Second revision of Cotonou agreement 2007-2013 financial framework of development assistance .... LGBT rights?

As the furor continues over the threat to deny aid to African countries who maintain anti gay positions the new Cotonou Agreement when fully perused seemed to have left out the whole business of LGBT rights, let us also not forget that the African Caribbean and Pacific ACP countries had strong opposition to any move that seemed as an imposition of attachments to benefits in exchange for some lgbt rights. 

In November last year they had issued a threat of sorts in the form of:

African, Caribbean & Pacific issue declaration to EU "To refrain from any attempts to impose its values which are not freely shared"

and in March they: African, Caribbean & Pacific Countries refuse to include declaration of gay rights in Brussels.

• Negotiations were concluded on 19/03/2010.
• Official signature ceremony took place in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, on 23/06/2010.
• Revised Cotonou agreement will be applicable on a provisional basis from 01/11/2010.

The Cotonou Agreement is the most comprehensive partnership agreement between developing countries and the EU. Since 2000, it has been the framework for the EU's relations with 79 countries from Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific (ACP) . The first revision took place in 2005 and prepared the ground for the

The second revision  adapts the partnership to changes which have taken place over the last decade, in particular:

• The growing importance of regional integration in ACP countries and in ACP-EU cooperation is reflected. Its role in fostering cooperation and peace and security, in promoting growth and in tackling cross-border challenges is emphasized. In Africa, the continental dimension is also recognized, and the African Union becomes a partner of the EU-ACP relationship.
• Security and fragility : no development can take place without a secure environment. The new agreement highlights the interdependence between security and development and tackles security threats jointly. Attention is paid to peace building and conflict prevention. A comprehensive approach combining diplomacy, security and development cooperation is developed for situations of State fragility.
• Our ACP partners face major challenges if they are to meet the Millennium Development Goals,  food security, HIV-AIDS and sustainability of fisheries. The importance of each of these areas for sustainable development, growth and poverty reduction is underlined, and joint approaches for our cooperation are now agreed.
• For the first time, the EU and the ACP recognize the global challenge of climate change as a major subject for their partnership. The parties commit to raising the profile of climate change in their development cooperation, and to support ACP efforts in mitigating and adapting to the effects of climate change.
• The trade chapter of the Agreement reflects the new trade relationship and the expiry of preferences at the end of 2007. It reaffirms the role of the Economic Partnership Agreements to boost economic development and integration into the world economy. The revised Agreement highlights the challenges ACP countries are facing to integrate better into the world economy, in particular the effects of preference erosion. It therefore underlines the importance of trade adaptation strategies and aid for trade .
• More actors in the partnership : the EU has been promoting a broad and inclusive partnership with ACP partners. The new agreement clearly recognizes the role of national parliaments, local authorities, civil society and private sector.
• More impact, more value for money : This second revision is instrumental in putting in practice the internationally agreed aid effectiveness principles, in particular donor coordination. It will also untie EU aid to the ACP countries to reduce transaction costs. For the first time, the role of other EU policies for the development of ACP countries is recognized and the EU commits to enhance the coherence of those policies to this end.

Overview of ACP-EC-Partnership Agreement ("The Cotonou Agreement")

European Development Fund (EDF) is the main instrument for providing Community assistance for development cooperation under the Cotonou Agreement. The EDF is funded by the EU Member State on the basis of specific contribution keys. Each EDF is concluded for a multi-annual period.

The "Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States of the one part and the European Community and its Member States of the other part" was signed on 23 June 2000 in Cotonou, Bénin ? hence the name " ACP-EC Partnership Agreement" or "Cotonou Agreement". It was concluded for a twenty-year period from March 2000 to February 2020, and entered into force in April 2003. It was for the first time revised in June 2005, with the revision entering into force on 1 July 2008.

The Cotonou Agreement is a global agreement, introducing important changes and ambitious objectives while preserving the 'acquis' of 25 years of ACP-EC cooperation.

Compared to preceding agreements and conventions shaping EC's development cooperation, the Cotonou Agreement represents further progress in a number of aspects. It is designed to establish a comprehensive partnership, based on three complementary pillars:

• development cooperation,
• economic and trade cooperation, and
• the political dimension.

