[yframe url=’http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoaY28XUxpg&feature=youtu.be’]
Part 1 of footage of the 17th annual Attiak Massacre Memorial Prayers in Attiak, northern Uganda on April 20, 2012. Filmed by the Justice and Reconciliation Project (JRP).
[yframe url=’http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4lpjfoN8rA&feature=relmfu’]
Part 2 of footage of the 17th annual Attiak Massacre Memorial Prayers in Attiak, northern Uganda on April 20, 2012. Filmed by the Justice and Reconciliation Project (JRP).
“Where to With Transitional Justice in Uganda? The Situation After the Extension of the Amnesty Act,” Justice in Conflict blog, 22 April 2012
http://justiceinconflict.org/2012/04/22/where-to-with-transitional-justice-in-uganda-the-situation-after-the-extension-of-the-amnesty-act/
By Patrick Wegner
Regular readers of this blog are aware that Uganda has both an amnesty law in force since 2000 as well as an International Crimes Division (ICD) at the High Court which is able to try crimes, including war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.
The 2000 Amnesty Act is broad, essentially granting ‘blanket amnesty’ for all crimes committed during rebellion if the reporter agrees to renounce armed struggle. Despite the Amnesty Act being in force, the Department of the Public Prosecutor (DPP) in Uganda charged a mid-level commander of the LRA, Thomas Kwoyelo, with crimes against humanity under the Geneva Convention. JiC has reported extensively about the trial in the past, you find all the articles here. Despite several court rulings that Kwoyelo has a legal right to receive amnesty and should be set free, the DPP argued that amnesty is not applicable for crimes against humanity. In violation of these court rulings and due process, Kwoyelo remains in jail at Luzira Prison, Kampala.
The Government of Uganda (GoU) has not taken a clear position concerning the Kwoyelo case and the clash between the blanket amnesty and the existence of a Court Division able to try international crimes. Therefore the upcoming review of the Amnesty Act in May 2012 has been anticipated with uncertainty and curiosity by observers. Will the GoU move away from the past amnesty approach and give in to the DPP that had stated it wanted to bring more charges against former LRA rebels? Or would it uphold the amnesty approach followed since 2000?
Now the Deputy Speaker of the Ugandan Parliament, Jacob Oulanyah, announced on Saturday 14th of April in Gulu that the extension of the Amnesty Act for two years is a done deal and that the law just waits being gazetted. (Thanks to Sharon Nakandha from Avocats sans Frontières Uganda for forwarding the article). This has some important implications for the way forward in transitional justice in Uganda.
It is important to acknowledge that the Amnesty Act was passed with strong civil society pressure from northern Uganda. Many northern Acholi see the LRA rebels as their abducted children and want them to lay down arms and return home. According to asurvey conducted by the Justice and Reconciliation Project (JRP) in December 2011 98 per-cent of the northern population believe that the amnesty is still relevant and should not be abolished. Abolishing the amnesty would thus go against the wishes of the formerly war affected population in northern Uganda. President Museveni has no reason to alienate his northern constituency (he received a majority in northern Uganda for the first time in the 2011 elections) by attacking a law that many see as very useful.
Former LRA Commander Thomas Kwoyelo in the courtroom (Edward Echwalu/Reuters)
According to recent figures from the JRP survey, 22,520 rebels have taken amnesty so far – 48 per-cent of them LRA members. Abolishing the amnesty law now would not have revoked those amnesties but, in the context of the ongoing detention of Thomas Kwoyelo, it would surely have stirred fears among LRA returnees. In my interviews with LRA officers in northern Uganda their fears of being tried years after they returned from the bush, be it by the ICC or the ICD, was very tangible. The fact that the amnesty was prolonged is also important for the military efforts to combat the LRA in the DRC, Central African Republic and South Sudan as it ensures that the formerly abducted fighters have a way out. The Amnesty Act can thus contribute to weaken the LRA by luring out fighters from the ‘bush’.
Yet, the fact that the Amnesty Act will apparently simply be prolonged without any changes also means that Uganda’s national concept for transitional justice remains incoherent and contradictory. Uganda has a blanket amnesty in place that covers any and all crimes, a notion that is on the retreat in international law. Many would indeed even argue that a blanket amnesty is not acceptable in international law: The Inter-American Court for Human Rights ruled so famously in its Barrios Altos case and the UN has instructed its envoys to not endorse blanket amnesties in peace negotiations. Yet, under Uganda’s Amnesty Act even Joseph Kony himself would have a right to receive amnesty.
At the same time, Uganda created a Division that is capable of trying these crimes but will not be able to do so as long as the amnesty remains in place in its current form. The GoU could have solved this problem and brought the Amnesty Act into line with international standards.
A reception centre for LRA abductees (Centre for Children in Vulnerable Situations)
According to the Amnesty Act the Parliament of Uganda has the power to revoke the amnesty for individuals on request of the Minister of Defence. It would thus be theoretically possible to revoke the amnesty for the LRA Commanders most responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Museveni had threatened several times to exclude the LRA commanders from amnesty only to then publicly ask Kony and his Commanders to accept the amnesty offer of the government. The Ugandan High Court even explicitly ruled in October 2005 that amnesty remains available for the LRA commanders. These inconsistencies may re-emerge in the future as the GoU once again failed to clarify its stance. If Joseph Kony was arrested tomorrow, the GoU would be caught between its constitution and the amnesty law on the one side, and its international legal obligations to surrender Joseph Kony and his key commanders to the ICC on the other side.
It is also strange that the GoU apparently did not wait for a report of the Transitional Justice Working Group of the Justice Law and Order Sector (JLOS) of the Government in which JLOS would have published its results of conducting surveys about the amnesty and traditional justice in all of Uganda. The Transitional Justice Working Group is charged with developing a coherent concept for transitional justice in Uganda, presumably providing for a comprehensive approach including amnesty, traditional justice, a truth commission and trials. The JLOS plans are impressive on the paper and could provide a blueprint for transitional justice concepts in post-conflict areas (see here for details).
Why did the decision makers not wait for this valuable feedback before deciding whether and how to prolong the Amnesty Act? One can only hope that the final suggestions of the Transitional Justice Working Group will be taken more seriously for the sake of a coherent and comprehensive approach towards transitional justice in Uganda.
