South Korea’s Democracy Defended

Posted on by admin

Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Democracy, Economy & Trade, Featured, Gender, Gender Identity, Headlines, Human Rights, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: Daniel Ceng/Anadolu via Getty Images

LONDON, Dec 20 2024 (IPS) – Democracy is alive and well in South Korea. When President Yoon Suk Yeol tried to impose martial law, the public and parliamentarians united to defend it. Now Yoon must face justice for his power grab.

President under pressure

Yoon narrowly won the presidency in an incredibly tight contest in March 2022, beating rival candidate Lee Jae-myung by a 0.73 per cent margin. That marked a political comeback for one of South Korea’s two main political parties, the rebranded centre-right People Power Party, and a defeat for the other, the more progressive Democratic Party.

In a divisive campaign, Yoon capitalised on and helped inflame a backlash among many young men against the country’s emerging feminist movement.

South Korea had a MeToo moment in 2018, as women started to speak out following high-profile sexual harassment revelations. South Korea is one of the worst performing members on gender equality of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development: it ranks third lowest for women’s political representation and last for its gender pay gap.

Some modest steps forward in women’s rights brought a disproportionate backlash. Groups styling themselves as defending men’s rights sprang up, their members claiming they were discriminated against in the job market. Yoon played squarely to this crowd, pledging to abolish the gender equality ministry. Exit polls showed that over half of young male voters backed him.

Human rights conditions then worsened under Yoon’s rule. His administration was responsible for an array of civic space restrictions. These included harassment and criminalisation of journalists, raids on trade union offices and arrests of their leaders, and protest bans. Media freedoms deteriorated, with lawsuits and criminal defamation laws having a chilling effect.

But the balance of power shifted after the 2024 parliamentary election, when the People Power Party suffered a heavy defeat. Although the Democratic Party and its allies fell short of the two-thirds majority required to impeach Yoon, the result left him a lame-duck president. The opposition-dominated parliament blocked key budget proposals and filed 22 impeachment motions against government officials.

Yoon’s popularity plummeted amid ongoing economic woes and allegations of corruption – sadly nothing new for a South Korean leader. The First Lady, Kim Keon Hee, was accused of accepting a Dior bag as a gift and of manipulating stock prices. It seems clear that Yoon, backed into a corner, lashed out and took an incredible gamble – one that South Korean people didn’t accept.

Yoon’s decision

Yoon made his extraordinary announcement on state TV on the evening of 3 December. Shamefully, he claimed the move was necessary to combat ‘pro-North Korean anti-state forces’, smearing those trying to hold him to account as supporters of the totalitarian regime across the border. Yoon ordered the army to arrest key political figures, including the leader of his party, Han Dong Hoon, Democratic Party leader Lee and National Assembly Speaker Woo Won Shik.

The declaration of martial law gives the South Korean president sweeping powers. The military can arrest, detain and punish people without a warrant, the media are placed under strict controls, all political activity is suspended and protests are widely banned.

The problem was that Yoon had clearly exceeded his powers and acted unconstitutionally. Martial law can only be declared when there are extraordinary threats to the nation’s survival, such as invasion or armed rebellion. A series of political disputes that put the president under uncomfortable scrutiny clearly didn’t fit the bill. And the National Assembly was supposed to remain in session, but Yoon tried to shut it down, deploying armed forces to try to stop representatives gathering to vote.

But Yoon hadn’t reckoned with many people’s determination not to return to the dark days of dictatorship before multiparty democracy was established in 1987. People also had recent experience of forcing out an evidently corrupt president. In the Candlelight Revolution of 2016 and 2017, mass weekly protests built pressure on President Park Guen-hye, who was impeached, removed from office and jailed for corruption and abuse of power.

People massed outside the National Assembly in protest. As the army blocked the building’s main gates, politicians climbed over the fences. Protesters and parliamentary staff faced off against heavily armed troops with fire extinguishers, forming a chain around the building so lawmakers could vote. Some 190 made it in, and they unanimously repealed Yoon’s decision.

Time for justice

Now Yoon must face justice. Protesters will continue to urge him to quit, and a criminal investigation into the decision to declare martial law has been launched.

The first attempt to impeach Yoon was thwarted by political manoeuvring. People Power politicians walked out to prevent a vote on 7 December, apparently hoping Yoon would resign instead. But he showed no sign of stepping down, and a second vote on 14 December decisively backed impeachment, with 12 People Power Party members supporting the move. The vote was greeted with scenes of jubilation from the tens of thousands of protesters massed in freezing conditions outside the National Assembly.

Yoon is now suspended, with Prime Minister Han Duck-soo the interim president. The Constitutional Court has six months to hold an impeachment process. Polls show most South Koreans back impeachment, although Yoon still claims his move was necessary.

