Seminar: Hierarchies of Victimhood

Hierarchies of Victimhood:
The challenge of policy interventions aimed at alleviating the suffering of
victims of political violence

September 6, 2013 - 13:00 - 14:30

Location: Emthonjeni Centre, Seminar Room 19, East Campus, Wits University

Speaker(s): Professor Brandon Hamber

Abstract

Using experience and knowledge gained from engagement and peacebuilding work with victims and survivors of political violence in Northern Ireland, as well as work in other contexts such as South Africa and the Basque Country, the paper will delve into the complex interplay between individual psychological processes and macro policy interventions aimed at assisting victims. The paper will highlight how suffering is politically framed and its relationship to national identity politics, and specifically how this can play itself out in terms of the politics surrounding victimhood and the resultant “competition” over suffering. The paper will highlight the limits of narrow mental health and medical orientated approaches to dealing with the needs of victims of political violence, and particularly how suffering can be “bureaucratised” in an attempt to deal with underlying politics of violence. As a case example specific attention will be given to the development of services to victims of the conflict in Northern Ireland.

Biography

Professor Brandon Hamber is Director of INCORE, an associate site of the United Nations University based at the University of Ulster. He is also a Mellon Distinguished Visiting Scholar in the School of Human and Community Development at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, South Africa. Prior to moving to Northern Ireland, he co-ordinated the Transition and Reconciliation Unit at the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation in Johannesburg. He trained in South Africa as a Clinical Psychologist at the University of the Witwatersrand. He has participated in peace initiatives, research projects and consultancies in Liberia, Mozambique, Bosnia, Northern Ireland, the Basque Country and Sierra Leone, among others. He has also been a Board member of the Khulumani Victim Support Group in South Africa. He has written extensively on transitional justice and the psychological implications of political violence. He has published some 40 book chapters and scientific journal articles, and is the author of Transforming Societies after Political Violence: Truth, Reconciliation, and Mental Health published by Springer in 2009, and later in 2011 in Spanish by Edicions Bellaterra.

Hosted by the African Centre for Migration and Society

US Circuit Court dismisses apartheid litigation

Today has effectively seen the end of the so-called Apartheid Lawsuit where members of the Khulumani Support Group had brought case against various companies for aiding and abetting violations under apartheid. The case has been dismissed after 10 years. Below I reproduce the full statement from Khulumani on this important issues. I would encourage all readers to contact Khulumani in this regard, contacts are below. Sad day for justice.

Press Release

Joint press release: US Circuit Court dismisses apartheid litigation
Issued by: Khulumani Support Group
[Johannesburg, 22 August 2013]

On Tuesday, 21 August 2013, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeal dismissed the South Africa Apartheid Lawsuit. The basis of the dismissal was the argument that "the Alien Tort Statute does not reach the extraterritorial conduct in this case", a judgement of the US Supreme Court of Appeals in the Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. case, handed down in April 2013. After the Kiobel judgement, US-based companies may no longer be held accountable for human rights violations that did not take place within the United States.

The dismissal comes more than 10 years after the cases were first filed in a New York District Court in November 2002. The South Africa Apartheid Litigation sued corporations with significant US-based operations for their direct support of the apartheid security agencies. These corporate defendants had either directly, or through their South African subsidiaries, provided the equipment used by the South African apartheid security agencies in committing violations of customary international law. The lawsuit charged the identified companies with aiding and abetting the perpetration of extra-judicial killings, torture, prolonged and arbitrary detention, indiscriminate shooting, rape and the racial classification of the people of South Africa that determined their life prospects over decades. The corporations that stood charged of their complicity in the perpetration of these apartheid crimes included Ford Motor Company, General Motors Corp, Daimler AG, International Business Machines Corporation, Barclays Bank, United Bank of Switzerland, Fujitsu and Rheinmetall, among others.

"We are deeply disappointed by the decision of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeal, though, in light of the Kiobel decision, it was to be expected," said Shirley Gunn, board member of Khulumani Support Group, the national membership organisation of victims and survivors of apartheid gross human rights violations. South African attorney for the claimants, Charles Abrahams, has said: "Notwithstanding its dismissal, the apartheid cases have contributed to the development of international law related to processes of holding corporations accountable for gross human rights violations. Corporations are increasingly aware that any human rights violations as a result of their operational conduct could attract international law liability."

