radiofree.asia

Category: United Nations

  • UN warns of worst ‘cascade of human rights setbacks in our lifetimes’

    Rights chief calls for concerted global action, citing recent violations in China, Russia and Ethiopia

    The UN rights chief has called for concerted action to recover from the worst global deterioration of rights she had seen, highlighting the situation in China, Russia and Ethiopia among others.

    “To recover from the most wide-reaching and severe cascade of human rights setbacks in our lifetimes, we need a life-changing vision, and concerted action,” Michelle Bachelet told the opening of the UN Human Rights Council’s 47th session.

    Related: ‘Bodies are being eaten by hyenas; girls of eight raped’: inside the Tigray conflict

    Related: China’s Uyghurs living in a ‘dystopian hellscape’, says Amnesty report

    Continue reading…

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

  • United Nations Climate Talks Slowed

    The international goal to limit global warming seemed far away this week, as the most recent round of United Nations climate negotiations ended with concerns about a lack of progress on key issues like climate financing for developing countries and a global framework for a carbon market, seen as a key tool to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

    The dearth of results will make it even harder to reach the target of preventing the average global temperature from rising much more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit), with time slipping away, said Saleemul Huq, director of the International Center for Climate Change and Development.

    The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the parent treaty of the 2015 Paris Agreement, isn’t moving fast enough “and it is no longer the only venue where the decisions matter,” Huq said.

    The post United Nations Climate Talks Slowed appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Hungary’s LGBT protests and Juneteenth Day: human rights this fortnight – in pictures

    A roundup of the coverage on struggles for human rights and freedoms from China to Colombia

    Continue reading…

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

  • UN Experts Declare Kameel Juma Hasan Arbitrarily Detained, Note Systemic Violations in Bahrain May Constitute Crimes Against Humanity

    17 June 2021- Today the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD)  published an Opinion on its website concerning Kameel Juma Mansoor Salman Hasan, the son of Bahraini civil society activist and former prisoner of conscience, Ms. Najah Ahmed Habib Yusuf, who had been declared arbitrarily detained by the WGAD. Facing over 20 different prosecutions on various charges, Kameel was arrested when he was only a minor, sentenced to a total term of imprisonment of 27 years and 10 months after appeal, and prohibited from continuing his education in prison. The Working Group asserted that Kameel’s detention is arbitrary, due to the unlawfulness of his arrest, the various violations of his right to fair trial––from his denied access to legal representation to his coercion into signing pre-prepared records––as well as his targeting as an act of reprisal against his mother’s activism. Due to the gravity of these violations, the Working Group has referred his case to the Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances (WGEID), the Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (SR on Torture), and the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers (SRIJL).

    Through its UN Complaint Program, Americans for Democracy & Human Rights in Bahrain (ADHRB) regularly receives information from Bahraini individuals and employs their accounts as key evidence in submitted complaints to the United Nations Special Procedures Offices. As such, the documentation collected by ADHRB was the source of information upon which the WGAD based its Opinion on Kameel’s case.

    In its Opinion (No. 2/2021), which it adopted on 3 May 2021, the WGAD determined that Kameel’s deprivation of liberty and detention is arbitrary according to various categories of its methods of work, and is thus in violation of Bahraini domestic law and several international human rights law provisions. The Working Group has requested the Government of Bahrain to take immediate and necessary measures to remedy Kameel’s situation, and bring it into conformity with the relevant international norms, including those set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). In that context, the Working Group has indicated that appropriate actions in Kameel’s case would be to:

    Release [him] immediately and accord him an enforceable right to compensation and other reparations, in accordance with international law. In the current context of the COVID-19 pandemic and the threat that it poses in places of detention, the Working Group calls upon the Government to take urgent action to ensure his immediate release…[and] to ensure a full and independent investigation of the circumstances surrounding the arbitrary deprivation of liberty of Mr. Kameel, including the allegation that he was tortured, and to take appropriate measures against those responsible for the violation of his rights.

    ADHRB welcomes this Opinion by the WGAD and urges the Bahraini authorities to “immediately and unconditionally release Kameel while granting him the right to reparations as well as ensuring that he receives medical care and resumes his education outside prison.”

    We share the WGAD’s concerns over the widespread patterns of warrantless arrest, fair trial rights violations, enforced disappearance, torture, denial of medical care and other systematic “violations of the rules of international law in Bahrain, which may constitute crimes against humanity.” Furthermore, ADHRB seconds the Working Group’s call for a country visit:

    As a current member of the Human Rights Council, it would be timely for the Government to extend an invitation to visit, and the Working Group looks forward to a positive response to its previous request to visit.

    The WGAD is one of the Special Procedures offices of the UN Human Rights Council. As part of its regular procedures, the Working Group sends allegation letters to governments concerning credible cases of arbitrary detention. The Working Group may also render Opinions on whether an individual or group’s detention is arbitrary and in violation of international law. The WGAD reviews cases under five categories of arbitrary detention: when it is clearly impossible to invoke any legal basis justifying the deprivation of liberty (Category I); when the deprivation of liberty results from the exercise of the rights to equal protection of the law, freedom of thought, freedom of opinion and expression, and freedom of assembly, among others (Category II); when violations of the right to a fair trial are so severe that the detention is rendered arbitrary (Category III); prolonged administrative custody for refugees and asylum seekers (Category IV); and when the detention is discriminatory on the basis of birth, national, ethnic or social origin, language, religion, economic condition, political or other opinions, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or any other status (Category V).

    In the present Opinion, the WGAD found that Kameel, who is currently incarcerated at the New Dry Dock Prison reserved for inmates under the age of 21, has suffered a slew of illegal human rights violations. First, he was unlawfully arrested without a warrant; second, he was not brought promptly before a judge nor granted legal representation; third, he was subjected to torture; and fourth, he was convicted in an unfair trial that relied on confessions signed under physical and psychological pressure.

    The torture that Kameel was subjected to included being beaten across his whole body with a focus on his genitals, being forced to stand for extended periods of time, and psychological torture in the form of continuous forced shaving of his head. The Working Group highlighted the fact that, “the use of physical or psychological force on a child is an extremely serious abuse of power, entirely lacking in necessity and proportionality.” Furthermore, when addressing Kameel’s solitary confinement in prison, the Working Group emphasized that “solitary confinement must not be used for a child and may amount to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” The Working Group also noted the fact that Kameel has been denied his right to education in prison, in violation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). As a result of all of this treatment, Kameel experienced psychological distress.

    According to the WGAD, the Government did not fully address the claims of torture and did not provide a convincing account of Kameel’s location and activity between January 2-5, 2020. The Working Group has therefore determined that the allegations of torture are credible, and that the authorities violated Article 5 of the UDHR, Article 7 of the ICCPR, Article 37(a) and (c) of the CRC, and Articles 2 and 16 of the Convention against Torture (CAT).

    The Working Group has determined that by arresting Kameel without a warrant, the authorities violated Article 9(1) of the ICCPR and Article 37 (b) of the CRC. Furthermore, Kameel was not brought promptly before a judge following his arrest. Because Kameel was a minor, a stricter standard of promptness is applied, meaning that he should have been brought before a judge within 24 hours, rather than 48 hours, of arrest.[1] While the Government argued that Kameel was brought to the Public Prosecutor’s Office (PPO) on January 2, 2020, the WGAD dismissed this argument stating that a prosecutorial body cannot be considered a judicial authority for the purposes of Article 9(3) of the ICCPR, which was therefore violated along with article 37 (d) of the CRC and rule 10.2 of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (“The Beijing Rules”). The WGAD further noted that during the aforementioned period, Kameel did not have access to a lawyer nor could he contact his family. Such restrictions, along with the fact that he was not brought promptly before a judge, effectively hindered Kameel from determining the legal basis for his deprivation of liberty, and are therefore in violation of his right to an effective remedy enshrined in Article 8 of the UDHR and Article 2(3) of the ICCPR.

    Given the Government’s failure to address allegations of enforced disappearance, and in light of the information it received from ADHRB, the WGAD determined that there is credible reason to believe that Kameel was indeed forcibly disappeared and thus placed outside the protection of the law in violation of Articles 9, 14, and 16 of the ICCPR; Article 37(b) of the CRC; and Article 6 of the UDHR. Additionally, because the authorities failed to establish a legal basis for Kameel’s arrest and blocked him from challenging it, the WGAD concluded that his deprivation of liberty is arbitrary under Category I.

    The WGAD asserted that Kameel did not have access to legal representation during key stages of his detention, namely during the interrogation and investigation period and during the pre-trial process, including his visit to the PPO. In fact, the proceedings against him continued despite delays in getting a lawyer, due to problems with the transfer of power of attorney. As such, his rights to adequate time and facilities to prepare his defense and to prompt access to legal, and other, assistance of his choosing, enshrined under Article 14(3)(b) of the ICCPR and Articles 37(d) and 40(2)(b)(ii), have been violated.

    The Government, on whom the burden of proof falls, failed to prove that Kameel made his statements freely. Kameel reported that he was forced to sign pre-prepared records which he was not allowed to read, in the absence of his lawyer. Confessions made in the absence of a lawyer are not admissible evidence in criminal proceedings,[2] and the recognition of statements obtained by way of torture as evidence renders the entire proceedings unfair.[3] Consequently, the WGAD has determined that Kameel’s right to the presumption of innocence, under Article 14(2) of the ICCPR and Article 40(2)(b)(i) of the CRC, and his right not to be compelled to confess guilt, enshrined in Article 13(3)(g) of the ICCPR and Article 40(2)(b)(iv) of the CRC, were both violated. Moreover, the authorities’ use of psychological and physical pressure to force Kameel to confess violates Bahrain’s obligations under Articles 2, 15, and 16 of the CAT. Given the gravity of the violations of Kameel’s fair trial rights, especially the lack of access to legal representation and his forced confession, the Working Group concluded that his detention falls under Category III deprivation of liberty.

    Finally, the WGAD also characterized Kameel’s detention as arbitrary under Category V, more precisely as discriminatory on the basis of birth and family ties. The Working Group affirmed that his arrest was conducted as an act of reprisal against his mother for her political activism and criticisms of the Bahraini government, which failed to address these allegations in its response:

    The Working Group is convinced that Mr. Hasan’s detention was the result of his mother’s activism and her actions in speaking out against the Government. In reaching this conclusion, the Working Group has taken into account the source’s allegation, which was not addressed by the Government, that the authorities asked Mr. Hasan questions during his interrogation relating to his mother’s political activity and whether his mother was still writing to organizations or to the media Rather, it appears that Mr. Hasan’s prosecution and imprisonment have been taken in retribution against his mother for the exercise of her right to freedom of opinion and expression.

