,

Shakespeare in Paradise

We all want and need to see ourselves. No matter how different we are, how unique our circumstances, it is important to know that there are other people have similar experiences, facing similar struggles, failing in the same ways, and trying to find the light at the end of the tunnel. Sometimes we find this when we, or others, are bold enough to share stories, ideas, and work in progress. Many of us are deeply private, have been convinced whatever goes wrong for us are signs of personal failings, and rely heavily on ourselves to save ourselves, so we talk very little about challenges we face, and try to show only the highlight reels. This means that, in many cases, the only time we really see ourselves, and that the difficulties we encounter are not just are own, it is in the arts. Movies, television shows, plays, and music, remind us that the human condition, and human suffering, are not so different that they cannot be shared with others.

 

In The Bahamas, we spend a substantial amount of time and energy trying to convince one another that we live in paradise. More specifically, we try to make one another believe that we have access to the paradise we work our fingers to the bone to create for other people, particularly through the tourism industry and acting as extensions of it for our survival. Every now and then, someone uses art to capture a true, true Bahamian moment or phenomenon and, no matter how saddening or embarrassing, the loudness of the truth brings us joy. 

 

Yes, that is a real thing that happens! Yes, that was a ruinous act! Yes, that was a spectacular failure! Yes, that is exactly how things do not work around here! 

 

Yes, that is just the kind of attitude those people give us every time. Yes, that is how many times we have to call before anyone ever calls back. Yes, that is how much more money that necessity costs than what any of us can afford. Yes, that is how mad we get when those people tell us the same nonsense over and over again, expecting us to believe it. Yes! Truth! Facts! Preach!

 

As angry as people in New Providence were about the road works at the time, hearing “da road dem dig up dig up,” tickled us greatly. We sang along, able to find the humor in a months long saga that made the drive from anywhere to anywhere else much too long and frustrating as detours seemed to send us all around the earth. It was a shared experienced. We could rant about it at work, at family gatherings, and on the phone with friends, but the song was different. It pointed out the absurdity of the experience and the inconvenience to all, and it made us laugh at it. It eclipsed our frustration. It plainly stated the truth, so we all felt seen and together in the maze, yet made it possible to see it as a moment in time would always be remembered by those of us who experienced it, and with something other than anger. 

 

Bahamian plays do something like this for us all the time. They, through very specific events, create portals that take us to our own experiences. We are watching the scene unfold while recalling our own stories, knowing almost exactly what will happen next, but not knowing exactly how. It is in these moments, in theaters, laughing alongside other Bahamians and residents of The Bahamas, that we see the universality of this life. It is then that we feel a connection to, a kinship with, other Bahamian people. We have this in common. This dysfunction, this feeling of being stuck, this knowing that we could be better, and we could be more. This incredulity about our circumstances, this appreciation for the creative people who put our realities on the page, to music, and on the stage. We are together in our knowing, in our wishing, and in our perceived inability to, as individuals, make any of it different. 

 

On Monday night, I went to the opening of Short Tales which is easily my favorite part of the Shakespeare in Paradise festival. Early in the year, there is a call for 10-minute plays by new writers. The selections are made, and the audience at Shakespeare in Paradise is treated to ten new plays. These plays are funny, gut-wrenching, and thought-provoking. They are set in places we all know well, from livings rooms to funeral homes. This year, the ten writers include Imani Ashari, Patrice Francis, Deon Simms, and S.A. Hanna. One play teleported a young Black man to a kitchen in the 1700s. Imagine what happened there. Another gave a lesson on five women in the Bahamian Women’s Suffrage movement. My personal favorite of the night gave a glimpse into the inner (not) workings of the government system. Whether you want to be doubled over in laughter or have something to think about for days to come, there are a few short plays in the mix for you. 

 

Ten minutes is not a long time, but buy a ticket to Short Tales and see what the writers, directors, and actors do with theirs. You can see Short Tales on Friday at 8pm, or next week Tuesday, Thursday, or Saturday at 8pm.

 

This year, the Shakespeare play is Hamlet 50/50—Hamlet with a twist. The cast includes T-Day, Julian Reid, Patrice Francis, Joanna Hepburn, and Chigozie Ijeoma. Get your tickets for tomorrow at 8pm, or Saturday, next week Monday, Wednesday, or Friday at 8pm. Visit shakespeareinparadise.org for the full schedule and online purchases.

 

Shakespeare in Paradise is now in its 16th year, with its theater home at The Dundas Center for the Performing Arts in need of financial support. Since the need to replace the air conditioning in the Winston V. Saunders Theatre, the larger theater space at The Dundas, arose in 2020, that space has been closed. The Black Box, which seats 70 people, has become the temporary space for all productions. It does not generate enough revenue to cover the expenses, so yes, buy tickets, and buy festival shirts and make donations if you are able to do so.  

 

The Dundas needs us to survive and, in many ways, we need The Dundas to survive. It is where we go to see ourselves. It is where creative writers take their work and hold up the mirror so we can see ourselves. The stage is a place to lay the truth and dare anyone to refute it. It Is the place to provoke action. It is the place to generate emotion. It is a place we need, and an experience we love. Nothing we love can stand without a foundation to support it.

/0 Comments/by

The toll Nassau’s traffic takes on us

After crossing over from Village Road to Soldier Road, in the left lane, the driver to the right of me cut across me to turn into the drive-through of one of the fast food restaurants on the corner. Luckily, I anticipated that the person would do something foolish, so I drove with an abundance of caution so I did not end up in an accident. On the same day, I was the second car in the left lane on Bernard Road, waiting to turn onto Soldier Road when a driver went up the middle lane and turned left in front of the cars in my lane that were correctly waiting for a green light.

I learned to drive in an environment where everyone seemed to drive with aggression. People did not wait to be let of our corner. They, instead, inched their cars out of corners, eventually forcing someone to stop because they blocked the road enough to warrant the use of brakes. They may have received a free curse-out too. The pushing out of corners remains the same, but the other cars come fast and furious, in the true sense of the phrase. Some of them cannot stop fast enough. Some of them refuse to use their brakes, daring the person inching their way out of the corner to keep doing it. The person trying to come out of the corner may decide that they would like to force the driver with the right of way, whether or not they are speeding, to test their brakes, so they keep pushing. Maybe they caause it, maybe they are hit with high impact by the speeding car. It is a foolish game, and more people seem to be playing it than not.

My friend and fellow advocate Erin Greene raises the issue of traffic on a daily basis, sharing anecdotes of the dangerous driving she witnesses and near-misses she experiences. It does not even take ten minutes of being on the road before one encounters a person who has decided that their rush to get where they are going or their adrenaline rush from doing nonsense is more important than people’s lives, often including their own. This, as Erin Greene regularly points out, is a metaphor for the social environment we are constantly creating for ourselves.

People get into the driver’s seat and feel a sense of power that they do not feel when they are not controlling a motorised vehicle. They are able to engage with other drivers in a way that is far from socially acceptable in any other circumstance. The car becomes a weapon and the aggressive use of the car is a threat that it will be used against anyone in its path. Many drivers become bullies. While most drivers would mutter to themselves or the people in their cars with them, people now put their windows down to verbally assault other drivers and, in some cases, pedestrians. Some put their cars in park, jump out, and (try to) start physical fights in the road.

Not being let out of a corner is seen as disrespect. Not being able to stop a driver from getting out of a corner somehow deflates the ego. Getting into a parking space before another driver, who was obviously waiting for the space, is a triumph. Carelessly overtaking the vehicle ahead, causing the driver of an oncoming vehicle to swerve out of the way, is fun. Driving while drunk, endangering everyone on the road, is brag-worthy. Blowing horns to pressure other drivers to break the law, from running red lights to endangering the lives of pedestrians trying to cross the road, is satisfying. Slowing down to annoy the driver behind is hilarious. Stopping to gawk at and take photos and videos of an accident scene, offering no assistance, is second nature.

