Harrowing story of ‘ES’, fleeing persecution to seek safety in US, shines light on judges who grant claims at exceptionally low rates – or not at all
At an immigration court in Pearsall, Texas, in front of a judge, government attorneys and a court interpreter, ES shakily recounted the darkest moments of his life.
He explained how he had been arrested seven years ago in Turkey, amid his government’s crackdown on followers of Islamic cleric Fethullah Gülen. The police officers who detained him accused him of being involved in a terrorist movement, and demanded he reveal the names of his associates, he said.
Berlin, March 4, 2025–-The Committee to Protect Journalists calls on authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina’s Serb-majority territory Republika Srpska to revoke a “foreign agent” law that poses a significant threat to media freedom and civil society.
“Republika Srpska authorities should immediately suspend any plans to enforce this ‘foreign agent’ legislation, which mirrors restrictive measures used by authoritarian regimes to silence critics,” said Attila Mong, CPJ’s Europe representative. “Such laws are incompatible with democratic values, and Bosnia and Herzegovina’s aspirations for European integration.”
On February 27, the National Assembly of the Serb-dominated half of Bosnia and Herzegovina called Republika Srpska passed the Law on the Special Registry and Transparency of the Work of Nonprofit Organizations, requiring foreign-funded groups to register with the justice ministry as “foreign agents” and comply with strict financial oversight and reporting rules. Russia, Georgia, and Kyrgyzstan have used similar legislation to criminalize critical voices and the media.
The bill was among several passed by Serb lawmakers in response to the February 26 one-year sentence given to Republika Srpska’s President Milorad Dodik on charges that he disobeyed the top international envoy overseeing peace in ethnically-divided Bosnia. The court in the national capital, Sarajevo also barred pro-Russian Dodik from politics for six years.
Dodik has long advocated for Republika Srpska to separate from Bosnia and Herzegovina and join Serbia. The Bosnian Serb mini-state is one of two autonomous entities — the other is the Bosniak-Croat Federation — created under the 1995 Dayton accords that ended the Bosnian war.
In a statement, 41 local non-governmental organizations described the foreign agent law as “a revenge attack on all critical voices.”
CPJ emailed Dodik’s press office to request comment but received no reply.
The Palestinian-Israeli film No Other Land won an Oscar for best documentary feature at Sunday’s Academy Awards.
The film — recently screened in New Zealand at the Rialto and other cinemas — follows the struggles of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank community of Masafer Yatta to stay on their land amid home demolitions by the Israeli military and violent attacks by Jewish settlers aimed at expelling them.
The film was made by a team of Palestinian-Israeli filmmakers, including the Palestinian journalist Basel Adra, who lives in Masafer Yatta, and Israeli journalist Yuval Abraham, both of whom are prominently featured in the film.
AMY GOODMAN:And the Oscars were held Sunday evening. History was made in the best documentary category.
SAMUEL L. JACKSON: And the Oscar goes to ‘No Other Land’.
AMY GOODMAN:The Palestinian-Israeli film No Other Land won for best documentary. The film follows the struggles of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank community of Masafer Yatta to stay on their land amidst violent attacks by Israeli settlers aimed at expelling them. The film was made by a team of Palestinian-Israeli filmmakers, including the Palestinian journalist Basel Adra, who lives in Masafer Yatta, and the Israeli journalist Yuval Abraham.
Both filmmakers — Palestinian activist and journalist Basel Adra, who lives in Masafer Yatta, and Israeli journalist Yuval Abraham — spoke at the ceremony. Adra became the first Palestinian filmmaker to win an Oscar.
BASEL ADRA: Thank you to the Academy for the award. It’s such a big honor for the four of us and everybody who supported us for this documentary.
About two months ago, I became a father. And my hope to my daughter, that she will not have to live the same life I am living now, always fearing — always — always fearing settlers’ violence, home demolitions and forceful displacements that my community, Masafer Yatta, is living and facing every day under the Israeli occupation.
‘No Other Land’ reflects the harsh reality that we have been enduring for decades and still resist as we call on the world to take serious actions to stop the injustice and to stop the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian people.
YUVAL ABRAHAM: We made this — we made this film, Palestinians and Israelis, because together our voices are stronger.
We see each other — the atrocious destruction of Gaza and its people, which must end; the Israeli hostages brutally taken in the crime of October 7th, which must be freed.
When I look at Basel, I see my brother. But we are unequal. We live in a regime where I am free under civilian law and Basel is under military laws that destroy his life and he cannot control.
There is a different path: a political solution without ethnic supremacy, with national rights for both of our people. And I have to say, as I am here: The foreign policy in this country is helping to block this path.
And, you know, why? Can’t you see that we are intertwined, that my people can be truly safe if Basel’s people are truly free and safe? There is another way.
It’s not too late for life, for the living. There is no other way. Thank you.
Israeli and Palestinian documentary ‘No Other Land’ wins Oscar. Video: Democracy Now!
AMY GOODMAN: We turn now to the occupied West Bank, where Israel is reportedly planning to build nearly a thousand new settler homes in the Efrat settlement near Jerusalem. The Israeli settlements are illegal under international law.
The group Shalom Achshav, Peace Now, condemned the move, saying the Netanyahu government is trying “to establish facts on the ground that will destroy the chance for peace and compromise”.
This comes as Israel’s ongoing military operations in the West Bank have displaced at least 45,000 Palestinians — the most since the ’67 War.
Today, the Oscar-nominated Palestinian director Basel Adra shared video from the occupied West Bank of Israeli forces storming and demolishing four houses in Masafer Yatta.
Earlier this month, Basel Adra himself filmed armed and masked Israeli settlers attacking his community of Masafer Yatta. The settlers threw stones, smashed vehicles, slashed tires, punctured a water tank.
Israeli soldiers on the scene did not intervene to halt the crimes.
Palestinian film maker Basil Adra, co-director of No Other Land, speaking at the Oscars . . . “Stop the ethnic cleansing!” Image: AMPAS 2025/Democracy Now! screenshot APR
Basel Adra’s Oscar-nominated documentary No Other Land is about Israel’s mass expulsion of Palestinians living in Masafer Yatta.
In another post last week, Basel wrote: “Anyone who cared about No Other Land should care about what is actually happening on the ground: Today our water tanks, 9 homes and 3 ancient caves were destroyed. Masafer Yatta is disappearing in front of my eyes.
Only one name for these actions: ethnic cleansing,” he said.
In a minute, Basel Adra will join us for an update. But first, we want to play the trailer from his Oscar-nominated documentary, No Other Land.
No Other Land trailer. Video: Watermelon Films
BASEL ADRA: [translated] You think they’ll come to our home?
MASAFER YATTA RESIDENT 1: [translated] Is the army down there?
NEWS ANCHOR: A thousand Palestinians face one of the single biggest expulsion decisions since the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories began.
YUVAL ABRAHAM: [translated] Basel, come here! Come fast!
BASEL ADRA: [translated] This is a story about power.
My name is Basel. I grew up in a small community called Masafer Yatta. I started to film when we started to end.
They have bulldozers?
I’m filming you.
MASAFER YATTA RESIDENT 2: [translated] I need air. Oh my God!
BASEL ADRA: [translated] We have to raise our voices, not being silent as if — as if no human beings live here.
YUVAL ABRAHAM: [translated] What? The army is here?
BASEL ADRA: This is what’s happening in my village now. Soldiers are everywhere.
IDF SOLDIER: [translated] Who do you think you’re filming, you son of a whore?
YUVAL ABRAHAM: [translated] It would be so nice with stability one day. Then you’ll come visit me, not always me visiting you. Right?
BASEL ADRA: [translated] Maybe. What do you think? If you were in my place, what would you do?
