Showing posts with label History. Show all posts
Showing posts with label History. Show all posts

Sunday, 19 January 2025

PATRICE LUMUMBA 64 YEARS AFTER STILL HUNTS MANY



Symbol of resistance’: Lumumba, the Congolese hero killed before his prime

Sixty four years after his murder, the aborted legacy of Congo’s first prime minister Patrice Lumumba, still haunts many. By 

Shortly before noon on a Thursday in June 1960, 34-year-old Patrice Lumumba stepped up to the podium at the Palace of the Nation in Leopoldville (current-day Kinshasa) with a dream to unite his newly liberated country.

Standing before dignitaries and politicians, including King Baudouin of Belgium from which the then-Republic of the Congo had just won its independence, the first-ever prime minister gave a rousing, somewhat unexpected speech that ruffled feathers among th “No Congolese worthy of the name will ever be able to forget that it was by fighting that [our independence] has been won,” Lumumba said.

“Slavery was imposed on us by force,” he continued, while the king looked on in shock. “We remember the blows that we had to submit to morning, noon and night because we were ‘negroes’.”

With independence, the country’s future was finally in the hands of its own people, he proclaimed. “We shall show the world what the Black man can do when working in liberty, and we shall make the Congo the pride of Africa.”

But this was a promise left unfulfilled, as just six months later the young leader was dead.

For years murkiness surrounded the details of his killing, but it is now known that armed Congolese men murdered Lumumba on January 17, 1961, aided by the Belgians and with the tacit approval of the United States.

Sixty-four years on, Lumumba remains a symbol of African resistance, while many Congolese still carry the burden of his aborted legacy – whether they favoured

‘His death distressed me’

“When I learned of Lumumba’s death, I was shocked,” said 85-year-old Kasereka Lukombola, who lives in the Virunga quarter of Goma, in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo.

His gold-coloured Western-style house, unusual in this region, was built during colonial times and is a reminder of the vestiges of nearly 80 years of Belgian rule.

Lukombola was born during World War II, he said. “At that time, a Black man in Africa could not oppose the white settlers for certain reasons, including the colour of his skin and the fact that he was enslaved. Those who dared to challenge the whites were either imprisoned, beaten up or killed.”

He was 20 when Lumumba was killed. “I remember being in my village in Bingi [when I heard the news]. I regretted it, his death had distressed me. On that date, I didn’t eat, I had insomnia,” he said, adding that he still remembers it as if it were yesterday.

Lukombola accuses the Wazungu (a term meaning “foreigners”, but generally used for Belgian colonists) of having been behind the assassination.

“The Belgians were racially segregating the Congo, and Lumumba outcried against this. He encouraged us to fight tooth and nail to get rid of the colonisers,” he said.

“He had discovered certain plots by the colonists against us, the Congolese people. They wanted to enslave us forever. That’s when the Belgians developed a hatred against him, which led to his assassination.”

Lukombola believes that if Lumumba hadn’t been killed, he would have transformed the country into a veritable “El Dorado” for millions of Congolese, based on the vision he had for his people and the continent as a whole.

Tumsifu Akram, a Congolese researcher based in Goma, believes Lumumba was killed on the orders of certain Western powers who wanted to keep hold of Congo’s natural wealth.

“The decision to eliminate the first Congolese prime minister was taken by American and other officials at the highest level,” he told Al Jazeera.

Though Lumumba had friends both inside and outside the country, “as numerous as they were, his friends were not so determined to save him as his enemies were determined and organised to finish him off,” Akram said. “His friends supported him more in words than in deeds.”

Only a tooth remained

Just days after Lumumba delivered his June 30, 1960 Independence Day speech, the country began to fall into chaos. There was an armed mutiny, and then the secession of the mineral-rich province of Katanga in July. Belgium sent troops to Katanga. Congo then asked the United Nations for help, and although they sent peacekeepers, they did not deploy them to Katanga. So Lumumba reached out to the Soviet Union for assistance – a move that alarmed Belgium and the US.

