Google Ads

Showing posts with label Reparations Movement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Reparations Movement. Show all posts

Monday, March 17, 2014

Caricom leaders move forward with the case for reparations ...for the transatlantic trade in enslaved Africans in the Caribbean ...from Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, The Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Denmark

The case for reparations from slavery

 

By CLAUDE ROBINSON



The case for reparations for the transatlantic trade in enslaved Africans inched forward last week when Caricom leaders accepted a 10-point plan for negotiations with the European nations which planned, executed and profited immensely from this crime against humanity, a crime that cannot be allowed to disappear without settlement.

At their inter-sessional meeting in St Vincent and the Grenadines, leaders of the 15-member grouping of Caribbean states embraced the plan. Among other things, it seeks a formal apology, debt forgiveness, greater development aid for public health, educational and cultural institutions as well as unspecified financial damages for the persisting "psychological trauma" from the days of plantation slavery.

Also, it calls for the creation of a "repatriation programme" to help resettle members of the Rastafarian movement in Africa. Repatriation to Africa has long been a central belief of Jamaican Rastafarians and they have been pressing Britain to foot the bill, a claim the British have rejected.

The targeted countries are Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, The Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Denmark which participated, to varying degrees, in the slave trade that took place from the 16th through to the 19th centuries.

Meanwhile, at a press conference in Barbados Thursday, following the St Vincent summit, the chairman of Caricom's Reparations Commission (CRC), Professor Sir Hilary Beckles, said the region expects to host a major conference on reparations and reparatory justice shortly, and various European government delegations are expected to participate.

Professor Beckles said the conference would address "...this matter of continuing harm and continuing suffering within the tradition of international diplomacy. The diplomatic initiative is designed... to ensure that there is reconciliation, to ensure that there is truth and justice, and to put an end to this terrible history so that the world may move on in the 21st century as a more harmonious place".

Also endorsing a "non-confrontational" approach, Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller says Caricom was seeking to engage a "process of reconciliation and dialogue, free from animosity".

But litigation should not be ruled out if diplomacy and negotiation failed. That's why the region has engaged the British law firm, Leigh Day, to push the claim under international law, should that be necessary.

Not so long ago, Leigh Day secured a £20-million compensation award for Kenyans who were tortured by colonial authorities during the Mau Mau rebellion in the 1950s. The financial settlement, though relatively small, confirms that remedies are possible.

In various media statements, Martin Day, a principal of the firm, has been arguing that there is a case for adjudication in the international court of justice in The Hague. The United Kingdom accepts the jurisdiction of the court, but only in cases relating to disputes arising since 1974 and those that do not involve Commonwealth or former Commonwealth countries. Day does not see this as an insurmountable hurdle.

With a huge footprint from its slaving imperial and colonial past, Britain's objection to litigating its past conduct is understandable, as cases could arise from the often violent exercise of authority in the vast empire once under its control. Accepting a case for slavery could open a floodgate of claims for other human rights abuses.

Recently, a British junior minister, while on a visit to Jamaica to drum up business for his country, told us flatly to forget it and move on. Slavery happened. It wasn't pretty; but we should just get over it! I don't think so.

Slave owners compensated for loss of their 'property'

The enslavement of millions of Africans and subsequent abuse for more than 400 years did not occur by happenstance. Africans were classified in law as non-human, chattel, property and real estate. They were denied recognition as members of the human family by laws and practices derived from the parliaments and policies of Europe.

British traders shipped more than three million men, women and children from Africa to slave markets in the Americas in what has been acknowledged to be the largest forced migration in human history.

In a compelling argument of the case for reparations, historian Professor Beckles argues in his recent book, Britain's Black Debt: Reparation for Caribbean Slavery and Native Genocide, that international law provides that chattel slavery, as practised by Britain, was a crime against humanity.

He documents that slavery was invested in by the royal family, the Government, the established church, most elite families, and large public institutions in the private and public sectors. Citing the legal principles of unjust and criminal enrichment, he argues that Britain must pay up on the black debt owed to subsequent generations of Caribbean peoples.

Slavery ended throughout the Caribbean in the 1800s in the wake of slave revolts, and the realisation in Europe that the huge profits from the region's plantation economies were becoming unsustainable.

Since the abolition of slavery, numerous groups have been calling for reparations on the basis of social justice, equity, civil and human rights, education, and cultural identity.

However, that demand remains a divided issue. Britain has steadfastly refused to apologise or consider financial compensation. The closest positive response was in 2007 when Tony Blair, the then prime minister, expressed "deep sorrow and regret" for the "unbearable suffering" caused by Britain's role in slavery.

Some would wish that the campaigners for reparations would shut up. Forget about slavery and move on to more practical issues of human and economic development. The Europeans will neither pay nor apologise, they say.

Also, cynics suggest that our regional political leaders are using the reparations issue as a diversion from their inability to properly manage governmental institutions and natural resources for the advancement of Caribbean peoples.

No one can dispute that many of our administrations perform below expectations; examples of corruption, lack of adherence to good governance and accountability abound; and too many pressing social issues are not being seriously addressed.

But this does not undermine the case for reparations, which is likely to be a defining issue of the 21st century as peoples all over the world demand the righting of historical wrongs of enslavement and native genocide, whose negative effects are still clearly visible for all who care to see.

