Al-Bashir’s immunity
From Ralph Blumenau
Sir: Peter Oborne’s powerful piece about the ethnic cleansing in Darfur and eastern Chad (‘Darfur’s terrible export’, 10 June) has only one strange omission. Here, as in almost all media reports, we are told that ‘the Sudanese government’ is actively helping the murderous Janjaweed, but the dictator who heads that government, Omar Hasan Ahmed al-Bashir, is not named. It is as if one had never referred to the crimes of Saddam Hussein, but only to those of ‘the Iraqi government’. Why is al-Bashir being given this cloak of relative anonymity by our media? For the genocidal misery he has inflicted upon his people for years, he should be every bit as much a candidate for the Hague tribunal as the likes of Milosevic.
Ralph Blumenau
London W11
The loss of Catto
From James P. Carley
Sir: In his piece ‘A don who embodies the idea of a university’ (10 June) Alan Duncan did a brilliant job of evoking Jeremy Catto, a man whose career is living proof that the Research Assessment Exercise is not a suitable indicator of the worth of college tutors (at least in the Humanities). As he willingly has given of his time to generations of undergraduates, so too does he ‘waste’ valuable research hours helping postgraduates bring their projects to fruition and into print.
His own offerings are inevitably articles, but what he has written about the religion of Henry V, say — slight in quantity but deep in quality — will be read for generations after most of the hefty tomes which weigh so deeply in the opinion of those who assess have been consigned to the dustbins of history. Those rooms at Oriel, cluttered with books, CDs, bottles of ‘whisk’ and a roaring gas fire even in summer, are what will first come into our mind’s eye when we think of Jeremy, but it is the articles to which we’ll return again and again. His loss to the intellectual life at Oxford will be a profound one.
James P. Carley
University of Oxford
Amnesty and abortion
From Jonathan Bailey
Sir: What an excellent article by Simon Caldwell (‘Amnesty could kill itself’, 27 May) pointing out the profound folly of Amnesty International’s rapidly developing plan to ditch its prized neutrality on the issue of abortion. If Amnesty goes pro-choice it might well, as Mr Caldwell points out, frighten off many of its supporters and potential supporters, thereby diminishing its capacity to combat human rights abuses. As an Amnesty volunteer of many years, I am gravely concerned. But I will not be resigning, at least not immediately, and I would urge others in my position to remain members. By staying put we can continue to resist this unwelcome move. Indeed, anyone who does not wish to see this influential organisation put its weight behind abortion should join it and campaign against the proposal from within.
Jonathan Bailey
Sheffield
Different standards
From E.W. Huck
Sir: Charles Moore (The Spectator’s Notes, 27 May) reported on the debate in which Members of Parliament discussed their own salaries and complained that they were not being paid enough. It is remarkable that MPs still feel free to debate their own remuneration in view of the ethical code which Parliament has imposed on local authorities, a central feature of which is the requirement to avoid any possible conflict of interest.
Elected members of local authorities must declare a personal interest if they realise that they might benefit more than other people from the outcome of any decision to be made by their authority. If an impartial observer might think that the judgment of a councillor could be affected by that personal interest, then the interest becomes a prejudicial one and the councillor can take no part in the debate and must leave the meeting room while that agenda item is discussed. To reinforce this obligation, the Standards Board for England and its monitoring officers investigate allegations that standards have not been observed and councillors have been given the invidious duty of reporting fellow councillors if they believe the code has been breached.
There is a fundamental difference between the standard of conduct required from local councillors and standards adopted for themselves by our Members of Parliament.
E.W. Huck
Millom, Cumbria
French feet
From David Watkins
Sir: A large part of the difficulty in estimating the heights of historical figures (And another thing, 10 June) arises from ignorance of the fact that pieds and pouces, the units of length used by most French people at least until the mid-19th century, are significantly larger than English feet and inches. English and American writers often confidently assert, for example, that Napoleon was 5ft 2in. But he was definitely at least 5ft 6in — probably average for French soldiers of his time, though perhaps a little short for an officer.
David Watkins
Cardiff
Outlasting the ladies
From S.C. Chafe
Sir: I sympathise with Matthew Parris’s self-deprecating complaint about groups of women dining: the noise, the babbling and the enthusiastic shrieking (Another voice, 3 June). He not only asks the question but provides the explanation and invites criticism. This is unnecessary. I suggest he does what we do when encountering such groups at our wine lunches. This involves no complaint, no acknowledgment and no effort at all on our behalf. We simply outlast them!
S.C. Chafe
Victoria, Australia
Comments