“Ex-LRA abductees struggle to survive,” Daily Monitor, 7 April 2012
http://www.monitor.co.ug/SpecialReports/-/688342/1381202/-/item/0/-/nrtagaz/-/index.html
By Moses Akena
Eighteen years ago in an afternoon of May 1994, the then 10-year-old Evelyn Amony’s innocence and education was robbed off her after she was abducted by the Lord’s Resistance Army rebels from her way home after classes at Atiak Pupwonya Primary School in Atiak Sub-county, Amuru District.
Now 28, Amony, who was in Primary Four when she was abducted, was taken with three children below 12 years old as was preferred by the rebels. She says she was immediately taken to Kilak hills (Kony’s base then) where she baby sat most of his children, including two she identified as Salim and Ali.
However, her group later left for Palutaka in Sudan in October of that year where she stayed at the home of the LRA leader, whom she said guarded her jealously. “While in Uganda, he used to tell me that he will not let any man touch me vowing to get for me a good man at the right time to marry,” she reminiscences.
Ironically, one day in 1997, it did not occur to her that he (Kony) was the ‘good man’.
Amony, who at the time was 15 years old, says she vehemently resisted advances by Kony because he was her father’s age mate.
What astonished her, Amony recalls, is the rebel leader telling her that she should blame her mother for bearing her with her beauty and for her being hardworking and tidy.
“I tried escaping that night from the camp but I couldn’t go far because the place is mountainous and I didn’t know that I was rotating within the same place,” she says.
Tried to escape
After spending the night in the bush, an LRA patrol team arrested her the next day and took her back to the camp. Here, she met and narrated her ordeal to the senior LRA commanders then; Otti Lagony and Vincent Otti. This could not stop the mandatory punishment of 50 strokes of the cane that such a case attracted.
“He (Kony) told them that he is the final man and immediately ordered me to go and prepare tea despite feeling pain on my buttocks from the beating,” she says. Amony later conceived and bore three children for Kony before her eventual escape in August 2005.
Now eight years after her return, Ms Amony bears no hallmark of the grandeur she anticipated.
Squeezed in a grass-thatched mud and wattle hut in Kirombe, a Gulu Municipality suburb, Amony, who has also married a former abductee, is struggling to take care of the three children and two others that she adopted.
“I have a challenge taking care of the three children because I don’t know their clan though I hear their father comes from Odek Sub-county,” the LRA victim adds.
Luckily, two of her eldest children (all girls) are being taken care of by their paternal uncle and are studying in a Kampala primary school .
Aryemo’s case
Amony’s dilemma is shared by 27-year-old Grace Aryemo, a mother of three, who shares a small grass- thatched hut with her three children in Laroo, three kilometres out of Gulu Town near Gulu University.
Rejected by her family in Lacekocot in Pader District and castigated together with her children by her aunt whom she was staying with for being an “evil person,” she found solace in crushing rocks at a stone quarry near her home.
Once in a while, she manages to crush a container of about 100kgs of which she gets about Shs2,000 a day. However, she says she has hardly got any money in the last one month, adding with a melancholic tone of how she and her children occasionally forgo food when there is no money.
For Amony, a trip back home to Atiak presents chilling memories because people in the area blame her group for the April 1995 incident in which more than 300 people were massacred by the LRA.
She says at worst, she only spends two days at home because it is only her father who is fond of her. She cannot dare ask her brothers for share of the family land.
Amony says the hostility extended to the children who are labeled ‘bush children’ might bring a similar problem in future.
Their concern is shared by hundreds of women, who at a tender age, were among more than 100,000 children abducted, coerced, and for the case of the girls, impregnated by senior LRA commanders.
Hundreds of children are believed to be in captivity of the LRA, most of them as child soldiers. The women, through their umbrella association, Women’s Advocacy Network, last week held a meeting in Gulu Town organised by several NGOs in the region.
They cited, in a memorandum read by Grace Acan, who was abducted from St. Mary’s College, Aboke, in 1996, denial of land and other property to them, stigma, and refusal to ask for forgiveness by their husbands, financial difficulty and favouritism of the male returnees as reasons for their concern.
They also say their family members and those of their husbands have rejected them and their children, accusing them of killing them while in the bush and carrying with them a curse.
Most of them after being rejected by their relatives and husbands have opted to rent houses near Gulu Town from where they have to live from hand to mouth.
Aryemo, for instance, makes beads at home which she sells to supplement what her husband, with whom she is yet to bear a child, gets from riding a boda boda motorcycle.
NGO’s work
Santo Okema, the programmes officer at Ker kwaro Acholi, a cultural organisation, responding to concerns raised by the women that they have been ignored by the cultural institution as has been the norm in the past, promised to raise their concerns at a meeting of traditional leaders.
Susan Blanch Alal, the programmes manager at World Vision Uganda Children of War Rehabilitation Programme, said more than 14,000 children have since benefited from their programme.
She added that the organisation came in to support former abductees and people affected by war after detecting challenges with their reintegration in the community.
“We have developed a proposal on how best to reintegrate the formerly abducted persons in the community and make their lives fruitful and peaceful with the other community members,” Alal says.
Mapenduzi Ojara, the district chairperson, says they are aware of the grievances of the women and promised to look for solutions through programmes like the Peace, Recovery and Development Plan for northern Uganda.
Big struggle
He says recovery from war is a complex process that calls for a lot of commitment from the government and development partners who he says should design projects that are relevant to the women.
“What we are looking for now is to empower the women to access services and to also offer them psychosocial support,” Ojara says. The women are also particularly upset that some of the men who returned from captivity are enjoying more limelight than the women and have not taken any steps to take care of their children or ask for forgiveness.
“It’s painful that they took us to the bush, abused us, and impregnated us. They know they were our abductors and they don’t want to come and ask us for forgiveness,” Aryemo narrates.
For instance, in January, former LRA spokesperson, 50-year-old Sam Kolo graduated from Gulu University with a degree in Business Administration and immediately set his ambitions on getting a Master degree.
For Amony and the other women, their beauty still remains but the good life they dreamt of in childhood has been robbed off them and it is a struggle to rekindle it, something that they may realise much later in life and with little significance.
