radiofree.asia

Category: Human Rights

  • Civil society view of the 55th session of the UN Human Rights Council

    At the 55th Human Rights Council session, 22 civil society organisations share reflections on key outcomes and highlight gaps in addressing crucial issues and situations [see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2024/02/26/human-rights-defenders-issues-at-the-55th-session-of-the-human-rights-council/]:

    The failure of States to pay their membership dues to the United Nations in full and in time, and the practice of conditioning funding on unilateral political goals is causing a financial liquidity crisis for the organisation, the impacts of which are felt by victims and survivors of human rights violations and abuses. … Without the resources needed, the outcomes of this session can’t be implemented. The credibility of HRC is at stake. 

    We welcome the adoption of three resolutions calling for the implementation of effective accountability measures to ensure justice for atrocity crimes committed in the context of Israel‘s decades long colonial apartheid imposed over the Palestinian people, and for the realisation of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination. Special Procedures expressed their profound concern about “the support of certain governments for Israel’s strategy of warfare against the besieged population of Gaza, and the failure of the international system to mobilise to prevent genocide” and called on States to implement an “arms embargo on Israel, heightened by the International Court of Justice’s ruling […] that there is a plausible risk of genocide in Gaza […].”   This session, the Special Rapporteur on the OPT concluded that the actions of Israel in Gaza meet the legal qualifications of genocide. 

    We deplore the double standards in applying international law and the failure of certain States to vote in favor of ending impunity. This undermines the integrity of the UN human rights framework, the legitimacy of this institution, and the credibility of those States. From Palestine, to Ukraine, to Myanmar, to Sudan, to Sri Lanka, resolving grave human rights violations requires States to address root causes, applying human rights norms in a principled and consistent way. The Council has a prevention mandate and UN Member States have a legal and moral duty to prevent and ensure accountability and non-recurrence for atrocity crimes, wherever they occur.

    We want to highlight and specifically welcome the adoption of the first ever resolution on combating discrimination, violence and harmful practices intersex persons. The resolution builds on growing support in the Council on this topic and responds to several calls by the global coalition of intersex-led organisations. The resolution takes important steps in recognising that discrimination, violence and harmful practices based on innate variations of sex characteristics, such as medically unnecessary interventions, takes place in all regions of the world. We welcome that the resolution calls for States to take measures to protect the human rights of this population and calls for an OHCHR report and a panel discussion to address challenges and discuss good practices in protecting the human rights of intersex persons.

    We welcome the renewal of the mandate of the Independent Expert on the enjoyment of human rights by persons with albinism. As attested by human rights defenders with albinism, the mandate played an invaluable role by shedding light on human rights violations against persons with albinism through ground breaking research, country visits, and human rights training, and ensuring that defenders with albinism are consulted and take part in the decision-making. The organisations also welcomed the inclusion of language reflecting the important role played by “organizations of persons with albinism and their families”, and the reference to the role of States in collaboration with the World Health Organization, “to take effective measures to address the health-related effects of climate change on persons with albinism with a view to realizing their right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, particularly regarding the alarming incidence of skin cancer in this population, and to implement the recommendations of the report of the Independent Expert in this regard”.

    We welcome the adoption of the resolution on the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. We also welcome the update of the title of the mandate acknowledging the recognition of this right by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 48/13 on 8 October 2021 and the General Assembly resolution 76/300 on 28 July 2022. We also welcome the inclusion of gender-specific language in the text, and we call on the Special Rapporteur to devote a careful attention to the protection of environmental human rights defenders for their strong contribution to the realisation of the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment, as called for by several States. We also welcome that the Council appointed for the first time a woman from the global south to fulfill this mandate, and we welcome the nomination of another woman as Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights in the context of climate change. 

    We welcome the resolution on countering disinformation, which addresses new issues whilst once again rejecting censorship and reaffirming the ‘essential role’ that the right to freedom of expression plays in countering disinformation. We welcome the specific focus on girls – besides women – as well as risks associated with artificial intelligence, gender-based violence, and electoral processes. We urge States to follow the approach of the resolution and to combat disinformation through holistic, positive measures, including by ensuring a diverse, free and independent media environment, protecting journalists and media workers, and implementing comprehensive right to information laws. Importantly, we also urge States to ensure that they do not conduct their own disinformation campaigns. At the same time, social media companies have an essential role to play and should take heed of the resolution by reforming their business models which allow disinformation to flourish on their platforms. The resolution also mandates the Advisory Committee to produce a new report on disinformation, and it is absolutely essential that this report mirrors and reinforces existing standards on this topic, especially the various reports of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression.

    Whilst we welcome the technical renewal of the resolution on freedom of religion or belief, we regret that the parallel resolution on combating intolerance (widely known by its original name Resolution 16/18) was not tabled at the session. Since 2011, these duel resolutions have been renewed each year, representing a consensual and universal framework to address the root causes of hate based on religion or belief in law, policy, and practice. We call on the OIC to once again renew Resolution 16/18 in a future session, while ensuring no substantive changes are made to this consensual framework. We also urge all States to reaffirm their commitment to Resolution 16/18 and the Rabat Plan of Action and adopt comprehensive and evidence-based national implementation plans, with the full and effective participation of diverse stakeholders.

    We welcome the adoption of the resolution on prevention of genocide and its focus on impunity, risks and early warnings, as well as the paragraph reaffirming that starvation of civilians as a method to combat is prohibited under international humanitarian law; however, we regret that the resolution fails to adequately reflect and address serious concerns relating to current political contexts and related risks of genocide. 

    We welcome the adoption of the resolution on the rights of the child: realising the rights of the child and inclusive social protection, strengthening the implementation of child rights-compliant inclusive social protection systems that benefit all children. We also welcome the addition of a new section on child rights mainstreaming, enhancing the capacity of OHCHR to advance child rights mainstreaming, particularly in areas such as meaningful and ethical child participation and child safeguarding.  We remain concerned by persisted attempts to weaken the text, especially to shift the focus away from children as individual right-holders, to curtail child participation and remove the inclusion of a gender perspective.

    We welcome the adoption of the resolution on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment which addresses effective national legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture. We welcome the new paragraph urging States concerned to comply with binding orders of the International Court of Justice related to their obligations under the Convention Against Torture.

    We welcome the adoption of a new resolution on the human rights situation in Belarus. The Belarusian authorities continue their widespread and systematic politically-motivated repression, targeting not only dissent inside the country, but also Belarusians outside the country who were forced to flee for fear of persecution. Today, almost 1,500 prisoners jailed following politically-motivated charges in Belarus face discriminatory treatment, severe restriction of their rights, and ill-treatment including torture. The resolution rightly creates a new standalone independent investigative mechanism, that will inherit the work of the OHCHR Examination, to collect and preserve evidence of potential international crimes beyond the 2020 elections period, with a view to advancing accountability. It also ensures the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur who remains an essential ‘lifeline’ to Belarusian civil society.

    We welcome the resolution on technical assistance and capacity building in regard to the human rights situation in Haiti and emphasis on the role civil society plays in the promotion and protection of human rights and the importance of creating and maintaining an enabling environment in which civil society can operate independently and free from insecurity. We similarly welcome the call on the Haitian authorities to step up their efforts to support national human rights institutions and to pursue an inclusive dialogue between all Haitian actors concerned in order to find a lasting solution to the multidimensional crisis, which severely impacts civil society. We welcome the renewal of the mandate of the designated expert and reference to women and children in regard to the monitoring of human rights situation and abuses developments, as well as encouragement of progress on the question of the establishment of an office of the Office of the High Commissioner in Haiti. We nonetheless regret that the resolution does not address the multifaceted challenges civil society faces amidst escalating violence, fails to further address the link between the circulation of firearms and the human rights violations and abuses, and does not identify concrete avenues for the protection of civilians and solidarity action to ensure the safety, dignity and rights of civilians are upheld.

    We welcome the adoption of the resolution on Iran, renewing the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on human rights in Iran and extending for another year the mandate of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Iran. The continuation of these two distinct and complementary mandates is essential for the Council to fulfill its mandate of promotion and protection of human rights in Iran. However, given the severity of the human rights crisis in the country, we regret that this important resolution remains purely procedural and fails to reflect the dire situation of human rights in Iran, including the sharp spike in executions, often following grossly unfair trials. It also fails to address the increased levels of police and judicial harassment against women and girls appearing in public without compulsory headscarves, human rights defenders, lawyers, journalists and families of victims seeking truth and justice, and the continued pervasive discrimination and violence faced by women and girls, LGBTI+ persons and persons belonging to ethnic and religious minorities in the country.  

    We welcome the adoption by consensus of the resolution on Myanmar, which is a clear indication of the global concern for the deepening human rights and humanitarian crisis in the country as a result of the military’s over three-year long brutal war against the people resisting its attempted coup. We further welcome the Council’s unreserved support for Myanmar peoples’ aspirations for human rights, democracy, and justice as well as the recognition of serious human rights implications of the continuing sale of arms and jet fuel to Myanmar.

    We welcome the resolution on the situation of human rights in Ukraine stemming from the Russian aggression. The latest report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry (COI) reveals disturbing evidence of war crimes, including civilian targeting, torture, sexual violence, and the unlawful transfer of children. These findings underscore the conflict’s brutality, particularly highlighted by the siege of Mariupol, where indiscriminate attacks led to massive civilian casualties and infrastructure destruction. The report also details the widespread and systematic torture and sexual violence against both civilians and prisoners of war. Moreover, the illegal deportation of children emerges as a significant issue, as part of a broader strategy of terror and cultural erasure. The COI’s mandate extension is crucial for ongoing investigations and ensuring justice for victims. 

    By adopting a resolution entitled ‘advancing human rights in South Sudan,’ the Council ensured that international scrutiny of South Sudan’s human rights situation will cover the country’s first-ever national elections, which are set to take place in De­cember 2024. With this resolution, the UN’s top human rights body extended the mandate of its Com­mis­sion on Human Rights in South Sudan.

    We welcome the resolution on the human rights situation in Syria and the extension of the mandate of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry (COI), which will continue to report on violations from all sides of the conflict in an impartial and victim-centered manner. Syria continues to commit systematic and widespread attacks against civilians, in detention centers through torture, arbitrary detention and enforced disappearance and through indiscriminate attacks against the population in Idlib. We welcome that the resolution supports the mandate of the Independent Institution of the Missing People and calls for compliance with the recent order on Provisional Measures by the ICJ – both initiatives can play a significant role in fulfilling victims’ rights to truth and justice and should receive support by all UN Member States. In a context of ongoing normalisation, the CoI’s mandate to investigate and report on human rights abuses occurring in Syria is of paramount importance.

    We continue to deplore this Council’s exceptionalism towards serious human rights violations committed by the Chinese government. At a time when double-standards are enabling ongoing atrocity crimes to be committed in Palestine, sustained failure by Council Members, in particular OIC countries, to promote accountability for crimes against humanity against Uyghurs and Muslim peoples in China severely undermines the Council’s integrity, and its ability to prevent and put an end to atrocity crimes globally. Findings by the OHCHR, the UN Treaty Bodies, the ILO and over 100 letters by UN Special Procedures since 2018 have provided overwhelming evidence pointing to systematic and widespread human rights violations across the People’s Republic of China. We reiterate our pressing call for all Council Members to support the adoption of a resolution establishing a UN mandate to monitor and report on the human rights situation in China, as repeatedly urged by UN Special Procedures. We further echo Special Procedures’ call for prompt and impartial investigations into the unlawful death of Cao Shunli, and all cases of reprisals for cooperation with the UN.

    We regret the Council’s silence on the situation in India despite the clear and compounding early warning signs of further deterioration that necessitate preventive action by the Council based on the objective criteria. The latest of these early warning signals include the recent notification of rules to implement the highly discriminatory Citizenship Amendment Act by the Bharatiya Janata Party-led government just weeks before the election, along with recent intercommunal violence in Manipur and ongoing violence against Muslims in various parts of India amid increasing restrictions on civic space, criminalisation of dissent and erosion of the rule of law with political interference.

    We further regret that this Council is increasingly failing to protect victims of human rights violations throughout the Middle East and North Africa, including in Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen. The people of Yemen and Libya continue to endure massive ‘man-made’ humanitarian catastrophes caused in large part by ongoing impunity for war crimes, crimes against humanity and other grave violations of international law. In Algeria, Egypt, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and in other MENA countries, citizens are routinely subjected to brutal, wide-spread human rights violations intended to silence dissent, eradicate independent civil society and quash democratic social movements. Countless citizens from the MENA region continue to hope and strive for a more dignified life – often at the cost of their own lives and freedom. We call on this Council and UN member States to rise above narrow political agendas and begin to take steps to address the increasing selectivity that frequently characterises this Council’s approach to human rights protection and promotion. 