Democracy defended

South Korea’s representative democracy, like most, has its flaws. People may not always be happy with election results. Presidents may find it hard to work with a parliament that opposes them. But imperfect though it may be, South Koreans have shown they value their democracy and will defend it from the threat of authoritarian rule – and can be expected to keep mobilising if Yoon evades justice.

Thankfully, Yoon’s attacks on civic space hadn’t got to the stage where civil society’s ability to mobilise and people’s capacity to defend democracy had been broken down. Recent events and South Korea’s uncertain future make it all the more important that the civic space restrictions imposed by Yoon’s administration are reversed as quickly as possible. To defend against backsliding and deepen democracy, it’s vital to expand civic space and invest in civil society.

Andrew Firmin is CIVICUS Editor-in-Chief, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

  Source

New Legislation Outlaws Dissenters in Venezuela

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Democracy, Editors’ Choice, Freedom of Expression, Headlines, Human Rights, Latin America & the Caribbean, Migration & Refugees, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Democracy

Venezuela's legislative National Assembly approves the Bolivar law to punish with unprecedented severity those who support or facilitate punitive measures against the country. Credit: AN

Venezuela’s legislative National Assembly approves the Bolivar law to punish with unprecedented severity those who support or facilitate punitive measures against the country. Credit: AN

WASHINGTON, Dec 18 2024 (IPS) – In Venezuela you can no longer say in public that the economic sanctions applied by the United States and other countries are appropriate, or even be suspected of considering any of the authorities illegitimate, because you can be sentenced to up to 30 years in prison and lose all your assets.

In late November, the ruling National Assembly passed the Simon Bolivar Organic Law (of superior rank) against the imperialist blockade and in defence of the Republic, the latest in a regulatory padlock closing civic space, according to human rights organisations.

“We see a process of authoritarian learning. When we look at democratic setbacks, we see things that are repeated as patterns, such as the closure of civic space, of civil organisations, of journalism, of democratic political parties”: Carolina Jiménez Sandoval.

The powers of the Venezuelan state thus responded to United States’ and the European Union’s sanctions, and to the protests and denunciations of opponents and American and European governments, to the effect that a gigantic fraud was committed in the presidential election of 28 July this year.

The ruling Nicolás Maduro was proclaimed by the electoral and judicial powers as re-elected president for a third six-year term beginning on 10 January 2025, even though the opposition claims, by showing voting records, that it was their candidate Edmundo González who won, with at least 67% of the vote.

Speaking to IPS, several human rights defenders agreed that the country is following the example of Nicaragua, where laws and measures are driving hundreds of opponents into prison and exile, stripping them of their nationality and property, and suppressing critical voices by shutting down thousands of civil, religious and educational organisations.

“A red line has been crossed and the Nicaraguan path has been taken. Arbitrariness has been put in writing, in black and white, the repressive reality of the Venezuelan state, something even the military despots of the past did not do,” said lawyer Alí Daniels, director of the organisation Acceso a la Justicia, from Caracas.

The law adopted its long name as an indignant response to the US Bolivar Act, an acronym for Banning Operations and Leases with the Illegitimate Venezuelan Authoritarian Regime, designed to block most of that country’s business dealings with Venezuela.

The president of the non-governmental Washington Office on Latin America (Wola), Carolina Jiménez Sandoval, observed that “the closer we get to 10 January, the day when whoever won the 28 July election must be sworn in, we see more and more laws meant to stifling civic space.”

Other laws along these lines include: one to punish behaviour or messages deemed to incite hatred; another “against fascism, neo-fascism and similar expressions”; a reform to promptly elect 30,000 justices of the peace; and a law to control non-governmental organisations.

Demonstration in Caracas demanding respect for human rights. Credit: Civilis

Demonstration in Caracas demanding respect for human rights. Credit: Civilis

Mere suspicion is enough

The Venezuelan Bolivar act considers that sanctions and other restrictive measures against the country “constitute a crime against humanity”, and lists conduct and actions that put the nation and its population at risk.

These include promoting, requesting or supporting punitive measures by foreign states or corporations, and “disregarding the public powers legitimately established in the Republic, their acts or their authorities.”

Those who have at any time “promoted, instigated, requested, invoked, favoured, supported or participated in the adoption or execution of measures” deemed harmful to the population or the authorities, will be barred from running for elected office for up to 60 years.

Any person who “promotes, instigates, solicits, invokes, favours, facilitates, supports or participates in the adoption or execution of unilateral coercive measures” against the population or the powers in Venezuela will be punished with 25 to 30 years in prison and fines equivalent to between US$100,000 and one million.

