Tongan parliament blatantly ignores women's rights

Congratulations Tonga for not ratifying CEDAW - Tu‘akikofe ki Moana: I wish to congratulate the Tonga Legislative Assembly for its socially and culturally pro Tongan decision not to allow Tonga and its culture to rule over by a Western based United Nation Document like CEDAW. Those who are promoting CEDAW e.g. TNCWC, must do so in its entirety. This means that such organization support homosexual marriage; abortion; and animal rights. All these of course cut across the fundamental values of Tongan society that have existed for generation. It’s about time Tonga re-examine its ratification of Western based UN initiatives that slowly undermines the very foundation of minority society of which Tonga is one. So thank you and God speed for such reforms. - Tau‘akikofe ki Moana

CEDAW stands for social justice - Siosiua Lafitani Tofua‘ipangai: Hobbes and Machiavelli were two of the Western Renaissance thinkers to remind us, that, all governments are naturally prone to participate in countless activities of ‘corruption’ (i.e. violation and destruction of a system), especially if there are no opposed social movements outside from the Parliament and Executive Bodies, as in the case of Judiciary within, to encounter them with the ‘check-balance principles’.For Hobbes, ‘it is by nature human follies to act in the manner of corruption’, and ‘cunning is a common behavior of political leaders’, according to Machiavelli. Hence, the issue of ‘human rights’, in its various images, as in the case of the Bill of Rights and CEDAW, is fundamentally relevant and crucial for the check and balance of all evils in politics, which is normally culminated upon ‘power in corruption’. It is a kind of social insecurity and political immaturity not to ‘sign’ in human rights documents such as CEDAW, but some may argue that it’s mainly because of its ‘individualistic tendencies’ and ‘cultural opposition’, as being argued by the Prime Minister. For him, due to the individualism and cultural opposition of CEDAW, it’s therefore ‘very dangerous’ for the whole nation and its traditional culture. To make it easier to corrupt any political system the behaviors of ‘egoism’ and ‘cultural destruction’ must be upheld by political leaders, rather than individualism and cultural opposition. Both former are the evil extremity of the latter anyway.

The implication of what I’m trying to unfold, it’s not the whole nation that feel the danger, individualistic tendencies and cultural opposition of CEDAW, rather it’s the politicians themselves with their egoistic and culturally destructive motives. Democracy and capitalism are already built upon individualism, which is opposed to the communal spirit of our traditional Tongan cultures anyway. It’s threatening to their power in corruption, a hindrance for their decisions at any point in time to corrupt the system. Some human rights Acts in CEDAW can challenge such decisions together with other movements, sharing the same focus and way of dealing with human shortcomings. This is not unique to Tonga per se, but it’s a global matter, be it democratic in law order or not. Political leaders always feel threaten and uncomfortable to include any form of socio-political movement that may obtain the universal power to publically question and challenge their power in corruption, especially in a situation whereby almost all political parties in the House agree to corrupt the system with the confusing label of ‘parliamentary democracy’ …– Westminster and Federal Systems. A good illustration of this issue is the ‘spiral increase’ in wages of the Tongan Parliamentarians by themselves last year, and their attempts in 2006, which finally ignited the light for the riot, to ‘intercept’ the progress of the Report by the National Commission for Political Reforms, and again currently when the government Ministers have repeatedly intercepted the progress of the Electoral Commission’s Report together with the 70 Submissions from the public. I do believe the Attorney General should do the same thing to these Ministers as he did to the Parliamentary Commission for Ashika, if all Commissions are bound and obliged to the same ‘rule of law’.

