Category: Democracy


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • By Don Wiseman, RNZ Pacific senior journalist

    Reports in Papua New Guinea say the governments of Bougainville and PNG have agreed to table the 2019 independence referendum results in Parliament.

    While discussions are ongoing, some degree of consensus has been reached during the talks, being held at Burnham Military Camp, just outside of Christchurch in New Zealand’s South Island.

    The talks are not open to the media.

    The PNG government agreed to a Bougainville request for a moderator to be brought in to solve an impasse over the tabling of the region's independence referendum.
    The PNG government agreed to a Bougainville request for a moderator to be brought in to solve an impasse over the tabling of the region’s independence referendum. Image: 123rf/RNZ Pacific

    A massive 97.7 percent of Bougainvillians voted for independence in 2019.

    Former Bougainville president John Momis told delegates in Burnham to “take the bull by the horn” and confront the independence issue without further delay.

    Both governments have agreed to present three highly pivotal documents to the PNG National Parliament.

    The commitment was formally conveyed by PNG’s Minister of Bougainville Affairs, Manaseh Makiba.

    Only sovereignty acceptable
    Meanwhile, the ABG President, Ishmael Toroama, said Bougainville would not accept a governance model that did not grant sovereignty.

    This comes amid talk of other options, such as self-government in free association.

    To achieve membership of the United Nations sovereignty is needed.

    Writing in the Post-Courier, journalist Gorethy Kenneth said the Bougainville national leaders, for the “first time have come out in aligning with the Bougainville team in New Zealand”.

    She reported that Police Minister and Bougainville regional MP Peter Tsiamalili Jr said he was in a peculiar position but he represented the 97.7 percent who voted for independence and he would go with the wishes of his people.

    The ICT Minister, and South Bougainville MP Timothy Masiu also said his one vote in Parliament would be for independence as far as his people were concerned.

    The PNG government has spoken previously of fears that independence for Bougainville would encourage other provinces to seek autonomy.

    Provinces, such as New Ireland, have made no secret of their dissatisfaction with Port Moresby and desire to control more of their own affairs.

    But the Bougainville Minister of Independence Implementation, Ezekiel Massat, said Bougainville’s status was constitutionally “ring-fenced” and could not set a precedent for other provinces.

    He said “under the Bougainville Peace Agreement, independence is a compulsory option”.

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Caleb Fotheringham, RNZ Pacific journalist

    Further reports of civilian casualties are coming out of West Papua, while clashes between Indonesia’s military and the armed wing of the Free Papua Movement continue.

    One of the most recent military operations took place in the early morning of May 14 in Sugapa District, Intan Jaya in Central Papua.

    Military spokesperson Lieutenant-Colonel Iwan Dwi Prihartono said in a video statement translated into English that 18 members of the West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) had been killed.

    He claimed the military wanted to provide health services and education to residents in villages in Intan Jaya but they were confronted by the TPNPB.

    Colonel Prihartono said the military confiscated an AK47, homemade weapons, ammunition, bows and arrows and the Morning Star flag — used as a symbol for West Papuan independence.

    But, according to the TPNPB, only three of the group’s soldiers were killed with the rest being civilians.

    The United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) said civilians killed included a 75-year-old, two women and a child.

    Both women in shallow graves
    Both the women were allegedly found on May 23 in shallow graves.

    A spokesperson from the Indonesian Embassy in Wellington said all 18 people killed were part of the TPNPB, as declared by the military.

    “The local regent of Intan Jaya has checked for the victims at their home and hospitals; therefore, he can confirm that the 18 victims were in fact all members of the armed criminal group,” they said.

    “The difference in numbers of victim sometimes happens because the armed criminal group tried to downplay their casualties or to try to create confusion.”

    The spokesperson said the military operation was carried out because local authorities “followed up upon complaints and reports from local communities that were terrified and terrorised by the armed criminal group”.

    Jakarta-based Human Rights Watch researcher Andreas Harsono said it was part of the wider Operation Habema which started last year.

    “It is a military operation to ‘eliminate’ the Free Papua guerilla fighters, not only in Intan Jaya, but in several agencies along the central highlands,” Harsono said.

    ‘Military informers’
    He said it had been intensifying since the TPNPB killed 17 miners in April, which the armed group accused of being “military informers”.

    RNZ Pacific has been sent photos of people who have been allegedly killed or injured in the May 14 assault, while others have been shared by ULMWP.

    Harsono said despite the photos and videos it was hard to verify if civilians had been killed.

    He said Indonesia claimed civilian casualties — including of the women who were allegedly buried in shallow graves — were a result of the TPNPB.

    “The TPNPB says, ‘of course, it is a lie why should we kill an indigenous woman?’ Well, you know, it is difficult to verify which one is correct, because they’re fighting the battle [in a very remote area],” Harsono said.

    “It’s difficult to cross-check whatever information coming from there, including the fact that it is difficult to get big videos or big photos from the area with the metadata.”

    Harsono said Indonesia was now using drones to fight the TPNPB.

    “This is something new; I think it will change the security situation, the battle situation in West Papua.

    “So far the TPNPB has not used drones; they are still struggling. In fact, most of them are still using bows and arrows in the conflict with the Indonesian military.”

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • COMMENTARY: By Steven Cowan, editor of Against The Current

    The New Zealand Foreign Minster’s decision to issue a travel ban against two Israeli far-right politicians is little more than a tokenistic gesture in opposing Israel’s actions.

    It is an attempt to appease growing opposition to Israel’s war, but the fact that Israel has killed more than 54,000 innocent people in Gaza, a third under the age of 18, still leaves the New Zealand government unmoved.

    Foreign Minister Peters gave the game away when he commented that the sanctions were targeted towards two individuals, rather than the Israeli government.

    Issuing travel bans against two Israeli politicians, who are unlikely to visit New Zealand at any stage, is the easy option.

    It appears to be doing something to protest against Israel’s actions when actually doing nothing. And it doesn’t contradict the interests of the United States in the Middle East.

    Under the government of Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, New Zealand has become a vassal state of American imperialism.

    New Zealand has joined four other countries, the United States, Britain, Australia and Norway, in issuing a travel ban. But all four countries continue to supply Israel with arms.