    We regret that once more, civil society representatives faced numerous obstacles to accessing the Palais and engaging in discussions, both in person and remotely, during this session. The UN human rights system in Geneva has always and continues to rely on the smooth and unhindered access of civil society to carry out its mandate. We remind UN Member States, as well as UNOG, that the Council’s mandate, as set out in HRC Res 5/1, requires that arrangements be made, and practices observed to ensure ‘the most effective contribution’ of NGOs. Undermining civil society access and engagement not only undermines the capacities and effectiveness of civil society but also of the UN itself.

    Signatories:

    1. All Human Rights for All in Iran
    2. Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
    3. Association Arc pour la defense des droits de l’homme et des revendication democratique/culturelles du peuple Azerbaidjanais Iran -”ArcDH”
    4. Balochistan Human Rights Group
    5. Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies
    6. Child Rights Connect (CRCnt)
    7. CIVICUS
    8. Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI)
    9. Egyptian initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR)
    10. Ensemble contre la Peine de Mort
    11. Franciscans International
    12. Gulf Center for Human Rights
    13. Impact Iran
    14. International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI)
    15. International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
    16. International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA)
    17. International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
    18. Kurdistan Human Rights Network
    19. Kurdpa Human Rights Organization
    20. PEN America
    21. The Syrian Legal Development Programme (SLDP)
    22. United 4 Iran

    see also: https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/un-geneva/eu-human-rights-council_en

    https://www.fidh.org/en/international-advocacy/united-nations/human-rights-council/55th-human-rights-council-session-israel-palestine-belarus-iran

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

  • People LIVING IN Gaza amid Israel’s genocide are taking GERMANY to COURT over arms exports

    Five Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip have filed a legal complaint in Berlin against Germany’s government. It is over the state’s delivery of weapons to Israel, an NGO representing them said on Friday 12 April.

    Germany: in the dock over arms exports to Israel

    The complaint seeks to “revoke the export licences issued by the German government for arms deliveries to Israel”, the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) said in a statement.

    A spokeswoman for the administrative court in Berlin confirmed it received the complaint late on Thursday 11 April. The five plaintiffs live in different parts of the Gaza Strip, including Rafah, the official added.

    The Palestinians are “challenging the authorisation already granted for the delivery of anti-tank weapons” and seeking to stop deliveries that have not yet been authorised, the spokeswoman said.

    The complaint is directed against the economy ministry, which now has two weeks to respond.

    The five Palestinians have all had family members killed in Israeli missile attacks since 7 October, according to the ECCHR.

    The plaintiffs say Berlin is failing to fulfil its obligations under international law, including the 1948 United Nations Genocide Convention.

    Wolfgang Kaleck, general secretary of the ECCHR, said:

    Germany cannot remain true to its values if it exports weapons to a war in which serious violations of international humanitarian law are evident.

    Complicit in genocide – multiple times over

    Germany is the second biggest arms exporter to Israel after the US, accounting for 30% of imports between 2019 and 2023, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

    Berlin is facing a case in the International Court of Justice in which Nicaragua says it is in breach of the UN Genocide Convention, set up after the Holocaust.

    On Tuesday 9 April, Berlin’s representatives insisted that Germany supplied arms only “on the basis of detailed scrutiny… that far exceeds the requirements of international law”.

    Since 7 October, the Israeli military has killed over 33,482 Palestinians, injured 76,049, and destroyed approximately 62% of homes in Gaza.

    Additional reporting via Agence France-Presse

    Featured image via the Canary

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Indonesian military’s crimes in West Papua and the democratic solution

    By Sharon Muller of Arah Juang

    On Friday, March 22, a video circulated of TNI (Indonesian military) soldiers torturing a civilian in Papua. In the video, the victim is submerged in a drum filled with water with his hands tied behind his back.

    The victim was alternately beaten and kicked by the TNI members. The victim’s back was also slashed with a knife.

    The video circulated globally quickly and was widely criticised.

    Gustav Kawer from the Papua Association of Human Rights Advocates (PAHAM) condemned the incident and called for the perpetrators to be brought to justice.

    This was then followed by National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM), Indonesian Human Rights Watch (Imparsial), the Diocese, the church and students.

    Meanwhile, Cenderawasih/XVII regional military commander (Pangdam) Major-General Izak Pangemanan tried to cover up the crime by saying it was a hoax and the video was a result of “editing”.

    This argument was later refuted by the TNI itself and it was proven that TNI soldiers were the ones who had committed the crime. Thirteen soldiers were arrested and accused over the torture.

    The torture occurred on 3 February 2024 in Puncak Regency, Papua.

    Accused of being ‘spies’
    The victim who was seen in the video was Defianus Kogoya, who had been arrested along with Warinus Murib and Alianus Murib. They were arrested and accused of being “spies” for the West Papua National Liberation Army-Free Papua Organisation (TPNPB-OPM), a cheap accusation which the TNI and police were subsequently unable to prove.


    Indonesia human rights: 13 soldiers arrested after torture video. Video: Al Jazeera

    The three were arrested when the TNI was conducting a search in Amukia and Gome district. When Warinus was arrested, his legs were tied to a car and he was dragged for one kilometre, before finally being tortured.

    Alianus, meanwhile ,was also taken to a TNI post and tortured. After several hours, they were finally handed over to a police post because there was not enough evidence to prove the TNI’s accusations.

    Defianus finally fainted, while Warinus died of his injuries. Warinus’ body was cremated by the family the next day on February 4.

    Defianus is still suffering and remains seriously ill. This is a TNI crime in Papua.

    But that is not all. On 22 February 2022, the TNI also tortured seven children in Sinak district, Puncak. The seven children were Deson Murib, Makilon Tabuni, Pingki Wanimbo, Waiten Murib, Aton Murib, Elison Murib and Murtal Kurua.

    Makilon Tabuni died as a result.

    Civilians murdered, mutilated
    On August 22, the TNI murdered and mutilated four civilians in Timika. They were Arnold Lokbere, Irian Nirigi, Lemaniel Nirigi and Atis Tini.

    The bodies of the four were dismembered: the head, body and legs were separated into several parts, put in sacks then thrown into a river.

    Six days later, soldiers from the Infantry Raider Battalion 600/Modang tortured four civilians in Mappi regency, Papua. The four were Amsal P Yimsimem, Korbinus Yamin, Lodefius Tikamtahae and Saferius Yame.

    They were tortured for three hours and suffered injuries all over their bodies.

    Three days later, on August 30, the TNI again tortured two civilians named Bruno Amenim Kimko and Yohanis Kanggun in Edera district, Mappi regency. Bruno Amenim died while Yohanis Kanggun suffered serious injuries.

    On October 27, three children under the age of 16 were tortured by the TNI in Keerom regency. They were Rahmat Paisel, Bastian Bate and Laurents Kaung. They were tortured using chains, coils of wire and water hoses.

    The atrocity occurred in the Yamanai Village, Arso II, Arso district.

    On 22 February 2023, TNI personnel from the Navy post in Lantamal X1 Ilwayap tortured two civilians named Albertus Kaize and Daniel Kaize. Albertus Kaize died of his injuries. This crime occurred in Merauke regency, Papua.

    95 civilians tortured
    Between 2018 and 2021, Amnesty International recorded that more than 95 civilians had been tortured and killed by the TNI and the police. These crimes target indigenous Papuans, and the curve continues to rise year by year, ever since Indonesia occupied Papua in 1961.

    These crimes were committed one after another without a break, and followed the same pattern. So it can be concluded that these were not the acts of rogue individuals or one or two people as the TNI argues to reduce their crimes to individual acts.

    Rather, they are structural (systematic) crimes designed to subdue the Papuan nation, to stop all forms of Papuan resistance for the sake of the exploitation and theft of Papua’s natural resources.

    The problems in Papua cannot be solved by increasing the number of police or soldiers. The problems in Papua must be resolved democratically.

    This democratic solution must include establishing a human rights court for all perpetrators of crimes in Papua since the 1960s, and not just the perpetrators in the field, but also those responsible in the chain of command.

    Only this will break the pattern of crimes that are occurring and provide justice for the Papuan people. A human rights court will also mean weakening the anti-democratic forces that exist in Indonesia and Papua — namely military(ism).

    Garbage of history
    A prerequisite for achieving democratisation is to eliminate the old forces, the garbage of history.

    The cleaner the process is carried out, the broader and deeper the democracy that can be achieved. This also includes the demands of the Papuan people to be given the right to determine their own destiny.

    This is not a task for some later day, but is the task of the Papuan people today. Nor is the task of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) political elite or political activists alone, but it is the task of all Papuan people if they want to extract themselves from the crimes of the TNI and police or Indonesian colonialism.

    Independence can only be gained by the struggle of the ordinary people themselves. The people must fight, the people must take to the streets, the people must build their own ranks, their own alternative political tool, and fight in an organised and guided manner.

    Sharon Muller is a leading member of the Socialist Union (Perserikatan Sosialis, PS) and a member of the Socialist Study Circle (Lingkar Studi Sosialis, LSS). Arah Juang is the newspaper of the Socialist Union.

    Translated by James Balowski for Indoleft News. The original title of the article was “Kejahatan TNI di Papua dan Solusi Demokratis Untuk Rakyat Papua dan Indonesia”.

    References
    Gemima Harvey’s report The Human Tragedy of West Papua, 15 January 2014. This reports states that more than 500,000 West Papua people have been slaughtered by Indonesia and its actors, the TNI and police since 1961.

    Veronica Koman’s chronology of torture of civilians in Papua. Posted on the Veronica Koman Facebook wall, 24 March 2024.

    Jubi, Alleged torture of citizens by the TNI adds to the long list of violence in the land of Papua. 23 March 2024.

    VOA Indonesia, Amnesty International: 95 civilians in Papua have been victims of extrajudicial killings.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Indigenous rights flag-burning protest rocks CNMI community

    By Mark Rabago, RNZ Pacific Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas correspondent

    A man on Saipan has burned the official CNMI flag in protest, saying that it does not truly represent Indigenous people of the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas (CNMI).

    A public video of the flag-burning was posted by Raymond Quitugua that has stirred various negative reactions within the CNMI community.

    Under the CNMI’s constitution, flag-burning is prohibited and those found to have breached the law can face up to one year in jail or fined up to US$500 (NZ$835).

    The official CNMI flag
    The official CNMI flag . . . disputed by some Chamorro critics. Image: 123rf/RNZ

    Quitugua said the true CNMI flag was the initial design presented back in the 1970s that featured a latte stone with a star in the front of it on a field of blue.

    The current official flag of the US territory consists of a rectangular field of blue, a white star in the center, superimposed on a gray latte stone, surrounded by the traditional Carolinian mwáár.

    But Quitugua claims the official flag does not accurately represent the Indigenous people of the CNMI, which he believes is the Chamorro community (not including the Carolinian community).

    He added that he burned the flag as a form of protest and he intended to take the issue to court.

    Disappointed, insulted
    Renowned elder in the CNMI community, Lino Olopai, as well as one of the many champions of the CNMI’s flag, expressed disappointment and insulted by Quitugua’s actions and said that warranted jail time.

    Olopai said the basis of the current CNMI flag was indeed the Chamorro flag, but a group of Carolinians that included himself fought to have a mwáár on the flag as a representation of the Carolinian community as they believed they, too, were indigenous people of the CNMI.

    He added that Quitugua’s flag-burning is a form of discrimination against the Carolinian community, which like the Chamorros, are the two recognised Indigenous people of the CNMI.

    “Stop the racism. We are all part of the Pacific islands,” Olopai said.

    “We should maintain peaceful attitude and spirit with one another. Not just between the Chamorro and Carolinian communities, but with other communities across the Pacific,” he said.

    In a letter to the editor of the Saipan Tribune, former lawmaker Luis John Castro also criticised Quitugua’s flag-burning, saying there were other more constructive forms of protest.

    “If something such as the flag does not jive with your beliefs, OK you don’t have to agree,” he said, adding “but there are many ways to resolve differences other than desecrating a cultural symbol”.

    “Conduct an online poll, call into [a radio station] and make it a topic of discussion. Hold a town hall meeting with other concerned citizens, ask a legislator to draft bills or initiative to address its look, or file a certified question with the courts to get an answer to your concerns.

    “Why do something like burn the flag? To seek attention? To get likes and shares on Facebook? To incite civil unrest?” he wrote.