Where’re the voices of the Human Rights and Democracy Movement Tonga (HRMT) and the People’s Representatives then? I’m not surprised if they did join force with the Prime Minister and his followers in raising their hands up high to kick out the CEDAW from the House, because it’s evil for their power in corruption altogether. Domestic violence against women and children, even murdering them like animals, is getting worst and it won’t get better, and this is also due to our political leaders’ decision to recruit in the movement of ‘domestic beaters’ and ‘harassers’, in the sense of their consensus vote and agreement in the House to throw out CEDAW into the ocean of no hope. The National Center for Women and Children (NCWC) might need to investigate whether our Parliamentarians are in the forefronts of these beaters and harassers. CEDAW is not dealing with just human rights of women and children but ‘social justice’ generally as well, which is an issue that churches should be in the forefront of calling and lobbying for its acceptance. Social justice is a very important part of Christianity, and Catholicism in particular. I’m not surprised, to see our leaders trying to portray a false picture that CEDAW is going to overhaul and destroy the structure of our culture and land tenure system. It’s not the CEDAW but it’s going to be the government and Parliamentarians with their several attempts to turn up-side-down the whole fabric of our constitutional and political system within two years, an act of great frustrations. Our land tenure system will be definitely affected, as a result of this total reshuffle and corruption. This is a real corruption. Importantly, we should differentiate ‘Fahu-‘Ulumotu’a’ system with its cultural basis, deriving from ‘Sister-Brother’ relationship, from the ‘Husband-Wife’ relationship. Fahu-‘Ulumotu’a taboos are specific orientated and not universal, except in the situation of the Royal House. For example, only Princess Mafile’o Pilolevu Tuita can be alluded to by tradition as the Fahu for the whole of Tonga. The rest of the females are only Fahu of their individual kinships or Ha’a (lineages), and no wives are Fahu to their husbands, there is no Fahu in the workforce, education, politics, immediate family, etc., but only in kainga and Ha’a systems. A brother respects his sisters because of the Fahu-‘Ulumotu’a taboos but not in Husband-Wife principles, and that’s why wives at home are treated like animals by their husbands. CEDAW won’t overhaul the whole culture of the Kingdom and its land tenure system, but it will help to minimize the increasing rate of mistreating, harassing and murdering of women and children in the Kingdom. Signing CEDAW doesn’t mean that we must follow all Acts by coercion and force, but it’s an encouragement of the universal spirits of ‘publicity of opposition’ and ‘inclusiveness’, as well as, an embodiment of our nationally clear-cut support for the minimization of domestic violence against women and children. Australian and American governments have signed CEDAW, but haven’t fully committed to follow all its 30 Acts. At the end of the day, it’s all up to individual governments to change and amend existing Acts in their Constitutions. - Siosiua Lafitani Tofua‘ipangai

CEDAW: The 'whys' and 'hows' of gender equality - ‘Amelia Kinahoi: As you are aware of, currently there are 185 countries (over ninety percent of the members of the United Nations) are party to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). The USA signed CEDAW on 17 July 1980 but yet to ratify. Tonga has yet to sign nor ratify CEDAW. CEDAW is the main instrument for gender equality. Gender mainstreaming, the main strategy recommended by the Beijing Platform of Action that was endorsed by the UN member states in the 1995 Fourth World Conference on Women, has to be consistently linked to the goals of gender equality and equity embodied in CEDAW. Most development practitioners and women’s rights advocates understand the purpose of CEDAW being to modify the social and cultural patterns of men and women, with a view to achieving the elimination of prejudices and customs and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women. It is well known that nations may sign the convention and any nation may request a revision, which would be voted upon by the United Nations General Assembly. Any of the countries may make a “reservation,” meaning that the state will not accept certain articles at the time of ratification. It is also a known fact that the CEDAW Committee has no means of directly forcing a nation to comply with its suggestions or recommendations. CEDAW widely promotes that women shall have “the same right to enter into marriage” as men but does not address the definition of marriage. There is no mention in CEDAW of homosexuality, gay, or lesbian issues. Female sexuality isn’t addressed, although female health concerns are. CEDAW urges nations/states to ensure “on abasis of equality of men and women, access to health care services, including those related to family planning. The fine details of operation alising or implementing of CEDAW is entirely at the discretion of the nation.

