Proposed Colombia Free Trade Agreement: Labor Issues

[Excerpt] This report examines three labor issues and arguments related to the pending U.S.-Colombia free trade agreement (CFTA): violence against trade unionists; impunity (accountability for or punishment of the perpetrators); and worker rights protections for Colombians. For general issues relating to the CFTA, see CRS Report RL34470, U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement: Economic and Political Implications, by M. Angeles Villarreal. For background on Colombia and its political situation and context for the agreement, see CRS Report RL32250, Colombia: Issues for Congress, by Colleen W. Cook and Clare Ribando Seelke. Opponents of the pending U.S.-Colombia free trade agreement (CFTA) argue against it on three points: (1) the high rate of violence against trade unionists in Colombia; (2) the lack of adequate punishment for the perpetrators of that violence; and (3) weak Colombian enforcement of International Labor Organization (ILO) core labor standards and labor laws. Proponents of the agreement argue primarily for the proposed Colombia FTA on the basis of economic and national security benefits. Accordingly, they argue, the CFTA would: support increased exports, expand economic growth, create jobs, and open up investment opportunities for the United States. They also argue that it would reinforce the rule of law and spread values of capitalism in Colombia, and anchor hemispheric stability. Proponents specifically respond to labor complaints of the opponents, that (1) violence against trade unionists has declined dramatically since President Álvaro Uribe took office in 2002; (2) substantial progress is being made on the impunity issue as the government has undertaken great efforts to find perpetrators and bring them to justice; and (3) the Colombian government is taking steps to improve conditions for workers. If Congress were to approve the Colombia FTA, it would be the second FTA (after Peru) to have some labor enforcement “teeth.” Labor provisions including the four basic ILO core labor standards would be enforceable through the same dispute settlement procedures as for all other provisions (i.e., primarily those for commercial interests.) Opponents argue that under CFTA, only the concepts of core labor standards, and not the details of the ILO conventions behind them, would be enforceable. Proponents point to recent Colombian progress in protecting workers on many fronts. They argue that approval of the FTA and the economic growth in Colombia that would result is the best way to protect Colombia’s trade unionists. They also argue that not passing the agreement would not resolve Colombia’s labor issues. Opponents argue that delaying approval of the proposed CFTA further would give Colombia more time to keep improving protections for its workers. This report will be updated as events warrant

A review on perception of genetically modified foods in Nigeria

Genetically modified foods (GMFs )), GMOs or engineered foods refer to foods produced from genetic ally modified plants or animal s who se DNA have undergone modifications either by an inherent or a foreign DNA (transgenes) for improvement of the targeted o rganism. Genetically modified foods were introduced to  Nigeria by National Biotechno logy Development Agency ( to combat food security issues and other agricultural challenges . After the introduction, the Nigerian Government believed that the products can be release d to the m arket. This brought persistent argument s by Nigerians on the perception and acceptance of the GM foods. The basis for the arguments were made on factors such as safety , environmental threat, price , means of colonization, food security, family size, potentiality , awareness of GM foods. These arguments were by individuals and organizations within various areas /fields in Nigeria. The perception led to the division of Nigerians to protagonists and antagonist s with regards to GMOs. The article reviewed the introduction, perceptions and views of factors on GMFs acceptance among Nigerians

Local Voices: Citizen Conversations on Civil Liberties and Secure Communities

The informed and active involvement of citizens in government at all levels has long been a goal of the League of Women Voters. The League has also been highly attentive to issues of civil rights and civil liberties throughout its history. As a result, the League of Women Voters Education Fund, the citizen education and research arm of the League, initiated a multi-faceted approach to enhancing both public and policymaker understanding of the issues involved in the complex interaction of civil liberties and homeland security.In 2005, with generous funding from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Education Fund launched a project entitled Local Voices: Citizen Conversations on Civil Liberties and Secure Communities. The project has three main components.One component involved facilitating ten public deliberations in communities across the country in June 2005. The League asked the Study Circles Resource Center (SCRC), a national organization that works to advance deliberative democracy, to be a partner in this project. In collaboration with the League, SCRC developed a discussion guide, provided advice to local Leagues as they prepared for the public deliberations, and trained local discussion facilitators at the ten sites. The hosts were the Leagues in: Baltimore, Maryland; Black Hawk-Bremer counties, Iowa; Brookhaven, New York; Columbia, Missouri; Dallas, Texas; Lexington, Kentucky; Los Angeles, California; Miami, Florida; North Pinellas County, Florida; and Seattle, Washington. Each site hosted between 50 and 100 community members for four to six hours of conversation. Insights from these forums were collected in two forms: observations recorded by trained note takers in break-out discussions (approximately six to ten participants in each) at every site and a post-deliberation individual participant survey. Questionnaires, developed by Lake Snell Perry Mermin/Decision Research (LSPM/DR), were completed by more than 650 participants. The results areiincluded in the report. (See Appendix A for more information.)The other two components of the project involved qualitative and quantitative public opinion research to explore attitudes and values toward homeland security and civil liberties. The League hired LSPM/DR to conduct six focus groups in three cities: Bakersfield, California; Dallas, Texas; and Richmond, Virginia. In addition, LSPM/DR conducted an analysis of national polling data that provide reflections of Americans' opinions toward homeland security and civil liberties.The findings from all components of the Local Voices project are chronicled in this report. Neither this report nor the ultimate Congressional action on the USA PATRIOT Act by any means signals the end of the issue or the need for conversation on this important topic.The issues -- and the decisions -- involved in the intersection between civil liberties and homeland security will continue to evolve and manifest themselves in various ways. The consequences of the decisions this country makes will have lasting effects on every American, in their lives and communities, and on the nation as a whole.This report presents a number of findings and insights gleaned from the range of public input obtained during the Local Voices project. These findings are identified and then described at length in the following pages. Some are focused on specific topics within the current debate, and some are more general and far-ranging.At the conclusion of this report, the League presents a series of recommendations. These relate to the ways government at all levels, as well as community institutions, the media, and the public itself, can work to strengthen public understanding, public involvement and public confidence in the conversations, decisions and trade-offs that have been and will continue to be made about homeland security and civil liberties

Redefining Human Security The Case of Albania

This paper offers a critical study of the concept and issues of human security. Its usage, definition and applicability may differ since different authors explain issues related to security differently. Although there is still no common definition on what human security is, most authors agree that human security is related to individuals in terms of theirwellbeing. For too long, human security has been focused on the protection of state territory, regarded as the traditional perception of security. This kind of interpretation refers to a narrow security concept, not well constructed and incapable of addressing most of the important issues related to the security of the individual. The issue of security for a nation is quite different to the issue of security for individuals, because the first tends to protect the boundaries of the state where people live while the second aims to protect all human being from insecurities. Human security is a new challenge in today’s world; it presents new threats which are far away from the threats generated by the traditional concept of human security. The new concept of human security should be analysed in people’s daily lives, not in a country’s guns and weapons. To protect people’s lives means respecting all human rights prescribed in domestic law and international conventions; violating them means causing human insecurities and the failure of the state to fulfil its own responsibilities towards the law. Therefore, the protection and the welfare of the people should become first goal of the government. In cooperation with international organizations and NGOs, governments should find and promote appropriate policies to establish a political, economic and social security environment for all the people as citizens of that country