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

Press Freedom in Sri Lanka: A Long Road to Justice

Posted on by admin

Asia-Pacific, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Freedom of Expression, Headlines, TerraViva United Nations

Press Freedom

At the gravesite of the late editor-in-chief of the influential English-language newspaper Sunday Leader Lasantha Wickrematunge, who was killed in his car on January 8, 2009, on his way to work in Colombo. Credit: Johan Mikaelsson/IPS

At the gravesite of the late editor-in-chief of the influential English-language newspaper Sunday Leader Lasantha Wickrematunge, who was killed in his car on January 8, 2009, on his way to work in Colombo. Credit: Johan Mikaelsson/IPS

COLOMBO, Oct 25 2024 (IPS) – Anyone interested in unsolved murders and disappearances will find much to study in Sri Lanka. Fifteen to twenty years ago, the country made global headlines, not only for the government’s military offensive against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) guerrillas but also for the numerous murders of journalists. The newly elected president, Anura Kumara Dissanayake—often referred to as AKD—seems determined to address the culture of impunity.

Local press freedom organizations in Sri Lanka have documented 44 cases of murdered and disappeared journalists and media workers between 2004 and 2010. International media watchdogs report lower numbers due to narrower definitions of who qualifies as a journalist. Regardless, it is well known that many journalists risk their lives. To date, no one has been convicted for the crimes committed against individual journalists or entire newsrooms.

One of the most iconic and globally recognized cases is the murder of Lasantha Wickrematunge, who was killed in his car on January 8, 2009, on his way to work in Colombo. As the editor-in-chief of the influential English-language newspaper Sunday Leader, Wickrematunge was a vocal critic of the government and a prominent figure in public debates.

The Rajapaksa brothers, ex-president Gotabaya Rajapaksa and his brother Mahinda, allegedly obstructed investigations into his murder as well as those involving journalists and members of parliament. Yet, the Wickrematunge family remains hopeful that justice will not only be served for Lasantha but also for all murdered journalists and their families, colleagues, and society as a whole.

Lal Wickrematunge, former owner of the now-defunct Sunday Leader, explained that a new process has begun, gaining momentum since the September 21 presidential election.

“This election was crucial because what’s needed now is political will, just political will,” Lal stated.

He had received assurances from two major presidential candidates, Sajith Premadasa and Anura Kumara Dissanayake, that the investigations would resume post-election.

“They requested to bring back retired CID inspectors to see if they can finally close these cases,” he added.

Since Dissanayake’s clear victory and his formation of an interim government, Lal confirmed that these promises have been fulfilled so far. With parliamentary elections set for November 14, Dissanayake’s leftist coalition, National People’s Power, is projected to secure a majority.

“The new president has reinstated investigators who were previously dismissed or even imprisoned on fabricated charges. These investigators are now back to work, aiming to bring those responsible for journalists’ murders—both in the South and North—to justice,” Lal said.

Hope for Accountability

After the election results were announced, a curfew was imposed, and security was heightened at international airports to prevent former politicians implicated in various crimes from leaving the country. With the upcoming parliamentary elections, Lal remains optimistic.

“I believe this is a step in the right direction. So far, the president has earned the trust of even those who didn’t vote for him, and it looks like his party will win a solid majority in parliament. He’s promised transparency and good governance, and he’s staying true to his word, gaining the confidence of people across the country,” Lal explained.

He then recalled the events of January 2009, when his brother Lasantha was murdered. Four men on two motorcycles smashed the windows of Lasantha’s car. Witnesses didn’t hear any gunshots, but Lasantha had a hole in his skull with no exit wound, and no bullets or gunpowder residue were found. It’s believed the killers used a bolt gun—typically used to slaughter livestock—which they concealed in a rolled-up newspaper.

The suspected mastermind behind the murder is Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who served as president from 2019 to 2022. After several months of widespread protests (known as Aragalaya, which means struggle in Sinhala) against his government over claims of resource mismanagement, fuel shortages, and skyrocketing food prices, he resigned. Rajapaksa, who returned to Sri Lanka after his resignation, now lives off the state like four other former presidents.

