COHRE Putting People Last Digya National Park 2006

Putting People Last Forced Evictions from Digya National Park, Ghana March – April 2006

Report Date: October 2006

COHRE Women and Housing Rights Programme COHRE Ghana Office PMB CT 402 Cantonments, Accra, Ghana COHRE Global Forced Evictions Programme COHRE International Secretariat 83 Rue du Montbrillant Geneva, Switzerland

1

INTRODUCTION

The Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) is an international human rights nongovernmental organisation based in Geneva, Switzerland, with offices in Brazil, Ghana, South Africa, Thailand, Sri Lanka, the United States and Australia. COHRE has consultative status with the United Nations, the Organisation of American States, the Council of Europe, and Observer Status with the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights. COHRE works to promote and protect the right to adequate housing for everyone, everywhere, including preventing or remedying forced evictions.

COHRE has been active in Ghana for the last three years - promoting housing rights and fighting to halt and remedy forced evictions.

This report is the product of a fact-finding mission to investigate evictions in Digya National Park, conducted by COHRE in collaboration with the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI), and People’s Dialogue on Human Settlements.

The intention of this report is to present the information acquired during the fact-finding mission to all relevant stakeholders - not to condemn - but to promote a constructive dialogue in order to remedy rights violations that have occurred and to prevent similar forced evictions.

The communities in Digya National Park have faced threats of eviction periodically in the past the most recent of which was in June 2002. In January 2003, COHRE and the Centre for Public Interest Law (CEPIL) provided a legal memorandum and supporting documentation to the Minister for Land and Forestry in Accra, Ghana. These documents detailed the prohibition of forced eviction in terms of international legal standards and the legal obligations of the Government of Ghana in this regard. The Minister responded to the concerns raised and directed that the planned eviction be suspended within days of receiving this information.

COHRE remained concerned that although the eviction had been averted, there was no guarantee that it would not be carried out at a later date, and thus continued to monitor the situation along with local organisations.

In March and April 2006, a task force of the Wildlife Division of the Forest Commission of Ghana, in conjunction with Ghana Police and Army officials forcibly evicted over 7 000 people living along Lake Volta in Digya National Park1. The ‘Digya Park evictions’ became widely known in Ghana after the media reported that a boat that was overloaded with evictees and their possessions had capsized in Lake Volta on 8 April, killing some of its occupants.

On 19 April 2006, COHRE and its partners the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) and People’s Dialogue on Human Settlements held a media conference and presented a Statement of Facts based on reports and first hand accounts of evictions in Digya Park.2 In addition, COHRE and Amnesty International issued a joint media statement regarding the forced evictions of Digya Park and the related boat disaster, which is attached hereto as Annex A. While the evictions were ongoing, CHRI and People’s Dialogue undertook a fact-finding mission on 5-6 April 2006. On 3-5 May, 2006, COHRE and People’s Dialogue travelled to Digya to conduct further investigations. COHRE and People’s Dialogue were able to visit the affected 1 2

which is located in Afram Plains District, Eastern Region, Ghana http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/new/2006/media_release_forced_evictions_in_ghana.pdf

2

villages, interview evictees, and observe the work of the Committee of Enquiry set up by the Ghanaian government to investigate the April boat disaster. A People’s Dialogue representative gathered additional information from 10-16 May 2006.

1.1

Methodology of investigations

This report sets forth information gathered from partner organizations, press reports, and first hand accounts gathered as a result of all three fact-finding missions reported above. It relys heavily on COHRE’s own investigation and fact-finding mission.

COHRE researchers interviewed more than 50 informants in the following categories: •

Evicted women from Digya Park in a market in Accra

•

Survivors of the 8 April boat disaster

• Residents remaining • Volta

in Digya Park under threat of eviction

River Authority Officials

• Media

personnel who had consistently reported events surrounding the eviction

2

DIGYA PARK AND ITS PEOPLE

Much of the area of the Digya National Park is comprised of a number of small islands. Prior to the eviction, the Park was host to 49 villages, with populations ranging from 50 to 824 persons.

An enumeration exercise conducted by the residents in 2001 put the estimated population of the area at 7 184, made up of fisherfolk, farmers and fishmongers. The majority of housing in these villages are mud structures, with thatched roofs. There is one school in Agordeke which serves the nearby islands. There is no pipe-borne water supply, sanitation system or electricity. None of the islands have a hospital or adequate medical facility. The only means of transport available to people is by boat.

There are two categories of persons reside in the villages - those considered indigenous to the area and those considered settlers. (Please see Section 6.1.1 for further discussion on this issue.) The indigenes are regarded as natives of the villages and the settlers are migrants from different parts of Ghana. It is common practice for migrants to pay a regular “user fee” to the native traditional leaders (chiefs) of the land to which they have relocated. The settlers of Digya follow this practice.

The Digya National Park covers an area of 3,478 km2 on the western shores of Lake Volta. The area was gazetted in 1971 and is considered a wildlife-protected area.3

3

http://www.fcghana.com/eco_tourism/digya.htm

3

Figure A: Map of the Volta Lake

3 2006 FORCED EVICTIONS FROM DIGYA NATIONAL PARK Wardens from the Game and Wildlife Division of the Forestry Commission4 (often referred to as ‘the Wildlife Division’) carried out a series of forced evictions in the Digya National Park from 10 March to 8 April 2006. The wardens were supported by police and soldiers. The evictions displaced and/or otherwise negatively affected approximately 7 000 people.

The Wildlife Division had sent a letter, dated 10 February 2006, to the traditional leaders (chiefs) of the following villages: Hedzro; Zikpo; Supom Odome; Agrafi; Tenakope; Agege; Yamouso; Korlelope; Kwaehumu; and Sapkiti. The letter informed the chiefs of an “evacuation exercise” scheduled for 28 February 2006 to “rid the Digya National Park of intruders.” It requested the residents to leave the Park on their own interest before the scheduled date.

The notice does not mention the authorisation or involvement of District Assemblies or other local authorities. Furthermore, Mr. Fodjour of the District Chief Executive (DCE) office at Donkokrom confirmed that the office did not receive notice of the pending eviction.

4

The Wildlife Division is one of the three divisions of the reconstituted Forestry Commission. It began as a branch of the Forestry Department of the Ministry of Agriculture responsible for wildlife issues. In 1965, it became a full-fledged line agency of the Ministry of Forestry known as the Department of Game and Wildlife, which later changed to Wildlife Division after the adoption of the Forestry and Wildlife Policy of 1994. The Wildlife Division is currently housed under the Ministry of Lands & Forestry. It is responsible for all wildlife in the country and administers 16 wildlife-protected areas (PAs), 5 coastal Ramsar Sites and the Accra and Kumasi Zoos. It also assists with the running of 2 community owned Wildlife Sanctuaries.

4

The villages had received similar warnings before which were never carried out, and they were not sure whether to take this one seriously. (Previous notices had been sent, as well as verbal threats from Wildlife Division wardens - Please see Section 6 for further details) Some residents may have left voluntarily before the 28 February date, but most were still living on the islands when the forced evictions took place from 15-21 March 2006, and again from 1-8 April 2006.

The evictions seemed to have followed a pattern whereby a number of armed wardens (usually seven to eight), sometimes together with army and police officials, would arrive from various camps they had established for themselves in the area. Armed with AK47 rifles and sticks, they forced the villagers to pack up their belongings and move to the shore. Thereafter, for the most part, the wardens did not allow the villagers to re-enter or re-occupy their homes. Instead they forced them to live in the open on the lakeshore, along with their belongings. Many villagers reported staying on the shores of various islands for up to three weeks, waiting to board the next available boat. Often, villagers could not afford either commercial boat fees or the costs of chartering a private boat. The eviction took place in a rainy though very hot season along the Volta. Therefore, many of the evictees became ill and there were several reports of children who had died due to exposure from the elements.

The evictions ended abruptly on 8 April at about 5pm, when a boat disaster involving evictees5 was reported on Obuba FM, a local radio station. The Wildlife wardens hurriedly left the makeshift camps they had set up on several islands.6 Most evictees were directed by the wardens to travel to, and stay on, Mankyere peninsula7 as an alternative site for their accommodation, but wardens did not mention the provision of alternative housing or compensation. (Please see Section 3.11 below) Many did not go to Mankyere, but instead relocated to villages on the mainland around Lake Volta and opposite Digya Park. Many were forced to return though because they could not find livelihood opportunities or proper accommodation at either Mankyere or other villages, which included Dzatake, Otisu and Tapa Abotoase.

Those that did stay on Mankyere island did so either out of fear of the wardens or because they lacked the means to return to their villages. On Mankyere they constructed makeshift shelters.

When COHRE visited Mankyere Island, on 5-6 May 2006, approximately 200 displaced villagers still resided there. However, when the evictions first occurred, there are estimates that as many as 5000 villagers were living on Mankyere.

Information gathered from residents from each of the villages listed below has been put together to provide a brief history of the village, an account of the eviction and, where possible, monetary estimates of property loss per village. Most of these villages were not named in the ‘evacuation exercise’ notice.

5

6

7

Investigations by Local Authorities in the area put the death toll at 10. This was revealed during interviews with the Assemblywoman for Abotoase, who distributed relief items to survivors of the boat disaster.

Agbedwode, Samuel, Wildlife Officials Threaten Fishermen at Gunpoint, Ghanaian Chronicle, 11 July 2006, posted on http://.allafrica.com/stories/prinable/200607110850.html Also known as Mankyere Island, though it is surrounded on three sides by water.

5

3.1 Agordeke “My wife and I were hardworking farmers till the eviction. Now we do not have any farms in the new community in which we live. In addition to this, we have to rent a house and buy food out of our savings. After we have exhausted our savings we will have to borrow from our family members till they get fed up with us. After that my family of 12 will starve to death.”

Seth Homeji Evictee from Agordeke

Although it was not listed in the ‘evacuation exercise’ notice, Agordeke was one of the hardest hit villages during the evictions. The village is mainly populated by farmers and fisherfolk, who originally came from other parts of the Volta Region. Most residents of Agordeke interviewed by COHRE had lived in Agordeke for more than 30 years. Of those COHRE spoke with, the longest-standing resident had lived in the village for 41 years.

A few residents stated that they had received some indication of the impending evictions when their Local Authority Representative (Assemblyman) told them, in early February 2006, that they had ten days to leave the village. However, residents did not know whether they should be concerned, as such “warnings” had come before with no result. Thus, they did not feel threatened until the Wildlife wardens arrived on 15 March 2006 and instructed the villagers to move all their belongings to the shore. An eighteen member team of wardens reportedly intimidated the people at the shore. Some residents claimed they were beaten without provocation. Others told COHRE that the wardens ate the villager’s food, which had been prepared from their limited supplies.