    Unions demand stronger action
    Last week, the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions demanded that the New Zealand government take stronger action against Israel. In a letter to Winston Peters, CTU president Richard Wagstaff wrote:

    “For too long, the international community has allowed the state of Israel to act with impunity. It is now very clearly engaged in genocide and ethnic cleansing in Gaza.

    “All efforts must be made to put diplomatic and economic pressure on Israel to end this murderous campaign.”

    THE CTU has called for a series of sanctions to be imposed on Israel. They include “a ban on all imports of goods made in whole or in part in Israel” and “a rapid review of Crown investments and immediately divest from any financial interests in Israeli companies”.

    The CTU is also calling for the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador.

    This article was first published on Steven Cowan’s website Against The Current. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • RNZ News

    The United States has denounced sanctions by Britain and allies — including New Zealand and Australia — against Israeli far-right ministers, saying they should focus instead on the Palestinian armed group Hamas.

    New Zealand has banned two Israeli politicians from travelling to the country because of comments about the war in Gaza that Foreign Minister Winston Peters says “actively undermine peace and security”.

    New Zealand joins Australia, Canada, the UK and Norway in imposing the sanctions on Israel’s Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir.

    Peters said they were targeted towards two individuals, rather than the Israeli government.

    “Our action today is not against the Israeli people, who suffered immeasurably on October 7 [2023] and who have continued to suffer through Hamas’ ongoing refusal to release all hostages.

    “Nor is it designed to sanction the wider Israeli government.”

    The two ministers were “using their leadership positions to actively undermine peace and security and remove prospects for a two-state solution”, Peters said.

    ‘Severely and deliberately undermined’ peace
    “Ministers Smotrich and Ben-Gvir have severely and deliberately undermined that by personally advocating for the annexation of Palestinian land and the expansion of illegal settlements, while inciting violence and forced displacement.”

    The sanctions were consistent with New Zealand’s approach to other foreign policy issues, he said.

    Israel's National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir (left) and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich
    Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir (left) and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich . . . sanctioned by Australia, Canada, the UK and Norway because they have “incited extremist violence and serious abuses of Palestinian human rights. These actions are not acceptable,” says British Foreign Minister David Lammy. Image: TRT screenshot APR

    “New Zealand has also targeted travel bans on politicians and military leaders advocating violence or undermining democracy in other countries in the past, including Russia, Belarus and Myanmar.”

    New Zealand had been a long-standing supporter of a two-state solution, Peters said, which the international community was also overwhelmingly in favour of.

    “New Zealand’s consistent and historic position has been that Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories are a violation of international law. Settlements and associated violence undermine the prospects for a viable two-state solution,” he said.

    “The crisis in Gaza has made returning to a meaningful political process all the more urgent. New Zealand will continue to advocate for an end to the current conflict and an urgent restart of the Middle East Peace Process.”

    ‘Outrageous’, says Israel
    Israel’s Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said the move was “outrageous” and the government would hold a special meeting early next week to decide how to respond to the “unacceptable decision”.

    His comments were made while attending the inauguration of a new Israeli settlement on Palestinian land.

    Peters is currently in Europe for the sixth Pacific-France Summit hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron in Nice.

    US State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce told reporters: “We find that extremely unhelpful. It will do nothing to get us closer to a ceasefire in Gaza.”

    Britain, Canada, Norway, New Zealand and Australia “should focus on the real culprit, which is Hamas”, she said of the sanctions.

    “We remain concerned about any step that would further isolate Israel from the international community.”

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Aisha Campbell, RNZ News intern

    Ponsonby’s post office is shutting shop next month despite push back from the local community.

    A sign on the storefront, which is at the College Hill end of Ponsonby Road, said the closure would take place on 4 July but the post boxes would be “staying put”.

    Ponsonby local and author John Harris said New Zealand Post’s decision to close the store was “ill-considered” and it should “try harder” to cater for the people who use the shop’s services.

    “They’ve got to be mindful of the vital role that post shops like this one play in glueing the community together,” Harris said.

    “If you go down to the post shop you’ll see it’s buzzing with activity; people popping in to post parcels or to get forms filled out and so forth . . .  they’ve got to think about the effect on small communities and this is like gutting the Ponsonby community.”

    Viv Rosenberg, a spokesperson for the Ponsonby Business Association, said the group is saddened by the decision to close the shop.

    ”Our local post office has been part of the fabric of our community in Three Lamps for several years and we regard the team there as part of our Ponsonby family. We are working alongside others to try and keep it open.”

    Plan but no timeframe
    In 2018, NZ Post announced its plan to close its remaining 79 standalone post offices but did not give a timeframe on when the final store would be shut.

    NZ Post general manager consumer Sarah Sandoval said customer data and service patterns were analysed to determine where NZ Post services were best placed.

    “The Ponsonby area is well serviced by existing postal outlets, and to remove duplications of services, we’ve decided to make this change.”

    The Asia Pacific Report story about the impending Ponsonby post office shop closure
    The Asia Pacific Report story about the impending Ponsonby post office shop closure published earlier this month. Image: Asia Pacific Report

    She also said that there were nearby options available, including on Hardinge Street 1.4km away, and NZ Post Herne Bay, 1km away.

    The NZ Post website said “store closures are given very careful consideration”.

    “[Reasons for closure] can include a decline in customer numbers or services which significantly affect the economic viability of the store,” NZ Post said.

    Harris emailed NZ Post CEO David Walsh expressing his disapproval of the decision to close the shop and requesting it be reconsidered.

    He said a response by the NZ Post general manager consumer stated the closure followed a close look at customer data and that there were other stores serving the Ponsonby community, which was an unsustainable way for the business to operate.

    “Herne Bay, Hardinge Street and Wellesley Street are either a challenging walk or you hop in the car and add to the grid,” Harris said.

    “They’re only thinking about the sustainability of the New Zealand Post itself not the community.”