    “The Opinion of the Working Group reflects that the Bahraini government needs to end its widespread and systemic practices of human rights violations before they even constitute crimes against humanity,” says Husain Abdulla, Executive Director of ADHRB. “The case of Kameel is among hundreds of cases that are presented to different United Nations Special Procedures Offices over the years and is an example of what political prisoners, prisoners of conscience, and imprisoned minors are subjected to as retribution and torture simply because of their political opposition. The Bahraini government, as a member of the Human Rights Council, should allow the Working Group to visit Bahrain in addition to immediately and unconditionally releasing Kameel and all political prisoners.”

    ADHRB echoes the calls of the WGAD in urging the Government of Bahrain to take the necessary steps to release  Kameel without delay; to open independent and impartial investigations into the numerous violations of international human rights law that he has suffered at the hands of the authorities; and to provide Kameel with compensation for these violations. Furthermore, ADHRB supports the commentary by the WGAD on the right to challenge the legality of detention before a court, the right to a fair trial, and the right to freedom of opinion and expression. Finally, ADHRB welcomes the call of the WGAD to visit Bahrain and hopes that the Working Group receives a positive response to its January 2017  request to visit.

     

     

     

     

     

    [1] Human Rights Committee, General comment No. 35, para. 33; Opinion Nos. 73/2019, para. 82; 14/2015, para. 29.

    [2] CRC/C/BHR/CO/4-6, paras. 43-44; Committee on the Rights of the Child, General comment No. 24, paras. 15-18; Beijing Rules, rule 11.

    [3] Opinion Nos. 59/2019, 52/2018, 34/2015, 43/2012.

    The post UN Experts Declare Kameel Juma Hasan Arbitrarily Detained, Note Systemic Violations in Bahrain May Constitute Crimes Against Humanity appeared first on Americans for Democracy & Human Rights in Bahrain.

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

  • Ethiopia: Tribalism Versus National Consciousness

    Nearly 554,000 people are sleeping on the streets in the US — 40% of them are Black. Of 2.3 million US prisoners, 34% are Black. However, the 06/01 quarterly report of the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect  (GlobalR2P) says that the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is the only human rights crisis in the Western hemisphere that warrants the attention of international law established by the United Nations. Those are just a few reasons to take its alarms about the ongoing human rights crisis in Tigray, Ethiopia, with a grain of salt or a hot pepper salad of skepticism.

    A coalition of twelve NGOs, including GlobalR2P, has submitted a Joint NGO Call for a UN Human Rights Council resolution on the ongoing human rights crisis in Tigray, Ethiopia , for consideration at the 47th Session of the UN Human Rights Council , which will take place in Geneva between June 21 and July 15.

    The post Ethiopia: Tribalism Versus National Consciousness appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • On “Conflict”, “Peace” and “Genocide”: Time for New Language on Palestine and Israel

    On May 25, famous American actor, Mark Ruffalo, tweeted an apology for suggesting that Israel is committing ‘genocide’ in Gaza.

    “I have reflected and wanted to apologize for posts during the recent Israel/Hamas fighting that suggested Israel is committing ‘genocide’,” Ruffalo wrote, adding, “It’s not accurate, it’s inflammatory, disrespectful and is being used to justify anti-Semitism, here and abroad. Now is the time to avoid hyperbole.”

    But were Ruffalo’s earlier assessments, indeed, “not accurate, inflammatory and disrespectful”? And does equating Israel’s war on besieged, impoverished Gaza with genocide fit into the classification of ‘hyperbole’?

    To avoid pointless social media spats, one only needs to reference the ‘United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide’. According to Article 2 of the 1948 Convention, the legal definition of genocide is:

    “Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, such as (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part …”

    In its depiction of Israel’s latest war on Gaza, the Geneva-based human rights group, Euro-Med Monitor, reported:

    The Israeli forces directly targeted 31 extended families. In 21 cases, the homes of these families were bombed while their residents were inside. These raids resulted in the killing of 98 civilians, including 44 children and 28 women. Among the victims were a man and his wife and children, mothers and their children, or child siblings. There were seven mothers who were killed along with four or three of their children. The bombing of these homes and buildings came without any warning despite the Israeli forces’ knowledge that civilians were inside.

    As of May 28, 254 Palestinians in Gaza were killed and 1,948 were wounded in the latest 11-day Israeli onslaught, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health. Though tragic, this number is relatively small compared with the casualties of previous wars. For example, in the 51-day Israeli war on Gaza in the summer of 2014, over 2,200 Palestinians were killed and over 17,000 were wounded. Similarly, entire families, like the 21-member Abu Jame family in Khan Younis, also perished. Is this not genocide? The same logic can be applied to the killing of over 300 unarmed protesters at the fence separating besieged Gaza from Israel between March 2018 and December 2019. Moreover, the besiegement and utter isolation of over 2 million Palestinians in Gaza since 2006-07, which has resulted in numerous tragedies, is an act of collective punishment that also deserves the designation of genocide.

    One does not need to be a legal expert to identify the many elements of genocide in Israel’s violent behavior, let alone language, against Palestinians. There is a clear, undeniable relationship between Israel’s violent political discourse and equally violent action on the ground. Potentially Israel’s next prime minister, Naftali Bennett, who has served the role of Defense Minister, had, in July 2013, stated: “I’ve killed lots of Arabs in my life – and there’s no problem with that.”

    With this context in mind, and regardless of why Ruffalo found it necessary to back-track on his moral position, Israel is an unrepentent human rights violator that continues to carry out an active policy of genocide and ethnic cleansing against the native, indigenous inhabitants of Palestine.

    Language matters, and in this particular ‘conflict’, it matters most, because Israel has, for long, managed to escape any accountability for its actions, due to its success in misrepresenting facts, and the overall truth about itself. Thanks to its many allies and supporters in mainstream media and academia, Tel Aviv has rebranded itself from being a military occupier and an apartheid regime to an ‘oasis of democracy’, in fact, ‘the only democracy in the Middle East’.

    This article will not attempt to challenge the entirety of the misconstrued mainstream media’s depiction of Israel. Volumes are required for that, and Israeli Professor Ilan Pappé’s ‘Ten Myths about Israel’ is an important starting point. However, this article will attempt to present some basic definitions that must enter the Palestine-Israel lexicon, as a prerequisite to developing a fairer understanding of what is happening on the ground.

    A Military Occupation – Not a ‘Conflict’

    Quite often, mainstream Western media refers to the situation in Palestine and Israel as a  ‘conflict’, and to the various specific elements of this so-called conflict as a ‘dispute’. For example, the ‘Palestinian-Israeli conflict’ and the ‘disputed city of East Jerusalem’.

    What should be an obvious truth is that besieged, occupied people do not engage in a ‘conflict’ with their occupiers. Moreover, a ‘dispute’ happens when two parties have equally compelling claims to any issue. When Palestinan families of East Jerusalem are being forced out of their homes which are, in turn, handed over to Jewish extremists, there is no ‘dispute’ involved. The extremists are thieves and the Palestinians are victims. This is not a matter of opinion. The international community itself says so.

    ‘Conflict’ is a generic term. Aside from absolving the aggressor – in this case, Israel – it leaves all matters open for interpretation. Since American audiences are indoctrinated to love Israel and hate Arabs and Muslims, siding with Israel in its ‘conflict’ with the latter becomes the only rational option.

    Israel has sustained a military occupation of 22% of the total size of historic Palestine since June 1967. The remainder of the Palestinian homeland was already usurped, using extreme violence, state-sanctioned apartheid, and, as Pappé puts it, ‘incremental genocide’ decades earlier.

    From the perspective of international law,  the term ‘military occupation’, ‘occupied East Jerusalem’, ‘illegal Jewish settlements’ and so forth, have never been ‘disputed’. They are simply facts, even if Washington has decided to ignore international law, and even if mainstream US media has chosen to manipulate the terminology as to present Israel as a victim, not the aggressor.

    ‘Process’ without ‘Peace’

    The term ‘peace process’ was coined by American diplomats decades ago. It was put to use throughout the mid and late 1970s when, then-US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, labored to broker a deal between Egypt and Israel in the hope of fragmenting the Arab political front and, eventually, sidelining Cairo entirely from the ‘Arab-Israeli conflict’.

    Kissinger’s logic proved vital for Israel as the ‘process’ did not aim at achieving justice according to fixed criteria that has been delineated by the United Nations for years. There was no frame of reference any more. If any existed, it was Washington’s political priorities which, historically, almost entirely overlapped with Israel’s priorities. Despite the obvious American bias, the US bestowed upon itself the undeserving title of ‘the honest peace broker’.

    This approach was used successfully in the write-up to the Camp David Accords in 1978. One of the Accords’ greatest achievements is that the so-called ‘Arab-Israeli conflict’ was replaced with the so-called ‘Palestinian-Israeli conflict’.

    Now, tried and true, the ‘peace process’ was used again in 1993, resulting in the Oslo Accords. For nearly three decades, the US continued to tout its self-proclaimed credentials as a peacemaker, despite the fact that it pumped – and continues to do so – $3-4 billion of annual, mostly military, aid to Israel.

    On the other hand, the Palestinians have little to show for. No peace was achieved; no justice was obtained; not an inch of Palestinian land was returned and not a single Palestinian refugee was allowed to return home. However, American and European officials and a massive media apparatus continued to talk of a ‘peace process’ with little regard to the fact that the ‘peace process’ has brought nothing but war and destruction for Palestine, and allowed Israel to continue its illegal appropriation and colonization of Palestinian land.

    Resistance, National Liberation – Not ‘Terrorism’ and ‘State-Building’

    The ‘peace process’ introduced more than death, mayhem and normalization of land theft in Palestine. It also wrought its own language, which remains in effect to this day. According to the new lexicon, Palestinians are divided into ‘moderate’ and ‘extremists’. The ‘moderates’ believe in the American-led ‘peace process’, ‘peace negotiations’ and are ready to make ‘painful compromises’ in order to obtain the coveted ‘peace’. On the other hand, the ‘extremists’ are ‘Iran-backed’, politically ‘radical’ bunch that use ‘terrorism’ to satisfy their ‘dark’ political agendas.

    But is this the case? Since the signing of the Oslo Accords, many sectors of Palestinian society, including Muslims and Christians, Islamists and secularists and, notably, socialists, resisted the unwarranted political ‘compromises’ undertaken by their leadership, which they perceived to be a betrayal of Palestinians’ basic rights. Meanwhile, the ‘moderates’ have largely ruled over Palestinians with no democratic mandate. This small but powerful group introduced a culture of political and financial corruption, unprecedented in Palestine. They applied torture against Palestinian political dissidents whenever it suited them. Not only did Washington say little to criticize the ‘moderate’ Palestinian Authority’s dismal human rights record, but it also applauded it for its crackdown on those who ‘incite violence’ and their ‘terrorist infrastructure’.

    A term such as ‘resistance’ – muqawama – was slowly but carefully extricated from the Palestinian national discourse. The term ‘liberation’ too was perceived to be confrontational and hostile. Instead, such concepts as ‘state-building’ – championed by former Palestinian Prime Minister, Salam Fayyad, and others – began taking hold. The fact that Palestine was still an occupied country and that ‘state-building’ can only be achieved once ‘liberation’ was first secured, did not seem to matter to the ‘donor countries’. The priorities of these countries – mainly US allies who adhered to the American political agenda in the Middle East – was to maintain the illusion of the ‘peace process’ and to ensure  ‘security coordination’ between PA police and the Israeli army carried on, unabated.