To avoid further violence, people began leaving from March 15 onwards as soon as they had gathered such belongings as they could carry and pooled enough funds for a boat to take them to various locations on the mainland.

According to Mr. Hope Ashiagbor - a teacher and farmer, living in Agordeke for over 13 years he and other villagers spent approximately three weeks on the shore with their belongings, after being forced out of their houses by the wardens. He was unable to pay for a boat to take him to another location. On 8 April 2006, he was forced onto an already overcrowded boat. When he refused - because the boat was overloaded - the wardens threatened that if he did not get on, he would face trouble. They claimed that this was the last boat that would be coming to carry evictees away. He was told that the boat was headed for Tapa Abotoase. Approximately ten miles from the shores of Tapa Abotoase, the boat, which was carrying more than twice its capacity, capsized after it struck a submerged tree stump. (Please see Section 4 for further information) Evictees estimated the village’s total losses at: 9 million cedis (approximately $1000) in property (mostly fishing nets and livestock), as well as approximately 2 million cedis ($230) in livelihood losses, primarily in terms of income they would have earned through fishing and fish mongering.

3.1.1 Violence in Agordeke Villagers’ accounts of the evictions from Agordeke include: • Wardens used sticks to severely beat a man because he questioned their decision to “harass their fellow Ghanaians”.

6

• A man showed the COHRE team deep scars on his back, saying that wardens had beaten him because he killed a protected animal during the eviction exercise.

• A resident of Agordeke for 41 years was forced to look directly at the sun for two hours continuously as a punishment for not responding promptly to instructions given by the wardens.

His eyesight is impaired as a result and no medial assistance was provided immediately thereafter.

•The Wildlife wardens destroyed make-shift shelters made by evictees to protect themselves from the rain and sun. When it started to rain during the eviction exercise, the Wildlife wardens sought refuge in the deserted homes of the villagers, but refused entry to the villagers and forced them to stand in the heavy rain.

“I put all my seven children on the boat with our household items because the Wildlife wardens forced us to leave the Island. I did not go to the market with my seven children, raffia mats, cooking pots and all our clothes, they are lying - the boat that capsized was not going to the market. Two of my children died in the boat disaster, and two of my sister’s children also died. This family is mourning four children; this is too much for us to bear!”

Rebecca Tobo Victim of the boat disaster and long time resident of Agordeke

3.2

Bikor

“I was frightened beyond description when the Wildlife wardens came to our village because of the inhumane treatment they used to give us any time they would come in the past.”

Mrs. Gbeda Kofi-Gbadegbe 27-year resident of Bikor

The village of Bikor had not been given any prior notice or information on the pending eviction.

The residents interviewed by COHRE had been residing in Bikor for 17-27 years. They said they had only heard rumours that the Wildlife Division wardens, who had been spotted in the area, were there to drive away Fulani herdsmen from Burkina Faso, who were illegally grazing their cattle in the Park. They did not know that they would be evicted from the Park and thus they were surprised to see a team of Wildlife wardens and soldiers arriving at the village on 8 April.

Many villagers were forced, under threat of violence, onto the boat that was to capsize before reaching Tapa Aobotoase. The witnesses COHRE spoke with had fortunately not lost relatives.

Residents estimate that property valued at approximately 20.5 million cedis (approximately $2300), including fishing nets and personal effects, were lost as a result of the eviction.

7

3.3

Horkpedzi

“I suspected that the wardens would come to my village, so I hid three baskets of fish in the bush, but it was discovered by the wardens. They beat me and forced me to carry all three baskets on my head at the same time. I injured my neck from carrying such a heavy load.”

John Manywin Long-time resident of Horkpedzi

The first people to settle at Horkpedzi came in 1967, and its population before the April 2006 eviction was about 500 . Residents are fisherfolk and farmers of cassava, groundnuts, yams and maize. They also rear sheep, goats and fowl. They sell their produce and fish in Tapa Abotoase.

The village of Horkpedzi had undergone a previous eviction in 1989, though most villagers had returned within two weeks. In 2002, another eviction was threatened, but the Minister for Lands and Forestry intervened and the evictions were suspended.

On 14 February 2006, the assemblyman for the district, Mr. Francis Ashaigbor delivered the Wildlife Division ‘evacuation exercise’ notice to the chief of Horkpedzi village. The residents of Horkpedzi were confused because their village did not appear on the list of those to be evacuated. The residents of Horkpedzi asked the Assemblyman to follow up with the Wildlife Division at Atebubu, the headquarters for Wildlife Division for Digya National Park, but Mr. Ashaigbor insisted that the residents of Horkpedzi must leave.

Wildlife Division wardens, armed with AK47 rifles, arrived with soldiers on 15 March 2006, the team consisted of approximately 10 soldiers and four wardens. Residents were told to pack all personal belongings and leave their houses immediately. They were forced to move to the shores of the island with their belongings and to wait for the next available boat to take them elsewhere.

Approximately 250 residents stayed there for several weeks, long after the Wildlife team had left, as they were very afraid to move back into their homes. Many also managed to move to Mankyere.

Twelve Wildlife Division wardens returned on 8 April 2006. They harassed villagers by impounding property including cattle, crates of minerals, and other food stuffs. The wardens also forced the owner of the only corn mill in the village to dismantle the mill at gunpoint.

Later that same day, the wardens and soldiers remained in the village saying (according to one resident of Horkpedzi ) that “they needed to ensure that we [the residents] would leave” though it was clear that the team itself was taking its time - even preparing a meal of the Horkpedzi residents’ food. That afternoon, news of the boat disaster reached Horkpedzi. The eviction team remained until dawn the next day, when they hastily left for Korlekope. Before leaving they ordered the remaining villagers to remain on the island and to move back into their homes.

Residents attributed this sudden change in stance by the evictors to the news of the boat disaster.

The total estimated losses of Horkpedzi residents who were interviewed and were able to provide estimates was 6.3 million cedis (approximately $700) worth of property.

8

3.4

Korlekope

Korlekope was amongst the villages listed in the 10 February ‘evacuation exercise’ notice, which was delivered directly to the chief of the village by wardens. The wardens returned to Korlekope in first week of March, during which time they intimidated villagers. They returned again about a week later together with soldiers. This team arrived at approximately 7 am when most of the men had gone fishing. They asked the women to pack all their belongings and move them onto the shore. The women did so and, when the men returned, they joined them on the shore.

3.5

Labilakope

The three residents who COHRE interviewed in the village of Labilakope were yam and cassava farmers. They estimated that most residents had lived there for 10 years.

Residents of Labilakope stated that they had received two weeks notice, although the ‘evacuation exercise’ notice of 10 February does not name Labilakope. One interviewee stated that he was forced to leave his home on 18 March by a team of Wildlife wardens and military. He and others remained at the shore for several weeks. On 8 April, the wardens returned, and forced some of the villagers onto the boat that capsized off Tapa Abotoase. None of the witnesses with whom COHRE spoke had lost relatives, though several had lost property. Some villagers left on 9 April, renting boats to bring them to Mankyere and other villages along the shore.

The value of property reportedly lost during the boat disaster, as well as property left behind and/or damaged, totalled approximately 22 million cedis (approximately $2450), with another 22 million cedis (approximately $2450) estimated as loss of income as a direct result of the eviction.

3.6 Mamakope8 Residents living in Mamakope, who were interviewed by COHRE, had been living there for between 35 and 42 years, earning their living as fisherfolk. Though not mentioned in the list of villages slated for evacuation in the letter sent by the Wildlife division, Mamakope was nonetheless forcibly evicted. Some residents of Mamakope reported having received approximately 2 weeks notice from their Local Authority Representative, though no one interviewed could recall the exact date.

After receiving the notice, the residents of Mamakope did not make any attempts to leave because they did not have alternative accommodation. The Wildlife wardens came to Mamakope on the 1st, as well as the 8th April 2006, to threaten the residents to go. The leaders of Mamakope pleaded with the wardens on 1 April to allow them more time, but they were refused. When the wardens returned on 8 April, they forced the remaining residents of Mamakope onto the boat that later capsized. Those who were able to make an estimate, put the value of property lost at 15 million cedis (approximately $1666). In addition, one fisherman reported approximately 5 million cedis in lost income. Another evictee from Mamakope lost eight million cedis (approximately $890) in the water when the boat capsized.

8

Mamakura and Mamakpedzi are alternative names for the island.

9

3.7 Mepekope “The Wildlife Wardens responded in anger when I questioned them about the use of force on their fellow Ghanaians. They beat me, stripped me naked, handcuffed me and took me to Zikpo on a boat.

When we got to Zikpo they left me there and told me to find my way home.”

Kobla Akahu More than 30-year resident of Mepekope

Mepekope is a fishing and farming village of about 500 persons, that has been settled since 1964 by people who had been displaced by the building of the Akasombo Dam. The main livelihood is fishing. There is also cassava farming and animal husbandry, although these have been limited in recent years due to harassment and eviction threats by wardens.

Some of the destroyed and abandoned housing at Mepekope village.

The villagers of Mepekope told COHRE of repeated harassment by the wardens between 1989 and 2002. They reported that sometimes these officers would come and stay for two to three weeks in the village with them. Between 1989 and 2002, several of the same Wildlife wardens involved in the current eviction had been regularly harassing the people of Mepekope.

The first evictions at Mepekope took place in 1989 (see Section 6 below). The entire village left, but most returned within 2 weeks. In this eviction, lives and property were lost. One resident explained to COHRE that the village was “visited by atrocities” during that eviction.

Residents told COHRE that, in the years after 1989, the wardens would come to the village by boat, enter the village and act in a threatening manner. Often the men in the village would run into the bush, fearing that the wardens would beat them. In 2002, during one such visit, the villagers reported that a young girl in the village was raped by the wardens. Though not confirmed to COHRE by the girl herself (she no longer lives in the village and therefore was not interviewed), other women residents said that wardens would harass them when they arrived and

10

found that the men had run into the bush. On subsequent visits, the men remained in the village to prevent further harassment. They have filed a series of complaints, and written several letters to the District Chief Executive (DCE) of Donkorkrum, their Minister of Parliament, and various other ministers (no copies available) but to no avail. The villagers also bundled up sticks that the wardens used to beat them and sent these to the MP who in turn sent them to Parliament. In 2002, the residents of Mepekope were threatened with eviction again, but it was stopped when the Minister of Lands and Forestry intervened.

Mepekope was not listed in the February 2006 ‘evacuation exercise’ notice. Wildlife wardens delivered the notice to the chief of a neighbouring village, who informed the people of Mepekope of the pending eviction. As their village was not on the list, the villagers of Mepekope were not that concerned.