"The dismissal of the cases, after so many years, once again leaves open and unresolved the unfinished business of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission," said advocate Dumisa Ntsebeza, former Truth and Reconciliation Commissioner. "Organised business has yet to account and take responsibility for their role during apartheid. They have a crucial role to play in helping to close the gap between the haves and the have-nots," said Marjorie Jobson, national director of Khulumani Support Group. "Many claimants have since died without receiving a cent. Only General Motors made a small contribution to which we'll now use to set up an Apartheid Reparations and Rehabilitation Trust Fund for the benefit of the claimants," said John Ngcebetsha and Medi Mokuena, attorneys for the claimants.

The latest decision highlights limitations in international law to hold transnational corporations accountable for complicity in the perpetration of gross human rights violations. In South Africa, the focus returns to the failures of the South African government to adequately and effectively deal with the provision of an inclusive programme of reparations to all victims and survivors of apartheid gross human rights violations – something the South African government claimed it was competent to provide in its original opposition to the South Africa Apartheid Lawsuit. All those disappointed by this latest development expect delivery on these assertions by the South African government.

For further information, you may contact:

Dr Marjorie Jobson, Khulumani Support Group, Mobile: (082) 268 0223, E-mail: marje@khulumani.net

Advocate Dumisa Ntsebeza, Duma Nokwe Group of Advocates, Mobile: (082) 467 2490, E-mail: ntsebeza@mweb.co.za

Charles Abrahams, Abrahams Kiewitz Attorneys, Mobile: (082) 560 7152, E-mail: Charles@ak.law.za

John Ngcebetsha, Ngcebetsha Madlanga Attorneys, Mobile: (082) 335 4189, E-mail: john@maaattorneys.co.za

Medi Mokuena, Mokuena Attorneys, Mobile: (078) 792 3038, E-mail: medim@mokuenaattorneys.co.za

Shirley Gunn, Human Rights Media Centre, Mobile: (082) 450 9276, E-mail: director@hrmc.org.za



Editorial contacts

Khulumani Support Group Marjorie Jobson (+27) 11 833 2044 marje@khulumani.net

Original Press Release on Khulumani.Net

Why it's a negative peace while we remain divided

Northern Ireland has made massive strides towards peace since the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement was signed 15 years ago.

The agreement is viewed globally as a positive model – particularly in the groundbreaking way that it guarantees nationality and identities, regardless of the status of Northern Ireland.

Politicians should be commended that, in spite of their different political aspirations, they have established the power-sharing institutions.

But in spite of this, those of us who study and practise conflict transformation would view the peace here as a negative peace. That is a context where political violence has decreased but the underlying issues that fuel conflict have not been addressed.

One of these issues is societal segregation. The signatories to the 1998 agreement recognised that societal integration was key to reconciliation, noting that "an essential aspect of the reconciliation process is the promotion of a culture of tolerance at every level of society, including initiatives to facilitate and encourage integrated education and mixed housing." But only 7% of children attend integrated schools 15 years on and, in spite of some slight improvements in residential mixing, most people go home to largely single-identity communities.

On the whole, people lead separate social, educational, sporting, recreational and religious lives.

“Union” by Reciprocal of Phi Photography is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Clearly, the commitment in the agreement to integration has not been realised, suggesting that – drawing on the sentiment of the agreement – reconciliation here is incomplete.

However, as the agreement has unfolded, what has become apparent is that what reconciliation means to different parties is not clear.

The original commitment to promoting integration has also waned. Politicians' inability to agree an overarching policy to promote integration is evidence of this.

One of the reasons why this policy has not been agreed is because there is no commonality on the vision of what society we are working towards.

Is the goal one of 'thin' integration or deeper social transformation? Are we going to settle for a society where the dominant communities are going to remain separate and, hopefully, equal, co-existing in negative peace? Or are we seeking more profound change, where all aspects of life are integrated?

Co-existing and sharing society might be an acceptable goal in the short term, given the history of conflict. But is it enough?

