FRIDAY, 23 JULY 2004, ABUJA, NIGERIA

ADDRESS BY HIS EXCELLENCY
ALHAJI DR AHMAD TEJAN KABBAH
PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SIERRA LEONE

Your Excellency, Olusegun Obasanjo, President of the Republic of Nigeria,

Your Excellencies, Heads of State and Government,

Honourable Ministers of Government,

Representatives of the Diplomatic and Consular Corps,

Representatives of the UN Family,
Senior Government Officials,
Distinguished Guests,
Ladies and Gentlemen:

I am extremely grateful to our host brother, His Excellency President Olusegun Obasanjo for inviting me here today to participate at this historic event: The Regional (Africa) Launch of the UN Human Development Report for the year 2004. I am also honoured that our host President has asked me to provide a lead commentary on the Report itself. Thankfully he has not imposed any restrictions on me.

Your Excellencies
Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is no secret that in recent decades, sub-Saharan Africa has been the world's worst performing region in terms of poverty reduction. Nearly one in two people on the African continent survives on less than $1 a day. It is also estimated that Africa would need to grow by 5 per cent per year just to keep the number of poor from rising. Consequently, if the number living in extreme poverty is to be halved by 2015, as called for in the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), not only will our economies need to grow substantially higher than they are now, but incomes will also have to be distributed more equitably, and aid flows significantly increased and more effectively utilized. The Economic Commission for Africa estimates that an investment of some 33 per cent of GDP is needed to reach the desirable growth rates.

The Human Development Report 2004 has more or less given us an update on progress made by countries and regions in addressing pro-poor growth and development. I am very pleased that in my days in the UN I was fortunate to observe, first hand, the design of the concept of the Human Development Index. I believe that the main objective then was to analyse and report on the social, political and economic performance of member countries in a participatory way. The resulting analyses and indicators then became the predominant basis for determining the level of UN intervention in terms of human development assistance. I am sure we have not deviated from this goal, except perhaps that today the Report should also be advocating for deeper and broader development assistance, especially for those countries that are consistently in the latter half of the index. I am also impressed by the thematic approach the Report has taken. On the whole, the Report has proved to be a very useful instrument for advocating a rather more holistic human development approach to development.

The choice of cultural diversity as a theme further reinforces the multidimensional aspect of our human development challenges. We should be able to fully appreciate the depth, strengths, weaknesses and the potential debilitating influence of such diversity on our development efforts. The report argues persuasively that allowing cultural diversity and ethnicity to flourish does not necessarily promote tensions and conflict. Rather it encourages the adoption of appropriate policies that recognize and accommodate cultural differences, as a key factor in assuring longer term co-existence among different groups. This is indeed food for thought.

In Africa, for too long we have been afraid to embrace openly and transparently diversity when it finds expression in tribal or ethnic forms. We are always proud to talk of the richness of our cultural values in the international arena but shy in addressing the manipulation of diversity by some leaders and elites. Worse is that we have too readily accepted that certain conflicts are caused by, or related to, ethnicity when in fact a more careful analysis reveals greed as the true fuel for civil conflicts in situations where the population's expectations have not been matched by development results. Tribal or ethnic passions then become the instrument of choice to be manipulated by warlords and other aspiring leaders who are searching for access to the country's resources, or to the limited development results available.

My country has had a long history of peaceful coexistence among different tribes. Tribal rivalry exists, but never escalated to ethnic conflict. Inter-tribal marriages are common, just as are marriages between people of different religions. I am myself living proof of this!!! Yet, when we had the conflict there were many attempts made to present it as inter-tribal. In fact even the national response to the conflict sometimes took a tribal orientation. As the world now knows, it was rather the manipulation by outsiders of those who were left out of the development process, in order to secure access to our diamonds and gold that fueled and sustained the conflict.

Could the earlier adoption of more robust policies on ethnicity and diversity have avoided the conflict? I doubt it. What is clear however is that our society's healing process was shorter because of the level of tolerance we are accustomed to.

We of course now have peace, thanks to the heroic efforts of our brothers in Nigeria and other countries that supported us in many ways including their blood. Nevertheless we recognize that the cultural liberty that we enjoy manifested by religious and ethnic tolerance can so easily wreck our fragile institutions, if we fail to meet the basic development needs of the people. When the social and economic fruits of development are scarce, then leaders resort to ethnicity for distribution and allocation. The institutions that should normally ensure equitable allocation of resources become compromised and weakened by the elites and leaders who are supposed to preserve them. In particular, I refer to the Judiciary and the public administration. In sum while federalism, proportional representation, and other innovative systems are useful, my conviction is that tolerance must be preached widely by the leadership and every effort deployed to preserve the key institutions that protect individual freedoms.

The Report has attempted to rank countries using selected human development indicators, including per capita incomes, life expectancy, education, unemployment, access to good water, healthcare and sanitation, and gender empowerment. It has also used these data to assess the progress in each country towards the MDGs. Notably the results are mixed. Indeed, even though most of our countries in sub-Saharan Africa are classified in the lower half, it is important not to underestimate the peculiar difficulties and human development challenges the majority of these countries face, including "in-conflict" and "post-conflict" situations.

Take my own country Sierra Leone for example which is ranked at the bottom of the HDI ladder. Our country has just emerged from a devastating decade-long civil strife. During this war a lot of economic and social infrastructure was totally destroyed in addition to countless human suffering. Under such circumstances, being ranked against countries that have not undergone comparable experiences should serve as a basis for increased advocacy to address the structural causes of their status rather than passing a value judgement on the seriousness of their development efforts.

The fact of the matter is that the HDR and its various indices should act as a wake-up call for low ranked countries to be assisted or encouraged to respond effectively to the challenges of human development. For us in Sierra Leone it resonates with challenges for maintaining sustainable peace, inclusive social and economic development, broad based participatory political processes, respect for human rights, reconciliation and providing free expression of cultural diversity.

My message here is simple. While I do appreciate the indicators and ranking efforts in the Report, I also believe that we may need to do more in reflecting more adequately the peculiar circumstances of countries or regions, which may influence their indicators and ranking. In Sierra Leone as indeed in many other post-conflict countries in our region, progress has continued to be made in strengthening peace and security, Democracy and good governance have improved significantly.

Against this background, I would like us to reflect more deeply on the following questions at this launching of the 2004 HDR:

· What message is the Report trying to bring, especially for the many developing countries in Africa and other Third World regions, and how can we make this more penetrating, in the context of advocating for greater global recognition of our problems and the need for substantial concessional development assistance?
· How can we make country and regional comparisons more realistic and beneficial?
· What policy and programme options can we evolve from the data and diagnosis?
· What can be done to build inclusive, culturally diverse societies in Africa?
· What lesson can we draw from the Report to reinforce the objectives of NEPAD?

I have no doubt that after such reflection, we will all have greater appreciation of the value of this Report

Finally, we uphold the principle that cultural diversity is necessary for sustainable and peaceful human development. The challenge for all our countries is to develop and promote diversity as a management tool for building inclusive societies that function on policies that explicitly use cultural differences to enhance multi cultural governance as a best practice.

I thank you.
=============================