Then, on 15 March, the team of Wildlife wardens came to Mepekope, along with soldiers and police, and forced the villagers to pack and move their belongings to the shore and there to await a boat to pick them up. They used force and threats of force to make the people move their belongings. Livestock and other items were seized by the wardens before leaving the village on 16 March.

Several villagers lived on the shore for many days waiting for a boat. Others chartered boats at high cost or used their own canoes, carrying their belongings to various locations. Evictees reported that several boats or canoes capsized and millions of cedis worth of equipment (mainly nets for fishing) and personal belongings were lost.

The wardens returned on the morning of 8 April, brandishing AK47 rifles. They forced those remaining to board the boat which later capsized. Others, who had left in March and had returned, escaped into the bush to avoid being forced onto the boats.

The village was almost empty when the COHRE team visited on 4 May 2006. Evictees from Mepekope moved to Atafram, Otisu, Kpordoave, Dzatake, Mankyere, Aglakorpe, and Kwawkudade, which are villages located outside the National Park. Approximately 150 people have since returned due to hardship and a lack of livelihoods and shelter at alternative locations.

Many testified that they had been forced to leave belongings behind, and that when they returned, they found them stolen or destroyed. Approximately 84 million cedis’ worth of tools, nets, food stuffs, animals and crops (destroyed due to forced neglect) were lost, and approximately 6 million cedis was spent in transport from the island as a result of the eviction.

11

TESTIMONIES FROM MEPEKOPE: The Wildlife wardens came on the 15th of March, staying here the whole day. I left on the 16th of March, to Kwakudade - I was actually headed for Mankyere, but was forced to pass by as it seemed too crowded. I was forced to paddle there with my livestock, wife and children. Once in Kwakudade, I found no livelihood opportunities - there is nothing for us there.

Kadzote Abotsi 41 year resident of Mepekope I was evicted on 16 of March. I was forced to hire a boat at the cost of 3 million cedis to transport my cattle to Otisu. I had returned to Mepekope to transport other livestock, but was forced to take them on the overcrowded boat which sank. The livestock was killed. My daughter was with me on the boat, but thankfully we both survived. When we arrived finally in Tapa Abotoase, we had no clothes, we were given clothes by the people.

Elias Kodzo Agbenyefa 42 year resident of Mepekope I was alone, so I was very scared when the Wildlife wardens arrived to tell us to leave - I was told my place is not right for human settlement. They came to my house and threatened me. As I could not afford transport, I sent a message to my brother in law who lives nearby. He came several days later to fetch me. I was only able to take a few personal belongings and left everything else behind. I had been growing cassava to support myself, but that is gone now. I suffered at the new place so much.

Mrs Sam Awo 30 year resident of Mepekope The Wildlife wardens came with soldiers - we were not expecting them. We had heard of the letter, but did not take it seriously for Wildlife wardens had threatened before only to harass and bother us.

They came that day with sticks and guns. They said to me as the leader of this village “Are you not aware you have to leave?� I asked the wardens for more time- they said that there was no more time, we had to leave now. They threatened to kill all the animals if we did not leave. So I was forced to charter a boat to take my family and my livestock to Otisu. I came back for family members and more livestock, carrying it on the ill fated boat. I lost all my property, but luckily my family survived.

Simon Detepe (Community Leader for Mepekope) 41-42 year resident of Mepekope When we were finally able to arrange transport from Mepekope, after being evicted, it was a paddle boat. We travelled to Atifram, for Mankyere was far too overcrowded. We were suffering at Atifiam there was no food, no accommodation, no livelihood. We were forced to come back to Mepekope, though we left everything at Atifram. Now we have no home.

Kwasirwomi Kpogo 15 year resident of Mepekope The Wildlife wardens came with soldiers on 15 March with guns and military, they told us if we do not leave we would be victims of their violence. So I was scared, and left 17 March. I had to return to get more belongings, and was there when the Wildlife wardens came again on 8 April- I hid in the bush, so they could not find me to put me on the boat.

Mr. Aklapa 20 year resident of Mepekope I was forced to leave my items at the lakeside when evicted, when I returned I found them all stolen. I was trying to convey livestock, but they were forced too tightly on the boat I was travelling on and many of them died. I lost about 35 million cedis (approximately $390) worth of property.

Sakomandor Yawvi 20 year resident of Mepekope

12

3.8

Surveyorkpedzi:

“I was threatened at gunpoint. They fired warning shots into the air, telling us we must go.”

Madame Kafuia Avatror 21 year resident of Surveyorkpedzi village

Surveyorkpedzi was not listed in the ‘evacuation exercise’ notice. Nevertheless they were informed about the eviction exercise verbally by Mr. Ashaigbor, the Assemblyman for the area. A team of Wildlife wardens and soldiers arrived at the village on 16 March, threatening villagers at gunpoint to pack their belongings and to go to the island shore. Many stayed there for several days until they could find transport to bring them to Mankyere or other locations. On 8 April, Wildlife wardens evicted those that had returned subsequently or had not left earlier.

The Wildlife wardens forced a villager, Mr. Abavor, to dismantle his sugar cane crusher and corn mill, at a replacement value of 7 million cedis (approximately $780). Another resident said that wardens stole or destroyed property valued at 2.4 million cedis (approximately $270) in her small store. The total reported lost income in Surveyorkpedzi was 5 million cedis.

3.9

Wanukope

The village of Wanukope was also not included in the notice of the evacuation exercise but it too was targeted during the evictions.

Wanukope predominantly consists of ‘settlers’ from the north of Ghana. Most of the evictees are now staying with the largely Moslem community in Tapa Abotoase.

Between the end of February and mid-March 2006, the wardens came to Wanukope regularly from nearby Gborkope (where it is reported that Wildlife wardens had established a temporary camp) to demand that the villagers leave. Violence was typical during such visits. A female evictee from Wanukope interviewed by COHRE in Tapa Abotoase, told COHRE that she witnessed a man being severely beaten by Wildlife wardens, allegedly because they had found him in possession of a gun.

Most of the evictees from Wanukope were on the boat that capsized on 8 April and two were among those who perished. The oldest survivor of the boat disaster is from Wanukope. Wanu, a 70 year-old man who was rescued from the water, is a community leader. He lost 84 sheep and goats and other properties. He had lived in Wanukope for over 40 years. His father was an the indigenes to the area.

3.10 Zikpo “I cannot know how I can survive with my wives and children in any new environment – it may be better for me to commit suicide since the evacuation has taken my hope and aspirations.”

Mr Ketzi 40 year resident of Zikpo village

13

The village of Zikpo has been in existence since 1964. The residents are primarily fisherfolk and fishmongers. Their village was listed in the ‘evacuation exercise’ notice of February 2006 which was delivered directly to their chief.

Villagers informed COHRE of regular harassment by the Wildlife wardens since 1989.

An armed group of Wildlife wardens and military personnel arrived on 20 March 2006, to force the villagers to move their belongings to the shore. After two weeks, they returned, armed again, and threatened the villagers. All households left, but up to 20 households have subsequently returned because of harsh living conditions at the places at which they resettled.

Some of the remaining items left by fleeing evictees on the shores of Zikpo.

FIGURE 1: LOSSES REPORTED TO COHRE TEAM: VILLAGE Bikor Horkpedzi Labilakope Mepekope Surveyorkope TOTAL REPORTED LOSSES

LOSS IN INCOME

LOSS IN PROPERTY 5.5 million cedis 6.3 million cedis 22 million cedis 22 million cedis 84 million cedis 5 million cedis 2.4 million cedis 27 million cedis = 3000 USD 120.2 million cedis – apprx.

13,350 USD

14

3.11 Evictees remaining at Mankyere Mankyere, a small peninsula jutting into Lake Volta, became a temporary home for most evictees from the various villages on Digya Islands. The nearest evicted village is Zikpo, approximately 10 minutes away by motorboat.

From the outset of the evictions in March 2006, most of the evictees were directed to go to Mankyere by the Wildlife wardens. The area along the shores of Mankyere quickly became overcrowded. Most accounts estimate that there were 5000 people there after the last day of evictions on 8 April. When COHRE visited Mankyere, on 4 and 5 May 2006 - almost 6 weeks after the first day of the evictions - we were told that 3000-4000 people were still living on the shore. The evictees were forced to stay on the shoreline because the land further inland had already been claimed or given away by the chief . Additionally, remaining close to the shore gave the evictees easier access to the lake for fishing, and a better chance of finding transport for those able to afford it.

There are numerous problems for residents at Mankyere. For the fishermen, the water around Mankyere is very deep, and does not allow for the kind of fishing they are used to practice, as any nets that they were able to bring to Mankyere during the eviction are unusable, and have to be altered for fishing in the deeper water. Most evictees are fisherfolk and fishmongers but it is not viable for all fisherfolk within the lake area to operate from Mankyere only.

The chief at Mankyere, Chief Anoche, is a sub-chief9 to the paramount chief10 of the Adjadi Stool. In an interview with COHRE, Chief Anoche said that the chieftaincy of the Adjadi Stool has long been officially recognised and was given the land at Mankyere by the Government in 1989. As such, the Adjadi chief is empowered to allocate land at Mankyere ‘at will’. It was explained to COHRE that this is why Mankyere was designated as the relocation area, and that the Adjadi chief had empowered sub-chief Anoche (at Mankyere) to give land to any evictee who asked for it. (It should be noted that COHRE was not able to confirm this version with either the Paramount chief or Government officials.)

However, the evictees have accused the chief of Mankyere of giving land primarily to herdsmen from the north of Ghana and Burkina Faso for their cattle to graze. This has had a large impact on the amount of land available for farming. It is estimated that, about 75 percent of land has been allocated to herders and only 25 percent left over for farming by the evictees. The SubChief admitted to COHRE that there was not enough land for the influx of evictees.

9

10

A traditional leader of a small village or cluster of villages, under the authority of a higher ranking, or paramount, chief.

A traditional leader who has authority over a sizeable traditional area with lesser ranking traditional leaders under his authority.

15

The evictees forced to camp at Mankyere Island in deplorable conditions, 5 May 2006 All the evictees at Mankyere confirmed the version of events narrated by their counterparts in other villages - they came to Mankyere under pressure from the Wildlife Division wardens.

Statement of the Mankyere Women’s Committee:11 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Is it a law in Ghana that a Ghanaian should be sacked from their own country?

Now you’ve sacked us what was you aim in sacking us?

The question is: Between bush animals and human beings - which of these are more expensive?

Our desire is that we should have a sound mind, if not so we shall die through these sufferings.

Students school fees are paid by us, now that we stop working due to this unbearable place of living, how shall we send them to school again? What shall we do to regain our work? Food is unavailable for the student’s living.

Our children are being destroyed is it good for a Ghanaian to suffer this way?

Our conclusion is that bush animals should be removed before human beings are.