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • ‘Right to freedom from torture’: UN experts urge the Gambia not to decriminalise FGM

    Repealing ban would mean return of ‘one of the most pernicious forms of violence committed against women and children’

    A team of UN experts has urged Gambian lawmakers not to repeal a ban on female genital mutilation, saying such a move would set a dangerous global precedent.

    In a letter dated 8 April and made public on Thursday, the experts, led by Reem Alsalem, the UN special rapporteur on violence against women and girls, said allowing the unchecked return of “one of the most pernicious forms of violence committed against women and children” would violate their right to freedom from torture.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Zara, H&M Linked to Illegal Deforestation & Human Rights Abuses with Brazilian Cotton Supply Chain

    earthsight
    8 Mins Read

    Industrial cotton farming in Brazil that’s sold to Asian suppliers of Zara and H&M is destroying the Cerrado savanna and violating the rights of local communities, a new investigation has revealed.

    Zara & H&M – two of the world’s largest fashion companies – source cotton from industrial farms in Brazil that are accused of illegal deforestation, land grabbing, violent conflicts and corruption. These practices are violating the human rights of local communities and tearing down the Cerrado, the world’s largest savanna, according to a new report by climate NGO Earthsight.

    Lying south of the Amazon, the Cerrado is home to 5% of the world’s animals and plants, encompassing 161 species and millions of humans depending on its forests for their livelihoods. But half of the biome’s native vegetation has already been lost to industrial farming by agribusinesses turning their attention to the Cerrado to spare the Amazon. And just last year, deforestation rates in the region increased by 43% – almost all of which is illegal.

    “While we all know what soy and beef have done to Brazil’s forests, cotton’s impact has gone largely unnoticed. Yet the crop has boomed in recent decades and become an environmental disaster,” said Earthsight director Sam Lawson. “If you have cotton clothes, towels or bed sheets from H&M or Zara, they may well be stained by the plundering of the Cerrado.”

    Video footage from the year-long investigation shows a community member being shot, lands being burned, and large swathes of green fields being cleared, tracing over 800,000 tonnes of cotton back to firms in Asia that make clothes for Zara and Inditex (the parent company of Zara, Pull&Bear, Massimo Dutti, Bershka and Stradivarius), which together have over 10,000 locations and made $41B in combined revenue in 2022.

    SLC Agrícola and Grup Horita’s land-grabbing and violent history

    Brazilian cotton has become much more prominent in the fashion industry over the last decade, with the country now the world’s second-largest exporter of the crop, and set to overtake the US by 2030. In the last decade, Brazil’s cotton exports have more than doubled, and almost all of this is grown in the Cerrado.

    The investigation found that H&M and Zara’s suppliers source cotton grown in the Brazilian state of Bahia by two of its largest producers: SLC Agrícola (which is the top producer) and Grupo Horita (the sixth-largest). Both owned by some of Brazil’s wealthiest families, their cotton production in western Bahia is linked to a number of illegalities.

    The region has been heavily impacted by industrial agriculture, with locals telling Earthsight it’s hard to find a single large-scale cotton or soy farm in all of western Bahia that isn’t the result of land grabbing. Agribusinesses extract nearly two billion litres of water daily from the area, but dump 600 million litres of pesticides on the Cerrado every year. The heavy use of pesticides gives cotton an “extremely high” climate footprint – clearing Cerrado vegetation for agriculture emits as much carbon as 50 million cars in a year.

    zara deforestation
    Courtesy: Earthsight 2023

    Horita grows cotton, soy and other crops on a third of a mega estate called Estrondo in a Bahia municipality. It has been linked to violent land disputes that pit Estrondo against Indigenous communities called geraizeiros, who have inhabited the area since the 19th century and have their right to traditional lands protected by law. Bahai’s attorney general ruled in 2018 that Estrondo was one of the largest land-grabbed areas Brazilian history, but these public lands belong to the state and should be environmentally protected and set aside for the local population.

    Over half of the area illegally appropriated by Estrondo’s owners in the 1970s and 1980s has been deforested, and in the last 10 years, the traditional communities have faced intimidation and harassment by armed men working for the agribusinesses. In 2019, two community members were shot by Estrondo’s security guards.

    One of Grupo Horita’s owners, Walter Horita, has been caught in a corruption scandal for the sale of court rulings related to land disputes in Bahia, with attempts to influence judicial and political stakeholders in the region, and reports of him transferring $1.2M to a court official.

    Another land-grabbing case has afflicted the Capão do Modesto community, with large agribusinesses accused of misappropriating public lands to convert them into “legal reserves”, which landowners must set aside for environmental prevention. But instead of keeping part of their productive properties as legal reserves, some agribusinesses have acquired land elsewhere to do so. Bahia’s attorney general has referred to Capão do Modesto as “one of the most serious land grabbing cases” in the region, with the local community facing harassment, surveillance, intimidation and attacks carried out by gunmen.

    Better Cotton certification masks illegal deforestation

    cotton illegal deforestation
    Courtesy: MapBiomas/Thomas Bauer/Earthsight 2023

    Both Grupo Horita and SLC Agrícola also have a history of illegal deforestation. The former’s farms were found to have illegally felled over 25,000 hectares, while there were no permits found for 11,700 hectares of deforestation by the company between 2010 and 2018. In fact, it has been fined over 20 times for environmental violations, totalling $4.5M.

    And despite adopting a zero-deforestation policy in 2021, SLC Agrícola was accused of clearing over 1,350 hectares of native vegetation at one of its farms in 2022. That’s before you consider the 40,000 hectares its farms lost over the last 12 years. The business has also been fined over $250,000 since 2008 for its violations.

    Earthsight notes how H&M and Zara rely on the Better Cotton (BC) certification system. All the cotton investigated by the organisation was BC-certified, and the two fashion giants are the world’s biggest users of such cotton. Brazil, meanwhile, produces the largest amount of BC-licensed fibre (42% of the global total).

    But this system is “fundamentally flawed”, with BC having repeatedly been accused of greenwashing, not allowing for full supply chain traceability, and failing to protect human rights. The certification has “excessively vague” requirements to comply with local laws and no mention of land ownership or disputes. A 2019 ban on ecosystem conversion doesn’t address illegal deforestation, while an upcoming traceability system is inadequate as it traces cotton back to countries, not farms.

    H&M and Inditex don’t have the policies and tools in place to make up for BC’s shortcomings. The former’s human rights and sustainability policies fail to address community rights or deforestation, while the latter’s climate commitments don’t extend to its cotton suppliers. BC has now launched an investigation into the allegations.

    In a statement, H&M said it took the findings “extremely seriously”. “Even despite the standard owners’ best efforts, violations can of course occur. Therefore, it is essential that the standards and certifications we select have credible grievance mechanisms and incident management processes in place that enable remedy,” it said.

    “We have commercial relationships with all these companies. Inditex’s purchases from these organisations represents a fraction of their total production,” said Inditex. “Accordingly to suppliers’ information, these companies do not directly purchase cotton to any Brazilian producer. They purchase cotton with different origins throughout specialised traders depending on the raw material characteristics, certification and price.”

    What governments and companies need to do

    cotton deforestation
    Courtesy: Thomas Bauer/Earthsight 2023

    The report notes that government reforms are needed to transform the cotton and fashion industries, given their weak supply chain oversight and ineffective certification systems. The EU, for its part, is close to finalising its Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive – but this will be a watered-down version of the original proposal, thanks to Germany’s withdrawal of support for the law. This was driven by the FDP (part of the governing coalition in the country), which has received funding from businesses that would be affected by the law.

    Last year, the EU’s Deforestation Regulation came into force to require the production of certain goods to be legal and free from deforestation, but it does not cover cotton or goods made from cotton. This is also the case with the UK’s illegal deforestation ban and the US’s Forest Act. In Brazil, the federal government is promoting the PPCerado plan to reduce deforestation in the savanna, but this also only targets illegal deforestation and fails to address land clearing authorised by the local government.

    Successive Bahia governments have also adopted regulations that undermine the state’s constitutional provisions on environmental and community protection. Earthsight suggests that the approval of deforestation permits has skyrocketed, with over 750,000 hectares authorised between 2012 and 2021. “The federal government should put in place a plan to halt all large-scale deforestation in the Cerrado, not only the illegal kind,” the report states. “Bahia’s government should map all public lands to ensure they are preserved and that traditional communities fully enjoy their land rights.”

    Earthsight says Better Cotton must require certified farms to seek the consent of Indigenous communities for any activities that affect them, while rules on deforestation need to ban certified cotton from growing on land that was deforested illegally before December 2019. Conflict of interest issues also need to be resolved by putting impartial parties in charge of certification and audits.

    Better Cotton is also being asked to implement and enforce a meaningful traceability system, with H&M, Zara and other big retailers called upon to pressure the accreditation programme to do so. Until that happens, these businesses need to go beyond using certifications and ensure their goods are sourced ethically by introducing more rigorous policies and checks.

    “These firms talk about good practice, social responsibility and certification schemes, they claim to invest in traceability and sustainability, but all this now looks about as fake as their high-street window arrangements,” said Lawson. “It has become very clear that crimes related to the commodities we consume have to be addressed through regulation, not consumer choices. That means lawmakers in consumer countries should put in place strong laws with tough enforcement. In the meantime, shoppers should think twice before buying their next piece of cotton clothing.”

    The post Zara, H&M Linked to Illegal Deforestation & Human Rights Abuses with Brazilian Cotton Supply Chain appeared first on Green Queen.

    This post was originally published on Green Queen.

  • The senior Swiss women who went to court over climate change, and won – podcast

    This week, in a landmark case, the European court of human rights ruled that Switzerland’s weak climate policy had violated the rights of a group of older Swiss women to family life. Ian Sample talks to Europe environment correspondent Ajit Niranjan about why the women brought the case and what the ruling could mean for future climate policy.

    Read Ajit Niranjan’s article about the court case

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Swiss Government’s Climate Inaction Violates Human Rights, Rules Top European Court

    climate change human rights
    5 Mins Read

    In a landmark ruling, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled in favour of a group of Swiss women, who said their government violated human rights by taking adequate action on climate change. However, the court also threw out two other similar cases.

    On what was a milestone day for global climate lawsuits in Strasbourg, France, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that the Swiss government’s inaction on climate change violates human rights, while rejecting similar claims made by French and Portuguese citizens in separate cases.

    This was the first such ruling by an international court, with the ECHR acknowledging that weak climate policies can be in breach of the human rights set out in the European Convention. Despite the defeat of the other two cases, the verdict sets a legal precedent for future litigation on how the climate crisis affects people’s right to a safe planet, and amps up pressure on governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

    “It is clear that future generations are likely to bear an increasingly severe burden of the consequences of present failures and omissions to combat climate change,” said ECHR president Síofra O’Leary.

    Why the ECHR ruled in favour of Swiss climate activists

    echr climate change
    Courtesy: Shervine Nafissi

    The French suit was brought by MEP Damien Carême, who argued that France’s inadequate efforts to mitigate climate change violated his rights to life and privacy and family life. The case was filed when he was the mayor of Grand-Synthe, a coastal French town vulnerable to flooding. But the court rejected the case because he no longer lives there.

    The Portuguese case, meanwhile, was filed by six youngsters who sued 32 European countries for failing to avert the climate crisis and its effects, which they said threatened their right to life and discriminated against them based on their age. The ECHR refused to admit it on the grounds that applicants can’t bring cases against countries other than Portugal, and added that they hadn’t pursued legal options within Portugal.

    As for the Swiss suit, it was filed by the KlimaSeniorinnen, a group of 2,400 elderly women whose average age is 74. The eight-year legal battle saw the organisation accuse the Swiss government of not doing enough to combat climate change. They argued that their rights are especially infringed on as they’re most affected by increasingly frequent extreme heat events, citing a UN IPCC report revealing that women and older adults are among the demographics facing the highest risks of temperature-related deaths during heatwaves.

    Unlike the other two cases, the ECHR agreed with the KlimaSeniorinnen, who said Switzerland violated their right to life by failing to cut emissions that can limit global heating to 1.5°C above pre-industrial temperatures. The court ruled that the Swiss government had failed to comply with its duties under the European Convention concerning climate change.

    O’Leary noted that there were critical gaps in the process of putting in place the relevant domestic regulatory framework. “This included a failure to quantify, through a carbon budget or otherwise, national greenhouse gas emissions limitations,” she said. “The respondent state had previously failed to meet its past greenhouse gas emission reduction targets by failing to act in good time and in an appropriate and consistent manner.”