I think it is fair to say that Tongans are not fully aware of CEDAW and that vigorous communication and education measures should be undertaken for girls and women, and boys and men on the “whys” and “hows” of the overarching goal of gender equality (what CEDAW is all about) so that every girl and woman will understand and appreciate gender equality, internalize these rights and claim their rights, and every boy and man will also understand women’s equal rights, promote and protect these rights. However, that should not be one of the determining factors for not signing on to an instrument that will promote and bring social justice to the people. I believe we can maintain our “Tonganess” with CEDAW. CEDAW is about gender equality and social justice. On the other hand, do we as Tongans sometimes or too often romanticize about our past cultures and traditions? As we know, culture is a double-edged sword! It can be used to strike a blow for empowerment, or to keep down somebody who wants to be different. While we experience the tides changing, we continue to witness and experience that as we juxtapose the words “women” and “power”, men fear this! The fear of sharing the power that they have become accustomed to and enjoyed over history! I hope to see that the “hope of CEDAW being ratified” will be a comeback for Tonga sooner rather than later. - ‘Amelia Kinahoi

Tonga not ready for CEDAW - Lopeti Senituli: The Tonga National Centre for Women and Children has claimed in a media statement entitled, …“Tongan Parliament Blatantly Ignores Women’s Rights”, (Matangitonga 19 Sept 09) that a report published by the Pacific Regional Rights Resource Team compared existing Tongan legislation to the implications of signing CEDAW and found that, Tonga'’s legislation complies with the provisions of CEDAW, but there are certain aspects of Tonga's legislation that are yet to be brought in line with the Convention. That quote is mischievous and misleading. Although it is true that Tonga's existing legislations comply with the provisions of CEDAW, TNCWC should have informed the public that the RRRT Report they quoted also states that, "“In due time, Tonga would have to change the laws regarding the wife's interest in her husband's land which not only regulates the woman's sexuality but discriminates against women and is inconsistent with Article 16 of CEDAWs. That is the bottom line for all States ratifying CEDAW. On ratification, each State Party is making a solemn commitment to remove all constitutional, legislative, legal, customary, cultural, traditional, political, economic, social, and all forms of discrimination against women. That is a commitment that the Legislative Assembly and the Government of Tonga are not yet ready to make. That does not mean that they do not support women's human rights. Far from it! The amendment of the Nationality Act in 2007 to allow Tongan women who marry non-Tongan citizens, and their children, to retain their Tongan nationality attests to the fact that the Legislative Assembly and the Government supports womens rights and are doing something about it, even though Tonga has not ratified CEDAW.

The Legislative Assembly's decision not to ratify CEDAW last week is based on the fact that it wants to: reserve the right not to apply provisions of Article 2 of CEDAW to the succession to the Throne, Nobility and hereditary titles, and its land laws and to; reserve the right not to apply provisions of Articles 12 and 16 on family health and marital customs relating to access to health care services including family planning, choice of spouse, spacing of children, and the ownership and disposition of family property. If the Legislative Assembly had voted to ratify CEDAW, Tonga, in accordance with Article 2(f), would be required to amend Clause 32 of its Constitution, which specifies that succession to the Throne shall be to the eldest male child and the heirs of his body to allow the female child to ascend to the Throne if she is the eldest. The same amendment would have to be made to Clause 111 of the Constitution which also specifies that the succession to hereditary estates and titles shall also be through the eldest male child and the heirs of his body. Tonga would also be required to make the same amendment to Section 82 of its Land Act (C AP 132) which deals with succession to tax and town allotments, which presently specifies that inheritance shall descend in the first place to the eldest son of the deceased holder.