    The so-called ‘security coordination’, of course, refers to the US-funded joint Israeli-PA efforts at cracking down on Palestinian resistance, apprehending Palestinian political dissidents and ensuring the safety of the illegal Jewish settlements, or colonies, in the occupied West Bank.

    War and, Yes, Genocide in Gaza – Not ‘Israel-Hamas Conflict’

    The word ‘democracy’ was constantly featured in the new Oslo language. Of course, it was not intended to serve its actual meaning. Instead, it was the icing on the cake of making the illusion of the ‘peace process’ perfect. This was obvious, at least to most Palestinians. It also became obvious to the whole world in January 2006, when the Palestinian faction Fatah, which has monopolized the PA since its inception in 1994, lost the popular vote to the Islamic faction, Hamas.

    Hamas, and other Palestinian factions have rejected – and continue to reject – the Oslo Accords. Their participation in the legislative elections in 2006 took many by surprise, as the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) was itself a product of Oslo. Their victory in the elections, which was classified as democratic and transparent by international monitoring groups, threw a wrench in the US-Israeli-PA political calculations.

    Lo and behold, the group that has long been perceived by Israel and its allies as ‘extremist’ and ‘terrorist’, became the potential leaders of Palestine! The Oslo spin doctors had to go into overdrive in order for them to thwart Palestinian democracy and ensure a successful return to the status quo, even if this meant that Palestine is represented by unelected, undemocratic leaders. Sadly, this has been the case for nearly 15 years.

    Meanwhile, Hamas’ stronghold, the Gaza Strip, had to be taught a lesson, thus the siege imposed on the impoverished region for nearly 15 years. The siege on Gaza has little to do with Hamas’ rockets or Israel’s ‘security’ needs, the right to ‘defend itself’, and its supposedly ‘justifiable’ desire to destroy Gaza’s ‘terrorist infrastructure’. While, indeed, Hamas’ popularity in Gaza is unmatched anywhere else in Palestine, Fatah, too, has a powerful constituency there. Moreover, the Palestinian resistance in the Strip is not championed by Hamas alone, but also by other ideological and political groups, for example, the Islamic Jihad, the socialist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), and other socialist and secular groups.

    Misrepresenting the ‘conflict’ as a ‘war’ between Israel and Hamas is crucial to Israeli propaganda, which has succeeded in equating Hamas with militant groups throughout the Middle East and even Afghanistan. But Hamas is not ISIS, Al-Qaeda or Taliban. In fact, none of these groups are similar, anyway. Hamas is a Palestinian Islamic nationalist movement that operates within a largely Palestinian political context. An excellent book on Hamas is the recently published volume by Daud Abdullah, Engaging the World. Abdullah’s book rightly presents Hamas as a rational political actor, rooted in its ideological convictions, yet flexible and pragmatic in its ability to adapt to national, regional and international geopolitical changes.

    But what does Israel have to gain from mischaracterizing the Palestinian resistance in Gaza? Aside from satisfying its propaganda campaign of erroneously linking Hamas to other anti-American groups, it also dehumanizes the Palestinian people entirely and presents Israel as a partner in the American global so-called ‘war on terror’. Israeli neofascist and ultranationalist politicians then become the saviors of humanity, their violent racist language is forgiven and their active ‘genocide’ is seen as an act of ‘self-defense’ or, at best, a mere state of ‘conflict’.

    The Oppressor as the Victim

    According to the strange logic of mainstream media, Palestinians are rarely ‘killed’ by Israeli soldiers, but rather ‘die’ in ‘clashes’ resulting from various ‘disputes. Israel does not ‘colonize’ Palestinian land; it merely ‘annexes’, ‘appropriates’, and ‘captures’, and so on. What has been taking place in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in occupied East Jerusalem, for example, is not outright property theft, leading to ethnic cleansing, but rather a ‘property dispute’.

    The list goes on and on.

    In truth, language has always been a part of Zionist colonialism, long before the state of Israel was itself constructed from the ruins of Palestinian homes and villages in 1948. Palestine, according to the Zionists, was ‘a land with no people’ for ‘a people with no land’. These colonists were never ‘illegal settlers’ but ‘Jewish returnees’ to their ‘ancestral homeland’, who, through hard work and perseverance, managed to ‘make the desert bloom’, and, in order to defend themselves against the ‘hordes of Arabs’, they needed to build an ‘invincible army’.

    It will not be easy to deconstruct the seemingly endless edifice of lies, half-truths and intentional misrepresentations of Zionist Israeli colonialism in Palestine. Yet, there can be no alternative to this feat because, without proper, accurate and courageous understanding and depiction of Israeli settler colonialism and Palestinian resistance to it, Israel will continue to oppress Palestinians while presenting itself as the victim.

    The post On “Conflict”, “Peace” and “Genocide”: Time for New Language on Palestine and Israel first appeared on Dissident Voice.


    This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Ramzy Baroud.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • UN decries Myanmar ‘catastrophe’ as Aung San Suu Kyi’s trial looms

    Human rights commissioner says junta is ‘singularly responsible for crisis’ ahead of ousted leader’s trial

    Myanmar has descended into a “human rights catastrophe”, the UN’s top human rights official has warned in the run-up to the scheduled start of the trial of Myanmar’s ousted leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, who faces criminal charges that could lead to decades in prison.

    Aung San Suu Kyi, who previously spent a total of 15 years in detention at the behest of Myanmar’s generals and is widely revered domestically as a symbol of the country’s yearning for democracy, is expected to appear in court in Naypyidaw on Monday.

    Continue reading…

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

  • Event: June 24th Discussion on the rights of indigenous women and girls with the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women

    The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women will hold a virtual day of general discussion on the rights of indigenous women and girls. The Committee states that “the purpose of the day of general discussion is to stimulate…

    This post was originally published on Human Rights at Home Blog.

  • June & July 2021 Deadlines – Calls for Inputs by UN Human Rights Mechanisms

    The following UN Human Rights Mechanisms have issued calls for inputs with deadlines in June and July 2021 and law professors whose practice, research, and/or scholarship touches on these topics may be interested in submission: Special Rapporteur on the right…

    This post was originally published on Human Rights at Home Blog.

  • United Nations asked to look into the death in custody Indigenous man David Dungay

    International lawyer Geoffrey Robertson to argue Australia failed to protect Dungay’s right to life and denied family justice for his 2015 death in Long Bay jail

    International human rights lawyer Geoffrey Robertson says there has been “no proper investigation” into the 2015 death in prison custody of Aboriginal man David Dungay and will take his case to the United Nations to force Australia to take action.

    Robertson announced on Thursday he will lodge the complaint on behalf of the Dungay family at the UN human rights committee in Geneva.

    Related: Aboriginal deaths in custody reports to be increased to every six months after years of delays

    My son had a right to live … And I have the right to demand accountability and justice for what happened to David

    Related: Deaths inside: every Indigenous death in custody since 2008 tracked – interactive

    Continue reading…

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

  • Spat at, abused, attacked: healthcare staff face rising violence during Covid

    Data shows increased danger for those on the frontline in the pandemic, with misinformation, scarce vaccines and fragile health systems blamed

    Hundreds of healthcare workers treating Covid patients around the world have experienced verbal, physical, and sometimes life-threatening attacks during the pandemic, prompting calls for immediate action from human rights campaigners.

    Covid-related attacks on healthcare workers are expected to rise as new variants cause havoc in countries such as India and rollouts of vaccination programmes belatedly get under way in some countries, according to the UN special rapporteur on the right to health.

    Related: ‘They stormed the ICU and beat the doctor’: health workers under attack

    Continue reading…

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

  • Papuan armed resistance insists talks with Jakarta must be mediated by UN

    Asia Pacific Report newsdesk

    West Papua National Liberation Army-Free Papua Organisation (TPNPB-OPM) spokesperson Sebby Sambom says the armed resistance force is not prepared to hold a dialogue with or pursue diplomacy with the Indonesian government unless it is mediated by the United Nations.

    “We, the TPNPB under the leadership of General Goliath Tabuni reject [a bipartite] dialogue with Jakarta,” said Sambom, reports CNN Indonesia.

    However, the armed resistance is urging the Indonesian government to hold tripartite negotiations with the TPNPB-OPM Tabuni leadership and all components of the Papuan liberation movement who have been resisting Jakarta rule.

    This dialogue, he said, must be mediated by a third party, and the third party must come from the United Nations.

    “We don’t have an agenda for a dialogue, but our agenda is tripartite negotiations, namely negotiations mediated by a UN organisational body,” he said.

    “So a Jakarta-Papua dialogue will not be realised, if the main actor is not involved,” he explained.

    Earlier, the TPNPB-OPM designated Puncak Ilaga, Papua, as a battleground against joint forces from the TNI (Indonesian military) and Polri (Indonesian police). It designated this region because it was far away from civilian settlements and would not endanger Papuan civilians.

    Negotiations rather than war
    On the other hand, the TNI was not concerned about the designation of Puncak Ilaga as a battleground to fight the OPM.

    However, Regional Representatives Council (DPD) member from Papua, Filep Wamafma, is asking that the Indonesian government endeavour to open diplomatic communications with the TPNPB-OPM rather than conducting an open war in Ilaga.

    “I hope that there will be political diplomacy between the TNI, Polri and the OPM in order to reach the best solution, to safeguard civilians,” Wamafma told CNN Indonesian.

    CNN Indonesia has attempted to contact Join Regional Defence Command III spokesperson Colonel Czi IGN Suriastawa and Coordinating Minister for Security, Politics and Legal Affairs Mahfud MD by text message and telephone about the offer to mediate with the involvement of the UN.

    Neither Suriastawa nor Mahfud had responded when this article was published.

    Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was “Jubir OPM Mau Ambil Jalur Diplomasi dengan RI Asal Ada PBB”.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • New Climate Prediction: Likely To Reach 1.5C In The Next Five Years

    Geneva – There is about a 40% chance of the annual average global temperature temporarily reaching 1.5°C above the pre-industrial level in at least one of the next five years – and these odds are increasing with time, according to a new climate update issued by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO).

    There is a 90% likelihood of at least one year between 2021-2025 becoming the warmest on record, which would dislodge 2016 from the top ranking, according to the Global Annual to Decadal Climate Update, produced by the United Kingdom’s Met Office, the WMO lead centre for such predictions.

    Over 2021-2025, high-latitude regions and the Sahel are likely to be wetter and there is an increased chance of more tropical cyclones in the Atlantic compared to the recent past (defined as the 1981-2010 average).

