Listening to "what the women say"
Was at a meeting
this morning organised by FOKUS Women and the Office of National Unity and
Reconciliation (ONUR) by virtue of the fact that I am a Board Member of ONUR.
The meeting was conceptualised around the FOKUS Women publication Reconciling Sri Lanka, what the WOMEN say
which is an interesting compilation of case studies of 30 women’s views on
reconciliation. The agenda included testimonies from some of the women who featured in the book, but also interventions
from government officials and a minister
and some poetry and songs from women who had been directly affected by
the war. Present at the meeting were four women parliamentarians, some
members of the diplomatic corps including the High Commissioner of South Africa
in Sri Lanka, women from different age and ethnic groups from different parts of the country and from different walks of life.
The meeting
would not have achieved anything had it not had simultaneous translation
allowing everyone to speak in either English, Sinhala or Tamil. The case studies were also published in all
three languages, and FOKUS Women Director , Shyamala Gomez went into great
pains to explain that the case studies
were shared with the women in the
language that was used when they were being interviewed for verification, so
that there was a high level of verification, and no gatekeeping. Well done FOKUS Women! I am sure others will follow
suit.
What struck
me most during the discussions was the chasm between women’s lived realities
and the perceptions of the institutional actors in the room. Sri Lankan governance is awash with good
policies, the most recent being the National Reconciliation Policy, but there
was no sense that these policies were being implemented. The women talked about lack of transparency
and trackability of government activity and decision making, the political
manouvering that was detrimental to reconciliation, the elite capture of the
reconciliation initiatives and lack of meaningful engagement of women,
minorities and people at the grassroots, the continued failure to provide
government information in Tamil as well as Sinhalese, issues related to land
ownership and housing, the specific problems relating to widows and female
headed households, divisive media representation and the reluctance of political parties to
nominate women to contest. There were
several who regretted the disruption of their education by the threat of
violence, or forced displacement. For many there was definitely a sense of
being excluded and ‘left behind’.
Mano Ganesan,
Minister of National Co-existence Dialogue and Official Languages, came into
the meeting for a short while. Proud of his trilingual ability he pointed out
to the participants that women comprise more than half the population, are the
largest contributors to the economy and have suffered most from war and conflict. His message was for women to take on
political and economic authority – make the
best use of the electoral quotas as well as spearhead civil society movements
in the North around issues that they find unacceptable.
Swarna
Sumanasekera, Chairperson, National Committee on Women, brought in a very
realistic perspective that highlighted some ongoing and planned activities of
the Ministry in collaboration with other state institutions while admitting
that there were things that needed to be done better. She emphasised that
government needed to consult more widely with women when making policy
decisions and formulating plans. She
talked about action plans for combatting violence against women and for
addressing the issues of female headed households, and about the inclusion of
women’s rights issues in the Human Rights Action Plan. She mentioned the recommendation from the
Treasury that 25% of budget allocations at the DS level for rural development
should go to benefit women, and the need to follow up quotas for women’s
political representation with voter education as well as skills development for
current and aspiring female politicians. She admitted to not knowing whether
local government institutions followed the 25% budget allocation recommendation
of the Treasury and made several references to Ministry initiatives that are
monitoring impact. She seemed to
recognise the value of monitoring and evaluation, a recognition that was absent from the
presentations of others. Her several references to Shyamala Gomez’s support
suggested that FOKUS Women seems to be making an effort to build the capacity
of the women’s machinery. Well done
FOKUS Women!
I left soon
after the South African High Commissioner’s intervention that aimed to share
some lessons from her country’s experience of reconciliation 22 years ago. She urged us to see reconciliation not just
as a product, but as a continuous process.
She also cautioned against the emphasis on policy. In her opinion
policies were necessary but not sufficient to achieve change. Gender Mainstreaming happens in the context
of ‘male-streaming’ - the context is
highly patriarchal and we should not underestimate the tenacity and resilience
of patriarchy. She also warned against
the language of institutionalisation that can demobilise grassroots
movements. What worked in South Africa
was the existence of a coherent media strategy and a common narrative that
fostered citizen ownership of the process, capacity building of women that not
just provided the survival skills, but skills that helped transform gender
relations, a reconciliation barometer that kept track of changes and alliances
built with different groups particularly women parliamentarians.
All in all
an interesting morning, an opportunity to touch base with some things going on
here in Sri Lanka.
Comments
Post a Comment