Guest MikeSC Report post Posted March 6, 2005 Niger cancels 'free-slave' event The government of Niger has cancelled at the last minute a special ceremony during which at least 7,000 slaves were to be granted their freedom. A spokesman for the government's human rights commission, which had helped to organise the event, said this was because slavery did not exist. It is not clear why the government, which was also a co-sponsor of the ceremony, changed its position. At least 43,000 people across Niger are thought to be in slavery. Representatives of the slaves, the government and human rights campaigners had been due to attend the event at In Ates, near the border with Mali. A local chief had agreed to the release after the introduction of a new law, which punishes those found guilty of slavery with up to 30 years in jail. Anti-Slavery International had described the ceremony as a historic step forward. The British-based campaign group said the people who had been due to be freed made up 95% of the local population. SLAVERY IN NIGER Traditional part of Niger society Estimated 43,000 slaves in Niger Slaves subject to rape, torture and abuse New law means slave owners can be punished "The government needs to ensure not only that the law is implemented, but that there are the means of support available for former slaves and their children to live their lives in freedom and independence," the group's Africa programme officer, Romana Cacchioli, said before the ceremony was cancelled. According to a local anti-slavery organisation, Timidria, males slaves are forced to work in farms and tender cattle, while women are confined to domestic duties. Acting under pressure, Niger's parliament banned the keeping or trading in slaves in May 2003. In a ceremony in December 2003, dozens of slaves were liberated, many of them shedding tears of joy as they were given certificates showing they were free. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4321699.stm Thank God the gov't stopped this ceremony before somebody noticed that it doesn't really exist anyway. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boon 0 Report post Posted March 6, 2005 This is rather interesting. Since it's pretty well known that there is slavery in the country, why would the gov't stop a ceremony to grant freedom? I can see the slave owners wanting to cover it up and deny that they're slaves, but not the gov't. Essentially, they denied those 7,000 folks their freedom, reassuring what they really are. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iggymcfly 0 Report post Posted March 7, 2005 I think what they're saying is that since there is no legal slavery under the law, certificates of freedom would be worthless. Basically, if they see anyone trying to use anyone as a slave, then by rights they should be slapped with a prison term immediately. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted March 7, 2005 I think what they're saying is that since there is no legal slavery under the law, certificates of freedom would be worthless. Basically, if they see anyone trying to use anyone as a slave, then by rights they should be slapped with a prison term immediately. Then why would the government have set up the ceremony in the first place? -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
monkey 0 Report post Posted March 7, 2005 Just to point out something that people often forget. While not condoning slavery in any form myslef (just to be clear). There are issues where slavery exists in the third world in which the slave is supported by the slave owner, often the owners supply the slaves with land to work. Once they have been freed normally under western NGO pressure to the government they kick the former slaves off the land they own and so while technically freer they have no money, no land and no hope of working. I noticed in the parts of the article quoted there was no mention of money to help set up the freed slaves in their own businesses or money for land redistribution either. What I am trying to say is that people often talk about freeing slaves as though that is the end of it but normally that is only the first step because without financial help and general support you will find the situation where the freed slaves will try and sell themselves back to their former owners. Just food for thought. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites