Category: Death threats

  • By Eleisha Foon, RNZ Pacific senior journalist

    Papua New Guinea’s rising voice as opposition candidate for prime minister, East Sepik Governor Allan Bird, has pushed back after addressing recent death threats.

    Bird told RNZ Pacific he has declined police protection and is opting to use his own security after his nomination as opposition candidate for prime minister resulted in alleged threats to his personal safety.

    “I was informed about 10 days ago of the threats against my life. I’ve heard a few more threats are in fact active,” he said.

    “So I thought, probably the best way to declare it would be to put it out in the public domain.”

    He said three senior government ministers informed him about the death threats and were no longer contacting him, due to concerns his phone was “being monitored”.

    Bird was confident in his security to keep him safe and said whoever was behind the threats had picked on the wrong person.

    “My people served with the allied forces in the Second World War. So my grandfather did that. He was uneducated. So picking on me is not a smart thing to do.”

    RNZ Pacific has contacted the PNG police for comment after Bird accused authorities of illegally monitoring his phone and looking for dirt to charge and arrest him.

    “I have nothing to hide. So, apparently, they haven’t found any dirt.”

    PNG riots aftermath
    “I do understand that they’re trying to connect me as one of the masterminds behind the Black Wednesday day events in Port Moresby.”

    He said it would be “almost impossible because I was out of the country prior to that happening. And then I understand they’re looking now at all my travel allowances, so they’re looking at that to see what they can find.”

    Regarding the threats, he said: “I’m not too stressed. These are some of the things you expect in PNG, otherwise you wouldn’t be in PNG.”

    Bird said he did not trust the country’s police and declined their offer for protection, opting to use his own personal security instead.

    “If things get pretty bad in the capital, I will just go back home. But for now, I’m just keeping a low profile, not really moving around, just restricting movements.”

    He addressed sceptics who criticised him for attempting to boost his profile to become PNG’s next prime minister.

    Bird said he had accepted the nomination as candidate out of “respect to his colleagues.”

    ‘Asked by my caucus’
    “I didn’t put my hand up. I was asked by my caucus.”

    He said, the country needed change, even if it was at the expense of his safety.

    “Who wants to run around with security guards all the time?

    “Whoever gets into the hot seat, whether it’s me or someone else, in all seriousness and honesty will soon to have to deal with these problems, the problems that are begging for solutions, and these are personal criticisms of Prime Minister Marape.”

    He said supporters of the nation’s current leader James Marape lacked proper education and said it was “like a cult following”.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • RNZ Pacific

    A Papua New Guinea MP who is being touted by the opposition as the next prime minister of the country says “my life is under threat”.

    East Sepik governor Allan Bird said that since his nomination, he had been advised of this by a deputy police commissioner, who said they were monitoring the situation.

    In a Facebook post on Saturday, Bird claimed “senior government ministers” told him his phones had been illegally tapped.

    “All the apparatus of state have been put on full alert to hunt down the most dangerous criminal in PNG: his name is Allan Bird,” he wrote on Facebook.

    “This is not the country I was born into, this is not the country the founding fathers envisioned.”

    He said “reliable sources” had told him various state institutions had been instructed to try and find anything illegal on him, and charge and arrest him.

    Last week, Bird told RNZ Pacific the country needed to decentralise power to deal with its challenges.

    He said PNG had “very serious challenges”.

    “Anyone who fixes these problems will be hated just like Sir Mekere [Morauta] did 25 years ago. Doing what needs to be done is not pretty, but it has to be done. Someone has to be willing to do the hard things.

    “Many countries have problems, but not many countries have all those challenges all at the same time. PNG does so right now.

    “If the problems aren’t fixed quickly then they will continue to get worse. Most of our people experience these problems every day now. It’s a struggle for survival.”

    Part of Governor Bird's FB posting about threats
    Part of Governor Bird’s FB posting about threats to his life on 9 March 2024. Image: Screenshot APR

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • RNZ News

    Former Green Party MP Golriz Ghahraman — a leading voice in Aotearoa New Zealand’s Parliament for human rights, an independent foreign policy, and justice for Occupied Palestine — was subject to “pretty much continuous” death threats and threats of violence, says party co-leader James Shaw.

    She has resigned as a Green Party MP after facing shoplifting allegations.

    Ghahraman said in a statement today stress relating to her work had led her to “act in ways that are completely out of character. I am not trying to excuse my actions, but I do want to explain them”.

    “The mental health professional I see says my recent behaviour is consistent with recent events giving rise to extreme stress response, and relating to previously unrecognised trauma,” she said.

    She said she had fallen short of the high standards expected of elected representatives, and apologised.

    In a joint media conference with Green co-leader Marama Davidson, Shaw said Green MPs were expected to maintain high standards of public behaviour.

    “It is clear to us that Ms Ghahraman is in a state of extreme distress. She has taken responsibility and she has apologised. We support the decision that she has made to resign.”

    Party ‘deeply sorry’
    The party was “deeply sorry” to see her leave under such circumstances, he said.

    Shaw said that Parliament was a stressful place for anybody.

    “However, Golriz herself has been subject to pretty much continuous threats of sexual violence, physical violence, death threats since the day she was elected to Parliament and so that has added a higher level of stress than is experienced by most Members of Parliament.

    “And that has meant, for example there have been police investigations into those threats almost the entire time that she has been a Member of Parliament, and so obviously if you’re living with that level of threat in what is already quite a stressful situation then there are going to be consequences for that,” Shaw said.

    “And so I have a lot of empathy for you know the fact that she has identified that she is in the state of extreme mental distress.

    “Ultimately Golriz is taking accountability for her actions, she’s seeking medical help and she is in a state of extreme distress, that’s where we are at and we support her decision.”

    Asked whether the Greens should review how they should support and select MPs, Green co-leader Marama Davidson said the party had a high quality and very robust selection process.

    MPs ‘are still human’
    “It is also understandable that all MPs across all political parties are still human when they come into politics.

    “We will continue to support Golriz through a really distressing time that she is having at the moment and that is a Green Party responsibility also.”

    Ghahraman was clearly distressed, Davidson said.

    “We know that this is a decision for her to apologise and to resign from Parliament, for her well-being, for her to be able to focus and our responsibility is to make sure she has the support she has needed and to continue to give her aroha and compassion.”

    Asked why the Greens did not front up to the situation earlier, Davidson said the Green Party co-leaders needed to seek clarity about the situation before making statements and Ghahraman was still overseas.

    “I think people can understand how important it is to have face-to-face and in person conversations with such allegations.

    “Also to allow her to have the support that she needs to be able to discuss those allegations.”

    Once the co-leaders had received advice and worked out a course of action, Ghahraman returned “at the earliest possible convenience”, Davidson said.

    Treatment of women of colour
    Davidson said there had been conversations in recent times about the particular treatment of women and women of colour who had public profiles.

    “It is incumbent on all political parties and the parliamentary system to be able to support everyone under the pressure of political profiles and the Greens certainly have always taken that seriously to make sure there are avenues for MPs feeling that stress to be able to communicate and seek help.”

    Asked whether the co-leaders were aware that Ghahraman was experiencing mental distress before the allegations came to light, Shaw said it would not be appropriate to comment on the mental health condition of one of their colleagues.

    “Professional support is available to all of our MPs and we do know that people do access them and we encourage people to access that professional support,” Shaw said.

    Davidson said it was a sad day and she was losing a friend and colleague who she had worked with for six years.

    “We are here to give aroha and hold her leadership in the portfolio work, kaupapa work that she has often been a lone voice in,” she said.

    “We just have aroha and sadness for the value of her kaupapa and for her as a person and she was a part of our team.”

    Green caucus support
    Shaw said Ghahraman was getting a lot of support for her colleagues in the Green caucus, other Green Party members, as well as from other communities that she is well-connected to.

    “And of course most importantly, she’s got professional support as well.”

    Davidson said that they would continue to support Ghahraman by ensuring she continued to know “that our aroha and compassion that we are holding that as colleagues, as friends, as women in politics, and that’s really important to us”.

    Shaw said Parliament had improved in terms of making support available to MPs over the last few years.

    “We strongly encourage our MPs and our staff to access professional support if they feel that they need it and we will continue to do so.”

    Shaw said Ghahraman was not looking for an excuse by disclosing her mental health issues and she said she wanted to take full accountability for her actions.

    “She’s not looking for an excuse here, she’s trying to sort of seek a reason to explain her behaviour, not to justify it and I think that’s really really important,” Shaw said.

    Shaw said pressures on MPs were discussed as a caucus including at monthly staff meetings of senior MPs and staff, at a quarterly weekend meeting, as well as working closely with parliamentary security, police and IT.

    Davidson said losing Ghahraman was a big loss but the party would continue to uphold her portfolio areas, legacy and mahi.

    Ghahraman was elected on the Green Party list, ranked 7th. She held 10 spokesperson portfolios, including Justice, Defence, and Foreign Affairs. She has not been charged.

    Her resignation allows the next person on the list to enter Parliament — former Wellington mayor Celia Wade-Brown.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • On 3 January 2023 it was reported that a prominent Ugandan LGBTQ+ activist Steven Kabuye was stabbed by unknown assailants on a motorbike after receiving death threats. Steven Kabuye, 25, suffered knife wounds and was left for dead on the outskirts of the capital Kampala.

    Human rights defenders have been warning about the risk of attacks on members of the LGBTQ+ community after Uganda last year adopted what is considered one of the harshest anti-gay laws in the world.

    Kabuye told detectives investigating the incident that he had been receiving death threats, according to a statement issued by police spokesperson Patrick Onyango.

    Richard Lusimbo, head of the community action group Uganda Key Populations Consortium, said: “All our efforts at the moment [are to ensure] that he gets the medical attention he deserves and also the perpetrators of this heinous act are held responsible.”

    Ugandan gay rights activist Hans Senfuma said in post on X that the attackers wanted to kill Kabuye. “Steven claims that these two guys’ intentions were to kill him, not robbing, and also claims that it seems they have been following him for several days,” Senfuma wrote.

    Kabuye, who works with the Coloured Voices Media Foundation, which campaigns on behalf of LGBTQ+ youth, told investigators who visited his bedside that he had been receiving death threats since March 2023. He had returned to Uganda in December for Christmas after travelling abroad in June.

    In May last year, Uganda adopted anti-gay legislation containing provisions making “aggravated homosexuality” a potentially capital offence and setting out penalties for consensual same-sex relations of up to life in prison.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/03/ugandan-lgbtq-activist-in-critical-condition-after-brutal-knife-attack

    https://www.barrons.com/news/prominent-uganda-lgbtq-activist-injured-in-knife-attack-0796fbdf

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • On 24 October 2023, human rights group Crew Against Torture reported that the Chechen Authorities had held Crew Against Torture member and Chechen human rights defender Magomed Alamov, and issued death threats. The authorities also threatened Magomed Alamov by threatening his family’s safety.

    Magomed Alamov returned to the Chechen Republic after accompanying a young woman, who was a survivor of domestic, violence from Russia’s North Caucasus on 5 October 2023. Since his return, his colleagues have not been able to reach him.

