As the opening speaker of the World Leaders Forum, President Joaquim Alberto Chissano of the Republic of Mozambique discussed his government's efforts to end poverty and called on the international community to help end injustice. In his second address at Columbia University, Chissano, who is also chairman of the African Union, discussed the great strides his country has made toward eradicating poverty by "creating conditions for poverty reduction."

The programme hosts eco-design workshops that train local people and international students together in a knowledge-sharing process. The programme organisers believe that the key to rural poverty alleviation lies in the provision of acceptable housing, access to water and sanitation, creation of local economies, and the development of sustainable livelihoods, preferably based on indigenous knowledge systems and eco-efficient practices.

The U.N. refugee agency Tuesday criticized Libya for its deportation of Eritreans last month, calling it a "severe violation" of African and international rules of protection. "UNHCR is concerned over the ongoing forcible return of potential refugees from Libya," said Ron Redmond, spokesman for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. "It also raises concerns over the intentions of the Libyan government to ensure minimum standards of treatment for persons who might be in need of international protection."

Calls on the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) to quit the ruling coalition could lead to an early General Election, as the LDP has 68 MPs out of the 132 Narc MPs - leaving other parties in the coalition with 64. The LDP has already announced a new slogan, Rainbow Fagilia (Rainbow sweep), and a thumbs-up salute as its symbol - contrasting with Narc's two-finger V salute - and has established its Rainbow House headquarters in Nairobi's Lavington area, in readiness for the 2007 General Election.

High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour and the Secretary-General's Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, Juan Méndez, have arrived in the strife-torn Darfur region of Sudan to examine how to shield helpless civilians from further militia attacks. They have visited camps for internally displaced persons (IDPs) and talked to African Union (AU) monitors in North Darfur, to get their feedback for future recommendations.

According to a report conducted by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), "inappropriate" policies, corruption and the government's human rights record have contributed to Zimbabwe's continued economic decline. However, Anti-corruption and Anti-monopolies Programme Minister Didymus Mutasa told IRIN that, as far as he was concerned, the government had made substantial strides in addressing the issue of corruption.

There is more to the resignation of Law Society Chairman Ahmednasir Abdullahi from the Kenya Anti Corruption Commission (KACC) Advisory Board than meets the eye. Ostensibly, Mr Abdullahi resigned from the board because he was unimpressed by "President Kibaki's blatant and casual breaking of the law" in his refusal to confirm Dr Julius Rotich as a director of the commission. However, it seems that the greater significance of his resignation is that it signals a break in the cosy ties that the LSK and civil society as a whole have been seen to enjoy with the Narc government.

Female Genital Mutilation is a human rights violation that cannot be justified in the name of culture. I beg to differ that celebrating African womanhood entails continuing to perpetuate practices that are used to subjugate women. Celebrating African womanhood means that we should embrace wholeheartedly African cultural norms that uplift women and they are many, but at the same time, we cannot defend human rights violations using the tool of culture.

FGM violates a woman's womanhood, the very essence, the very vital part of her that makes her a woman. If we African women continue to think in these terms, whom do we expect to defend and advocate for our rights? It is tragic to hear such sentiments supporting FGM echoed by one who is obviously learned. Culture is a constantly evolving and changing thing and is actually determined by the people who practice it. For instance, wife inheritance was the norm in many societies but with the HIV/AIDS pandemic, societal norms have had to take cognisance of this and the practice is slowly dying away. Therefore to advocate for a practice like FGM in any of its forms given the attendant medical complications is quite unrealistic.

There are many alternative ways of passing education about being a woman to our children without resorting to mutilating them. Which form if any of FGM serves a purpose except to subjugate a woman's sexuality? The practices and norms that shape the rubric of a people's interaction are their culture. Culture evolves as society evolves. We have come too far in striving for the rights of African women to allow sentiments such as those advocating for FGM to drag us back.

The ongoing debate on what has been called female genital mutilation is not only entertaining but also worrisome, especially reading the comments by Lwanga and Mohammed, two women activists who purport to be talking for women, but from two almost extreme sides.

Let me give a general comment on what the two have said from an outsiders perspective. Firstly, the discussion is about to get out of hand and if these two ladies were talking on a one to one (face to face) basis, we may need to call the fire brigade, so bring the fire down. This is because the import of emotions expressed by the two particularly Mohammed, are not only unhealthy for women's empowerment, but also questionable. Forgive me for saying that the two are trying to defend their positions in the name of women. For Lwanga, it should be understood that her arguments are scholarly, from an academician, but nonetheless impractical as the analogies she uses are grossly wanting. But as a scholar she is entitled to that for scholarship is about argument that leads to more and more debate that may lead to generation of knowledge over time.