3.11.1 Shelter Most evictees had no alternative living arrangements. Many were forced to move in with wellwishers or family members on other shores of the Volta, in towns and villages such as Tapa Abotoase and Kwamekrom. One resident of Agordeke who COHRE interviewed had an alternative home in Tapa Abotoase, to which he and his family were able to relocate - but such possibilities were rare amongst the evictees. The few who could afford to rent houses in Tapa Abotoase were worried about how long they could afford the rents because they had lost their source of livelihood as a result of the evictions.

11

The Women’s Committee of Mankyere was established as a response to the eviction, and includes over 100 women on Mankyere. The Statement, copied verbatim above, was provided both orally and in writing to the COHRE Team during their visit of 4 May 2006.

16

At Mankyere, approximately 100 makeshift shelters made up of bits of wood, thatch and other materials such as plastic sheets were erected along the waterfront. Such shelters provided little real protection. Building materials are scarce and the evictees do not have funds to buy what is available. A few of the evictees staying at Mankyere had been able to travel back to their villages to retrieve some materials they had left behind.

3.11.2 Health The health situation in Mankyere was very poor. People were living in very unhygienic and crowded conditions. There is real concern about the lack of food and health supplies. At the time of the COHRE visit, Emmanuel Egbenyo, the only Health Assistant in the area, said that six evictee children had died as a result of severe malnutrition and exposure to the elements, and one evicted woman had died in the Wora Wora hospital due to shock and exposure. Another woman had recently collapsed and been brought to the hospital at Tapa Abotoase.

Egbenyo reported that he must travel regularly to the nearest hospital in Tapa Abotoase for limited health supplies. There is no emergency health post with qualified medical staff at Mankyere for the evictees.

Food supplies, donated by the National Disaster Management Organization (NADMO), NGO’s, and Members of Parliament are inadequate and there was discontent among the evictees about the mode of distribution. Many of the evictees COHRE spoke with alleged that food supplies meant for them had been diverted to people unaffected by the eviction.

3.11.3 Livelihoods Many of the evictees had been running small farms near or at their homesteads in the various villages. All the crops that the evictees had left behind were annual crops, primarily cassava. The eviction was carried out at a time when many of the crops were becoming ready for harvest.

Because the eviction happened without adequate and proper notice, the evicted farmers were forced to leave the crops behind to rot.

The fisherfolk reported to COHRE that the overcrowding in new locations like Mankyere will adversely affect their ability to effectively carry out their trade. Fishmongers, who are next in the economic livelihood chain of these villages, had developed methods to preserve fish and supplied the dried fish to other villages, towns and markets, including Adabraka Market in the capital city, Accra. The evictions, and the forced abandonment of their fish drying tools, have left these women fishmongers with no alternate livelihood. Without sources of livelihood, the evictees, especially those at Mankyere, are living in very harsh economic conditions.

3.11.4 Education The two primary schools serving all the villages, located in Agordeke and Hedrzo, were abandoned by teachers and students because of the evictions. Many of the evictees at Mankyere, and many who have returned to their villages, have thus gone without schooling since the evictions. Until the time of this report, neither the Agordeke school nor a replacement had opened. Many evictees living in locations where schools exist, such as Tapa Abotoase, have been unable to reenrol their children due to a lack of funds for fees and books. COHRE estimates that schooling for many as 3 000 children has been disrupted by the evictions.12 12

Estimate gathered through interviews and confirmed by various community leaders.

17

4

EVICTIONS RELATED BOAT DISASTER

On 8 April 2006, a wooden motorized boat carrying over 150 evictees13 capsized in the Volta Lake. According to the Regional Police Commander, the boat was carrying more than double its 63-person capacity as well as livestock, personal possessions and furniture. Initial media reports 14 put the death toll at 120 but after an investigation and identification of survivors, the death toll was confirmed to be ten. 15

The Volta Lake, with its dangerous tree stumps. This area is where the boat disaster of 8 April occurred.

Game and Wildlife wardens, who were armed, had forced the helmsman to overload the boat with evictees and their personal goods and livestock. The overloaded boat then struck clustered tree stumps in the water and capsized.

The Game and Wildlife Division’s Executive Director denied that there was a link between the evictions and the boat disaster, in a press conference on 11 April 2006. He said that all the wardens had left the National Park by 8 April and passengers on the boat were voluntarily going to the market at Tapa Abotoase. However, survivors of the boat disaster interviewed by the COHRE team, as well as those who testified in front of the Volta Lake Boat Disaster Committee, explained that they were forced on to the boat by a team of Wildlife wardens as part of the eviction. The helmsman of the boat, Mawuli Akimbola, said that 14 heavily-armed wardens on speed boats escorted his boat and forced him to overload it.16 The Wildlife wardens travelled with and/or alongside the boat in their own boats from village to village.

4.1

Committee of Inquiry:

The Minister of Ports, Harbour and Railways set up the Volta Lake Boat Disaster Committee to investigate circumstances surrounding the boat disaster.17 The Committee was given up to 26

13 14 15

16 17

Precise passenger numbers are unavailable for boats traveling in rural areas. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4896164.stm The Committee of Enquiry, during a press conference in which its report was handed over to the Government revealed they came to the conclusion that the death toll is 10. However this figure is disputed by some sections of the press who claim mass graves of evictees have been discovered in the Volta Region Evidence before the boat disaster committee sitting at Tapa Abotoase – 3 May 2006 http://www.mphrgh.org/news/article.asp?id=7

18

May 2006 to present its report. However, the report was delayed because of the number of people who gave evidence at Jasikan, Tapa Abotoase, Kwamekrom, Mankyere and Accra.

Representatives from COHRE, People’s Dialogue and the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative appeared before the Committee with a draft of this report, case law on housing rights and interviews conducted by COHRE18.

At a press conference, the Committee representatives handed their findings to the Minister for Ports, Railways and Harbours. The Committee representatives failed to address the substance of the report at the press conference, and only confirmed that there were 10 deceased boat disaster victims - rather than as many as 100 dead, as earlier reports had stated. The Minister said that the President of Ghana will study the report and a White Paper will be issued on the reports and its findings. 19

5

OFFICIAL NARRATIVE

5.1

Evacuation Exercise Notice

In a letter dated 10 February 2006, Asamoah Boateng, Park Manager of the Wildlife Division, stated that the “Wildlife Division is going to embark on an evacuation exercise to ride the park of intruders” to enable the Division to develop the park “to achieve the goal for which the area was acquired.” The letter claimed that the exercise would begin on 28 February 2006, and informed “all those concern [sic] in advance to vacate the park in their own interest before the said date.”

The letter was addressed to the chiefs of the villages of Hedzro, Zikpo, Supom Odome, Agrafi, Tanakope, Agege, Yamoso, Kolekope, Kwaehumu and Sapkiti.

The notice does not provide a meaningful reason for the eviction to the residents of Digya National Park. The notice refers to the need to rid the park of intruders, but does not define what constitutes an intruder. Those people who had resided in Digya National Park since before the park existed could not reasonably be referred to as intruders.

From interviews with evictees, it is clear that Wildlife wardens were not consistent in the reasons they gave to residents they were evicting. One reason given to some evictees was that the area was not fit for human habitation; another was that the area needed to be developed for tourists; and others were told animals must live there, not people. Some residents were merely told that the land did not belong to them, so they must leave. Many others were given no explanation at all.

5.2

Game and Wildlife Division Statements

The Executive Director of the Game and Wildlife Division addressed a press conference on 11 April 2006, after his agency had been publicly implicated, not only in the Lake Volta boat disaster days before, but in the forced eviction of people from Digya Park.

With respect to the boat disaster, the Executive Director asserted that (a) the people on board were voluntarily on their way to the market at Tapa Abotoase, and that (b) all Wildlife Division 18 19

http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/chrinews/2006/volta_lake_disaster_cmt_continues_sitting.htm http://www.ghanaweb.com/public_agenda/article.php?ID=5476

19

personnel were out of the area by 8 April (the day of the disaster) and so, by implication, had no connection with the boat-trip on that day.

Evictees respond with uniform incredulity to the suggestion that occupants of the boat were just going to market. They concede it was indeed market day at Tapa Abotoase but are very clear that people were on the overcrowded boat because they were being forcibly evicted (as described above). Survivors of the boat disaster who were interviewed by COHRE insist that they would not have gone to the market carrying all their household items, their children and their animals and livestock.

With respect to the Division’s involvement in forced evictions, the Executive Director said that, since Wildlife personnel were in the area, they “took the opportunity to remind the residents to leave” but insisted that no one was forced to leave. Again, this version cannot be reconciled with people’s accounts of their forcible eviction that emerges plainly and consistently, from their various accounts.

In a press statement entitled “Boat Accident on the Volta Lake: wildlife Division Side of the Story”, the Wildlife Division claims: “A team made up of wildlife and military personnel was in the field between March 11 and 20, 2006 basically to drive out over 6000 cattle that had been taken into the park illegally. Prior to the team’s arrival in the field some settlers had left. Of course, while in the field staff reminded settlers to leave. While others were preparing still other were given time to wind up their activities and leave. This team was in the field between March 11 and 20, 2006.

Staff of the Digya National Park were in the field over the weekend to ensure that those who had left did not return. This monitoring team returned to Atebubu, the Park HQ, on Sunday April 9 and did not see anybody rushing to leave the Park. The team never forced anybody to leave either.”

This last statement – that Wildlife staff were in the field to ensure that those who had left (referring to evictees) did not return - contradicts other claims made in the very same statement which also says: “At the time of this unfortunate accident [referring to the boat disaster], April 8, 2006, no military or wildlife staff were in the field in connection with the evacuation exercise”.

Other claims and attempted justifications in the Division’s statement are strongly refuted by those interviewed by COHRE. For instance, the Division attempted to explain its significant presence and heightened degree of activity in Digya Park at the time by alleging that 6000 head of cattle had been transported into the Park. However, those that COHRE spoke with pointed out that it is highly improbable for 6000 cattle to be transported into the Park at one time given the limited means of transport available to the villagers.

Evictees confirmed the presence of Wildlife wardens in their villages from 20 March until 9 April with many witnesses, especially from Horkpedzi, recalling the Wildlife wardens being in their village when the report of the boat disaster came over the radio. Only after hearing this did the wardens depart.

20

5.3

Wildlife Division wardens identified by evictees

In interviews with COHRE, most evictees could identify a number of Wildlife wardens by name, in some cases nicknames. Residents were able to recognise wardens who came to villages periodically and harassed and intimidated the villagers. The villagers did not tie specific events to specific individuals, but stated that Ghaddaffi and Warleader were the most brutal in their treatment of the villagers.