    Magomed Alamov is a human rights defender and lawyer of Chechen origin. Up until very recently, he has collaborated with the human rights group Crew Against Torture; an informal union of Russian lawyers who, individually, continue the work they used to do as a Russian-based human rights organisation “Committee Against Torture” (CAT). Following the listing of CAT as a foreign agent by Russian authorities on 10 June 2022, the organisation was forced to close its doors. Established in 2000, CAT was a prominent human rights organisation in Russia, investigating allegations of torture by state agents and representing victims of torture in the court system, including at the European Court of Human Rights. Human rights defenders who used to work with CAT were regularly subjected to defamation campaigns, physical attacks, detentions, and judicial persecution because of their peaceful human rights work.

    On 5 October 2023, at the request of the human rights organisation ‘North Caucasus: SOS’, Magomed Alamov accompanied a survivor of domestic violence from Ingushetia to a safehouse. On 11 October 2023, the human rights defender started to receive phone calls from the General Administration for Combating Extremism (Centre E). The caller demanded that Magomed Alamov present himself for questioning in relation to his involvement in the alleged disappearance of the aforementioned survivor. In the absence of a subpoena, the human rights defender refused to present himself.

    On 13 October, Chechen law enforcement officers unlawfully detained the human rights defender’s brother, at the Special Police Regiment #2, where the authorities threatened him, and demanded him to get in touch with Magomed Alamov and to convince the human rights defender to return to the Chechen Republic. Fearing for his brother’s life, Magomed Alamov travelled to the Chechen Republic; his colleagues from Crew against Torture are unsure about his current whereabouts.

    On 23 October2023, the survivor of domestic violence got in touch with her relatives in the Chechen Republic, and reported that Magomed Alamov was present at their house during the call. She reported that the human rights defender addressed her and said “I am at your house, surrounded by your relatives. My life and the life of my family is in danger. They gave me a week for you to return home. If you are not home in a week – they will kill me.” On 23 October 2023 the Crew against Torture filed complaints to the Ministry of Interior and to the Office of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation demanding protection for the human rights defender.

    Front Line Defenders condemns the harassment and death threats against the human rigths defender and lawyer Magomed Alamov. The organisation believes he is being targeted for his peaceful and legitimate human rights work. Front Line Defenders reminds the Russian authorities that the Chechen Republic is a part of the Russian Federation, and calls upon them to end systemic harassment against human rights defenders in the North Caucasus. Front Line Defenders urges the Russian authorities to confirm the whereabouts of Magomed Alamov, and ensure his safety in the Chechen Republic, as well as elsewhere in the country.

    https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/case/chechen-authorities-hold-human-rights-defender-magomed-alamov-promising-kill-him-5-days

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • On 20 October 2023 Front Line Defenders wrote that between 2 October 2023 and 16 October 2023, human rights defender Javier Medardo Feijoo Villa received several death threats via phone calls and voice messages towards both him and his family. The unidentified perpetrators claimed that they were keeping the human rights defender under surveillance, and maintained that they had access to his data and aware of all his moves within the community.l

    Javier Medardo Feijoo Villa is the president of the Estero Piedras community, located in the coastal area of the Molleturo on Azuay province. This community is also part of the San Felipe de Molleturo Commune, an ancestral territory that has been of great importance to the region, given that it has fought to defend against attempts by transnational mining companies to dispossess the people in the region of their land and water sources. He is also president of the North Zone Road Committee, which represents 15 communities in the region. As a community leader, the human rights defender has sought support from the competent authorities to stop criminal acts and illicit activities, mainly assaults and robberies caused by criminal groups that threaten the area. Javier has played an important role in the defence of water, nature and the territories belonging to the communities who he represents.

    Since 2 October 2023, human rights defender Javier Medardo Feijoo Villa has been the target of several death threats. Over the course of two weeks, he has received calls and voice messages threatening to kill him and his family. The callers claimed to be keeping the human rights defender under surveillance, and maintained that they had access to his data, as well as all his moves. The level of violence articulated in these threats increased over the weeks, causing the human rights defender to stop responding to messages or calls altogether, and provoking him to block the numbers of those who called him. The threats continued up until 16 October 2023. The human rights defender has been filing relevant complaints with the Prosecutor’s Office about the recent threats and has requested that the Police Commander of Zone 6 take the necessary measures protect him and his family.

    Violence against human rights defenders working on indigenous, land and environmental rights has been on the rise in Ecuador; human rights defenders Andrés Durazno and Alba Bermeo were murdered in 2021 and 2022 respectively. Still to this day no one has been charged with their murder.

    https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/case/ecuador-death-threats-against-human-rights-defender-and-community-leader-javier-medardo-feijoo

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • ANALYSIS: By Damien Kingsbury, Deakin University

    New Zealand pilot Phillip Mehrtens has now been held hostage in West Papua for four months. Stalled attempts to negotiate his release, and an unsuccessful Indonesian military rescue attempt, suggest a confused picture behind the scenes.

    Members of the West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) kidnapped Mehrtens on February 7, demanding Indonesia recognise West Papua’s independence.

    The Nduga regency, where Mehrtens was taken and his plane burnt, is known for pro-independence attacks and military reprisals.

    New Zealand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade has said: “We’re doing everything we can to secure a peaceful resolution and Mr Mehrtens’ safe release, including working closely with the Indonesian authorities and deploying New Zealand consular staff.”

    Meanwhile, the Indonesian military (TNI) has continued its military operation to hunt down the TPNPB — including by bombing from aircraft, according to Mehrtens in one of several “proof of life” videos released by the TPNPB.

    Early negotiations
    From late February, I was authorised by the TPNPB to act as an intermediary with the New Zealand government. This was based on having previously worked with pro-independence West Papuan groups and was confirmed in a video from the TPNPB to the New Zealand government.

    In this capacity, I communicated regularly with a New Zealand Police hostage negotiator, including when the TPNPB changed its demands.

    The TPNPB had initially said it would kill Mehrtens unless Indonesia recognised West Papua’s independence. But, after agreeing to negotiate, the TPNPB said it would save Mehrtens’ life while seeking to extract concessions from the New Zealand government.

    Its current position is that New Zealand stop its citizens from working in or travelling to West Papua, and also cease military support for Indonesia.

    In late May, however, frustrated by the lack of response, the TPNPB again said it would kill Mehrtens if talks were not forthcoming.

    My involvement with the New Zealand government ended when I was told the government had decided to use another channel of communication with the group. As events have unfolded, my understanding is that the TPNPB did not accept this change of communication channels.

    Latest in a long struggle
    The TPNPB is led by Egianus Kogeya, son of Daniel Yudas Kogeya, who was killed by Indonesian soldiers in an operation to rescue hostages taken in 1996. The TPNPB is one of a small number of armed pro-independence groups in West Papua, each aligned with a faction of the Free West Papua movement.

    The West Papua independence movement grew out of Dutch plans to give West Papua independence. Indonesia argued that Indonesia should be the successor to the Dutch East Indies in its entirety, and in 1963 assumed administration of West Papua with US backing. It formally incorporated West Papua in 1969, after 1035 village leaders were forced at gunpoint to vote for inclusion in Indonesia.

    As a result of Indonesians moving to this “frontier”, more than 40 percent of West Papua’s population is now non-Melanesian. West Papuans, meanwhile, are second-class citizens in their own land.

    Despite the territory having Indonesia’s richest economic output, West Papuans have among the worst infant mortality, average life expectancy, nutrition, literacy and income in Indonesia.

    Critically, freedom of speech is also limited, human rights violations continue unabated, and the political process is riven by corruption, vote buying and violence. As a consequence, West Papua’s independence movement continues.

    There have been a number of mostly small military actions and kidnappings highlighting West Papua’s claim for independence.

    “Flag-raising” ceremonies and street protests have been used to encourage a sense of unity around the independence struggle.

    These have resulted in attacks by the Indonesian military (TNI) and police, leading to killings, disappearances, torture and imprisonment. Human rights advocates suggest hundreds of thousands have died as a result of West Papua’s incorporation into Indonesia.

    Illustrating the escalating conflict, in 2018 the TPNPB kidnapped and killed more than 20 Indonesian workers building a road through the Nduga regency. It has also killed a number of Indonesian soldiers, including some of those hunting for Mehrtens.

    Negotiations stalled
    TPNPB spokesperson Sebby Sambom has said foreigners were legitimate targets because their governments support Indonesia. Despite Kogeya’s initial claim that Mehrtens would be killed if demands were not met, Sambom and TPNPB diplomatic officer Akouboo Amadus Douw had responded positively to the idea of negotiation for his release.

    Since talks broke down, however, the TPNPB has said there would be no further proof-of-life videos of Mehrtens. With the TPNPB’s late May statement that Mehrtens would be killed if New Zealand did not negotiate, his kidnapping seems to have reached a stalemate.

    The TPNPB has told me it is concerned that New Zealand may be prioritising its relationship with Indonesia over Mehrtens and has been stalling while the TNI resolves the situation militarily.

    At this stage, however, Mehrtens can still be safely released. But it will likely require the New Zealand government to make some concessions in response to the TPNPB’s demands.

    Meanwhile, the drivers of the conflict remain. Indonesia continues to use military force to try to crush what is essentially a political problem.

    And, while the TPNPB and other pro-independence groups still hope to remove Indonesia from West Papua, they feel they have run out of options other than to fight and to take hostages.The Conversation

    Dr Damien Kingsbury is emeritus professor, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Deakin University.  This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Finau Fonua, RNZ Pacific journalist

    The West Papuan Council of Churches says New Zealand hostage pilot Phillip Mehrtens’ life is in danger if negotiations do not take place with the West Papua Liberation Army (TPNPB).

    The council is calling on Indonesian President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo to cease military operations in West Papua and seek dialogue with TPNPB.

    Chief moderator Reverend Benny Giay said they are sending a letter to President Widodo.

    Since the kidnapping of 37-year-old pilot Phillip Mehrtens on February 7 by TPNPB local commander Egianus Kogoya, violence has escalated between the Indonesian Army and the guerrilla TPNPB, with both sides reporting military and civilian casualties as a result.

    “Egianus Kogoya could shoot the pilot,” Reverend Giay said.

    Reverend Benny Giay
    Reverend Benny Giay . . . the Indonesian government has to take a peaceful approach . . . “We are asking the Indonesian president to withdraw the military.” Image: Sastra Papua

    “In order to stop that, the Indonesian government has to take a peaceful approach,” he said.

    “We are asking the Indonesian president to withdraw the military and to allow the church to go in and to dialogue with the TPNPB for the release of the pilot.”

    Peaceful talk plan ‘ignored’
    “We know that the TPNPB leader has proposed a kind of peaceful talk, but the government has not responded, and we are asking this through our letter, the TPNPB have proposed a peaceful talk…so why can’t you [President Widodo] take it?” Rev Giay said.

    But Indonesian authorities say they are pursuing a “peaceful dialogue” to the crisis.

    Commander of the Indonesian National Armed Forces Admiral Yudo Margono told local reporters in Sulawesi last week that they were being cautious.

    Indonesia news agency Detikcom reported Admiral Margono saying on June 7: “We still prioritise [negotiations] carried out by religious leaders, community leaders and PJ regents there,” he said.

    “If we prioritise operations with the military, of course, there will be many negative impacts on public safety,” he added.

    It was a message repeated late last month by Papua Police chief Mathius Fakhiri.

    “I talked to various parties about this negotiation process including the Church, which includes the Church Council and the Bishop who will do as much as possible to negotiate with the Egianus Kogoya group to be able to release the pilot,” Fakhiri told Detikcom on May 25.