Other drivers, when in vehicles, are not seen as real people. People get behind the wheels of cars and seem to think they have been transported to a video game. It is all about them. No one else on the road is real. There are no other lives of value. The goals are to get to the destination, to get there quickly, to have the kind of “fun” that only comes from taking ridiculous risks, and the biggest, baddest bully on the road at that time, and not necessarily in that order.

It is even more frustrating that we see police on the road who we know must see what we see. They see the illegal and reckless driving we see, and they often choose not to respond. We know the hotspots where the most foolish behavior takes place, and we know that they know too, but they never position themselves there. We know that the people who drive like no one else matters and notice there are few consequences are likely to test limits in other ways. Law-abiding people are insulted by the inaction on traffic infractions, especially as taxes increase (when there are many traffic fines to issue and collect) and traffic fatalities flood social media.

Traffic in the streets of New Providence tell us more than we would like to know about one another. Impatience may be the least of the problems we see there. The endless anger and the need to express it, by any means, are not to be taken lightly. How is it that a person becomes so incensed by another driver’s reasonable caution that they get out of their vehicle to instigate a fight, with or without a weapon? What does it mean when so many of us try not to react to the ludicrous behavior we see on the road because “they might have a gun” and we do not want to become the country’s next murder victim? Most people who do not work from home start their days with the kind of frustration that should not live in anyone at nine o’clock in the morning, but that is a consequence of driving to work.

We all complain about customer service and it not being our fault that people hate their jobs, but we are all less than cheerful after an hour in traffic, guessing what other drivers will do and trying to avoid the consequences of their actions. How could we not be exhausted by the time we get to our destinations? There is pent up frustration that has to go somewhere, and without the ability to recognize and manage our emotions, without the safety of talking about our feelings without being judged, and without the freedom to take a few minutes to recalibrate, it is almost inevitable that an relatively innocent person will bare the brunt of out frustration.

Living in New Providence, truth be told, is hard. Having to drive everywhere we go is difficult. The lack of safe, reliable public transportation to get to and from work and school is inconvenient and costly. Living in a society plagued by violence that seems, at times, to be indiscriminate or rooted in petty motivations, is scary and tiring. We are always on guard. We are always in defense mode. The tension wreaks havoc on our minds and bodies.

There is an anger problem here. There is a widespread attempt to push back against the lack of control that people have in their lives. There is little value assigned to human life, especially when the lives are seen as separate from our own. The traffic problem we have is not just that people are jerks or that people are absolute idiots who do not know or have no regard for the rules of the road. This, too, may be true. It is also that people feel lost and powerless, that people have no regard for other people’s lives, and that people have little focus on the longterm.

There is no quick fix for the problems we have allowed to fester. We have years of work to do. We need to find the cause of the hopelessness, lack of control, and anger that people feel. We need to help them to identify these feelings and to manage them in healthy ways. We have to find ways to build community and shared sense of responsibility for our collective wellbeing. This is a role for families, schools, faith-based organisations, and government entities to play. We did not get here overnight, and there is no quick and easy way out of it. Conversations, social protection, civic education, conflict management, and community programming are all a part of the solution, and this requires investment. The question is, as always, what is the longterm transformation worth to the government and the private sector which have the means to invest and innovate?

Published in The Tribune on September 11, 2024.

/0 Comments/by
, , ,

Stop normalising gender violence

Cases of gender-based violence against women continue to be in the news on a daily basis. With little or no ongoing work to prevent gender-based violence against women and girls and insufficient resources allocated to intervention, women and girls are experiencing violence in many forms, and repeatedly.

A 26-year-old man who met a 14-year-old girl on Instagram in 2022 pleaded guilty to “unlawful sexual intercourse”. He will return to court on September 18 for sentencing.

A 20-year-old man admitted to “injuring his girlfriend and assaulting her with a knife”. He threatened to kill the woman. The news report stated that he “lost his temper” during an argument. He was sentenced to three months for causing harm and five months for assault with a dangerous instrument, and the sentences are to be served concurrently.

These people were not under the impression that what they were doing was right. Certainly, the 26-year-old knew that he was raping the 14-year-old girl as no one under the age of 16 can give consent. The 20-year-old man definitely knew that assaulting his girlfriend with a knife and without a knife was a criminal offence. Why did they act violently?

Were they trying to make a point? Were they trying to assert authority? Did they want to appear dominant? Did they want to have power and control over someone else? What makes violence the go-to when there are ways that we can actually fulfill our needs to communicate, to respect ourselves and be respected, and to take control of our own lives?

Violence, in all of its forms, has been normalised in The Bahamas. Many believe that violence is an appropriate response to a variety of situations. “What did you do to make him do that?” is a victim-blaming question that is often asked of survivors of domestic violence and intimate partner violence. It suggests that there is cause and effect—that person who experienced violence caused it, and that the perpetrator was violent for a reason. Violence, however, is not reasonable. It is not a reasonable response to any situation or event. It is not a reasonable way to express emotion.

Violence has long been regarded by Bahamians as a solution. It is regarded as one of the most foundational tools of parenting. Children are beaten for failing to behave in the ideal manner, getting lower grades in school that parents and guardians want to see, not making the best decisions at all times, going through development (including changes in their bodies), being unable to regulate their emotions at all times, having natural reactions to situations, and crying when they are beaten. There are many other “reasons” that children are beaten. The beatings that children are subjected to vary widely.

Some adults hit children repeatedly with hands. Some adults hit children with objects like shoes and power cords. Some adults pinch and poke children. Some adults punch and kick children. Some adults take children by the neck and throw them against walls. Shout obscenities at their children and threaten to hit them, put them out, take them to the police station to be beaten, or send them to someone else who, presumably, does not have the means to provide for them. Destroy their children’s belongings. Record and publicly share videos of themselves verbally and/or physically assaulting their children.

It is all violence. It is a failure of parents and guardians to effectively communicate with children, regulate their own emotions, deprioritise their egos, and be led by love—not fear or the desire to instill it in others—as they raise their children with the respect and discipline that eschews violence.

People learn violence early. Children are taught, through the actions of adults, that violence is a way to respond to their emotions. Violence is the response when feelings are hurt. Violence is the response when there is a feeling of disrespect. Violence is the response when there is the feeling of embarrassment. Violence is the way to coerce someone into taking a particular action. Violence is the way to instill fear. Violence is the way to assert dominance. This is what we are led to believe when violence, and the fear of violence, form our discipline.

Violence is, in fact, the way of the cowardly, the ignorant, the lazy, the underdeveloped. Violence is a failure to communicate. It is the failure to experience and process emotions. It is the failure to lose and to then move on. Violence is indicative of an incompatibility with humanity which requires us to have experiences that prompt feelings, to then experiences those feelings, and to understand what those feelings mean, even when it means sitting in the discomfort or vulnerability of being seen as human.

When violence is taught, by demonstration, from childhood, what are we to do about the challenges we face as we get older and both our needs and responsibilities change? What can we expect from one another when we are under stress and many factors are completely out of our control? What standard do we currently hold ourselves and one another to, especially as we navigate crises from the devastation of hurricanes and the impact of COVID-19 to difficult relationships and precarious living situations?

Far too many people turn to violence, expecting it to make them feel and appear more powerful. They use it to shut people up. They use it to make people talk. They use it to make money. They use it to make a name for themselves. They use it to send messages. “They” are not always the criminals that comes to mind. “They” are not just the young men on the street. “They” are not just people on the run. “They” are people in high places and in not-so-high places where decisions are made.