“#Ugandans 2012,” Canadian International Council, 12 March 2012
http://www.opencanada.org/features/ugandans2012/
By Erin Baines
After being relentlessly pursued by the Ugandan military for more than a year, eight-year old Aling – a daughter born of forced marriage to one of the high commanders of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) – was tired and scared. One morning after a particularly deadly attack, she turned to her mother and asked, “Mama, why can’t we just leave this army?” Her mother had spent 14 years as a forced wife. She knew the risks involved in betraying the rebels, yet she could not refuse her child. They left that night.
The commander was enraged. He sent 20 of his best soldiers to bring back his daughter and kill his wife. As they went, one of the soldiers said to the others, “Aling’s mother is a good woman. She has helped us many times when we were injured or needed comfort. Why should we not follow her instead of the commander?” They too escaped, joining Aling and her mother at a rehabilitation centre in Pajule, Pader District.
Some days later, having heard that his soldiers, wife and daughter were in the nearby centre, the commander dispatched another 70 soldiers to attack the place, ordering them to kill everyone. As they got nearer, the soldiers surrendered their guns to the local officials. They too followed the lead of Mama Aling, the mother of the child who asked if it was not time to go home.
Since the early 2000s, the Ugandan initiative, the Justice and Reconciliation Project (JRP), a Ugandan initiative, has recorded some of the worst human rights abuses that have taken place during the war, and the efforts of people like Mama Aling to stop them. JRP documents the stories of ordinary people caught between the warring parties – of those pressed into fighting against their will, and those who are born of circumstances not of their choosing. The organization got the help of dozens of persons in displaced camps who, for years, volunteered to keep track of, and record, what was happening there.
At the height of the war, the original JRP team walked, rode bicycles and boda boda (motorcycles), and travelled in the backs of trucks to reach areas that no international journalist or advocate would go to. At the time, people weren’t permitted to travel even a few kilometres our to town after curfew.
Members of the JRP team – who are about the same age as Jason Russell, the maker of the Kony 2012 film – document the memories of massacre survivors. They record stories of sexual violence and the ways women and men resist armed soldiers. They speak to parents whose children are still missing. They listen to commanders who surrendered and who regret the atrocities they committed. They try to move beyond the good-guy-bad-guy model, recognizing the extraordinary circumstances in which soldiers commit violence against others, as children who grew up in war and were forced to fight.
Sometimes this work is overwhelming. It often feels like documentation and advocacy is not enough. At some point, each member of the team has held heads in hands and wept following an interview, or after meeting a community. After the tears, they gather courage and write it all down. Then they go and talk about it with local officials and request a resolution.
They publish reports and news articles, do tours and hold radio programmes in order to bring the voices of communities to national and international debate and attention. This isn’t always an easy task.
In 2007, Boniface Ojok, the project’s coordinator, met with the LRA and government representatives to the peace talks. He sat in between the heads of the two delegations and told them what he has seen and learned about justice from people on the ground.
Co-founder Michael Otim put his life on hold for more than two years, attending each and every peace talk between 2006 and 2008 as an advisor to a delegation of cultural and religious leaders.
JRP’s advocacy is not just with officials and leaders, however. It also engages the communities most affected by the war. JRP’s members utilize oral history, dance, song, drama, poetry, radio programs, community dialogues and public marches to share what they have learned at national debates, and to promote ownership of advocacy. They help survivors found their own advocacy groups, and when resources are available, they bring survivors to meet with officials and leaders.
For example, JRP supports storytelling sessions among a group of war-affected women Gulu, a town in northern Uganda. These sessions provide a space in which women can speak freely about their memories of war and the challenges of daily life. As word spread about the group, so many women wanted to join that new groups started to form. On International Women’s day this year, IRP formally launched the Women’s Advocacy Network, with over 200 members. The group’s chairperson, Evelyn Amony, spent more than 10 years in captivity. She believes she survived the war to tell her story, and to help others tell theirs.
This is courageous and exhausting work, but JRP is not alone. Hundreds of local and national organizations work to document and remember, and to insist on justice. There is Human Rights Focus (HURIFO), for instance, which operated as the only human-rights organization in the region for many years. There is also the Acholi Religious Leaders Peace Initiative, an interdenominational group (Catholic, Presbyterian, Anglican and Muslim) that has repeatedly met with the rebels and government in attempts to persuade them of the need for peace talks.
There is Alice Achan, who rallied her community together to build a shelter for the hundreds of children who escaped rebel captivity but had no where to go, and no way to find their parents. In the shelter, she loved and nourished each one of them until they could be reunited with their families. Then there is the Concerned Parents Association, which formed after 139 girls were abducted from St. Mary’s College in Aboke. Women like Angelina Atyam travelled the world over and back (she even met Oprah!) to find their children.
During the nearly 10 years I have worked in Uganda with advocates, survivors and researchers, I have never heard them lobby for military intervention. In fact, the opposite is true: Ugandans have consistently insisted on an amnesty process for rebels, recognizing that many soldiers were forced into combat as children. Most prefer to talk peace rather than wage war. It is common knowledge that the first to be killed in military raids are the most recently abducted kids.
This is not to say that Ugandans do not want to stop Kony, or that they do not want justice. Nor is it to say that local leaders are perfect and know all the solutions, or that they speak with one voice. This is not the case.
The point is, Ugandans, along with people in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic, Sudan and many other countries around the world, are working for peace in both extraordinary and ordinary ways that are often off “the grid”.
They do so that the world is a better place for their children – so that it is better for Jason Russell’s children – and they do it without ever being called a hero.
So alongside the current media hubbub around Kony 2012, how about celebrating the heroism of thousands of Ugandans like Aling, Boniface, Evelyn, and Alice, building peace and working for justice despite the war. How about #Ugandans2012?
“More on Kony 2012,” The Daily What, 12 March 2012
http://thedailywh.at/2012/03/12/more-on-kony-2012/
JRP is referenced twice in this opinion piece on “Kony 2012” — “… in an effort to perpetuate “myths” about Kony…” and “…are desperately trying — peacefully, through reconciliation – to move away…”
Author Unknown
More On Kony 2012: If this past week has taught us anything, it’s that people love — love — being aware of things. More than that, they love telling other people that they are aware of things. Most of all, however, people are absolutely, unconditionally, head over heels in lifelong love with other people liking the fact that they are aware of things.
But why do people love being aware of things as much as they do? In a 2008 blog post, Stuff White People Like attempted to get to the core of the Western world’s codependent relationship with awareness. By raising awareness, wrote Christian Lander, ”you get all the benefits of helping (self satisfaction, telling other people), but no need for difficult decisions or the ensuing criticism (how do you criticize awareness?).”
