There are moments when the world is a joke and a dangerous place at the same time

Nov 27, 2010 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

There could have been no greater act of asininity as when the UN Human Rights Commission was composed of many of brutal states in which the great freedoms that human beings are naturally entitled to were not recognized by the government of those states. \This was in the United Nations. the lofty, phenomenal international organization created after WW2 to enhance the freedoms of the peoples of the world.
It was dangerous in the sense that Cuba, Morocco, Libya, Saudi Arabia and many other bestial regimes were sitting on the Human Rights Commission of the United Nations pronouncing on human rights when their people were denied liberty, rights and justice. \This was nothing to laugh about. This was real stuff where nasty regimes that killed their people were shaping the human rights agenda of the UN. But as disastrous as that was, it was a joke. Imagine Colonel Gaddafi and Fidel Castro telling the UN about human rights.
President Ronald Reagan was not amused. And he launched a frontal assault on the UN leadership demanding changes on its Human Rights Commission. Under pressure from successive American Presidents, the UN finally restructured that infamous body under Kofi Annan in 2006.
But it was more form than substance. Renamed the UN Human Rights Council, it still allows for countries with records of bestial violations against its own people to sit on its executive arm.
Now we have another joke on the international scene. It is named UNASUR, meaning the Union of South American Nations.
This 12-member body is currently meeting in Guyana. And at this conference it plans to introduce into its founding charter, a clause of social stability by emphasizing that government cannot be overthrown by coups or violent means.
If and when that happens, sanctions will be applied to the offending state. No doubt the group leadership had Ecuador and Honduras in mind. The latter had a coup, the former an attempted putsch by section of the security forces.
The asininity of this new clause lies in the absence of any demand for the adherence to constitutional exercise of power by governments. If you can institute a binding contract on countries to observe the legitimate transfer of power then why can’t you insist that when power is acquired it must be frameworked within the rubric of good governance?
It reminds me of the stupidity that currently obtains in Guyana. The ruling cabal denounces unorthodox activities of the opposition like violent streets protests, illegal marches, etc.
So why is it wrong for an opposition to use illegal methods to confront the rulers but the governing elites can commit egregious violations, constitutional transgressions and illegal inequities and that is not as bad as the unacceptable behaviour of the opposition?
I know of no philosopher who justifies the legitimacy of unjust rulers. The closest is Thomas Hobbes, the 18 century English philosopher in his book, “Leviathan.” Hobbes was unfairly interpreted.
Hobbes acknowledged that once the social contract is agreed upon, then the governor’s power becomes absolute. But he definitely left room for the rejection of the governor once he reneges on his side of the bargain.
There will always be violence directed at governments that rule harshly and brutally. The same way the constitution of UNASUR sanctions elites who come to power through a coup or violent conspiracy, it has to invent laid out criteria for good governance for those who have been elected.
UNASUR has to become a joke and maybe it is a joke already if it cannot see that Hugo Chavez is a tropical Mussolini. This man is a dictator who commits atrocious crimes against the opposition and sections of the population. He is close to becoming another Fidel Castro.
And to crown it all his Minister of Defence says that if the opposition wins the next presidential election the armed forces will not accept it. Now this is a huge case for UNASUR to take up. President Lula needs to explain that if governing parties are not made to commit themselves to good governance then why was the President elect of Brazil, Ms. Rousseff, jailed for three years in the seventies for participation in armed revolution against the state?
It is obvious that she felt that the Brazilian Government was not practising good governance and she joined an urban guerrilla group to violently overthrow it. Anyway, one doubts that UNASUR will have a long life.
There will not be in the far future any South American integration along the lines of the EU.

Latest News

There are moments when the world is a joke and a dangerous place at the same time

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| March, 17th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

St. Lucia’s Elite Blazers takes aim at FIBA 3×3 World Tour in...

Petra/Milo U18 Football kicks off Round II action...

Track and Field clubs demand nullification of AAG...

Joint Statement from WIPA and CWI on Athlete...

RCNA launches Childhood Obesity Prevention...

FL Sport donates stumps to Meten-Meer-Zorg...

Features/Columnists

Following one’s conscience rather than the crowd

If Guyana’s President Ali is the “Zelensky of the Caribbean”, who is the Putin?

New beginning, or beginning of a nightmare?

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

There are moments when the world is a joke and a dangerous place at the same time

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| March, 17th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Features/Columnists

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]