ACP PRESS RELEASE 3rd   ACP-EU JOINT PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY Brussels, 30 October 2001
1.        "General Report" calls for ACP-EU strategy for "electronic development" 2.         Working Group on the Impact of sanctions
Contact:    Hegel Goutier, Press & Information Tel: +  02 743 06 04 / 93 - Fax :+ 02 743 06 58 - Email :  goutier@acp.int ACP General Secretariat - 451 Avenue Georges Henri - 1200 Brussels - Belgium

  

1.      "General Report" calls for ACP-EU strategy for "electronic development".

The "General Report on the means and needs of ACP States to access global communication as a contribution to sustainable development" was presented by Rapporteur Mrs. Karin Junker (European Socialist Party, Germany) at the plenary session of the Joint Parliamentary Assembly today, Tuesday 30 October 2001.

The report which calls for the promotion of an integration plan for ACP countries in the framework of the European Union's development policy, emphasizes the fact that there is no alternative to the introduction of Information and Communication Technologies which are indispensable to the development of ACP countries and their integration into the global economy. It recommends state withdrawal from the ICT sector and the setting up of independent regulatory bodies to supervise the granting of licences and ensure free competition.

The report appeals to institutions in ACP and EU countries, as well as donors, to take the necessary measures to avoid splitting ACP societies into those with access to information technologies and the rest, especially in rural areas which would be deprived of such technology.

After underscoring the value of ICTs in the strengthening of civil society, the establishment of a corresponding administration, and support for good governance, the report recommends that the Commission regularly include the subject of the diffusion of information and communication technologies in political dialogue with ACP States and donor countries, and international and non-governmental organisations. It invites the Commission to present a global strategic plan for "electronic development".

Questions and answers

All participants in the deliberations supported the report which an EU Parliamentarian nevertheless accused of being too convoluted, suggesting that the Rapporteur subdivide it into themes.

The ACP participants stressed the role that the state should play in the development of ICTs in ACP countries.

This was done by Mrs. Shirley Segokgo (Botswana) who regretted the lack of ICT policies and strategies in ACP countries at national or regional level. She considered it the responsibility of ACP leaders to mobilise the required resources and encourage healthy competition. She sounded the alarm concerning the brain-drain occuring in ACP countries in the ICT sector.

Mr. Kaire Mbuende (Namibia) drew attention to the risk of duality, using his own country as example - a territory larger than France, Belgium and Germany put together, with a population of only 1.8 million. In such a situation, the setting up of infrastructures necessary for the development of ICTs, without considerable external help, would be impossible. He therefore called on the European Commission to give priority to this cross-cutting sector which makes it possible to reduce costs of all other development programmes.

Mr. Ajay Guness (Mauritius) recalled that his country had made ICTs one of the pillars of its development and opposed a point in the report recommending state withdrawal from that sector. On the contrary, he felt the state should facilitate the process and create the necessary infrastructures, as in Mauritius where the project would have otherwise failed.

Mr. Gado Boureima (Niger) stressed the need to promote local radio networks and lamented the fact that, unlike other donor organisations, the EU did not seem concerned to include this in its policy. He also echoed the Mauritian Parliamentarian's criticism concerning state withdrawal from the ICT sector. He explained that Niger had invested a lot to cover almost the entire country of one million square kilometres with communications networks, and that widespread use of mobile phones by private companies was destabilising the market. Lastly, he called for capacity building, especially for journalists and other communication experts.

Mrs. Junker welcomed the comments from the ACP representatives and promised to take account of them in the preparation of the final report. She proposed the inclusion of a seminar on the regulations governing the ICT sector in the programme of the next Joint Parliamentary Assembly, during which the issue of a world communications order could be discussed. In reply to the concerns on the role of the state, she did not expect the proposed withdrawal to be systematic. She supported the Botswana delegate's call for measures to prevent the brain-drain from ACP countries.

 

2. Working Group on the Impact of sanctions

In the absence of the Rapporteur, Dr Richard Cheltenham (Barbados) it was the South African Parliamentarian, Mr R.DAVIS who presented the report on the impact of sanctions at the plenary session of the JPA today, Tuesday 30 October. The Working Group on the impact of sanctions  and, in particular, of embargoes on the people of the countries on which such measures are imposed, met on Monday 29 October ahead of the 3rd session of the Joint Parliamentary Assembly and unanimously decided to adopt the draft report prepared by the Rapporteur after making a few amendments.

In a nutshell, the adopted text considers that,  generally, sanctions have no basis, as confirmed by all the cases examined. Cuba represents a case in point where a great power has acted unilaterally in an extra-territorial context. As far as the great power which imposed the sanction is concerned, the rationale behind the sanctions was of a moral nature rather than a clear motivation for a change in policy.

The draft report  notes that, in all cases, sanctions have been imposed by rich and powerful economies against poor and weak ones. Furthermore, it has always been observed that sanctions have almost never been imposed on the products  imported by the rich countries .

Sanctions can be classified as "soft" with an embargo which allows more or less aid to seep through, and "draconian" which are applied with rigour and more tenacity although the criteria underlying them are not very clear.

The report also observes that sanctions hit the underprivileged most and  spare those at the head of political regimes these sanctions are meant to target. The humanitarian impact of sanctions is disastrous. That is the reason why sanctions should not be resorted to. Wherever  justified, they should be "smart" and specifically targeted at the governments and their interests by aiming at their military and economic capacities, for instance through a strict control on arms, financial flows and the import-export trade. Besides all the serious consequences on the countries affected, the report has noted collateral damage on other countries which could trigger chain reactions, not to mention that countries hit often take retaliatory measures against others.

Lastly, sanctions may pose other problems when it comes to lifting them because, often, in the final analysis, the rationale behind them gradually moves further and further away from the original motive for those sanctions.

In conclusion, the report which the Working Group is going to propose to Plenary session for a vote considers that, in the light of these conclusions, it is necessary to examine certain provisions of the Cotonou Agreement, more specifically Articles 96 and 97 on political dialogue which provide for the suspension of Community aid to ACP States which, eventually, amounts to sanctions.

In the debates that followed the presentation of the report, Mr Miguel Angel Martinez (PPE-DE, Spain) strongly condemned the unilateral decisions taken by some countries to impose sanctions. He added that sanctions should have been taken against such a country by the international  community. Sanctions, in really indispensable cases, should be imposed under the sole authority of the United Nations.

Replying to questions from Mr. R.A. Kisonga (Ambassador of Democratic Republic of Congo), and Mr. F. M. Dabor (Sierra Leone) who were surprised that their respective countries were not among the cases presented, Mrs. Maes, a member of the Working Group on "Sanctions",  pointed out that the list was not exhaustive.

Mr. Bob van den Bos (ELDR, Netherlands) considered it necessary to nuance the conclusion of the report because sanctions, particularly those called for by the opposition, can be effective, as was the case of Haiti or South Africa during the apartheid era.

▂