AMY GOODMAN: That’s the trailer for the Oscar-nominated documentary No Other Land, co-directed by the Israeli journalist Yuval Abraham and our next guest, Basel Adra, Palestinian activist and journalist who writes for +972 Magazine, his most recent piece headlined “Our film is going to the Oscars. But here in Masafer Yatta, we’re still being erased.”
Basel has spent years documenting Israeli efforts to evict Palestinians living in his community, Masafer Yatta, south of Hebron.
Basel, welcome back to Democracy Now! If you can talk about your film and also what’s happening right now? This is not a film about history. It’s on the ground now. You recently were barricaded in your house filming what was going on, what the Israeli settlers were doing.
Palestinian film maker Basel Adra talks to Democracy Now! Video: Democracy Now!
BASEL ADRA: Thank you for having me.
Yeah, our movie, we worked on it for the last five years. We are four people — two Israelis and two Palestinians, me, myself, Yuval and Rachel and Hamdan, who’s my friend and living in Masafer Yatta. We’re just activists and journalists.
And me and my friend Hamdan spent years in the field, running after bulldozers, soldiers and settlers, and in our communities and communities around us, filming the destruction, the home destructions, the school destructions, the cutting of our water pipes and the bulldozing of our roads and our own schools, and trying to raise awareness from the international community on what’s going on, to get political impact to try to stop this from happening and to protect our community.
And five years ago, Yuval and Rachel joined, as Israeli journalists, to write about what’s happening. And then we decided together that we will start working on No Other Land as a documentary that showed the whole political story through personal, individual stories of people who lost their life and homes and school and properties on this, like in the last years and also in the decades of the occupation.
We released the movie in the Berlinale 2024, last year, at the festival. And so far, we’ve been, like, screening and showing, like, in many festivals around the world.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Basel, your film has received an Oscar nomination, but you haven’t been able to find a distributor in the US What do you know about this refusal of any company to pick up your film to distribute it? And also, can it be seen in the West Bank or in Israel itself?
BASEL ADRA: It’s sad that we haven’t found a US distributor. Our goal from making this documentary, it’s not the award. It’s not the awards itself, but the people and the audience and to get to the people’s hearts, because we want people to see the reality, to see what’s going on in my community, Masafer Yatta, but in all the West Bank, to the Palestinians and how the life, the daily life under this brutal occupation.
People should be aware of this, because they are — somehow, they have a responsibility. In the US, it’s the tax money that the people are paying there. It has something to do with the home destruction that we are facing, the settlers’ violence, the building of the settlements on our land that does not stop every day.
And we, as a collective, made this movie. We faced so many risks in the field, on the ground. Like, my home was invaded, and the cameras were confiscated from my home by Israeli soldiers.
I was physically attacked in the field when I’m going around and filming these crimes, I mean, to show to the people and to let the people know about what’s going on.
But it’s sad that the distributors in the US so far do not want to take a little bit of risk, political risk, and to show this documentary to the audience. I am really sad about it, that there is no big distributors taking No Other Land and showing it to the American people.
It’s very important to reach to the Americans, I believe. And so far, we are doing it independently on the cinemas.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And your co-director is Israeli. Have you come under criticism for working with Israelis on the film?
BASEL ADRA: So far, I’m not receiving any criticism for working with Israelis. Like, working together is because we share somehow the same values, that we reject the injustice and the occupation and the apartheid and what’s going on, and we want to work pro-solution and pro-justice and to end these, like, settlements and for a better future.
AMY GOODMAN: Basel, the Oscars are soon, in a few weeks. Can you get a visa to come into the United States? Will you attend the Oscars?
BASEL ADRA: So, I have a visa because I’ve been in the US participating in festivals for our movie. But my family and the other Palestinian co-director doesn’t have one yet, and they will try to apply soon.
And hopefully, they will get it, and they will be able to join us at the Oscars.
AMY GOODMAN: So, since it’s so difficult to see your film here in the United States, I want to go to another clip of No Other Land. Again, this is our guest, Basel Adra, and his co-director, Yuval Abraham, filming the eviction of a Palestinian family.
BASEL ADRA: [translated] A lot of army is here.
YUVAL ABRAHAM: [translated] They plan a big demolition?
BASEL ADRA: [translated] We don’t know. They’re driving towards one of my neighbors.
Now the soldiers arrived here.
MASAFER YATTA RESIDENT 1: [translated] Aren’t you ashamed to do this? Aren’t you afraid of God?
ISRAELI SOLDIER: [translated] Go back! Move back now! Get back! I’ll push you all the way back!
YUVAL ABRAHAM: [translated] I speak Hebrew. Don’t shout.
MASAFER YATTA RESIDENT 2: [translated] I hope that bulldozer falls on your head. Why are you taking our homes?
MASAFER YATTA RESIDENT 3: [translated] Why destroy the bathroom?
AMY GOODMAN: That’s Israeli bulldozers destroying a bathroom. This is another clip from No Other Land, in which you, Basel, are attacked by Israeli forces even as you try to show them you have media credentials.
BASEL ADRA: [translated] I’m filming you. I’m filming you! You’re just like criminals.
ISRAELI SOLDIER: [translated] If he gets closer, arrest him.
BASEL ADRA: [translated] You’re expelling us. Arrest me! On what grounds?
ISRAELI SOLDIER: [translated] Grab him.
BASEL ADRA: [translated] On what grounds? I have a journalist card. I have a journalist card!
ISRAELI SOLDIER: [translated] Shut up!
BASEL’S FATHER: [translated] Don’t hit my son! Leave our village! Go away! Leave, you [bleep]! Shoot.
AMY GOODMAN: Basel, that is you. Your mother is hanging onto you as you’re being dragged, your father. What do you want the world to know about Masafer Yatta, about your community in this film?
BASEL ADRA: I want the world to really act seriously. The international community should take measures and act seriously to end this, like, demolitions and ethnic cleansing that is happening everywhere in Gaza, in the West Bank, through different policies and different, like, reasons that the Israelis try to separate out, which is all lies.
It’s all about land, that they want to steal more and more of our land. That’s very clear on the ground, because every Palestinian community being erased, there is settlements growing in the same place.
This is happening right there, in the South Hebron Hills, everywhere around the West Bank, in Area C. And now they are entering camps, since January until now, by demolishing, like, destroying the camps in Jenin, Tulkarm and Tubas, and forcing people to leave their homes, to go away.
And the world just keeps watching and not taking serious action. And the opposite, actually.
The Israelis keep receiving all. Like, this amount of violations of the international law, the human rights laws, it’s very clear that it’s violated every day by the Israelis. But nobody cares. The opposite, they keep receiving weapons and money and relationships and —
AMY GOODMAN: Basel —
BASEL ADRA: — and diplomatic cover. Yes.
AMY GOODMAN: We have to leave it there. I thank you so much, look forward to interviewing you and Yuval in the United States. Basel Adra, co-director of the Oscar-nominated documentary No Other Land.
Volker Türk alarmed at growing power of ‘unelected tech oligarchs’ and warns gender equality is being rolled back
The UN human rights chief has warned of a “fundamental shift” in the US and sounded the alarm over the growing power of “unelected tech oligarchs”, in a stinging rebuke of Washington weeks into Donald Trump’s presidency.
Volker Türk said there had been bipartisan support for human rights in the US for decades but said he was “now deeply worried by the fundamental shift in direction that is taking place domestically and internationally”.
Council of Europe’s Michael O’Flaherty urged leaders not to give in to populist rhetoric over migration
Europe’s most senior human rights official has said there is evidence of asylum seekers being forcibly expelled at EU borders, as he urged mainstream politicians not to concede to populists on migration.
The commissioner for human rights at the Council of Europe, Michael O’Flaherty, told the Guardian he was concerned about the treatment of asylum seekers at the EU’s external borders in Poland and Greece, as he warned against a “securitisation response” that goes too far.
