GLOMAV articles The International Conference on War-Affected Children and International Conference on Youth and Violence Education: Around the world, there are tens of thousands of children who, because of wars, are denied their right to education. Education is the key to preventing conflicts and to rebuilding our lives after conflict. We demand quality education be provided to all children affected by war. In addition to courses offered in national curriculum, education needs to emphasize awareness through teaching the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Self-understanding and development must be motivated through capacity building, leadership training, and the exploration of issues such as women's rights and democracy. This education must be provided both during and after war. Adults also need access to education, especially education that makes them aware of children's rights. All children need to be encouraged to accept diversity and tolerance. Education is an essential component of peace building. Empowerment must begin at the community level. Long-term conflict prevention begins with social education. Building Peace War destroys everything - our schools, our homes, our families, our communities, our jobs, our health and our souls. War destroys our childhood. We need to rebuild all of these things to create healthy communities. On our journey to peace, we need long-term support and assistance. Beyond simple survival, we need individual, family, and community healing. This means promoting cultural and social activities that teach our communities to work together. As over half of the population of our countries, we are needed to build peace today and to make it last for tomorrow. We are an important part of our communities and want to play a role in making decisions and taking action. We ask government officials, friends, parents, teachers, and other sympathetic adults to help us to learn about and become involved in all political processes - from our neighbourhoods to the United Nations. To build peace and prevent war, we need long-term commitments that help us to defeat poverty. We want local people to lead the development, but we need access to skills, knowledge and tools to improve the economies of our communities. When people can make a good living and respect all people regardless of their gender, age, or ethnicity, it is less likely that they will go to war. People need to have enough money so that they are not forced to partake in conflicts. Refugees and Internally Displaced People: During war many people, including women and children, are denied their right to safety. Without refuge, children are likely to be hurt, maimed, killed, or manipulated into joining rebel factions and other groups that destroy their innocence. It is crucial that sanctuary be made available, regardless of expense. Because of war, many children and their families are unable to return to their communities. We demand that the international community take actions to allow all refugees and internally displaced people to safely return home. For those who feel trapped within refugee camps, it is necessary that they be provided equal and essential basic needs, including satisfactory food rations and sanitary living conditions. All child refugees must be offered free education, as a child's learning process must not be interrupted by displacement. Refugees need more flexible and efficient assistance in receiving the proper documentation to allow access to aid while they are in the camps and re-integration within their own communities following the conflict. Leadership roles within the camp should be equally distributed among all, including adolescents. We must be involved in making the decisions and helping to plan programs inside refugee camps. Tools for Destruction Preventative measures are needed to protect the rights of children worldwide. In order to protect our children, we must prohibit the production and trading of weapons, including small arms and landmines. The quantity of small arms that a country can export, import, or stockpile is currently unregulated. An independent international organization should be put in place to monitor and facilitate all arms trade, as well as assist countries in establishing internal small arms control. Such an organization should facilitate the ban on arms sale to governments that do not operate within human rights standards. Also, in post-war situations, disarmament processes must be encouraged where small arms can be recovered and destroyed. Destruction of these arms means ensuring that they will never be reused. All companies and nations involved in the production and use of landmines must be put to shame. Violations Against Children's Rights During war we are more vulnerable to the abuse of your rights. War makes our societies more violent, and children suffer the results of this violence. Children are orphaned without any support, abducted to serve in armies, sexually abused by armed groups and may be forced into prostitution because there are no alternatives when family members are killed. In some cases children are dehumanized