The objectives of the Cotonou Agreement
<>The partnership is centred on the objective of reducing and eventually eradicating poverty consistent with the objectives of sustainable development and the gradual integration of the ACP countries into the world economy (Art. 1 of Cotonou Agreement). The fundamental principles of the Cotonou Agreement

• equality of the partners and ownership of the development strategies;
• participation (central governments as the main partners, partnership open to different kinds of other actors)
• pivotal role of dialogue and the fulfilment of mutual obligations
• differentiation and regionalisation

The actors of the Cotonou Agreement

• The actors of cooperation are:
• States (authorities and/or organisations of states at local, national and regional level);
• Non-state actors (private sector; economic and social partners, including trade union organisations, civil society in all its forms according to national characteristics).

The implementation of the Cotonou Agreement
The 10^th EDF covers the period from 2008 to 2013 and has been allocated ? 22.7 billion; it was established between the EU Member States by Internal Agreement. In comparison to the 9^th EDF which covered the period 2000 to 2007, the initial amount available has increased by almost 65 % (the 9^th EDF was initially allocated ? 13.8 billion for 2000-2007).

The cooperation with the ACP States funded from the EDF is complemented by development cooperation funded from the EC budget, through budgetary instruments - the Development Cooperation Instrument, the Instrument for Stability, the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights and the European Humanitarian Aid Instrument.

Revision clause:
The Cotonou Agreement provides for a revision clause which foresees that the agreement is adapted every five years till 2020.

In accordance with Article 95 Cotonou Agreement, the main reasons for the Second Revision of the Cotonou Agreement are:

• to preserve the relevance and the outstanding character of the Partnership between ACP and EU countries;
• to adapt the Agreement to recent major changes in international and ACP-EC relations;
• to further develop several themes that are essential for both parties:
• • the political dimension, institutional issues and sector specific policy issues;
  • economic cooperation, regional integration and trade;
  • development finance cooperation, including humanitarian and emergency assistance and new development advances in aid programming and management.

The contracting parties and the "ACP Group of States"
The Cotonou Agreement established a unique partnership between the ACP States on the one hand, and the European Community and its Member States on the other hand.

The notion of "ACP States" goes back to the "ACP Group of States", formally established in 1975 with the Georgetown Agreement , which was initially signed by 46 African, Caribbean and Pacific states. Today, the ACP Group of States counts 79 countries , 78 of them signatories of the Cotonou-Agreement (with Cuba being the exception). S outh Africa is a contracting party of the Cotonou Agreement, but not all the provisions apply to the cooperation between South Africa and the EC (see protocol 3 of the Cotonou Agreement).

The ACP Group of States has its own institutions and decision making processes. It relates with the European Community through the joint institutions of the Cotonou Agreement.

When the initial news of the intention as espoused by David Cameron on GLBTQJA Wordpress I had expressed my concerns about the perception of countries being forced to adopt gay rights, we saw what happened when out going Prime Minister Golding made mention of us not caving in to foreign imposition during the invented gay marriage debate and the Charter of Rights.  My two cents then was:

My two cents

But what will that do though in the long run if most states and including Jamaica outside of the region mentioned in the article have a strong beliefs or perception that homosexuality is an import and that actions such as this are forcing the hand of countries with “christian principles” and “high moral values” to capitulate to the powerful gay lobby from first world nations? yet The Prime Minister David Cameron is not gay as far as we know but could be viewed as a puppet in the scheme of this with the pressure coming and positions from the European Union side of things and other bodies such as the United Nations on sexual orientation.

Is forcing countries to comply the way to go?

Or hitting them economically?

continue HERE

Peace and tolerance

H

European Parliament’s Subcommittee on Human Rights hearing on LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex) rights in the world

On 30 June 2011, the European Parliament’s Subcommittee on Human Rights held ahearing on LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex) rights in the world. Members of the European Parliament, European Parliament staff, European Commission staff, ambassadors and members of the public heard from human rights defenders, civil society and high-level EU civil servants about the human rights of LGBTI people worldwide.

Andrzej Grzyb MEP: Introduction from LGBT Intergroup on Vimeo.

Andrzej Grzyb MEP, acting Chair of the Subcommittee on Human Rights opened the event.

Ulrike Lunacek MEP: Introduction from LGBT Intergroup on Vimeo.

