Last Wednesday (March 25), a United Nations (UN) resolution introduced by Ghana, which defined transatlantic slavery as “the gravest crime against humanity” and called for reparations, was adopted despite opposition from Europe and the United States (U.S.). Ghanaian President John Dramani Mahama, speaking on behalf of the 54-member African Group - the largest regional bloc at the UN - prior to the vote, stated, “Today, we come together in solemn solidarity to affirm truth and pursue a route to healing and reparative justice.”  The resolution, spearheaded by Ghana, received 123 votes in favor. Three countries (the U.S., Israel, and Argentina) voted against the resolution, while 52 countries - mostly from Europe, including Türkiye - abstained.

The resolution reaffirmed the need to address historical injustices affecting Africans and the diaspora with justice, human rights, dignity, and healing. It also emphasized that calls for reparations constitute a concrete step toward redressing these injustices.

WHY THE GRAVEST CRIME?

Before the vote, U.S. Ambassador Dan Negrea, the U.S. representative to the UN Economic and Social Council, stated that the text was “highly problematic in countless respects,” Negrea expressed regret that Washington felt compelled to remind this council once again that the United Nations exists “to maintain international peace and security” and was not founded “to advance narrow specific interests and agendas, to establish niche International Days, or to create new costly meeting and reporting mandates.” Additionally, he stated that the U.S. “does not recognize a legal right to reparations for historical wrongs that were not illegal under international law at the time they occurred.”

The first question that arises with this ruling is why slavery is described as the “gravest crime” against humanity, and whether this description suggests that other crimes against humanity, such as genocide, are less grave. As James Kariuki, the United Kingdom chargé d’affaires to the UN, has also stated, the view that “No single set of atrocities should be regarded as more or less significant than another” acknowledges slavery as a crime against humanity while asserting that it is incorrect to assess any group of atrocities as more or less significant than another. In response to this argument, which at first glance seems valid, Kyeretwie Osei, Program Officer at the African Union (AU) Economic, Social, and Cultural Council, emphasizes that the real issue is not about creating a hierarchy among crimes, but rather an effort to properly contextualize that specific period in history. Osei highlights that the impact of that era was earth-shattering and actually laid the groundwork for all subsequent forms of oppression and crimes against humanity. In other words, Osei........

© Birgün