RIGHTS-CUBA: Opposition Groups Complete Human Rights Survey

By Patricia Grogg Reprint | | Print |

Patricia Grogg

HAVANA, Mar 4 2003 (IPS) - A proposal to abolish the death penalty garnered the strongest support in an unprecedented poll in which Cubans from all walks of life were invited to express their views regarding an open letter on human rights drafted by opposition groups.

A proposal to abolish the death penalty garnered the strongest support in a poll in which Cubans from all walks of life were invited to express their views regarding an open letter on human rights drafted by opposition groups.

The dissident groups, which are illegal but tolerated to a certain extent by the socialist government of Fidel Castro, said that of the 35,209 people surveyed, only 1,842 disagreed with the first clause, which states that ”no Cuban can be sentenced to death or executed.”

An even smaller number, 1,400, said capital punishment should remain a part of Cuba’s penal code, to be applied in exceptional cases.

More than 700 people, meanwhile, disagreed with article 29, according to which ”all Cubans have the right by law to marry the person they choose, on the sole condition that the chosen person has given their consent,” said the groups that make up the Moderate Opposition’s Round-Table on Reflection, which organised the initiative.

”That would include same-sex marriages, which is a complicated issue in our ‘machista’ society,” said activist Dimas Castillo, one of the participants in the survey that was carried out in all 14 provinces of this Caribbean island nation of 11.2 million.

At a news briefing Tuesday, the organisers of the project said people from ”all imaginable positions along the social spectrum, both within and outside Cuba,” were asked to express their opinion on the draft version of the open letter, which consists of 46 clauses.

Those polled included labourers, small farmers, students, self- employed workers, homemakers, unemployed, members of the military, government officials, atheists and church-goers, opponents of the socialist regime, and militant members of the Communist Party.

The activists said the initiative was unprecedented. ”Never before has a survey like this one been carried out without the support of the media and in the face of so many difficulties,” they underlined.

With the exception of two survey takers ”who suffered reprisals,” no significant setbacks were encountered during the five-month process, reported Reinaldo Escobar and Manuel Cuesta Murúa, members of the Moderate Opposition’s Round-Table on Reflection.

A committee on which ”all tendencies, stripes and options in Cuban society will be represented” will draw up the final version of the open letter on ”the basic rights and duties of Cuban citizens,” which will contain the results of the survey.

The final text will be submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Commission, traditionally the scenario of heated debates over Cuba’s human rights record.

Last year, the Commission approved a motion to send a special delegate to assess the human rights situation in Cuba and report on the results of the fact-finding mission at this year’s session, to be held Mar. 17 to Apr. 25.

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights designated French Judge Christine Chanet as the special delegate.

Chanet has not yet sought authorisation from the Cuban government to visit the country. Havana, which argues that human rights are guaranteed in Cuba as in few other countries in the world, has not publicly pronounced itself on the question.

In a message sent to the Human Rights Commission, the opposition groups that conducted the survey asked for United Nations support for the initiative, which they said would help ”improve human rights on the island.”

”We want the open letter to be an instrument for the promotion of a nationwide dialogue on human rights and for the formation of a culture of citizenship as the basis for democratic institutions,” says the communique, which was distributed at the press conference.

The ”citizen debate” was initially promoted by the Round- Table on Reflection, which is made up of dissident groups like the Democratic Socialist Current, Democratic Solidarity, the Movement for Democracy, and the Independent Nationalist Action Movement.

But Escobar and Cuesta Murúa clarified that 67 organisations of all stripes took part in the survey, and 20 others asked to participate in drafting the final document.

According to the activists, the large number of groups involved demonstrated that the open letter is not a political, but rather a civic, initiative. ”It was not conducted as a programme of the opposition, but as a civil initiative. It was just the opposition groups that dared to carry it out,” said Escobar.

Cuesta Murúa, meanwhile, clarified that among the dissident groups that backed the poll were the promoters of the Varela Project, an earlier initiative that gathered more than 11,000 signatures that were handed in to the legislative National Assembly to seek a referendum on changes to Cuba’s socialist system.

Also participating were the members of the Assembly to Promote Civil Society.

In the activists’ view, the wide variety of people consulted provides the foundation for the creation in Cuba of ”a new social pact” on human rights. The groups also want human rights studies to be included in the educational curriculum.

The open letter contains 35 clauses on individual, social, cultural and economic rights, while clauses 36 through 45 refer to citizen duties to the nation, the community and human society.

The letter also establishes the right of Cubans to free movement, including ”circulating and residing anywhere in the national territory, freely leaving the country, and returning whenever one deems convenient.”

A 1997 decree strictly regulates internal migration to Havana. In addition, Cubans require a special ”departure permit” to travel abroad.

The last clause states that the rights and duties of Cuban citizens ”are limited only by the rights and duties of others, the safety of all, and the just requirements of the general welfare and democratic involvement.”