Indian activists from the Social Unity Center of India shout slogans against the state government in protest against the gang-rape and murder of two girls in the district of Badaun. Photograph: Getty Images.
Show Hide image

We need to do go much further to end sexual violence in conflict

This week's summit must not be the culmination of the government's efforts.

This week, London will host the Global Summit to End Sexual Violence in Conflict. It is to be co-chaired by the Foreign Secretary, William Hague, and by Angelina Jolie in her capacity as Special Envoy for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees.

Angelina Jolie has an impressive record when it comes to her humanitarian work and raising the profile of difficult issues that could not be further removed from the glitz and glamour of Hollywood. William Hague has also played a key role in bringing this conference to London. He hasn't always received the credit he deserves from some in his own party on this issue, but he will receive Labour's support for his efforts to put sexual violence on the international agenda.

Representatives from across the globe will come to London to agree action to tackle the use of rape as a weapon of war, to end impunity for those who resort to sexual violence with no thought for the victims and no fear of reprisals, and to help the survivors of such an abhorrent, cowardly act.

I hope it proves a landmark success - we only need to look at the brutal reports of the conflict in the Central African Republic, where conflict-related sexual violence is described as epidemic, to know that the stakes could not be higher. There are countless other countries struggling with the legacy of sexual violence in conflict, or failing to end its systematic use today.

In Colombia, six women every hour were the victims of sexual violence and an estimated 12,809 women were the victims of conflict-associated rape between 2000 and 2009; few will have received support, let alone seen justice. In Burma, there are terrifying reports of the military's use of sexual violence, particularly against ethnic minority women and girls; the victims are often killed, while the perpetrators can carry on with impunity. In Somalia, sexual violence is pervasive, particularly in the camps for those who have lost their homes, but they do not have the medical services or justice systems to support survivors or secure justice and protection. According to UNICEF, one third of the victims of sexual violence in Somalia are children.

War Child reports that one in three men fleeing the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo have suffered sexual violence, while sexual violence has also been used against men, women and children in the Syrian conflict. Tragically, the list goes on of conflicts in which bodies have been taken as a prize and people have been violated as a means of warfare. So we cannot underestimate the importance of this summit for those still living in terror, or living with the scars of vicious attacks.

I hope, too, that this international focus on sexual violence in conflict can provide a springboard for a more concerted focus on sexual violence in other contexts and on other abhorrent acts of cruelty being committed against women across the globe.

Over the last month alone we have been appalled by the case of Meriam Ibrahim who was sentenced to 100 lashes for adultery and sentenced to death by hanging for apostasy because she had married a Christian man and refused to recant her Christian faith. She gave birth in prison, where she is being held with her 20 month son. Meriam, her husband and now the whole world are waiting for the outcome of her appeal; waiting for a court to agree she can fall in love with whoever she wants and is free to choose her own religion.

We have been horrified, too, by the public stoning of a pregnant woman in Pakistan. Farzana Parveen was killed by her family outside Lahore High Court because she had married against their wishes. The viciousness of the attack, and in such a public place, has rightly attracted the world's attention, but Farzana's murder should highlight wider problems in Pakistan, where there are hundreds of "honour" killings every year.

And then we have the two teenagers in India, whose bodies were found hanging from a tree after they had been gang-raped. Sexual violence is an increasing concern in India, but Indian citizens protesting about the shocking prevalence of such a heinous crime were confronted by a water cannon.

These are just three high profile examples from the last few weeks. There have been many, many more whose plight we will never hear about, just as there are so many thousands who are silently recovering from sexual attacks inflicted during conflicts that have devastated their countries.

In too many countries women are living in fear of horrific acts of gender-related violence, and facing cruel and inhumane punishments for "transgressions" that we would consider basic rights. So I hope that this week's summit is not the culmination of the UK government's efforts, and they will have Labour's support in their work going forward. We must make it clear that such abuses cannot be tolerated, just as the survivors need to know that they are not alone.

Kerry McCarthy is the Labour MP for Bristol East and the shadow foreign minister.

Getty
Show Hide image

David Osland: “Corbyn is actually Labour’s only chance”

The veteran Labour activist on the release of his new pamphlet, How to Select or Reselect Your MP, which lays out the current Labour party rules for reselecting an MP.

Veteran left-wing Labour activist David Osland, a member of the national committee of the Labour Representation Committee and a former news editor of left magazine Tribune, has written a pamphlet intended for Labour members, explaining how the process of selecting Labour MPs works.

Published by Spokesman Books next week (advance copies are available at Nottingham’s Five Leaves bookshop), the short guide, entitled “How to Select or Reselect Your MP”, is entertaining and well-written, and its introduction, which goes into reasoning for selecting a new MP and some strategy, as well as its historical appendix, make it interesting reading even for those who are not members of the Labour party. Although I am a constituency Labour party secretary (writing here in an expressly personal capacity), I am still learning the Party’s complex rulebook; I passed this new guide to a local rules-boffin member, who is an avowed Owen Smith supporter, to evaluate whether its description of procedures is accurate. “It’s actually quite a useful pamphlet,” he said, although he had a few minor quibbles.