In September, President Joseph Kasavubu dismissed Lumumba from government, something he ignored. Soon after, a military coup led by Congolese Colonel Joseph Mobutu (later known as dictator Mobutu Sese Seko) fully removed him from power. Lumumba was placed under house arrest, from which he escaped, only to be captured by Mobutu’s forces in December.

On January 17, 1961, Lumumba and two associates, Joseph Okito and Maurice Mpolo, were then taken to Katanga by plane – soldiers beat and tortured them on the flight and at their destination.

Later that day, all three were executed by a Katangan firing squad, under Belgian supervision.

Their bodies were at first thrown into shallow graves, but later dug up, hacked into pieces, and the remains dissolved in acid.

In the end, only one tooth of Lumumba’s remained, which was stolen by a Belgian policeman and only returned to Lumumba’s relatives in 2022.

In the years since the killing, Belgium has acknowledged that it was “morally responsible for circumstances leading to the death”. Meanwhile, information has also come to light exposing the US CIA’s involvement in a plot to kill Lumumba.

A ‘big mistake’?

At his home in Goma, Lukombola recounted all the “firsts” he’s lived through during his country’s complicated history, including taking part in the first municipal election of 1957 – in which he voted for Lumumba’s Congolese National Movement (MNC) party “because I was convinced it had a great vision for our country. It was out of a sense of pride,” he said.

He recounted being around during the riots of January 4, 1959; the proclamation of the Congo’s independence on June 30, 1960; the secession of Katanga and South Kasai between July and August 1960; and the joys of Zaire’s economic and political pinnacle in the mid-1960s.

Having lived through the reign of all five Congolese presidents, Lukombola understands the “enigma” that is the DRC and has seen how much it can change.

His only regret, he said, is that many historic events occurred after Lumumba had passed on. “If he were alive, he would restore us to glory and greatness.”

However, not everyone looks at Lumumba’s legacy with such awe and kindness.

Grace Bahati, a 45-year-old father of five, believes Lumumba is at the root of some of the misfortunes that have befallen the DRC and that the country continues to grapple with.

According to him, the first prime minister was too quick in wanting immediate independence for the Congo, while the country lacked sufficient intelligentsia to be able to lead it after the departure of the Belgians.

“Lumumba was in a hurry to ask for independence. I found that many of our leaders were not prepared to lead this country, and that’s unfortunate,” Bahati told Al Jazeera. “In my opinion, it was a big mistake on Lumumba’s part.”

Dany Kayeye, a historian in Goma, does not share this view. He believes Lumumba saw from afar that independence was the only solution, given that the Belgians had been exploiting the country for nearly 80 years and it was the Congolese who were suffering.

“Lumumba was not the first to demand the country’s immediate independence. The first to do so were the soldiers who had come from the second world war, having fought alongside the colonists,” Kayeye also noted.

But it was after Lumumba’s supposed “radicalisation” – when he was seen to be forging ties with the Soviet Union – that he found himself in Western crosshairs as they considered him as a threat to their interests during the crucial Cold War period, the historian said. Congolese like Mobutu Sese-Seko were then used in the manoeuvres against him.

“For a long time, the Congo had been envied because of its natural resources. The Belgians didn’t want to leave the country, and the only way to continue exploiting it was to anarchise it and kill its nationalists,” Kayeye explained. “It was in this context that Lumumba, his friends Maurice Mpolo, then president of the Senate, and Joseph Okito, then minister of youth, died together.”

‘He fought for justice’

Jean Jacques Lumumba is Patrice Lumumba’s nephew and an activist committed to the fight against corruption in the country.

The 38-year-old grew up in Kinshasa, raised by Lumumba’s mother and younger brother, but was forced into exile in 2016 for calling out corruption in the entourage of former Congolese president Joseph Kabila.

For him, his uncle remains a symbol of a fair and better Congo, and someone he draws inspiration from in his own activism.

“In my family, they tell me he was an atypical personality. He was quite frank and direct. He had a sense of honour and the search for truth from an early age right up to his political struggle,” Jean Jacques told Al Jazeera.

“He fought for justice and fairness. He himself refused corruption,” he added, calling corruption “one of the evils that characterise developing countries”.