This week on CounterSpin: Just because we might witness the daylight robbery of the social benefits we’ve been paying for and counting on for the entirety of our working lives, and just because Black people are no longer officially allowed to even mentor Black people coming in to fields they’ve been historically excluded from, and just because any program receiving public funding will now have to pretend there are “two genders”—doesn’t mean the environment isn’t still in immediate peril. It is.
But the lawsuits of deep-pocketed fossil fuel corporations against any and everyone who dares challenge their profiteering destruction are really also about our ability as non-billionaires to use our voice to speak out about anything. Not speaking out is increasingly a non-option. So where are we? We’ll learn about a case that is “weaponizing the legal system” against anyone who wants a livable future from Kirk Herbertson, US director for advocacy and campaigns at EarthRights International.
Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at recent coverage of the FCC, the Washington Post and Medicaid.
This post was originally published on CounterSpin.
Many days I was tied to a chair in the interrogation room for maybe 15 hours. I was not allowed to sleep or eat or drink. They tied my arms to the chair very painfully and when they were beating me they would put their hands or legs on my chest to bend my back.
We, the undersigned coalition of journalism and press freedom organizations, express our deep concern regarding the White House’s decision to bar Associated Press (AP) reporters from access to the Oval Office, Air Force One and other White House pool events.
AP provides essential reporting that is published by thousands of outlets across the United States and around the world, helping to keep millions informed on matters of national and international importance. U.S. newspapers, radio stations, and television broadcasters rely heavily on the AP’s copy to deliver news to local communities. Barring AP effectively removes these media outlets’ ability to deliver the news to the groups they serve.
Limiting AP’s access to media pool events because of the news agency’s editorial and style decisions stifles freedom of speech and violates the First Amendment. News organizations should be allowed to make editorial decisions without fear of retaliation from government officials.
We ask that the administration honor its commitment to freedom of expression, as outlined in President Donald Trump’s executive order, by restoring AP’s access to White House events and ensuring the administration upholds a nonpartisan defense of a free press.
Signed by–
Committee to Protect Journalists
Society of Professional Journalists
Freedom of the Press Foundation
Free Press Unlimited
International Press Institute
Institute for Nonprofit News
National Press Club
National Press Photographers Association
PEN America
Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
Student Press Law Center
Chapters of the Society of Professional Journalists
Arkansas Pro Chapter, Society of Professional Journalists Boston University Society of Professional Journalists Chicago Headline Club (SPJ) Colorado Pro Chapter, SPJ Connecticut Society of Professional Journalists Detroit Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists Georgia Pro Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists Hawaii Pro Chapter SPJ Indiana Professional Chapter, Society of Professional Journalists Las Vegas Pro Chapter, Society of Professional Journalists Maine Pro Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists Minnesota SPJ New Jersey Society of Professional Journalists SPJ Florida SPJ Houston Pro Chapter SPJ Kansas Pro Chapter SPJ Keystone Pro Chapter SPJ New England SPJ Northwest Arkansas Pro Chapter SPJ San Antonio Pro Chapter SPJ San Diego Pro Chapter SPJ University of Arkansas Chapter SPJ Valley of the Sun (Arizona) Pro Chapter SPJ Virginia Pro Chapter St. Louis Society of Professional Journalists, Pro Chapter The Deadline Club (New York City Chapter of SPJ) The Press Club of Long Island (SPJ) Utah Headliners Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists Washington, D.C., Pro SPJ Chapter
Healthcare workers are protected under international law yet hundreds were detained during the war. Now, some of Gaza’s most senior doctors have spoken of the violence and abuse they say they faced
Dr Issam Abu Ajwa was in the middle of performing emergency surgery on a patient with a severe abdominal injury at al-Ahli Arab hospital in central Gaza when thesoldiers came for him.
“I asked them what they were doing coming into the operating theatre,” he says.“One of the soldiers pointed at me and said: ‘Are you Dr Issam Abu Ajwa?’ I said: ‘Yes, that’s me.’ And then the beating began.”
Vietnam has passed legislation that would allow tech billionaire and senior U.S. presidential adviser Elon Musk’s Starlink telecommunications company to begin offering satellite internet services in the country.
The decision by the National Assembly is unprecedented in that it allows the U.S. company into the Vietnamese market without a domestic partner.
Starlink’s parent company SpaceX had repeatedly expressed its intention to invest in the market of 100 million people but had not yet succeeded because the previous rules, which also forbade foreign companies from owning more than 49% of shares in joint ventures.
A person familiar with the matter told Reuters news service that the abrupt change in stance could be seen as extending an “olive branch” to SpaceX amid Vietnam’s concerns about tariff threats from U.S. President Donald Trump.
Critics acknowledged that the decision would pave the way for more Vietnamese to access the internet, but also warned that it would allow the government to more tightly control the people.
How Starlink internet works(AFP)
According to the VnExpress news network, the decision is part of a resolution on piloting a number of special mechanisms and policies to create breakthroughs in the development of science, technology, innovation and national digital transformation.
The resolution stated that the pilot is based on the principle of ensuring national defense and security, in which there is no limit on the percentage of foreign investors’ share ownership, capital contribution or contribution ratio, and it would still maintain full ownership of local subsidiaries.
Promoting human rights?
Providing internet via satellite means that people living in remote and mountainous areas will be able to access the world’s vast knowledge and view uncensored information about democracy and human rights – which Hanoi’s critics say worries the government.
“The downside is that it helps the government control the people very effectively,” Nguyen Quang A, the former president of the Vietnam Association of Information Technology told Radio Free Asia, though he acknowledged it would help people by giving them more opportunity to express their opinions online.
The ruling also shows that the government is flexible when it comes to acquiring new technology, an information technology expert identified only by the pseudonym Phillip, for security reasons, told RFA Vietnamese.
Regardless of whether they access the internet via Starlink’s satellite internet constellation or by other means, users will still be bound by the rules of Vietnam’s cybersecurity law, which heavily regulates the internet and online activities, a resident with 10-years experience in tech security with experience at Vietnamese and international non-governmental organizations, told RFA.
“That means that telecommunications and Internet companies when opening up to Vietnamese users must place servers in the country, and the company will be responsible for providing all data when requested by the state.”
He said that Starlink would likely negotiate a deal with Vietnam’s Ministry of Information and Communications, but in the end “will have to give in and accept data requests,” in line with Google and Meta.
RFA attempted to contact SpaceX about the development, but received no response.
The Ministry of Information and Communications did not respond to requests for comment from Reuters news service.
Extending an “olive branch” to the US
A government official told Reuters a day earlier that the change paves the way for Starlink to launch in Vietnam and follows lengthy negotiations with SpaceX.
This is “a demonstration from Vietnam that they can play transactional diplomacy if the Trump administration wants to,” the previous Reuters source familiar with the situation said.
Nguyen Quang A told RFA that allowing Starlink into the Vietnamese market could help reassure the U.S., which had a trade deficit of US$123.5 billion last year, making Vietnam the United States’ fourth largest trading partner.
Last September, Tim Hughes – SpaceX’s senior vice president –met with Vietnam’s general secretary To Lam during a business trip to New York, and expressed the company’s intention to invest US$1.5 billion in Vietnam but did not specify the timing and purpose of the investment.
IT expert Phillip said that the ruling presents an opportunity for Vietnam to be more open.
“Right now, we don’t know which companies will invest, what the policies will be, how much cooperation these companies will have with the government, but in my opinion, this is an opportunity for Vietnam to change and loosen up,” said Phillip. “If they want to be closer to the West, they have to loosen up a bit, they can’t completely control everything like before.”
Translated by RFA Vietnamese. Edited by Eugene Whong and Mike Firn.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Vietnamese.
Vietnam has passed legislation that would allow tech billionaire and senior U.S. presidential adviser Elon Musk’s Starlink telecommunications company to begin offering satellite internet services in the country.
The decision by the National Assembly is unprecedented in that it allows the U.S. company into the Vietnamese market without a domestic partner.