The names of the wardens identified are as follows: • • • • • • • • •

Ghaddaffi Warleader Mohammad Akpani Vivikoe Edward Ayisi Corporal Kumah Mampam Owusu Ranger Ata Kusi

6

HISTORY OF AREA AND EVICTIONS

6.1

Digya National Park

When Digya Park was established in 1971, the area was populated, and villagers engaged in fishing, farming and trade around the Volta Lake. The Government of Ghana created the Digya National Park by a legislative instrument (LI), LI 710. The park was created to serve as one of Ghana’s tourist sites because of its unique natural setting and diversity of wildlife and vegetation.20 According to evictees interviewed by COHRE, at the time of acquisition, no compensation was paid to them. Additionally, the Government made no attempt to evict the residents. Thus, residents remained and continued to fish and farm.

In the history narrated by the Executive Director of the Wildlife Division at the 11 April press conference, there were 16 villages belonging to nine chiefs, located within the Park’s boundaries when Digya National Park was created. He went on to claim that, by 1976, all of the 16 villages had been relocated outside the Park. This assertion cannot be sustained in the face of COHRE’s interviews with village residents who had been in the Park for over 40 years (and who stated that neither they nor their chiefs were part of any relocation by the government of Ghana).

The statement says that the Wildlife Division protected the area effectively until 1983, at which time nationwide bush fires caused famine in the country. As a result of this, staff of the Division vacated the National Park leaving it to be “invaded by fishermen, farmers and hunters”. Overall, the press statement attempts to define the residents of Digya as persons who are recent arrivals 20

http://www.fcghana.com/eco_tourism/digya.htm

21

to the Park who can have no credible rationale for their right to stay there – and refers to residents as ‘illegal settlers’ and ‘invaders’.

Contrary to these assertions, most evictees recounted to the COHRE team that they had lived in their villages continuously for more than thirty years; they did not take advantage of absence of wardens due to bush fires in 1983, as the Wildlife Division propagates.

6.1.1 Settler/migrant vs. indigene: Indigenes are commonly described throughout Ghana to mean persons whose ancestors are natives of the land whereas settlers are persons from other parts of the country that migrated to another part of the country for economic or other reasons.

The settler/immigrant vs. indigene issue is one that is pervasive throughout the investigation of the Digya National Park. The Wildlife Division considers those living in the area prior to the acquisition as indigenes, and those who arrived in the Park after the acquisition as settlers making the bold assertion that settlers could be evicted, but indigenes were relocated.

The press release by the Wildlife Division, on 11 April 2006, states that the indigenes had all been “relocated” by 1976. It goes on to justify later forced evictions by saying that it is “unethical to take land from indigenous people only to turn it over to illegal settlers.” Based on that logic, the release states that the Government “authorised and supported” an eviction of illegal settlers in 1989. (Please see Annex B)

6.1.2 Ongoing harassment by the Wildlife Division: Several documents acquired by the COHRE team from residents of the Digya reveal accounts of regular harassment by Wildlife Division staff and wardens prior to the 2006 evictions.

A letter dated 8 December 2001, entitled “Atrocities of Game Wardens Against Migrant Fisherman Settlers on Yamouso Stool Land at Digya National Park” and sent from the Yamouso Traditional Council at Donkorkrom-Kwahu to the Honourable Minister of Land and Forestry, documents that: “The Game Wardens stationed at Atebubu (Wildlife Division headquarters for Digya) in the Brong Ahafo Region whose duty it is to protect wildlife in the Digya National Reserve according to evictees interviewed by COHRE have for the past six years been harassing and intimidating poor and defenceless fishermen settlers on the Yamouso and other Stool Lands in the area. These game Wardens threaten with AK47 rifles.”

The abuses described include sexual abuse of young women, extortion of monies and impounding of livestock.

22

The first eviction was in 1989, by the Wildlife Division people. They said that the place where we were living was for the government. I saw many people especially boatmen be beaten by the Wildlife officials. 500 people left Zikpo, but we came back after several weeks, as there was no where for us to stay.

After that eviction, the Wildlife people came 2 times a year from 1992 onwards. They would hassle us and tell us to go, often beat us. We told them we cannot leave as there is nowhere for us to go. We were so desperate that when we saw them coming we would run to the bush.

Two years ago they came with the Regional Minister from Brong Ahafo Region who told us that the government wants to develop the land and that he would “think about� compensation for the people.

On the 18 of February this year, the Wildlife people came with soldiers and a letter that told us to go before the end of the month. There would not be any compensation they said. Most villagers did not worry too much as they had seen the Wildlife people come and go so often.

On 17 March they came back on their speed boats, and built a tent on Zikpo which they used as a base for visiting other villages. Finally on 20 March a strong wind blew their tent away and they left, though not before forcing us to go to Mankyere island. There is nothing here for us.

Botsoe Savu Dzonton 20 year resident of Zikpo

6.2

Evictions in 1989

In November 1989, Wildlife wardens came into the various villages to evict them. They came without warning and used guns and sticks to intimidate villagers. Fearful villagers abandoned their homes and farms, and moved to other villages on the opposite shore of the Volta. At that time, the Wildlife wardens allegedly told villagers that their residing in the National Park was a hindrance to their efforts to develop the National Park into a tourist attraction. As noted earlier, the people tried to settle in the new locations that they found themselves in, but there were no prospects for survival or decent livelihoods, and shelter and food were grossly inadequate. They therefore moved back into the villages from which they had been evicted.

6.3

Evictions threat in 2001

In response to this notice, a petition was prepared and sent by villagers on 20 February 2001, addressed to the traditional rulers in the area, as well as Ministers of Parliament and the District Chief Executives. The villagers appealed to the government to allow fisherfolk to stay and carry on with their work within the Park and to demarcate part of Digya National Park for their permanent stay. They premised their plea on a number of factors including: their large numbers; the original cause of their migration (namely the flooding of the Volta River); the evictions of 1989, which caused great hardship and had resulted in losses of life and property; and the fact that they were Ghanaians wishing to improve Ghana. No response to the petition was given to the settlers.

An additional petition was made on 1 March 2001 by the traditional ruler of the Nkomi Stool Lands (within the Digya National Park), Nana Kwabena Effedah, through his attorney Sam Okudzeto. He requested the Ministry of Lands and Forestry to stop the continuous harassment

23

of the residents of Nkomi lands by the Wildlife Division21. His petition claims that his lands of Nkomi were illegally “trespassed and encroached upon and added to the Game Reserve.” He states that the previous chief of Nkomi made the Wildlife Division aware of the error (of adding the Nkomi Lands to the Park) but this did not result in a change of demarcation. The petition goes on to state that neither compensation nor resettlement was offered to those living on the stool lands for this unlawful acquisition by the Government, despite repeated requests. The petition also asked for a meeting of all parties; that an adequate resettlement area be given to those living on the Nkomi stool lands and indicated that, if no amicable resolution is found, the lands of Nkomi should be given back to the people.

One of the chiefs, Nana Adade-Bekoe, also sent a letter on the 8th of December 2001 to the Wildlife Division with details of harassment by the wardens on his stool lands. According to the Chief, a visit by his elders to communities on his stool land in November revealed that the people were harassed and intimidated by the wardens from Atebubu in the Brong Ahafo Region22. His elders had observed the use of AK47 rifles; sexual abuse of young women; and extortion of money from farmers by the wardens.

The Wildlife Division did not respond to this letter, and there is no evidence that the allegations were properly investigated, or that the perpetrators were prosecuted. The Wildlife Division did not provide remedies.

A further petition, dated 10 January 2002, was filed with the Minster for Lands and Natural Resources, as well as the MP’s for the area and the President of Ghana, by various traditional leaders - namely the leaders of Nkomi Stool lands and Supom Odome, as well as Yamouso. All three leaders jointly appealed for the Wildlife Division officials to desist from harassing their subjects.

COHRE notes that the Wildlife Division’s previous failures to investigate the improper conduct of its staff may well have contributed to the sense of impunity with which they carried out evictions in 2006.

6.4

Evictions threat in 2002

‘Illegal’ settlers were threatened with eviction again in 2002. In a letter dated 28 March 2002, the Afram Plains Distrcit Assembly addressed the traditional leader of Yamouso, ‘settler’ farmers and all chiefs of Ntonaboma (which is the resettlement village for the people of Supom Odome - see section 6.4.1 below). The letter informed them of a decision by the Eastern Regional Security Committee and the Afram Plains District Security Committee “that all illegal settlers presently at the Digya National Park should evacuate the place by the end of June, 2002.” In response, community leaders contacted the Centre for Public Interest Law (CEPIL). In January 2003, CEPIL, wrote to the then Minister for Lands and Forestry, Prof Kasim Kasanga reminding him of Ghana’s obligations under international and national law on evictions. The Minister responded by suspending the evictions in January 2003.

21

22

His petition claims that his lands of Nkomi were illegally “trespassed and encroached upon and added to the Game Reserve”. He states that the previous chief of Nkomi made the Wildlife Division aware of the error (i.e., of adding the Nkomi Lands to the Park) but this did not result in a change of demarcation. The petition goes on to state that neither compensation nor resettlement was offered to those living on the stool lands for this unlawful acquisition, despite repeated requests.

The villages named by the Chief of Yamouso were: Old Yamouso; Kolekope; Fantekope; Mepekope; Kafuikope; Kokomba; Agordeke; Mamakpedzi; Hedzo; Agyeman-Akuraa; Isifu Akura; Adakope; Singlekope; and Assemblymankope.

24

The first eviction was in 1989, by the Wildlife Division people. They said that the place where we were living was for the government. I saw many people especially boatmen be beaten by the Wildlife officials. 500 people left Zikpo, but we came back after several weeks, as there was no where for us to stay.

After that eviction, the Wildlife people came 2 times a year from 1992 onwards. They would hassle us and tell us to go, often beat us. We told them we cannot leave as there is nowhere for us to go. We were so desperate that when we saw them coming we would run to the bush.

Two years ago they came with the Regional Minister from Brong Ahafo Region who told us that the government wants to develop the land and that he would “think about” compensation for the people.

On the 18 of February this year, the Wildlife people came with soldiers and a letter that told us to go before the end of the month. There would not be any compensation they said. Most villagers did not worry too much as they had seen the Wildlife people come and go so often.

On 17 March they came back on their speed boats, and built a tent on Zikpo which they used as a base for visiting other villages. Finally on 20 March a strong wind blew their tent away and they left, though not before forcing us to go to Mankyere Island. There is nothing here for us.