    The post New Climate Prediction: Likely To Reach 1.5C In The Next Five Years appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Advocates Contributes to Special Rapporteur Thematic Report on Rape

    UN Photo/Jean-Marc Ferré
    Dubravka Šimonović, Special Rapporteur on violence against women, one of the experts making the call. 

    U.N. Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women (VAW) Dubravka Šimonovic has released her thematic report on rape as a grave and systematic violation of human rights and gender-based violence against women.  The Advocates contributed a detailed written response to the Special Rapporteur’s initial request for submissions about local laws on rape and sexual violence. The Advocates also joined the Expert Group Meeting on May 27, 2020 to discuss a wide variety of issues about rape laws and implementation. The Special Rapporteur invited The Advocates’ Women’s Program director Rosalyn Park to that meeting of worldwide experts and cited to The Advocates’ comments in the Expert Group Meeting’s report. 

    Based on input from dozens of organizations and states, the Special Rapporteur on VAW issued numerous conclusions and recommendations. Some notable recommendations for states’ legal framework addressing rape are: 

    • The law should protect all persons, regardless of gender expression or sexual orientation 
    • Spousal rape should be criminalized, and states should abolish provisions mitigating consequences if the rapist marries the victim 
    • Rape by a spouse should be an aggravating, rather than a mitigating, or nullifying, factor 
    • Non-consent should be the central focus of rape statutes, without requiring proof of force 
    • Force, injury, use of a weapon, exploitation of intoxication, and multiple perpetrators should be among the aggravating factors for rape, beyond the basic nonconsensual offense 
    • The victim’s testimony should not need further corroboration to be considered as evidence of rape 
    • The law should include rape shield provisions, to exclude from evidence the victim’s previous sexual history 
    • There should be no statute of limitations for rape, or at most, prolonged limitations periods permitting victims time to heal and for children to reach adulthood before initiating rape proceedings 
    • States should collect data on prosecution, sentencing, and the attrition of reported rape cases 

    This report should help leaders craft statutes and response strategies to improve accountability for rape. 

    The Advocates for Human Rights thanks the U.N. Special Rapporteur Dubravka Šimonovic for her six years’ tenure as the special rapporteur on violence against women. Throughout the course of her appointment, she carried out numerous country visits to assess the situation of violence against women in countries including Georgia, Bulgaria, Ecuador, and Nepal. She issued several thematic reports on issues that spanned COVID-19 and domestic violence, mistreatment and violence against women in childbirth, violence against women in politics, online violence against women, and shelters and protection orders. The Advocates expresses its gratitude and congratulations to the U.N. Special Rapporteur Dubravka Šimonovic for her longstanding commitment and service to women’s human rights.

    The Advocates for Human Rights is a nonprofit organization dedicated to implementing international human rights standards to promote civil society and reinforce the rule of law.

    Curious about volunteering? Please reach out. The Advocates for Human Rights has an opportunity for you.

    Eager to see change? Give to our mission, our vision, our work. Your gift matters.

    This post was originally published on The Advocates Post.

  • UN to launch inquiry into ‘systematic discrimination’ in Israel and Palestine

    UN rights chief says Israel attacks on Gaza could constitute war crimes and accuses Hamas of firing indiscriminate rockets

    The UN’s main human rights body will launch an investigation into “systematic discrimination and repression” in Israel and Palestine, with the aim of identifying what it said were the root causes of recent Gaza bloodshed.

    The proposal for unprecedented levels of scrutiny of alleged abuses, called at the request of Muslim states, was passed by the 47-member UN human rights council on Thursday.

    Related: Ireland condemns ‘de facto annexation’ of Palestinian land by Israel

    Continue reading…

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

  • Marilyn Garson: Ceasefire, but we cannot let this go the same way

    COMMENT: By Marilyn Garson in Wellington

    I lived in Gaza from 2011, through the attack of 2014, and for one year after. I am not Palestinian, but some of the things I remember will be relevant in the coming months.

    The bombardment was shattering. There followed a winter of soul-destroying neglect by donor states. Tens of thousands of Gazans remained in UNRWA shelter-schools. Many more families shivered in remnant housing, on tilting slabs of concrete, in rooms with three walls and a blanket hung in lieu of a fourth, persistently cold and wet.

    Recovery? America sold Israel $1.9 billion in replacement arms. The World Bank assessed Israel’s bomb damage to Gaza at $4.4 billion. Of the $5.4 billion that donors pledged to reconstruct Gaza, in that critical first year the International Crisis Group calculated that the donor states actually came up with a paltry $340 million.

    Aid is an insufficient place-holding response, but it is needed now. This time, it cannot happen the same way.

    Having bombed, Israel is allowed to carry on the assault by slow strangulation.

    In the workaday business of delivering the material needed to rebuild, the blockade allows Israel to choose the chokepoints of reconstruction. Having bombed, Israel is allowed to carry on the assault by slow strangulation.

    In 2014 they were allowed to impose a farcical compliance regime for the cement that was needed to rebuild the 18,000 homes they had damaged or destroyed. UNRWA engineers were required to waste their days sitting next to concrete mixers.

    International staff spent hours of each day driving between them to count — unbelievably — sacks of cement. 100,000 people were homeless and cement was permitted to reach them like grains of sand through an eye-dropper. Not a single home was built through the remainder of 2014.

    Choking off the supplies
    Perhaps this time Israel will choke off the supplies needed to re-pave the tens of thousands of square meters of road they have blown up; it will be something. We have watched an attack on the veins and arteries of modern civilian infrastructure.

    If the crossings regime is allowed to remain in place, we will be leaving the Israeli government to decide unilaterally whether Gazans will be permitted to live in the modern world.

    This time, it simply cannot go the same way.

    I was as frightened by the way the bombs changed us. 1200 hours of incessant terror and violence had re-wired our brains. The lassitude, the thousand-yard-stares, the woman from Rafah who clutched her midsection as if she could hold her twelve lost relatives in place. I and my team of Gazan over-achievers struggled to finish any task on time.

    Eight months later I found research on the anterior midcingulate cortex to help us understand how bombardment can alter the finishing brain. Every step seemed to be so steeply uphill.

    Even more un-Gazan, we often struggled alone. The very essence of Gaza is its density. In its urban streets you know the passersby with smalltown frequency. Gaza coheres with the intentional social glue of resistance.

    After the bombardment, people seemed to float alone with their memories. The human heart returns to the scene of unresolved trauma, and our hearts were stuck in many different rooms.

    Good people suffering
    The good people who listened and cared as professionals or as neighbours, were themselves suffering. Parents compared notes through those months: how many of their children still slept beneath their beds in case the planes came back?

    Over everyone’s heads hung the knowledge that there had been no substantial agreement beyond a cessation of firing.

    I felt I was watching people reach for each other, and for meaning. Young Gazan men stood for hours, waving Palestinian flags over the rubble of Shuja’iyya while residents crawled over the rubble landscape in search of something familiar. Bright pennants sprouted across the bombed-out windows of apartments.

    Not everyone found meaning. Suicide and predatory behaviour also rose. Hamas cracked down on dissent violently, while more-radical groups made inroads among young people who may have felt they had no other agency.

    The aftermath was all these things at once. When I left Gaza in late 2015, it felt poised between resuming and despairing. Since then, it has gone on for another six years. This bombardment picked up where the last one left off: in 2014 the destruction of apartment blocks was Israel’s final act and this time, it was their opening salvo.

    This time, we cannot let it go the same way.

    I had to learn to harness my sadness and outrage. If we are to make it different this time, we need to do that.

    Reclaimed rubble sea wall, Gaza - Marilyn Garson
    Reclaimed rubble sea wall, Gaza City … “this isn’t over [yet for Palestine and Gaza] and we will not let it go the same way.” Image: Marilyn Garson
    Raging at the blockade
    In the first weeks after the 2014 bombing, I could only rage at the blockade wall but the wall stood, undented. I didn’t know how to look further, and as a Jew I was afraid to look further. I began to read books on military accountability. Those principles helped to focus my gaze beyond the wall.

    Now as then, we have witnessed a barbaric action, comprised of choices. Individuals are accountable for each of those choices. It is neither partisan nor, must I say it, antisemitic to call them to account ceaselessly.

    Accountability takes the side of civilian protection. If one belligerent causes the overwhelming share of the wrongful death and damage, then that party has duly earned the overwhelming share of our attention. Call them out.

    Loathe the wall but rage wisely at its structural supports: expedient politics, the arms trade that profits by field-testing its weapons on Gazan Palestinians, any denial of the simple equality of our lives, the hand-wringing or indifference of the bystander. Those hold the wall up.

    Prior to this violence, Donald Trump had been busily normalising Israel’s diplomatic relations – good-bye to all that. Normalise BDS, not the occupation of Palestine. Apply sustained, peaceful, external pressure as you would to any other wound.

    BDS firmly rejects an apartheid arrangement of power, until all people enjoy equality and self-determination.

    Palestinians as a single nation
    “See and reject the single system that classifies life ethnically between the river and the sea. When you recognise a single systemic wrong, you have recognised Palestinians as a single nation.

    A statement by scholars of genocide, mass violence and human rights last week described the danger: “[T]he violence now has intensified systemic racism and exclusionary and violent nationalism in Israel—a well-known pattern in many cases of state violence—posing a serious risk for continued persecution and violence against Palestinians, exacerbated by the political instability in Israel in the last few months.”

    In other words, this isn’t over and we will not let it go the same way.

    The risk to Gaza now is the risk of our disengagement before we have brought down the walls. That is the task; nothing less. This time, Gaza must go free.

    Marilyn Garson writes about Palestinian and Jewish dissent. This article was first published by Sh’ma Koleinu – Alternative Jewish Voices and is republished with permission. The original article can be read here.

     

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Land Governance: Future

    The third video in the “Land governance” series explores potential paths toward just systems of land management that honor Indigenous rights and responsibilities, including implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, inclusion of Indigenous systems of governance and stewardship, potential mechanisms to recognize Indigenous land ownership and the need for meaningful relationships to serve as a foundation for moving forward.

    See:

  • “Land Governance: Past”
  • “Land Governance: Present”
    • The post Land Governance: Future first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Israel is Ethnically Cleansing Gaza

    This started becoming clear on May 12th, and has become increasingly confirmed by events since then.

    On May 12th, Al-Arabia, CBS News, and other media, reported Israel’s Defense Minister Benny Gantz as promising that “The army will continue to attack to bring a total, long-term quiet.” And, “Only when we reach that goal will we be able to speak about a truce.” Britain’s Guardian reported his speech as having said that “Israel vows not to stop Gaza attacks until there is complete quiet.” Britain’s The Express reported him as saying that “There is no end date and we will not receive moral sermons from any organization on our right to protect the citizens of Israel. Only when we reach that goal will we be able to speak about a truce.”

    In other words, Israel is promising that until Gazans are totally conquered, there will be no “truce”: Israel will continue this until total victory is achieved — conquest, surrender by all Gazans.