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Six months have passed since rebels led by Hay’at Tahrir al Sham (HTS) toppled the Assad family’s 53-year dictatorship in Syria in December 2024. After an initial period of widespread celebration, a new period has set in — one of realization that the end of Assad’s rule has not meant solving the deep problems compounded in Syria from 14 years of counterrevolution and war. In the initial weeks…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • In Trump’s America, the bar for martial law is no longer constitutional—it’s personal.

    What is unfolding right now in California—with hundreds of Marines deployed domestically; thousands of National Guard troops federalized; and military weapons, tactics and equipment on full display—is intended to intimidate, distract and discourage us from pulling back the curtain on the reality of the self-serving corruption, grift, graft, overreach and abuse that have become synonymous with his Administration.

    Don’t be distracted. Don’t be intimidated. Don’t be sidelined by the spectacle of a police state.

    This is yet another manufactured crisis fomented by the Deep State.

    When Trump issues a call to “BRING IN THE TROOPS!!!” explaining to reporters that he wants to have them “everywhere,” we should all be alarmed.

    This is martial law without a formal declaration of war.

    This heavy-handed, chest-thumping, politicized, militarized response to what is clearly a matter for local government is yet another example of Trump’s disregard for the Constitution and the limits of his power.

    Political protests are protected by the First Amendment until they cross the line from non-violent to violent. Even when protests turn violent, constitutional protocols remain in place to safeguard communities: law and order must flow through local and state chains of command, not from federal muscle.

    By breaking that chain of command, Trump is breaking the Constitution.

    Deploying the military to deal with domestic matters that can—and should—be handled by civilian police, despite the objections of local and state leaders, crosses the line into authoritarianism.

    When someone shows you who they are, believe them.

    In the span of a single week, the Trump administration is providing the clearest glimpse yet of its unapologetic, uncompromising, corrupt allegiance to the authoritarian Deep State.

    These two events—the federalization of the National Guard deployed to California in response to protests and the president’s lavish, taxpayer-funded military parade in the nation’s capital—bookend the administration’s unmistakable message: dissent will be crushed, and power will be performed.

    Trump governs by force (military deployment), fear (ICE raids, militarized policing), and spectacle (the parade).

    This is the spectacle of a police state. One side of the coin is militarized suppression. The other is theatrical dominance. Together, they constitute the language of force and authoritarian control.

    Yet this is more than political theater; it is a constitutional crisis in motion.

    As we have warned before, this tactic is a familiar one.

    In times of political unrest, authoritarian regimes often invoke national emergencies as a pretext to impose military solutions. The result? The Constitution is suspended, civilian control is overrun, and the machinery of the state turns against its own people.

    This is precisely what the Founders feared when they warned against standing armies on American soil: that one day, the military might be used not to defend the people, but to control them.

    It is a textbook play from the authoritarian handbook, deployed with increasing frequency under Trump. The optics are meant to intimidate, broadcast control, and discourage resistance before it even begins.

    Thus, deploying the National Guard in this manner is not just a political maneuver—it is a strategic act of fear-based governance designed to instill terror, particularly among vulnerable communities, and ensure compliance.

    America is being transformed into a battlefield before our eyes.

    Militarized police. Riot squads. Black uniforms. Armored vehicles. Pepper spray. Tear gas. Stun grenades. Crowd control and intimidation tactics.

    This is not the language of freedom. This is not even the language of law and order.

    This is the language of force.

    This transformation is not accidental—it’s strategic. The government now sees the public not as constituents to be served but as potential combatants to be surveilled, managed, and subdued. In this new paradigm, dissent is treated as insurrection, and constitutional rights are treated as threats to national security.

    What we are witnessing today is also part of a broader setup: an excuse to use civil unrest as a pretext for militarized overreach.

    We saw signs of this strategy in Charlottesville, Virginia, where police failed to de-escalate and at times exacerbated tensions during protests that should have remained peaceful. The resulting chaos gave authorities cover to crack down—not to protect the public, but to reframe protest as provocation and dissent as disorder.

    Then and now, the objective wasn’t to preserve peace and protect the public. It was to delegitimize dissent and cast protest as provocation.

    It’s all part of an elaborate setup by the architects of the Deep State. The government wants a reason to crack down, lock down, and bring in its biggest guns.

    This is how it begins.

    Trump’s use of the military against civilians violates the spirit—if not the letter—of the Posse Comitatus Act, which is meant to bar federal military involvement in domestic affairs. It also raises severe constitutional questions about the infringement of First Amendment rights to protest and Fourth Amendment protections against warrantless search and seizure.

    Modern tools of repression compound the threat. AI-driven surveillance, predictive policing software, biometric databases, and fusion centers have made mass control seamless and silent. The state doesn’t just respond to dissent anymore; it predicts and preempts it.

    While boots are on the ground in California, preparations are underway for a military spectacle in Washington, D.C.

    At first glance, a military procession might seem like a patriotic display. But in this context, it is not a celebration of service; it is a declaration of supremacy. It is not about honoring troops; it is about reminding the populace who holds the power and who wields the guns.

    This is how authoritarian regimes govern—through spectacle.

    By sandwiching a military crackdown between a domestic troop deployment and a showy parade, Trump is sending a unified message: This is about raw, unchecked, theatrical power. And whether we, the people, will accept a government that rules not by consent, but by coercion.

    The Constitution was not written to accommodate authoritarian pageantry. It was written to restrain it. It was never meant to sanctify conquest as a form of governance.

    We are at a crossroads.

    Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. Strip away that consent, and all that remains is conquest through force, spectacle, and fear.

    As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, if we allow the language of fear, the spectacle of dominance, and the machinery of militarized governance to become normalized, then we are no longer citizens of a republic—we are subjects of a police state.

    The post The Spectacle of a Police State: This Is Martial Law Without a Formal Declaration of War first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Asia Pacific Report

    Aotearoa New Zealand’s Te Pāti Māori has condemned the Israeli navy’s armed interception of the Madleen, a civilian aid vessel attempting to carry food, medical supplies, and international activists to Gaza, including Sweden’s climate activist Greta Thunberg.

    In a statement after the Madleen’s communications were cut, the indigenous political party said it was not known if the crew were safe and unharmed.

    However, Israel has begun deportations of the activists and has confiscated the yacht and its aid supplies for Gaza.