Starlink’s parent company SpaceX had repeatedly expressed its intention to invest in the market of 100 million people but had not yet succeeded because the previous rules, which also forbade foreign companies from owning more than 49% of shares in joint ventures.
A person familiar with the matter told Reuters news service that the abrupt change in stance could be seen as extending an “olive branch” to SpaceX amid Vietnam’s concerns about tariff threats from U.S. President Donald Trump.
Critics acknowledged that the decision would pave the way for more Vietnamese to access the internet, but also warned that it would allow the government to more tightly control the people.
How Starlink internet works(AFP)
According to the VnExpress news network, the decision is part of a resolution on piloting a number of special mechanisms and policies to create breakthroughs in the development of science, technology, innovation and national digital transformation.
The resolution stated that the pilot is based on the principle of ensuring national defense and security, in which there is no limit on the percentage of foreign investors’ share ownership, capital contribution or contribution ratio, and it would still maintain full ownership of local subsidiaries.
Promoting human rights?
Providing internet via satellite means that people living in remote and mountainous areas will be able to access the world’s vast knowledge and view uncensored information about democracy and human rights – which Hanoi’s critics say worries the government.
“The downside is that it helps the government control the people very effectively,” Nguyen Quang A, the former president of the Vietnam Association of Information Technology told Radio Free Asia, though he acknowledged it would help people by giving them more opportunity to express their opinions online.
The ruling also shows that the government is flexible when it comes to acquiring new technology, an information technology expert identified only by the pseudonym Phillip, for security reasons, told RFA Vietnamese.
Regardless of whether they access the internet via Starlink’s satellite internet constellation or by other means, users will still be bound by the rules of Vietnam’s cybersecurity law, which heavily regulates the internet and online activities, a resident with 10-years experience in tech security with experience at Vietnamese and international non-governmental organizations, told RFA.
“That means that telecommunications and Internet companies when opening up to Vietnamese users must place servers in the country, and the company will be responsible for providing all data when requested by the state.”
He said that Starlink would likely negotiate a deal with Vietnam’s Ministry of Information and Communications, but in the end “will have to give in and accept data requests,” in line with Google and Meta.
RFA attempted to contact SpaceX about the development, but received no response.
The Ministry of Information and Communications did not respond to requests for comment from Reuters news service.
Extending an “olive branch” to the US
A government official told Reuters a day earlier that the change paves the way for Starlink to launch in Vietnam and follows lengthy negotiations with SpaceX.
This is “a demonstration from Vietnam that they can play transactional diplomacy if the Trump administration wants to,” the previous Reuters source familiar with the situation said.
Nguyen Quang A told RFA that allowing Starlink into the Vietnamese market could help reassure the U.S., which had a trade deficit of US$123.5 billion last year, making Vietnam the United States’ fourth largest trading partner.
Last September, Tim Hughes – SpaceX’s senior vice president –met with Vietnam’s general secretary To Lam during a business trip to New York, and expressed the company’s intention to invest US$1.5 billion in Vietnam but did not specify the timing and purpose of the investment.
IT expert Phillip said that the ruling presents an opportunity for Vietnam to be more open.
“Right now, we don’t know which companies will invest, what the policies will be, how much cooperation these companies will have with the government, but in my opinion, this is an opportunity for Vietnam to change and loosen up,” said Phillip. “If they want to be closer to the West, they have to loosen up a bit, they can’t completely control everything like before.”
Translated by RFA Vietnamese. Edited by Eugene Whong and Mike Firn.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Vietnamese.
Young Afghan refugee brings case after move to prevent those who arrived on ‘dangerous journey’ from citizenship
Plans to prevent refugees who arrive in the UK on a small boat, lorry or via other “irregular” means from becoming a British citizen are facing their first legal challenge.
The challenge is being brought by a 21-year-old Afghan refugee who arrived in the UK aged 14, after fleeing the Taliban and being smuggled to Britain in the back of a lorry. He was granted refugee status and after five years was granted indefinite leave to remain. He was due to apply for British citizenship on 1 March.
Myanmar’s military government has adopted a law allowing foreign companies to provide armed security services, which analysts suspect will lead to former military personnel from China protecting its extensive economic interests in its southern neighbor.
The law raises the prospect of Chinese private military corporations guarding oil and gas pipelines from Myanmar’s Indian Ocean coast to Yunnan province, and ensuring uninterrupted supplies in the event of war in the South China Sea blocking regular shipping routes.
The Private Security Service Law, published in state-run media on Tuesday, states that foreign companies seeking a license to set up a security company must be registered under the Myanmar Companies Law.
The National Defence and Security Council must approve a company “holding arms and ammunition due to work demand in providing private security services,” states the law, signed by the leader of the junta that seized power in 2021, Senior Gen. Min Aung Hlaing.
The legislation stipulates that companies must ensure that staff are “not a member of any armed forces of a foreign country.” Myanmar’s military-drafted 2008 constitution rules out foreign forces operating in the country.
The law also requires that “at least 75% of the hired private security servants must be Myanmar citizens,” and companies providing private security services have to abide by existing laws on weapons.
China has extensive economic interests in Myanmar, many of them linked to a long-planned China-Myanmar Economic Corridor between China’s Yunnan and Myanmar’s coast.
The corridor is part of Beijing’s multi-billion-dollar Belt and Road Initiative of energy and trade-facilitating infrastructure projects.
They include a special economic zone and proposed deep-water port, with oil and gas facilities, in Kyaukpyu in Rakhine state, 800-kilometer (500-mile) oil and gas pipelines that extend to Kunming in southwest China, copper jade and rare earth mines and hydro-electric plants.
While the embattled military still holds Kyaukpyu, many of the other projects are in areas that have come under the control of anti-junta forces battling to end military rule since the generals overthrew a government led by Aung San Suu Kyi in February 2021.
While the civil war has delayed Chinese projects, insurgent forces, some of which maintain contacts with China, have not launched major attacks on pipelines and other facilities, and have even promised to protect them.
Analysts said the new law sets out the legal framework for a Chinese proposal to set up a China-Myanmar Joint Venture Security Company, as reported in the military’s Myanmar Gazette on Nov. 8.
Lawyer Gyi Myint said the law reflected the junta’s determination to get China’s economic projects implemented by relying on Chinese security help.
“We have reached a situation where the military has allowed things that are not allowed internationally. This is not in line with the 2008 constitution,” Gyi Myint told Radio Free Asia from an undisclosed location.
Political analyst Than Soe Naing said the law would allow former members of China’s People’s Liberation Army to operate legally in Myanmar.
“The junta council is selling out to China for nothing even though it is constantly talking about sovereignty,” he told RFA.
RFA tried to contact the junta council’s spokesman, Maj. Gen. Zaw Min Tun, to inquire about the criticism of the law but he did not answer the telephone.
The military council has not said when the proposed China-Myanmar Joint Venture Security Company would be set up.
The Burmese-language Khit Thit Media reported late last year that a deal to establish a Chinese private military corporation in Kyaukpyu was signed in November between a Special Economic Zone management sub-committee and officials from the Chinese CITIC Group Company.
Edited by RFA Staff.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Burmese.
Myanmar’s military government has adopted a law allowing foreign companies to provide armed security services, which analysts suspect will lead to former military personnel from China protecting its extensive economic interests in its southern neighbor.
The law raises the prospect of Chinese private military corporations guarding oil and gas pipelines from Myanmar’s Indian Ocean coast to Yunnan province, and ensuring uninterrupted supplies in the event of war in the South China Sea blocking regular shipping routes.
The Private Security Service Law, published in state-run media on Tuesday, states that foreign companies seeking a license to set up a security company must be registered under the Myanmar Companies Law.
The National Defence and Security Council must approve a company “holding arms and ammunition due to work demand in providing private security services,” states the law, signed by the leader of the junta that seized power in 2021, Senior Gen. Min Aung Hlaing.