    The ECHR further noted that Swiss courts hadn’t provided convincing reasons as to why they considered it unnecessary to examine the KilmaSeniorinnen’s complaints, adding that they had failed to take into consideration the compelling scientific evidence concerning climate change and hadn’t taken the complaints seriously.

    Swiss president Viola Amherd wasn’t impressed with the verdict, saying: “I would like to know what the grounds for it are. Sustainability is very important to Switzerland, biodiversity is very important to Switzerland, the net-zero target is very important to Switzerland. We are working on those and will continue to work on them with all our strength. This ruling does nothing to change that.”

    But the country now has a legal duty to take greater action against climate change – its current commitments outline a 50% reduction in emissions by 2030, from a 1990 baseline. And if it doesn’t update its climate policies, further litigation and financial penalties could follow.

    ECHR ruling sets legal precedent for climate change lawsuits

    The ECHR rejects about 90% of all applications it receives, but fast-tracked the three climate cases due to their urgent nature. In fact, it delayed hearings on six other climate cases pending the three rulings on Tuesday. These include a lawsuit in Norway that accuses the government of violating human rights by issuing new oil and gas exploration licenses beyond 2035.

    The ECHR’s unprecedented decision will have a ripple effect on future climate cases, establishing a binding legal precedent for all 46 member states of the Council of Europe, which could face similar lawsuits that they’re likely to lose.

    “We expect this ruling to influence climate action and climate litigation across Europe and far beyond. The ruling reinforces the vital role of courts – both international and domestic – in holding governments to their legal obligations to protect human rights from environmental harm,” said Joie Chowdhury, senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law. “While today we did not see ideal outcomes in all the three cases, overall today is a watershed legal moment for climate justice and human rights.”

    “I really hoped that we would win against all the countries so obviously I’m disappointed that this didn’t happen,” said Sofia Oliveira, a 19-year-old applicant in the Portugal case. “But the most important thing is that the Court has said in the Swiss women’s case that governments must cut their emissions more to protect human rights. So, their win is a win for us too and a win for everyone.”

    Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the EU Commission (which Switzerland is not a part of), said: “The Commission takes note of these rulings and will of course be studying them very carefully. But regardless of the legal arguments, what these cases do is they remind us of the high importance and urgency which our citizens attach to climate action.”

    Climate change litigation has been on the up for a few years now, spanning countries like the Netherlands, Pakistan, the UK, Italy, Turkey, Australia, Brazil, Peru, South Korea and New Zealand. Last month, an Indian court ruled that citizens have the right to be free from the adverse impact of climate change, while in August, youth climate activists in Montana, US registered a legal victory after a judge ruled that the state’s fossil fuel policy was violating their right to a clean and healthful environment.

    Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg, who was part of a gathering outside the court called the Swiss government’s inaction “a betrayal beyond words”. “This is only the beginning of climate litigation,” she said. “The results of this can mean in no way that we lean back. This means that we have to fight even more, since this is only the beginning. Because in a climate emergency, everything is at stake.”

    The post Swiss Government’s Climate Inaction Violates Human Rights, Rules Top European Court appeared first on Green Queen.

    This post was originally published on Green Queen.

  • EU asylum and migration pact has passed despite far right and left’s objections

    Long-awaited package of measures marks victory for Europe’s centre albeit with ‘doubts and concerns’ over implementation

    Almost a decade in the making, the EU’s new migration and asylum pact suffered so many setbacks, stalemates and rewrites that when member states finally announced a deal last year, its passage through parliament seemed assured.

    That was, however, to ignore the objections of Europe’s resurgent far-right parties, who felt it was not tough enough (and, perhaps, hoped to profit at the ballot box from allowing the current chaos around migration to continue).

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Inter-American Court of Human Rights: Historic Victory for CAJAR in Colombia

    In a landmark ruling for fundamental freedoms in Colombia, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights found that for over two decades the state government harassed, surveilled, and persecuted members of a lawyer’s group that defends human rights defenders, activists, and indigenous people, putting the attorneys’ lives at risk. 

    The ruling is a major victory for civil rights in Colombia, which has a long history of abuse and violence against human rights defenders, including murders and death threats. The case involved the unlawful and arbitrary surveillance of members of the Jose Alvear Restrepo Lawyers Collective (CAJAR), a Colombian human rights organization defending victims of political persecution and community activists for over 40 years.

    The court found that since at least 1999, Colombian authorities carried out a constant campaign of pervasive secret surveillance of CAJAR members and their families. That state violated their rights to life, personal integrity, private life, freedom of expression and association, and more, the Court said. It noted the particular impact experienced by women defenders and those who had to leave the country amid threat, attacks, and harassment for representing victims.  

    The decision is the first by the Inter-American Court to find a State responsible for violating the right to defend human rights. The court is a human rights tribunal that interprets and applies the American Convention on Human Rights, an international treaty ratified by over 20 states in Latin America and the Caribbean. 

    In 2022, EFF, Article 19, Fundación Karisma, and Privacy International, represented by Berkeley Law’s International Human Rights Law Clinic, filed an amicus brief in the case. EFF and partners urged the court to rule that Colombia’s legal framework regulating intelligence activity and the surveillance of CAJAR and their families violated a constellation of human rights and forced them to limit their activities, change homes, and go into exile to avoid violence, threats, and harassment. 

    Colombia’s intelligence network was behind abusive surveillance practices in violation of the American Convention and did not prevent authorities from unlawfully surveilling, harassing, and attacking CAJAR members, EFF told the court. Even after Colombia enacted a new intelligence law, authorities continued to carry out unlawful communications surveillance against CAJAR members, using an expansive and invasive spying system to target and disrupt the work of not just CAJAR but other human rights defenders and journalists. 

    In examining Colombia’s intelligence law and surveillance actions, the court elaborated on key Inter-American and other international human rights standards, and advanced significant conclusions for the protection of privacy, freedom of expression, and the right to defend human rights. 

    The court delved into criteria for intelligence gathering powers, limitations, and controls. It highlighted the need for independent oversight of intelligence activities and effective remedies against arbitrary actions. It also elaborated on standards for the collection, management, and access to personal data held by intelligence agencies, and recognized the protection of informational self-determination by the American Convention.

    For more details see: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/04/historic-victory-human-rights-colombia-inter-american-court-finds-state-agencies

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

  • Thirty years ago the world failed to stop the Rwandan genocide. Now we fail Gaza | Chris McGreal

    The same countries that said ‘never again’ after Rwanda have given Israel a free pass during six months of death and destruction

    As the war in Gaza grinds through its deadly sixth month and allegations of war crimes by Israel pile up, this week also marks 30 years since the world turned its back on Rwanda’s Tutsi minority.

    The 100 days of killing that became known as the Rwandan genocide began on 7 April 1994. Hutu extremists murdered about 800,000 Tutsis while major powers, led by the US, found reasons not to save them.

    Chris McGreal writes for Guardian US and is a former Guardian correspondent in Washington, Johannesburg and Jerusalem

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Europe’s Gaza betrayal has broken the trust of millions of people in the global south | Shada Islam

    By seemingly giving carte blanche to Israel, the EU has sacrificed hard-won credibility with civil society in Africa, Asia and the Middle East

    The European Union’s failure to hold Israel to account for violations of international law in Gaza has blown a gaping hole through its claims to be a values-based defender of international rules, democracy and human rights. Accusations of double standards have come hard and fast from governments in the global south, with many contrasting Europe’s unequivocal condemnation of the Russian invasion of Ukraine with its reluctance to call out Israel’s devastation of Gaza.

    “Rarely will anyone soon in the global south listen when western politicians insist on international law,” the Middle East analyst Amro Ali argued recently. This is the kind of observation that causes justifiable concern in Brussels.

    Shada Islam is a Brussels-based commentator on EU affairs

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • When Rishi Sunak speaks, the nation shrugs. There’s no coming back from that | Rafael Behr

    Flirting with leaving the European court of human rights has failed to move the dial for the PM, and has highlighted his deficiencies

    Rishi Sunak is not a deep-cover agent of the Labour party, but politics might not look very different if the prime minister were on a secret mission to make life easier for Keir Starmer.

    To achieve this feat, special operative Sunak would occupy positions expected of a Conservative leader, but in a way that minimised public enthusiasm and maximised division in his own party.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • MEPs to vote on divisive migration policy in ‘big moment for Europe’

    Proponents of legislation for bloc say it will take away far-right arguments but critics claim the opposite

    The European parliament is to vote on Wednesday on sweeping new laws to overhaul its migration policy amid renewed criticism that it is feeding the agenda of the extreme right rather than protecting vulnerable people.

    Ylva Johansson, the home affairs commissioner who was the driving force behind the legislation, said on Tuesday that with the reforms aimed at “managing migration in an orderly way”, the 27-member bloc was taking a step towards neutralising the populist far right.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Violent clashes in New Caledonia as tensions rise over nickel pact

    By Patrick Decloitre, RNZ Pacific correspondent French Pacific desk

    Fresh clashes in New Caledonia have erupted in the suburbs of Nouméa between security forces and pro-independence protesters who oppose a nickel pact offering French assistance to salvage the industry.

    The clashes, involving firearms, teargas and stone-throwing, went on for most of yesterday, blocking access roads to the capital Nouméa, as well as the nearby townships of Saint-Louis and Mont-Dore.

    Traffic on the Route Provinciale 1 (RP1) was opened and closed several times, including when a squadron of French gendarmes intervened to secure the area by firing long-range teargas.

    The day began with tyres being burnt on the road and then degenerated into violence from some balaclava-clad members of the protest group, who started throwing stones and sometimes using firearms and Molotov cocktails, authorities alleged.

    Security forces said one of their motorbike officers, a woman, was assaulted and her vehicle was stolen.

    Two of the protesters were reported to have been arrested for throwing stones.

    Banners were deployed, some reading “Kanaky not for sale”, others demanding that New Caledonia’s President Louis Mapou (pro-independence) resign.

    Northern mining sites also targeted
    Other incidents took place in the northern town of La Foa, in the small mining village of Fonwhary, near a nickel extraction site, where Société Le Nickel trucks were not allowed to use the road.

    Pro-independence protesters banners demanding President Louis Mapou’s resignation – Photo NC la 1ère
    Pro-independence protesters banners demand territorial President Louis Mapou resign. Image: 1ère TV

    Mont-Dore Mayor Eddy Lecourieux told local Radio Rythme Bleu they had the right to demonstrate, “but they could have done that peacefully”.

    “Instead, there’s always someone who starts throwing stones.”

    At dusk, the Saint-Louis and Mont-Dore areas were described as under control, but security forces, including armoured vehicles, were kept in place.

    “On top of that, there are more marches scheduled for this weekend,” Lecourieux said.

    Pro-independence protesters oppose current plans to have a French Constitutional amendment endorsed by France’s two houses of Parliament.

    As a first step of this Parliamentary process, last week, the Senate endorsed the text, but with some amendments.

    Opposing marches
    Pro-France movements also want to march on the same day in support of the amendment.

    If endorsed, it would allow French citizens to vote at New Caledonia’s local elections, provided they have been residing there for an uninterrupted 10 years.

    Pro-independent parties, however, strongly oppose the project, saying this would be tantamount to making indigenous Kanaks a minority at local polls, and would open the door to a “recolonisation” of New Caledonia through demographics.

    A similar high-risk configuration of two marches took place on March 28 in downtown Nouméa, with more than 500 French security forces deployed to keep both groups away from each other.

    French authorities are understood to be holding meeting after meeting to fine-tune the security setup ahead of the weekend.

    Florent Perrin, the president of Mont-Dore’s “Citizens’ Association”, told media local residents were being “taken hostage” and the unrest “must cease”.

    He urged political authorities to “make decisions on all political and economic issues” New Caledonia currently faces.

    Perrin called on the local population to remain calm, but invited them to “individually lodge complaints” based on “breach of freedom of circulation”.

    “On our side too, tensions are beginning to run high, so we have to remain calm and not respond to those acts of provocation,” he said.

    Pro-independence protesters blockade the village of La Foa on 9 April 2024 - Photo NC la 1ère
    Pro-independence indigenous Kanak protesters in New Caledonia blockade the village of La Foa yesterday. Image: 1ère TV

    The ‘nickel pact’ issue
    The clashes and blockades took place on the same day the local Congress was discussing whether it should give the green light to New Caledonia’s President Louis Mapou to sign the “nickel pact”, worth around 200 million euros (NZ$358 million) in French emergency aid.

    In return, France is asking that New Caledonia’s whole nickel industry should undergo a far-reaching slate of reforms in order to make nickel less expensive and therefore more attractive on the world market.