    “This is the latest act in a horrific string of violence against civilians trying to access meagre aid,” said Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer.

    “Since May 27, more than 130 civilians have murdered been while lining up for food at aid sites.

    “This is not an arrest [of the Madleen crew], it as an abduction. We have grave concerns for the safety of the crew.

    “Israel [has] proven time again they aren’t above committing violence against civilians.

    “Blocking baby formula and prosthetics while a people are deliberately starved is not border patrol, it is genocide.”

    Te Pāti Māori said it called on the New Zealand government to:

    • Demand safe release of all crew;
    • Demand safe passage of Aid to Gaza;
    • Name this blockade and starvation campaign for what it is — genocide; and
    • Sanction Israel for their crimes against humanity

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Asia Pacific Report

    Pacific advocacy movements and civil society organisations have challenged French credentials in hosting a global ocean conference, saying that unless France is accountable for its actions in the Pacific, it is merely “rebranding”.

    The call for accountability marked the French-sponsored UN Ocean Conference (UNOC) in Nice this week, during which President Emmanuel Macron will be hosting a France-Pacific Summit.

    French officials have described the UNOC event as a coming together “in the true spirit of Talanoa” and one that would be inconceivable without the Pacific.

    While acknowledging the importance of leveraging global partnerships for urgent climate action and ocean protection through the UNOC process, Pacific civil society groups have issued a joint statement saying that their political leaders must hold France accountable for its past actions and not allow it to “launder its dirty linen in ‘Blue Pacific’ and ‘critical transition’ narratives”.

    ‘Responsible steward’ image undermined
    France’s claims of being a “responsible steward” of the ocean were undermined by its historical actions in the Pacific, said the statement. This included:

    ● A brutal colonial legacy dating back to the mid-1800s, with the annexation of island nations now known as Kanaky-New Caledonia and Ma’ohi Nui-French Polynesia;

    ● A refusal to complete the decolonisation process, and in fact the perpetuation of the colonial condition, particularly for the those “territories” on the UN decolonisation list. In Kanaky-New Caledonia, for instance, France and its agents continue to renege on longstanding decolonisation commitments, while weaponising democratic ideals and processes such as “universal” voting rights to deny the fundamental rights of the indigenous population to self-determination;

    ● 30 years of nuclear violence in Ma’ohi Nui-French Polynesia with 193 test detonations — 46 in the atmosphere and close to 150 under the Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls, irradiating both land and sea, and people. Approximately 90 percent of the local population was exposed to radioactive fallout, resulting in long-term health impacts, including elevated rates of cancer and other radiation-related illnesses;

    ● Active efforts to obscure the true extent of its nuclear violence in Maʻohi Nui-French Polynesia, diverting resources to discredit independent research and obstructing transparency around health and environmental impacts. These actions reveal a persistent pattern of denial and narrative control that continues to undermine compensation efforts and delay justice for victims and communities;

    ● French claims to approximately one-third of the Pacific’s combined EEZ, and to being the world’s second largest ocean state, accruing largely from its so-called Pacific dependencies; and

    ● The supply of French military equipment, and the 1985 bombing of the Greenpeace flagship Rainbow Warrior by French secret service agents — a state-sponsored terrorist attack with the 40th anniversary this year.

    A poster highlighting the issue of political prisoners depicting the Kanak flag after the pro-independence unrest and riots
    A poster highlighting the issue of political prisoners depicting the Kanak flag after the pro-independence unrest and riots in New Caledonia last year. Image: Collectif Solidarité Kanaky

    Seeking diplomatic support
    “Since the late 1980s, France has worked to build on diplomatic, development and defence fronts to garner support from Pacific governments.

    This includes development assistance through the Agence Française de Développement (AFD), Asian Development Fund, language and cultural exchanges, scientific collaboration and humanitarian assistance.

    A strong diplomatic presence in Pacific capitals as well as a full schedule of high-level exchanges, including a triennial France-Oceania leaders’ Summit commencing in 2003, together function to enhance proximity with and inclination towards Paris sentiments and priorities.

    The Pacific civil society statement said that French leadership at this UNOC process was once again central to its ongoing efforts to rebrand itself as a global leader on climate action, a champion of ocean protection, and a promoter of sovereignty.

    “Nothing can be further from the truth,” the groups said.

    “The reality is that France is rather more interested in strengthening its position as a middle power in an Indo-Pacific rather than a Pacific framework, and as a balancing power within the context of big-power rivalry between the US and China, all of which undermines rather than enhances Pacific sovereignty.”

    New global image
    The statement said that leaders must not allow France to build this new global image on the “foundations of its atrocities against Pacific peoples” and the ocean continent.

    Pacific civil society called on France:

    ● For immediate and irreversible commitments and practical steps to bring its colonial presence in the Pacific to an end before the conclusion, in 2030, of the 4th International Decade on the Eradication of Colonialism; and

    ● To acknowledge and take responsibility for the oceanic and human harms caused by 30 years of nuclear violence in Maʻohi Nui–French Polynesia, and to commit to full and just reparations, including support for affected communities, environmental remediation of test sites, and full public disclosure of all health and contamination data.

    The statement also called on Pacific leaders to:

    ● Keep France accountable for its multiple and longstanding debt to Pacific people; and

    ● Ensure that Ma’ohi Nui-French Polynesia and Kanaky-New Caledonia remain on the UN list of non-self-governing territories to be decolonised (UN decolonisation list).

    “Pacific leaders must ensure that France does not succeed in laundering its soiled linen — soiled by the blood of thousands of Pacific Islanders who resisted colonial occupation and/or who were used as test subjects for its industrial-military machinery — in the UNOC process,” said the statement.


    This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • COMMENTARY: By Cole Martin in Occupied Bethlehem

    Many people have been closely following the journey this week of the Madleen, a small humanitarian yacht seeking to break Israel’s illegal blockade of Gaza with a crew of 12 on board, including humanitarian activists and journalists.

    This morning we woke to the harrowing, yet not unexpected, news that the vessel had been illegally hijacked by Israeli forces, who boarded and took the crew captive into Israeli territories, in contravention of international law.

    Yet another on the long list of war crimes Israel has committed over the last 20 months of genocide, and decades of illegal occupation.