The legislation stipulates that companies must ensure that staff are “not a member of any armed forces of a foreign country.” Myanmar’s military-drafted 2008 constitution rules out foreign forces operating in the country.
The law also requires that “at least 75% of the hired private security servants must be Myanmar citizens,” and companies providing private security services have to abide by existing laws on weapons.
China has extensive economic interests in Myanmar, many of them linked to a long-planned China-Myanmar Economic Corridor between China’s Yunnan and Myanmar’s coast.
The corridor is part of Beijing’s multi-billion-dollar Belt and Road Initiative of energy and trade-facilitating infrastructure projects.
They include a special economic zone and proposed deep-water port, with oil and gas facilities, in Kyaukpyu in Rakhine state, 800-kilometer (500-mile) oil and gas pipelines that extend to Kunming in southwest China, copper jade and rare earth mines and hydro-electric plants.
While the embattled military still holds Kyaukpyu, many of the other projects are in areas that have come under the control of anti-junta forces battling to end military rule since the generals overthrew a government led by Aung San Suu Kyi in February 2021.
While the civil war has delayed Chinese projects, insurgent forces, some of which maintain contacts with China, have not launched major attacks on pipelines and other facilities, and have even promised to protect them.
Analysts said the new law sets out the legal framework for a Chinese proposal to set up a China-Myanmar Joint Venture Security Company, as reported in the military’s Myanmar Gazette on Nov. 8.
Lawyer Gyi Myint said the law reflected the junta’s determination to get China’s economic projects implemented by relying on Chinese security help.
“We have reached a situation where the military has allowed things that are not allowed internationally. This is not in line with the 2008 constitution,” Gyi Myint told Radio Free Asia from an undisclosed location.
Political analyst Than Soe Naing said the law would allow former members of China’s People’s Liberation Army to operate legally in Myanmar.
“The junta council is selling out to China for nothing even though it is constantly talking about sovereignty,” he told RFA.
RFA tried to contact the junta council’s spokesman, Maj. Gen. Zaw Min Tun, to inquire about the criticism of the law but he did not answer the telephone.
The military council has not said when the proposed China-Myanmar Joint Venture Security Company would be set up.
The Burmese-language Khit Thit Media reported late last year that a deal to establish a Chinese private military corporation in Kyaukpyu was signed in November between a Special Economic Zone management sub-committee and officials from the Chinese CITIC Group Company.
Edited by RFA Staff.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Burmese.
Lady Carr defends judiciary’s independence after Starmer said decision to accept case resulted from a ‘legal loophole’
England and Wales’s most senior judge has written to Keir Starmer about an “unacceptable” exchange with Kemi Badenoch at prime minister’s questions, saying she was “deeply troubled” by the discussion on the case of a Palestinian family’s right to live in the UK.
Lady Sue Carr, the lady chief justice, criticised the Conservative leader’s questions about the case, in which a family from Gaza had applied through a scheme designed for Ukrainian refugees.
New York, February 14, 2025— Six months after a mass uprising ousted the increasingly autocratic administration of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, Bangladeshi journalists continue to be threatened and attacked for their work, along with facing new fears that planned legislation could undermine press freedom
Bangladesh’s interim government — established amid high hopes of political and economic reform— has drawn criticism from journalists and media advocates for its January introduction of drafts of two cyber ordinances: the Cyber Protection Ordinance 2025 (CPO) and Personal Data Protection Ordinance 2025.
While the government reportedly dropped controversial sections related to defamation and warrantless searches in its update to the CPO, rights groups remain concerned that some of the remaining provisions could be used to target journalists. According to the Global Network Initiative, of which CPJ is a member, the draft gives the government “disproportionate authority” to access user data and impose restrictions on online content. Journalists are also concerned that the proposed data law will give the government “unchecked powers” to access personal data, with minimal opportunity for judicial redress. “Democracy cannot flourish without robust journalism,” said CPJ Asia Program Coordinator Beh Lih Yi. “Bangladesh’s interim government must deliver on its promise to protect journalists and their right to report freely. Authorities should amend proposed laws that could undermine press freedom and hold the perpetrators behind the attacks on the press to account.”
CPJ’s calls and text messages to Nahid Islam, the information, communication, and technology adviser to the interim government, requesting comment on the ordinances did not receive a reply.
Meanwhile, CPJ has documented a recent spate of beatings, criminal investigations, and harassment of journalists for their work.
Attacks
A group of 10 to 12 men attacked Shohag Khan Sujon, a correspondent for daily Samakal newspaper, after he and three other journalists investigated allegations of medical negligence at a hospital in central Shariatpur district on February 3.
Sujon told CPJ that a clinic owner held the journalist’s legs as the assailants hit his left ear with a hammer and stabbed his back with a knife. The three other correspondents — Nayon Das of Bangla TV, Bidhan Mojumder Oni of News 24 Television, and Saiful Islam Akash of Desh TV — were attacked with hammers when they tried to intervene; the attack ended locals chased the perpetrators away.
Sujon told CPJ he filed a police complaint for attempted murder. Helal Uddin, officer-in-charge of the Palang Model Police Station, told CPJ by text message that the investigation was ongoing.
In a separate incident on the same day, around 10 masked men used bamboo sticks to beat four newspaper correspondents — Md Rafiqul Islam of Khoborer Kagoj, Abdul Malak Nirob of Amar Barta, Md Alauddin of Daily Amar Somoy, and Md Foysal Mahmud of Daily Alokito Sakal — while they traveled to a village in southern Laximpur district to report on a land dispute, Islam told CPJ.
The attackers stole the journalists’ cameras, mobile phones, and wallets and fired guns towards the group, causing shrapnel injuries to Mahmud’s left ear and leg, Islam said.
Authorities arrested four suspects, two of whom were released on bail on February 10, Islam told CPJ. Laximpur police superintendent Md Akter Hossain told CPJ by phone that authorities were working to apprehend additional suspects.
Threats
Shafiur Rahman, a British freelance documentary filmmaker of Bangladeshi origin, told CPJ he received an influx of threatening emails and social media comments after publishing a January 30 article about a meeting between the leadership of Bangladesh’s National Security Intelligence and the armed group Rohingya Solidarity Organisation.
Multiple emails warned Rahman to “stop or suffer the consequences” and “back off before it’s too late.” Social media posts included a photo of the journalist with a red target across his forehead and warnings that Rahman would face criminal charges across Bangladesh, leaving Rahman concerned for his safety if he returned to report from Bangladesh’s refugee camps for Rohingya forced to flee Myanmar.
“The nature of these threats suggests an orchestrated campaign to silence me, and I fear potential real-world repercussions if I continue my work on the ground,” Rahman said.
CPJ’s text to Shah Jahan, joint director of the National Security Intelligence, requesting comment about the threats did not receive a reply.
Criminal cases
Four journalists who reported or published material on allegedly illicit business practices and labor violations are facing possible criminal defamation charges after Noor Nahar, director of Tafrid Cotton Mills Limited and wife of the managing director of its sister company, Dhaka Cotton Mills Limited, filed a November 13, 2024, complaint in court against them. If tried and convicted, they could face up to two years in prison.
The four are: * H. M. Mehidi Hasan, editor and publisher of investigative newspaper The Weekly Agrajatra.
* Kamrul Islam, assignment editor for The Weekly Agrajatra.
* Mohammad Shah Alam Khan, editor of online outlet bdnews999.
* Al Ehsan, senior reporter for The Daily Post newspaper.
CPJ’s text to Nahar asking for comment did not receive a reply.
Md Hafizur Rahman, officer-in-charge of the Uttara West Police Station, which was ordered to investigate the complaint, told CPJ by phone that he would send the latest case updates but did not respond to subsequent messages.