Over the past few days, public discussion has centered the horrific text messages, videos, and photos that have been circulating via WhatsApp and other social media platforms. The violence displayed in them is disgusting, terrifying, and gratuitous. The way people are fiends for graphic images, publicly asking for the material to be sent to them, is sickening. It is a clear indication of the way many have been desensitised not only to the idea of violence, but the display of it. How different from the person who inflicts violence is the depraved person who wants to watch it happen?

How can we continue to pretend to be shocked by the rate and extent of murder and other violent crime in The Bahamas, knowing that many people around us teach it, practice it, and delight in it? People who claim to care about various issues related to national development and human rights are laughing about a recent murder and the graphic material circulating. These are signs of people who are peaceful or peace-loving. These are not signs of people who are concerned about the safety or wellbeing of people in The Bahamas.

While this case is discussed, along with the way positions and relationships to people in positions of power protect certain people, no matter what they do, let us not forget the sitting Member of Parliament charged for rape and making death threats. Everyone is not treated equally. Not the violent, and not the violated. Justice, all too often, takes a very long time to come.

Recommendations

1. Join Feminist Book Club this month. We are reading Ayọ̀bámi Adébáyọ̀’s Stay With Me which was shortlisted for the Women’s Prize for fiction. Nigerians Yejide and Akin fell in love in university and got married, decided that polygamy was not for them. After for years of trying, they have not been successful in conceiving. Yejide is doing everything she can, but what is she supposed to do when a new wife for Akin is delivered to their doorstep? The Guardian called it a “bright, big-hearted demonstration of female spirit, as well as the damage done by the boundlessness of male pride”. Join Equality Bahamas and Poinciana Paper Press for Feminist Book Club on Wednesday, September 18 at 6pm EDT. Register at tiny.cc/fbc2024 to receive information on our monthly meetings.

 

2. The Braxtons. This reality television show following The Braxton family comes four years after the last season of Braxton Family Values aired. In March 2022, Traci Braxton died of esophageal cancer at the age 50. Three episodes in, the first season of this new show starring the Braxton sisters and their mother, Ms E (Evelyn Braxton), focus on their grief alongside their promise to Trina that they would stay close. Sometimes funny, sometimes deeply saddening, the show can be hard to watch, especially for anyone experiencing grief. It can be helpful for people whose loved ones are grieving as it shows some of the different ways that grief can look, how differently people, even in the same family, process grief, and the long-term support that is needed.

Published in The Tribune on August 28, 2024.

/0 Comments/by

Discrimination in our independence

We are one week away from celebrating 51 years of independence in The Bahamas. Last year, the celebration seemed to last forever with many events and designated thematic days in the lead-up to July 10. This year is much less busy and promotion of Independence events seemed to start quite late. Nonetheless, much of the same old same old is taking place. The Beat Retreat has already taken place and the usual Clifford Park event will begin on July 9, ending with fireworks at midnight to bring in Independence Day. Even fifty plus one years later, the program is the same. There is little, if any, innovation in the celebrations.

Many of us have attended the Clifford Park event year after year after year, especially as young people. It may be because it was one of the few late night events that parents would allow their children to attend. Maybe because there was excitement about who and what would be seen there. Maybe there was tradition in the opportunity to dress up, be with cousins and friends, and do something predictable. Maybe it came with some freedom, especially as we got older, to venture a little further away from the adult supervision each year. One year it could be sitting in the row in front of the adults. Another year it could be going to buy sodas and “come right back!” Eventually, the younger cousins become the older cousins who are taking the preteens and teens to the event. When we are no longer so young that the incremental increase in freedom in over and no longer have younger people to chaperone, there is no need to keep going. It is the same show every single year.

We need something different a long time ago. One year, people were excited by the focus on different islands in The Bahamas, giving residents information about islands most have never visited and would not learn about firsthand. This was proof that we are, indeed, interested in learning more about The Bahamas. We want information. We want to hear from our elders. We want to see what young people are doing in the Family Islands. We want to hear the different words and phrases used in specific islands, and we want to make connections between practices of our older family members and their islands of birth. We are interested in the history of The Bahamas. We want it to be accessible, presented in an entertaining way. We want to have space to discuss, dissect, and debate.

Far too much time during the Clifford Park event is dedicated to the “ecumenical service” that is, year after year, boring, far too long, and clearly ego-driven as “religious leaders” compete in their long addresses and prayers.

The Bahamas is not a Christian nation, and the focus on and centring of Christianity is inexcusable. It is discriminatory and it is incorrectly taken as validation of the frequently repeated idea that The Bahamas is a Christian nation. The Bahamas is, in fact, a secular state. The constitution does not make this country a theocracy. On the contrary, only the preamble makes reference to “respect for Christian values.” The same preamble states that The Bahamas is a “Democratic Sovereign Nation founded on Spiritual Values” and it is important to note that “Spiritual Values” is not synonymous with Christianity, nor is it the same as Christian values.

The constitution itself has an entire chapter on protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual. Article 15 states that everyone in The Bahamas is “entitled to the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual” regardless of identity markers including race, creed, and sex, and these include the right to life, liberty, security of the person, and the protection of the law. It also guarantees freedom of conscience, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, and protection for the privacy of homes. These rights are further elaborated in the following Articles. Article 22 states:

“No person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of conscience, and for the purposes of this Article the said freedom includes freedom of thought and of religion, freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others, and both in public and in private, to manifest and propagate his religion of belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance”

In a country with freedom of religion, with a constitution that has a preamble that references its founding on “Spiritual Values,” why do publicly-funded events center Christians and Christianity? What does this communicate to the people who are not Christians? What does this communicate to the people of other faiths? Why are leaders of other religions not invited to participate in national events? Why are all of the prayers Christian prayers? Why aren’t interfaith prayers used? Why not do away with prayers entirely, have a moment of silence for people to quietly engage in their own religious or spiritual practice, or invite prayers from different faiths? Why does the government of The Bahamas validate the ignorance of the people who do not understand that The Bahamas is secular state? Why does the anti-rights group that the government consistently platforms fail to acknowledge that there are other religions and do the Christlike act of sharing space with them?

These are important questions to consider during independence conversations and celebrations. The constitution is a product of its time, the coloniser, and the people who participated in framing or editing it. It is, in many ways, colonial, and we know that it is in need of amendments. We also know that the Christianity that so many cling to—and did not make it into the constitution itself—is a relic of slavery and colonialism. It is unreasonable that this religion, which was used to support kidnapping, slavery, and genocide, and is still used today to inflict harm on people, is intertwined in independence celebrations every year.

There is not enough critical thinking about independence, what is means, and what it does not mean. We continue to go through the motions, follow the same old program, and ask no questions. We are stuck in a dull, inequitable, discriminatory, violent way of “celebrating” and we need to care enough to change it. Independence is more than sitting on a park, waiting for the dogs to come out and the fireworks to start. It must be more than one religions dominating hours of programming. It is more than the same people making decisions about what the programming on July 9 will entail. We have more people with deep knowledge and great ideas. Some of them even practice religions that are not Christianity. We need to make space. In our (Christian?) hearts, in our brilliant minds, in our annual programming. We need to make space.

Published in The Tribune on July 3, 2024.

/0 Comments/by
, , , ,

We agreed to protect women – why don’t we?

THE Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment, and Eradication of Violence against Women, also known as the Belém do Pará Convention was adopted on June 9, 1994. Belém do Pará is now 30 years old and has been ratified by 32 of the 34 member states of the Organization of American States (OAS). The Bahamas ratified the Convention, obligating it to prevent, investigate, and punish violence against women.