The Community Relations Council's peace monitoring report, which was launched last week, observed that the continuing absence of any agreed strategy for flags, parades, or dealing with the past – among others – has left the political establishment vulnerable to the shocks from events. This was obvious in the flag protests.

Although there is an agreement in place, the actual root of the conflict – the constitutional question – has not been settled. This is yet another reason why we need to keep building social integration.

When a settlement comes, whatever it is, a robust social structure needs to be in place where communities are not polarised and living and being schooled in separate groups. Without this, peace will always remain fragile.

Integration and deep cultural and attitudinal change, of course, will not happen overnight. But, given that 15 years have now passed since the signing of the agreement, now is a good time to reaffirm the spirit of integration expressed in it.

This needs to be coupled with politicians robustly clarifying their commitment to working towards integration and showing decisive leadership on how to achieve this.

Settling for division, or limited social sharing, may feel comfortable in the short term, but in the long run it will continue to erode the achievements embodied in the agreement.

Originally published by Brandon Hamber in the Belfast Telegraph, 19 April 2013.

Interview with His Holiness the Dalai Lama

I cannot explain the honour I had last week of meeting and getting to interview His Holiness the Dalai Lama on his visit to Derry. It was an incredibly moving and interesting discussion. Below I have put part of the interview as published on His Holiness' website.

His Holiness the Dalai Lama speaking on "Philosophies of Peace & Conflict" on April 18, 2013 with Brandon Hamber

Working for Peace, Educating the Heart and Cultivating Compassion in Derry

Press Release from The Office of His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet

April 19th 2013

Derry, Northern Ireland, 18 April 2013 - Today, His Holiness the Dalai Lama made his second visit to Derry, the Irish city whose motto is ‘Life, Truth and Victory’ and is UK City of Culture for 2013. He was invited by his old friend Richard Moore, the Director of the charity Children in Crossfire.

In the morning, His Holiness met Richard Moore, his wife and daughters and several of his brothers and sisters. When Richard remarked that his 93 year old mother was hoping to meet His Holiness, but was not feeling strong enough to go out, His Holiness replied that, if possible, he would like to go to see her.

His His first engagement was at Magee University where he was invited to participate in a conversation with Prof Brandon Hamber about ‘Philosophies of Peace and Conflict.’ In response to Prof Hamber’s question about whether the world is becoming a better place, he said:

“It’s a great honour for me to participate in this discussion. I’m here because of my wonderful friend Richard Moore, who as a young man, not especially religious minded, came to embody deep human values. When tragedy befell him, he didn’t allow himself to become filled with feelings of anger, hatred and resentment. The result is clear; he’s now a happy, peaceful human being.

“In the world at large it seems that people are becoming fed up with war and violence and the sense of ‘them’ and ‘us’ that provokes it is breaking down.”

Asked what his philosophy of peace is, he replied:

“Genuine peace comes about as a result of inner peace, so it starts on an individual level. Then you share it with your family and your neighbourhood. Inner peace is the basis of trust, the basis of friendship and so the basis of a wider peace in society and the world at large. Prayer doesn’t bring about peace, because it’s we who create the trouble, so it’s we who have to fix it.”

Prof Hamber asked if he was optimistic about Tibet and he was clear in his response.

“The problem in Tibet is not a matter of civil war, but that a new guest has come without a proper invitation, armed with a gun. Once that guest arrived, every Tibetan’s way of life came under threat. We have a rich cultural heritage, a culture of peace and compassion, which we want to preserve. Yes, the Tibet issue is linked to what happens in China. And things are changing there so, yes, we can hope. The last prime minister Wen Jiabao often spoke of the need for change and even the need for democracy. In the early 1980s Hu Yaobang went to Tibet. I met him in 1954 when he was head of the Chinese Communist Youth. He visited Lhasa in 1980 and publicly apologised for what had happened in Tibet. He was someone he followed Deng Xiaoping’s stricture, ‘Seek truth from facts’ and he realistically investigated local conditions. Some people say the new leadership seem to be taking a cue from Hu Yaobang’s approach, but it’s still too early to say. In the meantime, our Middle Way Approach attracts a lot of support from Chinese writers, thinkers and even ordinary villagers who get to know about it and understand it.”