through drugs and propaganda. In other cases, child soldiers choose to become soldiers in order to protect themselves and their families, or to gain food, shelter, and in some cases, a sense of family. In either case, rehabilitation programs are needed to deal with all aspects of war-related trauma among youth both during and after conflict. In order to recover, we need counselling and we need to know our rights - the right not to be abused, raped, especially in times of war when we are vulnerable to abuse. In the case of child soldiers, we demand that no young person under the age of 18 be recruited by either force or choice into the armed forces. Those who refuse to abide by this fundamental human right should be punished and shamed among the nations. How we will help to work on these issue Through examination of our priorities and recognition of the vital importance of action, we have come to the conclusion that as youth, it is ultimately our responsibility to put our own words into action and urge the adult participants of this conference to follow suit. LEGALITY OF Nigeria Labour Congress's STRIKE ACTION OVER INCREASE IN FUEL PRICES Following the new regime of prices in petroleum products as introduced by the Federal Government, the Nigeria Labour Congress, NLC, has planned a nation-wide strike action, begining from Monday, 30th June 2003. Several other bodies like the National Association Of Nigerian Students, NANS, Academic Staff Union of Nigerian Universities, ASUU, the Trade Union Congress, TUC, the National Union of Banks, Insurance and Financial Institutions Employees, NUBIFIE, the National Union Air Transport Employees, NUATE, amongst several others, have made emphatic promises to join the fray. Justifying this resort to strike, NLC President, Comrade Adams Oshiomole, dared the Government over threats to arrest or intimidate members of his organisation. The Federal Government, on its side, has maintained a two-pronged rigid posturing. Vice President Atiku Abubakar, for instance, was quoted as saying the other day that " there is no going back " on the price hike. Also, on Thursday, June 27, 2003, the Secretary to the Federal Government, Chief Ufot Ekaette, warned public and civil servants not to join in the proposed strike action, failure to heed this warning of which will deprive the erring officers of their salaries and allowances. The SGF also described the strike action as being "unwarranted and illegal", charging that the strikers "will be met with appropriate response by law enforcement agents". Having regard to the will power of the two contending sides, if one views their antecedents, then it will be inevitable to conclude that a gloomy economic, social and political future lies ahead, commencing from 30/6/2003. Now, is the threat to embark on a strike by the NLC and its allies "unwarranted and illegal"? While at common law, the NLC or any amalgam of workers can embark on a strike due not only to a trade dispute, but also "to give vent to a grievance or making a protest about something or the other, or supporting or sympathising with other workmen in such endeavour (for which see Tramp Shipping Corp. V. Greenwhich Marine Inc (1975) All E.R.898 at 990), the situation in Nigeria, as far as statute law is concerned, is entirely different. Thus, section 47 (1) of the Trade Disputes Act, 1990, limits the right to embark on a strike to a trade dispute - that is, a dispute over conditions of labour. From this narrow angle therefore, the NLC, ASUU and other employees have no right to embark on a general strike to compel Government to reduce fuel prices. But NANS and other civil rights organisations are not part of this limitation. It will, however, be misleading for one to, as the SGF has obviously done, limit himself to the restrictive provisions of the Trade Disputes Act, 1990. For, while section 34 of the 1999 Constitution (CFRN 1999) prohibits forced labour ( meaning, conversely, that a person qua worker can, for instance, through a prohibits forced labour ( meaning, conversely, that a person qua worker can, for instance, through a strike action based on any reason at all, withdraw his services), section 40 thereof allows "every person" to join a trade union "for the protection of his interests". "Every person" here was recently defined by the Supreme Court in I.N.E.C. V. Musa (2003) F.W.L.R.(Pt.145) 729 as including civil and public servants. Indeed, the Supreme Court held that section 79 (2) (c) of the Electoral Act, 2001, which restricted the rights of civil servants to join any political party of their choice was invalid, in view of section 40 of the CFRN 1999. If a civil / public servant is allowed to join a political party, therefore, he is free to hold a political opinion, stick to it and apply it. From this angle, therefore, such a civil / public servant can, even if the Trade Disputes Act restricts his right to embark on a strike action for political or (other) economic reasons. The provisions of the Constitution being superior to those of the Trade Dispute Act, therefore, reign supreme. Another dimension here, however, is to bring to the fore, restrictions