New York, February 14, 2025— Six months after a mass uprising ousted the increasingly autocratic administration of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, Bangladeshi journalists continue to be threatened and attacked for their work, along with facing new fears that planned legislation could undermine press freedom
Bangladesh’s interim government — established amid high hopes of political and economic reform— has drawn criticism from journalists and media advocates for its January introduction of drafts of two cyber ordinances: the Cyber Protection Ordinance 2025 (CPO) and Personal Data Protection Ordinance 2025.
While the government reportedly dropped controversial sections related to defamation and warrantless searches in its update to the CPO, rights groups remain concerned that some of the remaining provisions could be used to target journalists. According to the Global Network Initiative, of which CPJ is a member, the draft gives the government “disproportionate authority” to access user data and impose restrictions on online content. Journalists are also concerned that the proposed data law will give the government “unchecked powers” to access personal data, with minimal opportunity for judicial redress. “Democracy cannot flourish without robust journalism,” said CPJ Asia Program Coordinator Beh Lih Yi. “Bangladesh’s interim government must deliver on its promise to protect journalists and their right to report freely. Authorities should amend proposed laws that could undermine press freedom and hold the perpetrators behind the attacks on the press to account.”
CPJ’s calls and text messages to Nahid Islam, the information, communication, and technology adviser to the interim government, requesting comment on the ordinances did not receive a reply.
Meanwhile, CPJ has documented a recent spate of beatings, criminal investigations, and harassment of journalists for their work.
Attacks
A group of 10 to 12 men attacked Shohag Khan Sujon, a correspondent for daily Samakal newspaper, after he and three other journalists investigated allegations of medical negligence at a hospital in central Shariatpur district on February 3.
Sujon told CPJ that a clinic owner held the journalist’s legs as the assailants hit his left ear with a hammer and stabbed his back with a knife. The three other correspondents — Nayon Das of Bangla TV, Bidhan Mojumder Oni of News 24 Television, and Saiful Islam Akash of Desh TV — were attacked with hammers when they tried to intervene; the attack ended locals chased the perpetrators away.
Sujon told CPJ he filed a police complaint for attempted murder. Helal Uddin, officer-in-charge of the Palang Model Police Station, told CPJ by text message that the investigation was ongoing.
In a separate incident on the same day, around 10 masked men used bamboo sticks to beat four newspaper correspondents — Md Rafiqul Islam of Khoborer Kagoj, Abdul Malak Nirob of Amar Barta, Md Alauddin of Daily Amar Somoy, and Md Foysal Mahmud of Daily Alokito Sakal — while they traveled to a village in southern Laximpur district to report on a land dispute, Islam told CPJ.
The attackers stole the journalists’ cameras, mobile phones, and wallets and fired guns towards the group, causing shrapnel injuries to Mahmud’s left ear and leg, Islam said.
Authorities arrested four suspects, two of whom were released on bail on February 10, Islam told CPJ. Laximpur police superintendent Md Akter Hossain told CPJ by phone that authorities were working to apprehend additional suspects.
Threats
Shafiur Rahman, a British freelance documentary filmmaker of Bangladeshi origin, told CPJ he received an influx of threatening emails and social media comments after publishing a January 30 article about a meeting between the leadership of Bangladesh’s National Security Intelligence and the armed group Rohingya Solidarity Organisation.
Multiple emails warned Rahman to “stop or suffer the consequences” and “back off before it’s too late.” Social media posts included a photo of the journalist with a red target across his forehead and warnings that Rahman would face criminal charges across Bangladesh, leaving Rahman concerned for his safety if he returned to report from Bangladesh’s refugee camps for Rohingya forced to flee Myanmar.
“The nature of these threats suggests an orchestrated campaign to silence me, and I fear potential real-world repercussions if I continue my work on the ground,” Rahman said.
CPJ’s text to Shah Jahan, joint director of the National Security Intelligence, requesting comment about the threats did not receive a reply.
Criminal cases
Four journalists who reported or published material on allegedly illicit business practices and labor violations are facing possible criminal defamation charges after Noor Nahar, director of Tafrid Cotton Mills Limited and wife of the managing director of its sister company, Dhaka Cotton Mills Limited, filed a November 13, 2024, complaint in court against them. If tried and convicted, they could face up to two years in prison.
The four are: * H. M. Mehidi Hasan, editor and publisher of investigative newspaper The Weekly Agrajatra.
* Kamrul Islam, assignment editor for The Weekly Agrajatra.
* Mohammad Shah Alam Khan, editor of online outlet bdnews999.
* Al Ehsan, senior reporter for The Daily Post newspaper.
CPJ’s text to Nahar asking for comment did not receive a reply.
Md Hafizur Rahman, officer-in-charge of the Uttara West Police Station, which was ordered to investigate the complaint, told CPJ by phone that he would send the latest case updates but did not respond to subsequent messages.
The Committee to Protect Journalists sent a letter to Tunisian President Kais Saied on February 12 asking him to secure the release of journalist Mohamed Boughalleb, whose health is gravely worsening, and to repeal the cybercrime law Decree 54.
Boughalleb, a reporter with local independent channel Carthage Plus and local independent radio station Cap FM, was sentenced to six months in prison in April 2024 on defamation charges. But he has been imprisoned for nearly a year, as his sentence was increased to eight months on appeal and he has been charged on a second defamation count under Decree 54.
Tunisian authorities have used the cybercrime law to continue to arrest, prosecute, and silence members of the press, the letter states.
Janine Jackson interviewed TLDEF’s Ezra Young about trans rights law for the February 7, 2025, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript.
Janine Jackson: Transgender youth, families and advocates are filinglawsuits, pushing back on Trump executive orders that define sex as biological and “grounded in incontrovertible reality,” and that prohibit federal funding of transition-related healthcare for those under 19, including by medical schools and hospitals that receive federal research or education grants. According to a report by Jo Yurcaba at NBCOut, that latter order contained language claiming that “countless children soon regret that they have been mutilated,” and that they wind up “trapped with lifelong medical complications” and “a losing war with their own bodies.”
This accompanies orders prohibiting trans people from joining the military, and from receiving transition care while incarcerated, and then just yesterday, a move to ban trans women from women’s sports. It’s evident what Trump and his ilk want to do, but is it legal? And even if it’s not, what impacts could it still have?
Ezra Young is a civil rights attorney whose litigation and scholarship center on trans rights. He’s been visiting assistant law professor at Cornell Law School, director of impact litigation at the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, and legal director at African American Policy Forum, among other things. He joins us now by phone from Charlottesville, Virginia. Welcome back to CounterSpin, Ezra Young.
Ezra Young: Thank you so much for the invitation.
JJ: Ground us, please, with some basic understanding. Discrimination based on gender identity is illegal. That’s established, isn’t it?
EY: Yes, it is. Gender identity is a newer term, but is essentially equivalent to sex. Federal law prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, both under our Constitution, as well as under many statutes.
JJ: And it’s also established that the White House or Trump doesn’t have, really, the legal power or the authority to carry out these moves that these orders indicate, right?
EY: Correct. So this is just basic constitutional law, like I would teach my first-year law students; any one of them would be able to spot this. Under our Constitution, our government is one of limited powers. Those powers for the presidency are delineated in Article Two. The responsibility of the US president is to execute and enforce laws that are passed by Congress, not to make up new laws, and most definitely not to infringe upon the rights that are protected by the United States Constitution.
JJ: Right. Well, we know that the law saying they can’t do something doesn’t necessarily mean—we can already see that it hasn’t meant—that nothing happens, including things that can deeply affect people’s lives, even if they aren’t legal. So accepting that grayness, what should we be concerned about here?
EY: Well, first and foremost, I’d push back on the sense that there’s grayness. This is a situation where there’s black and white. Our Constitution, which I firmly believe in, enough so that I’m an expert in constitutional law and I teach it, limits what a president can do.
