negotiating its grand entrance to Africa’s growing markets and this deal is reported to be its biggest acquisition since 1999 when it bought Asda, the British supermarket. A few months back, the international company offered to pay billions to facilitate its 51 % ownership share of South Africa’s biggest retailer MassMart. The deal was approved by Massmart shareholders in January this year. However, if recent objections in South Africa to Walmart’s anticipated entry into the African market are anything to go by, then it is assured an uphill battle in the next coming months. South Africa’s powerful trade unions seem determined to take the retail giant head on and continuously express a strong desire to oppose the merger. Also, government has so far shown strong determination to oppose a deal that stands in contrast to South Africa’s economic development plans and its strategic priorities for the next years.

Since the announcement of the Massmart/Walmart merger numerous yet critical and necessary questions have arisen around the desirability of the deal in particular the implications it is likely to have for South Africa’s retail industry, small –to medium –sized enterprises and the country’s job creation project. The Competition Commission, a body tasked with regulating the South African market in the public interests recommended to the Competition Tribunal that the deal be approved without conditions. This decision was highly questioned by those who specifically maintain that Wal Mart needs to guarantee job security for its workers and voluntary bind itself towards using domestic suppliers. The Competition Tribunal had scheduled public hearings on the deal last week but these have been postponed to May to allow opposing parties to the deal an opportunity to prepare for a cross examination of witnesses provided by Massmart/Walmart.

Critics of Wal Mart’s operation and practices whether in the USA, Chile, Argentine, or India raise issues which create many uncertainties and questions about the deal. Also, Wal Mart’s alleged poor global reputation as an employer and increasing allegations of its lack of respect for workers rights including its negative attitude towards labour union activities cannot be ignored. Reports by Human Rights Watch and other human rights activists also paint a depressing picture thus making it absolutely necessary for South Africa to ensure a proper scrutiny of the merger. Obviously, there are two sides to any story and Wal Mart has in the past disputed the allegations. Nevertheless, the risks of ignoring the issues raised by those with direct experiences of Wal Mart operations are simply too much to be left unaddressed. When Norway disinvested from Wal Mart its pension fund’s ethics committee alleged that “Wal-Mart is involved in “serious and systematic human rights abuses”, consistently flouting international rules on child labour, health and safety, underpaying women and blocking unionisation in the workforce”. Can South Africa afford to turn a blind eye to these allegations?

What is in South Africa’s best interest? Without doubt, the country needs direct foreign investment, but at what cost? Trade Unions maintain that they want ‘responsible’ foreign direct investment. It is therefore clear that South Africa needs to vigilantly apply its mind on this merger and any further dialogue should be in line with its strategic plans and priorities.

March 21, 2011March 29, 2011

International Day for The Elimination of Racial Discrimination Should Challenge Us Against all Forms of Discrimination

In 1966, the United Nations General Assembly declared 21^st of March as International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Celebrated annually, and meant to remind countries of their collective responsibility in the fight against all forms of discrimination, this day’s observation owes its existence to the 1960 Sharpeville Massacre in which 69 people who were part of a peaceful demonstration against “pass laws’’ were brutally murdered by the South African apartheid regime. At that time, indigenous black Africans were legally required to carry dompas identity documents and to produce them whenever required to do so by the South African police. There were dire consequences for those who failed to produce such documents and many ended up in jail. In 1960, people of the township of Sharpeville participated in a peaceful march against ‘pass laws’ but were fired upon by the police. In South Africa, 21 March is celebrated as Human Rights day and is a public holiday.

More than 50 years after the Sharpeville Massacre, human rights activists and peaceful demonstrators still go through unimaginable suffering at the hands of those in authority. The ongoing killing of innocent civilians and peaceful demonstrators in Yemen, Bahran, and Libya are but a few examples that remind us that in some parts of the world people who dare question their governments still risks a similar fate to that of Sharpeville residents. As the world celebrates International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination thousands of people pursuing the struggle against elimination of all forms of discrimination, intolerance and other injustices are either behind bars, in exile or await dire consequences including death. Human Rights Watch reports on the state of human rights practises around the world paints a disturbing picture. What is further worrying though is the lacklustre approach that leaders and international bodies seem to adopt when occasions arise for them to show leadership and harshly condemn human rights violations. The 2011 Human Rights Watch’s report note that “in place of a commitment to exerting public pressure for human rights, they (governments that can be counted on to be on the side of human rights activists) profess a preference for softer approaches such as private “dialogue” and “cooperation”. The report goes further to list recent examples of soft approaches and these include “ASEAN’s tepid response to Burmese repression, the United Nations’ deferential attitude toward Sri Lankan atrocities, the European Union’s obsequious approach to Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, the soft Western reaction to certain favored repressive African leaders such as Paul Kagame of Rwanda and Meles Zenawi of Ethiopia, the weak United States policy toward Saudi Arabia, India’s pliant posture toward Burma and Sri Lanka, and the near-universal cowardice in confronting China’s deepening crackdown on basic liberties. In all of these cases, governments, by abandoning public pressure, effectively close their eyes to repression”.

Months back, the world welcomed the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, Burma’s pro-democracy leader from almost 20 years of house arrest by Burma’s military government yet Chinese writer, human rights activist and Nobel Laureate Liu Xiaobo is still behind bars. Liu Xiaobo, the only winner of the Nobel Peace Prize still in detention was sentenced to eleven years in prison by the Chinese government after co-authoring ‘Charter 08’, a manifesto that is robustly calling for democratic rights for the people of the People’s Republic of China. There is currently an ongoing campaign against his ongoing imprisonment. The campaign consists of more than 70 organisations including PEN South Africa’s Writers in Prison Committee and Poetry International South Africa. The question is, what are we doing as individuals when faced with situations of injustices? This year’s celebration should therefore challenge us to be more tolerant of those that differ from us and less tolerant of repressive governments and people in our lives who show disregard of the rights of others. Martin Luther King Jnr once said “our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter”. He further maintained that “the ultimate treasure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience but where he stands at times of controversy”. In deed these wise words remain relevant even today and challenge all good men and women not to close their ears and deliberately block the loud cries of help from those around them.