Because of the tremendous suffering during the two World Wars and the interwar economic and social hardship, world leaders decided – when they adopted the Charter of the United Nations in 1945, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 and subsequent instruments including the binding Covenants on economic, social and cultural rights, and political and civil rights in 1966 – to introduce safeguards against violation of human rights like the right to work, earn a remunerative wage in a decent environment, access adequate and balanced food, healthcare, quality education for all and equitable sharing of the benefits of economic growth etc.
From 1945 to 1975, the world enjoyed a period of relative peace and security and the golden economic environment resulted in the overall improvement in peoples’ welfare. In Africa and other developing countries, the benefits of peace and economic growth manifested themselves in falling death rates and rapid population growth.
The Keynesian model of demand management and state participation in national economies which drove post World War II economic growth came to an end in the 1970s. A combination of economic stagnation, rising unemployment and inflation (stagflation) defied the magic of Keynes. The oil crises of 1974 and 1979 increased the cost of oil importers beyond the foreign exchange earnings from commodities. The situation got worse during the global recession at the start of the 1980s which resulted in many countries failing to repay their debts thereby threatening the survival of the global financial system.
Governments in developing countries were forced to adjust their consumption and production patterns to repay their debts, resulting in drastic reduction of domestic demand as governments balanced their budgets, adjusted foreign exchange rates and diversified their exports. The economies were liberalized and privatized with an increasing participation of foreign companies on favorable terms. Labor flexibility was promoted, resulting in the reduction or elimination of trade unions and collective bargaining. How did these actions inter alia result in the violation of human rights?
To balance the budget, drastic and adverse measures were taken in education and healthcare, for example. In Uganda some classes or schools were eliminated causing children to drop out of school or walk long distances and study in congested classes. School fees and other charges were introduced forcing parents to decide which child or children to keep at home. In most cases the girls stayed at home, got married and began having babies at a tender age detrimental to their health and that of their children. Those who stayed in school acquired poor quality education rendering most of them unemployable.
Like the right to education, the right to food has been violated. To earn adequate foreign exchange and repay the external debt, Uganda diversified its export base by exporting foodstuffs traditionally grown for domestic consumption. Fisheries which were developed by colonial administration to provide an affordable source of protein to low income households have since the 1990s become one of the major foreign exchange earner and in the process deprived Ugandans of a vital source of protein and contributed to malnutrition especially among women and children.
To attract foreign investors, Uganda has introduced a policy of labor flexibility empowering employers to set low wages with or without benefits and fire workers at will with impunity. The drastic weakening of trade unions has undermined collective bargaining powers.
These adverse actions have resulted in agitation which has been suppressed by a regime that has become increasingly authoritarian, trampling the rights of Ugandans to express their opinions on how they are being governed. Sadly there are elements in the donor community that support Uganda government authoritarian methods arguing that Uganda is a stable country. The international community ignored warnings about the potential instability in Kenya until it exploded in December 2007 with deadly outcomes. We should prevent this from happening in Uganda.
Regarding Chile’s so-called ‘success story’ in economic reforms, Osvado Rosales has underscored that “The social and political costs of these sweeping and drastic reforms was high, and the economic cost was at times excessive or unnecessary” (SAIS Review Winter-Spring 1995).
And finally income distribution resulting from privatization, retrenchment and economic efficiency has been complex. Regarding Brazil it is noted that “Had the income gains resulting from greater economic efficiency been distributed to Brazil’s poorest, then privatization would have made an unambiguously positive contribution to equity as well as to efficiency. There is little or no credible evidence, however, that the efficiency gains were in fact distributed in this manner. What scanty evidence that does exist, notably the substantial increase in the profits of the recently privatized firms, suggests that much of the income gain from increased efficiency was captured by the new owners. … A significant share of these profits, moreover, accrued to foreign purchasers of the privatized firms” (Werner Baer 2001).