As Secretary of Defense from 2005 to 2015, Gotabaya allegedly ordered the assassination. The motive was linked to Sunday Leader’s reporting on corruption, particularly in the purchase of used Russian-made MIG fighter jets from Ukraine, where Rajapaksa was implicated as the main beneficiary. Rajapaksa sued the newspaper for defamation, and a court hearing was scheduled for 2009, but the case never proceeded due to Lasantha’s murder.

The Fight for Justice Continues

Though it has been 15 years since Lasantha’s death, his legacy endures, as do the memories of other murdered journalists. Of the 44 documented cases, 41 involved Tamil journalists. Many Sri Lankan journalists in exile, including those associated with JDS Lanka (Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka), continue to report on the situation back home.

In 2021-2022, a legal initiative called “A Safer World for the Truth” took place in The Hague under the auspices of The People’s Tribunal on the Murder of Journalists. This project, led by the Permanent People’s Tribunal in collaboration with Free Press Unlimited, Reporters Without Borders, and the Committee to Protect Journalists, reviewed three murder cases, including Lasantha’s.

Nishanta Silva, the lead investigator in the case, now in exile in Switzerland, presented evidence pointing to the involvement of the “Tripoli Platoon,” a secret military unit directly under Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s control.

Although targeted killings of journalists have ceased since 2009, Sri Lanka remains far down in global rankings for press freedom. In Reporters Without Borders’ Press Freedom Index, Sri Lanka ranks 150th out of 180 countries—a grim reflection of the ongoing challenges. Tamil journalists in the north face the greatest difficulties.

Press Freedom in Northern Sri Lanka: Challenges and Resilience

In Jaffna, the largest city in northern Sri Lanka with a population of 170,000, a vibrant Press Club brings together many local journalists who support one another. Similar press clubs exist in Kilinochchi and Mullaitivu, two other northern cities.

In October 2020, Mullaitivu Press Club president, journalist Shanmugam Thavaseelan, and photojournalist Kanapathipillai Kumanan were investigating illegal logging when a group of men approached and attacked them as they were photographing and filming a stack of about 200 tree trunks.

Both Thavaseelan and Kumanan were brutally beaten, with Thavaseelan losing two teeth. They spent three days in the hospital. Thavaseelan’s missing teeth serve as a lasting reminder of the assault.

During the attack, they were forced to delete the contents of a memory card; one card went missing, and one camera was damaged. The two journalists were also robbed of about 50,000 rupees, equivalent to USD 150. Their investigation revealed that the illegal logging was extensive and involved local authorities.

The attackers were identified and arrested by the police but were released on bail after a month. Four years later, the case remains ongoing in court.

“No journalist has been murdered or disappeared since 2009-2010. But they harass us and try to intimidate us in other ways. Over the past ten years, I’ve been involved in five court cases,” says Thavaseelan.

Journalists covering routine news, sports, and cultural events typically face no issues. However, those investigating corruption or misconduct often find themselves in trouble. Most journalists rely on motorcycles for transportation, making them vulnerable on the roads, where there have been multiple incidents of cars deliberately trying to run them over.

“There is no specific legal protection for journalists while we’re doing our work, unlike for government employees,” Thavaseelan explains.

Kumanan, who monitors and reports on the Mullaitivu region, is constantly under surveillance by military intelligence personnel. In this area, there is one Sinhalese soldier for every three Tamil civilians, and they regularly check on Kumanan and track his movements.

“I know my rights, and I stand up for myself, which usually makes them back off,” Kumanan says.

A Struggle for Justice

Freddy Gamage, a Sinhalese journalist from Negombo near Colombo, is president of the Sri Lanka Web Journalists Association and works to strengthen the bonds between journalists and press freedom advocates in the north and south. Over the years, he too has been the target of attacks.

“Our struggle for justice is incredibly difficult and has been going on for over a decade. It’s hard to see how justice will be served, even if the government changes, given how successive Sri Lankan governments have acted in the UN in Geneva, where these issues are raised,” Gamage says.

“But we can’t give up. We need to continue our efforts to unite journalists from the north, east, and south. After the elections, we need to consider what steps we can take, both nationally and internationally, to secure justice,” Gamage explains.

Every year, memorials for murdered journalists are held, where colleagues gather to renew their calls for justice. With the recent change in government, there is hope, but realizing justice will require strong political will, hard work, and perseverance.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

‘The Focus Should Be on Holding Social Media Companies Accountable, Not Punishing Individual Users’

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Democracy, Featured, Freedom of Expression, Global, Headlines, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Oct 7 2024 (IPS) –  
CIVICUS discusses the recent Twitter/X ban in Brazil with Iná Jost, lawyer and head of research at InternetLab, an independent Brazilian think tank focused on human rights and digital technologies.

Brazil’s Supreme Court recently upheld a ban on Elon Musk’s social media platform X, formerly Twitter, after it repeatedly refused to comply with orders to moderate content. The court ordered tech companies to remove X from app stores and imposed fines for continued access via VPNs in Brazil. This appeared to cause users to switch to alternatives such as Bluesky and Threads. Musk condemned the ban as an attack on free speech, but has since backed down and complied with the court’s orders. Debate continues over the controversy’s implications for democracy and accountability.

Iná Jost

Why did the Brazilian Supreme Court ban X?

The case began on 7 August when a Supreme Court justice, investigating ‘digital malicious activities’, ordered the blocking of seven X profiles for intimidating law enforcement officers and directly threatening the integrity of the court and democracy in Brazil.

X refused to comply with the order, claiming it violated freedom of expression. The judge then imposed a daily fine for non-compliance, which was subsequently raised and ended up amounting to over US$3 million as Musk continued to refuse to comply. At one point, the justice ordered the freezing of X’s financial assets in Brazil, but they weren’t enough to cover the fines.

After more back and forth, tensions escalated when the judge also froze the bank accounts of satellite internet company Starlink, arguing that both companies were part of the same economic group. This caused some controversy, as Starlink operates in a different sphere and its operations aren’t entirely linked to X.

The turning point came when X closed its headquarters in Brazil. Without a legal representative in the country, the court found it difficult to enforce its orders or impose additional penalties. It then gave X 24 hours to appoint a new representative, which it failed to do. As a result, on 30 August, the court ordered the closure of X.

It is important to mention that the court is not super transparent and the whole procedure was carried out under seal. We are unable to grasp the full picture because the process is closed and not all decisions are made public.

What was the legal basis for the decision to close X?

The Court based its decision on Brazil’s 2014 Civil Framework for the Internet. Under this law, platforms can be blocked for failing to comply with Brazilian laws or court orders. Some confusion arose over the notion that the ban was due to X’s lack of a legal representative in Brazil; however, the shutdown resulted from the company’s repeated refusal to comply with court orders.

Civil society raised concerns about some aspects of the decision. Initially, the order included blocking VPN services to prevent access to X, but this part was later reversed due to cybersecurity risks. Blocking VPNs that serve legitimate purposes would have been disproportionate. The order also proposed a US$9,000 fine for users trying to circumvent the ban, which many felt was excessive. We believe the focus should be on holding the company accountable, not punishing individual users.

Is it possible to strike a balance between regulating online platforms and protecting freedoms?

It is. Regulating platforms isn’t necessarily about censorship. In this case, it’s about ensuring a powerful company operates transparently and protects users. Platforms acting solely in their commercial interests can harm the public interest. Regulation can force them to provide clear terms and conditions and fair content moderation policies and respect due process for content removal.

The belief that any form of regulation threatens freedom of expression is misguided. Thoughtful regulation that allows users to express themselves while protecting them from harm such as hate speech or misinformation can balance the scales.

Musk’s stance in this case is deeply problematic. His selective compliance with court orders undermines the rule of law. While platforms like X are crucial to public communication, that doesn’t give them the right to defy the legal system they operate in. Freedom of expression does not absolve platforms of their legal responsibilities, particularly when those laws protect the integrity of democracy.

Musk’s claim that X represents absolute freedom of expression fails to consider the risks of a platform without proper rules. Without moderation, platforms can become havens for extremist groups, hate speech and disinformation. They should be regulated to ensure they remain a space for lawful discourse.

Do you think this case will set a precedent?

I don’t think so. Some people are worried other platforms could be blocked as well, but I don’t think that will happen. This is a unique scenario, and Brazil is a strong democracy. This wasn’t an act of censorship by the judiciary but a necessary measure given the platform owner’s refusal to comply with court orders.

States should develop regulatory mechanisms that allow them to hold platforms accountable and ensure compliance with national laws. This would avoid the need for outright blocking, which ultimately harms the users the most. While the company might incur some financial losses, journalists and citizens are losing access to a vital information and communication tool.

I hope states that are serious about regulating platforms will see this as an example of what shouldn’t happen. We shouldn’t allow things to escalate to this point. And we certainly shouldn’t use this as a leading case for blocking platforms.

Get in touch with InternetLab through its website or its Instagram and Facebook pages, and follow @internetlabbr on Twitte.

  Source

Bangladesh Students, Community Moves to Protect Minorities Following Fall of Hasina Government

Posted on by admin

Active Citizens, Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Featured, Freedom of Expression, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, Religion, TerraViva United Nations

Active Citizens

Students and youth groups in Bangladesh stand guard outside temples and churches to protect those from vandalism during unrest after the Awami League government ouster. Credit: Rafiqul Islam/IPS

Students and youth groups in Bangladesh stand guard outside temples and churches to protect those from vandalism during unrest after the Awami League government ouster. Credit: Rafiqul Islam/IPS

DHAKA, Aug 28 2024 (IPS) – Immediately after the fall of the Sheikh Hasina government on August 5, 2024, following weeks of deadly demonstrations staged by students, people carried out attacks on the houses and temples of the Hindu community in Dacope of Khulna, about 225 kilometres from Dhaka. They particularly attacked and vandalized the houses of minorities believed to be involved in the politics of the ousted Awami League government.

At least 11 Hindu houses in Dacope were attacked and vandalized, with attackers claiming these were acts of political revenge.

But, in Dacope, local Muslim and Hindu students and the community soon joined together to guard the houses and temples of the minorities so that they would no longer be victimized due to the political changeover.

Beginning in mid-June 2024, peaceful student protests in Bangladesh turned violent, resulting in hundreds of people killed, including at least 32 children, and thousands injured. The protests were the result of the reinstatement of a quota system for the distribution of civil service positions.

The government resigned in response to the protests, and a civilian interim government took its place.

In other areas too, attacks were carried out on the offices of the Awami League (AL) and residences and establishments of the AL leaders and temples, churches and houses of minority communities across Bangladesh during unrest.

Nur Nabin Robin, a resident of Chattogram City, said many people from minority communities, including Hindus, Buddhist and ethnic people, live in the port city in harmony.

But when the Sheikh Hasina government fell on August 5, people of the minority communities began to feel insecure in Chattogram since attacks on minorities were reportedly being carried out in different parts of the country, he said.

“So, we patrolled in the city for two to three nights in groups and guarded the temples and houses of the minorities so that none could attack them. We also asked them to call us via mobile phone if they can sense any clue of attack on them,” Robin told IPS.

Their concerns were exacerbated because most police stations across the country ceased operating after the fall of the previous government.

General students and even madrasa students came forward to protect the houses and places of worship as the leaders of the Anti-Discrimination Student Movement asked supporters to guard temples and churches, responding to concerns voiced over reports of attacks on minority groups.

Jasim Uddin, a resident of Kuliarchar in Kishoreganj, told IPS that after the fall of Sheikh Hasina’s government, mobs torched and vandalized houses of many AL leaders in his locality, but members of the Hindu community remained safe during the political turmoil as local people voluntarily safeguarded their temples and properties.

While national monuments and government buildings in the capital, Dhaka, were looted, there were no reports of attacks on temples or churches there during the recent political turmoil.

In Dhaka, Muslim students were found guarding the Dhakeshwari National Temple, a Hindu place of worship. A Muslim was spotted offering prayers in front of Dhakeswari temple so nobody would attack the temple.

Professor Muhammad Yunus, Chief Adviser to the interim government of Bangladesh, visited Dhakeshwari National Temple on August 13, 2024, to express his solidarity with the Hindu community. During his visit, he called upon the minorities to keep patience and remain united.

Yunus condemned the attacks on minority communities in the country as “heinous.”

Religious harmony is the long tradition of Banglalees, while people from different religions—Islam, Hindu, Buddhist, Christian—have been living together from generation to generation.