Of course, what makes awareness so alluring is precisely what makes it so pointless: It doesn’t — in and of itself — actually accomplish anything.
Awareness, beyond argument, is the first step towards fixing a problem. But, invariably, that shared endorphin boost people experience when banding together to rally around awareness for a cause wears off, and all that’s left is a bunch of people with no answers looking around for someone — anyone — to take the next step.
And then someone does. And we pat them on the back for their willingness to put in the elbow grease and leg work necessary to actually get something done. And we happily sign their petitions or open our wallets to them: After all, it’s the least we can do to help this selfless do-gooder advance our cause beyond awareness. And we send them on their way, content in the thought that, if we couldn’t spare the time, at least we could spare a few dollars and a signature.
But what if that person, or that organization, we just bankrolled doesn’t understand the problem or what needs to be done about it? What if, instead of helping, their actions end up hurting not only the people they claim to want to help, but also the people who are actually helping? And, perhaps most importantly, what if the people supposedly being helped don’t want help? Should it still be foisted upon them against their will?
Take KONY 2012 for example.
A lot has been said over the last several days about Invisible Children‘s ultra-viral awareness campaign that targets infamous central African warlord Joseph Kony, and his 26-year-old rebel militia, the Lord’s Resistance Army.
IC’s finances have been called into question; their “emotional porn” approach toward awareness solicitation has been criticised as a “fund-raising stunt” which employs “blatant dishonesty” in an effort to perpetuate “myths” about Kony thereby achieving their stated goal of direct military intervention; the group’s leadership troika — seen above posing in 2008 with members of the then-child-soldier-recruiting Sudan People’s Liberation Army – has been referred to as self-promoting colonialists by the AP photographer who snapped the shot. But, through all the op-eds and the think pieces and the public polls, the only opinions worth heeding have remained largely invisible: Those of the people who are actually from there.
“[Invisible Children] are not known as a peace building organization and I do not think they have experience with peace building and conflict resolution methods,” wrote Anywar Ricky Richard, the director of the northern Ugandan organization Friends of Orphans, and a man who knows first-hand the horrors of the Lord’s Resistance Army, having been a former child soldier in its service. “I totally disagree with their approach of military action as a means to end this conflict.”
Ugandan-born activist TMS Ruge, co-founder of Project Diaspora, agrees wholeheartedly with Richard. Of KONY 2012 he says: “It is a slap in the face to so many of us who want to rise from the ashes of our tumultuous past and the noose of benevolent, paternalistic, aid-driven development memes.”
Indeed, in the rush to condescend to the central Africans who are “just not working hard enough” to get rid of Kony and his ilk and finally start improving their quality of life, what many overlook (or willfully ignore) is the already-visible progress that has been made thanks to the hard-earned grassroots efforts of central Africans themselves.
“Uganda was voted by Lonely Planet amongst the top destinations for 2012 but has this NGO just undone the potential for Uganda’s tourism?” asks Ida Horner, a Ugandan expat who remembers well a much harsher life under Idi Amin. “After all the tourism industry provides a real opportunity for Ugandans to work their way out of poverty through providing services that tourists want to consume.”
Nigerian-American novelist Teju Cole takes it a step further and slams what he calls the “White Savior Industrial Complex,” which cares little for the end, so long as it gets satisfaction from the means. “The white savior supports brutal policies in the morning, founds charities in the afternoon, and receives awards in the evening,” says Cole. “The White Savior Industrial Complex is not about justice. It is about having a big emotional experience that validates privilege.”
And all this before we’ve even touched on the dark heart of the matter: Joseph Kony.
Kony is, without a doubt, a despicable human being. His 25-year reign of terror has resulted in hundreds of deaths, thousands of abductions, and hundreds of thousands of displacements. But to suggest that Kony is anywhere near worthy of cheap, throwaway comparisons to such historical horror-mongers as Hitler is not only irresponsible, it might actually be what Kony wants.
IC’s video appears to suggest that Kony is currently in possession of over 30,000 child soldiers. According to the UN’s latest report, the LRA has “less than 500 combatants,” and was “dislodged” by Ugandan security forces in 2002 — meaning they are no longer there, and are unlikely to return.
Kony and the LRA are now but a horrible memory to many in northern Uganda who don’t need an Internet campaign to make Kony popular. They know all-too-well who he is and what he was once capable of, and are desperately trying — peacefully, through reconciliation – to move away from the shadows of their traumatic past.
“Now we have peace, people are back in their homes,” says Dr. Beatrice Mpora, who runs a community health organization in the rebels’ former northern Uganda stomping ground of Gulu. “They are planting their fields, they are starting their businesses. That is what people should help us with.”
That is not to say that Kony is entirely done away with; he is still able to menace remote areas in neighboring countries such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Central African Republic — his last known hideout. But rather than an ascending fuhrer, Kony is an aging monster, thrashing about blindly in hopes of remaining relevant for a little while longer.
Sadly, it seems IC’s KONY 2012 campaign may end up doing exactly what it aims to do: Provide a spent villain with a second wind of infamy.
“Most madmen love the idea of fame,” says Marc DuBois of Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders), “so Joseph Kony’s wet dream just came true.” By focusing all available attention on a bygone bogeyman whose days are numbered, the IC may be unwittingly rejuvenating the perception of Kony as an intimidating and influential force with a wider reach than his true resources allow.
“Making Kony ‘famous’ could make him stronger,” says well-respected Ugandan blogger Javie Ssozi. And that strength puts a lot of people in danger, including both locals and aid workers such as DuBois and colleague Avril Benoît. “MSF teams in LRA-affected regions of DR Congo, Central African Republic & South Sudan are likely wary of retaliation risks,” said Benoît.
IC, with its support for direct military intervention in Uganda, may not care that Uganda’s own government considers it “totally misleading to suggest that the war is still in Uganda,” but Kony does. To him, KONY 2012 represents a rebirth — a chance to restore a stifling grip that has been slipping for years.
So say KONY 2012 succeeds. America plants even more bootprints on the ground, smokes Kony out of his cave, and turns him over to the International Criminal Court. A job well done and stogies all around. Now there’s just the small matter of the fact that nothing has actually changed, because KONY 2012 doesn’t do a lick to address any of the big-picture problems currently facing central Africa.