In the case of media and digital platforms, the punishment will be a heavy fine and the closure or denial of permits to operate.

The law highlights the creation of “a register that will include the identification of natural and legal persons, national or foreign, with respect to whom there is good reason to consider that they are involved in any of the actions contrary to the values and inalienable rights of the state.”

This registry is created to “impose restrictive, temporary economic measures of an administrative nature, aimed at mitigating the damage that their actions cause against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and its population.”

Daniels tells IPS that “this means that a mere suspicion on the part of an official, with good reason to believe that a sanction is supported, is sufficient for a preventive freezing of a person’s assets, prohibiting them from buying, selling or acting in a money-making business.”

“Without prior trial, by an official’s decision, without knowing where to appeal against the entry in that register, the person is stripped of means of livelihood. Civil death returns,” he added.

Archive image of a national meeting of human rights defenders. Credit: Civicus

Archive image of a national meeting of human rights defenders. Credit: Civicus

Other laws

The “anti-hate law” – without defining what is meant by it – has since 2018 prosecuted protesters, journalists, firefighters, political activists and human rights defenders on charges of directing messages inciting hatred towards the authorities.

This year, the state endowed itself with a law to punish fascism and similar expressions, a broad arc because it considers that “racism, chauvinism, classism, moral conservatism, neoliberalism and misogyny are common features of this stance.”

It has also reformed the justice of the peace law to promote the popular election of 30,000 local judges, under criticism from human rights organisations that see the process as a mechanism for the control of communities by pro-government activists and the promotion of informing on neighbours.

And, while the Bolivar act was being passed, the law on the control of NGOs and similar organisations was published, which NGOs have labelled an “anti-society law”, as it contains provisions that easily nullify their capacity for action and their very existence.

The law establishes a new registry with some 30 requirements, which are difficult for NGOs to meet, but they can only operate if authorised by the government, which can suspend them from operating or sanction them with fines in amounts that in practice are confiscatory.

“I think the application of the Bolívar law is going to be very discretionary, and if Maduro is sworn in again on Jan. 10, civic space will be almost completely closed and the social and democratic leadership will have to work underground,” sociologist Rafael Uzcátegui, director of the Venezuelan Laboratorio de Paz, which operates in Caracas, told IPS.

The president of Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, and his wife and vice-president, Rosario Murillo, have taken measures against dissent that are models of authoritarianism in the region. Human rights activists believe that in countries such as Venezuela and El Salvador their strategies and norms are being replicated by those who seek to remain in power indefinitely. Credit: Presidency of Nicaragua

The president of Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, and his wife and vice-president, Rosario Murillo, have taken measures against dissent that are models of authoritarianism in the region. Human rights activists believe that in countries such as Venezuela and El Salvador their strategies and norms are being replicated by those who seek to remain in power indefinitely. Credit: Presidency of Nicaragua

The Nicaraguan path

Daniels also argues that with the Bolívar law, the government “is going back 160 years, when the Venezuelan Constitution after the Federal War (1859-1863) abolished the death penalty and life sentences. A punishment that lasts 60 years in practice is in perpetuity, exceeding the average life expectancy of an adult in Venezuela.”

Along with this, “although without going to the Nicaraguan extreme of stripping the alleged culprits of their nationality, punishments are imposed that can turn people into civilian zombies, driven into exile. As in Nicaragua”.

For Jiménez Sandoval “there are similarities with Nicaragua, a harsh and consolidated case. It has cancelled the legal personality of more than 3,000 organisations, including humanitarian entities, national and international human rights organisations and universities, through the application of very strict laws.”

“In these cases… we see a process of authoritarian learning. When we look at democratic setbacks, we see things that are repeated as patterns, such as the closure of civic space, of civil organisations, of journalism, of democratic political parties,” she told IPS.

To achieve this, “they use different strategies, such as co-opting legislatures to make laws that allow them to imprison and silence those who think differently, to avoid any kind of criticism, because, at the end of the day, the ultimate goal of authoritarianism is to remain in power indefinitely”, concluded Jiménez Sandoval.

  Source

‘My Father Was Arbitrarily Arrested and Convicted for Denouncing Government Corruption’

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Democracy, Featured, Headlines, Human Rights, Latin America & the Caribbean, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Dec 17 2024 (IPS) –  
CIVICUS speaks with Ramón Zamora, son of Guatemalan journalist José Rubén Zamora, about restrictions on press freedom and the challenges of defending human rights in Guatemala.