“Over 90 percent people in Bangladesh do not believe in communalism. Attacks were carried out on minorities due to political reason or gaining personal interest. Those who carried out looting and vandalism were not involved in the student movement,” adviser to interim government Syeda Rizwana Hasan told a function recently in Dhaka.

She said madrasa students had safeguarded temples in many places of Bangladesh, which showed an example of the country’s religious harmony.

Barrister Sara Hossain, the honorary executive director of the Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust (BLAST), said once miscreants carry out any attack on minorities, all should protect them.

CONCERN REMAINS

Following the fall of the Sheikh Hasina government, there was chaos across the country, with law enforcement officials retreating in many places for fear of retaliation.

According to a report of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) of the United Nations released on August 16, 2024, attacks were conducted against minorities, including Hindus, especially in the days immediately after the change of government.

The OHCHR report recognized the role of the student organizations and other ordinary people who were forming groups to protect the minorities.

It details some of the attacks against minorities, including Hindus, especially in the days immediately after the change of government. On August 5 and 6, Hindu houses and properties were reportedly attacked, vandalized and looted in 27 districts. A number of places of worship were also damaged, including an ISKCON temple in Meherpur, Khulna division, which was vandalized and set on fire.

On August 5 and 6, Hindu houses and properties were reportedly attacked, vandalized and looted in 27 districts, while many temples were also damaged, including an ISKCON temple in Meherpur, Khulna division, which was vandalized and set on fire.

The Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist Christian Unity Council (BHBCUC) claimed that around 200-300 Hindu homes and businesses were vandalized since August 5 last while 15-20 Hindu temples were damaged.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Sportwashing Allegations at Africa’s Top Football Tournament

Posted on by admin

Africa, Climate Action, Climate Change, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Energy, Environment, Featured, Freedom of Expression, Green Economy, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Climate Change

Opponents of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline protested American International Group's continued support of the project. The protest was in New York in July. Credit: 350.org

Opponents of the East African Crude Oil pipeline protested American International Group’s continued support of the project. The protest was in New York in July. Credit: 350.org

ABUJA, Jul 30 2024 (IPS) – Following the recent Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON) tournament in Ivory Coast, a continent-wide campaign has emerged on social media challenging the tournament’s main sponsor, TotalEnergies, over its involvement in the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP).

EACOP, a massive 1,443-kilometer crude oil export pipeline, is designed to transport oil from Western Uganda’s oilfields to the port of Tanga in Tanzania. TotalEnergies, a major stakeholder in the project, will extract oil from the Tilenga field and export it to the Global North.

Environmentalists argue that the project threatens the livelihoods of tens of thousands of people and the region’s fragile ecosystems. The Ugandan and Tanzanian governments have dismissed these concerns, asserting that the pipeline is essential for bolstering their economies.

Many of these campaigners, particularly environmentalists, have faced harassment and arrest.

One of them, Stephen Kwikiriza, an employee of Uganda’s Environment Governance Institute (EGI), a non-profit organization, was reportedly abducted and beaten by the Ugandan armed forces in Kampala on June 4, 2024.

After being questioned, he was abandoned hundreds of miles from the capital, highlighting the latest episode in the crackdown on environmentalists in Uganda.

TotalEnergies, through their press officer, François Sinecan, emphatically denied that the company had anything to do with the harassment of environmentalists, or was involved in legitimizing the company through sponsorship.

Sportswashing

Critics argue that TotalEnergies is exploiting Uganda and Tanzania for their oil, even as it faces numerous legal battles due to its role in the climate crisis and refusal to take responsibility.

They worry that TotalEnergies is using AFCON, the continent’s biggest football tournament, and its global viewership to enhance its image while profiting from climate-wrecking fossil fuel extraction across Africa.

“AFCON is one of the ways they [TotalEnergies] are using to legitimize their existence. They have to use the sports arena. They seem to say, ‘Look at what we are doing in Africa, and in your communities, it is to your benefit.’ Every time you look at the logo of TotalEnergies, you might be convinced that this is a big corporation that should invest [in Africa], when in actuality, they are destroying our existence,” Nkurunziza Alphonse, the Ugandan Coordinator of the Students Against EACOP Uganda, told IPS.