All it has succeeded in doing is propping up Uganda’s war-crimes-perpetrating military and its brutal, corrupt, human-rights-abusing dictatorship, and strengthening the alliance of four-term-president Yoweri Museveni with his US counterpart at a time when a foothold in Uganda would be extremely advantageous to American oil interests.
Meanwhile, actual problems in need of actual solutions are being rendered inaudible by the beating of war drums.
Gulu, the Ugandan town ravaged by the LRA in a previous life is now home to the highest numbers of child prostitutes in Uganda, according to Ugandan journalist Angelo Izama. It also has unacceptably high rates of HIV/AIDS and hepatitis, even when compared to the rest of Africa. And the real bane of Ugandan children — the mysterious “Nodding Disease,” which has killed scores and debilitated hundreds — is no closer to a cure.
“Last year I went to Gulu, Uganda, where Invisible Children is based, and interviewed over 50 locals,” writes Columbia University student Amber Ha in an open letter to IC’s Jason Russell. “Every single person questioned Invisible Children’s legitimacy and intention.”
Adam Branch, a human rights advocate who has worked for years in northern Uganda, elaborates on what precisely has given so many people in the area pause:
The warmongering, the self-indulgence, the commercialization, the reductive and one-sided story they tell, their portrayal of Africans as helpless children in need of rescue by white Americans, and the fact that civilians in Uganda and central Africa may have to pay a steep price in their own lives so that a lot of young Americans can feel good about themselves, and a few can make good money.
By now it should be abundantly clear that KONY 2012 doesn’t offer a single enduring solution to any of the problems it pretends to want to fix. At the very least, it makes things worse. At the very most, it makes things much worse.
But beyond the reasons why lies a simple truth: Lasting change — the kind that makes people’s lives truly better — doesn’t come from awareness, or even from doing something: It comes from doing what needs to be done. And knowing what that is requires paying attention, listening to the victims, and understanding the whole story.
You’ll notice that I haven’t once mentioned money. There is plenty to say about IC’s accountability and transparency (or lack thereof) and the way it goes about spending the piles of cash it is making off KONY 2012 — and piles of cash are definitely being made considering the ubiquitous ”sold out” heraldic standards that popped up almost instantaneously next to the all-important “awareness swag” IC is hawking in conjunction with the video campaign — but that discussion is mostly moot.
IC is not a charity in the true sense of the word. It is a private interest group that allocates the overwhelming majority of its budget (nearly 70% in 2011) toward travel, compensation, administration, fundraising, making movies, and lobbying celebrities and congress [pdf] to support its central aim: Direct foreign military intervention in Africa.
Whether or not that is what IC should be spending its money on is a question best left to IC. The real question that you should be asking yourself is whether or not that is what you should be spending your money on.
It should be well-evident by now that KONY 2012 is a poorly thought-out and oversimplified campaign with shortsighted objectives that are detrimental to every relevant cause except making money. More than that, it is a campaign that is unwelcome by local civilians, politicians, experts, and humanitarian aid workers.
Asked about the video’s glossing over major aspects of regional history and culture, IC co-founder, and the star of KONY 2012, Jason Russell told the New York Times, “No one wants a boring documentary on Africa. Maybe we have to make it pop, and we have to make it cool. We view ourself as the Pixar of human rights stories.”
That’s great, except Africa is not a feel-good animated feature for the whole family. It is a real place with real people who would suffer real consequences if KONY 2012 succeeded in convincing well-meaning individuals that all it needs for a happy ending is to catch the “bad guy” with the help of American soldiers.
Africans deserve better than to be treated like two-dimensional Wacom sketches by a group of sensationalist jet-setters who — by their own admission — oversimplify the issues to sell their cause (and their bracelets). The people of Africa — nay, the people of everywhere — deserve real, long-lasting solutions; not quick-fix half-remedies that look good on Facebook.
There are plenty of ways to help without trampling all over self-determination. There are good, honest, transparent not-for-profits based in Africa that have been working for years to promote self-sufficiency through education, health services, rehabilitation, democracy-building initiatives, and myriad other programs that have resulted in empowering change. These organizations help the people help themselves without condescension or remote imperatives.
But don’t take my word for it: Do the research. Find a cause you support and make sure it is what it says it is, and, more importantly, that it helps the people it claims to help. Invisible Children and KONY 2012 do not meet that criterion, and for that reason, above all other reasons presented here and elsewhere, it should not be allowed to speak on their behalf.
“Uganda: How you can help,” Washington Post, 9 March 2012
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/uganda-how-you-can-help/2012/03/09/gIQANxuE1R_blog.html
By Elizabeth Flock
Whether or not you support the very viral Kony 2012 campaign created by the charity Invisible Children, Joseph Kony and the child-recruiting Lord’s Resistance Army he leads are undeniably brutal. Uganda, where the LRA has long operated, has been ravaged by conflict for decades.
Villagers sit in the back of a Ugandan army truck as they are moved to a safe area from the site of a massacre carried out by the Lords Resistance Army in 2004. (KAREL PRINSLOO – AP) The country suffered grave atrocities under the dictatorial regime of Idi Amin in the 1970s. Since the LRA, a violent religious and military group, began operations in Uganda in 1987, it has abducted and forced about 66,000 children in the country to fight with them, according to the World Bank. Nearly 90 percent of the region’s population has been forced to leave their homes. And while the LRA has weakened in recent years, Uganda, with a population of 32 million, continues to suffer from serious human rights problems. A U.S. State Department report in 2010 gave a chilling list of abuses, including arbitrary and vigilante killings, trafficking in persons, sexual abuse of children and the ritual killing of children. It is worth reading the entire list here.
Since BlogPost began covering the Kony 2012 campaign Wednesday, many readers have expressed in e-mails or in the comments that they would like to better know how to help Uganda. Below, we have rounded up a partial list of the many groups doing aid work in the country. Some of these charities have ratings or reviews on Charity Navigator or Great Nonprofits to help you make a choice; others do not. The Web site for Invisible Children is here, or watch their film first below:
Oxfam Uganda
Oxfam, an international oganization that works to fight poverty and injustice, focuses in Uganda on supporting people affected by conflict, lobbying for peace and working to better livelihoods, especially in the north. View its Web site here.