Rubén Zamora is part of the CIVICUS Stand as My Witness campaign, which seeks the release of unjustly imprisoned human rights defenders. The veteran journalist, founder of Periódico Siglo 21 and renowned for his investigations into corruption, has been fighting unfounded accusations of money laundering for over two years. His legal situation took a turn for the worse recently when a court ordered his return to prison after a brief period of house arrest. As his family prepared to appeal, President Bernardo Arévalo denounced the court’s decision as an attack on freedom of expression.

Ramón Zamora

What was your father’s role in Guatemalan journalism and what led him to antagonise powerful forces?

My father comes from a family of journalists. His grandfather, Clemente Marroquín, was the founder of La Hora, one of the most important newspapers in Guatemalan history. In 1990, my father founded the media outlet Siglo 21. A transition to democracy was underway and he had understood that democracy couldn’t function without real freedom of expression, that is, when people aren’t able to express their ideas without fear. That’s why it was important to have a media outlet that, on top of providing information, also included a plurality of voices.

Siglo 21 opened up spaces for leftist thought, which earned it threats and attacks from sources linked to the army. In addition, from the outset it dealt with sensitive issues, which quickly put it in the crosshairs of many powerful figures. Threats and attacks soon followed for his investigations into corruption. In 1993, following a coup by then President Jorge Serrano Elías, who suspended the constitution and dissolved Congress, the presidential security service came looking for my father and the family was forced into hiding. However, my father continued to fight, publishing a banned edition of Siglo 21, which had been censored, and sharing information with international media.

After leaving Siglo 21, he founded El Periódico in 1996 and Nuestro Diario in 1998, always with the aim of continuing to investigate corruption. His investigations led to the jailing of several powerful people. Over the years he suffered arbitrary treatment, assassination attempts and kidnappings, but he continued his work, until 2022, when he was arbitrarily arrested and sentenced in retaliation for exposing corruption in the government of Alejandro Giammattei.

What were the charges that sent your father to prison?

He was accused of money laundering, extortion and influence peddling. It was alleged that he used the newspaper and his access to government sources to obtain privileged information to extort money from businesspeople and public officials. According to government officials, my father threatened to publish stories in the newspaper if they did not comply with his demands, and allegedly laundered the money from these extortions through the newspaper.

To understand the justification for his arrest, we need to consider the broader context of attacks on the newspaper. Since 2013, the newspaper has suffered economic pressure and threats from government officials, such as then Vice-president Roxana Baldetti, who called our clients to threaten them with investigations if they continued to support the newspaper with advertising. This reduced the paper’s income by more than half. To get around the pressure, my father finally started accepting donations from people who wanted to remain anonymous. This was one of the reasons he was accused of laundering undeclared money. My father was criminalised for defending freedom of expression and denouncing corruption.

How did your father experience these years of arbitrary detention?

At first it was very hard because he was held in a military prison, in a very small cell, completely isolated from other prisoners. In the same prison were people convicted of corruption thanks to the reporting he had published, which put him in great danger. He soon started receiving constant threats.

In the first few days, his cell was searched several times, and bedbugs found their way into his bed, causing severe bites all over his body. He was unable to sleep because of the constant noise, as there was construction going on next to his cell. It was all very stressful, both physically and emotionally. There were times when he thought he would never get out alive. To make matters worse, we were often denied authorisation to enter the prison or given ridiculous excuses, which kept him in a constant state of uncertainty.

He also suffered greatly during court hearings. There was one judge who went out of his way to prevent him having access to a proper defence. We had to change lawyers several times and many of them were persecuted for defending my father.

My brother and I worked to keep the newspaper afloat, even though several journalists were forced into exile. A few months ago we managed to get my father released to house arrest, but his case continued to be full of irregularities and a month later the benefit of house arrest was lifted. We are still waiting for the appeals court to review the decision, but it is likely he will have to return to prison this week or next. My father is still fighting for his freedom and a fair trial to prove his innocence.

How can the international community help?

The international community has played a very important role in the whole process. We were able to get my father out of prison in large part because of pressure from organisations such as Amnesty International, CIVICUS, the Committee to Protect Journalists, Freedom House, Reporters Without Borders and others who spoke out and mobilised.

As a family, we have always felt supported. We are now awaiting the resolution of the amparo appeal – a petition to protect constitutional rights, which could allow my father to continue his struggle from home. This would be ideal, although we are still awaiting a final decision.

The international community must continue to defend human rights and freedom of expression and support the media, particularly in countries where corruption and impunity prevail.