So let me contrast this with the president’s power when it comes to immigration. There’s a lot of power in the president when it comes to immigration, because that’s an issue over which our Constitution gives him power. But our Constitution is one of the government of limited powers, meaning if power isn’t expressly provided via the Constitution, the president can’t just make up that power. So for folks who think the president is doing something unconstitutional, or insists he has powers he doesn’t have, the best thing to do is to push back and say absolutely no.
Part of what we’re seeing right now, with some local hospitals in New York and elsewhere essentially trying to comply in advance, in the hope to appease Trump if one day he does have the power to do what he says he’s doing, that’s absolutely wrongheaded. We don’t, and no one should. That was why our country was founded. Despite all the sins on which it was founded, a good reason why we were founded was to make sure that the people retained the vast majority of the power. And when politicians, including the United States president, pretend they have more power than they do, it’s our responsibility as citizens and residents of this nation to push back and say no.
JJ: I appreciate that, and that the law is not itself vague, but that with folks complying in advance, as you say, and with this just sort of general confusion, we know that a law doesn’t have to actually pass in order for harms to happen, in order for the real world to respond to these calls, as we’re seeing now. So it’s important to distinguish the fact that the law is in opposition to all of this, and yet here we see people already acting as though somehow it were justified or authorized, which is frightening.
EY: It is frightening, and I think, again, that goes to our responsibility as Americans. Citizens or not, if you’re here, you’re an American, and you’re protected by the Constitution. It’s our responsibility to push back people who are all too ready to take steps against the trans community, against trans people, just like all of the other minority groups President Trump is trying to subjugate, and to insist: “Hey, stop. You’re not required to do this. If you’re choosing to do this, that’s a problem.”
JJ: We are seeing resistance, both these lawsuits and protests in the street, I feel like more today than yesterday, and probably more tomorrow than today. Do you think that folks are activated enough, that they see things clearly? What other resistance would you like to see?
Ezra Young: “If Trump were to put out an executive order today declaring the sky is purple, that doesn’t change the reality that the sky is not purple.”
EY: I think protests are a great way for folks who might not know a lot of these issues, or might have limited capacities, so they’re not lawyers, they’re not educators, they’re not doctors, but they’re people who care. That’s a great way to push back, put your name and faith and body on the line, and to show you don’t agree with this.
In addition to that, I would suggest that people read these executive orders and know what they say and know what they don’t say. When I say, right now, for the trans community, complying in advance is one of the biggest problems we’re seeing, I mean it. I’ve been on dozens of calls with members of the trans community, including trans lawyers at large organizations and law firms, people who work for the federal government, who are not what my grandfather would call “using their thinking caps” right now. They’re thinking in a place of fear, and they’re not reading. They’re not thinking critically.
If Trump were to put out an executive order today declaring the sky is purple, that doesn’t change the reality that the sky is not purple. We don’t need to pretend that is the reality. We can just call it out for what it is, utter nonsense.
Beyond that, I would say people should not change anything about the way they live their life or go about the world, simply out of fear that something will be done to them that no one has the power to do.
I can say—it’s kind of funny—I was at a really conservative federal court last year, and I lost my passport. I thought I was going to find it again, but I didn’t, and then I got busy with work, and Trump came into office. So I finally got my stuff together, and applied for a new passport. A lot of people in my community were concerned that I wasn’t going to get a passport, and all I could think was: “I read all of the rules. I read all of the executive orders. There’s nothing that says I can’t get my passport.” I’m not home in Ithaca, New York, right now, but my understanding is my passport was delivered yesterday.
JJ: OK, so just going forward, people think media critics hate journalists, when really we just hate bad journalism, which there has been a fair amount of around trans issues; but there are also some brighter spots and some improvements, like one you saw out of what might seem an unlikely place. Would you tell us a little about that?
EY: One of my friends, Brittany Stewart, of an organization called Gender Justice, which is based in Minnesota, brought a lawsuit against the state of North Dakota, challenging a ban on minors accessing trans healthcare. This case was filed about two years ago, and it just went to a bench trial, meaning it was heard by only a judge in North Dakota last week.
Very lucky to the people of North Dakota, there’s a wonderful local journalist by the name of Mary Steurer who has been following the case for the last two years, and attended each and every day of the seven day bench trial. And each day after court, she submitted a story where there were photographs taken straight from the courtroom of the witnesses that were not anonymous, and describing what happened for the day.
And it’s not just passive recording that Mary did; it’s really critical reporting. She picked up on reporting in other states where the same witnesses testified. She shared long summaries of witness testimonies for the day. And my understanding is her reporting was so good that the two other major newspapers in North Dakota ran all of her daily reports on their front pages.
JJ: Yeah, Mary Steurer writes for the North Dakota Monitor. I looked through that reporting on your recommendation, and it really was straightforward, just being there in the room, bringing in relevant information. It just was strange, in a way, how refreshing it was to see such straightforward reporting. She would mention that a certain person made a statement about medical things, and she’d quote it, but then say, “Actually, this is an outlying view in the medical community,” which is relevant background information that another reporter might not have included. So I do want to say, just straightforward reporting can be such sunlight on a story like this.
EY: Yes, and especially I appreciate that Mary is local to North Dakota. She’s not an outsider parachuting in for a trial that might otherwise be overly sensationalized. This is a North Dakotan covering a North Dakota case in Bismarck, and she’s really speaking to the sensibilities of North Dakotans, and what they want to know about a case like this, not what outsiders like me from New York might think.
JJ: Let me just ask you, Ezra, while I have you, forward-looking thoughts. I’ve heard you say these moves are not legal, these executive orders are not legal, they can be stopped, people are engaged in stopping them. Are there things you’d look for journalists to be doing right now, or for other folks to be doing right now, that can make sure that goes forward in the way that we want it to?
EY: For journalists, I’d recommend that you cast a wide net to understand all of the actions that are happening, and all of the lawsuits that are happening. A lot of journalists at the national level, at the very least, do really reactive reporting. So within a few minutes of an executive order coming out, they’ll talk to the same activists that they always talk to on both sides. They’ll talk to a lawyer who has no idea what this area of law is, just to get a quote in, and then they move on.
I think it would be helpful for Americans, and trans Americans especially, to know there’s more going on in our fight than being reactive to nonsense executive orders.
As one example, I filed suit against the US Office of Personnel Management yesterday, on behalf of my client Manning, a former federal employee challenging the federal government’s health benefits plans’ decades-long trans exclusions in healthcare. This is a case that captures the long arc of the struggle for trans rights. It started 10 years ago, and ironically enough, the only administration that was supportive of Mr. Manning’s bid was Mr. Trump.
JJ: That is odd.
EY: But here we are in court again.
JJ: All right then, so cast a wide net, and don’t just look at the most recent thing that’s come down the pike, because that will just have all of our heads spinning, and take our eyes off the prize.
EY: And talk to different voices, not just the same activists, not just the same lawyers, not just the same parents, not just the same kids. There are a lot of trans people. We’re not a monolith. We have different views and interests, and different experiences, and you won’t capture that if you just talk to the same talking heads.
JJ: All right, then. We’ve been speaking with civil rights attorney Ezra Young. You can follow his work at EzraYoung.com. Thank you so much for joining us this week on CounterSpin.
Family fleeing Gaza were allowed to join brother in UK after applying through scheme meant for Ukrainian refugees
A judge who granted a Palestinian family the right to live in the UK after they applied through a scheme originally meant for Ukrainian refugees made the wrong decision, Keir Starmer has said.
A family of six seeking to flee Gaza were allowed to join their brother in the UK after an immigration judge ruled that the Home Office’s rejection of their application breached their human rights, it emerged on Tuesday.
Widowed parent’s allowance claims for those not married or in civil partnership can only be backdated from 30 August 2018
Two bereaved parents have filed a case at the European court of human rights, claiming that the UK government’s treatment of them is discriminatory.
Jyotee Gunnooa and Andrew Byles lost their partners but were unable to claim a benefit for widowed parents because they were not married or in civil partnerships when the deaths happened.