    Throughout the conflict, U.S. President Joe Biden has said that America’s policy is to request that there be a truce. However, ever since at least May 12th, Israel has made clear that a “truce” will occur only when the Gazans are totally defeated, so that there is, in Gaza, “a total, long-term quiet.” Does that differ from Israel’s announcing that they are ethnically cleansing Gazans from Gaza?

    The difference would be equivalent to the difference between offering Gazans a choice ultimately between remaining quiet in the world’s largest-ever open-air prison, versus becoming totally exterminated by their enemy. What type of choice is that, actually?

    On 15 April 2018, Elliott Gabriel reported from Gaza City, that

    Palestinians confined to Gaza have faced several devastating onslaughts by the Israelis, as well as a crippling blockade by Tel Aviv and Cairo that has resulted in the collapse of the coastal strip’s economy. Monitors and advocates across the world have decried the grave humanitarian crisis prevailing in Gaza that has resulted directly from its being deprived of needed goods including construction material, electricity, food, water and medicine.

    In a report on Gaza last November, local human rights monitor B’Tselem noted:
    “Israel used its control over the crossings to put Gaza under a blockade, turning almost two million people into prisoners inside the Gaza Strip, effecting an economic collapse and propelling Gaza residents into dependency on international aid.”

    On 15 May 2019, the Guardian bannered “One million face hunger in Gaza after US cut to Palestine aid,” and noted that,

    The UNRWA, created in 1949 to provide short-term relief for Palestinian refugees after the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict, runs schools, hospitals and social services in five areas including the West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria.

    It is largely propping up Gaza, subject to a total blockade by air, land and sea since 2007. Political stalemate, conflict with Israel and divisions among Palestinian factions have left the territory an economic ruin, without health and social services and with almost no access to clean water and only four or five hours of electricity a day.

    With no peace in sight, a generation is growing up in Gaza who have only known the fenced-in territory and never met an Israeli.

    So, if that is the reality there, then how is this ‘choice’ anything other than an ethnic cleansing of Gaza, turning it into a prison that’s designed for its inhabitants to be “quietly” exterminated until Israelis can then ultimately take over that land and make it a new land for settlement by Israelis?

    On 14 May 2021, U.S. Professor Juan Cole, an internationally recognized expert on the Middle East, headlined “Shooting Fish in a Barrel: Israel bombs Palestinian Refugees from Israel in Gaza, 50% of them Children,” and he wrote:

    At one point in the zeros the Israeli military made a plan to only allow enough food into Gaza to keep the population from becoming malnourished, but nothing more. No chocolate for the children. It was one of the creepiest moments in the history of colonialism.

    The unemployment rate in Gaza is 50%, the highest in the world. Half the population depends on food aid. The aquifer is polluted and increasingly salty from rising seas owing to climate change, so truly clean water is available to only about 5 percent of the population. Israel has several water purification plants. The Palestinians of Gaza do not.

    There is no equivalence between Israel and Gaza. Israel has the best-equipped military in the Middle East and has several hundred nuclear bombs, Its gross domestic product (nominal) per capita is on the order of $42,000 per year.

    The nominal GDP per capita in Palestine is $3000, and those who live in Gaza earn less yet.

    On 19 May 2021, U.S. President Joe Biden’s Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin who was selected because he is both a Black and a neoconservative, headlined at the ‘Defense’ department, “Readout of Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III’s Phone Call With Israeli Minister of Defense Benjamin ‘Benny’ Gantz,” and here is the entirety of that news-report:

    Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III spoke today with Israeli Minister of Defense Benjamin “Benny” Gantz.  Secretary Austin underscored his continued support for Israel’s right to defend itself, reviewed assessments of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, and urged de-escalation of the conflict.

    The United States Government has ‘urged de-escalation’ but “underscored [its] continued support for Israel’s right to defend itself,” while exterminating Gazans.

    Also on May 19th, the White House issued a statement about the phone conversation that day between Biden and Netanyahu, “The president conveyed to the Prime Minister that he expected a significant de-escalation today on the path to a cease-fire.”

    However, on the morning of Thursday, May 20th, CNBC reported that, “Israel launched a fresh wave of airstrikes over the Gaza strip early Thursday in what it says are continued operations to take out Hamas targets.” That action by Netanyahu — a flagrant disregard for what U.S. President Biden had publicly instructed him to do (and the United States Government donates annually $3.8 billion to Israel for purchase of U.S.-made weapons) — was very embarrassing for Biden. However, Biden had not publicly threatened Netanyahu, but had only instructed him. Therefore, the question, at this point, was whether Netanyahu’s disobedience would be publicly punished (such as by means of applying U.S. sanctions against Israel and against Netanyahu personally). Which was the master, and which was the slave, in the U.S.-Israel relationship? Absent a public punishment of Israel for its disobedience, Israel would appear to be the master, and the U.S. its slave.

    Also on May 20th, Al Jazeera, a news-operation that represents the royal family of Qatar, headlined “Death, destruction in Gaza as Israel defies truce call: Live”, and reported that, “Israeli fighter jets continued to pound the Gaza Strip on Thursday, … as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu defied calls for a de-escalation.” This was specific public recognition that Israel was defying the publicly announced policy of the U.S. Government.

    It’s good to know what America stands for, and has been standing for, at least after the Presidency of Jimmy Carter, if not ever since Harry S. Truman became America’s President in 1945. The United States has certainly been like this, continually, for a very long time.

    So has Israel.

    It is now out in the open. If Biden will retaliate strongly against Israel, he will change U.S. foreign policy since 1945. If he fails to retaliate at all, he will be profoundly embarrassed. If he continues to try to walk the fence on this matter, then, since it’s all out in the open now, the United States itself will be profoundly embarrassed. No matter what he does, the future will not be like the past. This juncture is a historical turning-point, whichever way he might turn.

    The post Israel is Ethnically Cleansing Gaza first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Unity at Last: The Palestinian People Have Risen  

    From the outset, some clarification is needed regarding the language used to depict the ongoing violence in occupied Palestine, and also throughout Israel. This is not a ‘conflict’. Neither is it a ‘dispute’ nor ‘sectarian violence’ nor even a war in the traditional sense.

    It is not a conflict, because Israel is an occupying power and the Palestinian people are an occupied nation. It is not a dispute, because freedom, justice and human rights cannot be treated as a mere political disagreement. The Palestinian people’s inalienable rights are enshrined in international and humanitarian law and the illegality of Israeli violations of human rights in Palestine is recognized by the United Nations itself.

    If it is a war, then it is a unilateral Israeli war, which is met with humble, but real and determined Palestinian resistance.

    Actually, it is a Palestinian uprising, an Intifada unprecedented in the history of the Palestinian struggle, both in its nature and outreach.

    For the first time in many years, we see the Palestinian people united, from Jerusalem Al Quds, to Gaza, to the West Bank and, even more critically, to the Palestinian communities, towns and villages inside historic Palestine – today’s Israel.

    This unity matters the most, is far more consequential than some agreement between Palestinian factions. It eclipses Fatah and Hamas and all the rest, because without a united people there can be no meaningful resistance, no vision for liberation, no struggle for justice to be won.

    Right-wing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could never have anticipated that a routine act of ethnic cleansing in East Jerusalem’s neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah could lead to a Palestinian uprising, uniting all sectors of Palestinian society in an unprecedented show of unity.

    The Palestinian people have decided to move past all the political divisions and the factional squabbles. Instead, they are coining new terminologies, centered on resistance, liberation and international solidarity. Consequently, they are challenging factionalism, along with any attempt at making Israeli occupation and apartheid normal. Equally important, a strong Palestinian voice is now piercing through the international silence, compelling the world to hear a single chant for freedom.

    The leaders of this new movement are Palestinian youth who have been denied participation in any form of democratic representation, who are constantly marginalized and oppressed by their own leadership and by the relentless Israeli military occupation. They were born into a world of exile, destitution and apartheid, led to believe that they are inferior, of a lesser race. Their right to self-determination and every other right were postponed indefinitely. They grew up helplessly watching their homes being demolished, their land being robbed and their parents being humiliated.

    Finally, they are rising.

    Without prior coordination and with no political manifesto, this new Palestinian generation is now making its voice heard, sending an unmistakable, resounding message to Israel and its right-wing chauvinistic society, that the Palestinian people are not passive victims; that the ethnic cleansing of Sheikh Jarrah and the rest of occupied East Jerusalem, the protracted siege on Gaza, the ongoing military occupation, the construction of illegal Jewish settlements, the racism and the apartheid will no longer go unnoticed; though tired, poor, dispossessed, besieged and abandoned, Palestinians will continue to safeguard their own rights, their sacred places and the very sanctity of their own people.

    Yes, the ongoing violence was instigated by Israeli provocations in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in East Jerusalem. However, the story was never about the ethnic cleansing of Sheikh Jarrah alone. The beleaguered neighborhood is but a microcosm of the larger Palestinian struggle.

    Netanyahu may have hoped to use Sheikh Jarrah as a way of mobilizing his right-wing constituency around him, intending to form an emergency government or increasing his chances of winning yet a fifth election. His rash behavior, initially compelled by entirely selfish reasons, has ignited a popular rebellion among Palestinians, exposing Israel for the violent, racist and apartheid state that it is and always has been.

    Palestinian unity and popular resistance have proven successful in other ways, too. Never before have we seen this groundswell of support for Palestinian freedom, not only from millions of ordinary individuals across the globe, but also from celebrities – movie stars, footballers, mainstream intellectuals and political activists, even models and social media influencers. The hashtags #SaveSheikhJarrah and #FreePalestine, among numerous others, are now interlinked and have been trending on all social media platforms for weeks. Israel’s constant attempts at presenting itself as a perpetual victim of some imaginary horde of Arabs and Muslims are no longer paying dividends. The world can finally see, read and hear of Palestine’s tragic reality and the need to bring this tragedy to an immediate end.

    None of this would be possible were it not for the fact that all Palestinians have legitimate reasons and are speaking in unison. In their spontaneous reaction and genuine communal solidarity, all Palestinians are united from Sheikh Jarrah to all of Jerusalem, to Gaza, Nablus, Ramallah, Al-Bireh and even Palestinian towns inside Israel – Al-Lud, Umm Al-Fahm, Kufr Qana and elsewhere. In Palestine’s new popular revolution, factions, geography and any political division are irrelevant. Religion is not a source of divisiveness but of spiritual and national unity.

    The ongoing Israeli atrocities in Gaza are continuing, with a mounting death toll. This devastation will continue for as long as the world treats the devastating siege of the impoverished, tiny Strip as if irrelevant. People in Gaza were dying long before the Israeli airstrikes began blowing up their homes and neighborhoods. They were dying from the lack of medicine, polluted water, the lack of electricity and the dilapidated infrastructure.

    We must save Sheikh Jarrah, but we must also save Gaza; we must demand an end to the Israeli military occupation of Palestine and, with it, the system of racial discrimination and apartheid. International human rights groups are now precise and decisive in their depiction of this racist regime, with Human Rights Watch – and Israel’s own rights group, B’tselem – joining the call for the dismantlement of apartheid in all of Palestine.