    Communication with the crew was lost after the final moments of tense onboard footage as they donned lifejackets, threw phones and other sensitive data overboard, and raised their arms in preparation for whatever might come next.

    Israel has a detailed history of attacking all previous freedom flotillas — including the 2010 mission aboard the Mavi Marmara in which 10 crew were killed and dozens more injured when Israeli forces hijacked the humanitarian vessel.

    Another mission earlier this year was cut short when it was targeted by an airstrike in international waters, injuring crew.

    The next updates were scenes filmed by Israeli forces which appear to show them calmly handing bread rolls and water to the detained crew, painting a picture which immediately recalled my own experience last year being unlawfully arrested in the southern West Bank.

    Detained while documenting
    I was detained while documenting armed settler violence, taken illegally to a military base where myself and three other internationals were given a bathroom stop, bread and water.

    While we ate, they filmed us, saying “You are unharmed, yes? We are looking after you well?”

    We were then loaded into a police van where a Palestinian farmer sat blindfolded, in silence, with his hands zip-tied behind him.

    Eleven of the 12 crew members on board the humanitarian yacht Madleen
    Eleven of the 12 crew members on board the humanitarian yacht Madleen before being arrested by Israeli forces today. Image: FFC screenshot APR

    Israel loves to put on a show of their “humane treatment” when internationals are present and cameras are rolling, but it’s a shallow and sinister facade for their abusive racism and cruelty towards Palestinians.

    It appears their response to the Madleen’s crew over the next few days will be exactly that. Don’t buy into it; this is no more than deeply sinister propaganda to cover state-backed racism, supremacy, and cruelty.

    Families in Gaza are still facing indiscriminate airstrikes, continuous displacement, forced starvation, and the phony Israel/US “Gaza Humanitarian Foundation” which has led to more than 100 civilians being shot while desperately seeking food.

    Thousands of trucks still wait at the border to Gaza, barred entry by Israeli forces, while Palestinians face severe malnutrition and a man-made famine.

    The New Zealand government has still not placed a single sanction on the Israeli state.

    Cole Martin is an independent New Zealand photojournalist based in the Middle East and a contributor to Asia Pacific Report.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • COMMENTARY: By Cole Martin in Occupied Bethlehem

    Many people have been closely following the journey this week of the Madleen, a small humanitarian yacht seeking to break Israel’s illegal blockade of Gaza with a crew of 12 on board, including humanitarian activists and journalists.

    This morning we woke to the harrowing, yet not unexpected, news that the vessel had been illegally hijacked by Israeli forces, who boarded and took the crew captive into Israeli territories, in contravention of international law.

    Yet another on the long list of war crimes Israel has committed over the last 20 months of genocide, and decades of illegal occupation.

    Communication with the crew was lost after the final moments of tense onboard footage as they donned lifejackets, threw phones and other sensitive data overboard, and raised their arms in preparation for whatever might come next.

    Israel has a detailed history of attacking all previous freedom flotillas — including the 2010 mission aboard the Mavi Marmara in which 10 crew were killed and dozens more injured when Israeli forces hijacked the humanitarian vessel.

    Another mission earlier this year was cut short when it was targeted by an airstrike in international waters, injuring crew.

    The next updates were scenes filmed by Israeli forces which appear to show them calmly handing bread rolls and water to the detained crew, painting a picture which immediately recalled my own experience last year being unlawfully arrested in the southern West Bank.

    Detained while documenting
    I was detained while documenting armed settler violence, taken illegally to a military base where myself and three other internationals were given a bathroom stop, bread and water.

    While we ate, they filmed us, saying “You are unharmed, yes? We are looking after you well?”

    We were then loaded into a police van where a Palestinian farmer sat blindfolded, in silence, with his hands zip-tied behind him.

    Eleven of the 12 crew members on board the humanitarian yacht Madleen
    Eleven of the 12 crew members on board the humanitarian yacht Madleen before being arrested by Israeli forces today. Image: FFC screenshot APR

    Israel loves to put on a show of their “humane treatment” when internationals are present and cameras are rolling, but it’s a shallow and sinister facade for their abusive racism and cruelty towards Palestinians.

    It appears their response to the Madleen’s crew over the next few days will be exactly that. Don’t buy into it; this is no more than deeply sinister propaganda to cover state-backed racism, supremacy, and cruelty.

    Families in Gaza are still facing indiscriminate airstrikes, continuous displacement, forced starvation, and the phony Israel/US “Gaza Humanitarian Foundation” which has led to more than 100 civilians being shot while desperately seeking food.

    Thousands of trucks still wait at the border to Gaza, barred entry by Israeli forces, while Palestinians face severe malnutrition and a man-made famine.

    The New Zealand government has still not placed a single sanction on the Israeli state.

    Cole Martin is an independent New Zealand photojournalist based in the Middle East and a contributor to Asia Pacific Report.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Asia Pacific Report

    Israel’s military attack and boarding of the humanitarian boat Madleen attempting to deliver food and medical aid to the besieged people of Gaza has been condemned by New Zealand Palestinian advocacy groups as a “staggering act of state piracy”.

    The vessel was in international waters, carrying aid workers, doctors, journalists, and supplies desperately needed by the 2 million population that Israel has systematically bombed, starved, and displaced.

    “This was not a military confrontation. It was the assault of an unarmed civilian aid ship by a state acting with total impunity,” said the group Thyme4Action.

    “This is piracy, it is state terror, and it is a genocidal act of war.

    Half of the 12 crew and passengers on board are French citizens and the volunteer group includes French-Palestinian European parliamentarian Rima Hassan and Swedish climate crisis activist Greta Thunberg and two journalists.

    They all made pre-recorded messages calling for international pressure on their governments against the Israeli state. The messages were posted on the Freedom Flotilla Coalition X page.

    The group Thyme4Action said in a media release that a regime engaged in genocide would send sends drones and armed commandos to detain civilians in international waters.

    Israel’s ‘total moral collapse’
    “We are witnessing the total moral collapse of a state, supported for years by Western governments to act with utter impunity, violate our global legal system, morality and principles.

    “No amount of spin or military propaganda can hide the cruelty of deliberately starving a population, targeting children, bombing hospitals and bakeries, and then violently stopping others from bringing aid.”

    Thyme4Action said the attack on the Madleen was not a separate incident — “it is part of the same campaign to eliminate Palestinian life, hope, and survival. It is why the International Court of Justice has already ruled that Israel is plausibly committing genocide.”

    “This is not complicated,” said the statement.

    French journalist Yanis Mhandi on board the Madleen
    French journalist Yanis Mhandi on board the Madleen . . . “I’ve been detained by Israeli forces while doing my job as a journalist.” Image: FFC screenshot APR

    “Israel has no legal authority in international waters. Under the United Nations Convention
    on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), Israel’s boarding of a civilian aid ship beyond its territorial waters is an act of piracy, unlawful kidnapping, forcible abduction and armed
    aggression.

    Under international humanitarian law, deliberately blocking aid to a population facing
    starvation is a war crime.

    Under the Genocide Convention, when a state intentionally denies food, water, and
    medicine to a population it is bombing and displacing, this constitutes part of a genocidal
    campaign.”

    NZ silence condemned
    The advocacy group condemned the silence of the New Zealand government as being “no longer neutral”.

    The moment that the Freedom Flotilla Coalition lost communications with the Madleen
    The moment that the Freedom Flotilla Coalition lost communications with the Madleen as Israeli forces attacked the vessel. Image: FFC

    It demonstrated a shocking lack of respect for international law, for human rights, and for the safety of global humanitarian workers.

    “It reflects a broader decay in foreign policy — where selective outrage and Israeli
    exceptionalism undermine the credibility of everything New Zealand claims to stand for.”

    Thyme4Action called on the New Zealand government to:

    • Publicly condemn Israel’s illegal assault on the Madleen and its passengers;
    • Demand the immediate release of all aid workers, journalists, and civilians
    abducted by Israeli forces;
    • Suspend all diplomatic, military, and trade cooperation with Israel until it complies
    with international law; and
    • Support international accountability mechanisms, including referring Israel’s crimes
    to the International Criminal Court and backing enforcement of the ICJ’s provisional
    measures on genocide.

    “This has to stop. This is not just a crisis in Gaza,” said the statement.

    ‘Crisis of global morality’
    “It is a crisis of global morality, of international law, and of our basic shared humanity.

    “We stand with the people of Gaza. We stand with the brave souls aboard the Madleen, and
    we demand an end to this madness before the world forgets what it means to be human.

    “We need a government that stands for all that is right, not all that is wrong.

    “Aid is not terrorism. International waters are not Israel’s territory. And silence in the face of evil is complicity.”

    Pro-Palestinian supporters in New Zealand have held protests against the genocide and demanding a ceasefire right across the country at multiple locations for the past 87 weeks.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • COMMENTARY: By John Hobbs

    It is difficult to understand what sits behind the New Zealand government’s unwillingness to sanction, or threaten to sanction, the Israeli government for its genocide against the Palestinian people.

    The United Nations, human rights groups, legal experts and now genocide experts have all agreed it really is “genocide” which is being committed by the state of Israel against the civilian population of Gaza.

    It is hard to argue with the conclusion genocide is happening, given the tragic images being portrayed across social and increasingly mainstream media.

    Prime Minister Netanyahu has presented Israel’s assault on Gaza war as pitting “the sons of light” against “the sons of darkness”. And promised the victory of Judeo-Christian civilisation against barbarism.

    A real encouragement to his military there should be no-holds barred in exercising indiscriminate destruction over the people of Gaza.

    Given this background, one wonders what the nature of the advice being provided by New Zealand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to the minister entails?

    Does the ministry fail to see the destruction and brutal killing of a huge proportion of the civilian people of Gaza? And if they see it, are they saying as much to the minister?

    Cloak of ‘diplomatic language’
    Or is the advice so nuanced in the cloak of “diplomatic language” it effectively says nothing and is crafted in a way which gives the minister ultimate freedom to make his own political choices.

    The advice of the officials becomes a reflection of what the minister is looking for — namely, a foreign policy approach that gives him enough freedom to support the Israeli government and at the same time be in step with its closest ally, the United States.

    The problem is there is no transparency around the decision-making process, so it is impossible to tell how decisions are being made.

    I placed an Official Information Act request with the Minister of Foreign Affairs in January 2024 seeking advice received by the minister on New Zealand’s obligations under the Genocide Convention.

    The request was refused because while the advice did exist, it fell outside the timeline indicated by my request.

    It was emphasised if I were to put in a further request for the advice, it was unlikely to be released.

    They then advised releasing the information would be likely to prejudice the security or defence of New Zealand and the international relations of the government of New Zealand, and withholding it was necessary to maintain legal professional privilege.

    Public interest vital
    It is hard to imagine how the release of such information might prejudice the security or defence of New Zealand or that the legal issues could override the public interest.

    It could not be more important for New Zealanders to understand the basis for New Zealand’s foreign policy choices.

    New Zealand is a contracting party to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Under the convention, “genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they [the contracting parties] undertake to prevent and punish”.

    Furthermore: The Contracting Parties undertake to enact, in accordance with their respective Constitutions, the necessary legislation to give effect to the provisions of the present Convention, and, in particular, to provide effective penalties for persons guilty of genocide. (Article 5).

    Accordingly, New Zealand must play an active part in its prevention and put in place effective penalties. Chlöe Swarbrick’s private member’s Bill to impose sanctions is one mechanism to do this.

    In response to its two-month blockade of food, water and medical supplies to Gaza, and international pressure, Israel has agreed to allow a trickle of food to enter Gaza.

    However, this is only a tiny fraction of what is needed to avert famine. Understandably, Israel’s response has been criticised by most of the international community, including New Zealand.

    Carefully worded statement
    In a carefully worded statement, signed by a collective of European countries, together with New Zealand and Australia, it is requested that Israel allow a full resumption of aid into Gaza, an immediate return to ceasefire and a return of the hostages.

    Radio New Zealand interviewed the Foreign Minister Winston Peters to better understand the New Zealand position.

    Peters reiterated his previous statements, expressing Israel’s actions of withholding food as “intolerable” but when asked about putting in place concrete sanctions he stated any such action was a “long, long way off”, without explaining why.

    New Zealand must be clear about its foreign policy position, not hide behind diplomatic and insincere rhetoric and exercise courage by sanctioning Israel as it has done with Russia over its invasion of Ukraine.

    As a minimum, it must honour its responsibilities under the Convention on Genocide and, not least, to offer hope and support for the utterly powerless and vulnerable Palestinian people before it is too late.

    John Hobbs is a doctoral candidate at the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (NCPACS) at the University of Otago. This article was first published by the Otago Daily Times and is republished with the author’s permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Pacific Media Watch

    More than 150 press freedom advocacy groups and international newsrooms have joined Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) in issuing a public appeal demanding that Israel grant foreign journalists immediate, independent and unrestricted access to the Gaza Strip.

    The organisations are also calling for the full protection of Palestinian journalists, nearly 200 — the Gaza Media Office says more than 230 — of whom have been killed by the Israeli military over the past 20 months.

    For more than 20 months, Israeli authorities have barred foreign journalists from entering the Gaza Strip, says RSF in a media release.

    During the same period, the Israeli army killed nearly 200 Palestinian journalists in the blockaded territory, including at least 45 slain for their work.

    Palestinian journalists who continue reporting — the only witnesses on the ground — are facing unbearable conditions, including forced displacement, famine, and constant threats to their lives.

    This collective appeal, launched by RSF and CPJ, brings together prominent news outlets from every continent demanding the right to send correspondents into Gaza to report alongside Palestinian journalists.

    The signatories include Asia Pacific Report from Aotearoa New Zealand.

    “The media blockade imposed on Gaza, combined with the massacre of nearly 200 journalists by the Israeli army, is enabling the total destruction and erasure of the blockaded territory,” said RSF director-general Thibaut Bruttin.

    “Israeli authorities are banning foreign journalists from entering and ruthlessly asserting their control over information.

    “This is a methodical attempt to silence the facts, suppress the truth, and isolate the Palestinian press and population.

    Asia Pacific Report . . . one of the signatories
    Asia Pacific Report . . . one of the signatories to the Gaza plea. Image: APR

    “We call on governments, international institutions and heads of state to end their complicit silence, enforce the immediate opening of Gaza to foreign media, and uphold a principle that is frequently trampled — under international humanitarian law, killing a journalist is a war crime.

    “This principle has been violated far too often and must now be enforced.”

    RSF director-general Thibaut Bruttin speaking at the reception celebrating seven years of Taipei's Asia Pacific office
    RSF director-general Thibaut Bruttin speaking at the reception celebrating seven years of Taipei’s Asia Pacific office in October 2024. Image: Pacific Media Watch

    The media blockade on Gaza persists despite repeated calls from RSF to guarantee foreign journalists independent access to the Strip, and legal actions such as the Foreign Press Association’s (FPA) petition to the Israeli Supreme Court.

    Palestinian journalists, meanwhile, are trapped, displaced, starved, defamed and targeted due to their work.

    Those who have survived this unprecedented massacre of journalists now find themselves without shelter, equipment, medical care or even food, according to a CPJ report. They face the risk of being killed at any moment.

    To end the enduring impunity that allows these crimes to continue, RSF has repeatedly referred cases to the International Criminal Court (ICC), urging it to investigate alleged war crimes committed against journalists in Gaza by the Israeli army.

    RSF also provides aid to Palestinian journalists on the ground — particularly in Gaza — through partnerships with local organisations such as ARIJ (Arab Reporters for Investigative Journalism).

    This partnership provides Palestinian journalists with psychological and professional support, ensuring the continued publication of high-quality reporting despite the blockade and the risks.

    Through this cooperation, RSF reaffirms its commitment to defending independent, rigorous journalism — even under the most extreme conditions.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • What might sociocracy look like on the small scale, less formally, enacted by college students who have just begun to feel it out?

    How might sociocracy’s resonance pervade an organization, even without the opportunity for thoroughly elaborated structure?

    In this presentation, Juan Pablo will share how “Students for Environmental Justice” used Sociocracy as a subversion of the traditional, hierarchical classroom model. In exposing the intrinsic, but invisibilized, governance and decision-making processes of the classroom, this group was then empowered to take ownership of their collective class– from the curriculum at the foundation of it, to the grant money that would fund their community outreach projects around climate justice.

    The post Sociocracy In The Higher Education Classroom appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • ANALYSIS: By Anna-Karina Hermkens, Macquarie University

    Bougainville, an autonomous archipelago currently part of Papua New Guinea, is determined to become the world’s newest country.

    To support this process, it’s offering foreign investors access to a long-shuttered copper and gold mine. Formerly owned by the Australian company Rio Tinto, the Panguna mine caused displacement and severe environmental damage when it operated between 1972 and 1989.

    It also sparked a decade-long civil war from 1988 to 1998 that killed an estimated 10,000 to 15,000 civilians and caused enduring traumas and divisions.

    Industry players believe 5.3 million tonnes of copper and 547 tonnes of gold remain at the site. This is attracting foreign interest, including from China.

    Australia views Bougainville as strategically important to its “inner security arc”. The main island is about 1500 km from Queensland’s Port Douglas.

    Given this, the possibility of China’s increasing presence in Bougainville raises concerns about shifting allegiances and the potential for Beijing to exert greater influence over the region.

    Australia’s tangled history in Bougainville
    Bougainville is a small island group in the South Pacific with a population of about 300,000. It consists of two main islands: Buka in the north and Bougainville Island in the south.

    Bougainville has a long history of unwanted interference from outsiders, including missionaries, plantation owners and colonial administrations (German, British, Japanese and Australian).

    Two weeks before Papua New Guinea received its independence from Australia in 1975, Bougainvilleans sought to split away, unilaterally declaring their own independence. This declaration was ignored in both Canberra and Port Moresby, but Bougainville was given a certain degree of autonomy to remain within the new nation of PNG.

    The opening of the Panguna mine in the 1970s further fractured relations between Australia and Bougainville.