In Article 1, Belém do Pará defines violence against women as “any act or conduct, based on gender, which causes death or physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, whether in the public or the private sphere”. In Article 2, it elaborates with the specific inclusion of violence that “occurs within the family or domestic unit or within any other interpersonal relationship, whether or not the perpetrator shares or has shared the same residence with the woman”, “occurs in the community and is perpetrated by any person” including harassment in the workplace and other institutions, and “is perpetrated or condoned by the state or its agents regardless of where it occurs”.

In addition to the specific mention of the public and private spheres in Article 1, Article 3 specifically states the right of every woman to be free from violence in both the public and private spheres. Article 3 also draws attention to State-condoned violence and, in the Bahamian context, makes it necessary to look at laws that discriminate against women and exclude particular acts of violence or perpetrators of violence.

Articles 1 to 3 are easily applied to the issue of marital rape in The Bahamas and the flimsy excuses put forward by successive governments and anti-rights groups who insist, implicitly, that women are not full human beings and there should be exceptions when violence is perpetrated at home and by spouses. Violence against women is clearly defined, and the Convention explicitly states, twice, that women have the right to be free from violence in the public and private spheres, and perpetrated by any person. This means states are obligated to prevent, investigate, and punish violence enacted against women in the home and violence enacted against women by their spouses.

Articles 7 to 9 are specific to the duties of State Parties. These include their obligation to:

1. apply due diligence to prevent, investigate and impose penalties for violence against women

2. include in their domestic legislation penal, civil, administrative and any other type of provisions that may be needed to prevent, punish and eradicate violence against women and to adopt appropriate administrative measures where necessary (This includes the gender-based violence bill, recommended by the CEDAW Committee in 2018 and by member states in the Universal Periodic Review process in 2023. The government committed to pass the bill, but stopped consultation, abandoned the bill, and passed the “Protection Against Violence” Act which does not, in any way, address the specific issue of gender-based violence.)

3. take all appropriate measures, including legislative measures, to amend or repeal existing laws and regulations or to modify legal or customary practices which sustain the persistence and tolerance of violence against women (This includes the amendments to the Sexual Offences Act, removing “who is not his spouse” from the definition of rape, repealing section 15 on “sexual assault by spouse”, adding a statutory definition of consent, and adding a clause of non-immunity on the basis of marriage.)

4. promote awareness and observance of the right of women to be free from violence, and the right of women to have their human rights respected and protected (The CEDAW Committee has recommended that the government ensure that women and girls are aware of their human rights, particularly under the Convention, and there has been no movement toward this in the five years since.)

5. modify social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women, including the development of formal and informal educational programs appropriate to every level of the educational process, to counteract prejudices, customs and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or superiority of either of the sexes or on the stereotyped roles for men and women which legitimise or exacerbate violence against women (Related to the previous point, there is no plan and there has certainly been no action by the government to address the issue of gender stereotyping and harmful ideology. This, too, is an obligation through CEDAW, and one that is critical to preventing violence against women and girls.)

6. to ensure research and the gathering of statistics and other relevant information relating to the causes, consequences and frequency of violence against women, in order to assess the effectiveness of measures to prevent, punish and eradicate violence against women and to formulate and implement the necessary changes (The gender-based violence, which was never passed, should have included a system for recording and analysing incidents of violence against women and, in particular, femicide, in order to identify risk factors and trends which would aid in developing effective prevention and intervention.)

The Belém do Pará is not often discussed in The Bahamas. We have generally been more attentive to the United Nations human rights mechanisms. While they are useful, it is important that we make better use of regional mechanisms and find ways to learn from other countries in the region that have had success in reducing violence against women and in implementing the Convention in effective ways.

That 30 years have passed since The Bahamas ratified the Convention and few people recognise its name, much less know what it is about and what it contains is a failure of successive government administrations. It is, as we know, not enough to participate in multilateral processes, sign and ratify documents, make commitments, and occasionally report. The general public needs to be made aware of the obligations of the government to protect and expand our human rights. We need to know our rights and how to access them. We need to have a clear understanding of the existing national legislation and how it is contravention with international commitments. We, importantly, need to know that these commitments are to us, and not to an institution. The institutions are vessels and, yes, motivators, and we, the people, are rights holders. It is our right to know our rights, and it is the obligation of the government to ensure that we know them and access them fully.

Published in The Tribune on June 12, 2024.

/0 Comments/by
, , , ,

Bahamian politics a race to the bottom

It looks like we are in for another race to the bottom. We are now halfway through this term, and the Free National Movement will decide who its leader will be in the coming weeks. While the two candidates, from what we have seen thus far, are quite different, neither inspires confidence. The party itself has a significant amount of work ahead of it to define itself and prove itself to a new generation of voters and the voters who refused to show up for it in 2021. Two and a half years later, this work has not even begun. In fact, it seems to be working against itself. It is not even trying to play the role of Opposition, failing to draw attention to the governance failures, failing to offer solutions, and failing to model better practices.

Member of Parliament for St. Anne’s seemed to be upset by the announcement that The Bahamas now recognises Palestine as a state. The Bahamas took far too long to take this step, particularly as we witness, on a daily basis, the settler colonialism and genocide, by Israel, of Palestine and the Palestinian people. The Bahamas was the last CARICOM country to recognise Palestine as a state, and this is an embarrassment. White has now added to the embarrassment by his weak attempt to challenge it, and using “traditional allies” to do it. He said, “Our traditional allies, Madam Speaker, are countries that we haven’t aligned our position with, and I find that on such an important international issue, now it’s a national issue.”

The genocide of the Palestinian people has been an issue at the international, regional, and national levels for years, and without recognition of the same. As stated in the Caribbean Feminist Statement Against Israel’s Settle Colonial Project and Ongoing Genocide in Palestine, “We, Caribbean people, who have arisen from histories of genocide, enslavement, indentureship, and colonialism, remain firm and unwavering against all attempts at settler colonialism, apartheid, arbitrary arrests and detention, displacement and forced exile, confiscation of land and territories, sexual violence, and other human rights violations carried out by any State against any ethnic, racial, or geographic population. These images of violence are all too familiar.”

Over the past 228 days, we have seen the displacement of over 900,000 people from Gaza. We have seen the destruction of schools, mosques, and hospitals. We have watched as journalists report on the conditions with the eery sound of weapons flying overhead. We have read about the hunger, seen the images of injuries and death, and heard the cracks in the voices of thousands of people who continue to speak against the violence they are experiencing without end and call on us, the rest of the world, whoever our allies may be, to help them.

When we, human rights advocates, call on the government to fulfill its obligation to protect, promote, and ensure access to human rights, there is talk of “sovereignty.” When we reference the United Nations human rights mechanisms that The Bahamas has voluntarily adopted and ratified, such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), “sovereignty” comes up. When the United States Embassy flies the PRIDE flag at its locations, “sovereignty” is thrown around. For some reason, though, when it comes to The Bahamas taking a principled position — the right position — on the statehood of Palestine, it is time for The Bahamas to worry about its allies and their wishes. Why might that be? There are far too many people in positions of leadership who are ill-equipped, unprepared, and generally opposed to human rights, regardless of sovereignty or allyship. It seems, in fact, that they are playing a game that has nothing to do with the wellbeing of the people they claim to serve.

White said, “[…] the people of this nation, Madam Speaker, should be informed I think on a more regular basis on why some of these international decisions are being made, why we are agreeing one way or the other.”