Get in touch
Website
Twitter

See also
Guatemala: ‘Corrupt elites see defenders of justice as a threat to their interests and try to silence them’ Interview with Virginia Laparra 30.Aug.2024
Guatemala: ‘Disregard for the will of the people expressed at the ballot box is the greatest possible insult to democracy’ Interview with Jorge Santos 13.Jan.2023
Guatemala: ‘Our democracy is at risk in the hands of political-criminal networks’ Interview with Evelyn Recinos Contreras 04.Jul.2023

  Source

Camps of Death, Terror: Syrian Survivors Face Long Road To Recovery

Posted on by admin

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Democracy, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, International Justice, Middle East & North Africa, Peace, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Human Rights

The people walk to Saydnaya prison to search for the detainees. Credit: Abdul Karem al-Mohammad/IPS

The people walk to Saydnaya prison to search for the detainees. Credit: Abdul Karem al-Mohammad/IPS

IDLIB, Syria, Dec 16 2024 (IPS) – Detained without trial for over three years for trial for allegedly treating “terrorists” (as opponents of former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad were deemed), Alaa al-Khalil, a 33-year-old nurse from the Syrian city of Hama, recounts the agony of her time in a prison cell she shared with at least 35 women.

She was released from Aydnaya prison on December 8 after the fall of the Assad regime.

Following the fall of Assad’s regime and his escape to Moscow on December 8, armed opposition factions managed to open the doors of prisons, freeing hundreds of detainees who had endured the most horrific forms of torture for opposing Assad’s rule and demanding his removal from power. Many lost their lives within the prisons and were buried in mass graves, while the families of the detainees continue to search for their missing loved ones in the prisons of tyranny.

Years of Torture

“I was arrested at a security checkpoint belonging to the former Syrian regime and transferred to the Political Security Branch in Damascus—my hands were cuffed, and my eyes were blindfolded. In prison, we were 35 women in a small, cramped room with the toilet in the same room, without any privacy,” Khalil told IPS. “The marks of severe torture were clearly visible on some of the women. As for sleep, we would lie on the floor and take turns sleeping due to the very small size of the room. The most painful thing was that there were many pregnant women who gave birth to children who grew up inside the prison.”

The search for survivors in Sednaya prison. Credit: Abdul Karem al-Mohammad/IPS

The search for survivors in Sednaya prison. Credit: Abdul Karem al-Mohammad/IPS

During that time, she said the prisoners suffered from “hunger, cold, and all forms of torture, including beatings, burning with cigarettes, and nail pulling.”

Many of the female detainees were raped and exposed to sexual violence as a form of punishment. After midnight, the guards would come to the detainees’ room to select the most beautiful girls to take them to the officers’ rooms.

“We preferred torture and even death to rape. When a girl refused to have sex or confess to the charges against her during interrogation, she would be killed by the guards or interrogators, and her body would be thrown into the salt room, which was prepared in advance to preserve the bodies of the dead for as long as possible,” she said, tearfully remembering the daily trauma.

Khalil confirms that prisoners were not allowed to look at the guards, talk, or make any noise, even during torture. They were punished by being deprived of water or forced to sleep naked without covers in the freezing cold. The meals consisted of a few bites of spoilt food, and many people contracted serious infections, diseases, and mental disorders.

Now released, Khalil hopes to enjoy safety, stability, and peace in this country after years of oppression and injustice.

Adnan al-Ibrahim, 46, from the southern Syrian city of Daraa, was also released a few days ago from Adra prison on the outskirts of Damascus after spending over 10 years there on charges of defecting from Bashar al-Assad’s army and seeking asylum in Lebanon.

“I feel like I’m dreaming after being released from prison. They accused me of terrorism, subjected me to torture, and I was never brought before a court during my imprisonment. I’m still traumatized by what I endured,” Ibrahim says.

“We were subjected to the worst treatment imaginable in prisons. All we want now is the right to live a decent life, far from injustice, arbitrary arrests, and the ongoing killing in Syria.”

He is now emaciated and weak—his weight drastically reduced due to malnutrition and poor diet. Most of his fellow inmates suffered from life-threatening illnesses as a result of the torture they endured. Many inmates lost their memory due to being beaten on the head during interrogations, and the bodies of the dead remained for long periods before being removed. Many of these bodies were disposed of by burning.

Burdened by Psychological Prauma

Samah Barakat, a 33-year-old mental health specialist, says the survivors of Syrian detention centres will need help to overcome their traumas.

‘The experience of imprisonment and torture in prisons is painful and traumatic for survivors. Imprisonment is not limited to physical torture; the mental state is also affected. Prisoners were subjected to various forms of torture and oppression, leading to a significant deterioration in their mental health. These effects include a range of psychological disorders such as psychosis, memory loss, and speech impediments, in addition to the spread of diseases due to their deprivation of basic medical care.”

Barakat confirms that some detainees are likely to suffer from physical, psychological, and behavioural effects, accompanied by constant anxiety, depression, and social withdrawal.