But as UWI historian Professor Verene Shepherd, chairman of Jamaica's reparations committee, told Britain's The Daily Telegraph in an interview last month, British colonisers had "disfigured the Caribbean", and their descendants should now pay to repair the damage.

"If you commit a crime against humanity, you are bound to make amends," she said. "The planters were given compensation, but not one cent went to the freed Jamaicans." The same countries that deny culpability for their misdeeds are now busy trying African and other leaders for crimes against humanity. Justice demands that all wrongs be righted.

— kcr@cwjamaica.com

March 16, 2014

Jamaica Observer

Sunday, August 7, 2011

Back Pay For Slavery

Carolyn Cooper, Contributor

jamaica-gleaner



THE PRINCIPLE of reparations was established long ago in the 1833 Act for the Abolition of Slavery throughout the British colonies. But there was a catch to the act - not much different in essence from the original sin of catching Africans for enslavement in the Americas. Reparations were to be made to the perpetrators of human trafficking, not to the victims.

This is how the act opens: "Whereas divers persons are holden (held) in slavery within divers of His Majesty's colonies, and it is just and expedient that all such persons should be manumitted and set free, and that a reasonable compensation should be made to the persons hitherto entitled to the services of such slaves for the loss which they will incur by being deprived of their right to such services ... ," etc.

This is a classic example of the diabolical mindset of 'wicked white people'. Slaveholders were legally entitled to the services of their slaves and therefore had a right to 'reasonable compensation' for loss of service. The enslaved had no such rights or entitlements. They were freed with nothing in their two long hands; just like that rather sad-looking couple standing in a basin of water in New Kingston's 'Emancipation Park'.

When I talk about 'wicked white people' I don't mean specific individuals who have done me personal wrong. I'm not speaking about singular acts of evil. It's a far bigger issue. What concerns me is the collective crimes against humanity committed by gravalicious people who consider themselves absolutely entitled by God and nature to dominate the world. In many instances, these self-proclaimed rulers just happen to be white.

In the age of colonial conquest, 'wicked white people' as a special interest group committed crimes of unapologetic horror. They ravaged other people's bodies, souls, lands and histories; they vandalised sacred objects and then locked them away in 'museums' - those cemeteries of other people's culture. 'Wicked white people' invading and stealing, stealing, stealing without conscience.

I know I'm going to be accused of racism for exposing 'wicked white people' to public scrutiny in this way. But that's just another ploy of 'wicked white people' and their collaborators to perpetuate mental slavery. It's racism to talk about racist behaviour. But actual racist behaviour is not racism. It's just human nature. What an irony!

Justice versus expediency

So let's say instead that 'nice and decent' white people agreed that it was "just and expedient" to set the enslaved free. But the yoking of justice and expedience in the Act for the Abolition of Slavery reveals the central philosophical and practical dilemma at the heart of the emancipation enterprise.

Justice seemingly puts emancipation on solid moral ground. Expedience erodes all claims to moral authority. It was expedient to emancipate enslaved Africans because plantation slavery had become an expensive proposition. The substitution of beet for cane turned West Indian sugar into a rather sour deal.

After centuries of mostly verbal outrage - incessant talk, talk, talk about 'wicked white people' - we, the collective victims of transatlantic slavery, must finally decide to take legal action in the largest class-action suit in the history of the world. This is a truly wonderful idea. Not the wishy-washy, everyday sense of 'wonderful', meaning simply 'great'; it's the mind-blowing, original meaning of the word: full of wonder.

Five hundred years after the rape of the body and land of the original inhabitants of this part of the world; 500 years after the violent uprooting and enslavement of millions of Africans, we, their descendants, both native and immigrant, must lay claim to rights of reparation.

In the sweet by and by

For many Africans in the diaspora, it is in religion that we find hope for reparations. The Christian religion seems to recommend long-term investment in the celestial stock market. The concept of reparations has best been expressed in pious hymns like this: "In the sweet by and by I'll have a mansion so bright and so fair, won't it be glorious when I get there in the sweet by and by?" God will repair the breach. God is the ultimate human rights arbitrator.

Then we have those Africans who want hard cold cash in the here and now. Think of the title song from the movie The Harder They Come: "They tell me bout the pie up in the sky waiting for me when I die. But between the day you born and when you die, they never seem to hear even your cry. So as long as the sun will shine, I'm gonna get my share, what's mine. The harder they come, the harder they fall, one and all."

That's an excellent anthem for the Reparations Movement, the Garveyism of our times. It's the same kind of daring that made Marcus Garvey conceive the Universal Negro Improvement Association and Communities League: a global movement of African peoples who see themselves as having a shared history and a common destiny.

And don't think it's a joke. With derisive laughter cynics like to say, 'when you get the money you can check me.' But the Jews got compensation from the Germans; Japanese-Americans got compensation for the atrocities committed against them. Why not Africans? I'd like to know what, exactly, our National Commission on Reparations is doing about it.

If you think that after 500 years it's now too late for reparations, just remember Psalm 90:4 in which David, himself a Jew, converses with the Supreme Arbitrator: "For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past." Come to think of it, all we're really talking about is half a day's back pay.

August 7, 2011

jamaica-gleaner