For Mohammed she is an NGO executive, indeed a lobby group that would like to problematise every thing about women to get the much needed funding to continue eating. For me, eradication of FGM is not a basic need for women for it adds no extra food on their table, but education is. Why cant these organisations focus on the education of girls and put more funds there without concentrating on issues that won't add food on women's tables.

In balancing the space for women rights and the space for respecting cultural practices Doreen Lwanga may not be entirely wrong in arguing for 'legislation aimed at protecting women's rights should also include the right to practice a certain culture, even if that might include FGM'. It is an accommodation of the right for cultural space. Is that so wrong? As cultures change and evolve, hopefully FGM will be left behind in time. My only concern in legislating against FGM is the criminalisation of our elders who wholly believe that it is an 'unharmful' cultural practice.

If two leading feminist activists who have the time and the brain power cannot arrive at a consensus on how we balance 'rights and culture' what hope is there for us lay women who want to believe and do the right thing, but at the same time do not want to disrespect our cultural practices.
My Grandmother without, the benefit of western education, rejected this piece of culture, so my mother was not done. My mother in turn rejected this piece of culture and I thankfully was spared. I have not had a daughter, but I do have a son, and he had to be circumcised in line with the cultural wish of the family. Was I wrong? Should I be criminalised (if for arguments sake male circumcision is outlawed)?

Let me take this opportunity to add my voice to those opposed to Female Genital Mutilation (FGM). I have read with great care the debate and/or exchange between Doreen Lwanga and Faiza Jama Mohammed regarding FGM, and my observations are presented below.

Ms. Lwanga quoted the language of Article 5 relating to the vis: 'Elimination of Harmful Practices', defined in Article 1(g) as ".. all behaviour, attitudes and/or practices which negatively affect the fundamental rights of women and girls, such as their right to life, health, dignity, education and physical integrity." She maintained, "What is not clear [to her] is what forms of Female Genital Mutilation (or cutting) fall under this category as 'harmful'?". For cry not loud, couldn't Ms. Lwanga realize that the operative words are "harmful practices" and "Female Genital Mutilation"? Clearly and in the context of the contentious article:

a) HARMFUL: This means damaging, injurious, destructive, detrimental, hurtful, unsafe etc. To that extent, the Article would not bar practices that don't fit in any of the above. However, for the practice to be protected it ought to be so demonstrably antithetical "harmful" and ought to be backed by empirical evidence as opposed to emotional submissions and/or attachment thereto.

b) MUTILATION: this refers to disfigurement, defacement, damage, marring, injury, maiming etc. I was disturbed by Ms. Lwanga's using mutilation and transformation interchangeably when she stated, "In different African cultures, there are different forms of female genital transformation, some of which have never been harmful to the girl child or woman".
Whereas "transformation" may not be harmful, mutilation is definitely harmful. The equivalent of transformation is merely "makeover", "alteration", "renovation" none of which connote "disfigurement", "injury" etc.

When she states: "I do not want to sound pretentious that there are no incidences where the FGM practices have produced harmful results, however, that does not make the norm harmful by itself. Malpractice could occur because of using an unsterilised instrument, conduct in uncertain locations for fear of subjective law enforcers and/or just like any other accident happens. The results may become harmful such as bleeding profusely, genital injury or death, although that does not make the norm harmful. Thus, there is a need to emphasise that there is a difference between a 'norm' and a 'practice'."

Well, whereas we have an admission as to the harmful nature of female genital mutilation, with all due respect to her sincere contribution, our friend did not offer any safe alternative. Had she advocated for legalized monitored "transformation", which I don't doubt would provide a solution, such would have offered us food for thought, but she did not.

Art. 17 of the Protocol promotes "'Positive Cultural Context". This, she says, she does not understand and wonders how it relates to the cultural rights of women as human beings. She, understandably, is opposed to any society moving to codify people's cultural practices and label them "harmful", and vehemently asserts that it is wrong to assume that you can take a "broad brush" of one group (anti-FGM/C or pro-monogamous) and sweep away the aspirations and traditions. What she missed though is that when the language of the article provides for "'Positive Cultural Context" it implies that the contemplated laws must put into consideration its contextual environment. I submit that if this approach is adopted it would not amount to "a broad brush" per se.

Assuming that the impact of such Protocol would "criminalize women's cultural lives", which is not true, but so argued by Lwanga, the effect, if the law is contextually tailored, would in essence be reflective of peoples aspirations to transform society for the better. There are societies where children (little boys and girls who have not had their monthly periods yet) are sacrificed to the "gods." To those who believe in cleansing society of its curses by offering these innocent children it is "good practice" and a "virtue".