    Landowners opposed the environmental degradation and limited revenues they received from the mine. The influx of foreign workers from Australia, PNG and China also led to resentment. Violent resistance grew, eventually halting mining operations and expelling almost all foreigners.

    Under the leadership of Francis Ona, the Bougainville Revolutionary Army (BRA) fought a long civil war to restore Bougainville to Me’ekamui, or the “Holy Land” it once was.

    Australia supported the PNG government’s efforts to quell the uprising with military equipment, including weapons and helicopters.

    After the war ended, Australia helped broker the Bougainville Peace Agreement led by New Zealand in 2001. Although aid programmes have since begun to heal the rift between Australia and Bougainville, many Bougainvilleans feel Canberra continues to favour PNG’s territorial integrity.

    In 2019, Bougainvilleans voted overwhelmingly for independence in a referendum. Australia’s response, however, was ambiguous.

    Despite a slow and frustrating ratification process, Bougainvilleans remain adamant they will become independent by 2027.

    As Bougainville President Ishmael Toroama, a former BRA commander, told me in 2024:

    “We are moving forward. And it’s the people’s vision: independence. I’m saying, no earlier than 2025, no later than 2027.

    “My benchmark is 2026, the first of September. I will declare. No matter what happens. I will declare independence on our republican constitution.”

    Major issues to overcome
    Bougainville leaders see the reopening of Panguna mine as key to financing independence. Bougainville Copper Limited, the Rio Tinto subsidiary that once operated the mine, backs this assessment.

    The Bougainville Autonomous Government has built its own gold refinery and hopes to create its own sovereign wealth fund to support independence. The mine would generate much-needed revenue, infrastructure and jobs for the new nation.

    But reopening the mine would also require addressing the ongoing environmental and social issues it has caused. These include polluted rivers and water sources, landslides, flooding, chemical waste hazards, the loss of food security, displacement, and damage to sacred sites.

    Many of these issues have been exacerbated by years of small-scale alluvial mining by Bougainvilleans themselves, eroding the main road into Panguna.

    Some also worry reopening the mine could reignite conflict, as landowners are divided about the project. Mismanagement of royalties could also stoke social tensions.

    Violence related to competition over alluvial mining has already been increasing at the mine.

    More broadly, Bougainville is faced with widespread corruption and poor governance.

    The Bougainville government cannot deal with these complex issues on its own. Nor can it finance the infrastructure and development needed to reopen the mine. This is why it’s seeking foreign investors.

    Panguna, Bougainville's "mine of tears"
    Panguna, Bougainville’s “mine of tears”, when it was still operating . . . Industry players believe 5.3 million tonnes of copper and 547 tonnes of gold remain at the site, which is attracting foreign interest, including from China. Image: David Robie/Asia Pacific Report

    Open for business
    Historically, China has a strong interest in the region. According to Pacific researcher Dr Anna Powles, Chinese efforts to build relationships with Bougainville’s political elite have increased over the years.

    Chinese investors have offered development packages contingent on long-term mining revenues and Bougainville’s independence. Bougainville is showing interest.

    Patrick Nisira, the Minister for commerce, Trade, Industry and Economic Development, said last year the proposed Chinese infrastructure investment was “aligning perfectly with Bougainville’s nationhood aspirations”.

    The government has also reportedly made overtures to the United States, offering a military base in Bougainville in return for support for reopening the mine.

    Given American demand for minerals, Bougainville could very well end up in the middle of a struggle between China and the US over influence in the new nation, and thus in our region.

    Which path will Bougainville and Australia take?
    There is support in Bougainville for a future without large-scale mining. One minister, Geraldine Paul, has been promoting the islands’ booming cocoa industry and fisheries to support an independent Bougainville.

    The new nation will also need new laws to hold the government accountable and protect the people and culture of Bougainville. As Paul told me in 2024:

    “[…]the most important thing is we need to make sure that we invest in our foundation and that’s building our family and culture. Everything starts from there.”

    What happens in Bougainville affects Australia and the broader security dynamics in the Indo-Pacific. With September 1, 2026, just around the corner, it is time for Australia to intensify its diplomatic and economic relationships with Bougainville to maintain regional stability.The Conversation

    Dr Anna-Karina Hermkens is a senior lecturer and researcher in anthropology, Macquarie University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Radio Free Asia.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Kinshasa, June 6, 2025—Authorities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo should reverse the 90-day suspension of media coverage on the activities of the People’s Party for Reconstruction and Democracy (PPRD), the political party of former President Joseph Kabila, and all other restrictions on reporting, the Committee to Protect Journalists said Friday.

    “The authorities in the DRC should reverse the prohibition of coverage related to former President Joseph Kabila and his political party and cease threatening legal action for reporting on matters of public interest,” said Angela Quintal, CPJ’s Africa regional director. “Escalation of fighting in eastern DRC has brought heightened dangers for journalists, which the government should be seeking to mitigate, not enhance. The Congolese people need unfettered access to information, not censorship.”

    On June 2, the Higher Council for Audiovisual and Communication (CSAC), the DRC’s media regulator, ordered the media to cease coverage on the party’s activities for 90 days. The order, which CPJ reviewed, also forbids communication channels from “offering space” to PPRD members or Kabila “under penalty of very heavy sanction in accordance with the law,” with the prosecutor general in charge of enforcement.

    As justification, the order claimed that Kabila and the party financially and ideologically support the M23 and AFC rebel groups in the eastern part of the country. It follows other government efforts to curb the influence of Kabila and his party, including the suspension of its activities in April. On May 22, the DRC’s Senate lifted immunities that were previously granted to Kabila, who became a life-long senator when his presidency ended in 2019. The government has accused the former president of treason, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and participation in an insurrectionist movement for his alleged support of the M23 rebellion.

    On May 23, Kabila broadcast a nationwide speech on his YouTube channel, which has since been taken down, in which he criticized current DRC President Félix Antoine Tshisekedi and proposed his own solutions for restoring peace in the east. Since late May, Kabila has been engaging in discussions with various actors in the eastern city of Goma, which is under M23 control.

    CPJ’s calls and messages to Oscar Kabamba, a spokesperson for the CSAC, went unanswered.


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

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.