    “I opened myself to all parties, from the beginning, namely the Nduga government in collaboration with the Chief of Police and then there were also parties from Komnas HAM who offered themselves and we accepted,” Fakhiri added.

    Church leader claims Indonesia ‘not taking us seriously’
    However, Reverend Giay said the church could not mediate a dialogue unless the Indonesia military ceased its operations.

    “The Papuan police chief has agreed that church [negotiators] should go in and talk with Egianus . . . but that means the military has to be withdrawn from the area [and] that has not been done yet,” Reverend Giay said.

    “As of now, I cannot guarantee anything about church involvement because as of now the government is not taking us seriously,” he claimed.

    Both Indonesia’s military and TPNPB have confirmed shootouts in the Nduga Regency of the remote highlands of Papua.

    Indonesian authorities have confirmed the deaths of four Indonesian soldiers as a result of the fighting.

    Reuters reported two weeks ago that the TPNPB released a video of Merhtens saying he would be shot in two months if the group’s demands were not met.

    “If they [Indonesia] do not allow the church to go in and mediate, we will conclude that they are involved in the possible death of the pilot,” Reverend Giay said.

    “From our discussions here, we think the conditions of the pilot may be worsening.

    “We want to see the pilot . . . for Egianus to show us that he is okay…that is our first priority.”

    Mehrtens’ welfare ‘top priority’ for MFAT
    According to New Zealand’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs, everything is being done to try and seek Mehrtens’ release, but the details of this have been limited.

    The TPNPB maintains that New Zealand has not approached them for negotiation.

    “The welfare of the New Zealander at the heart of this situation is our top priority,” MFAT told RNZ Pacific in a statement in March.

    “We are doing everything we can to secure a peaceful resolution and the safe release of the hostage, including working closely with the Indonesian authorities and deploying New Zealand consular staff.”

    Reverend Giay said Wellington needed to pressure Jakarta into ceasing its military operations.

    “New Zealand government and the international community has to pressure the Indonesia government and military to seek a peaceful dialogue.”

    “That is only possible if the Indonesian military withdraw,” he added.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Finau Fonua, RNZ Pacific journalist

    The West Papuan Council of Churches says New Zealand hostage pilot Phillip Mehrtens’ life is in danger if negotiations do not take place with the West Papua Liberation Army (TPNPB).

    The council is calling on Indonesian President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo to cease military operations in West Papua and seek dialogue with TPNPB.

    Chief moderator Reverend Benny Giay said they are sending a letter to President Widodo.

    Since the kidnapping of 37-year-old pilot Phillip Mehrtens on February 7 by TPNPB local commander Egianus Kogoya, violence has escalated between the Indonesian Army and the guerrilla TPNPB, with both sides reporting military and civilian casualties as a result.

    “Egianus Kogoya could shoot the pilot,” Reverend Giay said.

    Reverend Benny Giay
    Reverend Benny Giay . . . the Indonesian government has to take a peaceful approach . . . “We are asking the Indonesian president to withdraw the military.” Image: Sastra Papua

    “In order to stop that, the Indonesian government has to take a peaceful approach,” he said.

    “We are asking the Indonesian president to withdraw the military and to allow the church to go in and to dialogue with the TPNPB for the release of the pilot.”

    Peaceful talk plan ‘ignored’
    “We know that the TPNPB leader has proposed a kind of peaceful talk, but the government has not responded, and we are asking this through our letter, the TPNPB have proposed a peaceful talk…so why can’t you [President Widodo] take it?” Rev Giay said.

    But Indonesian authorities say they are pursuing a “peaceful dialogue” to the crisis.

    Commander of the Indonesian National Armed Forces Admiral Yudo Margono told local reporters in Sulawesi last week that they were being cautious.

    Indonesia news agency Detikcom reported Admiral Margono saying on June 7: “We still prioritise [negotiations] carried out by religious leaders, community leaders and PJ regents there,” he said.

    “If we prioritise operations with the military, of course, there will be many negative impacts on public safety,” he added.

    It was a message repeated late last month by Papua Police chief Mathius Fakhiri.

    “I talked to various parties about this negotiation process including the Church, which includes the Church Council and the Bishop who will do as much as possible to negotiate with the Egianus Kogoya group to be able to release the pilot,” Fakhiri told Detikcom on May 25.

    “I opened myself to all parties, from the beginning, namely the Nduga government in collaboration with the Chief of Police and then there were also parties from Komnas HAM who offered themselves and we accepted,” Fakhiri added.

    Church leader claims Indonesia ‘not taking us seriously’
    However, Reverend Giay said the church could not mediate a dialogue unless the Indonesia military ceased its operations.

    “The Papuan police chief has agreed that church [negotiators] should go in and talk with Egianus . . . but that means the military has to be withdrawn from the area [and] that has not been done yet,” Reverend Giay said.

    “As of now, I cannot guarantee anything about church involvement because as of now the government is not taking us seriously,” he claimed.

    Both Indonesia’s military and TPNPB have confirmed shootouts in the Nduga Regency of the remote highlands of Papua.

    Indonesian authorities have confirmed the deaths of four Indonesian soldiers as a result of the fighting.

    Reuters reported two weeks ago that the TPNPB released a video of Merhtens saying he would be shot in two months if the group’s demands were not met.

    “If they [Indonesia] do not allow the church to go in and mediate, we will conclude that they are involved in the possible death of the pilot,” Reverend Giay said.

    “From our discussions here, we think the conditions of the pilot may be worsening.

    “We want to see the pilot . . . for Egianus to show us that he is okay…that is our first priority.”

    Mehrtens’ welfare ‘top priority’ for MFAT
    According to New Zealand’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs, everything is being done to try and seek Mehrtens’ release, but the details of this have been limited.

    The TPNPB maintains that New Zealand has not approached them for negotiation.

    “The welfare of the New Zealander at the heart of this situation is our top priority,” MFAT told RNZ Pacific in a statement in March.

    “We are doing everything we can to secure a peaceful resolution and the safe release of the hostage, including working closely with the Indonesian authorities and deploying New Zealand consular staff.”

    Reverend Giay said Wellington needed to pressure Jakarta into ceasing its military operations.

    “New Zealand government and the international community has to pressure the Indonesia government and military to seek a peaceful dialogue.”

    “That is only possible if the Indonesian military withdraw,” he added.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Finau Fonua and Lydia Lewis, RNZ Pacific journalists

    A researcher at Human Rights Watch in Jakarta is calling for the immediate release of the six hostages — including a New Zealand pilot — being held by a rebel group in Indonesia’s Papua region.

    The rebels in Highlands Papua are threatening to execute Susi Air pilot Phillip Mehrtens if their demands are not met.

    Five other people are also believed to have been taken hostage in the attack.

    The West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) has posted an ultimatum on social media demanding Jakarta negotiate with them over independence for the region.

    “Pilot is still alive and he will be held hostage for negotiations with Jakarta, if Jakarta is obstinate, then the pilot will be executed,” the statement read.

    “We will take the New Zealand citizen pilot as hostage and we are waiting for accountability from the Australian government, the New Zealand government, the European Union governments, and the United Nations, because for 60 years these countries have supported Indonesia to kill Indigenous Papuans.”

    Researcher Andreas Harsono knows the main spokesperson of the rebel group, Sebby Sambom, after decades of research in the field.

    Personal appeal
    He made a call to him personally to let the hostages go.

    “I call on this group to immediately release all of the hostages including the pilot — it is a crime to kidnap anyone including this pilot,” he told RNZ Pacific.

    “I do not know how to measure the seriousness of such a threat but this is a hostage situation, things could be out of control. So the best way is to negotiate and ask them to release the pilot.”

    Andreas Harsono
    Human rights researcher Andreas Harsono . . . “The best way is to negotiate and ask [the rebels] to release the pilot.” Image: Human Rights Watch/RNZ Pacific

    Harsono noted the difficulties for New Zealand attempting to negotiate with the group, particularly given their demands.

    “I don’t think it is easy or even internationally accepted to pressure the New Zealand government to negotiate for West Papuan independence from Indonesia,” he said.

    “It is way too complicated for any country in the world, including New Zealand, to negotiate the independence of this particular territory. But, of course, the Papuan people have suffered a lot and the Indonesian government should do more to end impunity and human rights abuses in West Papua.

    “But this is a hostage situation. The most important thing is to call on this group to immediately and unconditionally release all of the hostages, including the New Zealand pilot.”

    Very remote region
    Harsono said he did not know whether the passengers had been taken hostage, nor did he know if they were indigenous Papuans.

    “The area is very remote, only certain people go there, mainly construction workers, and there were killings against Indonesian workers back in 2018,” he said.

    Indonesian authorities say they are facing difficulties locating Merhtens because of the lack of telecommunications facilities in Paro district and the absence of any Indonesian military or police post in the area.

    Jubi News quotes Papua Police spokesperson Ignatius Benny Ady Prabowo, saying they were continuing to track the whereabouts of Mehrtens and were preparing to go to Paro district.

    He said that before the burning of the plane, rumours had been circulating that a rebel group had threatened 15 construction workers who were building a health centre in the district.

    New Zealand’s Prime Minister, Chris Hipkins, told Radio New Zealand: “The New Zealand embassy in Indonesia is working on the case.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Airstrikes ordered against civilian targets, destruction of thousands of buildings, millions displaced, nearly 3000 civilians murdered, more than 13,000 jailed, the country’s independent media banished, and the country locked in a deadly nationwide civil war. Myanmar civilians now ask what else must happen before they receive international support in line with Ukraine, writes Phil Thornton.

    SPECIAL REPORT: By Phil Thornton

    In the two years since Myanmar’s military seized power from the country’s elected lawmakers it has waged a war of terror against its citizens — members of the Civil Disobedience Movement, artists, poets, actors, politicians, health workers, student leaders, public servants, workers, and journalists.

    The military-appointed State Administration Council amended laws to punish anyone critical of its illegal coup or the military. International standards of freedoms — speech, expression, assembly, and association were “criminalised”.

    The Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (Burma), reported as of 30 January 2023, the military killed 2901 people and arrested another 17,492 (of which 282 were children), with 13,719 people still in detention.

    One hundred and forty three people have been sentenced to death and four have been executed since the military’s coup on 1 February 2021. Of those arrested, 176 were journalists and as many as 62 are still in jail or police detention.

    The Committee to Protect Journalists ranks Myanmar as the world’s second-highest jailers of journalists. Fear of attacks, harassment, intimidation, censorship, detainment, and threats of assassination for their reporting has driven journalists and media workers underground or to try to reach safety in neighbouring countries.

    Journalist Ye Htun Oo has been arrested, tortured, received death threats, and is now forced to seek safety outside of Myanmar. Ye Htun spoke to the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) of his torture, jailing and why he felt he had no choice, but to leave Myanmar for the insecurity of a journalist in exile.

    They came for me in the morning
    “I started as a journalist in 2007 but quit after two years because of the difficulty of working under the military. I continued to work, writing stories and poetry. In 2009 I restarted work as a freelance video and documentary maker.”

    Ye Htu said making money from journalism in Myanmar had never been easy.

    “I was lucky if I made 300,000 kyat a month (about NZ$460) — it was a lot of work, writing, editing, interviewing and filming.”

    Ye Htun’s hands, fingers and thin frame twist and turn as he takes time to return to the darkness of the early morning when woken by police and military knocking on his front door.

    “It was 2 am, the morning of 9 October 2021. We were all asleep. The knocking on the door was firm but gentle. I opened the door. Men from the police and the military’s special media investigation unit stood there — no uniforms. They’d come to arrest me.”

    Ye Htun links the visit of the police and army to his friend’s arrest the day before.

    “He had my number on his phone and when questioned told them I was a journalist. I hadn’t written anything for a while. The only reason they arrested me was because I was identified as a journalist — it was enough for them. The military unit has a list of journalists who they want to control, arrest, jail or contain.”

    Ye Htun explains how easy it is for journalists to be arrested.

    “When they arrest people…if they find a reference to a journalist or a phone number it’s enough to put you on their list.”

    After the coup, Ye Htun continued to report.

    “I was not being paid, moving around, staying in different places, following the protests. I was taking photos. I took a photo of citizens arresting police and it was published. This causes problems for the people in the photo. It also caused some people to regard me and journalists as informers — we were now in a hard place, not knowing what or who we could photograph. I decided to stop reporting and made the decision to move home. That’s when they came and arrested me.”

    In the early morning before sunrise, the police and military removed Ye Htun from his home and family and took him to a detention cell inside a military barracks.

    “They took all my equipment — computer, cameras, phone, and hard disks. The men who arrested and took me to the barracks left and others took over. Their tone changed. I was accused of being a PDF (People’s Defence Force militia).

    “Ye Htun describes how the ‘politeness’ of his captors soon evaporated, and the danger soon became a brutal reality. They started to beat me with kicks, fists, sticks and rubber batons. They just kept beating me, no questions. I was put in foot chains — ankle braces.”

    The beating of Ye Htun would continue for 25 days and the uncertainty and hurt still shows in his eyes, as he drags up the details he’s now determined to share.

    “I was interrogated by an army captain who ordered me to show all my articles — there was little to show. They made me kneel on small stones and beat me on the body — never the head as they said, ‘they needed it intact for me to answer their questions’”.

    Ye Htun explained it wasn’t just his assigned interrogators who beat or tortured him.

    “Drunk soldiers came regularly to spit, insult or threaten me with their guns or knives.”

    Scared, feared for his life
    Ye Htun is quick to acknowledge he was scared and feared for his life.

    “I was terrified. No one knew where I was. I knew my family would be worried. Everyone knows of people being arrested and then their dead, broken bodies, missing vital organs, being returned to grieving families.”

    After 25 days of torture, Ye Htun was transferred to a police jail.

    “They accused me of sending messages they had ‘faked’ and placed on my phone. I was sentenced to two years jail on 3rd November — I had no lawyer, no representative.”

    Ye Htun spoke to political prisoners during his time in jail and concluded many were behind bars on false charges.

    “Most political prisoners are there because of fake accusations. There’s no proper rule of law — the military has turned the whole country into a prison.”

    Ye Htun served over a year and five months of his sentence and was one of six journalists released in an amnesty from Pyay Jail on 4 January 2023.

    Not finished torturing
    Any respite Ye Htun or his family received from his release was short-lived, as it became apparent the military was not yet finished torturing him. He was forced to sign a declaration that if he was rearrested he would be expected to serve his existing sentence plus any new ones, and he received death threats.

    Soon after his release, the threats to his family were made.

    “I was messaged on Facebook and on other social media apps. The messages said, ‘don’t go out alone…keep your family and wife away from us…’ their treats continued every two or three days.”

    Ye Htun and his family have good cause to be concerned about the threats made against them. Several pro-military militias have openly declared on social media their intention against those opposed to the military’s control of the country.

    A pro-military militia, Thwe Thauk Apwe (Blood Brothers), specialise in violent killings designed to terrorise.

    Frontier Magazine reported in May 2022 that Thwe Thauk Apwe had murdered 14 members of the National League of Democracy political party in two weeks. The militia uses social media to boast of its gruesome killings and to threaten its targets — those opposed to military rule — PDF units, members of political parties, CDM members, independent media outlets and journalists.

    Ye Htun said fears for his wife and children’s safety forced him to leave Myanmar.

    “I couldn’t keep putting them at risk because I’m a journalist. I will continue to work, but I know I can’t do it in Myanmar until this military regime is removed.”

    Air strikes target civilians – where’s the UN?
    Award-winning documentary maker and artist, Sai Kyaw Khaing, dismayed at the lack of coverage by international and regional media on the impacts of Myanmar’s military aerial strikes on civilian targets, decided to make the arduous trip to the country’s northwest to find out.

    In the two years since the military regime took illegal control of the country’s political infrastructure, Myanmar is now engaged in a brutal, countrywide civil war.

    Civilian and political opposition to the military coup saw the formation of People Defence Force units under the banner of the National Unity Government established in April 2021 by members of Parliament elected at the 2020 elections and outlawed by the military after its coup.

    Thousands of young people took up arms and joined PDF units, trained by Ethnic Armed Organisations, to defend villages and civilians and fight the military regime. The regime vastly outnumbered and outmuscled the PDFs and EAOs with its military hardware — tanks, heavy artillery, helicopter gunships and fighter jets.

    Sai Kyaw contacted a number of international media outlets with his plans to travel deep inside the conflict zone to document how displaced people were coping with the airstrikes and burning of their villages and crops.

    Sai Kyaw said it was telling that he has yet to receive a single response of interest from any of the media he approached.

    “What’s happening in Myanmar is being ignored, unlike the conflict in Ukraine. Most of the international media, if they do report on Myanmar, want an ‘expert’ to front their stories, even better if it’s one of their own, a Westerner.”

    Deadly strike impact
    Sai Kyaw explains why what is happening on the ground needs to be explained — the impacts of the deadly airstrikes on the lives of unarmed villagers.

    “My objective is to talk to local people. How can they plant or harvest their crops during the intense fighting? How can they educate their kids or get medical help?

    “Thousands of houses, schools, hospitals, churches, temples, and mosques have been targeted and destroyed — how are the people managing to live?”

    Sai Kyaw put up his own money to finance his trip to a neighbouring country where he then made contact with people prepared to help him get to northwestern Myanmar, which was under intense attacks from the military regime.

    “It took four days by motorbike on unlit mountain dirt tracks that turned to deep mud when it rained. We also had to avoid numerous military checkpoints, military informers, and spies.”

    Sai Kyaw said that after reaching his destination, meeting with villagers, and witnessing their response to the constant artillery and aerial bombardments, their resilience astounded him.

    “These people rely on each other, when they’re bombed from their homes, people who still have a house rally around and offer shelter. They don’t have weapons to fight back, but they organise checkpoints managed by men and women.”

    Sai Kyaw said being unable to predict when an airstrike would happen took its toll on villagers.

    Clinics, schools bombed
    “You don’t know when they’re going to attack — day or night — clinics, schools, places of worship — are bombed. These are not military targets — they don’t care who they kill.”

    Sai Kyaw witnessed an aerial bombing and has the before and after film footage that shows the destruction. Rows of neat houses, complete with walls intact before the air strike are left after the attack with holes a car could drive through.

    “The unpredictable and indiscriminate attacks mean villagers are unable to harvest their crops or plant next season’s rice paddies.”

    Sai Kyaw is concerned that the lack of aid getting to the people in need of shelter, clothing, food, and medicine will cause a large-scale humanitarian crisis.

    “There’s no sign of international aid getting to the people. If there’s a genuine desire to help the people, international aid groups can do it by making contact with local community groups. It seems some of these big international aid donors are reluctant to move from their city bases in case they upset the military’s SAC [State Administration Council].”

    At the time of writing Sai Kyaw Khaing has yet to receive a reply from any of the international media he contacted.

    It’s the economy stupid
    A veteran Myanmar journalist, Kyaw Kyaw*, covered a wide range of stories for more than 15 years, including business, investment, and trade. He told IFJ he was concerned the ban on independent media, arrests of journalists, gags and access restrictions on sources meant many important stories went unreported.

    “The military banning of independent media is a serious threat to our freedom of speech. The military-controlled state media can’t be relied on. It’s well documented, it’s mainly no news or fake news overseen by the military’s Department of Propaganda.”

    Kyaw lists the stories that he explains are in critical need of being reported — the cost of consumer goods, the collapse of the local currency, impact on wages, lack of education and health care, brain drain as people flee the country, crops destroyed and unharvested and impact on next year’s yield.

    Kyaw is quick to add details to his list.

    “People can’t leave the country fast enough. There are more sellers than buyers of cars and houses. Crime is on the rise as workers’ real wages fall below the poverty line. Garment workers earned 4800 kyat, the minimum daily rate before the military’s coup. The kyat was around 1200 to the US dollar — about four dollars. Two years after the coup the kyat is around 2800 — workers’ daily wage has dropped to half, about US$2 a day.”

    Kyaw Kyaw’s critique is compelling as he explains the cost of everyday consumer goods and the impact on households.

    “Before the coup in 2021, rice cost a household, 32,000 kyat for around 45kg. It is now selling at 65,000 kyat and rising. Cooking oil sold at 3,000 kyat for 1.6kg now sells for over double, 8,000kyat.

    “It’s the same with fish, chicken, fuel, and medicine – family planning implants have almost doubled in cost from 25,000 kyat to now selling at 45,000 kyat.”

    Humanitarian crisis potential
    Kyaw is dismayed that the media outside the country are not covering stories that have a huge impact on people’s daily struggle to feed and care for their families and have the real potential for a massive humanitarian crisis in the near future.

    “The focus is on the revolution, tallies of dead soldiers, politics — all important, but journalists and local and international media need to report on the hidden costs of the military’s coup. Local media outlets need to find solutions to better cover these issues.”

    Kyaw stresses international governments and institutions — ASEAN, UK, US, China, and India — need to stop talking and take real steps to remove and curb the military’s destruction of the country.

    “In two years, they displaced over a million people, destroyed thousands of houses and religious buildings, attacked schools and hospitals — killing students and civilians — what is the UNSC waiting for?”

    An independent think tank, the Institute for Strategy and Policy – Myanmar, and the UN agency for refugees confirm Kyaws Kyaw’s claims.The Institute for Strategy and Policy reports “at least 28,419 homes and buildings were torched or destroyed…in the aftermath of the coup between 1 February 2021, and 15 July 2022.”

    The UN agency responsible for refugees, the UNHCR, estimates the number of displaced people in Myanmar is a staggering 1,574,400. Since the military coup and up to January 23, the number was 1,244,000 people displaced.

    While the world’s media and governments focus their attention and military aid on Ukraine, Myanmar’s people continue to ask why their plight continues to be ignored.

    Phil Thornton is a journalist and senior adviser to the International Federation of Journalists in Southeast Asia. This article was first published by the IFJ Asia-Pacific blog and is republished with the author’s permission. Thornton is also a contributor to Asia Pacific Report.

    *Name has been changed as requested for security concerns.

  • COMMENTARY: By Lynley Tulloch

    There is a dangerous anger on rapid boil at the protest in Wellington. It is a stew of dispossession and unrest alongside various delusional beliefs and violent threats.

    Two weeks into the protest and the police have had to endure human waste and acid thrown at them; a car driven into them; threats of violence; chants of “shame on you”; accusations of police brutality; physical attacks and injuries.

    Meanwhile, the illegal occupiers (who refused to move their cars to a free car park) claim peace and love as the Ministry of Health reported today a record 2846 new community cases of covid-19 with 143 people in hospital with the virus.

    This “protest” was from the beginning organised in part and spread by QAnon (a conspiracy group that want to hang the government literally) alongside religious groups. Also in the mix are white supremacists (Nationalist Front).

    It was joined by “everyday people” annoyed with mandates they don’t want to live with.

    Well, if these “everyday people” can lower their standards to stand shoulder to shoulder with violent extremists all I can say is, “shame on you”.

    Deputy Leader of the House, Labour’s Michael Wood recently spoke of these threats at Parliament: “There is a river of violence and menace. There is a river of anti-Semitism. There is a river of Islamophobia. There is a river of threats to people who work in this place and our staff.”

    A recent Stuff article reported that a “Labour MP says protesters have been waiting at the doors of her office at night, and are telling politicians they will be ‘lynched, hung or kidnapped’”.


    Deputy Speaker Michael Wood speaking in Parliament on February 17. Video: NZ Parliament

    These underlying threads of violence give the protest its bite, if not its bark. The protest in Wellington was inspired by the truckers’ convoy in Canada and the occupation of Ottawa.

    We know that this was not an organic uprising of truckles, but was rather inspired by QAnon conspiracy theorists.

    Conspiracy far right media platform Counterspin in New Zealand was central in the formation and viral spread of the Aotearoa convoy,

    It is also, astoundingly, a protest that is preaching aroha (love) and peace. This is at odds with the Trump-loving, QAnon inspired cesspit of violence. QAnon believes that the government is full of elite Satan-worshipping paedophiles in government, business and media.

    They believe that politicians and journalists will be executed in a day of reckoning.

    That is why “hang ‘em high” was chalked on the steps to Parliament in the first days of the protest. Many people at this protest want to see politicians and media people executed.

    This protest also has the support of white supremacists with swastikas chalked on a statue in the early days.

    This disgusting far-right, anti-establishment hatred has no place in Aotearoa. Yet here it is at a protest supported by thousands on the Parliament lawn.

    I have protested at many events over the years in Aotearoa in the name of animal rights. Never would I stand alongside people who preach violence. And in all cases police behaviour toward myself and my fellow protestors has been exemplary and respectful.

    The protest was ill-thought out in direction, leaderless, and doomed to failure. Their demands cannot possibly be met in a time of global pandemic that has brought the world quite literally to its knees.

    And yet as the days tick by, yoga classes spring up alongside gardens. Food stalls and dancing, a concert, love and freedom grow like fairy tales.

    It’s all a fairy tale. Make no mistake. This protest may preach peace, but its bones are evil.

    — Lynley Tulloch

    It’s all a fairy tale. Make no mistake. This protest may preach peace, but its bones are evil.

    So where to go from here? There is no end in sight for this drama. The protesters are revelling.

    The government can’t move them. Police can’t move them. The army can’t move them.

    Ironically, as suggested by ex-Labour party president Mike Williams, it will be the covid virus itself that will bring them down. And that is one little virus that doesn’t care about threats of violence.

    The only thing it will take notice of is a vaccine and a mask, and those are in short supply on Parliament grounds right now.

    The virus doesn’t care if you are a child, or elderly, or immune-compromised or dangerously deluded. It doesn’t give a care in the world about your rights. It just goes and sticks its spikes right into you joyfully.

    And so, Mike Williams is probably right. And therein lies the biggest irony of this whole protest.

    Dr Lynley Tulloch is an educational academic and also writes on animal rights, veganism, early childhood, feminist issues, environmentalism, and sustainable development.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • COMMENTARY: By Gavin Ellis

    It is common practice for journalists to share contact details and locations in hostile environments such as war zones. Something is very wrong when news organisations in New Zealand share those details about their staff covering a story in downtown Wellington.

    Stuff’s head of news Mark Stevens disclosed last Friday that “competing media have shared contacts of journalists in the field to provide a safety network if things get dangerous”.

    It followed incidents during the “Convoy 2022” protest in the grounds of Parliament when journalists were abused, spat on, and assaulted. A Stuff reporter was pushed and shoved and a protester abused a Newshub news crew member and threatened to destroy his video camera.

    Protesters told reporters to “watch your backs on the street tonight” and that they would be “executed” for their reporting. Placards read “Media is the Virus”, “Fake News”, and accused journalists of treason.

    One placard parodied a covid-19 health message: “UNITE AGAINST MEDIA 22”.

    Anti-media sentiment is nothing new. The 2020 Acumen-Edelman Trust Barometer showed New Zealanders scored media poorly — and below the global average — in terms of competence and ethics and only 28 percent thought they served the interests of everyone equally and fairly.

    Those results did make me wonder what news media Kiwis were actually seeing and hearing but, in such things, perception is everything.

    Journalists reasonably thick-skinned
    But journalists are reasonably thick-skinned: They can take criticism and even insults. I doubt there is a reporter in the country who hasn’t been on the receiving end. Even death threats are something that goes with the territory.

    I’ve received a few in my career. Most were of the “Drop Dead” or “You don’t deserve to be here” variety and only one was a credible threat. That one could have endangered others and was not specifically directed at me (it was reported to the police).

    However, something has changed.

    A reporter I hold in high regard told me last week that he had received more death threats in the last three months of 2021 than in the previous three decades. I’m not going to name him because to do so will simply increase the likelihood of further attempts at intimidation.

    He told me reporters had become the focus of a great deal of anger and resentment:

    “A few recent events I’ve covered have seen members of the anti-crowd deliberately moving to within a foot of me, maskless, and breathing or coughing at me, or trying to physically rub against me. That’s not an uncommon experience for those out in the field. And there’s the odd occasion, too, where the threat of physical violence is such that I’ve needed to back-peddle quickly.”

    We are seeing a migration of behaviour. The US Press Freedom Tracker recorded 439 physical attacks on journalists in that country in 2020 (election year) and a further 142 in 2021. That compared with 41 in 2018 and 2019.

    Tightened security
    Last June the BBC tightened security around its staff after an escalation in the frequency and severity of abuse from anti-vaxxers. During Sydney anti-mandate protests last September, 7News reporter Paul Dowsley was sprayed with urine and hit in the head by a thrown drink can.

    Then, in November, it came here. A 1News camera operator on the West Coast graphically recorded a foul-mouthed middle-aged man carrying an anti-vaxx placard who shoved him backwards and tried to dislodge his camera: “Do you want this [expletive] camera smashed in your face, you [expletive]?”

    The current anti-vaxx movement in Canada has generated similar behaviour. Brent Jolly of the Canadian Association of Journalists said several reporters covering the trucker convoy in Ottawa have said they have been harassed on the scene and online and feel like they have a “target on their backs”.

    Evan Solomon, a reporter for CTV, told the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) that he had a full can of beer thrown at his head. It missed but exploded inside a camera case. All CTV crews now have a security person with them when filming outside, no longer use lights or tripods, and in one province have removed CTV identification from vehicles.

    In Ottawa people have asked reporters to remove their names from stories because they are getting death threats. Broadcasting journalists have been targeted – probably because their presence is more obvious – although one print reporter told the CPJ that she does not wear a mask during protests because it draws attention to her (she is triple vaccinated), does not go into protest crowds at night, and liaises with other reporters to advise current locations and risks.

    None of this should suggest a coherent and organised anti-media campaign is sweeping the globe. We are seeing something that is a good deal more orchestrated than organised, in which the anti-vaccination movement is no more than a rallying point, and the media are a target because they are messengers for inconvenient truth.

    The proof of that became apparent while I was watching the live feed of the protest in the grounds of Parliament.

    ‘End the Mandate’ signs
    A string of images spelled out how incoherent it was. There were printed “End the Mandate” signs, “My body, my choice” t-shirts, a loony sign saying natural immunity was 99.6 per cent effective, Canadian flags, a figure in Black Power regalia wearing a full-face plastic mask, someone wearing a paramilitary “uniform”, and a man waving the ultimate conspiracy theory sign: “Epstein didn’t kill himself”.

    Then there were the actions of the protesters. A few were gesticulating to police and the media, uttering things I could not (and arguable did not want) to hear. Many more were gyrating to rhythms playing over loudspeakers, beaten out on the plastic barriers on the forecourt, or generated in their own heads. It was a sort of group euphoria.

    And in a perverse sort of way I think that is what is behind the attitude toward media. 1News reporter Kristin Hall had been reporting the protest and wrote a commentary on the broadcaster’s website. In it she said that despite their varying opinions and causes, the protesters were “united in their distaste for the press”. Then she gave an example of just how incoherent this united front can be:

    “‘You’re all liars,’ a man told me today. When I asked if he could be more specific, he said he doesn’t consume mainstream media. People have asked me why I’m not covering the protests while I’m in the middle of interviewing them.”

    Unfortunately, it is this lack of logic that makes abuse of media so hard to counter. Media cannot make peace with leaders of a movement because it is a moving feast and the orchestrators are hidden from sight. It cannot be remedied simply by stating facts because these people accept only what supports and ennobles their own disinformation-fuelled world view, a view fed by inflammatory social media that conflates then amplifies discontent on a global scale.

    Nor can media offer immediate solutions to pent-up anger aggravated by two years of pandemic.

    What media can — and must — do is prevent contagion. They need an inoculation campaign to ensure that the malaise infecting a small group of people does not spread.

    Duty of care a priority
    Mark Stevens alluded to cooperation between media to keep staff safe and that duty of care is a priority. However, media organisations need to go further. They must, on the one hand, earn the trust of a population that does not generally hold them in high regard. It is best done by demonstrating that journalists are following best professional practice and that means quality reporting and presentation.

    On the other hand, they must ensure that the community understands that journalists have a right (indeed, a duty) to report on events in its midst — irrespective of whether or not its members agree with what they are being told.

    The United States has an excellent track record in openly discussing professional standards and the role of media in society. We should take some leaves from their book and bring the community more into the conversation.

    That is challenging, because the problem does not lie solely with the media but with the system of democracy of which it is a vital part.

    Rod Oram, in a commentary on the Newsroom website last weekend, discussed the need for democratic reform:

    “We have really struggled, though, to conceive, plan and execute deep systemic change, let alone get as many people as possible involved in that and benefiting from it. But that’s the only way we’ll tackle our deeply rooted economic, social and environmental failures.”

    That democratic reform must include the media rethinking how it engages with the public. They must introduce open industry-wide governance to replace anachronistic and sometimes self-serving structures. They must demonstrate their commitment to accuracy, fairness and balance. They must find new ways to be inclusive and pluralistic. They must secure recognition as trusted independent sources of verified facts.

    Calling out manipulation
    That will take time. Meanwhile the problem of media abuse will continue. The short-term solutions will include calling out those who seek to manipulate a minority to destabilise our society. Here are two good examples:

    The short term also requires media organisations to continue to meet that duty of care toward their staff. The Committee to Protect Journalists has developed a four-part “Safety Kit” to provide journalists and newsrooms with basic safety information on physical, digital and psychological safety. It’s a good starting point for any journalist.

    Of course, journalists also need to keep matters in perspective. The threats represented by a group of disorganised protesters remains relatively small and, with the right training, journalists can judge the level of risk they face in most situations.

    When it came to death threats, for example, I soon learned that I could bin the ones that were written in crayon.

    Dr Gavin Ellis holds a PhD in political studies. He is a media consultant and researcher. A former editor-in-chief of The New Zealand Herald, he has a background in journalism and communications – covering both editorial and management roles – that spans more than half a century. Dr Ellis publishes a blog called Knightly Views where this commentary was first published and it is republished by Asia Pacific Report with permission.

    • Read the full Gavin Ellis article here:

    Copycat media abuse from ragtag bag of protesters

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • New Delhi, January 27, 2022 – Indian authorities must immediately conduct a swift and thorough investigation into threats made to Mumbai-based Washington Post columnist and freelance journalist Rana Ayyub, the Committee to Protect Journalists said Thursday.

    Ayyub, who has long been a victim of online trolling and threats, told CPJ that she began receiving an onslaught of threats on Twitter after she tweeted her criticism of the Saudi Arabia government’s role in the ongoing Yemen war on January 22.

    Since then, she has received over 26,000 tweets in response, including many rape and death threats, from social media users who posted in support of the Saudi government and India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which she has criticized in recent columns in The Washington Post.

    “No journalist should have to suffer the intense online harassment and threats repeatedly directed against Rana Ayyub,” said Steven Butler, CPJ’s Asia program coordinator, in Washington, D.C. “Indian authorities must take action against anyone who has threatened violence against Ayyub and ensure her safety.”

    On Wednesday, the news website Scoop Beats published a video that included a doctored photo of a tweet purportedly by Ayyub, saying, “I hate India and I hate Indians,” according to the journalist and a screenshot of the video, which CPJ reviewed. Scoop Beets later took down that video, but Ayyub told CPJ that the threats against her increased after it was published.

    Ayyub filed a complaint to the Mumbai police against Scoop Beats, which CPJ reviewed; the complaint accuses the website of spreading false information about her and inciting threats.

    CPJ emailed and messaged Scoop Beats founders Divya Gandotra Tandon and Akhilendra Sahu on Twitter for comment, but did not receive any replies. BJP spokesperson Syed Zafar Islam did not respond to CPJ’s emailed request for comment.

    Critics of Ayyub in India claim that she is sympathetic to Yemeni militants who orchestrated a rocket attack on Saudi Arabia on December 20 in which two Indian nationals were killed; she told CPJ that her criticism of the Saudi government is solely based on its role in the Yemen war.

    Social media harassment of Ayyub had included recent incidents when she was subjected to doxxing by an anti-Muslim app and was on a list of women journalists who have been subjected to targeted trolling allegedly by social media users sympathetic to the BJP. 


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Erik Crouch.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • ANALYSIS: By Jack Heinemann, University of Canterbury

    Two high-profile University of Auckland academics raised important questions about academic freedom with their complaint to the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) that their employer had failed its duty of care to them.

    Associate Professor Siouxsie Wiles and Professor Shaun Hendy have become well known for their work explaining the science behind covid-19 and guiding the public and government response.

    But not everyone has agreed with that response or valued their contribution, and the academics have been threatened by what they have called “a small but venomous sector of the public”. They argued the university had not adequately responded to their safety concerns and requests for protection.

    The case has now been referred to the Employment Court and the outcome for all parties remains unknown.

    My focus is on the initial determination by the ERA, which referred to a letter from the university to Wiles and Hendy in August 2021 that urged them “to keep their public commentary to a minimum and suggested they take paid leave to enable them ‘to minimise any social media comments at present’.”

    According to the ERA, this advice was “apparently given after [the university] received recommendations from its legal advisors to amend its policies so as to ‘not require’ its employees to provide public commentary, in order to limit its potential liability for online harassment.”

    The ERA also noted the university “says that the applicants are not ‘expected’ or required to provide public commentary on COVID-19 as part of their employment or roles with the respondent, but it acknowledges they are entitled to do so.”

    This issue is central to my concerns about academic freedom.

    Freedom and risk
    The academics argued that the university is statutorily required to “accept a role as critic and conscience of society” – as is set out under section 268 of the Education and Training Act 2020.

    Universities routinely fulfil this role when academic staff and students state controversial or unpopular opinions and the results of their independent scholarship. Asking academics to step back from those roles to avoid risk seems to acknowledge that the threat derives from them doing their work.

    I also fail to see how it would mitigate risk. An electrician who tried to mitigate the risk of electrocution by spending less time around wires hasn’t actually reduced the risk of electrocution when doing their job. They’ve just reduced the amount of time they are doing their job.

    The Auckland academics are not the first to receive threats because of their “critic and conscience” activities. In the US, my former boss Dr Anthony Fauci says he, too, has received death threats from members of the public because of his work on the pandemic.

    Less visible but still damaging threats or derogatory comments can come from within the university community, too. Systemic discrimination based on gender and race is well documented in academia. And increasingly, there are conflicts arising out of commercial interests in public research organisations.

    Elsewhere it can be even more dangerous, such as the state-sponsored attacks on academics reported in Turkey. As a fellow scientist, I empathise with colleagues forced into the spotlight by virtue of their expertise or conscience.

    Uses and limits of institutional power
    Universities provide an important protection of academic freedom by not using their power as employers to stifle opinion. But it’s not enough. Universities should be more active in enabling academics to fulfil their role as critic and conscience of society so that, as expected by parliament, academic freedom is “preserved and enhanced”.

    Prof Shaun Hendy
    Professor Shaun Hendy … well known for his work explaining the science behind covid-19 and guiding the public and government response. Image: The Conversation/Getty

    But there are also limits. No university in Aotearoa New Zealand has the scale to protect its students and staff from the concerted actions of a hostile country, a multi-billion dollar multinational company, or even the whispers of co-conspirators at coffee breaks during the ranking of grants.

    What universities should do cannot exceed what they can do.

    A coalition of government, universities, unions, staff and students needs to work together to redefine what can be done.

    The government could reaffirm its commitment to critic-and-conscience activities by creating or re-purposing funding explicitly for these. Accountability will follow because universities would be required to expose that activity to public oversight.

    The expectations of the university and the government to preserve and enhance academic freedom should become a normal conversation.

    The risk is governments might want to influence what does and does not constitute being a critic and conscience of society, and use funding to stifle criticism of its policies. While this risk exists already, the temptation to constrain academic freedom could become stronger.

    But balance would be provided by using the United Nations’ higher education declaration as a benchmark, through the transparency of the funding accountability exercise, and the declared precondition the funding allocation process be subject to ongoing and open scrutiny by university staff and students.

    Accepting risk with freedom
    Universities would be expected to use their additional resources to enable students and staff, as safely as possible, to use their academic freedom for public service.

    Jurisdictional responsibilities could be negotiated between universities and government so that, where appropriate, a threat requiring more than campus security would be covered by the country’s police or defence resources.

    But students and staff have some responsibilities, too. The university community cannot and should not leave its own protection to others. It needs to take a greater role in self-policing prejudice, privilege and conflicts of interest within the academic community itself.

    Confronting the ultimate holders of power within their own academies and professional bodies will be the most painful action for members. But it would be worse for the community to fail in this and therefore do less as the critic and conscience of society.

    If the use of academic freedom did not create risk, parliament would not have needed to legislate for its protection. But that risk should not be shouldered by Wiles and Hendy, or anyone else, alone.The Conversation

    Dr Jack Heinemann is professor of molecular biology and genetics at the University of Canterbury. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • SPECIAL REPORT: By Joyce McClure in Guam

    I spent five years as the lone journalist on the remote Pacific island of Yap. During that time I was harassed, spat at, threatened with assassination and warned that I was being followed.

    The tyres on my car were slashed late one night.

    There was also pressure on the political level. The chiefs of the traditional Council of Pilung (COP) asked the state legislature to throw me out of the country as a “persona non grata” claiming that my journalism “may be disruptive to the state environment and/or to the safety and security of the state”.

    During a public hearing of the Yap state legislature in September 2021, 14 minutes of the 28-minute meeting was spent complaining about an article of mine that reported on the legislature’s initially unsuccessful attempt to impeach the governor.

    One politician then posted about me on his Facebook page, under which a member of the public posted a comment saying I should be assassinated.

    American Bill Jaynes, editor of the Kaselehlie Press in Pohnpei, one of Yap’s sister states in the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), has had his share of death threats over the years, too.

    Several death threats
    “In the 15 or so years I’ve been at this desk I have had several death threats,” he said.

    “Early on in my tenure, some angry individual carved a request for me to perform an act of physical impossibility into the hood of my car which then rusted for posterity. Most of that was during the early days before I came to be trusted to view things from an FSM rather than a foreigner’s point of view and to handle things factually rather than sensationally.”

    Freedom of the press is included in both the FSM and the Yap State Constitution, but as Leilani Reklai, publisher and editor of the Island Times newspaper in Palau and president of the Palau Media Council, says: “Freedom of the press in the constitution is pretty on paper but not always a reality.”

    These incidents are shocking, but sadly are not isolated. Journalists in the Pacific face imprisonment, loss of employment and banishment from their homes.

    “While there might not be assassinations, murders, gagging, torture and ‘disappearances’ of journalists in Pacific island states, threats, censorship and a climate of self-censorship are commonplace,” professor David Robie, founding editor of Pacific Journalism Review, wrote in a 2019 article for The Conversation.

    A Fijian journalist, who asked to remain anonymous, said that after he posed questions to a politician during a public forum, the politician replied that he knew where the reporter lived. The following day, the reporter’s car was broken into.

    Soon after, the reporter was told that if he didn’t stop being critical, he would be kicked out of his job “and can go bag groceries instead” and he was evicted from his housing. The reporter believes all of these incidents stemmed from the questions he asked of the politician.

    “Within one week my life changed completely,” he said. “I do not see a future for me or any other journalist who is curious and questioning to make a career in journalism in Fiji.”

    Fiji ranked 55th in world
    According to the Reporters Without Borders’ 2021 World Press Freedom Index, Fiji is ranked as 55th out of 179.

    The index highlights the “draconian” Media Industry Development Decree, introduced in 2010 and turned into law in 2018. “Those who violate this law’s vaguely-worded provisions face up to two years in prison. The sedition laws, with penalties of up to seven years in prison, are also used to foster a climate of fear and self-censorship,” said Reporters Without Borders.

    In 2018, senior journalist Scott Waide of Papua New Guinea was suspended by EMTV after the airing of his report critical of the government for purchasing 40 luxury Maseratis and three Bentleys to drive attendees during the APEC conference.

    Reinstated after a public and media outcry, Waide stated during an interview on ABC’s Pacific Beat programme: “Increasingly, not just EMTV, but nearly every other media organisation in Papua New Guinea has been interfered with by their boards or with politicians, or various other players in society.

    “They’re doing it with impunity. It’s a trend that’s very dangerous for democracy.”

    Daniel Bastard, Asia-Pacific director of Reporters Without Borders, said the situation is complicated by how small and connected many Pacific nations are.

    “The fact is that political leaders are also economic bosses so there’s a nexus. It’s symptomatic of the small journalistic communities in the Pacific islands that need to deal with the political community to get access to information. They have to be careful when they criticise knowing the government can cut advertising, publicity, etc. There’s still a strong level of intimidation.”

    While there are particular dangers faced by local journalists, foreign reporters living in the Pacific are not safe either.

    Denied renewal of work permit
    Canadian Dan McGarry, former media director of the Vanuatu Daily Post and a resident of the island nation for nearly 20 years, was denied renewal of his work permit in 2019. The reason given was that his job should be held by a local citizen.

    But McGarry said he believed it was politically motivated due to his reporting on “Chinese influence” in the small nation. He was then denied re-entry to Vanuatu after ironically attending a forum on press freedom in Brisbane.