“[Patrice Lumumba] wanted wellbeing and development … This is inspiring in the fight I continue to wage, for the emergence of the African continent.”

Jean Jacques feels Lumumba no longer belongs just to the DRC and Africa, but to all those who desire freedom and dignity around the world.

Although he never met his uncle, he is pleased that his memory and legacy continue to live on.

And although he came to a tragic and devastating end, for Jean Jacques, Lumumba’s demise is also something that has immortalised his name and the battles he waged.

African leaders should honour the memory of people like him and others who paid with their lives to build a “developed, radiant and prosperous Africa, ready to assert itself in the concert of nations”, the younger Lumumba said.

Lumumba’s ‘eternal’ legacy

More than six decades after Lumumba was killed, the DRC is in the midst of multiple crises – from armed rebellions to resource extraction and poverty.

Although it is a country of immense natural wealth, it has not found its way to the majority of Congolese people – something many in the country attribute to the continued exploitation by internal and external forces.

Daniel Makasi, a resident of Goma, believes that the colonialism Lumumba was so determined to fight, is still going strong – though it manifests in different ways today.

“Today, there are several forms of colonisation that continue through the multinationals that exploit resources in the DRC and that do not benefit ordinary citizens,” he told Al Jazeera.

He added that Africans need to channel the spirit of Lumumba to stop such neo-colonialism as far as possible, so they can enjoy the fullness of their natural wealth.

Lumumba was able to transform the country in a short space of time, making Congolese “prouder”, and that makes him “eternal”, Makasi said, urging people to follow his example.

Others also agree that future generations owe Lumumba an “immeasurable” debt for what he started.

“For me, Patrice Emery Lumumba is a symbol of resistance to imperialist forces,” said Moise Komayombi, another Goma resident, remembering the June 1960 Independence Day address that the Belgians considered a “vicious attack” but that inspires many Africans to this day.

“He inspired us to remain nationalists and protect our homeland against all forms of colonisation,” Komayombi said, reminding himself that Lumumba’s work is still not done.

source

Wednesday, 23 October 2024

NENWE -ON-LINE(Nol) UNIVERSITY NEW PROGRAMS ANNOUNCEMENT.


The NOL Board of Directors, and the NOLU  Management, are pleased to announce the introduction of two new programs in the lifelong learning programs of the University.


1. NKORO DISCUSSION
The "Nkoro Discussion" will be anchored by Prof. Sai Nwenya, and  moderated by Chief Charles O Chukwubike .

Firstly, the program focuses on topics and questions from the  remote and contemporary history of Nenwe and the Igbos.
Some other  discussions in this program will have the flavours of the discussions that were, and  still being held in the Nenwe and Igbo traditional societies. It aims to lend some clarity to the not easily understood customs and traditions of the Nenwe people, while taking a fresh look at the commonly observed cultural practices also of the Nenwe people. The program also hopes to draw the discussion ideas and topics from its worldwide audience. Please feel free to participate with your presence, questions, or suggestions of topics and/or ideas for discussion or how the program can be improved upon.
It will debut on Saturday, October 26, 2024 @ 5 PM, Nigeria local time, at the NOLU virtual auditorium.

2. "IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES"
When communication between people, especially between closely related pairs,  breaks down, irretrievably, it does come with some costs, both tangible and intangible.
This new program aims to take the university audience through important flashpoints with the view on recognizing when you and your pair have arrived at each of those flashpoints and when reconciliation could still be available and on the table.
Engr. Cornelius Okwudiri Ani , is the sole anchor. He will be broadcasting from Atlanta, in the State of Georgia, The United States.
The Program has been scheduled to debut on Monday, November 4, 2024, @ the virtual auditorium of the NOLU. It will be simultaneously broadcast on the NOL general platform. Its start time is 5 PM, Nigeria local time.
These two programs are respectively approved to run for a term of six months from its debut. Each will be subject to a possible mutually agreed renewal at the expiration of each term.
The University looks forward to your characteristically strong patronage and enduring support for these two new programs.
Thank you.
Signed
The NOLU Management
NENWEONLINE@GMAIL.COM

