SADC Summit to discuss security, economic integration

 Luanda – The Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) will analyse the security and economic integration of the sub-region in its meeting set for 17-18 August.

The 42nd Summit of the Heads of State of SADC, that will take place in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), will focus on the security, the implementation of 20/63 agenda, economic integration and the financial life of the SADC region.

 

The event will take place under the motto "Promotion of Industrialisation, through Agro-Processing, Transformation of Mineral Resources and Development of Regional Value Chains, for Economic, Inclusive and Resilient Growth".

 

The Angolan minister of Foreign Affairs, Teté António, who will represent the Head of State at the event, said the partipants will also discuss the issue related to the promotion of industrialisation, a commitment of the Angolan government aimed at sustainable development.

 

According to him, during the event, Angolan leaders who contributed to the development of Southern Africa will be honoured, including the first President, Agostinho Neto.

 

As for the talk with US Secretary of State, Teté António explained that the contact was positive because it addressed issues related to some African countries.

 

SADC comprises South Africa, Angola, Botswana, Democratic Republic of Congo, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe and Seychelles.

Rwanda asylum scheme: Warning over political killings before UK flight

 UK ministers who backed sending asylum seekers to Rwanda were warned by their own adviser that its government tortures and kills political opponents.

The warning came weeks before the British government tried to send asylum seekers to the African nation.

The adviser raised concerns about the tone and accuracy of an official note on Rwanda’s human rights record.

There is an ongoing legal challenge against government attempts to keep more of the comments secret.

Migrants identified for the aborted flight, and three media organisations – BBC News, including BBC Two’s Newsnight, the Times and the Guardian newspapers – are seeking disclosure of the material.

The first Rwanda flight was grounded in June after the European Court of Human Rights said the High Court in London must first fully examine whether the removals policy is lawful. A hearing is scheduled for next month.

On Tuesday, the government asked the High Court to rule that the case should not include 11 specific comments about Rwanda from an unnamed Foreign Office (FCDO) official, who had been asked for their view.

The court heard that FCDO bosses had asked the unnamed official, who had some expertise in African affairs, to look at a draft of the Rwanda “Country Policy and Information Note”.

This is an official and public document on the country and its human rights record – and it was being updated while the Rwanda flights plan was being thrashed out.

In an email sent to colleagues on 26 April – two weeks after the plan became public – the reviewer questioned the tone of the report and whether it accurately reflected the situation in the country.

High Court judge Lord Justice Lewis was told the official had written in a covering email: “There are state control, security, surveillance structures from the national level down… political opposition is not tolerated and arbitrary detention, torture and even killings are accepted methods of enforcing control too”.

Jude Bunting QC, appearing for the media organisations, told the court the withheld evidence from the reviewer was likely to be the most critical material about the Rwanda affair.

“The sensitivity of this policy cannot be understated,” he said.

“The public needs to understand the material that was available to the [government] at the time the decisions under challenge were taken, the evidence that is said to weigh against, as well as to justify, this flagship policy, and the reasons why the [government] decided to proceed.”

Lord Justice Lewis will rule in the coming days on whether any of the material should be kept secret.

Last month the High Court heard that Whitehall officials had initially excluded Rwanda on human rights grounds from the list of potential partners for asylum transfers.

The court was told that Dominic Raab, the then-foreign secretary, had been warned that a deal with Rwanda would force the UK to constrain what it said to the nation about its record.

The Home Office is claiming public interest immunity on parts of the independent reviewer’s response, with Neil Sheldon QC telling the court there would be a “potential of very significant harm” to international relations and national security issues if the extracts were disclosed.

The pilot scheme would see those who arrived in the UK by what the government considers “illegal, dangerous or unnecessary” routes – such as in small boats or hidden in lorries – flown to the African country, where they could then claim asylum.

An upfront payment of £120m to Rwanda would be followed by further payments as the country handled more cases, the Home Office has said.