The International Rescue Committee Uganda
The IRC works internationally to help people rebuild after humanitarian crises. In Uganda, where the IRC has been since 1998, the committee works to protect women and children from violence and encourages education, peace and development. It also helps small farmers and businesses. View its Web site here.
BRAC
BRAC says it is the largest NGO operating in Uganda, and has been in the country since 2006. Its focus areas are health and education, women and girl empowerment, and microfinance for the poor. BRAC claims to have reached more than 2 million Ugandans, and says 10,800 students have graduated from its schools, which operate in post-conflict zones in the north. View its Web site here.
The Refugee Law Project (RLP)
The RLP works to ensure human rights for asylum seekers, refugees, and internally displaced persons in Uganda. It offers legal aid as well as counseling, clinical and mental health services. View its Web site here.
Grassroots Reconciliation Group (GRG)
GRG works in northern Uganda to rehabilitate former child soldiers and help reconcile them with their communities. The group says it has assisted 525 former child soldiers and their communities on micro-finance, counseling, and livelihood projects such as agriculture and goat-rearing. View its web site here.
African Youth Initiative Network (AYINET)
AYINET provides physical and psychosocial care and rehabilitation in the Uganda’s war-affected northern region. It specifically works to support victims of brutalities suffered at the hands of the LRA, through medical rehabilitation or the promotion of youth leaders who will work for peace and justice. View its Web site here.
Christian Counseling Fellowship (CCF Pader)
CCF is a community-based organization in Pader, northern Uganda. Its goal is to promote Christian values and provide education, child protection, health care and livelihood opportunities to war-affected women and children.View its Web site here.
Justice and Reconciliation Project (JRP)
JRP, in Gulu, northern Uganda since 2005, works to empower war-affected communities by getting them to participate in the processes of justice, healing and reconciliation, and involving them in research and advocacy. View its Web site here.
Gulu Support the Children Organisation (GUSCO)
GUSCO is an indigenous NGO that works to promote the well-being of conflict-affected children in the north. It provides psycho-social support, capacity building of communities, education, advocacy and peace-building. View its Web site here.
St. Mary’s Lacor Hosptial
The hospital, founded in 1959 by Catholic missionaries, says it provides diagnostic, therapeutic and preventive medicine services for more than 300,000 patients annually, half of whom are children younger than 6. View its Web site here.
Caritas Uganda
Caritas Uganda provides access to food as well as initiatives for democracy-building, gender equality and HIV/AIDS eradication. View its Web site here.
“Taking ‘Kony 2012′ Down A Notch,” Justice in Conflict blog, 7 March 2012
http://justiceinconflict.org/2012/03/07/taking-kony-2012-down-a-notch/
JRP is cited (below: “majority of Acholi people”) in reference to our December situational analysis on amnesty.
By Mark Kersten
As we speak, one of the most pervasive and successful human rights based viral campaigns in recent memory is underway. Invisible Children’s ‘Kony 2012‘ campaign has taken Twitter, Youtube, Facebook and every other mainstream social media refuge by storm. In many ways, it is quite impressive. But there’s one glaring problem: the campaign reflects neither the realities of northern Ugandan nor the attitudes of its people. In this context, this post examines the explicit and implicit claims made by the ‘Kony 2012′ campaign and tests them against the empirical record on the ground.
Before jumping into the fray, however, I should preface the post by noting that, in many ways, Invisible Children have done a fantastic job in advocating for the rights of northern Ugandans, highlighting the conflict and providing tangible benefits to victims and survivors of LRA brutality. Indeed, this post is not intended to take aim at Invisible Children as an organization but rather to debunk some of the myths its ‘Kony 2012′ campaign is propagating.
The Problem is Popularity?
Kony 2012 is about making Joseph Kony, the leader of the notorious LRA, famous because, the line of reasoning goes, if everyone knew him, no one would be able to stand idly by as he waged his brutal campaign of terror against the people of East Africa.
I am actually stupefied that any analysis of the ‘LRA question’ results in the identification of the problem being that “Kony isn’t popular enough”. The reality is that few don’t know who Joseph Kony is in East Africa and the Great Lakes Region, making it all-too-apparent that this isn’t about them, their views or their experiences. But even more puzzling is that Joseph Kony is one of the best known alleged war criminals in the world – including in the United States. This is the case in large part because of the advocacy of Western NGOs, including Invisible Children and the Enough Project as well as the ICC arrest warrants issued against Kony and his senior command.
I would understand if this were the 1990s or even the early 2000s when the misery plaguing northern Uganda flew completely under the radar. I would understand if this campaign was about the ongoing conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo. But a campaign in 2012, premised on Joseph Kony not being famous enough is just folly.
A poster from the ‘Kony 2012’ campaign. (Poster: Invisible Children)
Umm…what about northern Ugandans?
It is hard to respect any documentary on northern Uganda where a five year-old white boy features more prominently than any northern Ugandan victim or survivor. Incredibly, with the exception of the adolescent northern Ugandan victim, Jacob, the voices of northern Ugandans go almost completely unheard.
It isn’t hard to imagine why the views of northern Ugandans wouldn’t be considered: they don’t fit with the narrative produced and reproduced in the insulated echo chamber that produced the ‘Kony 2012′ film.
‘Kony 2012′, quite dubiously, avoids stepping into the ‘peace-justice’ question in northern Uganda precisely because it is a world of contesting and plural views, eloquently expressed by the northern Ugandans themselves. Some reports suggest that the majority of Acholi people continue to support the amnesty process whereby LRA combatants – including senior officials – return to the country in exchange for amnesty and entering a process of ‘traditional justice’. Many continue to support the Ugandan Amnesty law because of the reality that it is their own children who constitute the LRA. Once again, this issue is barely touched upon in the film. Yet the LRA poses a stark dilemma to the people of northern Uganda: it is now composed primarily of child soldiers, most of whom were abducted and forced to join the rebel ranks and commit atrocities. Labeling them “victims” or “perpetrators” becomes particularly problematic as they are often both.
Furthermore, the crisis in northern Uganda is not seen by its citizens as one that is the result of the LRA. Yes, you read that right. The conflict in the region is viewed as one wherein both the Government of Uganda and the LRA, as well as their regional supporters (primarily South Sudan and Khartoum, respectively) have perpetrated and benefited from nearly twenty-five years of systemic and structural violence and displacement. This pattern is what Chris Dolan has eloquently and persuasively termed ‘social torture‘ wherein both the Ugandan Government and the LRA’s treatment of the population has resulted in symptoms of collective torture and the blurring of the perpetrator-victim binary.