Friday, 15 October 2021

An Overview of Female Genital Mutilation in Nigeria

An Overview of Female Genital Mutilation in Nigeria

TC Okeke, USB Anyaehie, and CCK Ezenyeaku

Additional article information

Abstract

Nigeria, due to its large population, has the highest absolute number of female genital mutilation (FGM) worldwide, accounting for about one-quarter of the estimated 115–130 million circumcised women in the world. The objective of this review is to ascertain the current status of FGM in Nigeria. Pertinent literature on FGM retrieved from internet services [Google search on FGM in Nigeria, www.online Nigeria, PubMed of the national library of medicine www.medconsumer. Info/tropics/fgm.htm, Biomedcentral and African Journal Online (AJOL) (FGM)] and textbooks, journals, and selected references for proper understanding of the topic was included in this review. The national prevalence rate of FGM is 41% among adult women. Evidence abound that the prevalence of FGM is declining. The ongoing drive to eradicate FGM is tackled by World Health Organization, United Nations International Children Emergency Fund, Federation of International Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO), African Union, The economic commission for Africa, and many women organizations. However, there is no federal law banning FGM in Nigeria. There is need to eradicate FGM in Nigeria. Education of the general public at all levels with emphasis on the dangers and undesirability of FGM is paramount.

Keywords: Female genital cutting, Female genital mutilation, Harmful traditional practice, Nigeria

Introduction

Female genital mutilation (FGM) is defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as all procedures which involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia and/or injury to the female genital organs, whether for cultural or any other non-therapeutic reasons.[1] In Nigeria, subjection of girls and women to obscure traditional practices is legendary.[2] FGM is an unhealthy traditional practice inflicted on girls and women worldwide. FGM is widely recognized as a violation of human rights, which is deeply rooted in cultural beliefs and perceptions over decades and generations with no easy task for change.

Though FGM is practiced in more than 28 countries in Africa and a few scattered communities worldwide, its burden is seen in Nigeria, Egypt, Mali, Eritrea, Sudan, Central African Republic, and northern part of Ghana where it has been an old traditional and cultural practice of various ethnic groups.[2,3] The highest prevalence rates are found in Somalia and Djibouti where FGM is virtually universal.[2]

FGM is widely practiced in Nigeria, and with its large population, Nigeria has the highest absolute number of cases of FGM in the world, accounting for about one-quarter of the estimated 115–130 million circumcised women worldwide.[2] In Nigeria, FGM has the highest prevalence in the south-south (77%) (among adult women), followed by the south east (68%) and south west (65%), but practiced on a smaller scale in the north, paradoxically tending to in a more extreme form.[2,4] Nigeria has a population of 150 million people with the women population forming 52%.[4] The national prevalence rate of FGM is 41% among adult women. Prevalence rates progressively decline in the young age groups and 37% of circumcised women do not want FGM to continue.[2] 61% of women who do not want FGM said it was a bad harmful tradition and 22% said it was against religion. Other reasons cited were medical complications (22%), painful personal experience (10%), and the view that FGM is against the dignity of women (10%).[2] However, there is still considerable support for the practice in areas where it is deeply rooted in local tradition.[2] The aim of this review was to ascertain the current status of FGM in Nigeria.

Materials and Methods

Pertinent literature on FGM was retrieved from internet services [Google search on FGM in Nigeria, www.online Nigeria, PubMed of the National Library of Medicine www.medconsumer. Info/tropics/fgm.htm, Biomedcentral and African Journal Online (AJOL) (FGM)] and textbooks, journals, and selected references for proper understanding of the topic was included in this review.

