Another case for passion in Parliament
It was fascinating to watch on TV last week the passion with which Members of Parliament spoke about the plight of women porters or kayayei in Parliament. The question I’ve been asking myself is, why have our MPs not shown similar concern about other vulnerable women, such as rape victims?
Advertisement
Or is it because in this election year, identifying with the situation of kayayei is a vote-catcher?
It is one full year since this column highlighted (on March 6, 2015), the issue of a serious obstacle preventing rape and defilement victims from seeking justice: the fact that they have to pay a fee for the medical report that the police require in order to take the case to court, but which many victims can’t afford. Yet, there has been no reaction from any quarter.
Not even the fact that my article had the pointed headline ‘A reform that Members of Parliament need to champion’ could provoke any comment, in support or against, from any MP!
What ignited the MPs’ fervour last Friday was a report in the House on the ‘Kayayei Phenomenon’, the large numbers of young women who migrate from the North to the urban South to work as porters in markets and other commercial centres. The report was presented by the chairperson of the Committee on Gender and Children, Ms Laadi Ayii Ayamba (National Democratic Congress; Pusiga, Upper East).
Contributing to the report, many members expressed deep concern about the problem. There was even a suggestion that a trust fund should be established to support vocational training for young girls in order to stem the migration.
Anyway, I wonder if, similarly, the Committee on Gender will look into this aspect of violence against women, the lack of comprehensive support for rape victims. Without doubt, tackling violence against women is very central to the gender agenda and any discussion on the status or wellbeing of women.
Incidentally, according to studies and media reports, countless numbers of kayayei are part of the rape statistics.
Earlier this week, on March 8, the world marked International Women’s Day (IWD). Ghana’s theme for the observance was ‘Gender equality by 2030: inclusion of all for Ghana’s sustainable development’.
If rapists can go scot-free because their victims are too poor to afford to pay for the medical report they need to seek justice, what kind of “inclusion” or social justice is that?
Notably, in her statement to mark IWD 2016, the Chairperson of the African Union Commission, Dr Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma, reminds us that this year, “being the African Union Year of Human Rights with a specific focus on the Rights of Women, provides yet another opportunity to celebrate African women, while also highlighting issues of concern”.
Surely, the rape medical fee is an issue of concern. And what about their rights?
As I pointed out last year, evidently many of the victims can’t afford the fee, quoted as GH¢300. No wonder so many of them apparently give up in despair even before they leave the police station after plucking up courage to report the rape.
Other issues I raised were:
It is evident that any loophole that allows perpetrators to escape justice needs to be blocked, and clearly charging victims for such medical reports is an escape route for offenders, a ‘salt-in-the-wound’ absurdity.
I can’t imagine how this kind of report can be equated with standard medical reports, as seems to be the case, for example for new employment or to make an accident claim, so as to justify charging the victim-applicant for it.
Why should such a burden be placed on the victims?
According to the police, because of poverty some sexual assault victims fail to complete the medical form process to enable investigations to proceed.
Why can’t the state pay doctors their fee for the rape reports? Why should it be possible for a rapist to enjoy impunity simply because the victim could not pay the charge for the medical report?
And I’m also wondering whether this fee couldn’t be covered under the National Health Insurance Scheme.
I’m baffled by the silence of women’s groups and children’s rights advocates on this anti-victim fee. But what about our MPs?
Again, as I asked in the 2015 article: Is this not an injustice that our MPs, notably women MPs, could commit to end and thus ensure a victim-friendly reform?
However, maybe the kayayei report contributions in Parliament give cause for hope; hope that the Gender Committee of Parliament will take up the issue of this anti-victim medical fee; hope that a report will then be presented to the House; hope that the rape medical report fee will generate the same or similar emotion as the report on the porters and lead to action to abolish the fee, or make the state responsible for it.
And surely, this is an issue that accomplished, dedicated human rights lawyer and Minister of Gender, Children and Social Protection, Nana Oye Lithur, could and should have taken up by now.
On the other hand, if I am wrong, if the silence is because action has already been taken to abolish this most scandalous fee, without publicity, I would be extremely happy to have been proved wrong.
But I fear that is not the case and that this abominable double punishment for rape victims is still in place.
No matter how movingly or eloquently our legislators speak on women’s issues on the floor of the House, their commitment will only be proven by speedy action to correct such injustices as the rape medical report fee.
The writer is a columnist (Thoughts of a Native Daughter) in The Mirror newspaper. This article was also published in the March 11, 2016 edition of The Mirror