However, all common law jurisdictions classify this as murder. Can these people present any compelling argument in their defence? I think not! To that extent mutilation cannot be defended as a virtue whatsoever, and does not add value to the value or integrity of a woman. I shall not discuss the right of a woman to choose because Faiza Jama Mohammed already responded to that.

However, my question is what is the validity of a little girl's "consent" amid cultural pressure to be "a woman"? Lwanga cited examples where mothers may be forced to sneak out of cities and take their daughters for genital mutilation! These are the desires of the mothers and not of the daughters. Often times, mothers desire that their daughters walk the "cultural journeys" which they themselves walked because they are still slaves of their past! What is disturbing is Lwanga's statement that such protocol would "deny them a chance of becoming women". Gender is not defined by mutilation but by natural endowment.

Africa's dilemma is not its uneducated and/or illiterate population but rather her highly revered elite who, notwithstanding their western exposure, continuously labour to strike a balance between "intellectualism" and/or "enlightenment" vis-à-vis cultural preservation. Whereas we may be tempted to resist "undue western influence" we should keep in mind that we have a duty to re-evaluate our cultures and rid them of vices, especially those that tend to suggest that you are not a full human being unless and until your genitals are mutilated.

Lastly, my apologies go to my sister Lwanga if my tone was harsh, because such must have been unintentional. Nonetheless, I can assure you that I was refuting the ideas in the article and not rejecting the wonderful individual who has actually ignited a healthy debate.

Rita Marley, the widow of the famous Jamaican Singer, Bob Marley, paid a visit to the Chairperson of the Commission of the African Union, H.E. Alpha Oumar Konaré to inform him of the "Africa Unite" Initiative launched by the Bob Marley Foundation, with the support of the Ethiopian Government and Friends of Bob Marley, to commemorate the 60th birthday of Bob Marley.

On the fourth anniversary of the adoption of the Women, Peace and Security Agenda Resolution 1325, the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom have dedicated each week of October to a women, peace and security theme during which UN, governmental and NGO events will be held to coincide with that particular theme. Please refer to the online calendar, which will be available shortly on Peace Women's 4th Anniversary index at: http://www.peacewomen.org/un/4thAnniversary/4thAnniversaryindex.html

Since the early 90s, when democracy began spreading around the continent, electoral processes have been the most critical moments in African countries' political life. Although some African States or political parties have been able to manage these in a satisfying way, what we observe today in a number of democracies should make us more careful, and have us consider the means to develop a more democratic culture of electoral processes and political change on the continent.

The Democratic Alliance (DA) accused the African National Congress of trying to lure a number of DA councillors with offers of financial inducements, positions, additional perks and privileges, during the 15-day floor-crossing period. So far, about 10 instances of bribery from around the country have been reported. However, ongoing reports suggest the scale of enticements might be much larger.

Blade Nzimande, the secretary-general of the SA Communist Party (SACP), told the ninth congress of the Southern African Clothing and Textile Workers' Union (Sactwu) that the black economic empowerment (BEE) was not empowering workers, but enriching the few. In the midst of increasing working-class struggles over casualisation of the workforce, outsourcing and the continuing jobless bloodbath, he encouraged an audit of BEE in order to ensure that it was in fact creating more jobs, the fundamental criterion of black empowerment.

For ordinary Zimbabweans in the high-density suburb of Mbare, life is unbearable because of the dilapidated state of the housing units where residential flats are no longer suitable for human habitation. However, at the other end of the spectrum, are the likes of Robert Mugabe and Phillip Chiyangwa, whose wealth has been accumulated at the expense of the suffering masses. It is estimated that one half of the cost of the Mugabe mansion would be sufficient to refurbish all the dilapidated flats in Mbare.

Women in Politics Support Unit (WiPSU) is disappointed by the Delimitation Commission set by President Mugabe which is being entrusted with the responsibility of defining constituency boundaries in preparation of the upcoming elections in 2005. The work of the commission is extremely important as it will define which geographic boundaries determine constituencies, which has an effect on electoral reforms in Zimbabwe and the underrepresentation of women in politics.

According to a Southern Africa Poverty Review Network (SAPRN) report on the poverty situation in Zambia, the government's monopolisation of the poverty reduction agenda was the biggest hindrance to success against poverty. The report stresses that Zambia needs to make poverty reduction a priority by conducting a full assessment of the situation and by restructuring the national budget accordingly.

Public service union leaders were excited by the turnout around the country in protest against government's wage offer on Thursday. National Health and Allied Workers Union president Nolunthundu Mayinde-Sibiya said in Pretoria the turnout was looking very good.