placed in the Trade Disputes (Essential Services) Act, 1990. Section 2 of this Act makes it an offence for any person(s) rendering essential services to engage in any acts " calculated to disrupt the economy or acts calculated to obstruct or disrupt the smooth running of any essential services". In this category are hospital workers, etc. It is a question of fact whether airspace workers, workers in financial institutions, etc., are amongst the category of workers offering "essential services". Be that as it may, the Trade Disputes (Essential Services) Act is a law "reasonably justifiable in a democratic society - (a) in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or public health; or (b) for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons" (section 45(1) CFRN 1999). It is morally and constitutionally wrong for hospital workers, for instance, to embark on a strike action, more so, a politically-motivated one, leaving their patients to die unattended to. That is the meaning of the phrase "for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons". From this further narrow angle, therefore, workers offering essential services have no right to join the NLC strike on 30/6/2003. Examples in Nigeria and elsewhere show that strike actions go beyond just refusing to work: they involve mobilisation, movement and enforcement of the action. Are these lawful or constitutional? Section 41 CFRN 1999 guarantees freedom of movement, hence persons striking can move about to vent their grievances. This right, again, has its own limitations. First, the Public Order Act 1990, requires people embarking on such mass action to obtain prior police permit. Is this Act a law "reasonably justifiable in a democratic society"? In Tai Solarin V.I.G.P (1983) 1 F.N.L.R 415, the Lagos High Court held that the police were right in stopping the Applicant from holding his public " lectures" at Campus Square, Lagos, without police permit. In Ghana, the Supreme Court of Ghana was recently bold enough, New Patriotic Party V.IGP Accra (2000) HRLRA 1, to knock off the Public Order Decree, 1972 of Ghana, which required a police permit before a person or group of persons can embark on a public procession. The Ghana Supreme Court held that even without Police permit, it is lawful it being pursuant to constitutional guarantee for freedom of movement, for persons to embark on a peaceful procession or demonstration. It held therefore, that section 13 of the Public Order Decree which required a prior police permit was offensive to Article 21 (d) of the Constitution of Ghana, 1992, hence deserved to be struck down. Though a persuasive authority, N.P.P V. I.G.P. Accra is a commendable piece of judicial activism. It is doubtful if it will not persuade the Nigerian Supreme Court, supposing the Federal Government decides to clamp down on organized labour, resulting to litigation. This is because if the organized labour is fighting to enthrone a regime of cheap prices of goods, for the better of the common man, then it and not the government, is the one promoting “public safety, public order, public morality or public health. The right to move around and mobilize for a strike commonly called in labour circles “picketing". In Hubbard V. Pitt (1976) Q.B. 142, Lord Denning, M.R, held that picketing a person's premises (even if done with a view to compel or persuade) is not unlawful “unless it is associated with other conduct of a nuisance in itself.He concluded that picketing is not unlawful “unless it is associated with obstruction, violence, intimidation, molestation or threats. See also, Straford V. Lindley (1965) A.C. 142. In the United States, the situation is not much different. Thus in De Jonge V. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353 57 S Ct 255, a State law which punished participation in a meeting for lawful discussion of public issues because it was held under the auspices of an organization which advocated the use of unlawful means to effect political changes, was repugnant to the right of free assembly. See, also Herndon V. Lowry, 301 U.S. 242, 57 S Ct 732 and Bates V. Little Rock, 361 U.S. 516, 80 S Ct 412. Therefore, even if the NCL had previously been involved in the use of unlawful means to effect social, economic and political changes (but this is not true) all persons, to use the phrase of the CFRN 1999, every person , are/is free to join in the strike of 30/6/03, except those offering essential services. In conclusion, as at the time of sending this piece to the Press, the Federal Government was reported to have secured an injunction restraining the NLC from embarking on the strike action. Although details of this injunction are not known, it is trite law that before a person will be guilty of contempt of Court, such a person must have been personally served with the order of injunction. Radio and television announcements are not okay in law. Therefore, even if Comrade Adams Oshiomole and a few of his officers have been served with the said order of injunction, other unionists who have not been served will not be guilty of contempt of Court if they go ahead with