Ulrike Lunacek MEP, Co-President of the LGBT Intergroup, presented the hearing and explained why it was necessary to look at the rights of LGBTI people globally, citing work done recently by the European Parliament

Naome Ruzindana: Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi from LGBT Intergroup on Vimeo.

Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi
Naome Ruzindana from Rwanda presented recent developments for LGBTI people in eastern Africa, and notably Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi (including how these countries influenced each other).

The decriminalisation of homosexuality in India
A movie produced by the International AIDS Alliance showcased interviews with Indian activists commenting on the decriminalisation of homosexuality in 2009

Mauro Cabral: Trans and intersex rights from LGBT Intergroup on Vimeo.

Trans and intersex rights in the world
Argentinean activist Mauro Cabral explained the issues brought forward by a growing global movement for the rights of trans(gender) and intersex people, including trans murders and sterilisation.

Riina Kionka: The role of the EU from LGBT Intergroup on Vimeo.

The role of the EU
Riina Kionka is Head of Division for Human Rights Policy Guidelines in the EU’s External Action Service, and outlined positive action by the EU in several domains: in the EU legal and policy framework, the EU’s bilateral relationships, at the United Nations, and at regional and local level.

Jean-Louis Ville: The European Commission from LGBT Intergroup on Vimeo.

The European Commission
Responsible for Governance, Democracy, Gender and Human Rights at the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Development and Cooperation, Jean-Louis Ville outlined action and calls for funding at the European Commission that were likely to help LGBTI civil society in the Global South

Questions and answers

Questions and answers from LGBT Intergroup on Vimeo.

Ulrike Lunacek and Michael Cashman MEPs: Conclusion from LGBT Intergroup on Vimeo.

Ulrike Lunacek and Michael Cashman MEPs: Conclusion

European Parliament calls for special protection of LGBT asylum-seekers

Members of the European Parliament voted today to modernise the EU-wide system for examining asylum claims. Among the measures adopted today, groups of asylum-seekers with special needs were updated to include people fleeing persecution based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.

In a report drafted by French centre-left MEP Sylvie Guillaume (Socialists & Democrats), the European Parliament adopted a series of amendments to guarantee that lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender people seeking asylum in the EU would receive particular attention.

Measures include providing expert advice to asylum officials on sexual orientation and gender identity; protecting claimants’ privacy; guaranteeing that physical examinations fully respect human dignity and integrity, for instance in cases involving minors or transgender people; and ensuring that applications by LGBT asylum-seekers are not ‘fast-tracked’ for removal to their country of origin.

Sirpa Pietikäinen, Member of the centre-right European People’s Party and Vice-President of the LGBT Intergroup, commented: “I am particularly proud that my centre-right colleagues agreed on the need for special protection, regardless of their general position on asylum. Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people fleeing countries such as Iraq, Uganda, Honduras or Indonesia must receive particular protection taking into account cultural sensitivity. This is a major step towards fully complying with our engagements under international asylum law.”

Rui Tavares MEP, Civil Liberties Coordinator of the left GUE/NGL political group and Vice-President of the LGBT Intergroup, added: “The European Parliament is showing that asylum rules need updating to reflect reality: 76 countries criminalise homosexual acts, and 7 foresee the death penalty (maybe 8 soon with Uganda). I regret that other progressive provisions did not pass, but today’s text will ultimately bring more fairness for LGBT asylum‑seekers.”

The text adopted today is the European Parliament’s formal position at first reading. Asylum rules will effectively be amended once EU governments examine the text and conclude an agreement with the European Parliament.

Read more:

• Read the legislative resolution (not yet amended following today’s votes)

A Response to the EU parliamentary question on the depathologisation of gender identity disorder ............

European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection John Dalli answered a parliamentary question on the depathologisation of gender identity disorder:

The Commission refers the Honourable Members to its answer to written question P‑2625/10, in which the Commission explained the ongoing process of revision of the International Classification of Diseases, ICD-10.

The objective of the International Classification of Diseases is to facilitate the tasks of health professionals and health systems in helping individuals, in particular in relation to their reimbursement. This classification does not imply any social, cultural or moral judgement about individuals, behaviours or needs.

As mentioned in the Issue Paper on Human Rights and Gender Identity adopted by the Human Rights Commissioner of the Council of Europe in July 2009, many international and national medical classifications impose the diagnosis of mental disorder on transgender persons. Such a diagnosis may become an obstacle to the full enjoyment of human rights by transgender people especially when it is applied in a way to restrict the legal capacity or choice for medical treatment.