Kony and his former second in command, Vincent Otti, with former UN Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, Jan Egeland (Photo: New York Times)
The Solution?
Given Invisible Children’s problematic identification of the issue, it becomes impossible for them to come up with an appropriate vision of resolving the crisis.
Invisible Children is, perhaps rightly, proud that it put the ‘LRA question’ on the Obama administration’s agenda. In this context, last year’s announcement that the administration would send 100 military ‘advisors’ to Uganda was widely celebrated. But this triumphalism occludes key realities.
The sending of 100 troops was not, in any sense, an altruistic move by the administration. First, it went unreported that many of the troops were already in Uganda. Second, the announcement was, at least in part, a tit-for-tat response for the Government of Uganda’s military engagement in Somalia – where the US refuses to deploy troops. As Matt Brown of the Enough Project conceded:
“The U.S. doesn’t have to fight al-Qaida-linked Shabab in Somalia, so we help Uganda take care of their domestic security problems, freeing them up to fight a more dangerous – or a more pressing, perhaps – issue in Somalia.
It is clear that the ‘Kony 2012′ campaign sees the 100 US troop allotment as inadequate. Here they are right – 100 US troops is not the solution. But their own answer is highly problematic.
We know what the makers of “Kony 2012″ believe should happen but they won’t say it explicitly, except to say that Kony must be “stopped”.
Obama’s orders for his 100 troops – presumably supported by those behind ‘Kony 2012′ – is to “kill or capture” Joseph Kony. I don’t think it is a stretch to suggest that many of the same individuals who will form the legion of participants in ‘Kony 2012′ were on the streets celebrating the killing of Osama bin Laden. It thus likely holds that they bought into the belief, proffered by Obama himself, that bin Laden’s killing amounted to justice and if you didn’t agree, you should get your head checked.
The solution then, is something similar: an American-led intervention into at least four countries where the LRA is or has been active (Uganda, the DRC, the Central African Republic and South Sudan) to hunt down Kony. Capturing him, after all, is secondary to “stopping” him.
The idea of “stopping Kony”, of course plays into the narrative created by the ‘Kony 2012′ campaign where what actually happens to Kony and the LRA is irrelevant. The unspecific aim of “stopping” him is sufficient. Who, after all, doesn’t want Kony “stopped”? But then what? If Kony is killed or captured, then what? What happens to the other members of the LRA? ‘Kony 2012′ offers no answers here.
In this context, it is worthwhile remembering that massive regional military solutions (Operations Iron Fist and Lightning Thunder most recently), with support from the US, have thus far failed to dismantle or “stop” the LRA. These failures have created serious and legitimate doubts that the ‘LRA question’ is one that can be resolved by military means.
Incredibly, there is no mention in the film or the campaign that northern Ugandans are currently enjoying the longest period of peace since the conflict began in 1986. Virtually every single northern Ugandan I spoke to during my own field research believes that there is peace in the region. While sporadic violence continues, particularly as a result of bitter land disputes, there have been no LRA attacks in years. In the mid 2000s, the ‘LRA problem’ was exported out of Uganda. The LRA is currently residing in the DRC, CAR, and perhaps parts of South Sudan and even Darfur. Today, land issues and the recent Walk to Work crisis are higher on the agenda than the LRA in northern Uganda.
Lastly, killing Kony cannot resolve the actual sources of the crisis which are far more structural than superficial (to put it lightly) analyses like ‘Kony 2012′ would like to admit. As respected scholars of northern Uganda, Mareike Schomerus, Tim Allen, and Koen Vlassenroot, recently argued,
“Until the underlying problem — the region’s poor governance — is adequately dealt with, there will be no sustainable peace.”
Kony (left) with Otti. (Photo: AFP)
The Need for a Sober Second Thought
In the end, ‘Kony 2012′ falls prey to the obfuscating, simplified and wildly erroneous narrative of a legitimate, terror-fighting, innocent partner of the West (the Government of Uganda) seeking to eliminate a band of lunatic, child-thieving, machine-gun wielding mystics (the LRA). The main beneficiary of this narrative is, once again, the Ugandan Government of Yoweri Museveni, whose legitimacy is bolstered and – if the ‘Kony 2012′ campaign is ‘successful’ – will receive more military funding and support from the US.
Of course, as a viral campaign launched through social media, ‘Kony 2012′ is impressive, if not unprecedented. It will, undoubtedly, mobilize and morph a horde of sincere American youths into proxy war criminal hunters. It will further succeed in increasing the ‘popularity’ of Joseph Kony and the LRA in the United States. But it will do so for many of – if not all – the wrong reasons.
I remember when I was in grade school and a teacher told the students that it was actually difficult to fail. “You have to try to fail,” he said. If ‘Kony 2012′ is to be judged by its reflection of the realities on the ground in northern Uganda and how it measures up against the empirical record, the makers of Kony 2012 tried – and succeeded.
——————————
UPDATE: I’ve now published a response to the main criticisms that this post has inspired. See here: Taking ‘Kony2012′ Down a Notch – Responding to Criticism.
Check out this excellent account by Daniel Solomon over at his blog, Securing Rights.
Also, big thanks to my friend and colleague, Paul Kirby, for his insightful comments on a draft of this post.
From February 20-22, 2012, JRP organized an exchange between victims’ groups from across the greater north. More than 35 representatives from West Nile, Acholi, Lango and Teso attended the Barlonyo memorial prayers and candlelight vigil and a 1-day exchange meeting to share experiences and develop a way forward for victim-led advocacy in northern Uganda.
[AFG_gallery id=’42’]
Note: JRP’s photo from the Kwoyelo trial opening was featured in this post.
“The Kwoyelo Trial: A Final(?) Roundup,” Justice in Conflict, 13 February 2012
http://justiceinconflict.org/2012/02/13/the-kwoyelo-trial-a-final-roundup/
By Patrick Wegner
Last summer Justice in Conflict regularly reported on the trial of former LRA Commander Thomas Kwoyelo. After being arrested by the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in 2009, the Ugandan Department of Public Prosecutions (DPP) decided to charge Kwoyelo with war crimes under the Geneva Conventions and with crimes under national law.