    Speak up. Speak out. The Palestinians have risen. It is time to rally behind them.

    The post Unity at Last: The Palestinian People Have Risen   first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • UN Relief Agency Condemns Israeli Bombing of Gaza Refugee Camp

    UNRWA Condemns Israeli Bombing of Gaza Refugee Camp, Killing Family of 10

    Matthias Schmale, director of UNRWA operations in Gaza, says civilians in the besieged territory are facing “terror from the skies” amid Israel’s bombardment, which has already killed nearly 200 people. “The price the civilian population is paying for this is unacceptable. This has to stop. This is terror on a civilian population.”

    TRANSCRIPT

    This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

    AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The Quarantine Report. I’m Amy Goodman. You can sign up for our daily news digest email by texting “democracynow” — one word, no space — to 66866. We’ll send you our news headlines and stories every day, as well as news alerts.

    At least 10 Palestinians from the same extended family died Saturday when Israel bombed the Gaza refugee camp al-Shati. Eight of the victims were children. One 5-month-old baby named Omar was pulled from the rubble alive. His mother and four of his siblings were killed. This is Omar’s father, Mohammad Al-Hadidi.

    MOHAMMAD AL-HADIDI: [translated] They targeted the house they were in. There were no rockets there, just women and children; no rockets, just peaceful children celebrating Eid. What have they done to deserve this? A rocket hit their house, over their heads, without warning or communication. Three whole floors fell over them, and we had to recover their body parts. … I call on the international community, those who support human rights and children’s rights and democracy, those who penalize anyone who harms a child, to look to our children here who are being bombed with strikes that drop entire floors onto people who we have to recover their body parts.

    AMY GOODMAN: We’re joined now in Gaza by Matthias Schmale, the director of operations for UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees.

    Can you talk about what happened, not only there, but what’s happening to children, to the Palestinians in Gaza?

    MATTHIAS SCHMALE: Good afternoon, Amy. And thank you for giving me this opportunity to talk to you.

    Look, the way I describe this is we’ve had seven days of war. This is war. We are not close to war. We are in a military confrontation. This is war. And I think, as you just heard from Refaat, the citizens of Gaza are experiencing this in a terrified manner. It’s terror from the skies, what’s going on here. And you mentioned the house that was leveled in Beach camp, our refugee camp. Six of those children were children that went to UNRWA schools. So it hits home very directly. Some of my staff knew the family. And these six children are among 18 children that we now have confirmed that went to UNRWA schools. So, what I am trying to get to with all of this is the price the civilian population is paying for this is unacceptable. This has to stop. This is terror on a civilian population.

    We also have to then think about the people who have fled their homes out of fear. A few nights ago, there was heavy fighting in the north. There were rumors of a tank — of a ground invasion by the Israelis, and thousands of people left their homes in fear, not necessarily because they were destroyed, as I understand it — I will come back to that — but in fear of what will fall from the sky next. And we now have, today, three days later or so, 41,000 and more people in 50 of our schools. Unfortunately — well, fortunately, the population, remembering also 2014, sees the blue of the United Nations and buildings that have a blue U.N. flag on it as still a relatively safe place, safer than their own home. So, that is what is happening. As UNRWA, we are trying our best to stand up our teams that will manage these centers properly and provide the necessary assistance. There are some immediate needs, like protection, including protection from COVID — of course, COVID is far from over — as well as safe water, the basic needs you need to have covered if you are in a shelter away from home.

    Then you’ve also talked about people who have actually lost their home. The last I heard is that at least 600 families are not able to go back. So, many of the people who are at the moment in our shelters could go back if there is a ceasefire, but there is a group of at least 600 families and households that couldn’t because either their house is totally destroyed or it’s too damaged to go back. And, you know, allow me to make a point there. The Israelis claim — and correctly on this point — that they often warn. They don’t always, like the Beach camp hit was without warning, as far as I know. But they have warned, on other high-rise buildings, civilians to get out. So, in those terms, they protect their lives. But they have lost their homes. They are now without a home. And it’s completely senseless and mind-boggling.

    So, that is the situation on the ground. I cannot as eloquently, of course, as Refaat describe the impact on the civilian population. He is directly affected. I can only say to you I hear a lot about traumas. One of my colleagues texted me, very movingly, saying, as a family, they now sleep on the same mattress in the central part of their home, just because they want to die together, if that happens.

    AMY GOODMAN: Matthias, you talked about people responding to a rumor that Israel is invading, but this was not just a rumor. Israel, the military, directly put that out. The headlines of The New York Times, “A Press Corps Deceived, and the Gaza Invasion That Wasn’t”; The Washington Post, “Israel told the media it had ground forces in Gaza. Then it changed the story”; AP, “Israeli military accused of using media to trick Hamas.” You’re talking about the human toll of that trick. Can you explain further the significance of them putting this out and tens of thousands of Palestinians fleeing?

    MATTHIAS SCHMALE: Yeah, I mean, I can only say, if they indeed — “they” being the military on the Israeli side — put this out deliberately without really having the intention, that is just atrocious, you know, and unacceptable, because, as you have said, it led to then thousands of people fleeing. And by the way, we only know about the 41,000 that are seeking refuge, a safe place to be, in our schools. There are many thousands more that went to family and relatives. So, there’s another disaster in the making here, because a lot of poor families are having to host people, you know, being themselves squeezed. So we’re looking into how we can assist them. It’s reckless, this. It’s shameless and reckless how the military is operating in terms of the civilian population.

    AMY GOODMAN: Can you give us some specific stories of children killed? I ask that because when the Israeli military was asked about this yesterday, they said, “Consider the source of the information you’re getting about the number of Palestinian children who are dead.” They said, “It is the Palestinian Health Ministry in Gaza, which is run by Hamas.” So, they said, consider the source. So, Matthias Schmale, you are with the United Nations. Talk about the number of Palestinians, Palestinian children, who have died.

    MATTHIAS SCHMALE: So, Amy, if I may say two things on this. We have our independent source. We run 278 schools, which are populated by 285,000 children. We have very precise information about this school population, the 285,000 children. This is independent information from the Ministry of Health and the authorities here, when I tell you my health teams have reported to me that they know at least 18 of the more than 50 children killed were UNRWA schoolchildren. So there is no doubt in my mind this is correct, independently verified information. And I would not be surprised if, sadly, that number of 18 were to rise quite significantly. So that’s one bit.

    The other bit is, I was told, very movingly, by one of our so-called area education officers about a 13-year-old child, one of the 18, by the name of Hamza. His mother is severely disabled, and his father has died. Hamza is the person who looks after the family. And he was out shopping to get the basic needs covered for the family. And on his way back, he happened to be in the wrong place when a missile hit. So, a young child leaves the home to bring food for his family and returns dead. These are not made-up stories. This is not Hamas stories or anyone spinning a story. This is a real-life story. The human cost of this is unbearable and unacceptable.

    AMY GOODMAN: We’re only talking about the Israeli assault on Gaza, but we are talking about the pandemic. Israel has been hailed as being the gold standard of ensuring its population is vaccinated, has not been the case for what has happened in the Occupied Territories, which they are responsible for. During the pandemic, UNRWA has been working to ensure access to PPE and water. Can you talk about clean water? Can you talk now about this report we shared at the beginning, the number of doctors who have been killed in the Israeli airstrikes, including Dr. Ayman Abu al-Ouf — maybe you know him — who headed the coronavirus response at Shifa Hospital, the main hospital in Gaza; another prominent doctor from Shifa, the neurologist Mooein Ahmad al-Aloul, also killed in an airstrike; and what this means for Gaza?

    MATTHIAS SCHMALE: Yeah, I did not know those two individuals you named personally. I know of them. And again, you know, all the information I have had about them — I’ve been here now three-and-a-half years, so I think I have a pretty good sense of who is linked to the authorities and in reality a militant, and who is not, who is just simply doing their job. And to the best of my knowledge, these two doctors who were killed were professionals trying to provide healthcare and address immediate and urgent health needs of the population here. So, indeed, one of the issues, when there is a war, is to protect health institutions and healthcare workers, including doctors. And the toll in those terms is also rising.

    You mentioned, I think, at the beginning the MSF clinic that was destroyed. I also know from my colleagues in the Palestinian Red Crescent that their central ambulance unit was severely affected. One of our 22 primary healthcare centers, in fact, was not targeted but had some damage as a result of a strike that was too close. So, when we are still fighting the COVID-19 crisis — we were just seeing the beginning of the end of the second wave — we should also remember that we — just before corona started a year-plus ago, we were coming out of two years of Great Marches of Return, which had a devastating human impact. There were more than 35,000 people injured at the fence, as they call it here, more than 200 killed, again including 13 women or schoolchildren, due to disproportionate reaction from the Israeli side. And I’m mentioning this because the health system was already struggling and basically on its knees. We were very worried that COVID would be the cause of the health system falling apart. It barely coped. And now this on top of it. So, this war, if it continues any longer, has the risk of having a very decimating, devastating impact on healthcare on its people, in terms of the doctors and nurses, and on the healthcare infrastructure.

    AMY GOODMAN: Finally, Matthias Schmale, you grew up in South Africa. I’m wondering your thoughts on the comparison of occupied Palestine to apartheid. Our next group, B’Tselem, uses that term. Human Rights Watch uses that term. Of course, many Palestinians talk about that. Do you think that is a fair comparison?

    MATTHIAS SCHMALE: Speaking here as an individual who grew up in apartheid South Africa, I have to tell you, what I’m experiencing here reminds me a lot of what I saw in my childhood. The issue is people being treated — an entire people being treated differently from the rest of us. And whether that fits some academic definition of apartheid or not, it is wrong. And these are an occupied people, and this should stop. You know, not just the war has to stop. There has to be the beginning of a meaningful process — as we did see in South Africa, that ended the system there — that has as its aim a just solution for what happened 70 or so years ago during what the Palestinians call the Nakba, and that provides the opportunity for everyone — and that, of course, includes Israelis — to live a dignified and peaceful existence next to each other or together.

    AMY GOODMAN: Matthias Schmale, we want to thank you for being with us, director of UNRWA operations in Gaza. That’s the U.N. agency that works with Palestinians.

    This is Democracy Now! When we come back, we’ll speak to a reporter who works with Al Jazeera and AP. The media building that housed AP and Al Jazeera has just been bombed by the Israeli military this weekend. We’ll talk about what this means for getting access to information out of Gaza. Stay with us.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Arrest of Papuan activist Victor Yeimo reported to UN rights commission

    Asia Pacific Report newsdesk

    Human rights lawyer and Papua advocate Veronica Koman has formally reported the arrest of West Papua National Committee (KNPB) spokesperson Victor Yeimo to the United Nations Human Rights Commission.

    The report was made by the UK based human rights organisation TAPOL with Koman as Yeimo’s lawyer.