Botsoe Savu Dzonton 20 year resident of Zikpo

6.4.1 The holdouts of Supom Odome23 “The land of Supom Odome was not part of the demarcation for the forest reserve, we do no know why the Wildlife Division has decided to include us and harass us. Our land still belongs to us it is not for the Government. We have had several meetings with the Wildlife Division to make our point but they still insist that our land was part of the demarcation of the National Park” Kwasi Asiama

Supom Stool includes the villages of Agege, Agrave, Supom Odome, Kronanka and is located in Digya National Park, with a small proportion of migrants from other parts of the country. The traditional rulers of Supom Odome claim their ancestors have lived on the northern part of Digya since 1646. Unfortunately, construction of the Akosombo Dam submerged large parcels of their land. The VRA relocated some of the people to Ntonabomah, one of the 52 resettlement villages. Others stayed on those portions of land that were not submerged, and were joined later by migrants to the area, as well. The Chief of Supom Odome has insisted that his stool lands are not supposed to be part of the Park – contrary to the assertions of the Wildlife Division.

In 2002, the Chief of Supom sent his boat to convey some of his subjects to Supom New Town, which is not on Digya Island, because of the harassment by the Wildlife wardens. Since then, there has been correspondence between the Supom Stool chiefs and the Game and Wildlife Division. In a letter dated 20 June 2002 from the Wildlife Division to the Chief of Supom, the Division suggests that: “It is in the best interest of the people of Supom to see to it that the settlers leave the park”. The language of the letter seems designed to feed into or create potential tensions between ‘settlers’ and ‘indigenes’. Thus, the letter further states: 23

Nkomi and Yamouso have similar claims to that of Supom Odome.

25

“It was pointed out to the chief that there would come a time when these settlers would refuse allegiance to him because they will claim that they are on government land. When that time comes, the settlers will no longer fulfil their traditional obligations to him and the indigenous people of Supom, now living in Ntonaboma, would have been deprived of their land. In the meantime, the continued stay of settlers would have compromised the intended government project thus making the indigenes lose on the two fronts.”

Although Supom Odome was on the list of villages in the 10 February 2006 eviction notice, the wardens did not get to Supom Odome before their abrupt departure on the 9th of April when news of the boat-disaster had broken. Nevertheless the residents still live in fear of eviction.

6.5

Post 2006 eviction harassment and response

From the time of the boat disaster until approximately 10 July, no further activity by the Wildlife wardens was reported. However, around the 10 of July, the wardens stated coming back to the villages, and harassing the residents who had been forced to move back, due to harsh condition in their relocation sites.

The Centre for Public Interest Law (CEPIL) has now filed a motion for an order of prohibition restraining the Forestry Commission from forcibly evicting the people of Digya and violation of their fundamental human rights to livelihood, life and housing. CEPIL is also considering taking legal action regarding compensation for the losses incurred by the residents of Digya during the forced evictions.

7 CONTRIBUTING FACTORS It is important to note historical and contextual factors that have played a part in creating or aggravating the situations of insecure tenure that evictees have faced. Evictees suggest that two major events, namely; the construction of the Akosombo Dam and the demarcation of the Digya National Park, have adversely affected their lives.

7.1

Building the Akasombo Dam

One of Ghana’s post-independence priorities was the construction of the Akosombo Dam to provide hydro-electricity for industrialisation. The dam was built between 1961 and 1966 at the mouth of the Volta River by an Italian dam-building company, the Impregila Group. Its 912 MW electricity-generating capacity was primarily used to power the 100% foreign-owned Valco aluminium smelter. The World Bank provided funding for both the dam and the smelter. The Volta River Development Act (1961) established the Volta River Authority (VRA) to implement and manage the construction of the Akosombo dam.

About 80,000 people were forced to move from 740 villages to make way for the 8,500 square kilometre Volta reservoir — the largest in the world. COHRE interviewed the head of the VRA’s Estate and Compensations Department. According to him, the resettlement process necessitated by the Akosombo Dam was meticulously researched and appropriately conducted. On the basis of data from two large-scale sociological surveys, the Volta Resettlement Programme was designed, established and rolled out. The VRA conducted two social surveys in 740 villages with assistance from sociologists of Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology and the

26

Social Welfare Department. The first survey was intended to understand the social structure of villages, so as to put in place policies to create minimum disturbances in the future. The second was a more comprehensive census to attain an accurate count of the population. The data of the survey included an ethnic breakdown of the number of villages, a breakdown of families on village and community basis, occupational structures, identifying numerical strength of farmers, fishermen and artisans; this informed preferences for relocation sites.24 This process gave displaced people the choice between cash compensation and relocation to 52 resettlement villages (where core housing, and material support for expansion, was provided).

The VRA representative told COHRE that 90% of those affected by the flooding chose resettlement and that, by 1967, the process was complete. He added that this successful implementation of the resettlement programme ended VRA’s obligations to people affected by the flooding of villages.

However, COHRE’s research has found that the resettlement was not a clear-cut success.

In the first instance, the reservoir rose faster than anticipated and many people were forced to flee, leaving behind their belongings for which they were never compensated. Resettled farmers were not provided with adequate land to farm, and in 1966, food aid was required to prevent the resettled villagers from starving.

Additionally, there were an inadequate number of resettlement villages. There were 52 villages intended to accommodate with displaced persons from 740 villages. This meant that many of the villagers were not able to access housing in the villages and resettled in other locations at their own expense.

None of the villages in the Digya National Park were designated by the VRA as resettlement sites. However, many of the residents of Digya National Park with whom COHRE spoke said that they, and/or their families before, had been displaced by the rising Volta reservoir. Residents say that they were not offered compensation or resettlement and thus moved to areas in the present-day Digya National Park which were unaffected by the flooding. However, in 1971 these areas were designated as the Digya National Park.

7.1.1 Jurisdiction of Volta River Authority In an undated letter that COHRE acquired in the course of this research, a VRA official seeks to address concerns put to the VRA alleging that the VRA received payments for the use of land. In this letter the VRA official unequivocally states that it does not and will not seek funds for the use of the land over which it has authority - namely, land south of the Volta Lake and a 280 ft. perimeter along the entire shoreline of the lake. The VRA official maintains that this area is under its control and it places no limits on the use of the area - an apparent concession on the part of the VRA to allow fishing and farming on the banks of Lake Volta.

The Digya National Park constitutes a large area of land along the shores of the Volta Lake - land over which the VRA has claimed authority in the above-mentioned letter. This brings up two important questions. Firstly, it is not clear which government agency has authority over the land along the Lake Volta that is included in Digya National Park, but also included in the 280 ft. perimeter of the lake under VRA authority. Secondly, it is important to question if it is right that 24

http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/sdissues/energy/op/hydro_kalitsi.pdf

27

persons be constrained from residing and carrying out livelihood activities such as fishing on the land that falls within this zone, when very conflicting messages are being given about its use.

7.1.2 Volta River Authority’s Response to Appeal by Evictees Evictees appealed to the Volta River Authority to protect them from the harassment of the Game wardens.

COHRE interviewed the head of VRA’s Estate and Compensation Department who was of the opinion that the successful implementation of the resettlement plan ended VRA’s obligation towards people living in flooded villages along the lake, however they still have ongoing community development projects in the resettlement towns. He also said because a legislative instrument was issued by Government to acquire the Digya National Park, VRA cannot take over the land till another legislative instrument gives them the power to do so.

Nevertheless, there is a popular understanding that, within this area, the VRA allows fishing and farming. Accordingly, it is important that the issue of who owns the land and who has authority over the land in Digya National Park be clarified.

7.2

Land Administration in Ghana

Ghana’s land administration systems are complex and problematic. As a result, there are land disputes in several parts of the country – including the ongoing contestations relating to the Digya National Park. Ownership of land in Ghana is held by stool/skin (traditionally held property); families and individuals (private property); and the State (public property). ‘Stool land’ is land vested in the stool (chief) on behalf of, and in trust for, subjects of the stool. Digya Island, included in the National Park, was stool land prior to its compulsory acquisition by Government in 1971.

Some of the major challenges facing the administration of land that have been identified by the National Land Policy25 are: • • • • • • • • •

General lack of discipline on the land market Indeterminate boundaries of stool/skin lands Compulsory acquisition by Government of large tracts of land Inadequate security of tenure Difficult accessibility to land Weak land administration systems Lack of consultation with land-owners and chiefs Lack of consultation with, and cooperation among, development agencies Inadequate coordination with neighbouring countries.

Digya lands are especially affected by those problems relating to the compulsory acquisition of land, and the lack of consultation with land-owners and chiefs.

The Legislative Instrument of 1971 that created Digya National Park is an example of compulsory acquisition by the Government of Ghana. (In some countries, this practice is called 25

Institutional arrangements : Land Sector, Ghana : Executive Summary Presented to the Land Administration Project as part of the Institutional Arrangement Review

28

“right of eminent domain”, where a designated government body may claim land for public use, as long as proper compensation is paid to the current residents of the land.) Interviews with traditional leaders of Sopom Odome and Yamouso (both of which are large areas within the acquired area) revealed that compensation was not paid to the traditional leaders at the time, nor to any of their residents, even though the Legislative Instrument states clearly that such compensation is required in order to make the process of compulsory acquisition legal.

Another contributory factor in the Digya Island evictions was lack of consultation with landowners and chiefs. Because Digya Island was stool land prior to the Government acquiring it, the approval of the stools for such acquisition should have been sought. However, the Chiefs of Supom Odome say they were not consulted.

The Ghana Land Administration Project (LAP) is a direct response to the problems identified by the National Land Policy listed above. LAP has four components: • • • •

Harmonizing land policy and the regulatory framework for sustainable land administration Institutional reform and development Improving titling, registration, valuation and information systems Project management, monitoring and evaluation

The first 5-year phase of LAP, running from 2003 to 2008, is currently in progress. The initial phase is primarily focused on developing a series of pilot projects for community-based land systems throughout the country. While some success has been registered, challenges have emerged, resulting in poor performance in several pilot projects. It is feared that the desired outcome of the LAP - namely, a “sustainable and well functioning land administration system that is fair, transparent, cost effective, efficient, client oriented and decentralized,”26 may still be some time away.

Nonetheless, it is hoped that LAP will actively help resolve the controversies surrounding land ownership, in particular, the compulsory acquisition and the lack of consultation with landowners and chiefs that have been at the heart of several evictions and threatened evictions in the past.

8 ANALYSIS OF FACTS UNDER NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL LAW As a State Party to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Republic of Ghana and its political subdivisions are legally obligated to respect, protect and fulfil the right to adequate housing, including the prohibition on forced evictions, as guaranteed under Article 11(1) of the Covenant. It is furthermore obligated to not interfere with persons who enjoy some level of housing, as well as to protect everyone within its jurisdiction from forced eviction undertaken by third parties, including State and Municipal authorities.

Furthermore, in 2001 the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights found that the African Charter, which Ghana ratified on 26 January 1989, guaranteed the right to adequate housing, including the prohibition on forced eviction (see SERAC and CESR v. Nigeria, ACHPR 2002). In the SERAC case, the African Commission incorporated the substance and 26

Ibid.