The trial received considerable national and international attention as it was the first case of the newly created International Crimes Division (ICD) of the Ugandan High Court. The ICD had been founded in reaction to questions of accountability that arose during the Juba peace talks between the Government of Uganda (GoU) and the LRA. Meanwhile the Ugandan Parliament has passed the International Criminal Court (ICC) Act, which allows the ICD to prosecute Rome Statute crimes on the domestic level.
In a nutshell, the ICD referred the Kwoyelo case to the Constitutional Court when Kwoyelo’s defence lawyers protested that Kwoyelo had been denied amnesty under the Amnesty Act. In their view, this constituted a violation of equal treatment under the Ugandan Constitution. The Constitutional Court decided in late September 2011 that Kwoyelo should be eligible for amnesty and ordered the ICD to cease the case against him.
Even though the case was stopped, Kwoyelo remained in detention. He then decided to sue the GoU for illegal detention and petitioned the Ugandan High Court for amnesty on 23rd of November 2011. The High Court indeed ruled that Thomas Kwoyelo should be given amnesty and be set free. The Department of Public Prosecutions and the Amnesty Commission are the two competent institutions in this case and decided to meet to consult the Kwoyelo case after the High Court ruling. In early February the Department of Public Prosecutions again denied amnesty to Thomas Kwoyelo, citing that there can be no amnesty for charges of war crimes. Thomas Kwoyelo thus remains imprisoned in Luzira Prison in Kampala to date.
The judges of the ICD in charge of the Kwoyelo case (Justice and Reconciliation Project)
There are several conclusions that can be drawn out of the way the first domestic war crimes trial in Uganda developed. First and foremost, the ongoing back and forth concerning Thomas Kwoyelo’s amnesty again underlines that Uganda is at the crossroads with transitional justice. The actions of the DPP hint at a re-orientation towards more accountability and less amnesty in the future. The DPP has made that clear by repeatedly denying amnesty to Kwoyelo, despite court orders, and by announcing that it has prepared additional cases against former LRA rebels that it will pursue should Kwoyelo be found guilty. As far as I am aware there is no explicit government position on how amnesty and prosecution should relate to each other in the future, and the lack of clarity might well spark fears and unrest among LRA returnees as I have described in a piece last summer.
Secondly, the first case of the ICD has arguably also shown that demands for more positive complementarity, meaning more domestic trials, in ICC cases should be voiced more carefully. Creating institutions that are legally able to try ICC cases in the situation countries is an important goal. I have frequently argued for more positive complementarity at the ICC myself.
Yet just creating these institutions is not enough. One has to ensure that appropriate laws are in place and that the court is qualified to deal with international war crimes cases. There are several examples of how things went wrong in this context at the ICD. In general the GoU was seemingly in a hurry to demonstrate that the ICD was up and running by presenting a first case and preferably a conviction. Some sources have accused the GoU of presenting the ICD with a pre-determined budget and timeline for a ruling in the Kwoyelo case.
Thomas Kwoyelo before the ICD in Gulu
It is important to acknowledge that the ICD is doing something that has never been done anywhere else in Africa. Creating a High Court Division competent of ruling on Rome Statute Crimes is a novel development. The judges include well qualified experts with experience in international criminal law and most of them have attended best-practice training at the ICC in The Hague according to the ICD Registry.
Despite the ICD Project being generally commendable, there are some other problems that emerged from the rushed effort to try a first case at the ICD as quickly as possible. The case before the ICD showed that witness protection laws in Uganda are inadequate. The judges are only able to order ad-hoc measures to protect witnesses if there are clear signs for danger. The Justice Law and Order Sector (JLOS) of the Ugandan Government is working on laws to alleviate this problem, but results are not expected before mid-2012.
Last, but not least, the ICD is so far working with guiding principles instead of full rules of procedure. The guiding principles are open for best practice approaches from other cases of international criminal law, which makes them highly flexible. Yet, a lack of full rules of procedures may lead to problems of fair trial or delays in some cases. All in all the Kwoyelo trial has proven that the ICD is a politically independent institution that is to be taken seriously. Still, it has also shown the remaining weaknesses in the systems and has highlighted the danger of cases becoming politicized. The fact that Kwoyelo is still in jail despite numerous court rulings seems to be an indicator that the DPP was trying to make a political point by indicting Kwoyelo.
Community Theatre for Justice and Reconciliation, Soul Beat Africa, 27 Jan 2012
http://www.comminit.com/edutain-africa/content/theatre-justice-and-reconciliation
As part of community mobilisation activities, the Justice and Reconciliation Project (JRP) is using community theatre performances as a tool for survivors of the Ugandan conflict to advocate for issues affecting them. The dramas are created by community members, and videos made of the performances to highlight key issues.
Communication Strategies:
The pilot community theatre programme was implemented through JRP’s Community Mobilisation department. The mobilisation department works to engage communities in identifying what needs to be done to promote justice and reconciliation. This includes providing information and updates on transitional justice processes and building capacity and opportunities for victims’ involvement in such processes.
JRP has used community theatre in various communities. For example, on September 16 2011, JRP facilitated survivors and families of those killed in Uganda’s 1989 Mukura massacre to hold a community performance on transitional justice issues. The performance was part of JRP’s ongoing engagement with the Mukura Memorial Development Initiative (MUMEDI) and the Kumi Network of Development Organizations (KUNEDO) and was designed to generate discussion among the community on how to best seek justice and reconciliation after the conflict in the area. The drama’s script and theme was entirely drafted by the actors (see video below). The video shows how the drama highlights key scenes and recommendations by survivors of the 1989 Mukura massacre. In the performance, they call for traditional reconciliation with the President of Uganda.
In another community on September 21, JRP and the MAYANK Development Association organised celebrations for the annual International Day of Peace 2011 in Yumbe district, West Nile sub-region. Survivors of the UNRF II conflict presented a drama that highlighted the cause and rise of the UNRF II and the resolution of the conflict through the Yumbe Peace Accord in 2002. Other similar performances have been facilitated in Lukodi and Abia.
Development Issues: Post Conflict, Peace
Key Points:
Established in 2005, The Justice and Reconciliation Project (JRP) in Gulu, northern Uganda, works for transitional justice in Uganda by seeking to understand and explain the interests, needs, concerns, and views of communities affected by conflict. JRP promotes sustainable peace through the active involvement of war-affected communities in research and advocacy.