To the suggestion that people can become tired of working for peace and reconciliation, His Holiness said that this kind of work is not a matter of choice, but something we have to do. As he frequently tells Tibetans, in the long run the people we are in conflict with are the people we have to live with side by side, so we have to find a peaceful solution. In such situations, resorting to violence is like suicide. Taking a more realistic and holistic view can give us a more positive perspective, whereas getting caught up in the destructive emotions of anger, hatred and fear create unhappiness and bring nothing positive.

Addressing those in his audience who were less than 30 years old, His Holiness said:

“You truly belong to the twenty-first century generation; the future is in your hands.”

The release continues here detailing His Holiness visits to a range of venues in Derry delivering a major talk that afternoon to some 2500 people at the Culture of Compassion event.

Lack of Integration Strategy Undermining Northern Ireland's Political Progress

University of Ulster Press Release

The failure to progress a sharing and integrated strategy in Northern Ireland is undermining the achievements of the Good Friday Agreement, a leading University of Ulster academic has warned.

Professor Brandon Hamber (pictured) , the director of the University of Ulster's international conflict resolution research centre INCORE, told a joint committee of MPs and TDs in Dublin that significant strides had been made since the Agreement was forged 15 years ago.

However the Magee-based academic cautioned, as recent events in Northern Ireland have shown, in the absence of any strategy to deliver the integration envisaged in the Good Friday Agreement, the political process was vulnerable to stresses.

Professor Hamber told the meeting of the Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement that we need to acknowledge the progress that has been made, violence has decreased and the institutions are functioning but segregation remains.

“What we do know is integrated schooling has not changed significantly. Although there have been advancements, they have not been dramatic.If you look at mixed marriages, for example, these types of factors have not changed dramatically.

"In numerous quarters, this has been put down to a lack of policy on how sharing and integration will take place…the whole spirit of integration as expressed in the Agreement has not yet been realised.

"Of course, policy does not determine practice but it does provide us with a yardstick for measurement and it helps us create a vision for action in terms of what might be needed”.

Professor Hamber told the joint committee of TDs and MPs that other conflict resolution processes around the world had shown addressing underlying issues, including economic concerns and segregation, would provide stronger social cohesion and a greater guarantee of peace in the long term.

If underlying causes of conflict are not addressed, Professor Hamber said, "In the conflict field, we would talk about this as a negative peace. In other words, there is a context where political violence has decreased but a lot of the underlying issues that potentially can fuel violence still remain in place”.

Specifically Professor Hamber called for an integrated strategy in Northern Ireland on dealing with sectarianism, flags, parades and dealing with the past, and a recommitment to the essence of the 1998 Agreement, which talks specifically about the importance of integration in schooling and housing as key to reconciliation.

Note to Editors:







INCORE (International Conflict Research Institute) is a joint University of Ulster and United Nations University project based on the Magee campus. It aims to address the causes and consequences of conflict in Northern Ireland and internationally while also promoting conflict resolution management and peace-building strategies.

Professor Hamber was giving evidence in Leinster House to the Joint Committee of the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement alongside Peter Sheridan, Chief Executive, Co-operation Ireland and Neil Jarman, Director, Institute for Conflict Research.

The joint committee of TD and Northern Ireland MPs is chaired by Deputy Joe McHugh TD.

For further information, please contact:

David Young Telephone: 028 9036 6074 Email: David Young

Is the government planning for separate development?

Since the 1998 Agreement and devolution in 2007, there have been three broad opinions on how best to achieve greater integration in the education system in Northern Ireland.

Firstly, there are those who argue for a system of common schools, attended by pupils from all traditions. A second argument is that integration need not be planned, but will happen organically as all schools become more inclusive and open to enrolment from other traditions. However, figures show that almost half of Northern Ireland’s schoolchildren are still being taught in schools where 95% or more of the pupils are of the same religion and fewer than 50 schools have an enrolment of more that 10% from the ‘other community’. A third argument is that separate schooling is inevitable and will continue for the foreseeable future, so another strategy may be to promote ‘shared education’ through more contact and collaboration between schools of different traditions. But if the Northern Ireland Executive plans only for ‘shared education’, does this mean that there will never be any change to the current system of separate schooling?

Read the rest of this article by Alan Smith on the site 15 Years On.