Editorial | Sign the Samoa agreement

It is hard to fathom why nearly three years after being key architect of the new agreement to guide relations between the European Union (EU) and the Organisation of African, Caribbean and Pacific States (OACPS), Jamaica scrabbled to reassure itself that what the document says and the commitments it makes comport with national law.

Prime Minister Andrew Holness and his foreign minister, Kamina Johnson Smith, must therefore respond with greater clarity than they have so far managed as to why the administration has shilly-shallied on the matter. The Government must clearly stand firm for important principles, including the universal principles of human rights, gender equality, individual privacy and freedom from discrimination.

It is tempting to claim that this development is an aberration. Unfortunately, cynics will hear echoes of the recent fiasco at the United Nations (UN) when Jamaica failed to vote on a General Assembly resolution calling for a humanitarian pause to Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, although Kingston said it supported the resolution and had delivered a statement on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) underlining the very sentiments. Jamaica’s explanation consultations were not complete in time for the vote, which presumably meant that its UN staff were still seeking instructions from headquarters on how to vote. Yet, four minutes before the ballot, the very diplomats actively abstained in a vote on a Canadian amendment to the resolution. Despite the explanations, cynics will probably believe that something significant transpired within those handful of minutes.

With respect to the latest issue, the Samoa Agreement essentially establishes the broad framework within which the 27 EU members and the 79 OACPS countries are to conduct their economic and political relations over the next 20 years. The document is long on broad and universal aspirations, but short on specifics – in part because of trade relations between the EU and what used to be the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) group of countries are now covered by a series of regional Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs). In the case of the Caribbean, a regional EPA has been in place since 2008. Further, specific arrangements for the management of the EU’s aid to OACPS is not part of this treaty.

NO FUNDAMENTAL DEPARTURE

Importantly, too, there is no fundamental departure in the language of the Samoa Agreement from that of its Cotonou predecessor, or, for that matter, from the language of countless other international agreements to which Jamaica is a party. It affirms democracy, the rule of law and the upholding of human rights, including the protection of all individuals against discrimination.

Further, the language of the Samoa agreement and what it proposes are things that Ms Johnson Smith and her technocrats at the foreign ministry ought to be well aware of, given the role they played in negotiating the accord.

In 2018, for instance, the foreign minister chaired the ACP ministerial council that finalised the group’s negotiating mandate for the post-Cotonou pact. She also chaired several other related sessions during the negotiations.

In December 2020, as the agreement was being finalised, Ms Johnson Smith said at an OACPS conference: “Once the post-Cotonou Agreement has been initialled and subsequently signed in Samoa, let us ensure that this landmark agreement is effectively implemented in a manner that takes the OACPS-EU relationship to a higher level, that enables the Caribbean-EU partnership to realise its full potential that advances sustainable development in all our regions, and that further sustains intra-OACPS cooperation.”

That signing took place in Samoa’s capital of Apia on November 15. So far, 47 OACPS states have initialled the document. Jamaica did not participate.

According to Ms Johnson Smith, Kingston pulled out because of concerns “which continue to be raised on the domestic space”. While the minister did not identify the concerns or their source, she gave an assurance of the Government’s unfailing protection of Jamaica’s interest, “with the laws of Jamaica as our guide”.

Which is expected in negotiations the Government conducts on behalf of the Jamaican State. Agreements are vetted by the Government’s lawyers to ensure that they align with domestic law and are within the framework of the island’s Constitution.

Notwithstanding that the minister did not name those who have objected to the Samoa Agreement, it is known that an anti-gay rights, anti-abortion group called Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society has campaigned against the agreement. Their claim, apparently, is that the EU is using the pact to promote and normalise homosexuality, as well as the disruption of accepted family values in Jamaica and elsewhere.

What the agreement does in fact do is commit the parties to gender equality, non-discrimination and the provision of “universal access to sexual and reproductive health commodities and healthcare services, including for family planning, information and education, and the integration of reproductive health into national strategies and programmes”. It also calls for the parties to stand by other international agreements, to which Jamaica is already a signatory.

On Tuesday, Ms Johnson Smith declared: “...while we are confident that the agreement will not supersede any Jamaica law, what we want to be made clear …. (is) that at the point of signing … the interpretation that we expect is crystal.”

The Government should urgently act on that commitment – unless it intends to opt out of the partnership arrangement with the EU.