Alphonse was arrested in October 2022 when he led a group of students to the EU embassy in Kampala to deliver a petition against EACOP. But he is not the only student to be arrested and harassed in recent times.

On December 15 last year, Bwete Abdul Aziiz, a co-founder of the Justice Movement Uganda and a student at Kyambogo University in Kampala, rallied 50 students, including members of the movement, to protest and deliver a petition to the Ugandan parliament against the EACOP.

However, the students did not reach their destination as the police dispersed the protest and arrested Abdul Aziiz, along with three other students who are members of the movement.

“Before we were taken to the Central Police Station in Kampala, where we spent four days, we were held in an enclosed space for about an hour where the police threatened us to stop fighting the government. I was kicked in the ribs by a police officer, and other colleagues were slapped,” Abdul Aziiz told IPS.

However, Sinecan, TotalEnergies press officer, denied claims of sportwashing and involvement in the arrests of climate activists.

“Africa is part of the DNA of TotalEnergies, which has been present on the continent for ninety years and has never ceased to develop its activities and strengthen its local roots. The company employs 10,000 men and women in more than 40 African countries, working across the entire energy production and distribution chain. Every day, nearly 4 million customers visit the 4,700 service stations in the TotalEnergies network in Africa,” Sinecan told IPS.

He added that TotalEnergies  “will not tolerate any threat or attack against those who peacefully defend and promote human rights.”

“TotalEnergies has a history of engaging directly with all members of civil society, including NGOs involved in human rights issues. To this end, the company’s commitments include quarterly meetings, stakeholder dialogue, bilateral meetings, webinars on keynote topics identified by NGOs and responses to questions and concerns raised by all project stakeholders,” said Sinecan.

However, activists that IPS spoke to do not agree.

Bhekhumuzi Bhebhe, Campaigns Lead at Power Shift Africa, in a statement sent to IPS said, “Investing millions in sportswashing while undercompensating displaced households exposes a profound deceit by the French multinational. It also highlights the glaring disconnect between corporate sponsorship and genuine social responsibility.”

But the French oil giant denied claims of undercompensating displaced households, telling IPS that “as with all other aspects of the project, TotalEnergies stringently complies with local regulations and international standards (IFC).”

Football and Climate Change

The 2023 AFCON was postponed to 2024 due to adverse weather conditions, leading critics to argue that the tournament underscored the impacts of the climate crisis, for which TotalEnergies and other oil majors are largely responsible.

Richard Heede of the Climate Accountability Project has described EACOP as a mid-sized carbon bomb. The pipeline is projected to become operational by 2025 and once completed, it is expected to contribute approximately 34 million tons of carbon emissions annually for around 25 years.

Baraka Lenga, Greenfaith Tanzania coordinator, considers this a climate disaster.

“For capitalists and businessmen, EACOP implies making billions of dollars. TotalEnergies does not care about human rights but about money. In Tanzania, over 70 percent of citizens depend on agriculture, yet instead of being concerned about the negative impacts of EACOP, TotalEnergies is focused on profit,” Lenga said.

Alagoa Morris, an environmental expert and human rights activist in Nigeria, told IPS that African governments allow oil giants to exploit communities in the continent to maintain support from the Global North, where the majority of these oil firms are based. He says this has also led to numerous oil spills in the continent.

Last year, the Nigerian government confirmed the loss of 3,000 barrels of crude oil in TotalEnergies’ spill in the oil-rich Niger-Delta region, which is already one of the most polluted areas on the planet due to frequent oil spills.

“African governments are complicit in the exploitation of the continent’s oil resources because the wealth generated from oil is then used to fuel the lust for power and wealth of a few individuals, perpetuating a cycle of corruption and environmental degradation,” Morris said.

Renewable Energies?

To do away with fossil fuels by mid-century, world leaders during cop28 held at UAE last year, pledged to keep investing in renewable energies. However, with a projected population of about 2.5 billion in 2050, many African leaders doubt that renewable energy can adequately substitute for energy obtained from fossil fuels required to produce power for a rapidly growing population in Africa.

Seyifunmi Adebote, an environmental policy expert in Nigeria, believes Africa must embrace renewable energy but according to him, “many countries on the continent lack the infrastructure to transition to renewable energy in the short run.”