Origin and significance

FGM is a practice whose origin and significance is shrouded in secrecy, uncertainty, and confusion.[3] The origin of FGM is fraught with controversy either as an initiation ceremony of young girls into womanhood or to ensure virginity and curb promiscuity, or to protect female modesty and chastity.[5] The ritual has been so widespread that it could not have risen from a single origin.[3,6,7]

Types/variation of FGM in Nigeria

FGM practiced in Nigeria is classified into four types[8] as follows. Clitoridectomy or Type I (the least severe form of the practice): It involves the removal of the prepuce or the hood of the clitoris and all or part of the clitoris. In Nigeria, this usually involves excision of only a part of the clitoris. Type II or “sunna” is a more severe practice that involves the removal of the clitoris along with partial or total excision of the labia minora. Type I and Type II are more widespread but less harmful compared to Type III. Type III (infibulation) is the most severe form of FGM. It involves the removal of the clitoris, the labia minora and adjacent medial part of the labia majora and the stitching of the vaginal orifice, leaving an opening of the size of a pin head to allow for menstrual flow or urine. Type IV or other unclassified types recognized by include introcision and gishiri cuts, pricking, piercing, or incision of the clitoris and/or labia, scraping and/or cutting of the vagina (angrya cuts), stretching the clitoris and/or labia, cauterization, the introduction of corrosive substances and herbs in the vagina, and other forms.

In Nigeria, of the six largest ethnic groups, the Yoruba, Hausa, Fulani, Ibo, Ijaw, and Kanuri, only the Fulani do not practice any form.[9]

FGM varies from country to country, tribes, religion, and from one state and cultural setting to another, and no continent in the world has been exempted.[3] In most parts of Nigeria, it is carried out at a very young age (minors) and there is no possibility of the individual's consent.[6] Type I and Type II are more widespread and less harmful compared to Type III and Type IV. In Nigeria, there is greater prevalence of Type I excision in the south, with extreme forms of FGM prevalent in the North. Practice of FGM has no relationship with religion. Muslims and Christians practice it, but it is more widely spread in Christian predominated parts of Nigeria.[2]

FGM and women's rights

FGM is recognized worldwide as a fundamental violation of the human rights of girls and women. It reflects deep-rooted inequality between the sexes and constitutes an extreme form of discrimination against women. It involves violation of rights of the children and violation of a person's right to health, security, and physical integrity, the right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, and the right to life when the procedure results in death. Furthermore, girls usually undergo the practice without their informed consent, depriving them of the opportunity to make independent decision about their bodies.

Reasons to justify FGM

The respondents gave reasons for FGM. They regarded FGM as a tribal traditional practice (our custom is a good tradition and has to be protected), as a superstitious belief practiced for preservation of chastity and purification,[10] family honor, hygiene, esthetic reasons, protection of virginity and prevention of promiscuity, modification of sociosexual attitudes (countering failure of a woman to attain orgasm), increasing sexual pleasure of husband, enhancing fertility and increasing matrimonial opportunities. Other reasons are to prevent mother and child from dying during childbirth and for legal reasons (one cannot inherit property if not circumcised).[11] In some parts of Nigeria, the cut edges of the external genitalia are smeared with secretions from a snail footpad with the belief that the snail being a slow animal would influence the circumcised girl to “go slow” with sexual activities in future.[12] However, FGM is often routinely performed as an integral part of social conformity and in line with community identity.[3]

Health consequences of FGM

An estimated 100–140 million girls and women worldwide are currently living with the consequences of FGM.[13] In Africa, about 3 million girls are at risk for FGM annually.[13] Despite the increased international and little national attention, the prevalence of FGM overall has declined very little.[14] The procedure has no health benefits for girls and women. Adverse consequences of FGM are shock from pain and hemorrhage,[10] infection, acute urinary retention following such trauma, damage to the urethra or anus in the struggle of the victim during the procedure making the extent of the operation dictated in many cases by chance,[6] chronic pelvic infection, acquired gynatresia resulting in hematocolpos, vulval adhesions, dysmenorrhea, retention cysts, and sexual difficulties with anorgasmia. Other complications are implantation dermoid cysts and keloids,[12] and sexual dysfunction.[6,10]

Obstetric complications include perineal lacerations and inevitable need for episiotomy in infibulated paturients. Others are defibulation with bleeding, injury to urethra and bladder,[10] injury to rectum, and purperial sepsis. Prolonged labor, delayed 2nd stage and obstructed labor leading to fistulae formation, and increased perinatal morbidity and mortality have been associated with FGM.[10] The mental and psychological agony attached with FGM is deemed the most serious complication because the problem does not manifest outwardly for help to be offered. The young girl is in constant fear of the procedure and after the ritual she dreads sex because of anticipated pain and dreads childbirth because of complications caused by FGM. Such girls may not complain but end up becoming frigid and withdrawn resulting in marital disharmony.[3]