the planned strike action. The Obasanjo's and the Ekaette's should be told that millions of Nigerians are behind the NLC. Carry go NLC. Sent in for publication by: SEBASTINE HON ESQ (Port Harcourt- based Legal Practitioner and Chairman, Movement for the Emancipation of the Middle-Belt, MEMB). President Bush's real goal in Iraq By JAY BOOKMAN - Bookman is the deputy editorial page editor of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution The official story on Iraq has never made sense. The connection that the Bush administration has tried to draw between Iraq and al-Qaida has always seemed contrived and artificial. In fact, it was hard to believe that smart people in the Bush administration would start a major war based on such flimsy evidence. The pieces just didn't fit. Something else had to be going on; something was missing. In recent days, those missing pieces have finally begun to fall into place. As it turns out, this is not really about Iraq. It is not about weapons of mass destruction, or terrorism, or Saddam, or U.N. resolutions. This war, should it come, is intended to mark the official emergence of the United States as a full-fledged global empire, seizing sole responsibility and authority as planetary policeman. It would be the culmination of a plan 10 years or more in the making, carried out by those who believe the United States must seize the opportunity for global domination, even if it means becoming the "American imperialists" that our enemies always claimed we were. Once that is understood, other mysteries solve themselves. For example, why does the administration seem unconcerned about an exit strategy from Iraq once Saddam is toppled? Because we won't be leaving. Having conquered Iraq, the United States will create permanent military bases in that country from which to dominate the Middle East, including neighboring Iran. In an interview Friday, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld brushed aside that suggestion, noting that the United States does not covet other nations' territory. That may be true, but 57 years after World War II ended, we still have major bases in Germany and Japan. We will do the same in Iraq. And why has the administration dismissed the option of containing and deterring Iraq, as we had the Soviet Union for 45 years? Because even if it worked, containment and deterrence would not allow the expansion of American power. Besides, they are beneath us as an empire. Rome did not stoop to containment; it conquered. And so should we. Among the architects of this would-be American Empire are a group of brilliant and powerful people who now hold key positions in the Bush administration: They envision the creation and enforcement of what they call a worldwide "Pax Americana," or American peace. But so far, the American people have not appreciated the true extent of that ambition. Part of it's laid out in the National Security Strategy, a document in which each administration outlines its approach to defending the country. The Bush administration plan, released Sept. 20, marks a significant departure from previous approaches, a change that it attributes largely to the attacks of Sept. 11. To address the terrorism threat, the president's report lays out a newly aggressive military and foreign policy, embracing pre-emptive attack against perceived enemies. It speaks in blunt terms of what it calls "American internationalism," of ignoring international opinion if that suits U.S. interests. "The best defense is a good offense," the document asserts. It dismisses deterrence as a Cold War relic and instead talks of "convincing or compelling states to accept their sovereign responsibilities." In essence, it lays out a plan for permanent U.S. military and economic domination of every region on the globe, unfettered by international treaty or concern. And to make that plan a reality, it envisions a stark expansion of our global military presence. "The United States will require bases and stations within and beyond Western Europe and Northeast Asia," the document warns, "as well as temporary access arrangements for the long-distance deployment of U.S. troops." The report's repeated references to terrorism are misleading, however, because the approach of the new National Security Strategy was clearly not inspired by the events of Sept. 11. They can be found in much the same language in a report issued in September 2000 by the Project for the New American Century, a group of conservative interventionists outraged by the thought that the United States might be forfeiting its chance at a global empire. "At no time in history has the international security order been as conducive to American interests and ideals," the report said. stated two years ago. "The challenge of this coming century is to preserve and enhance this 'American peace.' " FOR MORE DETAILS: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2319.htm