Osland, who calls himself a “strong, but not uncritical” Corbyn supporter, carefully admonishes readers not to embark on a campaign of mass deselections, but to get involved and active in their local branches, and to think carefully about Labour’s election fortunes; safe seats might be better candidates for a reselection campaign than Labour marginals. After a weak performance by Owen Smith in last night’s Glasgow debate and a call for Jeremy Corbyn to toughen up against opponents by ex Norwich MP Ian Gibson, an old ally, this pamphlet – named after a 1981 work by ex-Tribune editor Chris Mullin, who would later go on to be a junior minister under Blai – seems incredibly timely.

I spoke to Osland on the telephone yesterday.

Why did you decide to put this pamphlet together now?

I think it’s certainly an idea that’s circulating in the Labour left, after the experience with Corbyn as leader, and the reaction of the right. It’s a debate that people have hinted at; people like Rhea Wolfson have said that we need to be having a conversation about it, and I’d like to kickstart that conversation here.

For me personally it’s been a lifelong fascination – I was politically formed in the early Eighties, when mandatory reselection was Bennite orthodoxy and I’ve never personally altered my belief in that. I accept that the situation has changed, so what the Labour left is calling for at the moment, so I see this as a sensible contribution to the debate.

I wonder why selection and reselection are such an important focus? One could ask, isn’t it better to meet with sitting MPs and see if one can persuade them?

I’m not calling for the “deselect this person, deselect that person” rhetoric that you sometimes see on Twitter; you shouldn’t deselect an MP purely because they disagree with Corbyn, in a fair-minded way, but it’s fair to ask what are guys who are found to be be beating their wives or crossing picket lines doing sitting as our MPs? Where Labour MPs publicly have threatened to leave the party, as some have been doing, perhaps they don’t value their Labour involvement.

So to you it’s very much not a broad tool, but a tool to be used a specific way, such as when an MP has engaged in misconduct?

I think you do have to take it case by case. It would be silly to deselect the lot, as some people argue.

In terms of bringing the party to the left, or reforming party democracy, what role do you think reselection plays?

It’s a basic matter of accountability, isn’t it? People are standing as Labour candidates – they should have the confidence and backing of their constituency parties.

Do you think what it means to be a Labour member has changed since Corbyn?

Of course the Labour party has changed in the past year, as anyone who was around in the Blair, Brown, Miliband era will tell you. It’s a completely transformed party.

Will there be a strong reaction to the release of this pamphlet from Corbyn’s opponents?

Because the main aim is to set out the rules as they stand, I don’t see how there can be – if you want to use the rules, this is how to go about it. I explicitly spelled out that it’s a level playing field – if your Corbyn supporting MP doesn’t meet the expectations of the constituency party, then she or he is just as subject to a challenge.

What do you think of the new spate of suspensions and exclusions of some people who have just joined the party, and of other people, including Ronnie Draper, the General Secretary of the Bakers’ Union, who have been around for many years?

It’s clear that the Labour party machinery is playing hardball in this election, right from the start, with the freeze date and in the way they set up the registered supporters scheme, with the £25 buy in – they’re doing everything they can to influence this election unfairly. Whether they will succeed is an open question – they will if they can get away with it.

I’ve been seeing comments on social media from people who seem quite disheartened on the Corbyn side, who feel that there’s a chance that Smith might win through a war of attrition.

Looks like a Corbyn win to me, but the gerrymandering is so extensive that a Smith win isn’t ruled out.

You’ve been in the party for quite a few years, do you think there are echoes of past events, like the push for Bennite candidates and the takeover from Foot by Kinnock?

I was around last time – it was dirty and nasty at times. Despite the narrative being put out by the Labour right that it was all about Militant bully boys and intimidation by the left, my experience as a young Bennite in Tower Hamlets Labour Party, a very old traditional right wing Labour party, the intimidation was going the other way. It was an ugly time – physical threats, people shaping up to each other at meetings. It was nasty. Its nasty in a different way now, in a social media way. Can you compare the two? Some foul things happened in that time – perhaps worse in terms of physical intimidation – but you didn’t have the social media.

There are people who say the Labour Party is poised for a split – here in Plymouth (where we don’t have a Labour MP), I’m seeing comments from both sides that emphasise that after this leadership election we need to unite to fight the Tories. What do you think will happen?

I really hope a split can be avoided, but we’re a long way down the road towards a split. The sheer extent of the bad blood – the fact that the right have been openly talking about it – a number of newspaper articles about them lining up backing from wealthy donors, operating separately as a parliamentary group, then they pretend that butter wouldn’t melt in their mouths, and that they’re not talking about a split. Of course they are. Can we stop the kamikazes from doing what they’re plotting to do? I don’t know, I hope so.

How would we stop them?

We can’t, can we? If they have the financial backing, if they lose this leadership contest, there’s no doubt that some will try. I’m old enough to remember the launch of the SDP, let’s not rule it out happening again.

We’ve talked mostly about the membership. But is Corbynism a strategy to win elections?

With the new electoral registration rules already introduced, the coming boundary changes, and the loss of Scotland thanks to decades of New Labour neglect, it will be uphill struggle for Labour to win in 2020 or whenever the next election is, under any leadership.

I still think Corbyn is Labour’s best chance. Any form of continuity leadership from the past would see the Midlands and north fall to Ukip in the same way Scotland fell to the SNP. Corbyn is actually Labour’s only chance.

Margaret Corvid is a writer, activist and professional dominatrix living in the south west.