He said this about the decision by The Bahamas to recognize Palestine as a state. He did not say this about countless other decisions made by the Government of The Bahamas with no announcement at all. There are no questions about the financial bills that are pushed through quickly and without consultation. There are no questions about the way The Bahamas votes at the United Nations on a regular basis. There are no questions about participation in InterAmerican processes or the decisions made therein. The continued failure of government officials to disclose assets is not a conversation this week. Why might that be?

Several human rights advocates have been calling on the government to communicate with the general public about its commitments and activities in international spaces. In fact, we have used international spaces and processes to demand that the government inform the Bahamian people of its commitments and to make human rights mechanisms accessible to the public. When we talk about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it should not be a cloudy concept for the general public, but a clear set of rights that we all can easily apply to their own lives, even if we cannot perfectly recite them. When we reference CEDAW, it should not evoke fear. When we remind the country that migrants are human beings with human rights, it should not be surprising or confusing. Perhaps successive administrations have enjoyed the low access to information for the general public which enables them to distract, to lie, and to create enemies of human beings rather than the inequitable systems we live within. Migrant people have always been scapegoats of choice, haven’t they?

It is no surprise that Minnis is not only running for leadership of the Free National Movement again, but that he is so easily and confidently referencing his spectacular failure from 2017 to 2021 — which even he was in a rush to escape with a nonsensically early general election — saying “Let’s do it again,” is a sure sign of delusion or confidence that, in a race to the bottom, he is a good bet.

Rather than focusing on the state of the country, largely due to his egotistical, sloppy, tyrannical “leadership” and the current administration that is taking full advantage of the terrible precedent set in many areas, including undisguised abhorrence for the press, he has taken aim at some of the most vulnerable people in the country. Instead of acknowledging the harm already done by terrible decisions and devastating inaction, he is going the lazy route of scapegoating Haitian migrants. He said that he would “aggressively deport all undocumented people” and claimed he would regularize those who have been in The Bahamas for a long time. These two promises are not aligned. The first is, in fact, quite troubling when we should know what is happening right now in Haiti. (It is important that we do not pretend that he was talking about all migrants. He meant, as they always mean, Haitian migrants).

Pintard, on the other hand, said the Free National Movement should not “make every immigrant a tyrant”. He pointed to willingness to collaborate and a duty to solve problems. It is cause for concern that these conversations do not seem to be taking place within the party and, importantly, across the obvious factions. Is there no clear direction for the party? No shared values? No clarity on what leadership means and looks like in practice?

We have not seen strong leadership from Pintard who has been in the ideal position to demonstrate his ability over the past few years. The current Opposition has fallen into the same practices as every Opposition before it, opposing for the sake of it, criticizing at every turn, and offering no solutions. It is old, it is tired, it is ineffective, and it serves no one. This is unfortunate, not only for a party that is vying for leadership in the next general election, but for the people of The Bahamas who need a true, properly functioning Opposition.

Anyone who is serious about leading a political party, not to mention leading a country, must demonstrate their values. These are not centering hatred of people or particular groups of people. Values are indicative of positions on pressing issues. People who are serious about leadership are clear in their positions. If they cannot decide for themselves, they certainly cannot be trusted to listen to and make decisions in the best interest of others. When will the Progressive Liberal Party and the Free National Movement figure out who they are and where they stand on critical issues? How will they communicate their identities to us? What will it take for them to be truly people-centred? Who, within these parties, are leaders with the competence to listen, learn, collaborate, communicate, and act with the most vulnerable in mind? If it takes anywhere near two more years to see manifestos and charters, we need to be clear that there are no leaders in these parties, and there are no parties prepared to lead.

Published in The Tribune on May 22, 2024.

/0 Comments/by
, ,

The Network of Caribbean Feminists Statement on Palestine

The Network of Caribbean Feminists released its statement–calling on CARICOM to support the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel) case at the International Court of Justice for measures to be taken against genocidal actions by Israel–on the ongoing genocide in Palestine on Monday, May 7. This post has excerpts from the statement.

“We affirm the humanity and dignity of the Palestinian people and we rebuke the violence enacted against them, including bombardment, starvation, sexual violence, ethnic cleansing, and the intentional destruction of educational, cultural, healthcare, political, and religious institutions. More than 35,000 Palestinian people have been killed since October 7, 2023. Most of them are women and children. More than 80,000 Palestinian people have been injured. Over 8,000 Palestinian people are missing. Almost 2 million Palestinians are currently displaced in Gaza, and 1.1 million are facing catastrophic food insecurity.”

“We reiterate the Human Rights Council resolution on the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination which “calls upon all States to ensure their obligations of non-recognition, non-aid or assistance with regard to the serious breaches of peremptory norms of international law by Israel.” We grieve the Nakba of 1948 and support Palestinians who reject the two-state solution. There can be no peace without justice.”

See and share the full statement at tiny.cc/caribbeanforpalestine

/0 Comments/by
, , , ,

Blueprint for Change says so

It should not be surprising at this point. Another week, another idiotic statement in response to the call for the criminalization of marital rape. This week, when asked about movement on the marital rape bill, the prime minister made a number of disturbing comments. 

First, he said, “Drafts are given for consideration. So we have a draft that has been given for our consideration. We have not gotten around to it yet.”

The bill to amend the Sexual Offenses Act to criminalize marital rape has been in draft form since, if not before, 2022. We have had the bill for at least two years. This comes after four years of sitting on an inadequate bill drafted by the previous administration. This is not a new issue, and there are no new items for consideration. There is nothing complicated to think about or discuss. Just last week, he stated that rape is rape, and that he has difficulty with categories and descriptions of rape. The marital rape bill removes a category and ensures that rape that is perpetrated by a spouse is legally treated as rape, as it should.

Next, he said, “As you would recall, I am guided by my ‘Blueprint for Change’. That sets out the basis for which I asked people to vote for me and marital rape was not contained in that. I’m not insensitive to it. I appreciate it and I know.” The Blueprint for Change mentions women only twice. On page 49, it states, “The PLP is committed to the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals that ensures quality education, life long learning opportunities, gender equality and empowerment for women and girls; quality water, sanitation, and access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy.”

The Sustainable Development Goals were adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in September 2015 with full support from all Member States, including The Bahamas. All of the 17 goals have targets, and those targets have indicators that facilitate monitoring and evaluation of progress toward the goals. 

Sustainable Development Goal 5, referenced in the Blueprint for Change, is to achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls. The first target is “End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere.” The indicator for this target is “Whether or not legal frameworks are in place to promote, enforce and monitor equality and non‑discrimination on the basis of sex.” The second target is “Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation. The indicators of this target are “Proportion of ever-partnered women and girls aged 15 years and older subjected to physical, sexual or psychological violence by a current or former intimate partner in the previous 12 months, by form of violence and by age” and “Proportion of women and girls aged 15 years and older subjected to sexual violence by persons other than an intimate partner in the previous 12 months, by age and place of occurrence.”

Gender equality requires an end to gender-based discrimination in law, policy, and practice. This, combined with the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the recommendations made by the Committee, led to the government engaging UN Women to undertake a review of all laws to identify those that discriminate against women and girls. This is what led to the discriminatory law review forum where the draft was, in a less than ideal way, discussed. The final report has not yet been delivered and approved, but we know the laws that were identified. The Sexual Offenses Act was one of them and Section 3, which defines rape, was specifically identified as one that needs to be amended. Eliminating discrimination against women, which is required to achieve gender equality, necessitates the criminalization of marital rape. The Blueprint for Change, then, includes a commitment to criminalizing marital rape.

On page 52, the Blueprint for Change states, “The Progressive Liberal Party is committed to eliminating all forms of discrimination against men and women in The Bahamas.” 