She explains that survivors of detention need psychological support, which varies depending on the impact of the detention experience. Some need psychological counseling or therapy sessions with specialists, while others require medication prescribed by a psychiatrist due to depression or other mental illnesses.

An Unknown Fate

For some, the uncertainty of the fates of their loved ones means the trauma of the Asad regime lives on.

Alaa al-Omar, 52, from the northern Syrian city of Idlib, went to Saydnaya prison and the Palestine Branch in Damascus after the fall of the Assad regime, hoping to find his son, who had disappeared in the prison’s depths.

“I went to the prison with great longing, but I found no trace of my son. I think he died as a result of torture.”

Omar affirms that his son was arrested by the Assad regime forces in 2015 while studying at a university in Aleppo, accused of participating in demonstrations, carrying weapons, and joining the opposition factions.

Omar indicates he heard nothing from his son or about his son since his arrest, and his fate remains unknown even now.

Human Rights Violations

Human rights activist Salim Al-Najjar (41), from Aleppo, speaks about the suffering of survivors of detention and told IPS that the history of building prisons and expanding detention centers in Syria dated back to the rule of Hafez al-Assad, whose regime in the 1980s exercised excessive force against its opponents, turning the country into a “large slaughterhouse.”

“In the regime’s prisons, lives are as equal as stones in the hands of a sculptor, killed and discarded without regard or importance. In them, a person becomes a mere number, with their history, feelings, and even dreams that haunted them until the last moment of their lives ignored,” Najjar says.

Al-Najjar confirms the existence of many prisons in Syria, but the Saydnaya prison, located north of the Syrian capital Damascus, is known as the most prominent political detention center in Syria and was notorious for its horrific reputation as a site of torture and mass executions, especially after the outbreak of the Syrian revolution in 2011. Saydnaya prison was where Assad’s detained opponents or defectors from his army or those who rejected his “killing policy.”

He points out that few detainees were released through family connections or bribes, while the detainees were left to die from their untreated wounds and diseases in “dirty, overcrowded” cells.

He notes that many detainees emerged from behind bars suffering from a loss of their mental faculties, unable to remember their names or identify themselves, and due to the severe changes caused by malnutrition and brutal torture, their features had changed to the point that their families did not recognize them at first.

Najjar hopes to achieve justice for the victims by presenting evidence and documents to international courts and holding Assad and all perpetrators of violations in Syria accountable.

The Syrian Network for Human Rights said in a statement on December 11 that Assad is accused of killing at least 202,000 Syrian civilians, including 15,000 killed under torture, the disappearance of 96,000 others, and the forced displacement of nearly 13 million Syrian citizens, as well as other heinous violations, including the use of chemical weapons.

“Syrian detention centers and torture chambers symbolize the agony, oppression, and suffering that Syrians have endured for decades. Survivors of detention continue to heal their wounds and strive to return to their normal lives and reintegrate into society. Sadly, a significant number of them have perished under torture.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

This Year Saw Most of the World Repressed – but in Civil Society there is Hope

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Democracy, Featured, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile. Credit: United Nations

NEW YORK, Dec 10 2024 (IPS) – Today is International Human Rights Day, Normally, it should be an occasion to celebrate the work of those who strive to create peaceful, just, equal and sustainable societies. But conditions for human rights defenders and their organisations to operate freely are extremely challenging around the world.

Almost three quarters of the world’s people live in states that severely constrain civic freedoms. These are the latest findings from the CIVICUS Monitor, a cross-continental research collaboration between over twenty civil society organisations.

Despite enormous technological and cultural advancements claimed by humankind the overwhelming majority of the world’s population are being actively denied agency to shape the decisions that impact their lives. Major restrictions in law and practice on the fundamental civic freedoms of peaceful assembly, association and expression are putting journalists and civil society activists at serious risk of persecution when they expose high level corruption or critique the actions of powerful decision makers.

Civic space conditions in some 30 countries where over a quarter of the world’s population live are so poor that even the slightest hint of dissent against those who hold power can get one thrown into prison for a long time or even killed. Such countries include Afghanistan, China, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Sudan among others.

This year, Eswatini, Ethiopia and the Occupied Palestinian Territories of Gaza and the West Bank have been downgraded to the worst ‘closed’ rating on the CIVICUS Monitor due to an acceleration in repression there.

As a human rights defender it worries me that countries with proud histories of resisting colonial oppression and with hard won constitutional commitments to democratic principles such as India, Kenya, Mexico and the Philippines have ended up being placed in the second worst ‘repressed’ category on the CIVICUS Monitor.