This week on CounterSpin: We know that once corporate news label something “controversial,” we’re in for reporting with a static “some say/others differ” frame—even if one “side” of the “controversy” is a relatively small group of people who don’t believe in science or human rights or democracy. So as the Trump White House comes out fast and furious against transgender people, their weird hatefulness lands in a public arena that generally rejects discrimination, but also in an elite media climate in which the very lives of transgender people have long been deemed “subject to debate.” We’ll hear about the current state of things from civil rights attorney Ezra Young.
Also on the show: When the New York Times reported Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s revelation that parasites have eaten part of his brain, Kennedy, running for president at the time, offered to “eat five more brain worms and still beat President Trump and President Biden in a debate.” We’re reminded of such “jokes” now, as Kennedy looks likely to be head of Health and Human Services, along with his claims that vaccines cause autism and chicken soup cures measles. But to resist Kennedy, we need to understand what fuels those who, even if they don’t like him, believe he might be a force for good in their lives. Anne Sosin is a public health researcher and practitioner based at Dartmouth College, who encourages looking around RFK Jr. to the communities that imagine he’s speaking for them.
24 January 2025 was the Day of the Endangered Lawyer. Its purpose is to call attention to threatened human rights lawyers who work to advance the rule of law and promote human rights under governmental harassment and intimidation, often at great personal risk. Each year the focus is on those lawyers working in one designated country.
In 2025, the Day of the Endangered Lawyer spotlights the persecution of lawyers in Belarus. Since 2020, a crackdown by the Belarus government has resulted in the targeting of lawyers and human rights defenders. Legal practitioners face increasing criminal sanctions, arbitrary detention and systemic interference in their abilities to practice law. Constitutional and legislative changes have eroded the independence of the judiciary and professional legal bodies and given the executive branch unwarranted control over the judiciary and legal profession.
Today, the ABA recognizes these human rights lawyers who champion justice and fight for the rule of law.
Family of Bowman, 44, plead for death sentence to be commuted as lawyers say ‘the system has failed him’
South Carolina is set to execute Marion Bowman Jr, a 44-year-old man who has maintained his innocence and in his final days became outspoken about the brutal conditions on death row.
The state, which has aggressively revived capital punishment after a 13-year pause, is due to kill Bowman by lethal injection at 6pm local time on Friday. It will be the first execution in the US of the new year.
‘We are not what the state labels us. We are kind, caring, loving people,’ he said in last words before lethal injection
South Carolina has executed Marion Bowman Jr, a 44-year-old man who has maintained his innocence and in his final days became outspoken about the brutal conditions on death row.
The state, which has aggressively revived capital punishment after a 13-year pause, killed Bowman by lethal injection on Friday evening. It was be the first execution in the US of the new year.
Instances of kidnapping, robbery and murder have grown significantly in cities controlled by Myanmar’s ruling junta, residents said Wednesday, due to what they claim is lax enforcement by police.
A legal expert, speaking on condition of anonymity for safety reasons, told Radio Free Asia that police are focused on protecting the military junta from rebel forces, rather than enforcing the law.
The junta, which seized control of Myanmar in a February 2021 coup, has imposed martial law in dozens of townships in the country to stamp out resistance in areas where anti-regime forces are active.
“To be honest, the legal system is almost nonexistent,” he said. “The primary reason for this is the country’s loss of peace and stability. The rule of law has completely collapsed.”
Police are unable to perform their fundamental duties because they must focus solely on security issues, the legal expert said.
“In terms of security, they are concentrated only on identifying and arresting members of organizations deemed ‘terrorist groups,’ while neglecting their core police responsibilities.”
A growing trend
Meanwhile, rising crime has become a trend in major cities and towns across Myanmar, sources said.
In 2024, at least five people were reportedly kidnapped in Yangon and Mandalay, as well as Tachileik and Muse — border towns in Myanmar’s Shan state.
A view of Mandalay, the second-largest city in Myanmar, July 5, 2024.(Sai Aung Main/AFP)
In an incident in December 2024, a group kidnapped, extorted and murdered an obstetrician-gynecologist in Mandalay region’s Chanmyathazi township.
On Jan. 3, a group of men abducted Tun Lin Naing Oo, a gas station owner, in Mandalay.
On Jan. 11, a man armed with a gun robbed a Kanbawza Bank branch in Mahanwesin ward, in Mandalay region’s Maha Aungmye township, in broad daylight. But instead of police intervening, bank security guards and residents surrounded and apprehended him.
On Jan. 18, three armed men kidnapped a grocery store owner in Muse.
A resident of Mandalay, who requested anonymity, told RFA that people there live in constant fear because of rampant crime, including robberies.
“Authorities themselves engage in illegal activities, leaving no sense of security or peace,” said the person, who declined to be identified for fear of retribution.
“Life has become exhausting,” the person said. “We struggle every day just to survive. This is the harsh reality, and everyone is suffering.”
Abductors demand ransom
When young women in major cities like Yangon and Mandalay go missing, it is often kidnappers who claim responsibility and demand ransom for their release, said residents of Yangon, Myanmar’s largest metropolis.
But their relatives typically refrain from filing complaints with authorities out of fear that the abductors may return to target them again, according to a source close to one such family in Yangon.
The source, who declined to be named for safety reasons, pointed to the recent kidnapping of a girl who was on her way to school one morning when she was nabbed off the street.
In the evening, he said, the kidnappers called her mother, demanding 60 million kyats (US$13,500) for her release and threatened to kill or sell her if the ransom wasn’t paid. The mother handed over the cash without contacting the police, and her daughter was released.
Military junta soldiers patrol in Yangon, Myanmar, Dec. 4, 2023.(AFP)
“I believe families are too afraid to report these incidents, fearing retaliation from the kidnappers,” said the source. “The main issue is that everyone is living in fear.”
Some of those who have reported such incidents to the police said authorities failed to take action or make arrests.
Curfew workarounds
Curfews in Yangon and Mandalay have done little to curb crime, residents said, despite regular military and police patrols.
A resident of Yangon, who requested anonymity for security reasons, said that criminals simply work around the city’s 1 a.m.-3 a.m. curfew.
“The looters are taking advantage of the situation, taking to the streets at 4 a.m. or 5 a.m., violating martial law, and looting,” the resident said.
“There are all kinds of robberies happening,” he said. “As a result, people have been forced to rely on one another, helping each other to protect their streets, homes and neighborhoods.”
RFA could not reach junta spokesman Maj. Gen. Zaw Min Tun for comment.
Following the 2021 coup d’état, crime rate statistics were not monitored as local watch groups and activists were prosecuted by the junta for opposing the takeover.
The United States, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and other Western countries have issued travel warnings for Myanmar, advising their citizens not to visit the country due to its high-risk status.
Translated by Kalyar Lwin for RFA Burmese. Edited by Roseanne Gerin and Malcolm Foster.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Burmese.
New York, January 28, 2025—Pakistan’s Senate on Tuesday passed controversial amendments to the country’s cybercrime laws, which would criminalize the “intentional” spread of “false news” with prison terms of up to three years, a fine of up to 2 million rupees (USD$7,100), or both.
“The Pakistan Senate’s passage of amendments to the country’s cybercrime laws is deeply concerning. While on its face, the law seeks to tamp down the spread of false news, if signed into law, it will disproportionately curtail freedom of speech in Pakistan,” said Beh Lih Yi, CPJ’s Asia program coordinator. “President Asif Ali Zardari must veto the bill, which threatens the fundamental rights of Pakistani citizens and journalists while granting the government and security agencies sweeping powers to impose complete control over internet freedom in the country.”
The proposed amendments to PECA include the establishment of four new government bodies to help regulate online content and broadening the definitions of online harms. CPJ’s texts to Pakistan’s Federal Information Minister Attaullah Tarar did not receive a response.
The Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists announced nationwide protests against the amendments, calling them unconstitutional and an infringement on citizens’ rights.