Despite accusations of investing in fossil fuels, TotalEnergies told IPS that it has “dedicated USD 5 billion to renewable and low-carbon energies and will dedicate another USD 5 billion in 2024. This is the second year in a row that TotalEnergies has invested more in low-carbon energies than in new hydrocarbon projects.

“Since 2020, we have been resolutely committed to our transition strategy, which is based on two pillars: gas and electricity. Gas and low-carbon electricity are at the heart of tomorrow’s energy system. Gas is an essential transitional energy to support the rise of intermittent renewable energies and replace coal in power generation. In electricity, we are already one of the world’s biggest solar and wind power developers, which should put us in the top 5 worldwide in this sector by 2030.”

Victory In Sight

The fate of EACOP is uncertain after several financial institutions, including previous supporters of TotalEnergies, announced they would no longer back the project due to global environmental protests.

European lawmakers have also condemned and called for its delay.

For the Ugandan-based Alphonse, this marks a significant victory in the fight against EACOP, as the lack of financiers could lead to the project being suspended.

“This is the time African countries should move away from fossil fuels. Oil is destroying our continent,” he said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

IPS UN Bureau, IPS UN Bureau Report,

  Source

Rights Groups Demand Governments Protect Exiled Journalists, Dissidents

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Democracy, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Freedom of Expression, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Press Freedom, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Freedom of Expression

Irene Khan, Special Rapporteur for freedom of expression and opinion, briefs reporters at UN Headquarters. Credit: Manuel Elías/UN

Irene Khan, Special Rapporteur for freedom of expression and opinion, briefs reporters at UN Headquarters. Credit: Manuel Elías/UN

BRATISLAVA, Jul 19 2024 (IPS) – Rights groups have called for governments to do more to combat transnational repression as a series of recent reports show growing numbers of exiled journalists, political dissidents and rights defenders are being targeted by autocratic regimes in an attempt to silence them.

They say governments must do more to deal with the repression, which takes the form of online harassment, surveillance, enforced disappearances, physical attacks and sometimes even killings, to protect the safety of these people.

“We have seen an increase in transnational repression, tied into the rise in authoritarianism around the world in general. Generally, there is a growing awareness of this complex problem among host countries and a willingness to do something about it.

“But more work needs to be done in some areas and governments need to support exiled journalists and understand the vital importance of the work they do,” Fiona O’Brien, UK Bureau Director at Reporters Without Borders (RSF), told IPS.

The scale of the problem has been laid bare in a number of reports in recent months.

In February, rights group Freedom House released a report documenting scores of attacks, including assassinations, abductions and assaults, carried out by governments against people outside their borders in 2023.

Naming Russia, Cambodia, Myanmar, Turkmenistan and China as the biggest perpetrators, it also reported on the first known cases of transitional repression sanctioned by a number of governments, including the regimes of Cuba, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, El Salvador, Myanmar, Sierra Leone and Yemen.

The group said that 44 countries—more than a fifth of the world’s national governments—have attempted to silence dissidents, activists, political opponents and members of ethnic or religious minorities beyond their own borders in the last ten years, with 1,034 recorded direct, physical incidents of transnational repression.

Meanwhile, at the end of June, while presenting a report on transnational repression, the United Nations special rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression, Irene Khan, raised concerns not just about increasing incidents of transnational repression, but host countries’ responses to it.

“Too often, states are either unwilling for political reasons or unable for lack of capacity or resources to protect and support journalists in exile. Journalists should not be treated as political pawns but as human beings in distress who, at great cost to themselves, are contributing to the realization of our human right to information,” Khan said.

Following the report, scores of governments issued a joint statement condemning the repression and committing to coordinated action to help people being targeted and to hold accountable those behind any attacks. But it did not spell out any specific measures that should be implemented to do this.

Rights groups say that concrete steps must be taken by host governments to address the problem both in their own countries, and to confront those regimes perpetrating such acts.

Phil Lynch, Executive Director at the non-profit organisation International Service for Human Rights, said such action should involve host states not only providing comprehensive protection and support to those at risk of acts of transnational repression, but also measures, to undermine the capabilities of regimes to target people abroad.

