WCAR Think Papers
A joint project of Human Rights Documentation Center (HRDC),
International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) and South Asia Human Rights
Documentation Centre (SAHRDC)
One of the most polarizing issues at the WCAR will be the subject of compensation for slavery and colonialism. The argument for compensation is that States which were directly responsible for these atrocities owe some form of remediation to States and individuals who are the successors or descendants of the original victims. The types of remediation, or compensation, include: monetary payments; debt relief; financed repatriation of descendants of slaves who wish to relocate; and return of expropriated art.
Thus far, the
terms of the debate have been mostly limited to the issue of the Trans-Atlantic
slave trade and European colonization of Africa -- pitting West European
States and the United States of America against African States. As for the former group, the West European
States which were major colonial powers and which are consequently on the
defensive in the compensation debate include: Belgium, France, Germany,
Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom. As for the
latter, the African Group receives strong support from Cuba and possibly
Israel. As a measure of their
support it is notable that in the 1998 Commission on Human Rights, Senegal,
Cuba and Israel -- though unsuccessful -- co-sponsored a draft resolution
entitled “Recognition of Slavery and the Slave Trade as Crimes Against
Humanity”.
The compensation issue already created significant
ruptures during the first PrepCom. On
the final day of negotiations, delegations reached their greatest obstacle:
deciding on the placement of compensation within the agenda. At the time, the
fourth theme (out of five) in the
agenda of the conference was entitled: “Provision of effective remedies,
recourses, redress, compensatory and other measures, at the national, regional
and international levels.” Portugal, speaking
on behalf of the European Union, wanted to place the entirety of the fourth
theme in brackets. The United States
suggested placing only the term “compensatory” in brackets. However, both alternatives were met with
strong opposition from the African Group, Armenia and Cuba. Demonstrating the importance they attach to
this one issue, the African Group stated that if the topic of compensation were
placed in brackets, they would bracket the entire text. The final text included brackets around the
term compensation, with a statement in the report indicating the different
perspectives on the meaning of the brackets.[1] West European States have subsequently
discussed, on an informal basis, different levels of non-cooperation they may
adopt if the issue of compensation gains momentum at the WCAR.
If the
compensation issue begins to receive significant attention at the conference,
it may open up a Pandora’s box. First,
the issue of colonialism and slavery cannot be easily restricted to Western
States’ treatment of Africa and Africans.
The Western States’ colonial expansion also included vast regions of the
Asia-Pacific, for example. Once the
door to compensation is ajar, it is difficult to deny similar claims of the
descendants of victims of French colonialism in Indochina (e.g., Vietnam,
Laos, Cambodia); Dutch colonialism in the East Indies (e.g., Indonesia);
and British colonialism in South and Southeast Asia (e.g., Bangladesh,
Burma, Fiji, India, Malaysia, Pakistan, Singapore, Solomon Islands). The European transportation of slaves and
indentured labourers from India and China -- including the
so-called “coolie system” -- to supplement and, later, replace the use of
African slavery further complicates the equation.[2]
The Spanish conquest
of the Americas and decimation of indigenous populations ranks as a
holocaust of its own. Under the
infamous “encomienda” system, so-called Indians were enslaved by Spanish
proprietors in Mexico, Peru and elsewhere. Spain took over vast areas of the South
American continent. According to
authoritative estimates, at the beginning of Spanish settlement, there were an
estimated 50 million indigenous peoples in the mainland areas; in the
seventeenth century the number was approximately down to 4 million. Portugal also made inroads into South
America. The Portuguese used Indian
slavery in Brazil and continued the practice at least partially until
the mid-eighteenth century.
West European
States and the United States are not the only ones with a history of engaging
in colonialism and repression. Japanese
imperial expansion in East Asia, including its colonization of Korea
and Taiwan in the early part of the twentieth century, makes it
vulnerable to claims for compensation. Russia,
in the late nineteenth century, subjugated people in the Far East, the Caucasus
and Central Asia to its quest for empire. The Ottoman Turks conquered large regions and decimated
populations -- one of the most egregious episodes being the Armenian genocide
of 1915.
With these
historical realities in mind, it is understandable why some argue that the
compensation debate may become much more complicated, if not wholly unwieldy,
at the WCAR. These other episodes of
colonialism and slavery will likely affect the alignments of States. These other cases may also be used by West
European States and the United States to argue that the claim for compensation
involves impractical demands and run-away implications, and that exclusive
concern with African slavery and African colonialism is being used against them
in an unfairly selective and politicised manner.
Recent developments confirm the prospects of this
issue dominating and perhaps capsizing the conference. At the conclusion of the European
preparatory meeting in Strasbourg in October 2000, the final “Report from the
Forum of Non-Governmental Organisations” stated:
The legacy of slave trade and colonialism continues to
have consequences in present times and remains at the root of some acts of
racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance. It is
necessary, so that society can be reconciled with its own history, that the
truth concerning slavery, slave trade and colonialism, be publicly
acknowledged. Former colonial powers and other parties involved have the
moral duty to grant reparation to victims of slave trade and colonialism. Such
reparation may take the form of restitution, compensation, rehabilitation and
satisfaction as well measures which guarantee non-repetition. The World
Conference against Racism in 2001 will constitute an important opportunity to
publicly apologize to the victims and their descendants.[3]
Subsequently, newspapers around the world spotlighted
this one element of the NGO Report.[4] The Times of India, for example, began its
story stating: “India could be the beneficiary of hundreds of millions of
pounds in compensation if the demands of an anti-racist conference in
Strasbourg are implemented. The conference is backing a campaign that says
‘colonial powers have a moral duty to grant reparation to victims of slave
trade and colonialism.’”[5]
Keeping the momentum alive, at the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and
Cultural) meeting in late October, the Cuba delegate stated that the WCAR could
serve as a landmark for seeking reparations for victims and descendants of
slavery.[6]
Given all the above, this Think Paper makes two
recommendations. First, before arrival
at the WCAR, governmental and NGO representatives should consider their stance
on, and the priority they assign to, the compensation issue. A high likelihood exists that, if present
trends continue, this single issue will be pushed to the point that the
conference’s viability will be jeopardised.
Participants should consider whether they are willing to forgo the
conference’s other objectives based on this issue alone. Second, this Think Paper suggests reasons
the compensation issue, if it continues to be framed in the current manner,
will compromise the conference’s success.
The current framing of the issue involves significant complexities and
produces exceptional divisiveness. At
the WCAR, if agreement on this issue appears unreachable, it should take a back
seat to those vitally important issues on which the world community is closer
to reaching agreement.
[1] A/CONF.189/PC.1/21.
[2] Tayyab Mahmud, Colonialism and Modern Constructions of Race, University of Miami Law Review, 1219, 1239 (1999).
[3] Report from the Forum of Non-Governmental Organisations (General remarks and recommendations), I(9) <www.ecri.coe.int/en/07/01/Report%20NGO%20Forum%20final.pdf>.
[4] See, eg., Tamara Thiessen, Europe “must say sorry for racism”, The Straits Times, Oct. 14, 2000, at p. 14; Former colonial powers urged to pay compensation, The Times of India, Oct. 22, 2000.
[5] Former colonial powers urged to pay compensation, supra.
[6] M2 Presswire, Oct. 20, 2000 (Third Committee summary report).