The issue paper also emphasises that transgender people appear to be the only group in Europe subject to state-enforced sterilisation and that married transgender persons find themselves forced to divorce prior to their new gender being officially recognised.

For these practices to be considered under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, namely with regard to the right of respect to human dignity, the right of respect to private and family life and the right to non-discrimination, they would have to fall within the remit of the implementation of Union law, which they do not.

As pointed out in a document produced by the European Parliament in relation to “Transgender Person’s Rights in the EU Member States”, which the Honourable Members mention in their question, the approach to regulate legal requirements for access to hormonal treatments and gender reassignment surgery without psychiatric monitoring varies between Member States. This is the result of the exclusive competence of the Member States in this matter.

The Commission is contributing to the revision of the 10th version of the ICD, and the 11th version of the ICD is scheduled to be adopted by the World Health Assembly in 2014. In the context of this revision, the Commission will take into account the issues raised by the Honourable Members.

Source

Meanwhile the vexed issue has also raised some concerns and responses on this side of the planet chiefly from Gender Identity Disorder Reform Advocates who are opponents towards its inclusion in the DSM V slated for release in May 2013.

In a clearly outlined piece as to reasons why Transvestic and other related disorders must be removed from the DSM Kelley Winters Ph. D said among other things "

The classification of gender diversity and nonconformity to birth-assigned gender roles as mental illness by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) has drawn growing protest and outrage from transpeople and and allies worldwide. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), published by the APA, is regarded as the medical and social definition of mental disorder throughout North America and strongly influences international diagnostic nomenclature. The fifth edition of the manual, the DSM-5, is in development and scheduled for publication in 2013. While the diagnostic category of Gender Identity Disorder (GID) has garnered most of the controversy, a second category of so-called Transvestic Fetishism (TF) has harmed transwomen, including transsexual women, as well as male-to-female crossdressers, dual gender and gender nonconforming people since the earliest days of the DSM. Trans and LGB advocates have been inexplicably quiet about the TF category, even after the APA proposed to expand the category in the DSM-5, renamed Transvestic Disorder, to implicate gender nonconforming people of all sexes and all sexual orientations.

The proposed DSM-5 diagnosis of Transvestic Disorder, even worse than its predecessor Transvestic Fetishism, labels gender expression not stereotypically associated with assigned birth sex as inherently pathological and sexually deviant. The diagnosis is punitive and scientifically capricious, serving to punish social and sexual gender nonconformity and enforce binary stereotypes of assigned birth sex. Here are ten reasons why the Transvestic Disorder diagnosis should be eliminated entirely from the DSM-5.

1. Diagnosis of Diversity
The World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), formerly the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association, (HBIGDA), publishes recognized standards of medical transition care for those who need it. In May, 2010, WPATH issued the following pivotal statement on de-psychopathologisation of gender variance,
The WPATH Board of Directors strongly urges the de-psychopathologisation of gender variance worldwide. The expression of gender characteristics, including identities, that are not stereotypically associated with one’s assigned sex at birth is a common and culturally-diverse human phenomenon which should not be judged as inherently pathological or negative. The [psychopathologisation] of gender characteristics and identities reinforces or can prompt stigma, making prejudice and discrimination more likely, rendering transgender and transsexual people more vulnerable to social and legal marginalisation and exclusion, and increasing risks to mental and physical well-being. WPATH urges governmental and medical professional organizations to review their policies and practices to eliminate stigma toward gender-variant people.
Gender expression that differs from social expectations of assigned birth sex does not meet any medical or scientific definition of mental pathology. Difference is not disease."

Please follow this and other related issues on my GLBTQ Jamaica Blog which also has Intersexed references as well as we look at our friends who are trans-gendered, inter-sexed who are looking for their rights to be recognized.

Peace and tolerance

H

African, Caribbean & Pacific issue declaration to EU "To refrain from any attempts to impose its values which are not freely shared"

A group of 79 African, Caribbean and Pacific states recently issued a unilateral declaration “on the peaceful co-existence of religions and the importance given to the phenomenon of homosexuality” in their partnership with the EU.