He said host states must ensure they do not support or acquiesce in acts of transnational repression, such as through extradition or refoulement to states engaged in the persecution of human rights defenders; do not provide or export the tools or technologies of transnational repression, such as spyware and arms, to repressive states; must build awareness and law enforcement capabilities to respond to acts of transnational repression; and publicly denounce, investigate and pursue accountability for acts of transnational repression, including through sanctions and diplomatic repercussions.

“They should also prioritise human rights in foreign policy and relations both at bilateral and multilateral levels, adopting a principled and consistent approach to human rights in all situations, without selectivity and without discrimination,” he told IPS.

The lack of any serious consequences for regimes using transnational repression is helping perpetuate its widescale use, experts say.

“Governments don’t seem to be shying away from using transnational repression. This is likely because there has been very little accountability even in the most well-publicized cases, like the assassination of [Saudi dissident writer] Jamal Khashoggi. Since governments aren’t paying a price for targeting dissidents abroad, there’s little reason for them not to attempt it,” Yana Gorokhovskaia, Research Director, Strategy and Design, at Freedom House, told IPS.

But it is not just host country governments that could do more, experts say.

“Most of the harassment and attacks are online. Big tech have been totally absent from [efforts to fight transnational repression]. Governments have to hold big tech to account on this,” said O’Brien.

“Increasingly, acts of transnational repression occur online or are technology-facilitated. Technology providers have a duty to conduct due diligence to ensure their technologies and tools are not used, directly or indirectly, to restrict or violate human rights, including through acts of transnational repression. Governments should also legislate to mandate that human rights due diligence is undertaken by companies,” added Lynch.

It appears that some countries are becoming increasingly aware of the issue and willing to improve how they tackle it.

O’Brien said this following an RSF report on harassment of Iranian journalists in the UK released earlier this year. British authorities have “shown a lot of interest in how to tackle this problem better,”  while Freedom House has highlighted how President Joe Biden’s administration has made addressing the issue a priority across law enforcement and security agencies.

Gorokhovskaia also pointed out that over the last four years various countries have adopted policies to mitigate the threat posed by transnational repression, including improved training for police and security agencies and more outreach to communities that can be targeted.

“Countries have also become more aware of how international organizations, like Interpol, can be misused for transnational repression and taken steps to address this (by examining Interpol notices from certain perpetrator countries),” she said.

But research from other groups shows a much less reassuring picture.

A report from Human Rights Watch (HRW) said some host country governments were not only failing to ensure adequate protective measures for those at risk but were even actively facilitating transnational repression.

UN special rapporteur Khan also warned of host states becoming enablers “of transnational repression, for instance, by colluding in abductions instigated by the home state.”

Some alleged cases of such facilitation involve ostensibly stable, democratic, western states.

Abdulrahman Al-Khalidi, a political activist and a known dissident, arrived in Bulgaria in October 2021.

A campaigner for human rights and advocate for democratic reforms, he had fled his home country in the wake of mass arrests following the Arab Spring.

But since crossing into Bulgaria and claiming asylum, he has faced a complicated and, he says, at times incomprehensible legal battle over authorities’ continued refusal to grant him asylum and release him from detention at the migration centre despite court rulings in his favour.

He is facing deportation to Saudi Arabia, where, he told IPS, he will almost certainly be killed.

Al-Khalidi believes the Saudi secret service is behind the Bulgarian authorities’ blocking of his asylum. He says that during questioning by agency officials, he was told they were working with Saudi authorities on his case and that Saudi officials wanted him returned to Saudi Arabia. The Bulgarian state security agency has repeatedly said Al-Khalidi is a threat to national security, thereby blocking his asylum and release from detention.

Speaking to IPS in early July as he began a hunger strike while at a migrant detention centre near the Bulgarian capital, Sofia, where he has been held for the last three years, Al-Khalidi had a warning for governments hosting exiled dissidents and journalists.

“We live in a time full of international turmoil in which younger generations believe in anarchism more than they believe in democratic principles. This is very dangerous. The blame for this is fully borne by politicians who benefit from this and whose actions contradict the principles of the state, subsequently raising generations who lose their faith in both,” he said.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source