If the Legislative Assembly had voted to ratify CEDAW, Tonga in accordance with Article 16(h), would also be required to amend Clause 111 of the Constitution and Section 82 and other sections of the Land Act to allow hereditary estates and tax and town allotments to be carved up between spouses on the occasion of a divorce, resulting in the overthrow of our unique land tenure system. Under Article 16(b) Tonga would also be required to ensure women, on the basis of equality, the same right freely to choose a spouse, and under Articles 12(1) and Article 16(e) the same right to decide on family planning and the number and spacing of their children. Concern was expressed in the Legislative Assembly, and internationally, that these three sub-articles are open to interpretation as allowing same sex marriage and abortion, both of which are abhorrent to the Tongan people. There have been suggestions that Tonga could have gone ahead and ratified CEDAW with reservations. Unfortunately the key Articles on which Tonga has reservations, viz Article 2 and Article 16, have been held by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women as central to the object and purpose of CEDAW, and therefore any reservations on them are “impermissible” under Article 28(2) which states very clearly that any reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the present Convention shall not be permitted

The Legislative Assembly and Government are looking after the interests of Tonga as a sovereign nation with a unique culture and way of life, the basic components of which should be maintained. That is why they have made the wide decision not to ratify CEDAW. Faka‘apa‘apa atu. - Lopeti Senituli

The UN forces CEDAW on supporters - Tevita Langi: I am glad our Parliament for once did something right by ignoring the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). I do believe Tongan women have all the rights as anyone else in the world. I support Tonga’s position because CEDAW is not necessary in Tonga. Among the reasons for my support of Parliament in this issue include the established culture we have practiced for centuries; non-binding, window dressing, feeling good suggestions from a politically motivated group; and do not try to fix something that is not broken. Fear of strong women, whatever that means, is not one of them. Tongans respectful treatment of women has been known worldwide before most of the countries in the United Nations, Ms. Kinahoi pointed out, came to existence. For example, in 1860, the British government sent Dr. Berthold C. Seemann, as one its leading delegates to Fiji in determining their status to be a colony. In describing the Tongan women of the time, he wrote, “Whilst in Tonga, the women have been treated from time immemorial with all the consideration demanded by their weaker and more delicate constitution, not being allowed to perform any hard work.” We are not male chauvinists, but people who love and respect their women from the beginning of time. To this day, it is still the practice of our culture while the rest of the world is in cultural chaos.

In comparison to England, Tonga is paradise. A year ago, September 2008, the British government officially adopted the ISLAMIC law with Sharia courts given powers to rule on Muslim civil cases. This was driven by its Arbitration Act of 1996. Sharia law takes away women’s rights to self determination and act independently. While the world screams for more rights for women, the country where the Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights were founded, and where renowned institutions of higher learning such as Oxford and Cambridge Universities are located, is silently squeezing the life out of women…’s right. When the Shariah law is practiced, women lose most of their rights to be individuals. Yes, this is the case for Muslim women in Britain and they signed up for CEDAW. Australia is struggling with CEDAW as well. The treaty addresses a few women rights, but there is nothing there to benefit Tongan women. Signing up to be part of the group will have consequences far beyond what we would have agreed to. In a nutshell, there are two major problems with CEDAW …– the content of the treaty and its implementation: CEDAW’s content is contemporary colonialism; it exports …–forces down the throats of signee nations …– its Neo-Marxist agenda. CEDAW’s implementation is through judicial imperialism; a committee of 23 UN-Appointed women determines whether a nation is in compliance with the treaty …– including whether the laws of the country align with the treaty. What the United Nations hasn…’t been able to accomplish through democratic processes, they hope to force by judicial fiat. Sadly, the proponents and those who are in favor of CEDAW are demonizing people like me as women haters to promote their agenda. FYI, I love women.

In summary, while women elites may find my position repulsive, we might as well use the acronym CEDAW as C - Cultural Colonialism; E - Egregious Enforcement; D - Dangerous Demands; A - Abortion and the Homosexual Agenda and W - Wants of the Elites vs. the Needs of the Needy. Before we blame our government for its wise decision, a closer “akonaki’i ‘o e fanau ke nau mohe ofi” is the Tongan solution for Tonga. Respect of others is taught and starts at home. By the way, what rights have we denied our women? We need to fix that. - TamaFoa