    Regional and international news organisations came to his defence and the court granted McGarry re-entry, but the newspaper’s appeal to have his work permit renewed is ongoing.

    I have written about some sensitive and difficult topics and like to think of myself as pretty fearless. In 2018 I wrote about illegal fishing by Chinese commercial fishing boats around the Outer Island of Fedrai. That coverage resulted in the expulsion of the fishing vessel and significant political consequences.

    I’ve written about issues in the customs and immigration processes in FSM, that were potentially jeopardising tourism to Yap, which is so important to so many people’s livelihoods, and also about a huge and controversial proposed resort that would have seen thousands and thousands of Chinese tourists flown in to that tiny island on charter flights.

    These stories matter and just because some Pacific nations are small and remote does not mean that they do not need or deserve the scrutiny of a free press.

    But eventually, the threats to my safety were too much to handle. I spent too much time looking over my shoulder, living behind locked doors and never going out alone after dark.

    In mid-2021, I moved to Guam for greater peace of mind where I am continuing to write about this largely invisible, but crucial part of the world.

    Joyce McClure is a freelance journalist based in Guam. This article was first published by The Guardian’s Pacific Project and has been republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Rep. Ilhan Omar plays a voicemail containing a death threat during a news conference about Islamophobia on Capitol Hill on November 30, 2021, in Washington, D.C.

    On Tuesday, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minnesota) shared audio of a harrowing death threat she received after a video of far-right Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colorado) making Islamophobic comments about her was posted and amplified online.

    Omar played the voicemail — which was laced with profanities and racist slurs — during a press conference in the Capitol aimed at urging the GOP to take action against the Islamophobia within their party. The lawmaker said she received the voicemail shortly after finishing a phone call with Boebert on Monday, in which the extremist Republican refused to apologize for her comments and instead doubled down on her bigoted attacks.

    During the short portion of the voicemail that Omar played, the anonymous caller made several threats on her life. “We see you Muslim and [n*****] bitch. We know what you’re up to. You’re all about taking over our country,” the caller said, referring to hateful and false conspiracy theories. “Don’t worry, there’s plenty that will love the opportunity to take you off the face of this fucking earth.”

    “You fucking Muslim piece of shit,” the caller continued. “You jihadist. We know what you are. You’re a fucking traitor. You will not live much longer, bitch. I can almost guarantee you that.”

    Members of any party should find threats to a lawmaker’s life unacceptable, Omar said. “Condemning this should not be a partisan issue,” she went on. “This is about our basic humanity and fundamental rights of religious freedom.”

    During her tenure as a representative, the progressive lawmaker has received and reported hundreds of threats on her life. These threats often spike after Republican attacks, as they did after Boebert’s attack this week, she said.

    While speaking in the Capitol, Omar shared her experience facing Islamophobia as she sought and gained public office. On her first day as a representative, Steve King of Iowa, a Republican representative at the time, implied that she might have explosives with her because of her faith.

    “The truth is, is that Islamophobia pervades our culture, our politics, and even policy decisions. Cable news hosts, leading politicians in the Republican party routinely espouse hateful rhetoric about a religion that includes a diverse group of more than a billion peaceful worshipers around the world,” Omar said.

    She went on to point out harmful stereotypes about Muslims, including that Muslims want to take over the country and — most pervasively — that all Muslims are terrorists. When Boebert and other political officials spew such rhetoric, Omar said, “it is not just an attack on me. It is an attack on millions of American Muslims across this country.”

    “We cannot pretend that this hate speech from leading politicians doesn’t have real consequences,” she went on, pointing to deadly attacks on mosques and Muslim families, as well as growing Islamophobic vitriol in the U.S.

    The lawmaker concluded her press conference by calling on Republican leaders to condemn and take action against Islamophobia within the party. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-California) has so far remained silent on the issue, standing by as his members wage hateful and dangerous aggression against Omar. Even as more videos of Boebert implying that Omar is a terrorist have been unearthed, Republican leaders refuse to take action.

    While some Democrats like Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-New York) are publicly calling for Boebert to be formally punished, Democratic leaders have said that they’re still contemplating the path forward. “We’re considering what action ought to be taken,” House Majority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland) told reporters.

    In the voicemail shared by Omar, the caller repeated some of the bigoted language used by Boebert and other far-right politicians. Boebert referred to Omar as being part of the “jihad squad,” a hateful nickname for progressive lawmakers dubbed by Republican politicians. The use of the word “traitor” has also been pervasive among the right, with another death threat caller using the word to describe a Republican lawmaker who voted with Democrats on the infrastructure bill earlier this month.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Rep. Paul Gosar is seen during a House Natural Resources Committee hearing in Washington, D.C., on July 28, 2020.

    “Censure is important but not enough,” said a leader at women’s rights group UltraViolet on Wednesday after the U.S. House of Representatives voted to censure Rep. Paul Gosar over an animated video he posted depicting the murder of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and violence against President Joe Biden.

    “Anyone who shares content of themselves murdering a coworker on social media would be fired without hesitation in any other workplace,” said Bridget Todd, communications director at UltraViolet. “There should be no difference in Congress.”

    The Arizona Republican’s violent video has spurred widespead backlash and 15,000 people have signed a petition organized by UltraViolet urging Gosar’s expulsion from Congress.

    The House voted to censure the congressman in a vote of 216 to 203, stripping him of his positions on the Committee on Oversight and Reform and the Committee on Natural Resources.

    Many members took to the House floor to express their condemnation of Gosar’s actions, including Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).

    “Rep. Gosar’s tweets depicting the murder of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and violence against President Biden are horrific. Social media platforms are often toxic places for women of color as is,” said Todd. “Rep. Gosar’s perpetuation of violence against Rep. Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter merely adds fuel to an already raging fire of promoting violence against women on social media.”

    Rights group Common Cause is also calling for the removal of Gosar from office and sent a letter to every member of the House on Wednesday demanding his expulsion and a more extensive investigation into his conduct.

    The letter lambasted the Arizona congressman’s actions as “reprehensible” and warned that “dangerous and incendiary social media posts like Rep. Gosar’s can spur real-world violence.”

    “You must reject the normalization of political violence and threats and recognize them as the extreme dangers to our democratic institutions and ideals,” wrote Common Cause president Karen Hobert Flynn.

    After the vote, Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, applauded the House decision, saying: “Today’s vote to censure Congressman Gosar and remove him from serving on committees is an essential first step towards accountability. Rep. Gosar’s unacceptable behavior cannot be met with silence as he explicitly invokes and threatens violence against a fellow member of Congress and the president of the United States.”

    This post has been updated with comment from Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.).

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Rep. Fred Upton speaks during the Problem Solvers Caucus press conference in the Capitol on February 11, 2020.

    As the GOP condemns party members who voted for the infrastructure bill in last week’s House vote, Republican Rep. Fred Upton (Michigan) has shared a voicemail he received over his “yes” vote from an angry caller who threatened his life.

    The message, which was obtained by The Detroit News, is riddled with profanities and expresses vitriol over Upton’s vote. “I hope you die. I hope everybody in your fucking family dies,” the caller says, before wishing death on Upton’s staff. According to The Detroit News, the caller is from South Carolina — outside of Upton’s state.

    Within the 30-second voicemail, the caller refers to Upton as a “traitor” multiple times, echoing language from a post by right-wing extremist Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Georgia), who called him and the 12 other GOP members who voted for the bill “traitors.”

    Upton says that he’s gotten several death threats and over 1,000 calls to his office since Greene shared his number on Twitter and encouraged her followers to contact the members of Congress. In response to hearing about the voicemail, the Georgia lawmaker dubiously claimed not to condone death threats before posting Upton’s phone number on Twitter for a second time, appearing to encourage her followers to send even more death threats.

    Upton says that threats have been pouring into his office ever since he voted to impeach Donald Trump in January. Numerous Republican representatives reported getting death threats directly before the impeachment vote, and some even said they felt they had to vote against impeachment because of the calls and voicemails threatening their lives.

    Other Republicans have also expressed frustration over the infrastructure vote, condemning the Republicans who voted for the extremely watered-down infrastructure bill that was negotiated by members of their own party. Some conservatives like Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colorado) have called for punishing the members who supported the legislation by stripping them of committee assignments or mounting primary challenges against them, presumably by someone further to the right.

    This is all despite the fact that the infrastructure bill was negotiated specifically to appease Republicans and Democrats sympathetic to their cause, like conservative Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin (West Virginia). The bill seeks to mildly improve infrastructure like roads and highways — a goal previously championed by Trump himself. Of course, the far right Republicans are likely upset over party members backing any measure supported by the Biden administration.

    Death threats and harassment have been prevalent among the far right for years. Last year, right-wingers threatened poll workers, government agencies and left-wing protesters. It’s not uncommon for progressive lawmakers to get death threats or be harassed. But concerningly, encouraging harassment appears to be an increasingly popular far right strategy to threaten political opponents and whip party members in order — and the tactic has recently been employed by members of Congress themselves.

    Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York) is a common target of harassment; at least one of the far right militants who attacked the Capitol in January stated that they wanted to “assassinate AOC.” This week, however, Ocasio-Cortez was the recipient of what appears to be a violent threat from a fellow member of Congress: Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Arizona).

    Earlier this week, Gosar tweeted a video depicting an animated version of him killing Ocasio-Cortez. But although the New York lawmaker often gets threatened by members of Congress, there has never been any consequences for this behavior.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • New York, October 21, 2021 – Authorities in Uzbekistan should swiftly investigate threats received by employees of the U.S. Congress-funded broadcaster Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and ensure that they can work safely, the Committee to Protect Journalists said today.

    On October 16, anonymous users of the Telegram messaging app sent dozens of death threats to staff members of RFE/RL’s Uzbek service, Radio Ozodlik, according to reports by Radio Ozodlik and RFE/RL.

    Over the course of about 30 minutes, staffers received messages threatening beheadings and sexual assault, accompanied with pornographic collages featuring images of the outlet’s employees.

    Many of the images appeared to have been created by the same person or group, as they featured an identical caption stating, “Ozodlik’s real goal is to raise a rebellion, to disrupt peace, to discredit our president,” the outlet wrote.

    Uzbekistan’s presidential elections are scheduled for October 24. This year, Ozodlik has published a series of high-profile investigations into the Uzbek government, and particularly into President Shavkat Mirziyoyev and his family’s wealth.

    “The unprecedented and repugnant threats made to employees of RFE/RL’s Uzbek service demand a clear response from Uzbek authorities,” said Gulnoza Said, CPJ’s Europe and Central Asia Program coordinator, in New York. “No journalist should have to work in the face of such threats, and the Uzbek government should take immediate steps to investigate these threats’ origins and hold those responsible to account.”

    In its report, Radio Ozodlik wrote that coordinated online attacks were a “regular occurrence” when it published critical articles and videos about senior government officials and the president and his family. Commentors have previously accused the outlet of spreading false information, slandering Mirziyoyev and fomenting disorder, it stated. However, the number of death threats received on October 16 was unprecedented, the outlet reported.

    Radio Ozodlik Telegram specialist Andrei Soshnikov told the outlet that while the accounts posting the threats could belong to real individuals, they were more likely to be part of an organized spam network.

    Radio Ozodlik’s entire staff has been based in the Czech Republic capital of Prague since 2005, when it was forced to close its Tashkent bureau after reporting on a massacre by Uzbek security forces in May that year, according to its website.