The government has said the “world-leading scheme” would help prevent dangerous Channel crossings and when announcing it Prime Minister Boris Johnson said it would “save countless lives” by stopping “vile people smugglers”.

More than 13,000 people have made the crossing from France so far this year, with around 8,000 arriving since the Rwanda policy was launched.

After the first flight to Rwanda was cancelled Home Secretary Priti Patel said she would not be deterred from “doing the right thing” and told MPs she believed the policy was “fully compliant” with the law.

Many groups have criticised the plans, with refugee organisations branding it cruel, while the Church of England and opposition MPs have also hit out at it.

The Rwandan government has said migrants would be “entitled to full protection under Rwandan law, equal access to employment, and enrolment in healthcare and social care services”.

……………………………………………………………

Kenya election 2022: Raila Odinga rejects William Ruto’s victory

 Raila Odinga has rejected the results of Kenya’s presidential election saying that the figures announced on Monday were “null and void”.

According to the official results, Mr Odinga narrowly lost to Deputy President William Ruto.

Mr Odinga accused the head of the electoral body of a “blatant disregard of the constitution”.

“We totally without reservation reject the presidential election results,” he said.

Making his remarks in front of supporters in the capital, Nairobi, he said that there was “neither a legally elected winner nor a president-elect”.

The 77-year-old long-time opposition leader was running for president for the fifth time. He has challenged the results in the previous two elections, including successfully in 2017.

This time round, the chairman of the electoral body Wafula Chebukati said he got 48.8% of the vote in last Tuesday’s election compared to Mr Ruto’s 50.5%.

Mr Odinga accused Mr Chebukati of “gross impunity” saying his team will pursue all legal options. He called his declaration “a major setback” to Kenya’s democracy that could trigger a political crisis.

He said that Mr Chebukati went against the law by announcing the result without the backing of his fellow commissioners. But an ally of Mr Ruto, Musalia Mudavadi, told BBC Focus on Africa radio that commissioners are required to collate the results but do not determine the result.

This is a legal point that may in the end have to be tested in court.

Minutes before Mr Odinga spoke, four of seven electoral commissioners who refused to approve Monday’s results, held a press conference to give their reasons.

They accused Mr Chebukati of side-lining them and of announcing results that were full of “mathematic absurdity and defied logic”.

Juliana Cherera, the vice-chairperson of the commission, said that if you added the percentages as announced by the chairperson of the commission the sum came to 100.01%.

But the BBC’s Reality Check team says that this was down to a rounding error and is not suspicious.

Mr Odinga has however commended the four commissioners for their “heroism”.

“The majority of (the electoral commission) – who stood up to the bullying and illegal conduct of Mr Chebukati, we are proud of them and ask them not to fear anything. Kenyans are with them,” he said.

On Monday, Mr Ruto described the objections of the commissioners as a “side-show”, but said he would respect a legal process. He also called for unity, saying he wanted to be a president for all, and for the country to focus on the future.

Last week’s election was largely peaceful. The electoral commission was widely praised for conducting a transparent process by posting on its website results from more than 46,000 polling stations and encouraging anyone to conduct their own tally.

However, scuffles broke out at the counting centre on Monday after Mr Odinga’s supporters accused the electoral commission of tampering with votes and attempted to block Mr Chebukati from announcing the final results. At least three poll officials were injured in the melee.

Calm has been restored in the country after a mixture of celebrations and violent protests followed the official declaration of the presidential results.

Thousands of supporters, clad in yellow, Mr Ruto’s party colours, poured onto the streets of Eldoret in the Rift Valley. In contrast in the western city of Kisumu, Mr Odinga’s supporters blocked roads and lit bonfires. Similar scenes played out at several towns and in the capital, Nairobi.

Generally there is a sense of relief that the counting process is over because the election season often means that life grinds to a halt.

But people will be paying attention to Mr Odinga’s plans to file a case at the Supreme Court.

……………………………………………………………