Joseph’s approach to reparations was learned

Dear Editor,

The Guyana Reparations Committee is eternally grateful for the letter by Mr Cedric L Joseph titled ‘The region’s case for reparations has to be founded on law rather than morality’ (SN, September 29). It was brilliant both from its sophistication and simplicity as he captured the historical, political and international dimensions of reparations for the Caribbean including Guyana.

As highlighted by Mr Joseph, reparations has to be about justice. It has to be founded on law. And indeed, international law is on the side of the Caricom nations.

Lord Gifford stated three key points in his presentation to the Group of Eminent Persons on Reparations to Africa and Africans in the Diaspora.

The first was “that the enslavement of Africans was a crime against humanity. I cited the Charter of the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, which defined crimes against humanity as: ‘Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population… whether or not in violation of the domestic law where perpetrated.’ I referred to the Genocide Convention, which did not create a new international crime but gave it new and more effective legal form. It recognized genocide as a crime against international law, and defined genocide as being ‘acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group as such.’ The invasion of African territories, the mass capture of Africans, the horrors of the middle passage, the sale and use of Africans as worse than beasts, the extermination of family life, culture and language, were violations of these international laws.”

The Durban Declaration of September 8 at the 2001 United Nations World Conference against Racism (WCAR) also stated:

“We acknowledge that slavery and the slave trade, including the transatlantic slave trade, were appalling tragedies in the history of humanity not only because of their abhorrent barbarism but also in terms of their magnitude, organized nature and especially their negation of the essence of the victims, and further acknowledge that slavery and the slave trade are a crime against humanity and should always have been so.”

So indeed, Caricom’s case or Guyana’s case for reparations have both to be grounded in law. And the law is clear. Indigenous genocide and African chattel slavery, were and are ‘crimes against humanity.’

The Caricom-Guyana case has nine elements, namely,

 

We assert that European Governments:

  1. Were owners and traders of enslaved Africans
  2. Instructed genocidal actions upon indigenous communities
  3. Created the legal, financial and fiscal policies necessary for the enslavement of Africans
  4. Defined and enforced African enslavement and native genocide as in their ‘national interests’
  5. Refused compensation to the enslaved with the ending of their enslavement
  6. Compensated slave owners at emancipation for the loss of legal property rights in enslaved Africans
  7. Imposed a further one hundred years of racial apartheid upon the emancipated
  8. Imposed for another one hundred years policies designed to perpetuate suffering upon the emancipated and survivors of genocide
  9. And have refused to acknowledge such crimes or to compensate victims and their descendants.

Apart from the brilliance with which Mr Joseph addressed this issue, he was also very correct in his observations about many among ourselves who seem to love the intellectual exercise of “negotiating with themselves.”

Mr Joseph captured this when he stated: “Quite instructive is the fact that it is Caribbean people, including Guyana, who are telling or warning us about engaging in a pipe dream; seeking hand-outs or overplaying the victim; that Africans participated in the slave trade; that exploitation of surplus labour by those who owned the means of production necessitated the use of force and that producers of wealth in those societies, like slaves of antiquity, serfs or peasants can equally justify claims for reparations; the high costs of a referral to the ICJ; and that reparations are a distraction from other important issues to resolve. Well, thanks very much; though where the criticisms have merit, and there is merit in some, they should be engaged rather than confronted.”

 

In all my travels, we in the Caribbean seem to be the best at this. And it is one of the most destructive divide and rule remnants of our colonialism. In essence, once you control the mind, you don’t have to control the body.

Next week the Caricom Reparations Commission will have its 2nd Annual Reparations Conference in Antigua where experts in many fields will converge to discuss critical issues about the way forward.

We welcome Mr Joseph’s article and will circulate it at the conference.

Reparations is an international battle for justice. Guyana has its own case against Holland and Britain and each country’s case will have some unique elements.

We thank Mr Joseph for his learned approach and his contribution to this global cause while others pout on the side engaged in a “circle of self.”

We invite him to visit our weekly Thursday meeting at the Museum of African Heritage on Barima Avenue from 5.30 pm.

As our National Poet Martin Carter said” All are involved, all are consumed.”

Yours faithfully,

Eric Phillips

Chair

National Reparations Committee