When policy isn’t enough: Examining accessibility of sexual and reproductive health rights for displaced populations in South Africa
Posted: 21 December, 2020 Filed under: Lidya Stamper | Tags: abortion, CEDAW, clinic, discrimination, displaced, Displaced Populations, gender inequality, IDP, IDPs, International Organization for Migration, IOM, Johannesburg, migrant populations, policy, poverty, public health, public health system, reproductive health, sexual and reproductive health rights, sexual health, South Africa, SRHS, UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement 2 CommentsAuthor: Lidya Stamper
Research Fellow, Centre of Human Rights, University of Pretoria
The right to sexual and reproductive health services (SRHS) is a fundamental human right for all, guaranteed under international human rights law. Legal protections outlining these rights have been recognised in South Africa through international, regional and domestic instruments. More specifically, these protections are highlighted and specified in documents such as the ‘Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women’ (CEDAW), the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa (Maputo Protocol), and the 1996 Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. Despite the presence of these legal frameworks, outlining equality and non-discrimination, persistent inequalities continue to act as barriers to exercising SRHS. Legislative and policy advances in SRH have been undermined by a lack of successful implementation and improvements in service delivery, service accessibility, and service availability. Implementation challenges combined with a fragmented health sector have resulted in various obstacles including a lack of standardised care, gaps in the dissemination of information, overburdened health facilities, and provider opposition. Social conditions such as gender inequality, poor access to health services, and provider attitudes continue to reinforce these barriers, undermining many of the intended outcomes of the existing legislative and policy advances in the SRH realm.
Cameroon at cross roads
Posted: 3 June, 2020 Filed under: Dunia Mekonnen Tegegn | Tags: Ambazonia Defense Forces, Ambazonia Governing Council, armed conflict, Cameroon, Central Africa, conflict, coronavirus, COVID-19, displaced, fleeing their home, French government, health systems, Humanitarian Access, International Humanitarian Law, violence 1 CommentAuthor: Dunia Tegegn
Human rights lawyer, Ethiopia
The war in Cameroon
The conflict in Cameroon is complex. It involves different actors including the separatists Ambazonia Governing Council, which leads the Ambazonia Defense Forces. The conflict also involves Southern Cameroons Defense Force, Boko Haram and government forces. For many years, Cameroon has been considered a refuge for Boko Haram, where the organisation was tolerated by the Cameroon authorities in the sense of an unspoken mutual non-aggression pact. Since 2013, however, the organisation has extended its attacks to Cameroon itself.
Again and again, the inequality between the Anglophone and the Francophone parts of Cameroon have been the trigger for burgeoning conflicts within society. Other triggers and exacerbators of conflict are corruption and state failure, especially with regard to the education and health systems. Already after the reunification, the Anglophone part began to strive for autonomy, which has intensified since 1990. As a result, the Southern Cameroons National Council (SCNC) was founded in 1995, advocating the separation of the English-speaking part from Cameroon and the establishment of an independent “Republic of Ambazonia”. There were also demonstrations in the Francophone part of Cameroon against a possible secession.