The UK's Department for International
Development (DfID) is to face a full judicial review over its alleged
funding of rights abuses in Ethiopia.
On Monday, a high court judge
ruled that "Mr O", an Ethiopian farmer who claims that
British aid helped fund a brutal forced resettlement programme in his
home country, has an arguable case against the UK government. His
lawyers argue there is evidence that British aid contributions to
Ethiopia's promotion of basic services (PBS) programme has helped
support its controversial villagisation programme, which aims to move
1.5 million rural families from their land to new "model"
villages across the country.
Since it was launched in 2010,the
resettlement programme has been dogged by allegations of forced
evictions, rapes, beatings and disappearances. Ethiopia is one of the
biggest recipients of British aid and the UK is a major donor to its
PBS programme, which is intended to improve access to education,
healthcare and other services for poor and nomadic people. However,
human rights campaigners say British money is also being used to pay
the salaries and administrative costs of the officials running the
relocation scheme.
Mr O, who is represented in his action against the
UK government by the London-based firm Leigh Day, claims he was
violently evicted from his farm in the Gambella region in 2011. He
says he was beaten and that he witnessed rapes and assaults as
government soldiers cleared people off their land. He has told his
lawyers that he was forced to resettle in a new village where he and
others were given no access to farmland, food or water and where they
could not make enough money to feed their families. He has since
moved to Kenya.
After assessing his case, Mr Justice Warby gave
permission for Mr O's lawyers to argue at a full judicial review that
the UK government violated its human rights policies by failing to
have systems in place to properly investigate and respond to reports
of human rights violations linked to the villagisation programme. He
added that under current legislation the UK government had a legal
obligation to respect and uphold human rights, and that Mr O's case
deserved a full hearing.
from here
No comments:
Post a Comment