29

jurisprudence of international human rights law on the prohibition of forced eviction into the implied right to adequate housing in the African Charter.

Moreover, pursuant to Chapter VI, Article 35(4) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, “The State shall cultivate among all Ghanaians respect for fundamental human rights and freedoms and the dignity of the human person.”27 Furthermore, Chapter V, Section 15 (2) (a) and (b) of the Constitution of Ghana specifically protect the citizens of Ghana from inhuman or degrading treatment. Additionally, pursuant to Chapter IV, Article 11(6) of the Constitution of Ghana, national laws must be interpreted or otherwise brought into consistency with the Constitution.28 Lastly, Chapter V, Articles 20(1),(2), and (3) of the Constitution of Ghana provides protection for the rights of persons whose land is to be acquired by the State. This must be noted as relevant as it highlights limitations on State powers to simply evict when disputes over land arise between the State and its residents.

In terms of international human rights law, for forced evictions to be considered as lawful, they may only occur in very “exceptional circumstances” and “all feasible alternatives” must be explored. If and only if such “exceptional circumstances” exist and there are no feasible alternatives, can evictions be deemed justified. However, certain requirements must still be adhered to. These are: 1.

First, States must ensure, prior to any planned forced evictions, and particularly those involving large groups, that all feasible alternatives are explored in consultation with affected persons, with a view to avoiding, or at least minimizing, the need to use force.

2.

Second, forced evictions should not result in rendering individuals homeless or vulnerable to the violation of other human rights. Governments must therefore, ensure that adequate alternative housing is available to affected persons.

3.

Third, in those rare cases where eviction is considered justified, it must be carried out in strict compliance with international human rights law and in accordance with general principles of reasonableness and proportionality. These include, inter alia: • • •

• • • • •

Genuine consultation with those affected; Adequate and reasonable notice for all affected persons prior to the scheduled eviction date; Information on the proposed evictions, and where applicable, on the alternative purpose for which the land or housing is to be used, to be made available in reasonable time to all those affected; Especially where groups of people are involved, government officials or their representatives to be present during an eviction; All persons carrying out the eviction to be property identified; Evictions not to take place in particularly bad weather or at night unless the affected persons consent otherwise; Provision of legal remedies; and Provision, where possible, of legal aid to persons who are in need of it to seek redress from the courts.

The Republic of Ghana is therefore in violation of its obligations under international law and national law for a number of reasons, including: 27 28

1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, Chapter VI, Article 35(4).

See, id. at Chapter IV, Article 11(6).

30

1) The evictions were not deemed to meet the “exceptional circumstances� threshold by an independent and impartial tribunal; 2) There is no indication that the Wildlife Division considered any feasible alternatives to eviction.

3) The Wildlife Division did not hold consultations with the affected communities concerning the planned eviction, the reason for the eviction, or feasible alternatives to eviction.

4) There was no provision of adequate alternative housing for evictees. Many evictees were either made homeless or forced to live in grossly inadequate conditions in Mankyere and other villages. Others have returned to their villages due to poor conditions in other locations and are living in an insecure tenure situation with the fear that they may be forcibly evicted again with violence and at great personal cost.

5) The Wildlife Division did not provide adequate notice of the planned evictions to affected persons. Although they issued a letter to some of the affected villages, this letter was inaccurate in terms of which villages would be affected and the dates on which the eviction was to take place. The letter was dated 10 February and gave an evacuation date of 28 February. However the evictions occurred from 15 March to 8 April, leaving those who had received notice uncertain as to whether the eviction had been cancelled.

Furthermore, and in any event, international human rights standards require a 90-day notice. Therefore, the notice given was inadequate.

6) The Wildlife Division did not provide adequate information about the reason for the eviction and the proposed use of the land. Many evictees that were interviewed did not comprehend the circumstances surrounding the eviction.

7) While the wardens were present, along with soldiers, carrying guns and sticks, the Member of Parliament responsible for the area and his representatives were not present during the evictions. Due to the scattered nature of the villages and poor transportation, provision should have been made for an independent monitoring team in each village.

8) The evictions took place at the beginning of the rainy season. This made evictees vulnerable to malaria and other diseases. Evictees were forced to stay in the open - some for up to three weeks - exposed to both rainy weather and the scorching sun at temperatures of up to 30°C. 9) No legal remedies have been provided to the affected persons.

9 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The evictions in the Digya Forest highlighted some of the problems facing land ownership in Ghana and the inability of Government to tackle land administration holistically. The keen interest shown by media houses, civil society and politicians was a reflection of increased awareness of evictions in Ghana. The 8 April 2006 boat disaster, though unfortunate gave the Digya evictions a national and international attention. It is expected that the Government of Ghana will provide adequate compensation for evictees and also adopt feasible polices to prevent forced evictions in the future.

Related to the Digya eviction, COHRE calls on the Ghanaian authorities to:

31

• Immediately cease all forced evictions in this area and in other parts of Ghana; • As a matter of urgency, ensure that all evictees are provided with basic shelter and housing as well as access to food, safe drinking water and sanitation, and medical services; • Immediately make public the findings of the Committee of Enquiry and if the Committee established evidence of crimes committed in the context of forced evictions, these should be thoroughly investigated by the relevant authorities, and those suspected of being responsible brought to justice; • Immediately release Government’s assessment of the Committee of Enquiry’s findings through the release of the pending White Paper; • Identify, in consultation with those affected, adequate alternative accommodation to all those rendered homeless by the recent forced evictions, and establish adequate mechanisms for compensation and other remedies for victims of past forced evictions; • Take steps to ensure adequate opportunities to earn a living for those whose livelihoods have been negatively affected by the forced evictions; • Provide compensation for losses incurred by the evictees as a result of the eviction, especially those forced onto the ill fated boat of 8 April; • Ensure that any legal use of force must respect the principles of necessity and proportionality, as well as the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials and any national or local code of conduct consistent with international law enforcement and human rights standards.

More broadly, COHRE requests the authorities of Ghana and other stakeholders to:, • Place a moratorium on all future evictions until such time as a human-rights based policy and/or guidelines, governing terms when eviction is justified based on international human rights laws and norms, is developed, implemented and enforced in Ghana; • Measures should be put in place to ensure that both public and private land holders do not engage in the practice of forced eviction or any other violation of the right to adequate housing; • Steps should be taken resolve the debate on settlers and indigene, based on the fact that all persons have the right to be free from forced eviction, no matter how long they have resided at a particular area; • Relevant stakeholders should engage in serious dialogue around the future of nature conservation and tourism in Ghana, seeking avenues for balanced approaches and avoiding a model that calls for removal of people in order to create ‘pristine wilderness’ areas. Such discussions can be greatly informed by other countries success stories in balancing tourism and nature conservationism with the basic human rights and needs of the people living in affected areas; • The Land Administration Programme must seriously consider the impact that land policies have on populations such as those living in Digya- those who are dependent on the land for survival. The LAP must actively help resolve the controversies surrounding land ownership, in particular, the compulsory acquisition of land by the State, and should demand that all land

32

acquisition attempts be preceded by full consultations with all stakeholders, especially those residing on the land and the chiefs.

10 THE ROLE OF NON- GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONS IN EVICTION RESPONSE 10.1 Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) The Digya evictions in 2002 were included into the first Report of the Advisory Group on Forced Evictions (AGFE) to the Executive Director of UN-HABITAT. AGFE was set up in line with the recommendations of the World Urban Forum at its first session to the Executive Director of UN-HABITAT requesting her to establish an advisory group to monitor and identify, and, if so requested, to promote alternatives to unlawful eviction29s. This publication was presented to the Executive Director of UN-HABITAT in 2005 and since then COHRE has monitored the Digya National Park evictions situation During the 2006 evictions, COHRE worked closely with its partners in planning a fact finding mission on 5 to 6h April 2006 and was involved in a press conference to highlight the plight of evictees and comment on the events surrounding the boat disaster of 8 April 2006 in which official reports put the death toll at 10 and unofficial reports put the figure at about 60. On the 3 to 5 May 2006 COHRE sent a team on a fact finding mission to Tapa Abotoase, Kwamekrom, Mankyere, Mepekope and Horkpezi. The team was also able to observe proceedings of the Committee of Enquiry set up by the Government of Ghana to investigate the 8 April 2006, boat disaster- COHRE also provided evidence to the Boat Disaster Committee on its fact finding mission, international law and case studies from other jurisdictions.

10.2 People’s Dialogue on Human Settlements People’s Dialogue on Human Settlements is a non-governmental organisation that works in partnership with the Ghana Homeless People’s Federation to find permanent solutions to urban poverty in Ghana through the improvement of human settlements and shelter conditions.

People’s Dialogue assistance to poor communities includes among other things, technical, facilitation and harnessing external resources to augment the resources mobilized by the communities.

People’s Dialogue, with the support of the Ghana Federation of the Urban Poor (then Ghana Homeless People’s Federation) was part of the team that went to Digya Islands on 4-6 April 2006. Following the boat disaster items worth 10 million cedis ($1110) and used clothes were distributed to evictees by People’s Dialogue and Ghana Homeless Peoples’ Federation. People’s Dialogue was also in Tapa Abotoase on the 3 May 2006 to observe proceedings of the Boat Disaster Committee of Enquiry. People’s Dialogue gave evidence to the Boat Disaster Committee on their fact finding missions.

29

UN-HABITAT Governing Council Resolution 19/5

33

10.3 Centre for Public Interest Law (CEPIL) CEPIL is a non- governmental organisation that promotes the public interest when rights are violated and defends the interest of the poor. CEPIL works in the area of prisoners’ rights and the right to shelter.

In 2002 CEPIL wrote a letter to the then Minister for Lands and Forestry, Professor Kasim Kasanga highlighting Ghana’s obligations under national and international law on evictions and appealed to the Government to reconsider its decision to evict the people. The Minister responded by suspending the eviction. A similar letter was written to the current Minister for Lands and Forestry on the 2006 evictions threat but on this occasion there was no response.

CEPIL was part of the NGO mission on 4-6 April 2006 to Digya Islands. CEPIL provided evidence to the Boat Disaster Committee on the legal process and their intention to file a case on behalf of the evictees against the Game and Wildlife Division.

10.4 Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) The Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, (CHRI) is a non-partisan independent international non-governmental organisation. Human rights education and advocacy are at the core of all CHRI’s activities, and the aims and ends of its reports and investigations. In order to develop human rights interventions particularly appropriate to the context of Africa, in May 2001 CHRI opened a new office in Ghana, this office co-ordinates programmes that build on CHRI’s current concerns.