    “An urgent call in the name of West Papua pro-independence leader Victor Yeimo has been sent by the human rights organisation TAPOL and lawyer Veronica Koman through the Special Procedures mechanism of the UN Human Rights Commission,” said a TAPOL media release.

    Koman, as Yeimo’s lawyer, said that there were indications that Papua regional police chief Inspector General Mathius Fakhiri would include additional charges against Yeimo.

    “Papua regional police chief Mathius Fakhiri has indicated to the police that additional charges may perhaps be laid against Victor Yeimo so that he grows old in jail,” said Koman.

    Based on this claim, TAPOL and Koman will be communicating with the UN over developments in Yeimo’s case.

    “Because of this, we will be in close communication with UN officials in order to inform them of each and every development including if there is additional questioning or bad treatment,” she said.

    Papua riots role ‘suspected’
    Earlier, Nemangkawi Task Force head Senior Commissioner Iqbal Alqudusy had confirmed that Yeimo was arrested on May 9.

    According to Alqudusy, Yeimo was included on the wanted persons list (DPO) in 2019 on suspicion of committing makar (treason, subversion, rebellion) and broadcasting a report or releasing information which could give rise to public unrest.

    Yeimo has been declared a suspect for being the actor behind the 2019 riots in Papua based on witness testimony which cited him as the leader of a demonstration where he spoke about Papuan independence and allegedly incited the public to damage public facilities.

    Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was “Penangkapan Victor Yeimo Dilaporkan ke Dewan HAM PBB”.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Indigenous Fisheries vs. Mob Rule

    Suspicious fire destroys Potlotek First Nation cabins. CTV.news

    On September 17, 2020, the Sipekne’katik First Nation of Nova Scotia opened its independent fishery, affirming the Band’s rights under Canada’s Supreme Court ruling of 1999 (the Marshall Decision), which allowed the Band to fish for a moderate living under its own regulations. On the 17th and in following days from 80 to 200 fishing boats of the commercial fishing industry came to St. Mary’s Bay to protest the new fishery. There were boat rammings, flare guns, intimidation, and destruction of lobster traps and gear. Canada’s Department of Fisheries and Oceans, the DFO Conservation and Protection Divison, the RCMP, the Coast Guard, were there but provided the Band no protection.1

    This began two months of intimidation, burnings, assaults, destruction and confiscation of lobster traps and gear, with mob actions by commercial fishermen unhampered by the few police on hand.

    The Sipekne’katik First Nation requested and received from Nova Scotia’s Supreme Court a temporary injunction assuring protection from attacks until mid-December 2020. Canadian law was not protecting them. The Band was faced with mobs of men understood to represent commercial fishing interests but under the colors of conserving lobster stock. The commercial seafood industry is known for the near extinction of several Atlantic species of fish. If the non-Indigenous fishermen of Nova Scotia who attacked the Sipekne’katik First Nation were free men, why wouldn’t they form worker-owned fishing cooperatives similar to the Indigenous fisheries?

    Prime Minister Trudeau’s Liberal government said the violence was a terrible thing and although military intervention was suggested by the Sipekne’katik First Nation, the number of RCMP officers was increased. While the RCMP was not able to intervene when a mob of over two hundred commercial fishermen torched a Sipekne’katik fisherman’s van and destroyed his catch, eventual arrests of over 20 participants resulted in a court date March 29th. As of mid-May reports of their trial aren’t available in the media.

    Then, instead of de-escalating, the government aggressively pursued its policies of licensing restrictions and seasonal limits affecting Indigenous fisheries, despite the serious doubts of the government’s right to interfere in the Indigenous self-regulatory process. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans, using the same argument of the commercial fishermen that the variant Indigenous lobster season (with its tiny catch) endangered the lobster stock, is legitimizing mob rule and the crimes of November and December 2020.

    The Potlotek First Nation of Cape Breton is one of several bands self-regulating its native fishery. Durng this past April 37 lobster traps belonging to a Potlotek fisherman were seized by the DFO2 which has steadily confiscated the Band’s lobster traps since last October.3  To continue to assert its fishing rights the Potlotek Band has had to bring suit against Canada, May 10th at the Halifax Supreme Court.4

    The DFO confiscates lobster traps of the Sipekne’katik First Nation as well, asserting regulations requiring conformity with the commercial industry’s season; the restrictions are imposed without Sipekne’katik’s consultation and permission as required. As a law unto itself the DFO also confiscates crab traps protected by Section 35 of the Constitution and the Sparrow Decision.5  The regulations risk closing and bankrupting native fisheries and stripping them of their Supreme Court guaranteed rights to fish for a “moderate livelihood.” The expense of proving that the government has exceeded its legal authority is placed on the First Nations.

    Lack of visible prosecution of the primary crime here – terrorizing of a selected ethnic group, encourages the perpetrators.

    From the perspective of the Convention on Genocide the concern is whether Canada’s government is intentionally continuing policies which lead to the extermination of Indigenous people. To limit discussion here to fishing rights, an indication of the controls on First Peoples is available in DFO licensing policy (as of November 2020); as revealed in response to a suit by Sipekne’katik First Nation against the Nova Scotia Seafood Alliance: the Alliance revealed that the seafood buyers were only permitted by the DFO to buy from fisheries licensed by the DFO, and these purchases had to be within the DFO defined seasons.6  These government regulations exclude the Sipekne’katik First Nation and other newly formed Indigenous fisheries from the right to market their small catches of seafood.

    Divisions between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples serve those who control both for profit. I tend to see current adversarial anti-Indigenous actions, with their similarities to KKK tactics and controls in the U.S. during the last century or so, as the result of corporate interests facilitated by the government. The criminal controls don’t really benefit the often desperate commercial fishermen who effect the terrorizing. While Prime Minister Trudeau’s government expressed horror at the violence dealt the Sipekne’katik fishery, his government’s Department of Fisheries and Oceans increased the dissent by confiscating Sipekne’katik’s lobster traps — much as boats from the commercial fleet had stolen them. The government failed to protect an Indigenous community requesting protection.1  Sipekne’katik First Nation Chief Sack suggested military intervention to protect his people but was refused.7  (The government was able to deploy sixty Canadian Armed Forces members to assist at Nova Scotia centres testing for COVID-19.8

    The Sipekne’katik First Nation has given every indication that it will pursue justice under the law, and that this would include appeals to the U.N.. Canadian political science Professor John McGarry, described by the CBC as “an international expert on conflict management,” has assured Canadians the U.N. wouldn’t provide “peacekeepers” since the Canadian government would have to approve of any intervention. By this, Professor McGarry acknowledges the seriousness of acts against the Sipekne’katik First Nation as possibly requiring the armed military intervention of ‘peacekeepers.’9

    The U.N. has refused to leave the Sipekne’katik First Nation to the promises of the Canadian State when faced by its commercial fishing industry. An April 30th letter from the head of the U.N.’s Committee on Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), Yanduan Li, asks Canada to answer the allegations made by Sipekne’katik First Nations band: “According to the information received during September and December 2020, especially between 13th and 17th October, Mi’kmaw people, and in particular Mi’kmaw fishers, have been subject to escalating racist hate speech, violence, including with firearms, intimidation, burning and destruction of their property, including lobster traps, lobster processing facilities and work vehicles.” Also noted: “It is further alleged that, despite being aware of the high risks of violence, the competent Canadian authorities – in particular the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) – failed to take appropriate measures to prevent these act of violence and to protect the Mi’kmaw fishers and their properties from being vandalized.” The three page letter challenges the government’s inaction and asks for a thorough investigation. It verifies the need to ask the Canadian government to “respect, protect and guarantee the rights of Mi’kmaw peoples in relation to their fishing activites and territories,” among other guaranteed rights.10 The deadline for response is July 14th.

    1. “DFO, RCMP knew violence was coming but did nothing to protect Mi’kmaw lobster harvester: Documents,” Brett Forester, February 10, 2021, aptn.
    2. “Traps seized by DFO in first day of Potlotek’s moderate livelihood lobster fishery,” Ardelle Reynolds, April 30, May 1, 2021, Saltwire.
    3. “Potlotek chief says band losing patience with DFO over fishery,” Tom Ayers, October 23, 2020, CBC News.
    4. “Potlotek First Nation seeks injunction against DFO over self-regulated fishery,” Erin Pottie, May 11, 2021, CBC News.
    5. “Mi’kmaw fisherman has crab traps seized by DFO during food fishery,” Angel Moore, April 14, 2021, aptn.
    6. “Nova Scotia Seafood Alliance says licences only let them buy from DFO-authorized fisheries,” Paul Withers, Novemher 17, 2020, CBC News.
    7. “’We’re being targeted now’: Mi’kmaq chief wants military called in to N.S. lobster clashes, attacks,” Greg Mercer, October 18, 19, 2020, Globe and Mail.
    8. “Canadian Armed Forces deploying personnel for Nova Scotia COVID-19 response,” April 27, 2021, CBC News.
    9. “UN peacekeepers won’t monitor Sipekne’katik fishery, says expert,” Paul Withers, April 30, 2021, CBC News.
    10. “Letter to H.E. Ms. Leslie Norton, Permanent Representative of Canada to the United Nations Office, Geneva, from Yanduan Li, Chair, Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination,” Reference CERD/EWUAP/103rd Session/2021/MJ/CS/ks, 30 April 2021, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, United Nations, Geneva Switzerland.
    The post Indigenous Fisheries vs. Mob Rule first appeared on Dissident Voice.


    This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by J.B. Gerald.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Rape is being used as weapon of war in Ethiopia, say witnesses

    Ethiopian nun speaks of widespread horror she and colleagues are seeing on a daily basis inside the heavily isolated region of Tigray

    Thousands of women and girls are being targeted by the deliberate tactic of using rape as a weapon in the civil war that has erupted in Ethiopia, according to eyewitnesses.

    In a rare account from inside the heavily isolated region of Tigray, where communications with the outside world are being deliberately cut off, an Ethiopian nun has spoken of the widespread horror she and her colleagues are seeing on a daily basis since a savage war erupted six months ago.

    Related: The Guardian view on the war in Ethiopia: Tigray’s civilians need protection | Editorial

    Related: Ethiopia: 1,900 people killed in massacres in Tigray identified

    Continue reading…

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

  • We must all mobilise to stop Israel’s crimes | Letter

    Emilie Tant from the Overseas Development Institute says solidarity in the international community is the only way to end Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories

    We don’t need the Israeli army to tell us that it is not particularly interested in a ceasefire (Israel-Gaza violence: death toll rises as UN envoy warns over escalation, 12 May) to recognise that these fresh UN warnings against escalating violence will not be heeded. For years the UN has been clear on Israel’s crimes against international law, yet the settler colonial project of successive Israeli governments has expanded unabated. Perhaps this is why the United Nations is referred to as the United Nothing by Palestinians across the West Bank.