As a development advocate who campaigned for the adoption of an ambitious set of universal Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, it concerns me that governments are deliberately limiting the ability of civil society organisations to work with them to create more equal and fairer societies.

Civic space restrictions negatively impact the quest for transparency, accountability and participation in public affairs. The Sustainable Development Goals include guarantees on access to information and fundamental freedoms as well as on responsive, inclusive and participatory decision making, which are essential for public spirited individuals and organisations to push for transformative changes in the political, social and economic spheres.

But CIVICUS Monitor researchers have recorded thousands of restrictions on the freedom of expression in 2024 including physical attacks on journalists and civil society activists merely for doing their work in the public interest.

Atefeh Rangriz, a defender of worker’s and women’s rights in Iran is currently languishing in prison on trumped up national security related charges. Guatemalan journalist Jose Ruben Zamora continues to be persecuted through the courts for exposing deep networks of patronage that exist among political and economic elites in that country.

Their cases are illustrative of the enormous challenge of thousands of journalists and civil society activists unjustly imprisoned around the world in countries as disparate as Belarus, Egypt, Israel and Vietnam.

The most recent CIVICUS Monitor Watchlist, released this September, draws attention to deterioration in civic space conditions in Argentina, Azerbaijan, Thailand and Zimbabwe, all of which are ruled by erratic authoritarian leaders. Because global civic space conditions are so challenging, including in several powerful states, the appetite of the international community to consistently call out flagrant violations of international law standards has been severely hamstrung in recent times.

It’s thus absurd that Azerbaijan, a petrostate with closed civic space, hosted the COP29 climate summit this year in an attempt to greenwash its reputation. The previous two COP summits were held in countries with equally appalling records: United Arab Emirates and Egypt. The election of Donald Trump, an avowed supporter of the fossil fuel industry, as the next president of the United States does not portend well for climate causes or for civic freedoms given his adulation for authoritarian leaders.

Climate justice, environmental and land rights activists are facing persecution in far too many countries for exercising their right to peaceful assembly. Earlier this year, five Just Stop Oil activists received sentences ranging from four to five years in prison in the United Kingdom for planning a non-violent protest action by blocking a motorway in 2022.

In Uganda, protestors were arrested merely for seeking to deliver a petition to the authorities outlining the adverse effects of an oil project including environmental degradation, land loss and violations of community rights. In September, Juan López, Honduran community leader and advocate for the rights of the Guapinol River, was assassinated despite calls for his protection.

Just as anti-apartheid protestors faced pushback in the 1980s, artists, students and academics have been targeted in several western democracies for advocating for the rights and dignity of the Palestinian people. It’s now forbidden to wear a keffiyeh within Canada’s Ontario state’s legislative assembly and there have been attempts to censor pro-Palestinian groups in Germany, the Netherlands and the USA. In Australia, four writers who had publicly opposed Israel’s war on Gaza had their workshops’ contracts terminated with the State Library of Victoria.

Nearly 10% of the total civic space violations documented globally in 2024 by CIVICUS Monitor researchers either took place in the Occupied Palestinian Territories or were perpetrated against those expressing solidarity with the Palestinian people. Despite this, throughout 2024 people continued to pour out onto the streets to express solidarity with beleaguered Palestinians. This in itself is extraordinary.

Even if global civic space conditions were mostly unwelcoming this year, civil society actions led to some remarkable victories for rights and justice. Greece became the first overwhelmingly Christian Orthodox country to legalise same-sex marriage while recognising the rights of same sex couples to adopt children. Thailand broke ground in Southeast Asia by passing a marriage equality bill in May 2024, making it the first country in the region to legalise same-sex marriage.

In the Czech Republic, civil society efforts led to a landmark reform in rape laws, now classifying any non-consensual sexual act as rape, removing the need for proof of force and strengthening protections for victims. In Kazakhstan, in response to a high-profile murder trial, lawmakers swiftly introduced new legislation that re-established criminal penalties for battery and enhanced protections for domestic violence survivors.

In Poland, a bill passed in February 2024 made emergency contraception accessible without a prescription, reversing a restrictive 2017 law and marking a significant win for womens’ rights over their bodies.

Moreover, people continued to exercise their protest rights across the globe this year. In Bangladesh, the longstanding oppressive government led by Sheikh Hasina was forced to step down following persistent public demonstrations against its regressive actions. In Venezuela, people outvoted the incumbent authoritarian government of Nicholas Maduro at the polls but his regime ended up rigging the election results. However, this doesn’t mean the struggle for democracy in Venezuela has been permanently suppressed.

