Jonathan Torgovnik’s photographs of children born of rape during the Rwandan genocide. By Mia Fineman, Slate Magazine
Powerful article about a photo series, focusing on the children of rape in Rwanda. The mothers photographed had been raped by Hutu militamen during the genocide, and the photographer interviewed them away from their children, then photographed the two together. A powerful reminder of consequences of war that continue a generation after a conflict ends.

I read the article and looked through the photos and testimonies. This part confused me:

(The subjects’ names have been changed to protect their identities. While the women want the world to know what happened to them, they hope to protect themselves and their children from the censure of their own communities.)

What about their faces? These photos are online for everyone to see. The book is on Amazon.com. Doesn’t this assume that Rwandans cannot access this article and these images? Or that they have no friends or relatives in other countries with better access?

I know that there are issues with connectivity Rwanda (starting with unreliable electricity). I know there’s a language barrier. I know that digital literacy is low. But I also know that the number of Internet users and shared access points (telecentres, libraries, internet cafes, etc.) is growing. Since 2000, the number of Internet users in Rwanda has grown from 5,000 to 100,000.

After working with telecentre.org, meeting folks from across the continent, and visiting grassroots telecentres, I see what’s possible and never ever assume that what I post online won’t be seen by all.

We are connected. Ethan and Paul Barera both attended the World Summit on the Information Society in Tunis in 2005. Since 2004, Paul’s been running the Nyamata telecentre, in Rwanda’s Bugesera District — one of areas hardest hit by the genocide (out of a population of 62,000, only 2,000 survived, mostly women and children). Paul provides a range of community services, from IT literacy training for adults and kids to computer maintenance and repair. In April 2008 he ran a three-day workshop for women survivors, focusing on how to create and manage a business and access microfinancing.

We are connected. Changing names is not enough to protect these women and their children. When we produce content like this we have to assume that everyone can see it. Including these children, soon young adults, some of whom may read that their mothers love and cherish them, despite the circumstances of their conception. Others whom may read “I never loved this child” — so disturbing.

I noticed two things:

Andrew Graham, the NDP candidate from New Brunswick Southwest, does not support reforms allowing free access to scientific and survey data gathered by government institutions. First, kudos to Mr Graham for signing the pledge — that’s the kind of leader we want. Now onto his comment, which explains his reasoning: “My main worry is those who would take tax-funded research and use it for private corporate profit.” Although it does not entirely address Mr Graham’s concern, my understanding is that if you licensed the data under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike license then anything that was built on the dataset would have to be shared in the same way, thereby allowing anyone — government, civil society groups, or nonprofits — to benefit from the value added by the private company. But I’m no copyright lawyer, so let me know if I have this wrong. Then, of course, the argument can be made that companies pay taxes too. So why shouldn’t they have access to the data? But that’s a whole other discussion.

The other thing I noticed is that none of the MP candidates from Outremont have signed the pledge. They are: Marcela Valdivia (Bloc), François Pilon (Green), Thomas Mulcair (NDP), Lulzim Laloshi (Conservative), and Sébastien Dhavernas (Liberal). C’mon folks! Let us know where you stand. Sign the pledge, or at least tell us why you disagree.

We’ve just launched our first project — ibelieveinopen.ca — a site that collects pledges from Member of Parliament (MP) candidates to commit to making five improvements to government transparency. The site also collects signups from voters to show that we care about transparency and that we’re paying attention.

Check out the results to see if your MP has made the pledge. If they’re not, you may want to ask them why, because the commitments are basic to good governance:

1. Support reforms that increase government transparency and accountability.
2. Make campaign promises specific and measurable, and report progress on promises and their metrics at least semi-annually.
3. Publish the content of his or her daily schedule, including meetings with lobbyists and special interest groups.
4. Support reforms allowing free access to scientific and survey data gathered by government institutions.
5. Support reforms that make it easier for Canadians to obtain government information they have a right to know.

Once you sign the pledge, you’ll be sent an email that you can forward to others to promote this great project. Easy way to get involved!