    The pact aims to salvage New Caledonia’s embattled nickel industry and its three factories — one in the north of the main island, Koniambo (KNS), and two in the south, Société le Nickel (SLN), a subsidiary of French giant Eramet, and Prony Resources.

    KNS’ nickel-processing operations were put in “sleep”, non-productive mode in February after its major financier, Anglo-Swiss Glencore, said it could no longer sustain losses totalling 14 billion euros (NZ$25 billion) over the past 10 years, and that it was now seeking an entity to buy its 49 percent shares.

    The other two companies, SLN and Prony, are also facing huge debts and a severe risk of bankruptcy due to the new nickel conditions on the world market, now dominated by new players such as Indonesia, which produces a much cheaper and abundant metal.

    New ultimatum from Northern Province
    On Tuesday, Northern province President Paul Néaoutyine added further pressure by threatening to suspend all permits for mining activities in his province’s nine sites, where southern nickel companies are also extracting.

    In a release, Néaoutyine made references to payment guarantees deadlines on April 10 that had not been honoured by SLN.

    It is understood SLN’s owner, Eramet, was scheduled to meet in a general meeting in Paris later on Tuesday.

    The French pact — France is also a stakeholder in Eramet — would also help SLN provide longer-term guarantees.

    Southern province President and Les Loyalists (pro-France) party leader Sonia Backès alleged on Tuesday that Néaoutyine wants to do everything he can to shut down SLN and block the nickel pact

    “Now things are very clear — before it was all undercover; now it’s out in the open,” she said.

    “Now we will do everything to maintain SLN, because this means 3000 jobs at stake.”

    Congress dragging its feet
    Yesterday, New Caledonia’s Congress was holding a meeting behind closed doors to again discuss the French pact.

    The Congress decided to postpone its decision and, instead, suggested setting up a “special committee” to further examine the pact and the condition it is tied to, and more generally, “the nickel industry’s current challenges”.

    Opponents to the agreement mainly argue that it would pose a risk of “loss of sovereignty” for New Caledonia on its precious metal resource.

    They also consider the nickel industry stake-holding companies are not committing enough and that, instead, New Caledonia’s government is asked to raise up to US$80 million (NZ$132 million), mainly by way of new taxes imposed on taxpayers.

    Last week, a group of Congressmen, mostly from pro-independence Union Calédonienne, one of the four components of the pro-independence FLNKS, with the backing of one pro-France party, Avenir Ensemble, had a motion adopted to postpone one more time the signing of the pact.

    President Mapou defies pro-independence MPs
    President Louis Mapou, himself from the pro-independence side, urged the supporters of the motion to “let [him] sign” last week during a Congress public sitting.

    “Let’s do it . . .  Authorise us to go at it . . .  What are you afraid of?” he said.

    “Are we afraid of our militants?”

    Mapou said if there was no swift Congress response and support to sign the pact, for which he himself had asked the Congress for endorsement, he would “take [his] responsibility” and go ahead anyway.

    “I will honour the commitment I made to the French State.”

    He said if they wanted to to sanction him with a motion of no confidence to go ahead. He was not afraid of this.

    Mapou also told the pro-independence side in Congress that he believed they khad ept postponing any Congress decision “because you want to engage in negotiations as part of [New Caledonia’s] political agreements”.

    Last week, Backès, who expressed open support for Mapou’s “courage”, told Radio Rythme Bleu she and Mapou had both received death threats.

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Bahrain’s king takes activists by surprise with pardon for at least 1,500 prisoners

    Released detainees include some jailed for political reasons and is UK ally’s biggest amnesty since Arab spring

    Bahrain has unconditionally released more than 1,500 prisoners, including political detainees, in the biggest royal pardon since the 2011 Arab spring uprising.

    The amnesty followed years of campaigning inside the country and by international human rights groups but came as a complete surprise to activists.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Fiji’s position over Israeli war on Gaza – international blunder or a domestic strategy?

    SPECIAL REPORT: By Richard Naidu, editor of Islands Business

    South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has been described as involving two competing narratives: one, about a displaced Palestinian people denied their right to self-determination, and the other, about the Jewish people who, having established an independent state in their historical homeland after generations of persecution in exile, have been under threat from hostile neighbours ever since.

    When Fiji joined the United States as the only two countries to support Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territory at the ICJ in February, it was seen as walking head-on into one of the longest running conflicts in history, leaving Fijians, as well as the international community struggling to figure out which narrative that position fits into.

    Following Hamas’ unprecedented attack on Israel in October, Israel’s retaliatory campaign against Gaza has provoked international consternation and has seen a humanitarian crisis unfolding, resulting in the motions against Israel in the ICJ.

    And since then other cases such as Nicaragua this month against Germany alleging the enabling by the European country of the alleged genocide by Israel as the second-largest arms supplier.

    South Africa had asked the ICJ to consider whether Israel was committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.

    Fiji’s pro-Israel position was on another matter — the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) had requested the ICJ’s advisory opinion into Israel’s policies in the occupied territories.

    Addressing the ICJ, Fiji’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, retired Colonel Filipo Tarakinikini said the ICJ should not render an advisory opinion on the questions posed by the General Assembly. He said the court had been presented “with a distinctly one-sided narrative. This fails to take account of the complexity of this dispute, and misrepresents the legal, historical, and political context.”

    The UNGA request was “a legal manoeuvre that circumvents the existing internationally sanctioned and legally binding framework for resolution of the Israel-Palestine dispute,” said Tarakinikini.

    “And if the ICJ is to consider the legal consequences of the alleged Israeli refusal to withdraw from territory, it must also look at what Palestine must do to ensure Israel’s security,” he said.

    On the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, “Fiji notes that the right to self-determination is a relative right.

    “In the context of Israel/Palestine, this means the Court would need to ascertain whether the Palestinians’ exercise of their right to self-determination has infringed the territorial
    integrity, political inviolability or legitimate security needs of the State of Israel,” he added.

    Crossing the line
    Long-standing Fijian diplomats such as Kaliopate Tavola and Robin Nair said Fiji had crossed the line by breaking with its historically established foreign policy of friends-to-all -and-enemies-to-none.

    Nair, Fiji’s first ambassador to the Middle East, said Fiji had always chosen to be an international peacekeeper, trusted by both sides to any argument or conflict that requires its services.

    “The question being asked is, how is it in the national interest of Fiji to buy into the Israeli-Palestine dispute, particularly when it has been a well-respected international peacekeeper in the region?

    “Fiji has either absented itself or abstained from voting on any decisions at the United Nations concerning the Israeli-Palestinian issues, particularly since 1978 when Fiji began taking part in the UN-sponsored peacekeeping operations in the Middle East,” Nair told Islands Business.

    Nair said it was worth noting that in keeping with its traditionally neutral position on Israeli-Palestinian issues, Fiji had initially abstained on the UN General Assembly resolution asking the ICJ for an advisory opinion.

    Former Ambassador Kaliopate Tavola asks why that position has changed. “Fiji’s rationale for showing interest now is not so much about the real issue on the ground — the genocide
    taking place, but the niceties of legal processes. Coming from Fiji with its history of coups, it is a bit over-pretentious, one may say”.

    Fiji's stance over Israel has implications for the military
    Fiji’s stance over Israel . . . implications for the safety and security of Fijian peacekeeping troops deployed in the Middle East. Image: Republic of Fiji Military Forces/Islands Business

    At odds with past conduct
    Former Deputy Commander of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces, now professor in law at the University of Fiji, Aziz Mohammed, says the change of position does not reconcile with Fiji’s past endorsement of international instruments and conventions, including the International Criminal Court (ICC) statute on war crimes at play in the current proceedings at the ICJ.

    “That endorsement happened by the government that was in power at the time of the current Prime Minister (Sitiveni Rabuka’s administration in the 1990s),” says Mohammed.

    “We became the fifth country to endorse it. So, it was very early that we planted a flag to say, ‘we’re going to honour this international obligation’. And that happened. But subsequently, we brought the war crimes (section from the ICC statute) into our Crimes Act. Not only that, but we also adopted the international humanitarian laws into our laws — three Geneva Conventions, and three protocols. So, in terms of laws, most countries only have adopted two, but we have adopted all the international instruments. But then we’re not adhering to it.”

    Fiji was among six Pacific Island countries — including Papua New Guinea, Tonga, Nauru, Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia — that voted against a UN resolution in October calling for a humanitarian truce in Gaza.

    That vote caused significant political ruptures. One of Rabuka’s two coalition partners, the National Federation Party (NFP), said Fiji should have voted for the resolution. “It was a motion that called for peace and access to humanitarian aid, and as a country, we should have supported that,” said NFP Leader, Professor Biman Prasad, who is Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister.

    Prasad’s fellow party member and former NFP Leader, Home Affairs Minister, Pio Tikoduadua, served in the Fiji peacekeeping forces deployed to Lebanon in the 1990s, and recounted the horrors of war he had seen in the region.

    “I can still vividly remember the blood, the carnage and the mothers weeping for their children and the children finding out that they no longer had parents,” he said.

    “In any war, no matter how justified your cause may be, it is always the innocent that suffer and pay the price. Those images, those memories are seared into my memory forever . . . that is why NFP has taken the position of supporting a ceasefire in Gaza contrary to Fiji’s position at the UN.”

    Commander of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces, Major-General Jone Kalouniwai said the “decision has significant implications for the safety and security of RFMF troops currently deployed in the Middle East” and called on the government to reevaluate its stance on the Israel-Hamas issue.

    “Their safety and security should remain a top priority, and it is crucial that their contribution to international peacekeeping efforts are fully supported and respected,” an RFMF statement said.

    Interesting cocktail
    Writing in the Asia-Pacific current affairs publication, The Diplomat, Melbourne-based Australia and the Pacific political analyst, Grant Wyeth said Pacific islanders’ faith and foreign policy make an “interesting cocktail” that drives their UN votes in favour of Israel. He knocks any theories about the United States having bought off these island nations.

    “Rather than power, faith may be the key to understanding the Pacific Islands’ approach,” writes Wyeth. “Much of the Pacific is highly observant in their Christianity, and they have an eschatological understanding of humanity.”

    He notes that various denominations of Protestantism see the creation of Israel in 1948 as the fulfillment of a Biblical prophecy in which the Jewish people — “God’s chosen” — return to the Holy Land.

    “Support for Israel is, therefore, a deeply held spiritual belief, one that sits alongside Pacific
    Islands’ other considerations of interests and opportunities when forming their foreign policies.”

    In September, Papua New Guinea moved its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Prime Minister James Marape was quoted as saying at the time: “For us to call ourselves
    Christian, paying respect to God will not be complete without recognising that Jerusalem is the universal capital of the people and the nation of Israel.”

    "I am ashamed of my own government" Fiji protest
    “I am ashamed of my own government” protester placards at a demonstration by Fijians outside the Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre (FWCC) . . . commentators draw a distinction between the matter of political recognition/state identity and the humanitarian issues at stake. Image: FWCC

    Political vs humanitarian
    The commentators draw the distinction between the matter of political recognition/state identity and the humanitarian issues at stake.

    Says Mohammed: “This is not about recognising the state of Israel. This is about a conflict where people wanted to protect the unprotected. All they were saying is, ‘let’s’ support a ceasefire so [that] women, children, elderly … could get out [and] food supplies, medical supplies could get in …’ and it wasn’t [going to be] an indefinite ceasefire, which we [Fiji]
    agreed to later.”

    Fiji eventually did vote for the ceasefire when it came before the UN General Assembly again in December, following a major outcry against its position at home. The key concern going forward is the impact on the future of Fiji’s decades-long peacekeeping involvement in the Middle East.

    Fiji-born political sociologist, Professor Steven Ratuva, is director of the Macmillan Brown Centre for Pacific Studies and professor in the Department of Anthropology and Sociology at the University of Canterbury.

    “The security of Fijian soldiers overseas will be threatened, as well as Fijian citizens themselves,” says Ratuva. “There are already groups campaigning underground for a tourist boycott of Fiji. I’ve personally received angry emails about ‘your bloody dumb country.’”

    Nair says when 45 peacekeeping Fijian soldiers were taken hostage by the al Qaeda-linked Syrian rebel group al-Nusra Front in the Golan Heights in 2014, when all else — including the UN — had failed to secure their release, Fiji’s only bargaining power was the value of its peacekeeping neutrality.