The Joint Parliamentary Assembly between the EU and African, Caribbean and Pacific states recently signed the revised Cotonou Agreement (PDF), delineating the trade and political relationship between the two parties. Despite the EU’s insistance, ACP states refused to include sexual orientation in the list of grounds on which discrimination should be banned.

Following these negotiations, the ACP group of states adopted a unilateral declaration in September. The declaration calls on the European Union to “refrain from any attempts to impose its values which are not freely shared”, linking homosexuality to incitement to religious hatred.

Download the unilateral declaration (PDF, English and French)

The European Parliament officially received the document late October. In a partial response, it adopted a resolution on the work of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly in 2009. In the resolution drafted by MEP Eva Joly , the European Parliament “reiterates the principle of the universality of human rights and non-discrimination as the basis upon which to enhance legitimate democratic governance and the political dialogue at the Joint Parliamentary Assembly”.

The next ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly will meet in Kinshasa, DRC, from the 2nd to the 4th December 2010.

So African Caribbean and Pacific states are fighting back it seems given the relaxed nature of the negotiations before during the Cotonou Agreement talks, was this a hint to what was to come on the vote to remove sexual orientation from the list of judicial killings at the recent United Nations meeting where several Caribbean states including Jamaica and Cuba surprisingly voted in favour of it?

There seems to be a collective move behind the political, diplomatic and economic scenes on this vexed issue of orientation conflicted with homosexuality and that foreign states are somehow "imposing" as it were this on so called sovereign nations when these same nations are parties to treatises that include protection of rights for all and respecting the main Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

This bit of news is indeed surprising, this is a section of regional activity on the European and by extension world stage we must watch carefully.

Peace and tolerance

H

More on Sexual Orientation Removal from The Cotonou Agreement Against European Parliament's Directive

Thanks to African Activist for alerting us to this, we almost overlooked the finer details in the midst of all else that has been happening.

Here is the original post I carried on the Cotonou Agreement and the African Caribbean States angle on refusing to budge on LGBT rights issues.

Meanwhile June 2010
The Gay and Lesbian Rights Intergroup reports that sexual orientation was excluded from the second revision of the Cotonou Agreement in violation of the European Parliament's directive. The Cotonou Agreement delineates political and trade relations between the European Union and African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states and includes human rights requirements.

Out of 79 ACP states, 49 criminalise homosexuality with up to 14 years in jail, and up to 5 punish lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people with death.

European Commissioner Andris Piebalgs previously intended to include non-discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation in the new terms (as demanded by the European Parliament), but finally agreed to conclude a deal with ACP states that does not mention the human rights of LGBT people, despite blatant increases in state-supported violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in the ACP region.

Michael Cashman MEP, Co-president of the European Parliament’s Intergroup on LGBT Rights, reacted: “This is unacceptable for the European Parliament. The Commission backed down in the face of governments that increasingly discriminate, imprison, torture and kill people because of their sexual orientation. It is a dangerous signal that there is a hierarchy of rights: some will be defended, but others will not. This matter will not be left to rest here.”

Ulrike Lunacek MEP, Co-president of the Intergroup on LGBT Rights, concurred: “I would have expected Commissioner Piebalgs not to give in to pressure from ACP governments. His abdication is not only against European values, it also is harmful to LGBT people in ACP countries who are confronted with the notion of homosexuality being ‘un-African’—a notion proven wrong by historians and sociologists. The European Parliament will confront the Commission with this decision.”

The revised agreement has been tentatively agreed upon, with the official signature planned for June 2010 in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Here is the European Parliament resolution of 20 January 2010 on the second revision of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement (the "Cotonou Agreement"). Notice the directive in item 32.

32. Calls for negotiations to reinforce the principle of non-negotiable human rights clauses and sanctions for failure to respect such clauses, inter alia with regard to discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, sexual orientation and towards people living with HIV/AIDS;
In Article 8 of the second revision of the Cotonou Agreement (pdf) on Political dialogue, sexual orientation is missing (See page 5).