GLOBAL MOVEMENT AGAINST VIOLENCE - Promoting WORLD PEACE; making the world a better and safer place to live in. GLOMAV is Global Movement Against Violence. The Project is geared towards the achievement of WORLD PEACE - making the world a better and safer place to live in. Promoting WORLD PEACE through: - Education - Dialogue & Reconciliation - International parley of children & youths of warring/disputing nations - Other related positive means to be initiated GLOMAV is made up of different international NGOs, governments and individuals with a common goal of achieving WORLD PEACE - making the world a better and safer place to live in. FOR MORE INFO visit for example: www.glomavnigeria.4t.com (GLOMAV Team in Nigeria) The project was championed by LAMUEL D.W. BIAMBO in his capacity as MASOVI's (Movement Against Social Violence)Vice-President, External Relations & Special Duties. PROGRAMMES EXECUTED SINCE INCEPTION OF GLOMAV in November 2002: - WORKSHOPS ON VIOLENCE IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS & CHILDREN SUNDAY SCHOOLS - PROJECT FEED THE HOMELESS & POOR ON CHRISTMAS DAY - PROJECT IT FOR ALL (A Computer Literacy Program) " ...Project Feed the Homeless And Poor (HAP) on Christmas Day was a huge success; being the very first project that GLOMAV executed after its inception in November 2002, which actually contributed physically, mentally and positively too, to humanity. It started with me having to meet a couple of leaders of some NGOs to discuss how we could impact on the lives of the children of homeless and poor families in the christmas season (which at the time, was just 5 days to Christmas). My meeting had a two sided effect: one which saw some of the NGOs not having any activity for the season, and some others already hooked up with one activity or the other. My effort in convincing some of them to incorporate their activities into doing something that will add physically & positively to children of HAP families wasn't that easy. But since time was running out and I told myself and my friends that 'we have to do something this christmas for HAP families; no matter how little - to put a SMILE on the faces of children of HAP families, so that they get to appreciate the TRUE MEANING of Christmas as a FESTIVAL OF LOVE, JOY and LAUGHTER. By christmas eve 2002,three NGOs including mine, some parents, individuals and friends had agreed to join forces to champion the project in different capacities: donations in cash and kind support, materials and food. I was the happiest person in the world that day, after the end of the project which was indeed a huge success: everybody was happy; the children, our team and our volunteers. We actually visited Slums, Remand homes and SOS Children's Village, all in the city of Lagos-Nigeria; distributing and serving food & drinks, clothings & footwears as well as greeting cards. MAKING THESE CHILDREN FEEL HAPPY LIKE THEIR RICH COUNTERPARTS ON CHRISTMAS DAY was our greatest priority for the project; EATING GOOD FOOD, WEARING GOOD CLOTHES, RECEIVING GOOD GIFTS. For this, I would like to immensely thank all our parents, friends and volunteers who contributed immensely to this worthy project: as we sacrificed our CHRISTMAS DAY for SERVICE to HUMANITY, which was fun to us. To mention a few, I would like to thank the following for making it possible: PRINCESS (DR.) BOLA JEGEDE - Chairperson, MASOVI; MR. AKINYELE - son of former Information Minister of Nigeria; MRS. OREFUWA, MR. & MRS. OKOJIE, MR. KUNLE ONIFADE, ETC. OUR TEAM: LAMUEL D.W. BIAMBO - Project Director (GLOMAV-Nigeria)& V-President,MASOVI; TEMIDAYO ISRAEL-ABDULAI - President GAAVOHCR; SOLA OREFUWA - President STOREHOUSE Foundation. Shortly after the Christmas project, GLOMAV-Nigeria organised another project tagged "PROJECT IT FOR ALL". It was a program aimed at educating YOUTHS in the area of computer appreciation and computer skill, to enable them turn their minds away from VIOLENCE and do something which we consider interesting and worthwhile; and which will eventually earn them a source of livelihood. We believed that an IDLE MIND, IS THE DEVIL'S WORKSHOP. So, we joined forces with resource persons in the IT field and organised a training program. The first was test-run in Lagos (western Nigeria), while the other was done in Port Harcourt (southern Nigeria) all on a small scale . On the whole a total of 30 youths where trained effectively on Microsoft basic programs. Our Appreciation on this project goes to the following: - Mr. Segun Martins (MCP), ADVIL CONCEPTS (Lagos) - BIGOS COMPUTERS, Port Harcourt. Two days after the latter program, we visited the Ikeja Cantonment; former home of the BOMB BLAST VICTIMS. We went there to mark the 1st YEAR REMEMBRANCE ANNIVERSARY of the many persons who lost their lives as a result of bomb explosions at the army barrack. We saw many burnt and wrecked houses as a result of the explosion and also saw that some of the victims who lost their homes could no longer wait for the government to rehabilitate them, and have gone into using their personal earnings in repairing their buildings.We went to see things for our selves after one year and to return with relief materials to further alleviate their sufferings. FOR MORE INFORMATION ON GLOMAV, visit our website www.glomavnigeria.4t.com
GLOBAL MOVEMENT AGAINST VIOLENCE Promoting World Peace