    “No international power stepped up to help Fiji in its most traumatic time in international relations in its entire history. Fiji had to fall back on itself, to use its own humble credentials. I successfully used our peace-keeping credentials in the Middle East and over many decades, including the shedding of Fijian blood, to ensure peace in the Middle East, to free our captured soldiers.”

    Punishing the RFMF?
    Mohammed agrees with the concern about the implications of Fiji’s compromised neutrality.

    “I think what’s on everybody’s mind is whether we’re going to continue peacekeeping or suddenly, somebody is going to say, ‘enough of Fiji, they have compromised their neutrality, their impartiality, and as such, we are withdrawing consent and we want them to go back,’” he says.

    Fiji’s Home Affairs Minister, Pio Tikoduadua has been dismissive of such concerns, saying Fiji’s position on Israel at the ICJ did not diminish the capability of its peacekeepers because Fiji had “very professional people serving in peacekeeping roles”.

    Mohammed, with an almost 40-year military career and having held the rank of Deputy Commander and once a significant figure on Fiji’s military council, asks whether Fiji’s position on Israel is a strategic manoeuvre by the government to reign in the military.

    “Do they really want Fijian peacekeepers out there? Or are they going to indirectly punish the RFMF [Republic of Fiji Military Forces]?” he said in an interview with Islands Business.

    He floats this theory on the basis that Fiji’s position on Israel came from two men acutely aware of what is at stake for the Fijian military — Prime Minister Rabuka and Tarakinikini, both seasoned army officers with extensive experience in matters of the Middle East.

    “We all know that in recent times, the RFMF has been vocal (in national affairs). And they have stood firm on their role under Article 131 (of Fiji’s 2013 Constitution which states that it is the military’s overall responsibility to ensure at all times the security, defence and well-being of Fiji and all Fijians).

    “And they have pressured the government into positions, so much so, the government has had difficulty. And they (government) say, ‘the RFMF are stepping out of position. Now, how do we control the RFMF? How do we cut them into place? One, we can basically give them everything and keep them quiet, or two, we take away the very thing that put them in the limelight. How do we do that? We take a position, knowing very well that the host countries will withdraw their consent, and the Fijians will be asked to leave’.

    “Fiji will no longer have peacekeepers. No peacekeeping engagements, the numbers of the RFMF will have to be reduced. So, all they will do is be confined to domestic roles.

    “People are questioning this,” says Mohammed. “Military strategists are raising this issue because the government knows they can’t openly tell the Fijian public that we are withdrawing from peacekeeping. There’ll be an outcry because every second household in Fiji has some member who has served in peacekeeping.

    “So, strategically, we [government] take a position. It may not be perceived that way. But the outcome is happening in that direction.”

    Richard Naidu is currently editor of Islands Business. This article was published in the March edition of the magazine and is republished here with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Israel’s security at core of German foreign policy due to Holocaust, ICJ hears

    Nicaragua asks UN’s highest court to halt German weapons sales to Israel, alleging it is breaching obligation to prevent genocide

    Germany has said Israel’s security is at “the core” of its foreign policy because of the history of the Holocaust, but denied accusations at the UN’s highest court that is aiding genocide in Gaza by arming Israel.

    Nicaragua has brought a case against Germany at the international court of justice (ICJ) urging judges to order a halt to German weapons sales to Israel, alleging it is in breach of its obligation to prevent genocide and ensure respect of international humanitarian law.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Israel’s security at core of German foreign policy due to Holocaust, ICJ hears

    Nicaragua asks UN’s highest court to halt German weapons sales to Israel, alleging it is breaching obligation to prevent genocide

    Germany has said Israel’s security is at “the core” of its foreign policy because of the history of the Holocaust, but denied accusations at the UN’s highest court that is aiding genocide in Gaza by arming Israel.

    Nicaragua has brought a case against Germany at the international court of justice (ICJ) urging judges to order a halt to German weapons sales to Israel, alleging it is in breach of its obligation to prevent genocide and ensure respect of international humanitarian law.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Standing Strong: Supporting Human Rights Defenders Worldwide

    By Michael Morrison In a world where human rights are not universally respected, there are courageous individuals who face persecution, silencing, torture, and forced displacement just for standing up for their beliefs. Prisoners Of Conscience (PoC), our UK-based charity, stands in solidarity with these brave people, offering both financial and practical support to those who defend human rights worldwide. Prisoners Of Conscience operates […]

    This post was originally published on Human Rights Centre Blog.

  • Human rights violated by Switzerland inaction on climate, ECHR rules in landmark case

    Court finds in favour of group of older Swiss women who claimed weak policies put them at greater risk of death from heatwaves

    Weak government climate policies violate fundamental human rights, the European court of human rights has ruled.

    In a landmark decision on one of three major climate cases, the first such rulings by an international court, the ECHR raised judicial pressure on governments to stop filling the atmosphere with gases that make extreme weather more violent.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • The world court will rule on Germany’s support for Israel. That shows how geopolitics has changed | Steve Crawshaw

    Western governments could once be confident of protecting their friends. Nicaragua’s case shows those days are gone

    The case brought by Nicaragua against Germany at the international court of justice (ICJ) in The Hague this week is a powerful example of the unprecedented political impact that the Gaza conflict is having around the world. Most obviously, Israel’s continuing assault after the 1,200 brutal murders and about 240 kidnappings by Hamas on 7 October has had a deadly impact on Palestinians. More than 30,000 people in Gaza have been killed, and a famine is now looming. The conflict has also opened up a division between the global north and south in a way not seen before.

    Nicaragua’s case focuses on Germany’s supply of arms to Israel – the country supplied more than €326m (£258m) last year, which equated to more than a quarter of Israel’s military imports. It also calls on Germany to restore Gaza funding to Unrwa, the UN agency that provides Palestinians with humanitarian aid. Nicaragua says the arms sales mean Germany is “facilitating” genocide. On Monday, it accused Germany of doing “business as usual – or better than usual” because of its burgeoning weapons sales.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • The world court will rule on Germany’s support for Israel. That shows how geopolitics has changed | Steve Crawshaw

    Western governments could once be confident of protecting their friends. Nicaragua’s case shows those days are gone

    The case brought by Nicaragua against Germany at the international court of justice (ICJ) in The Hague this week is a powerful example of the unprecedented political impact that the Gaza conflict is having around the world. Most obviously, Israel’s continuing assault after the 1,200 brutal murders and about 240 kidnappings by Hamas on 7 October has had a deadly impact on Palestinians. More than 30,000 people in Gaza have been killed, and a famine is now looming. The conflict has also opened up a division between the global north and south in a way not seen before.

    Nicaragua’s case focuses on Germany’s supply of arms to Israel – the country supplied more than €326m (£258m) last year, which equated to more than a quarter of Israel’s military imports. It also calls on Germany to restore Gaza funding to Unrwa, the UN agency that provides Palestinians with humanitarian aid. Nicaragua says the arms sales mean Germany is “facilitating” genocide. On Monday, it accused Germany of doing “business as usual – or better than usual” because of its burgeoning weapons sales.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • PSNA’s Minto slams Peters over ‘bluster’ speech on Gaza at UN

    Asia Pacific Report

    The leader of a New Zealand solidarity group of Palestinian self-determination supporters has accused the country’s Foreign Minister Winston Peters of making a “bluff and bluster” speech at the United Nations that was misleading about inaction at home.

    National chair John Minto of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) said in a statement today the Peters speech at the UN General Assembly yesterday was “bluff and bluster . . . [and] a classic case of doing one thing at home and saying another for overseas audiences”.

    He said the speech “fooled nobody” in New Zealand.

    In his UNGA speech, Peters described Israel’s war on Gaza as an “utter catastrophe” and labelled the besieged enclave a “wasteland”.

    He went on to say Israel could “not be under any misconceptions as to its legal obligations”.

    Peters also condemned the use of the veto in the UN Security Council five times to block ceasefire resolutions, and Israel’s continued building of illegal settlements on Palestinian land, saying the “misguided notion” and forced displacement of Palestinians “imperil the two-state solution”.

    Minto admitted that “these were strong words” but he added that they were “meaningless in the context of what the government has failed to do at home”.

    The PSNA chair said Peters had not told his international audience that the New Zealand government had:

    • Refused to stop New Zealand military exports which support Israel’s war on Gaza;
    • Refused (and still refuses) to condemn Israel for any of its war crimes such as collective punishment, the mass slaughter of over 33,000 Palestinians — mostly women and children — the targeting of aid workers and deliberate starvation of Gaza’s Palestinian population;
    • Refused (and still refuses) to call for an immediate permanent ceasefire in Gaza;
    • Refused (and still refuses) to reinstate funding for UNRWA (let alone doubling its funding and bringing forward payments which the government has been urged to do);
    • Refused (and still refuses) to withdraw from the US war to target Yemen which is acting to oppose Israel’s genocide of Palestinians;
    • Refused (and still refuses) to support or join South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice;
    • Refused (and still refuses) to shut down the Israeli Embassy; and
    • Refused (and still refuses) to grant humanitarian visas for Palestinians with family in New Zealand

    “Winston Peters stands with the US/Israel on Gaza in every important respect but has tried to give a different impression to the United Nations,” Minto said.

    “There was nothing in his speech which holds Israel to account for its war crimes — not even a single punctuation mark.

    “It was a Janus-faced performance at the United Nations.”

    UN considers Palestine membership bid
    Meanwhile, Palestine’s ambassador at the United Nations, speaking earlier than Peters, was optimistic about the occupied territory’s bid for full membership at the UN. The bid has been referred to a Security Council committee.

    “This is a historic moment again,” said Ambassador Riyad Mansour.

    The committee is expected to make a decision about Palestine’s status later this month, said Vanessa Frazier, Malta’s UN ambassador.

    Al Jazeera’s Gabriel Elizondo is monitoring the latest developments at UN headquarters.

    He said the last time Palestine’s bid for full UN membership got this far in 2011, it failed primarily because the US threatened to veto it.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • NZ’s Peters criticises Security Council at UN, says Gaza ‘a wasteland’

    RNZ News

    New Zealand Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters has told the United Nations the situation in Gaza is an “utter catastrophe” and criticised the Security Council for failing to act decisively.

    In a speech to the UN General Assembly in New York, Peters said Gaza was a “wasteland” and that New Zealand was “gravely concerned” that Israel may soon launch a military offensive into Rafah.

    Peters condemned Hamas for its terrorist attacks on October 7 and since.

    “All of us here must demand that Hamas release all remaining hostages immediately,” he said.

    But he said the facts on the ground in Gaza were absolutely clear with more than 33,000 people killed, millions displaced and warnings that famine was imminent.

    “Gaza, which was already facing huge challenges before this conflict, is now a wasteland. Worse still, another generation of young Palestinians — already scarred by violence — is being further traumatised.”

    Peters said New Zealand was a longstanding opponent of the use of the veto at the UN.

    Security Council ‘failed by veto’
    “Since the start of the current crisis in Gaza, the veto has been used five times to prevent the Security Council from acting decisively. This has seen the Council fail in its responsibility to maintain international peace and security,” he said.

    Peters acknowledged Israel’s “belated announcements” that it would allow more humanitarian aid into Gaza.

    “Israel must do everything in its power to enable safe, rapid and unimpeded humanitarian access,” he said.

    He called on all parties to comply with Resolution 2728 which demanded an immediate ceasefire for the month of Ramadan, leading to a lasting sustainable ceasefire.

    “Palestinian civilians must not be made to pay the price of defeating Hamas,” he said.

    The risks of the wider region being further drawn into this conflict also remained alarmingly high.

    “We strongly urge regional actors, including Iran, to exercise maximum restraint.

    “Israelis and Palestinians deserve to live in peace and security. There is overwhelming support in the international community — including from New Zealand — for a two-state solution.

    “Achieving this will require serious negotiations by the parties and must involve a Palestinian state.”

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

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Three ECHR cases will put governments in the hot-seat over their failures on the climate crisis

    Governments will be feeling the heat on Tuesday 9 April – as the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) will rule in three separate court cases over failings on the climate crisis. Crucially, the verdicts could force them to adopt more ambitious climate policies.

    ECHR cases against the climate crisis

    The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) will rule on whether governments’ climate crisis policies are violating the European Convention on Human Rights.

    All three cases accuse European governments of inaction or insufficient action in their measures against the climate crisis.

    In a sign of the importance of the issue, the cases have all been treated as priority by the Grand Chamber of the ECHR.  As the court’s top instance, its 17 judges can set a potentially crucial legal precedent.

    Significantly, the landmark cases will be the first time the court has issued a ruling on the climate crisis.