4. The dialogue shall focus, inter alia, on specific political issues of mutual concern or of general significance for the attainment of the objectives of this Agreement, such as the arms trade, excessive military expenditure, drugs, organized crime or child labour, or discrimination of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
In Article 31 of the second revision of the Cotonou Agreement (pdf) on HIV/AIDS, sexual orientation is missing in sections d and e (See page 17).

d) addressing gender inequality, gender-based violence and abuse, as drivers of the HIV/AIDS pandemic and intensifying efforts to safegaurd women's and girls' rights, develop effective gender sensitive HIV/AIDS programmes and services for women and girls, including those related to sexual and reproductive health and rights, and to support the full involvement of women in planning and decision making related to HIV/AIDS stragegies and programmes;

e) developing supportive legal and policy framewords and removing punitive laws, policies, practices, stigma and discrimination that undermine human rights, increase vulnerability to HIV/AIDS and inhibit access to effective HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, care and support, including medicines, commodities and services for people living with HIV/AIDS and the populations most at risk;

Clearly the deterioration in the human rights situation for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people in the 49 ACP states requires that the Cotonou Agreement follow the European Parliament's directive and include sexual orientation explicitly in the agreement.

To quote the European Parliament directive, this is a "non-negotiable human rights clause."

Source

African, Caribbean & Pacific Countries refuse to include declaration of gay rights in Brussels.

As part of a revised development agreement with the European Union African, Caribbean and Pacific country representatives refused to agree to include a declaration to include gay rights as part of their respective territories. In discussing trade and other economic matters calls were made for improved development aid to member states and reduce trade barriers to African, Caribbean & Pacific countries. Ahead of the talks however the European Union called for illegal immigrants in each state to be returned to their homelands and an end to discrimination against gays.

A compromise was however reached on elements on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which forbids discrimination on race, opinions, sex and all other considerations.

The European Commissioner for development in a radio interview with the BBC Caribbean report said essentially that gay rights issues were particularly sensitive for some on the African, Caribbean and Pacific states as he understood it. Hence the failure to agree on the gay rights declaration presently. The treatise however will treat with whatever comes as political matters and will be dealt with through dialogue. African, Caribbean and Pacific countries however should know it is an issue important to the EU and gay discrimination is of concern.

No action or sanctions will be taken at this time on any of the member ACP states who may breach the understanding of sexual discrimination but dialogue will be employed to resolve said issues. If dialogue does not work however then they may move to the next step, he didn’t explain those steps in the interview.

The problem with this is that many states especially Jamaica may walk away from this thinking that the European Union is dictating what it wants and using economic might and aid to impose the homosexual agenda as had been repeatedly said by some local economists, politicians and commentators. Many have actually said that if aid or economic assistance should come from the European Union or by any other foreign body that included any hint to or demand for gay rights that Jamaica in particular should reject such assistance. The ordinary man is made to believe that the European Union and others are trying to homosexualize predominantly black nations and the rhetoric associated with this believe is often pushed by those who ought to know better, many in a bid to popularise themselves on radio, television or other mediums including parliament are used to push the anti gay agenda.

The Rastafarian community too has often used this belief in their rhetoric as well often combining the Catholic Church hinting at the recent set of paedophile cases with priests worldwide. They often juxtapose it to the biblical prophecy that the anti Christ will come from Europe and will be gay and want to enforce homosexuality on the rest of the world. I am sure that as this news makes its way to the mainstream media the discourse will commence on the very beliefs as hinted to above reinforced.

These European Union and African, Caribbean and Pacific countries development agreement discussions have been happening since 2002 under the Cotonou Partnership Agreement, today’s discussions were to update the agreement as the gay rights issues was never actually really agreed upon at the previous sessions.

Most African, Caribbean and Pacific countries use this issue of gay rights to hold on to political power as we have seen here in Jamaica and other states. No sooner had the Jamaica Labour Party come to power in 2008 the Prime Minsters utterances on the BBC’s show Hardtalk where he went on the offensive outlining “Not in my Cabinet” hinting to no gays in his government when he was questioned by the then host whether he would have a gay person in his team. This act helped to sure up some lost ground post the election, but it was short lived as his own member Ernie Smith on his side lambasted gays as violent and rude at first it looked like a wonderful public relations gimmick to further portray the new administration as carrying the popular view but it did not go down well and soon backfired as the public, commentators, newspapers through their editorials and members from academia found it repulsive by virtue of his behaviour, choice of words and using the protection of parliament to discriminate against a group of citizens.

A little history folks

Peace and tolerance

H

see also:

Second revision of Cotonou agreement, signed on 19/03/2010