Current situation of FGM in Nigeria

FGM is widespread in Nigeria. Some sociocultural determinants have been identified as supporting this avoidable practice. FGM is still deeply entrenched in the Nigerian society where critical decision makers are grandmothers, mothers, women, opinion leaders, men and age groups.[15] FGM is an extreme example of discrimination based on sex. Often used as a way to control women's sexuality, the practice is closely associated with girls’ marriageability.[16] Mothers chose to subject their daughters to the practice to protect them from being ostracized, beaten, shunned, or disgraced.[14,17] FGM was traditionally the specialization of traditional leaders’ traditional birth attendants or members of the community known for the trade. There is, however, the phenomenon of “medicalization” which has introduced modern health practitioners and community health workers into the trade.[15] The WHO is strongly against this medicalization and has advised that neither FGM must be institutionalized nor should any form of FGM be performed by any health professional in any setting, including hospitals or in the home setting.[15]

Efforts to eliminate FGM in Nigeria

It is true that tradition and culture are important aspects of any society in helping to mold the views and behavioral patterns of the society; some traditions and cultural beliefs and practices like FGM are harmful and must be abolished. A multidisciplinary approach is needed to tackle this deep-rooted legendary practice of FGM. There is a need for legislation in Nigeria with health education and female emancipation in the society. The process of social change in the community with a collective, coordinated agreement to abandon the practice “community-led action” is therefore essential.[18] With improvement in education and social status of women and increased awareness of complications of FGM, most women who underwent FGM disapprove of the practice and only very few are prepared to subject their daughters to such harmful procedures.[3] The more educated, more informed, and more active socially and economically a woman is, the more she is able to appreciate and understand the hazards of harmful practices like FGM and sees it as unnecessary procedure and refuses to accept such harmful practice and refuses to subject her daughter to such an operation.

In 1994, Nigeria joined other members of the 47th World Health Assembly to resolve to eliminate FGM. Steps taken so far to achieve this include establishment of a multisectorial technical working group on harmful traditional practices (HTPs), conduct of various studies and national surveys on HTPs, launching of a regional plan of action, and formulation of a national policy and plan of action, which was approved by the Federal Executive Council for the elimination of FGM in Nigeria.

In Nigeria, FGM is being tackled by WHO, United Nations International Children Emergency Fund (UNICEF), Federation of International Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO), African Union, the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), and many women organizations. Intensification of education of the general public at all levels has been done with emphasis on the dangers and undesirability of FGM. In 1995, Platform of Action adopted by the Beijing conference called for the eradication of FGM through the enactment and enforcement of legislation against its perpetrator.[19] However, there is no federal law prohibiting the practice of FGM in Nigeria. This is the main reason for the slow progress on declining the prevalence of FGM. Despite the increased international and little national attention, the prevalence of FGM overall has declined very little.[14] The prevalence depends on the level of education and the geographic location.[20]

At the grassroots, efforts should be taken to join in the crusade to say “NO” to FGM anywhere it is practiced among our people. It is crude, dangerous, wicked and unhealthy. FGM is not required by any religion and there is no scientific evidence that women who have been mutilated are more faithful or better wives than those who have not undergone the procedure.[15] It is very clear that there is no single benefit derived from FGM.

  • Join the crusade to say “NO” to save the future generations of women.

  • Enquire about the practice in your locality and give clear information and education to other people on the health effects of FGM.

  • Work with other people to stop the practice in your area. Contact health or other influential authorities in your area to notify them about the problem.

  • Discuss with your law makers or local representatives on making laws against FGM.

Support families and communities in their efforts to abandon the practice and to improve care for those who have undergone FGM.[15]

Conclusion

There is need for abolition of this unhealthy practice. A multidisciplinary approach involving legislation, health care professional organizations, empowerment of the women in the society, and education of the general public at all levels with emphasis on dangers and undesirability of FGM is paramount.