    Domestic courts have already condemned several European states for not fulfilling their climate commitments. For instance, climate group Urgenda won a case against the Dutch government in 2019. In particular, a Dutch court ordered the government to cut its emissions by 25% by 2020.

    Then, in 2021, the Administrative Court of Paris ruled that France’s inaction on the climate crisis had caused ecological damage.

    Meanwhile, in 2022 three organisations took the UK government to the UK High Court  – and won. Specifically, this was for breaching its obligations under the UK’s Climate Change Act (2008). However, since the government has persistently failed to clean up its climate record, they are taking action once again.

    All in all, a 2023 report identified that individuals and groups had filed 81 cases against governments outside the US to challenge their overall climate policy response. [Pdf, p3]

    Now, the ECHR could go further and make clear new fundamental rights. Lawyer and former French environment minister Corinne Lepage, who is defending one of the cases, said that:

    The challenge lies in ensuring “the recognition of an individual and collective right to a climate that is as stable as possible, which would constitute an important legal innovation

    Climate inaction – a violation of human rights

    So on Tuesday, the Swiss Association of Elders for Climate Protection will bring the first case. The group comprises of 2,500 women aged 73 on average. Four of its members have put forward individual complaints.

    Specifically, the group is arguing that the “failings of the Swiss authorities” in terms of climate protection would:

    seriously harm their state of health

    While the convention does not contain any explicit provision relating to the environment, the court has already ruled based on Article 8 of the Convention in other cases. Notably, the article sets out the right to respect for private and family life. In previous cases relating to waste management or industrial activities, the ECHR has emphasised the obligation of states to maintain a “healthy environment”.

    Following this, the former mayor of the northern French coastal town of Grande-Synthe Damien Careme is taking action against the French government. Crucially, he is arguing that the “deficiencies” of the French state’s climate action is putting his town at risk of being submerged under the North Sea.

    In 2019, he already filed a case at France’s Council of State – its highest administrative court – alleging “climate inaction” on the part of France. The court ruled in favour of the municipality in July 2021, but rejected a case he’d brought in his own name. As a result, Careme took it to the ECHR.

    Finally, a group of six Portuguese, aged 12 to 24,  are bringing the last case to the ECHR. Significantly, the group of young plaintiffs were inspired to act after fires ravaged their country in 2017.

    Their case is not only against Portugal, but also 31 other states. This includes every EU country, plus Norway, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom and Russia. Almost all European countries belong to the Council of Europe (COE), not just EU members.

    While the COE expelled Russian after its invasion of Ukraine, the ECHR still hears cases against Moscow.

    A “turning point”

    The ECHR hears cases only when all domestic appeals have been exhausted. Crucially, its rulings are binding. Despite this, some states, like Turkey have failed to comply with its rulings in the past.

    The three cases rely primarily on articles in the convention that protect the “right to life” and the “right to respect for private life”.

    However, the court will only issue a precedent-setting verdict if it determines that these cases have exhausted all remedies at the national level. In 2023, the accused states tried to demonstrate this is not the case during two hearings held in 2023.

    Lawyer of the NGO Global Legal Action Network (GLAN) Gerry Liston said that the courts position:

    may mark a turning point in the global struggle for a livable future

    A victory in any of the three cases could constitute the most significant legal development on climate change for Europe since the signing of the Paris 2015 Agreement

    Feature image via Adrian Grycuk/Wikimedia, cropped and resized to 1200 by 900, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 PL

    Additional reporting by Agence France-Presse

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • NHS ramps up medical abuse of two people with ME/CFS – as new Europe-wide survey shows it’s systemic

    The NHS is continuing to unconscionably abuse two women living with severe Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME/CFS) – and putting their lives at risk.

    As it metes out this horrendous crusade of medical gaslighting and neglect, a new comprehensive patient survey has shown just how systemic this really is.

    ME/CFS survey: “shocking indictment” of treatment and research

    ME is a chronic systemic neuroimmune disease which impacts around 65 million people worldwide. It affects nearly every system in the body and causes a range of symptoms that impact patients’ daily lives. These include influenza-like symptoms, cognitive impairment, multiple forms of pain, and heart, lung, blood pressure, and digestive dysfunctions, among other significantly debilitating symptoms.

    Crucially, post-exertional-malaise (PEM) is the hallmark symptom of ME/CFS, which entails a disproportionate worsening of other symptoms after even minimal physical, social, or mental activities.

    A 2015 study found that the quality of life for people with ME/CFS was worse than that for patients with cancer, diabetes, heart disease and other serious conditions.

    However, as the Canary has consistently reported, a prominent and vocal element of the medical establishment has been psychologising this awful disease for years. In short, they have been pushing the idea that this is all in patients’ heads – and to devastating and sometimes deadly effect. Predictably, the result has been decades of medical abuse of people living with ME, that persists to this day.

    Now, a new survey provides a “shocking indictment” of these healthcare policies and research. Notably, it underscores the widespread impact that these have been having on people living with ME across Europe.

    Failing people with ME/CFS across Europe

    More than 11,000 people living with ME/CFS responded to a survey that the European ME Alliance (EMEA) conducted on patients across the continent.

    Predictably, the survey found that healthcare systems and policies across Europe are utterly failing people living with ME.

    For one, it showed the shameful lack of recognition and support for people living with the disease. Specifically, three-quarters of ME patients felt that they had received little or no health care support. On top of this, just one in eight said they’d had ‘good’ or ‘very good’ support.

    Significantly, the survey trashed the biopsychosocial model for treating ME – long used to gaslight, abuse, and neglect people living with it. You can read more about it here, but its basic premise revolves around the mistaken and highly damaging notion that the disease is psychosomatic. Invariably, healthcare professionals have weaponised this against patients.

    Vitally, the biopsychosocial model has promoted treatments that have caused harm to patients living with the illness, such as graded exercise therapy (GET). Notably, the UK’s key health body the National Institute for Care Excellence (NICE) updated its guidelines in 2021 to remove it as a treatment for ME.

    In what should be another nail in the coffin of this unethical treatment, the survey showed that almost half of respondents’ condition had deteriorated after healthcare services had put them through it.

    Conversely, it identified pacing – keeping activity levels inside a patient’s energy envelope – was the most beneficial strategy for managing ME.

    As well this, the survey highlighted the shocking state of diagnosis, with delays averaging 6.8 years across Europe.

    NHS routine neglect and abuse

    Right now, two women living with severe ME in the UK are experiencing these systemic healthcare failures firsthand.

    Severe ME impacts approximately 25% of people living with the disease. In these cases, people living with severe ME/CFS are mostly, if not entirely permanently bed-bound. What’s more, they are sometimes unable to digest food, communicate, or process information.

    Tragically, severe ME is sometimes fatal. As the Canary’s Steve Topple has documented, the disease has killed a number people living with it. Notably, this is often due to routine neglect and maltreatment by the healthcare system.

    And once again, the NHS has been putting the lives of two women living with severe ME at significant risk.

    Topple has reported on the “heartbreaking” situation for 18-year-old Millie McAinsh who lives with the chronic illness. As the petition for Millie explains:

    She is currently in The Royal Lancaster Infirmary part of the University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust. Some staff at the hospital have stated that they don’t believe or take seriously ME symptoms and are speculating that it is a mental illness/eating disorder, even though it is stated by WHO and NICE that ME is a physical and complex neurological illness.

    Millie agreed to come into the Royal Lancaster Infirmary on 30th January 2024 after 4 paramedics carefully helped her down from her bedroom in a scoop to the ambulance. She and her family were hoping that the stay would be short and a feeding tube given as soon as possible and to get Millie back home where she is able to manage her sensory hypersensitivity well.

    Since Millie has been in hospital, it has become very clear that that hospital environment is making Millie’s severe ME so much worse, due to the stimulating environment, all the tests and the complete lack of understanding of severe ME, and horrifically the hospital has made the unacceptable decision of sectioning Millie.

    Psychologising illness – as usual

    Since then, the hospital’s treatment of Millie has only got worse. Updates for the petition on 4 April detailed how the hospital has tried to fit a nasogastric (NG) feeding tube, but this failed. Notably, her family, alongside ME experts, have explained to the hospital that this is inappropriate for Millie due to her postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS).

    And predictably, doctors have been psychologising her illness:

    A functional element to Millie’s condition is being seriously discussed and a psychiatrist came to see her today. Although they told us that they aren’t an ME expert, they still said that they believe Millie is scared of the pain and symptoms that eating, walking and talking could produce and needs to be encouraged to push past these beliefs. They also basically suggested GET.

    Millie is under a psych review at the moment and everything she is saying is being written down as well as anything untoward family say.

    One of Millie’s consultants said that she is ‘choosing not to eat’ and now even though she is being fed by NG tube she is being offered food orally, she has stated that she finds this very upsetting as she desperately wants to eat but is too exhausted.

    Another of Millie’s consultants claims that the ‘fear’ of ME is making her this severe and that it is because she is scared of the disease and not because of the actual physical symptoms that she is this unwell.

    So once again, they are using this to keep Millie in hospital against her and her families wishes:

    The hospital has applied for a DOLs (Deprivation Of Liberty Safeguarding) the second assessor came to the hospital… and is going to recommend that the local council grant the DOLs. Meaning that Millie could be detained in hospital for three months unless she appeals it.

    “Serious consequences” of medical abuse

    Meanwhile, the NHS is subjecting another person living with severe ME to a similar toxic cocktail of psychologising abuse and neglect – which is of course threatening her life.

    Topple has also previously detailed the “life-threatening dehydration and malnutrition” that the NHS is putting Sussex patient Karen Gordon through. Similar to Millie, the hospital was providing entirely inappropriate care for Karen and eventually discharged her home. However, the East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust has since refused to tube-feed her at home. As a result, her family have voiced Karen’s fear that she is dying from dehydration and malnutrition.

    As Topple explained, the trust has:

    failed to follow NICE guidelines around severe ME patient’s needs, and also refused her intravenous (IV) total parenteral nutrition (TPN) – telling her she would have to go 100 miles to St Mark’s hospital in London for this.

    However, this was completely unsuitable for Karen – and littered with problems:

    The journey would be detrimental to her health. St Mark’s would not give her a side room.
    The hospital wouldn’t let Karen’s mother, who is her full-time carer, stay with her 24/7.
    So, Karen refused the referral – and as a result, the Conquest Hospital discharged her. It said there was “no alternative” it could “offer”.

    Since then, St Mark’s has so far failed to set up total parenteral nutrition (TPN) for her. Instead, they have doubled-down in attempting to force her to the hospital. On 6 April, Karen’s petition provided an update. It stated that:

    We have been told that Karen might be given a deadline for when she has to give a decision about whether she agrees to go to St Marks Intestinal Rehabilitation Unit. Karen was told again that if she does not agree to go to St Marks then East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust (ESHT) might take legal action, might say that she has to have another capacity assessment and say that her case may go to the Court of Protection. Or ESHT might send Karen home without IV feeding which she could not survive without. Karen has already been formally assessed as having capacity twice in about the last 18 months.

    Moreover, the petition said that:

    We do not think that it is fair or right if Karen is not given the option of remote setting up of home PN when there are so many valid problems and risks for her of going to and being at St Marks and knowing that there will be serious consequences for Karen if she does not get home PN as she needs it to survive.

    Time to “step up” over ME/CFS

    So, given its survey results, the EMEA concluded in its press release that:

    The dire situation for most ME/CFS patients across Europe is, in part, the result of both ignorance and lack of knowledge among health professionals, social workers, and policy makers. Yet ME/CFS has been recognised as a disease of the nervous system by the World Health Organisation since 1969.

    Lack of funding biomedical research contributes to ME/CFS being categorised as a high burden under prioritised disease that urgently requires a dedicated EU strategy.

    As such, it argued that:

    European governments must step up to fund existing, and develop new, Centres of Excellence for ME/CFS to perform a joined-up pan-European strategy of coordinated, collaborative translational biomedical research across Europe that will focus on establishing a full understanding of the disease and the development of treatments to mitigate or cure it.

    However, after decades of medical abuse killing ME patients, appealing to the medical establishment to amend its ways has done little to improve the indefensible state of healthcare for ME. Millie and Karen’s current situations demonstrate that action is needed now, and urgently. But as ever, change isn’t going to come from within.

    Feature image via WingedRedLion/Wikimedia, resized to 1200 by 900, licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • An overview of ADHRB’s participation in the activities of the 55th session of the Human Rights Council

    Americans for Democracy & Human Rights in Bahrain (ADHRB) participated in the 55th session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, held from 26 February and 5 April 2024.