The Bahamas ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in 1993. In 2018, it underwent its sixth periodic review. Marital rape was raised, again, raised as a pressing issue. In its Concluding Observations, the CEDAW Committee recommended that the Government of The Bahamas “Adopt, without delay, the amendments to the Sexual Offences Act expressly criminalizing marital rape, remove any temporal limitations to the right to file a complaint for marital rape in the draft amendment to the Sexual Offences Act and establish a sex offender register and registry.”

In her report following her visit to The Bahamas, the (then) Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women called on the Government of The Bahamas to “Revise or adopt new criminal law provisions to prohibit marital rape, including by ensuring that the definition of sexual crimes, including marital and acquaintance/date rape is based on the lack of freely given consent, and takes account of coercive circumstances, in line with general recommendation No. 35 of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women.”

These recommendations are connected to the aforementioned parts of the Blueprint for Change. Criminalizing marital rape is required to follow through on the commitment to the Sustainable Development Goals which include gender equality and to eliminate discrimination against men and women. We must not accept what the Prime Minister has said. This is the work that is required of his administration, and this is the work that is committed to carrying out in its own campaign document.

Finally, the prime minister said, “My thing is that any time a couple … in blissful marriage reaches a stage where they are going to report their husband for rape, it seems to me that that marriage is irretrievably broken, meaning they are no longer married even though it may not have been so pronounced by a court.”

The marriage is broken? Violence is destructive. Sexual violence destructive. Rape is destructive. The conversation about marital rape, contrary to popular belief, is not about marriage. It is about people. Specifically, it is about a person who is violated in a devastating, irreparable way by a perpetrator who is not only known to them, but in a legal arrangement that is supposedly rooted in love, but often turns out to be obsession and/or possession. At present, the law suggests that legal arrangement erases the humanity of the person who has been violated, and that they should endure that violence and have no legal recourse.

Here comes the prime minister. He says the rape means the marriage is broken, such that they are no longer married, regardless of what the law or courts say. This shifted the line of questioning to divorce. It must be made clear that divorce is not a remedy for rape. Whether the marriage is broken or a person in the marriage fails to see the other person as a human being with human rights, including the right to give and withhold consent, divorce should be readily available. It should be more than possible. It should be easy because those people should not be together and should not be forced, by the law, to operate, in any way, as a married people. The violent act of rape, however, requires different action. Any person who is raped must be able to report the rape and have access to justice. Divorce and rape charges are not the same, they are not interchangeable, and one does not replace the other. We need access to both. Everyone should be able to report acts of violence against them, have their reports taken, and see the justice system work for them. 

In December 2017, the prime minister said, “I think we all accept…I know no right thinking Bahamian will accept that a person should be violated or in any form or fashion be abused.”

In February 2022, he said, “I’ve given the attorney general the mandate to follow the recommendations that will flow from that conference[…] and we’ll see what the recommendations are from there, and we’ll move to enact what laws [are] recommended by them to the attorney general that is deemed appropriate by the Cabinet.”

In October 2022, he said, “Any assault on a woman, be it whether you call it rape, grievous harm or otherwise, the law should take its course. Report those incidents to the police.”

Help women who raped by their husbands to report those incident to the police. Make rape a crime, regardless of the relationship between the perpetrator and the victim or survivor. Commitments have already been made. The bill has already been drafted. Stand in the shoes you so desperately wanted to wear.  Do what you claimed, in your Blueprint for Change, you would do. Move toward the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 5 for gender equality and eliminate discrimination against women. Criminalize marital rape.

Recommendations

Yesterday was World Book Day, and Equality Bahamas shared a list of recommended books. One set of books were selected from the Feminist Book Club reads, and one set were written by Palestinian authors. Here are four books to consider buying or borrowing to read this month. 

How to Say Babylon by Safiya Sinclair

National Book Critics Circle Award Winner, a New York Times Notable Book, and winner of the 2024 OCM Bocas Prize for Fiction winner, this book is hard to put down. From the first page, Sinclair captures readers with the vivid depiction of her childhood and family life and her determination to get out and create a different life for herself. 

Evil Eye by Etaf Rum

Yara got married to break free from her conservative family. She went to university, got a job, and wants to teach full time. Her ability to participate in the work culture, which seems inextricably linked with upward mobility, is constrained by her domestic and care responsibilities. It does not help that colleagues obviously buy into stereotypes about Palestinian people, and this flattens her view of her own life into obligation and regret. She wants to prove that she isn’t the stereotypical Palestinian woman, and she wants to challenge, carefully, the norms that have been created in her own family so that she does not become her mother. 

What My Bones Know by Stephanie Foo

This is one of those books that, once you have read it, you are bound to think everyone should read. It is memoir infused with research, bringing scientific context to the deeply personal story Foo shared. Foo survived a childhood rife with abuse and abandonment. Though it took a long time, she got the diagnosis of complex post traumatic stress disorder (C-PTSD) and soon realized that she could not just “rally” and move on. She put in significant work to understand the diagnosis and access the care she needed. The story is difficult in parts, yet full of hope. 

You Exist Too Much by Zaina Arafat

A queer Palestinian-American girl is trying to be and love herself. This book takes us back and forth between the U.S. to the Middle East, showing different parts of her life. She struggles to live in a space between cultures and beliefs, trying to keep her identity and sense of self stable and strong. What happens when a mother tells her girl child, “You exist too much?” She has to reject it. She has to accept herself.

/0 Comments/by
, , , , ,

Yes, rape is rape

The Prime Minister said, “Rape is rape!” Women’s rights advocates have been saying this for years. Rape is rape! Rape is rape! Wherever it happens, whoever is involved, rape is rape. There are no exceptions. 

The rest of what the Prime Minister said, however, is nonsense. The rest of what he said, in fact, was contradictory. The rest of what he said was irresponsible and misleading. The rest of what he said was what we, by now, have come to expect from him—unwillingness to state a clear position and a singular commitment to obfuscation.

“Why do you want to describe rape? Rape is rape.”

Well, for all who are as confused as the Prime Minister, the statement “Rape is rape” means that rape in all forms, by any person with or without any kind of relationship to the person violated, is rape. Rape of an underage person is rape. Rape on a hotel property is rape. Rape in the morning is rape. Rape by a spouse is rape. In the statement “Marital rape is rape,” we see that “marital” is used as an adjective, indicating that the rape being discussed is rape by a spouse. It is both more succinct and wholly accurate. The reason we use the term “marital rape” is not a suggestion that it is not rape, but an affirmation that it is, in fact, rape. It is not that we are creating a category of rape, but that we are calling attention the distinction that is made in the law—a distinction that dehumanizes married women, violates the right to bodily autonomy, violates the right to be free from violence, and violates the right to be seen and treated as person before the law. “Marital rape” is a necessary term within this context—the violent, misogynistic Bahamian context—where there is no recourse for a women who raped by her spouse.

Rape is, as the Prime Minister put it, divided into categories. This does, indeed, present a problem. Rape is rape! All forms of rape are wrong. Whether rape takes place in the morning or at night, perpetrated by a person known or unknown to the person violated, it is rape. Sexual intercourse without consent is, without question, rape. The Sexual Offenses Act, however, does not align with this fact. Not only are there several “categories” of sexual violence in the Act, the definition of rape in Section 3 has a marital exclusion, hence the term “marital rape” in the advocacy to amend the law. Because the Act creates this exclusion, we must be intentional in naming the exclusion.

The definition of rape in Section 3 of the Sexual Offenses Act says, “Rape is the act of any person not under fourteen years of age having sexual intercourse with another person who is not his spouse —[without consent].” The issue with the definition is that it provides an exception for people who are married to the people they rape. “Rape is rape,” the Prime Minister said, but the law does not say the same, and his administration has the power to change it. 

