The main reason why the African governments have not responded to the question of slavery is unclear.
However, as an Africanist working in the field for some time, I can speculate as to why this is the case. The first point that comes to mind is the notion that African governments, including the Sudanese and Mauritanian governments, must enjoy total jurisdiction over their territory, and this is a part of a moral, legal and political notion that Ali Mazuri would call the Principle of Continental Jurisdiction.
This is part of a global idea of territorial sovereignty, a notion that has accounted for much of the bloodshed in Europe and her colonies since the nineteenth century.
As many political scientists now argue, the idea of sovereignty is being eroded and challenged by new forces. Certainly human rights groups and other forces in the international community no longer hold back from ringing the alarm bells when they smell a rat.
The second reason why there have been no commentaries on the subject may lie in the fact that many who support the idea of reparations might be deterred from saying anything because it is simply embarrassing to learn that the institution (known to American historians as the Peculiar Institution), is actually still alive in certain parts of the globe. Of course, the apologists for the remnants of this peculiar institution elsewhere in the global system would say that this global call for investigation of slavery in Sudan and Mauritania is an imperialist plot.
Some have suggested that it is a Zionist plot which has been concocted with the assistance of the Christian evangelical movement, whose stocks have been greatly affected by the Sudanese government.
Those of us who do not countenance any brutality from any human agency are not easily satisfied by such apologists of what appears to be the remnants of the peculiar institution in Africa.
Propaganda or no propaganda, the fact remains that the two accused governments must defend themselves at the court of human justice. It would make good sense if they agreed to an international commission to report on the matter. We are not saying that they are outrightly guilty as charged. But we cannot make any case on their behalf without evidence from their part to refute the allegations.
The third reason why I believe the African governments have been silent, may lie at the nature of the accused governments. Both are military dictatorships which have wanted to be acceptable to their civilian populations. They may see the allegations against them as just the first attacks from the opposition (in this case the global human rights movement and others interested in the welfare of the poor, the weak and the helpless on the African continent).
Once they confess to this major abomination, it is logical that other violations of the human rights of their citizens would be easier to expose and be challenged in the UN and other agencies of the court of human justice. In these days of CNN and BBC global coverage it would make good sense in public relations for the accused governments to prove their case.
Djembe published an article on slavery in Mauritania in the no 12 issue April-June 1995. Today, December 1996, the institution still exists in both the Sudan and Mauritania.
Feel free to quote or reproduce any article in Djembe under condition of stating source. Contents of the article are purely the opinion of the author, and do not in any way reflect the official position or thoughts of Djembe on those issues.
Djembe is an uncensored, open bulletin board