“The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice,” said Dr.Martin Luther King Jr. As these examples show, despite pervasive repression, the impulse to overcome oppression remains alive. Gains made through sustained civil society resistance through 2024 offer us hope that no matter how powerful autocratic forces may be, there will always be an undercurrent of civil society ready to weather the storm and strive for a better world for all.

Mandeep S. Tiwana is the Interim Co-Secretary General. CIVICUS, the global civil society alliance.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Now it’s Officially the Israeli-American Genocide in Gaza

Posted on by admin

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Democracy, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Middle East & North Africa, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

The International Criminal Court (ICC) Headquarters in The Hague, Netherlands. Credit: ICC
 
ICC issues arrest warrants for Israel, Hamas leadership: what happens next?

ATLANTA, USA, Nov 27 2024 (IPS) – As of last week, in the wake of the Nov. 21 issuance by the International Criminal Court (ICC) of arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former IDF Defense chief Yoav Gallant, all eyes turned to Washington to see the what the response of Israel’s main backer would be.

The charges were for “Crimes Against Humanity” and “War Crimes” for using starvation as a method of warfare in Gaza, something is explicitly forbidden in international law. A HAMAS operative, Muhammad Deif, who may already be dead, was also charged. One would think that the US should find it easy to agree. But what was the message from the Biden White House?

Press spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre said that the United States of America “Rejects the ICC ruling,” as if the International Criminal Court were just an off-beat punk yelling his head off in Lafayette Park just across from the presidential residence. But the prestigious court in the Hague has no option. It is bound to rule according to the law. It’s actions are neither political nor enacted on a whim.

The international law that created the treaty was endorsed by a host of national governments around the world—except for a few, Israel and the United States being the most prominent.

The US is not a State Party (signatory) to the ICC, even though 124 countries have signed the Rome Statute that created the ICC in 2002. Presidents Clinton and Obama tried to get ratification from the US Senate but failed. George W. Bush and the Neo-Cons flatly rejected the idea of endorsing the statute, not wanting any restrictions on their disastrous plan to attack Iraq.

Just the day before at the United Nations, the Security Council voted overwhelmingly 14-1 to demand a cease-fire in Gaza. But the US, by a single vote –because it has veto power under the rules set up in the wake of WW II—blocked the resolution.

The argument that a cease fire would help bring the hostages home, not hinder their release, was urged by the council but fell on deaf ears.

In a shameful action that will be long remembered throughout the world, the US representative, Deputy Ambassador Robert Wood, raised his hand to block the resolution. These two actions in the same week—flat out rejection of the ICC warrants and blocking a Security Council cease fire resolution intended to relieve massive human suffering, when taken together, mean not only that the United States is fully on board with the endless slaughter of civilians in Gaza under continuous Israeli bombing, but it now supports starving women and children too.

This is a stain that will not go away. Protestors in the streets and on university campuses have long been chanting, “Genocide Joe has got to go!” How out of touch is the near-senile President Biden? How corrupt, misguided, and inhumane do you have to be to make that decision, condemning the United States to be forever labeled as contributing to war crimes?

It’s true that Washington has long supplied arms to Israel, including during this conflict, but to support continued starvation and bombing of civilians as a matter of policy is much worse—either deliberately evil or insanity. No fancy negotiating tricks are allowed when innocent lives are at stake.

And where does the recent Democratic nominee for President, Vice President Kamala Harris, stand on all this? Does she have a voice within the Administration? She pledged repeatedly if elected to increase, not decrease, humanitarian aid to Gaza.

What’s wrong with advocating a cease fire after 13 months of massive, one-sided bloodletting that has killed and wounded nearly 150,000 people among the unfortunate citizens of Gaza?

Let’s define terms: A war is when both sides shoot at each other. A Turkey Shoot is different—the Turkey doesn’t have a chance, and sharpshooters just keep shooting to see who has the best aim. A slaughterhouse is when only one side has all the power and just keeps killing on a massive scale.

Israel’s troops have guns and bombs supplied by the United States, Germany, and the UK, and continues to shoot and bomb people in Gaza long after the other side has ceased firing. If the operation is a manhunt, call it a manhunt. If a reprisal, call it a reprisal. If ethnic cleansing, call it that. If the term “Warsaw Ghetto” is fitting, call it that. But don’t call it a righteous battle if the atrocities keep piling up on just one side with no sign of stopping.

Does anybody know how long it has been since HAMAS has fired rockets, or even machine guns at Israeli troops? You would think that if that were the case the slick Israeli lie machine would trumpet that information. So why not cease firing today, not tomorrow?

Why doesn’t the esteemed American President, “Genocide Joe,” just decide for once to do the right thing?

James E. Jennings, PhD is President of Conscience International, an aid organization that has worked in Gaza over many years.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source