    The balance of power in the occupied Palestinian territories is one of coloniser against the colonised, of the oppressor against the oppressed, and of perpetrator against victims. Only widespread solidarity from the international community, rooted in sustained strategies of digital and direct action, will force Israel to face the consequences of its crimes. To end the occupation, people around the world must mobilise together to draw a line in the sand. Mirroring strategies that built pressure against South Africa’s regime will do far more than diplomatic statements of condemnation that have so far failed to restrain Israel.

    Continue reading…

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

  • Thousands of Cambodians go hungry in strict lockdown zones

    Rights groups say government and UN inaction has left people lacking food and medicine for weeks

    Tens of thousands of Cambodians are going hungry under the country’s strict lockdown as Covid cases continue to rise amid criticism from human rights groups that the government and the UN are being too slow to act.

    The south-east Asian country had recorded one of the world’s smallest coronavirus caseloads, but infections have climbed from about 500 in late February to 20,695 this week, with 136 deaths.

    Related: Cambodia accused of using Covid to edge towards ‘totalitarian dictatorship’

    Continue reading…

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

  • Using the Recent Universal Periodic Review as a Framework for Accountability for Excessive Use of Force by Police in the United States

    In the recent Universal Periodic Review (UPR) by the Human Right Council, the United States received thirty recommendations from countries around the world calling for it to address excessive use of force by police. Many issues around officer-involved killings in the United States fall squarely within international law prohibiting excessive use of force.

    The Department of State under the Biden Administration welcomed these recommendations from the international community, yet it remains to be seen how the Biden Administration will implement them. The United States has accepted or partially accepted all thirty recommendations to address excessive use of force by police. This partial acceptance came with the condition that the recommendations would be implemented in compliance with U.S. domestic law.

    Many of the UPR recommendations made on the issue of excessive use of force by police recognized that it needs to be addressed alongside societal and structural reform. For example, the State of Palestine recommended that the United States “Put an end to structural racism and segregation, take measures to end police misconduct and documented human rights violations and pursue structural reforms to reduce the role of police in addressing societal problems” Centering the actions of police in the larger societal and structural problem of racism is a valuable approach that addresses the core of the problem rather than treating it as a symptom.

    The acceptance of UPR recommendations provides the framework of accountability on which the United States will be judged when the implementation of these recommendations is reviewed in the next UPR cycle. In her opening address to the council, Ms. Lisa Peterson, Acting Assistant Secretary of State, was open in addressing the urgent issue of police brutality in the United States, yet her statement lacked an acknowledgement of the depth and scope of police brutality and its systemic origin. Peterson stated:

    The United States is dedicated to eliminating racial discrimination and the use of excessive force in policing. The Department of Justice has issued guidance stating unequivocally that racial profiling is wrong and has prohibited racial profiling in federal law enforcement practices. Many states have done the same. Our Department of Justice prosecutes individual officers who violate someone’s civil rights and investigates police departments that might be engaging in a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives persons of their rights. We also seek to proactively prevent discrimination or the use of excessive force by participating in increased training of federal, state, and local law enforcement officers across the country.

    Increased training and vigorous federal review will not be an adequate response to an issue that has its roots in white supremacy. In his book The Condemnation of Blackness: Race, Crime, and the Making of Modern Urban America, Professor and historian Khalil Gibran Muhammad traces the origins of US policing back to slave patrols that evolved into white supremacist groups like the Klu Klux Klan and police patrols of northern American cities. He argues that the use of excessive force and outright brutality has always been a tool of managing minority populations throughout United States history. It will be vital for the United States to consider this historical context of state and police violence in implementing recent UPR recommendations.

    Excessive use of force by police will not be addressed in the United States over the span of one periodic review. Any measurable progress will require massive systemic change that acknowledges the violent origins of policing in the United States. U.S. leaders must come to terms with the reality that current federal systems to prevent discrimination and the use of excessive force in policing are wholly inadequate.

    In the wake of the conviction of Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd, questions have arisen surrounding accountability and justice. While Chauvin’s guilty verdict allows for a global sigh of relief, the threat of excessive use of force by police in the United States is ever present. The killing of Daunte Wright, a 20-year-old Black man, by a police officer in a suburb of Minneapolis during the trial of Derek Chauvin illustrates that excessive use of force persists. This moment demonstrates that accountability is possible after unrelenting pressure from civil society.

    Nonetheless, the justice required for actual change will be found in the larger commitment to complete structural and societal reform to eradicate systemic racism in the United States. The framework of the Universal Periodic Review encourages this accountability in making these societal changes, yet it will be up to the United States to implement recommendations made by the international community, and to uphold national demands for change. As scholar and human rights activist Angela Davis has stated, “You have to act as if it were possible to radically transform the world. And you have to do it all the time.”

    By: Ruby Joy Kinney, International Justice Intern and Case Manager at a Minneapolis immigration law firm

    The Advocates for Human Rights is a nonprofit organization dedicated to implementing international human rights standards to promote civil society and reinforce the rule of law.

    Curious about volunteering? Please reach out. The Advocates for Human Rights has an opportunity for you.

    Eager to see change? Give to our mission, our vision, our work. Your gift matters.

    This post was originally published on The Advocates Post.

  • Biden Administration Blocking UN Cease-Fire Statement As Israel Bombs Gaza

    The Biden administration is reportedly blocking the release of a United Nations Security Council statement calling for an immediate cease-fire as Israel continues its devastating assault on the occupied Gaza Strip, killing dozens of Palestinians and injuring hundreds more.

    According to Reuters, which cited anonymous diplomats and sources familiar with the Biden administration’s strategy, the United States is “delaying” the U.N. Security Council’s “efforts to issue a public statement on escalating tensions between Israel and the Palestinians because it could be harmful to behind-the-scenes efforts to end the violence.”

    One source told the outlet that the U.S. is “actively engaged in diplomacy behind the scenes with all parties to achieve a cease-fire,” but the official did not specify how a U.N. Security Council joint statement—which must be agreed to by consensus—would undermine those talks.

    The post Biden Administration Blocking UN Cease-Fire Statement As Israel Bombs Gaza appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • The Advocates & Partners Leverage the UN System to Ensure African States Don’t Flout a Seminal African Court Judgment Striking Down Mandatory Death Penalty Laws

    It has been more than a year since the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the African Court) delivered a judgment upholding the right to life of five Tanzanian nationals who had been arbitrarily sentenced to death, but the Tanzanian Government has yet to give effect to the decision.

    In 2011, Ally Rajabu and his co-defendants were convicted of murder and per the Tanzanian Penal Code, a judge mandatorily sentenced them to death. When the Court of Appeal (apex court in Tanzania) denied their appeal, they applied to the African Court to quash their conviction and commute their sentence. Remarkably, they filed the application pro se—representing themselves. The Court subsequently appointed an attorney to represent them pro bono.

    The African Court dismissed the request to overturn the convictions as doing so could infringe upon the jurisdiction of the national courts. Regarding the death sentences, however, the African Court held that a mandatory death penalty which prohibited the court from considering mitigating factors like the defendant’s social history and the proportionality between the facts and the sentence arbitrarily deprived the defendants of their right to life. Hence, the Court reasoned, Tanzanian authorities should set aside those death sentences. The Court gave Tanzania six months to give effect to the judgment and determine appropriate alternative sentences for Mr. Rajabu and his co-defendants.

    In December 2020, The Advocates of Human Rights submitted a List of Issues report to the Human Rights Committee (the Committee), observing that Tanzania has wavered in its support for the death penalty. Though the country has a moratorium on executions since 1994, Tanzanian courts continue to sentence people to death. The legislation calling for the mandatory imposition of the death penalty disregards due process requirements. Therefore, the African Court’s judgment marked a vital step in protecting human rights in Tanzania.

    Despite this progress, the Tanzanian Government has suggested that it might disregard the judgment. Officials have suggested that the Tanzanian Constitution takes precedence over international judgments. And in a move with wide-sweeping implications, Tanzania recently ended the right of individuals and NGOs to directly file cases against the Tanzanian Government in the African Court. This move could fetter Tanzanians’ access to an important human rights mechanism. The Advocates hopes the Committee will press Tanzania on its stance on the death penalty and its implementation of the African Court’s decision in its upcoming periodic review. The Advocates is also collaborating with three Tanzanian-based partners to prepare a joint stakeholder report on death penalty issues for the country’s November 2021 Universal Periodic Review.

    The significance of the African Court judgment extends beyond Tanzania, to the entire African continent. 13 African countries retain a mandatory death penalty for many crimes. Amongst them, Botswana, Somalia, and Sudan have arbitrarily imposed the death penalty and carried out executions. These continuing executions under mandatory death penalty regimes are an unfortunate development, undermining the authority of the African Court decision.

    Such irreverence from parties to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights makes it even more essential for the Committee to ask Tanzania to address the issue of the death penalty and for delegates to the Human Rights Council to press Tanzania for compliance in the upcoming UPR. An international spotlight on the issue will ensure progress toward respect for human rights not only in Tanzania, but also in the legal justice systems of the entire African continent.

    READ MORE:

    What comes after withdrawing from the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights?
    WE CAN’T CHANGE DEATH PENALTY – TANZANIAN HIGH COURT

    A Court in Crisis: African States’ Increasing Resistance to Africa’s Human Rights Court

    By Akshaya Mohan, undergraduate ‘Law with International Relations’ student at the University of Surrey and legal intern in The Advocates’ International Justice Program

    The Advocates for Human Rights is a nonprofit organization dedicated to implementing international human rights standards to promote civil society and reinforce the rule of law.

    Curious about volunteering? Please reach out. The Advocates for Human Rights has an opportunity for you.

    Eager to see change? Give to our mission, our vision, our work. Your gift matters.

    This post was originally published on The Advocates Post.

  • Revealed: 2,000 refugee deaths linked to illegal EU pushbacks

    A Guardian analysis finds EU countries used brutal tactics to stop nearly 40,000 asylum seekers crossing borders

    EU member states have used illegal operations to push back at least 40,000 asylum seekers from Europe’s borders during the pandemic, linked to the death of more than 2,000 people, the Guardian can reveal.

    In one of the biggest mass expulsions in decades, European countries, supported by EU’s border agency Frontex, systematically pushed back refugees, including children fleeing from wars, in their thousands, using illegal tactics ranging from assault to brutality during detention or transportation.

    Related: UK accused of stranding vulnerable refugees after Brexit

    Continue reading…

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

  • UN raises serious human rights concerns over Australia’s India travel ban

    ‘Nobody’s going to be jailed … at this time,’ deputy PM Michael McCormack says

    UN human rights officials have raised “serious concerns” about the Morrison government’s ban on Australians returning from India, and the severe penalties attached to breaches.

    The office of the UN high commissioner for human rights has questioned whether the controversial temporary measure – which can attract maximum penalties of five years’ imprisonment or $66,600 – is consistent with Australia’s human rights obligations.

    Related: Coalition to hold talks with Indian-Australian community leaders as anger mounts over travel ban

    Continue reading…

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