CHRI got involved in the Digya National Park evictions in 2006. CHRI facilitated the discussion on evictions in Digya and the boat disaster in particular, and interviews with evictees on number of radio stations with wide coverage in the capital. CHRI was also part of the mission by NGOs from 4 – 6 April 2006 to asses the impact of the evictions on the people. On 17 -18 April, CHRI sent a team to investigate media reports on deposited dead bodies from the boat disaster in the Kpandu and Wura wura hospitals. Their investigations disproved the assertions that dead bodies from the disaster were in Kpandu and Wura wura hospitals. CHRI also provided evidence to the Boat Disaster Committee on its fact finding missions and land law in Ghana.

10.5 Amnesty International Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights. AI’s vision is a world in which every person enjoys all the human rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other International human rights standards.

AI greatly concerned about the human rights violations during evictions in the Digya Forest and the subsequent boat disaster issued a joint press statement with COHRE on the 19 April 2006 condemning the evictions, highlighting the plight of evictees and made recommendations to the Government of Ghana. (Please see further Annex A for COHRE and AI joint press release.)

34

ANNEX A **FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE** COHRE/Amnesty International joint public statement – 19 April 2006

Ghana: Forced evictions in the Digya national park area must stop Amnesty International and the Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) have expressed their serious concern about the recent forced eviction of hundreds of residents from the Dudzorme Island within the Digya National Park in the Tapa-Abotoase area of Lake Volta, Ghana, and the planned forced eviction of thousands more. These forced evictions have deprived residents, including women and children, of their homes and, in most cases, of their means of earning a living. The organisations are also deeply concerned about the death of more than 100 of those forcibly evicted, when a ferry forcibly removing them from the island capsized on 8 April.

The Game and Wildlife Division argue that the forced evictions are necessary because the land was set aside as a forest reserve. Amnesty International and COHRE have been informed that the forced evictions were carried out without adequate prior consultation, adequate notice and compensation or alternative accommodation. This is in violation of Ghana’s regional and international human rights obligations, including the right to adequate housing, which includes the right not to be forcibly evicted.

The Dudzorme Island community were reportedly first threatened with evictions in June 2002. In January 2003, as a result of a campaign by local and international non-governmental organisations, including COHRE and the Center for Public Interest Law (CEPIL), against these planned forced evictions, the Minister for Land and Forestry decided to suspend the evictions.

However, on 5 February 2006 the Government served an eviction notice on the community, with less than one month’s notice. In late March and early April, officials of the Forestry Commission forcibly evicted residents from Dudzorme Island.

Sources confirmed to Amnesty International and COHRE that there was inadequate prior consultation with the community. Furthermore, insufficient notice of less than one month was given to the residents, in contrast to the 90 days absolute minimum recommended by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living. Evictees reported that they were forced out of their houses, subsequently forced on to the boat, and in the process some of them were beaten with sticks. Amnesty International and COHRE are furthermore concerned that the authorities have reportedly neither provided alternative housing nor compensation, which violate the right to adequate housing including the right not to be forcibly evicted.

The organisations are concerned that the rest of the up to 7,000 community members residing in the Digya National Park may face similar forced evictions.

Victims report that, in the process of forcibly evicting those residents, the overloaded ferry, which was taking them from the island in the Afram Plains area to Abotoase in the eastern part of the region, capsized. 58 persons have been confirmed dead and 71 have been registered as survivors, although not all have been found. Initial official reports indicate that the number of deceased is considerably lower.

35

Amnesty International and COHRE are deeply concerned about the manner in which these evictions appear to have been carried out, particularly about the use of excessive force, including the reported forcing of people onto the ferry without putting adequate safeguards for their safety in place.

Amnesty International and COHRE call on the Ghanaian authorities to: • Immediately cease all forced evictions in this area and in other parts of Ghana; • As a matter of urgency, ensure that all evictees are provided with basic shelter and housing as well as access to food, safe drinking water and sanitation, and medical services; • Immediately establish an independent commission of inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the ferry disaster and other allegations of human rights abuses in the context of the forced evictions. Such a commission should inquire into actions or omissions by the relevant authorities which may have led to the overcrowding of the ferry. The Commission of Inquiry should be independent and impartial, and its terms of reference and results should be made public. If the Commission establishes evidence of crimes committed in the context of forced evictions, these should be thoroughly investigated by the relevant authorities, and those suspected of being responsible brought to justice; • Identify, in consultation with those affected, adequate alternative accommodation to all those rendered homeless by the recent forced evictions, and establish adequate mechanisms for compensation and other remedies for victims of past forced evictions; • Take steps to ensure adequate opportunities to earn a living for those whose livelihoods have been affected by the forced evictions; • Ensure that any legal use of force must respect the principles of necessity and proportionality, as well as the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials and any national or local code of conduct consistent with international law-enforcement and human rights standards; • Place a moratorium on all future evictions until such time as a human rights based housing policy is developed and implemented.

Background Information Prior to the forced evictions, many of the evictees had lived in the Digya National Park, Afram Plain District, Ghana for over 30 years. They are part of a community of approximately 7,000, and live mainly on fishing.

Amnesty International has reported cases of forced evictions in many countries in Africa, including Angola, Nigeria, Sudan, Swaziland and Zimbabwe. COHRE estimates that forced evictions in Africa have affected over 1 million people in the last year.

COHRE is an international NGO which strives to promote the right to adequate housing, including the right to protection from forced eviction, for everyone, everywhere. COHRE has offices in a number of countries, including Ghana. COHRE has special consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations; as well as observer status with the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

Forced eviction has been defined by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as “the permanent or temporary removal against their will of individuals, families and/or communities from the homes and/or land which they occupy, without the provision of and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other

36

protection. The prohibition on forced evictions does not, however, apply to evictions carried out by force in accordance with the law and in conformity with the provisions of the International Covenants on Human Rights.”30 The UN Commission on Human Rights has considered that “the practice of forced evictions constitutes a gross violation of human rights, in particular the right to adequate housing”.31 Article 11.1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, to which Ghana is a party, states “The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions.” Forced eviction has been defined by the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), as “the permanent or temporary removal against their will of individuals, families and/or communities from the homes and/or land which they occupy, without the provision of and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection.”32 In addition to depriving people of their homes, forced evictions are often associated with violations of other human rights including the rights to health, to education to earn a living, the right to freedom of movement, the right to privacy and the right not to be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

30

UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 7, The Right to Adequate Housing (Art. 11(1) of the Covenant): forced evictions, UN Doc. E/C.12/1997/4, para 3.

31 UN Commission on Human Rights, Resolution 1993/77, para 1.

32 UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 7, The Right to Adequate Housing (Art.11(1) of the Covenant): forced evictions, UN Doc. E/C.12/1997/4, para 3.

37

ANNEX B Press Release from the Game and Wildlife Division of the Forestry Commission (11 April 2006) BOAT ACCIDENT ON THE VOLTA LAKE WILDLIFE DIVISION SIDE OF THE STORY The Wildlife Division has heard and read, with dismay and shock, the boat accident on the Volta Lake. The Division would like to sincerely express its condolences to the families and friends of those who died in the accident.

Many people have tried to get some information on the issue from the Division but unfortunately the Division did not have the facts at the time. The latest information available confirms that a boat accident has occurred and that as many as about 80 people may have lost their lives. Some people have linked the unfortunate accident to the Division’s recent evacuation exercise in Digya National Park.

It is, therefore, imperative that the Division brings out the facts for the information of the general public. The accident victims may include some of the people leaving the shores of the Digya National Park but it may appear that they were going to or returning from market and not directly connected to the evacuation exercise that is taking place in the Park. It was a market day at Abotoase near where the accident occurred and therefore the accident is more likely to be market related than anything else.

A team made up of wildlife and military personnel was in the field between March 11 and 20, 2006 basically to drive out over 6,000 cattle that had been taken into the park illegally. Prior to the team’s arrival in the field some settlers had left. Of course, while in the field staff reminded settlers to leave. While others were preparing still others were given time to wind up their activities and leave. This team was in the field between March 11 and 20, 2006.

Staff of the Digya National Park were in the field over the week end to ensure that those who had left did not return. This monitoring team returned to Atebubu, the Park HQ, on Sunday, April 9, 2006 and did not see anybody rushing to leave the Park. The team never forced anybody to leave either. The only boat they saw left Tsita and Agordeke area with about twenty people around 7.OOam on Saturday. The team, however, heard of the accident on Obuoba FM at 5.OOpm on Saturday while returning to base in Atebubu.

Government acquired the Digya National Park through LI 710 of 1971. On acquisition there were 16 communities belonging to 9 chiefdoms in the area. By 1976 all of them had relocated outside the Park. The Wildlife Division protected the area effectively until 1983 when the nationwide bushfires brought in its wake serious famine in the country. As a result staff of the Division could not find food in the communities and this led to mass vacation of posts. Because of its remoteness with no access roads, Digya NP suffered most, losing more than 80% of its staff at the time.

Fishermen, farmers and hunters took advantage of the situation and invaded the Park in their numbers. When the food situation normalised, the Division tried to regain control of the Park. It is unethical to take land from indigenous people only to turn it over to illegal settlers.

Government, therefore, authorised and supported the evacuation of these illegal settlers in 1989.

Unfortunately, the evacuation coincided with the ban on employment in the public sector and so the area could not be secured and these illegal settlers moved back. Efforts to evacuate them 38

have not been successful for so many years as settlers always took advantage of impending elections to derail the process. Just before the 2000 Presidential and Parliamentary elections the then MP for Afram Plains North Constituency asked for only six months grace to enable the settlers cast their vote. Following a field visit and extensive consultation with the settlers, they were, however, allowed additional one year making a total of one and half years to enable them wind up their activities, build new houses and make farms in their new location. They were expected to have left by December 31, 2001.

They did not comply with this arrangement and the then sector Minister referred the issue to the three Regional Coordination Councils (Brong Ahafo, Eastern and Ashanti Regions) to help relocate the settlers in their respective regions. Various meetings took place in all the regions and the settlers were to have left by end of 2002. Some settlers left the Park while others were preparing to leave when one community petitioned against its evacuation on the grounds that they were not settlers. The sector Minister halted the process for a Socioeconomic survey to be conducted. The survey supported the evacuation of all the settlers including Old Nkomi that had petitioned the sector Minister. Since then appeals have been made year after year for these settlers to relocate voluntarily.

This year the settlers were once more served notices to relocate. About the same time staff noticed the influx of cattle into the park. Following consultations with the Sene District Security Council, the BA Regional Security Council authorised the Military Operation Cowless Unit to help drive out the cattle from the park. The evacuation exercise as it had been said earlier on lasted only 9 days ending on March 20, 2006. At the time of this unfortunate accident, April 8, 2006, no military or wildlife staff were in the field in connection with the evacuation exercise.

Thank you for your attention.

39