     During these sessions, the organization delivered seven oral interventions under five items, shedding light on various human rights violations in Bahrain, Kuwait, and occupied Palestinian territories.

     ADHRB delivered five interventions related to the human rights situation in Bahrain under items 3, 4, 6, 8, and 9. Among these, two interventions under items 4 and 9 highlighted the Israeli genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and the American immunity granted to it, as well as discrimination against the Bidoon community in Kuwait and the violations they face.

    Item 3

    Under Item 3, ADHRB delivered an intervention during the General Debate on 15 March 2024.

    In her intervention, Bahraini activist Najah Yusuf drew attention to the recent escalation in Bahrain in summoning and arresting participants in pro-Palestine protests across the country, including more than 50 minors aged between 14 and 17. They were charged with crimes such as illegal assembly after being subjected to numerous violations. She pointed out that at least 29 children are facing harsh detention conditions, deprived of continuing their education, and subjected to mistreatment. Najah added that some minors were forced to confess to pre-prepared charges and denied family visits, including the case of the 17-year-old minor, Qasim Al-Sameea. The organization urged Bahrain to stop targeting children and minors, allowing them to reunite with their families and resume their education. ADHRB indicated that an impartial investigation should be initiated to address allegations of mistreatment. It urged the Council to pressure Bahrain to respect its obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, of which it is a party.

    Item 4

    Under Item 4, ADHRB delivered two interventions on 21 March 21, 2024, during the General Debate.

    In his intervention, activist Yusuf AlHoori drew the Council’s attention to the ongoing medical neglect suffered by elderly opposition leaders and human rights defenders in Bahraini prisons. Among them is the political prisoner Mr. Hasan Mushaima, who suffers from cancer, diabetes, and other serious diseases, facing life-threatening medical neglect. Yusuf also highlighted the case of the prominent human rights defender and opposition leader, Dr. Abduljalil Al-Singace, who suffers from post-polio syndrome and many other serious chronic diseases. He has endured prolonged solitary confinement and has been deprived of medical appointments, treatment, and crutches, forcing him to endure a solid food hunger strike for 1000 days. ADHRB urged the UN Human Rights Council to pressure Bahrain to immediately release these defenders and opposition leaders before it’s too late.

    In its second intervention under Item 4, ADHRB expressed deep concern over the United States’ ongoing support for countries with poor human rights records. This is notably evident in its continued support for the ongoing war in Gaza, despite the International Court of Justice’s warnings to Israel to prevent genocide. This support also extends to countries suppressing their citizens’ rejection of this war and their governments’ adherence to decisions related to the actions of the United States, as is the case in Bahrain. ADHRB pointed out the suppression campaigns led by Bahrain against citizens expressing their dissenting opinions regarding their government’s involvement in the American-led coalition against Yemeni forces in the Red Sea, with hundreds of participants in peaceful protests being arrested, including many children. ADHRB questioned the continued US support for countries with poor human rights records driven by political motives, asking: How can we ensure accountability prevails over political considerations in addressing human rights violations?

    Item 6

    Under Item 6 during the General Debate, ADHRB delivered an intervention on 26 March 2024.

    During its intervention, it raised concerns about the seriousness of Bahrain’s commitment to implementing the promised reforms according to the UPR recommendations. Despite Bahrain’s pledge to ensure accountability for torture victims, eliminate religious discrimination, release all prisoners of conscience, and protect the right to freedom of expression and assembly, it continues its restrictive policies. Victims of torture-obtained confessions remain imprisoned and face horrific forms of physical and psychological torture, while the perpetrators remain unpunished. ADHRB called on the international community to pressure Bahrain to fulfill its pledge to implement the UPR recommendations, halt systematic human rights violations, and achieve genuine reform in the country.

    Item 8

    During the General Debate on 27 March 2024, ADHRB expressed deep concern over Bahrain’s ongoing violations of religious freedoms, particularly targeting Shia citizens, which contravene the Vienna Declaration and contradict official claims. Since 2011, Bahrain has continuously restricted the rights of Shia citizens, closing mosques and disrupting Friday prayers. Security forces deploy military vehicles near Shia mosques to confront protests expressing solidarity with Palestinians facing Israeli attacks. Bahraini authorities persistently refuse to broadcast Shia-specific events on government-owned media. Religious leaders, such as Sheikh Mohamed Sanqour, face sectarian-based summons and arrests, charged with “insulting authorities” for refusing curriculum changes to satisfy Israel. Others faced arrest, like historian Jasim AlAbbas, who was charged with incitement and threatening civil peace, for discussing the historical context of Islam and Shiism in Bahrain. ADHRB condemned the restrictions imposed on Shia religious practices and urged Bahrain to end sectarian discrimination and uphold its commitments to respect and protect religious freedoms.

    Item 9

    In its first intervention under Item 9, ADHRB raised the discrimination faced by the Bahraini people in their right to protest for demanding their rights or in solidarity with humanitarian causes. In its intervention,  Activist Ebtisam AlSaegh said, “Today we live in a country with a million masks on the lists of constitutional laws, citizens’ rights, and human rights standards. There is a stark contrast between what is written on paper and what the people see and experience on the ground.” She pointed out that prisons are filled with prisoners of conscience on charges and cases unrelated to reality. Discrimination continues regarding the right to protest and express opinions among the people and opposition, resulting in the arrest of dozens, including children under the age of 18. This discrimination also resulted in the political isolation of a significant number of citizens, depriving the majority of the people of the right to peaceful protest. This constitutes a violation of all international standards recognized by the Bahraini authorities, yet these standards are not applied in reality. ADHRB emphasized the need to empty prisons of all prisoners and allow the exercise of the right to protest.

    In another intervention under Item 9, ADHRB highlighted the ongoing suffering of the Bidoon community in Kuwait. Although the law claims to provide means for Bidoon to obtain citizenship, the naturalization procedures are unclear, and citizenship and residency matters are not subject to judicial review. The Bidoon are deprived of property rights or equal access to services like Kuwaiti citizens, unable to obtain civil documents, denied the right to education, healthcare, and employment, and also deprived of their right to protest. ADHRB urged the Council to pressure Kuwait to end this racial discrimination, respect its human rights obligations, and ensure the basic rights of the Bidoon community, including their right to freedom of opinion, expression, and assembly. It also urged the Kuwaiti government to adhere to the Durban Convention, the United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons,, and the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.

    Through its participation in the 55th session of the Human Rights Council, Americans for Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrain succeeded in drawing attention to the ongoing human rights violations in Bahrain, despite the authorities’ repeated promises of reform and attempts to whitewash its human rights record. It also pointed out that the most serious issue facing political activists, especially opposition leaders and human rights defenders, is the deliberate medical neglect policy. The organization also drew attention to restrictions imposed on freedom of expression, including the suppression of marches supporting Palestinians. Additionally, ADHRB had positions regarding the American immunity for Israeli crimes in Gaza. and as part of its coverage of human rights issues in the Gulf region, it drew attention to what the Bidoon community is suffering as a result of being deprived of the right to citizenship.

    The post An overview of ADHRB’s participation in the activities of the 55th session of the Human Rights Council appeared first on Americans for Democracy & Human Rights in Bahrain.

    This post was originally published on Americans for Democracy & Human Rights in Bahrain.

  • ‘Foreign Agent’ Laws Spread, now also Georgia ?

    Iskra Kirova, Advocacy Director, Europe and Central Asia Division of HRW, wrote on 4 April 2024: ‘Foreign Agent’ Laws Spread as EU Dithers to Support Civil Society

    On the night before the infamous “foreign agents” law came into force back in 2012, unknown individuals sprayed graffiti reading, “Foreign Agent! ♥ USA” on the buildings hosting the offices of three prominent NGOs in Moscow, including Memorial. 
    On the night before the infamous “foreign agents” law came into force back in 2012, unknown individuals sprayed graffiti reading, “Foreign Agent! ♥ USA” on the buildings hosting the offices of three prominent NGOs in Moscow, including Memorial.  © 2012 Yulia Klimova/Memorial

    Georgia’s ruling party plans to reintroduce highly controversial Russia-style “foreign agent” legislation aimed at incapacitating civil society and independent media. If adopted, the laws, which were withdrawn last year in the face of massive protests, would require foreign-funded nongovernmental organizations and media to register as “agents of foreign influence”. That would make them subject to additional scrutiny and sanctions, including administrative penalties up to 25,000 GEL (about 8,600 Euro). Authorities claim the laws promote “transparency”, but their statements make it clear the laws will be used to stigmatize and punish critical voices.

    Georgia was granted EU candidate status in December 2023 on the understanding it would improve conditions for civil society. This move risks derailing its EU integration even if the EU has until now been willing to move the country forward in the accession process despite limited progress on EU reform priorities. Georgia’s defiance of the EU on its civil society commitments isn’t so surprising when seen in the regional context. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2024/03/24/kyrgyzstan-on-its-way-to-emulate-russia-with-a-draft-law-on-foreign-representatives-agents/

    The day before Georgia’s announcement, Kyrgyzstan’s president signed an abusive “foreign representatives” law. Copied almost entirely from the Russian equivalent, the law would apply the stigmatizing designation of “foreign representative” to any nongovernmental organization that receives foreign funding and engages in vaguely defined “political activity”. The bill had been widely criticized after its initial submission in November 2022, including in a urgency resolution by the European Parliament.

    The EU had ample opportunity to press the authorities to reject this bill. Kyrgyzstan benefits from privileged access to the EU internal market tied to respect for international human rights conventions: conventions this law clearly contravenes. The country is poised to sign an enhanced partnership agreement with the EU that centers democracy and fundamental rights. The EU has been silent on whether these deals would be imperiled by the bill’s adoption, despite the fact the European Commission’s own assessment highlighted Kyrgyzstan’s dire environment for civil society and the country’s breach of its obligations.

    The latest spate of curbs on civil society comes in the wake of the European Commission’s December 2023 legislative proposal for an EU Directive on “transparency of interest representation” that would create a register of organizations which receive foreign funding. European civil society vehemently opposes the proposal because it risks shrinking space for independent organizations at home and diminishing the EU’s credibility in opposing such laws abroad. Yet the Commission forged ahead. On the same day the proposal was adopted, Hungary’s parliament approved a law that gives a government-controlled body broad powers to target civil society and independent media.

    With civil society organizations under threat throughout Europe and Central Asia, we need an EU that in words and actions protects civic space and sets the right standards.

    https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/04/04/foreign-agent-laws-spread-eu-dithers-support-civil-society

    Georgian government wants to bring back criticised law 

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

  • Call for Applications 2024 ASEAN Human Rights Advocacy Academy

    On 4 April 2024 the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA) announced the call for applications for the 2024 ASEAN Human Rights Advocacy Academy. The Academy is a capacity building platform for youth activists in Southeast Asia to gauge a strong understanding and skills to engage with the ASEAN Human Rights mechanism.

    Since 2005, FORUM-ASIA has been actively engaged in the development and strengthening of the ASEAN human rights mechanisms. Against the backdrop of a global shrinking civic-space due to the rise of authoritarianism and a lack of capacities for civil society to meaningfully engage and influence law and policy making spaces, the Academy aims to bolster regional civil society participation and capacity to influence the regional human rights mechanisms to strengthen its human rights protection and promotion mandate. 

    The Academy will be held in-person for a total of five days (including travel days) in one of the Southeast Asian countries. It will consist of a series of knowledge sharing sessions and skills development workshops and field visits to engage with relevant stakeholders. 

    Programme: 

    The Academy, which will take place in the last week of May 2024 in one of the Southeast Asia countries (details will be shared upon announcement of successful application). Participants will be engaged in knowledge sharing and interactive group work involving the ASEAN and UN human rights mechanisms. They will meet with AICHR representatives, diplomatic missions, experts, and relevant regional stakeholders and gain first-hand insights into the workings of ASEAN and its human rights mechanisms. 

    Eligibility Criteria:

    • Youths of Southeast Asian nationality within the age of 18-35 who are in their early and mid-level stages of work or activism in human rights, peace and democracy. Those based in Southeast Asia will be prioritized. 
    • All Southeast Asian individuals are eligible to apply regardless of race, ethnicity, color, SOGIESC, religion, disability, etc. 
    • Application from FORUM-ASIA’s Southeast Asia member organizations will be welcomed 
    • Prior knowledge or experience in engaging with regional or international human rights mechanisms is a plus. Those without prior knowledge or experience are also welcome to apply. 

    Interested applicants must complete this application form by midnight of 18 April 2024 (BKK time). Late applications will not be considered. 

    For inquiry regarding this program, contact ea-asean@forum-asia.org

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