The definition of rape in the Sexual Offenses Act limits rape to non-consensual sexual intercourse that occurs outside of a marriage. The law, then, recognizes rape perpetrated by stranger, a parent, a sibling, a boyfriend, a teacher, an acquaintance, and a host of other people. It very specifically and deliberately does not recognize nonconsensual sexual intercourse, which is rape, that is perpetrated by a spouse. Again, this is an exception on the basis of marriage. It creates a “category” of rape that is permissible by the Sexual Offenses Act (while in contravention with international human rights standards and commitments that The Bahamas has made through its ratification of various conventions including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment, and Eradication of Violence against Women (Belém do Pará). 

Given this, it important to look at Section 15 on sexual assault by spouse. In this section, the drafters determined that there is a narrow set of circumstances under which nonconsensual sexual intercourse perpetrated by a spouse is a criminal offense. They decided that this nonconsensual sexual intercourse, which is understood to be rape in other cases, is going to be in a different category. Rather than rape, it is called “sexual assault by spouse.” This, then, is another “category” of rape.

Section 6 is the first that addresses indictable sexual offenses and states that “Any person who commits rape is guilty of an offence and liable to imprisonment for life, subject to, on a first conviction for the offence, a term of imprisonment of seven years and, in the case of a second or subsequent conviction for the offence, a term of imprisonment of fourteen years.” Terms of imprisonment vary from one “category” to another. Again, note that women’s rights advocates have not created these categories. They exist in the law.

Section 15 states “Any person who has sexual intercourse with his spouse without the consent of the spouse —[where there is a decree nisi of divorce; a decree of judicial separation; (a separation agreement; or an order of a court for the person not to molest or co-habit with his spouse[…] is guilty of the offence of sexual assault by spouse and liable to imprisonment for a term of fifteen years. In addition, prosecution requires “consent of the Attorney-General.” It is clearly rape, though given another name and treated differently by the law, and putting up an additional barrier to reporting and accessing justice, again, privileging the rapist who is married to the person they sexually violate.

“Rape is rape, whether you’re married or unmarried and the challenge they are having is describing it,” the Prime Minister said.

Who is the “they” being referenced by the Prime Minister? Women’s rights advocates are not trying to “describe” rape. We are using appropriate language to specify that the rape of a person by their spouse is currently not considered, in Bahamian law, to be an act of sexual violence, and it ought to be. As the Prime Minister said, rape is rape! The most direct and clear way to discuss this issue is to use the succinct term “marital rape” until the necessary amendments are made to the Sexual Offenses Act to remove the words “who is not his spouse” from the definition of rape. Then we can talk about rape without the adjective “marital.”

The Prime Minister said, “We passed a bill… a bill against violence against persons[…] that covers any manner of degradation, or what I call behavior that’s not acceptable to society.”

This is, quite simply, incorrect. The “Protection Against Violence” Act is an embarrassment. It was rushed, bypassing consultation processes, in order to displace—and perhaps get people to forget about—the Gender-Based Violence bill. We have not forgotten the Gender-Based Violence bill which has been in draft since 2016. Equality Bahamas has been calling for the Gender-Based Violence bill to be updated and passed for several years, and this has been one of its demands during the Global 16 Days Campaign since 2020. The CEDAW Committee, in 2018, expressed its concern about “the lack of a comprehensive law addressing violence against women and the delay in finalizing and adopting the draft bill on gender-based violence and the draft national strategic plan to address gender-based violence.” The Committee called on the Government of The Bahamas to “accelerate the adoption of the comprehensive draft bill on gender-based violence and the draft national strategic plan to address gender-based violence, in line with the Committee’s general recommendation No. 35.”

Successive administrations have failed to act on the recommendations to move closer to compliance with CEDAW and other international human rights mechanisms. The “Protection Against Violence” Act does not meet the requirements. It is not a gender-based violence bill and it does not address gender-based violence. It absolutely does not “cover any manner of degradation” and certainly does not, as the Prime Minister seemed to suggest, address the issue of marital rape.

The so-called Protection Against Violence Act states as its purpose “to provide for a national strategy to prevent and respond to the occurrence of violence and to protect victims of violence by promoting a strong multi-disciplinary community and services for the comprehensive management of victims and offenders; a system of information gathering for the purpose of generating reliable statistics in instances where violence in domestic relationships results in death; compliance with regional and international human rights treaty obligations of The Bahamas.”

In summary, the “Protection Against Violence” Act is meant to provide a strategy to prevent and streamline responses to violence, collect data on death due to domestic violence, and meet international human rights obligations. The Act has sections on developing and implementing a national strategic plan (which, we must remember, was already published in 2015 and has been collecting dust instead of being implemented or, at this point, significantly and substantively updated), institutional strengthening, establishment of a foundation, establishment of a commission, establishment of a secretariat and appointment of a director, general rights of victims, procedure for handling complaints, care and support services (including housing and legal assistance) which apply only to victims of sexual abuse, protocol when violence results in death, establishment of a violence fatality review team, and administrative details related to the bodies to be established. 

The “Protection Against Violence” Act does not, in and of itself, propose prevention. It does not present a strategy. It does address marital rape at all. It focuses on the establishment of bodies and structures. It is not the kind of law that people imagine when they read or hear the title. The law that address sexual violence is the Sexual Offenses Act and it, as explained, does not acknowledge that rape is rape. The marital exception is cruel, violent, dehumanizing, and does not have to exist. 

All we need is a Prime Minister who cares. Members of Parliament who care. Who are not lazy. Who are not complicit. Who are not more concerned about reelection than addressing the pervasive issue of gender-based violence and, in particular, violence against women that is perpetrated by a spouse or intimate partner. We need legislators who know and understand the law. Who are prepared to work together to amend the law so that marital rape is, legally, rape. It only takes one Member of Parliament to take a bill to Parliament. Thus far, not a single member has cared enough to do it. What great evidence of where we are as a country, with our “representation” in the government and its priorities.

Recommendations

  1. Join the call to criminalize marital rape. Learn more about the #Strike5ive campaign by Equality Bahamas at tiny.cc/strike5ive. 
  2. Read the Sexual Offenses Act. Pay attention the definition of rape, the forms of sexual violence that are included, and the differences in sentences.
  3. Read the “Protection Against Violence” Act. There was no consultation on the bill before it was rushed to be passed, bypassing the Gender-Based Violence bill which was mid-consultation and has been recommended by numerous bodies including the CEDAW Committee in 2018 and Member States of the United Nations at the Universal Periodic Review in 2023. Understand what is and is not in the Act. The misinformation being spouted by this administration is not accidental, and it is not hard to miss if you read the text yourself, looking for the changes it is expected to make.
/0 Comments/by
, , , ,

Sexual Assault Awareness Month 2024

Monday, April 1 marked the start of Sexual Assault Awareness Month. This year, the theme is Building Connected Communities. It is recognition of our individual and collective responsibility to prevent sexual violence in all forms, from sexual harassment to rape. It is important for us to remember that:

  1. Sexual violence is not only perpetrated by strangers. Most people who experience sexual violence know the perpetrators. 
  2. More than one in three women have experienced sexual violence.
  3. Offenses recognized in the Sexual Offenses Act include rape (with the exclusion of marital rape), indecent assault, serious indecency, and sex trafficking. 
  4. Marital rape is not yet criminalized. 
  5. Sexual violence is a spectrum, and sexual harassment—including street harassment—is included.
  6. Consent is required for sexual activity. There is no substitute for consent and no excuse for acting without consent. 
  7. We have the power to reinforce and to rebuke gender stereotypes and gender-based violence, and we do it in our intentional and unintentional responses to the behavior of the people around us. 