    President Mirziyoyev has unblocked news websites including BBC Uzbek, Voice of America, and Deutsche Welle during his tenure, but RFE/RL’s Uzbek service has remained blocked in the country, and its requests for accreditation have gone unanswered, the outlet wrote.

    In a statement passed to CPJ by Radio Ozodlik, RFE/RL President Jamie Fly described the threats as “despicable” and called on the Uzbek government to condemn them, stop blocking Radio Ozodlik’s website, and accredit the outlet’s journalists.

    CPJ emailed the Interior Ministry and office of the presidency for comment, but did not receive any replies.


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • By Igman Ibrahim in Jakarta

    Malang city district police chief (Kapolres) Senior Commissioner Leonardus Simarmata has been reported to the Indonesian police’s professionalism and security affairs division (Propam) over alleged racial slurs when securing an International Women’s Day (IWD) rally by Papuan students on March 8.

    The report was registered by the Greater Jakarta Papua Student Alliance (AMP) in the name of Arman Asso at the national police headquarters Propam.

    The report was registered as Number SPSP2/815/III/2021/Bagyanduan dated March 12, 2021.

    “Today we Papuan students officially reported Malang Kapolres Pak [Mr] Leonardus Simarmata for issuing an instruction and statement which was very racist and discriminatory against Papuan students in Malang city”, said AMP lawyer Michael Hilman at the Propam building in Jakarta yesterday.

    Hilman explained that Simarmata made the racist remark during a protest action held by the Papuan Solidarity Movement with the People (Gempur) in the East Java city of Malang on March 8.

    At the time, the protesters were taking up themes about women’s rights and opposing the extension of the Papua Special Autonomy Law (Otsus). The protest was later marred by a scuffle between students and police.

    It was at that time that Simarmata is alleged to have made the racist statement which was seen as deeply offensive to the Papuan people.

    “The racist remark deeply hurt our feelings as Papuans, where as a senior [official] who should promote human rights and provide proper security services for demonstrations he instead made a statement which was very, very racist,” said Hilman.

    The racial remark or words expressed by Simarmata were, “Shoot, just shoot, [spilling] the blood of [Papuan] students is halal [permissible under Islam]. Shoot, just shoot”.

    According to Hilman, the remark has inflamed Papuans in all corners of the county.

    “We are concerned that this could spread like the 2019 incident in Surabaya. This is the same as what was done by police in Surabaya,” Hilman said.

    “So we are concerned that it will go viral on every social media group and it has already gone super viral and had responses on WhatsApp groups, this has to be reported so it doesn’t spread in Papua.”

    Note
    The storming of a Papuan student dormitory in the East Java provincial capital of Surabaya in September 2019, which was proceeded by racist slurs by ultra-nationalist groups and security personnel which went viral on social media, led to widespread and sometimes violent anti-racist protests across West Papua.

    Translated by James Balowski of IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was “Kapolres Kota Malang Dilaporkan ke Propam Atas Dugaan Ujaran Rasial Terhadap Mahasiswa Papua”.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The formal Papuan complaint against Senior Commissioner Leonardus Simarmata over the alleged “shoot to kill” racial slur. Image: IndoLeft News/Tribune

    By Igman Ibrahim in Jakarta

    Malang city district police chief (Kapolres) Senior Commissioner Leonardus Simarmata has been reported to the Indonesian police’s professionalism and security affairs division (Propam) over alleged racial slurs when securing an International Women’s Day (IWD) rally by Papuan students on March 8.

    The report was registered by the Greater Jakarta Papua Student Alliance (AMP) in the name of Arman Asso at the national police headquarters Propam.

    The report was registered as Number SPSP2/815/III/2021/Bagyanduan dated March 12, 2021.

    “Today we Papuan students officially reported Malang Kapolres Pak [Mr] Leonardus Simarmata for issuing an instruction and statement which was very racist and discriminatory against Papuan students in Malang city”, said AMP lawyer Michael Hilman at the Propam building in Jakarta yesterday.

    Hilman explained that Simarmata made the racist remark during a protest action held by the Papuan Solidarity Movement with the People (Gempur) in the East Java city of Malang on March 8.

    At the time, the protesters were taking up themes about women’s rights and opposing the extension of the Papua Special Autonomy Law (Otsus). The protest was later marred by a scuffle between students and police.

    It was at that time that Simarmata is alleged to have made the racist statement which was seen as deeply offensive to the Papuan people.

    “The racist remark deeply hurt our feelings as Papuans, where as a senior [official] who should promote human rights and provide proper security services for demonstrations he instead made a statement which was very, very racist,” said Hilman.

    The racial remark or words expressed by Simarmata were, “Shoot, just shoot, [spilling] the blood of [Papuan] students is halal [permissible under Islam]. Shoot, just shoot”.

    According to Hilman, the remark has inflamed Papuans in all corners of the county.

    “We are concerned that this could spread like the 2019 incident in Surabaya. This is the same as what was done by police in Surabaya,” Hilman said.

    “So we are concerned that it will go viral on every social media group and it has already gone super viral and had responses on WhatsApp groups, this has to be reported so it doesn’t spread in Papua.”

    Note
    The storming of a Papuan student dormitory in the East Java provincial capital of Surabaya in September 2019, which was proceeded by racist slurs by ultra-nationalist groups and security personnel which went viral on social media, led to widespread and sometimes violent anti-racist protests across West Papua.

    Translated by James Balowski of IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was “Kapolres Kota Malang Dilaporkan ke Propam Atas Dugaan Ujaran Rasial Terhadap Mahasiswa Papua”.

    Print Friendly, PDF & Email

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Women journalists, feminists, activists, and human rights defenders around the world are facing virtual harassment. In this series, global civil society alliance CIVICUS highlights the gendered nature of virtual harassment through the stories of women working to defend our democratic freedoms. Today’s testimony on International Women’s Day is published here through a partnership between CIVICUS and Global Voices.


    By CIVICUS in Manila

    There has been a hostile environment for civil society in the Philippines since President Rodrigo Duterte took power in 2016. Killings, arrests, threats, and intimidation of activists and government critics are often perpetrated with impunity.

    According to the United Nations, the vilification of dissent is being “increasingly institutionalised and normalised in ways that will be very difficult to reverse.”

    There has also been a relentless crackdown against independent media and journalists.

    Threats and attacks against journalists, as well as the deployment of armies of trolls and online bots, especially during the covid-19 pandemic, have contributed to self-censorship—this has had a chilling effect within the media industry and among the wider public.

    One tactic increasingly used by the government to target activists and journalists is to label them as “terrorists” or “communist fronts,” particularly those who have been critical of Duterte’s deadly “war on drugs” that has killed thousands.

    Known as “red-tagging” in the Philippines, this process often puts activists at grave risk of being targeted by the state and pro-government militias.

    In some cases, those who have been red-tagged were later killed. Others have received death threats or sexually abusive comments in private messages or on social media.

    Rampant impunity means that accountability for attacks against activists and journalists is virtually non-existent. Courts in the Philippines have failed to provide justice and civil society has been calling for an independent investigation to address the grave violations.

    Filipina journalist Inday Espina-Varona tells her story:
    ‘Silence would be a surrender to tyranny’

    The sound of Tibetan chimes and flowing water transformed into a giant hiss the night dozens of worried friends passed on a Facebook post with my face and a headline that screamed I’d been passing information to communist guerrillas.

    Old hag, menopausal bitch, a person “of confused sexuality”—I’ve been called all that on social media. Trolls routinely call for my arrest as a communist.

    But the attack on 4 June 2020 was different. The anonymous right-wing Facebook page charged me with terrorism, of using access and coverage to pass sensitive, confidential military information to rebels.

    That night, dinner stopped at two spoonsful. My stomach felt like a sack with a dozen stones churning around a malignant current. All my collection of Zen music, hours of staring at the stars, and no amount of calming oil could bring sleep.

    Strangers came heckling the next day on Messenger. One asked how it felt to be “the muse of terrorists”. Another said, “Maghanda ka na bruha na terorista” (“Get ready, you terrorist witch”).

    A third said in vulgar vernacular that I should be the first shot in the vagina, a reference to what President Rodrigo Duterte once told soldiers to do to women rebels.

    I’m 57 years old, a cancer survivor with a chronic bad back. I don’t sneak around at night. I don’t do countryside treks. I don’t even cover the military.

    Like shooting range target
    But for weeks, I felt like a target mark in a shooting range. As a passenger on vehicles, I replaced mobile web surfing with peering into side mirrors, checking out motorcycles carrying two passengers—often mentioned in reports on killings.

    I recognised a scaled-up threat. This attack didn’t target ideas or words. The charge involved actions penalised with jail time or worse. Some military officials were sharing it.

    Not surprising; the current government doesn’t bother with factual niceties. It uses “communist” as a catch-all phrase for everything that bedevils the Philippines.

    Anonymous teams have killed close to 300 dissenters and these attacks usually followed red-tagging campaigns. Nineteen journalists have also been murdered since Duterte assumed office in 2016.

    Journalists, lawmakers, civil liberties advocates, and netizens called out the lie. Dozens reported the post. I did. We all received an automated response: It did not violate Facebook’s community standards.

    It feels foolish to argue with an automated system but I did gather the evidence before getting in touch with Facebook executives. My normal response to abusive engagement on Facebook or Twitter is a laughing emoji and a block. Threats are a different matter.

    We tracked down, “Let’s see how brave you are when we get to the street where you live,” to a Filipino criminology graduate working in a Japanese bar. He apologised and took it down.

    Threat against ‘my daughter’
    After I fact-checked Duterte for blaming rape on drug use in general, someone said my “defending addicts” should be punished with the rape of my daughter.

    “That should teach you,” said the message from an account that had no sign of life. Another said he’d come to rape me.

    Both accounts shared the same traits. They linked to similar accounts. Facebook took these down and did the same to the journalist-acting-as-rebel-intel post and page.

    The public pressure to cull products of troll farms has lessened the incidence of hate messages. But there’s still a growth in anonymous pages focused on red-tagging, with police and military officials and official accounts spreading their posts.

    Some officers were actually exposed as the masterminds of these pages. When Facebook recently scrapped several accounts linked to the armed forces, government officials erupted in rage, hurling false claims about “attacks on free expression.”

    This reaction shows the nexus between unofficial and official acts and platforms in our country. It can start with social media disinformation and then get picked up by the government, or it leads with an official pronouncement blown up and given additional spin on social media.

    Official complaints
    We’ve officially filed complaints against some government officials, including those involved with the top anti-insurgency task force. But justice works slowly. In the meantime, I practise deep breathing and try to take precautions.

    Officials dismiss any “chilling effect” from these non-stop attacks because Filipinos in general, and journalists in particular, remain outspoken. But braving dangers to exercise our right to press freedom and free expression isn’t the same as having the government respect these rights.

    Two years ago, journalist Patricia Evangelista of Rappler asked a small group of colleagues what it could take for us to fall silent.

    “Nothing,” was everyone’s response.

    And so every day I battle fear. I have to because silence would be a surrender to tyranny. That’s not happening on my watch.

    Inday Espina-Varona is an award-winning journalist from the Philippines and contributing editor for ABS-CBNNews and the Catholic news agency LiCASNews. She is a former chair of the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) and the first journalist from the country to receive the Reporters Without Borders (RSF) Prize for Independence.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.