Footnotes

Source of Support: Nil.

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

Article information

Ann Med Health Sci Res. 2012 Jan-Jun; 2(1): 70–73.
PMCID: PMC3507121
PMID: 23209995
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital, Enugu, Nigeria
1Department of Physiology, College of Medicine University of Nigeria, Enugu Campus, Nigeria
Address for correspondence: Dr. Tochukwu Christopher Okeke, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital, Enugu, Nigeria. E-mail: moc.oohay@uwkuhcotekibabu
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Articles from Annals of Medical and Health Sciences Research are provided here courtesy of Wolters Kluwer -- Medknow Publications

References

1. World Health Organization: Female Genital Mutilation: An overview. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1998. [Google Scholar]
2. UNICEF. Children's and Women's right in Nigeria: A wake up call. Situation Assessment and Analysis. Harmful Traditional Practice (FGM) Abuja NPC and UNICEF Nigeria. 2001:195–200. [Google Scholar]
3. Odoi AT. Female genital mutilation. In: Kwawukume EY, Emuveyan EE, editors. Comprehensive Gynaecology in the Tropics. 1st ed. Accra: Graphic Packaging Ltd; 2005. pp. 268–78. [Google Scholar]
4. Adegoke P. Ibadan University Humanist Society. Female Genital Mutilation: An African Humanist view. 2005 Nov [Google Scholar]
5. Asaad MB. Female circumcision in Egypt: Social implications current research and prospects for change. Stud Fam Plan. 1980;11:3–16. [PubMed[Google Scholar]
6. Hathout HM. Some aspects of female circumcision. J Obstet Gynaecol Brit Emp. 1963;70:505–7. [PubMed[Google Scholar]
7. Hosken FP. The hosken report. 3rd Review ed. Vol. 18. Vienna Published by Women's International Network News (WINN); 1992. Genital and sexual mutilation of females; p. 4. [Google Scholar]
8. Female genital mutilation. A joint WHO/UNICEF/UNFPA statement. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1997. World Health Organization. [Google Scholar]
9. Senior Cordinator for International women's Issues. Report on FGM or FG Cutting 2005. [Last accessed on 2010 Nov 22]. Available from: http://www.onlinenigeria daily news .
10. Verzin JA. Sequelae of female circumcision. Trop Doct. 1975;5:163–9. [Google Scholar]
11. Worseley A. Infibulation and female circumcision. A study of little – known custom. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1938;45:686–91. [PubMed[Google Scholar]
12. Akpuaka FC. Vulval adhesions following females circumcision in Nigeria. Postgrad Doct Afr. 1991;13:98–9. [Google Scholar]
13. World Health Organization: Female genital mutilation. Fact sheet No. 241. 2000. Jun, [Last accessed on 2008 Nov 2]. Available from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/
14. Yoder PS, Khan S. Numbers of women circumcised in Africa: The production of a total. Calverton: Macro International Inc; 2007. [Google Scholar]
15. WHO Elimination of FGM in Nigeria Plot 617/618 Diplomatic drive, Central District Abuja. Family Health Department, Federal Ministry of Health Phase II Federal Secretariat Abuja. 2007 Dec [Google Scholar]
16. Mackie G. Ending footbinding and infibulation: A convention account. Am Socio Rev. 1996;61:1009. [Google Scholar]
17. UNICEF. Overview of FGM/Cutting. Nigeria FGM/Cutting country profile. UNICEF Nigeria DHS. 2003 [Google Scholar]
18. Innocent Digest. Florence: UNICEF; 2005. UNICEF. Changing a harmful social convention: Female genital mutilation/cutting. [Google Scholar]
19. Paper presented at the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), Cairo 1994. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1994. World Health Organization: Health Population and development. WHO Position. WHO/AIE 1994:/94 – 2. [Google Scholar]
20. Kwame-Aryee RA, Seffah JD, editors. Handbook of Gynaecology (A practical Guide to student and practitioners) 1st Accra: Max Associates Ltd; 1999. FGM; pp. 266–7. [Google Scholar]

 Source