The general public may not be aware of the commitments The Government of The Bahamas has made to the people of The Bahamas through international mechanisms, and it has a duty to comply with ratified international human rights mechanisms. The government also has a duty to make the general public aware of its commitments, its reports to international bodies for periodic reviews, recommendations made by the reviewing bodies, and its response to the recommendations. Successive administrations have completely failed to raise public awareness and education on human rights and its obligations to ensure access to all of our human rights. 

In 1993, The Bahamas ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), also known as the women’s bill of rights. Article 5 of CEDAW calls on States to “modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women, with a view to achieving the elimination of prejudices and customary 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.” Under this Article, the CEDAW Committee makes recommendations to States to address the issue of gender stereotyping and gender-based violence against women. 

Since the adoption of CEDAW, the CEDAW Committee has also produced General Recommendation 35 which is specific to gender-based violence against women. In it, the States are called on to “ensure that all forms of gender-based violence against women in all spheres, which amount to a violation of their physical, sexual or psychological integrity, are criminalized and introduce, without delay, or strengthen, legal sanctions commensurate with the gravity of the offence, as well as civil remedies.” States are specifically called to “ensure that sexual assault, including rape, is characterized as a crime against the right to personal security and physical, sexual and psychological integrity and that the definition of sexual crimes, including marital and acquaintance or date rape, is based on the lack of freely given consent and takes into account coercive circumstances.” It is clear, then, that the criminalization of marital rape is required, necessary, and urgent. 

CEDAW Genera Recommendation 35 also articulates the need for integration of gender equality into curricula at all education levels. This should address gender stereotyping and gender-based discrimination, and include the values of non-violent masculinities and comprehensive sexuality education. We must ensure that people, from a young age, understand what sex is and is not. Everyone needs to know that sex requires consent, that consent must be enthusiastically and freely given, that consent applies to a specific act at a specific time and is not transferrable, and that consent can be withdrawn at any time. There is a clear different between sex and rape, and this distinction must be taught before people become sexually active. 

In 1995, The Bahamas ratified the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women, also known as the Belém do Pará. It affirms that “violence against women constitutes a violation of their human rights and fundamental freedoms, and impairs or nullifies the observance, enjoyment and exercise of such rights and freedoms” and that “elimination of violence against women is essential for their individual and social development and their full and equal participation in all walks of life.” Article 2 states that Violence against women includes physical, sexual and psychological violence “that occurs within the family or domestic unit or within any other interpersonal relationship, whether or not the perpetrator shares or has shared the same residence with the woman, including, among others, rape, battery and sexual abuse” which means it includes marital rape. Further, Article 3 states the right of women to be free from violence in public and private spheres. That marital rape has not yet been criminalized in The Bahamas is a failure to come into compliance with the Belém do Pará as well as CEDAW.

Importantly, the Belém do Pará recognizes the intersection of identity and the resulting layers of oppression and discrimination that women differently. This means, for example, that women with disabilities, elderly women, and women experiencing poverty are among those who are more likely to experience discrimination and violence and to face challenges in reporting and accessing justice in the absence of appropriate intervention. 

Reports of sexual violence continue to be in the news every week. Women live with the perpetual fear of being raped. Many still think rapists only lurk in bushes and around dark corners, trusting that people known to us are safe to be around. Rapists are, more often than not, partners, family members, friends, longtime family friends, ex-partners, and people in positions of authority. The abuse the power of familiarity, and they depend on shame, stigma, and silence to maintain their reputations and their freedom. Changing this requires public education campaigns, comprehensive sexuality education in all schools and at all levels, elimination of stigma, survivor-centered reporting mechanisms, and legal reform that affirms the humanity and human rights of all women, regardless of marital status and any other identity markers.

Remember the Strategic Plan to Address Gender-Based Violence?

This week, I saw the announcement of the National Strategic Action Plan on Gender-Based Violence and Sexual Violence of Trinidad and Tobago 2023-2027 which is expected to “empower [Trinidad and Tobago] to build capacity for curbing violence, a deeply entrenched problem that affects individuals across age, gender, and socio-economic lines” and “foster multi-sectoral collaboration in addressing gender-based violence (GBV) and its detrimental effects on families, communities, and the wider society, thereby allowing all of society to suitably approach challenges and serve our vulnerable populations in a comprehensive manner.”

Does this sound familiar? It may be because the Strategic Plan to Address Gender-Based Violence in The Bahamas had multi-sectoral coordination as its first recommendation. The Plan was lauded by UN Women, said to be a model for the Caribbean. This is, of course, not the first time that The Bahamas has led the way, producing a report or taking a position, only to fail to implement or ensure substantive effects of the work, welcoming other, more committed countries to pass it by. 

The National Task Force on gender-based violence launched in 2013. It was chaired by Justice Rubie Nottage (retired), Dr. Sandra Dean-Patterson, and Dr. Robin Roberts. The Taskforce produced the Strategic Plan to Address Gender-Based Violence in 2015. With a vision “to eliminate GBV from our society completely by working together to maintain a zero-tolerance for GBV,” it focused on three core principles—prevention, protection, and accountability. The Plan noted that gender-based violence is “endemic in our communities and constitutes a major public health issue in our country.”

In a section for immediate action, the Task Force identified “The Ten Low Hanging Fruit” which it considered to be practical and measurable. They included a national community awareness program on gender-based violence prevention, a focus on mentoring for men and boys, a sexual assault response team project, and an early intervention program for children exposed to violence. 

At a forum held in New Providence in April 2016, UN Women’s Deputy Representative for the Caribbean Tonni Brodber said, “The 10 Low-lying Fruit” concept, if successful, can signal to other countries how to successfully go about ending gender-based violence.” Ms. Brodber added, “This will speak to all the better practices that we see around the world that are useful in reducing or ending gender-based violence. It shows the world that when the Commonwealth of the Bahamas says it is going to do something it is going to get it done.”

Eight years later, the Strategic Plan to Address Gender-Based Violence has yet to be implemented. Perhaps The Bahamas will have to follow the lead of Trinidad and Tobago. It may implement its Plan before The Bahamas even bothers to update the one it created a Task Force to produce more than a decade ago. The proof of commitment is in the implementation. 

Recommendations

  1. Participate in National Poetry Writing Month (NaPoWriMo). The prompt for April 1, fittingly, was “dupe.” The prompt for April 2 was “Who’s ya people?” Get in touch with Poinciana Paper Press to join the NaPoWriMo WhatsApp group to receive the daily prompts, read others’ work, and share your own. 
  2. Attend Women’s Wednesdays. On Wednesday at 6pm, Equality Bahamas will be in conversation with journalist Ava Turnquest about media literacy in The Bahamas. Register at tiny.cc/wwapril24. 
  3. Read How to Say Babylon by Safiya Sinclair. Feminist Book Club, coordinated by Poinciana Paper Press and Equality Bahamas, meets every third Wednesday of the month at 6pm in a hybrid format. On Wednesday, April 17, participants will discuss Sinclair’s memoir, described as a “reckoning with the culture that initially nourished but ultimately sought to silence her [and] her reckoning with patriarchy and tradition, and the legacy of colonialism in Jamaica.” It is on the long list for the 2024 OCM Books Prize for Caribbean Literature in the non-fiction category alongside Equal to Mystery: In Search of Harold Sonny Ladoo, by Christopher Laird and Harvesting Haiti: Reflections on Unnatural Disasters, by Myriam J.A. Chancy. The winners in the categories of Poetry, Fiction, and Non-fiction will be announced on April 7, 2024, and the overall winner will be announced on April 27 at the NGC Bocas Lit Fest in Trinidad. Register to join Feminist Book Club at tiny.cc/fbc2024. 
/0 Comments/by