Author Archive

State of Human Rights in Belarus called ‘Catastrophic’ at the UN

July 12, 2023
The regime of Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko — seen here in Minsk, Belarus, on April 10, 2023 — is deliberately purging civil society of its last dissenting voices, a United Nations special rapporteur told the U.N. Human Rights Council on Tuesday.

The human rights situation in Belarus is catastrophic, and only getting worse, the United Nations special rapporteur on the country said on 4 July 2023, according to AFP.

Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko’s regime in Minsk is deliberately purging civil society of its last dissenting voices, Anais Marin told the U.N. Human Rights Council.

“The situation remains catastrophic. Unfortunately, it keeps on worsening,” said the special rapporteur on the human rights situation in Belarus. “The Belarusian government amended an already restrictive legislation aimed at dismantling civic freedoms, leading to a surge in politically motivated prosecutions and sentencing.

“The lack of accountability for human rights violations fosters a climate of fear among victims and their families,” Marin said. Marin has been in post for five years and reminded the council that she alerted them two years ago to the “totalitarian turn” taken by Minsk, evidenced by the “disregard for human life and dignity” during the crackdown on peaceful protesters in 2020. In her annual report, the French political scientist said more than 1,500 individuals were still being detained on politically motivated charges, with a daily average of 17 arbitrary arrests since 2020.

“I have good reasons to believe that prison conditions are deliberately made harsher for those sentenced on politically motivated grounds, by placing them in punishment cells for petty infraction to prison rules,” said Marin.

“No one has been held accountable in Belarus for arbitrarily detaining tens of thousands of peaceful protesters in 2020, nor for the violence or torture many of them have been subjected to.

“This general impunity, and the climate of fear resulting from ongoing repression, have compelled hundreds of thousands of Belarusians into exile.

Human rights defenders face ongoing persecution, she said, with more than 1,600 “undesirable organizations forcibly dissolved, including all remaining independent trade unions.

“This illustrates a deliberate state policy of purging civic space of its last dissenting elements,” she said.

Marin said independent media outlets had been labelled as “extremist organizations,” while academic freedom is “systematically attacked.”

“Ideological control and disciplinary measures restrict freedom of opinion and their expression,” she said.

Primary and secondary education is also subject to “ideological control,” with children “discouraged from expressing their own opinions” and facing “threats and consequences” for holding dissenting views.

Consequences for speaking out

As for the Russian invasion of Ukraine, individuals face challenges when trying to speak out against it or question Belarus’s role in facilitating the 2022 invasion.

“Anti-war actions led to numerous detentions and arrests, some on charges of planning terrorist attacks — a crime which can now be punished by death,” she said.

Belarus was immediately offered the Human Rights Council floor to respond to Marin’s comments but was not present.

On 11 July HRW underlined this with the case of Belarusian lawyer Yulia Yurhilevich and journalist Pavel Mazheika who ace up to seven years in prison

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/un-geneva/hrc53-interactive-dialogue-situation-human-rights-belarus-eu-statement_en?s=62

https://www.voanews.com/a/state-of-human-rights-in-belarus-catastrophic-un-told-/7167606.html

https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/07/11/travesty-justice-reaches-new-low-belarus

New wave of repression against human rights lawyers unleashed in China

July 12, 2023

In a joint statement published today, over 60 human rights organisations {such as the ISHR}, bar associations, scholars and Chinese human rights activists in exile urge global attention to the Chinese government’s new wave of repression against human rights lawyers unfolding over the past three months.

Human rights lawyers are a cornerstone of China’s human rights movement. From Uyghurs, Tibetans and Hong Kongers, to religious minorities, LGBTQI and feminist advocates, journalists, and political dissidents: human rights lawyers defend the full spectrum of civil society. They accompany and empower the most vulnerable against land evictions, discrimination, health scandals, or extra-legal detention. They embody the promise of rule of law and hold the government accountable to its commitments under China’s constitution, laws, and the international human rights treaties it has ratified. They ensure that no one is left behind.

As a result of this work, for many years and particularly since the round-up of over 300 human rights lawyers and legal assistants in the days following July 9, 2015 – an episode known as the 709 crackdown -, this profession has been ‘effectively criminalised in China,’ according to UN experts.

This year alone, Chinese authorities have passed harsh sentences on national security grounds of ‘subversion of State power’ against three lawyers who had attended a private gathering: Xu Zhiyong (14 years), Ding Jiaxi (12 years) and Chang Weiping (3.5 years). [see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2023/04/11/xu-zhiyong-and-ding-jiaxi-two-human-rights-defenders-in-china-sentenced/]Xu’s partner, feminist activist Li Qiaochu was also recently put on trial behind closed doors, being denied both a lawyer and access to healthcare.[see also: https://www.netherlandsandyou.nl/latest-news/news/2022/12/09/index]

Previously, lawyer Yu Wensheng – recipient of the 2021 Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders – and his wife Xu Yan had also been arrested on their way to the Delegation of the European Union in Beijing, over a year after Yu’s release. See: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/69fc7057-b583-40c3-b6fa-b8603531248e

China’s abuse of national security to target lawyers has been growingly mimicked in Hong Kong, where Chow Hang-tung and Albert Ho are awaiting trial under the territory’s overbroad National Security Law.

Beyond arrests, authorities are also increasingly using travel bans and enforced disappearances – including through a criminal procedure known as ‘Residential Surveillance at a Designated Location’ (RSDL) – to intimidate and silence human rights lawyers. Lawyer Li Heping and his family were intercepted at Chengdu airport in June this year, while lawyer Tang Jitian was detained for 398 days for attempting to attend a Human Rights Day celebration in December 2021. For RSDL, see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/residential-surveillance-at-a-designated-location-rsdl/

Released lawyers increasingly face disbarment, while their relatives, including underage children, are subjected to unrelenting harassment from the authorities. In recent months, Beijing-based lawyer Wang Quanzhang and his family have been forced to move 13 times, reporting constant threats and repeated cuts to their gas and electricity supply.

Human rights lawyers are one of the last avenues left to Chinese citizens seeking justice for the trampling of their most basic rights. Without sustained global pressure, the government will ramp up its campaign to imprison, disbar or silence these critical advocates for a more equal, just and rights-respecting China.

Raphael Viana David, ISHR’s China Programme Manager

Detained human rights lawyers are constantly subject to physical and psychological torture and ill-treatment in pre-trial detention and prison. They are routinely denied contact with their relatives and access to medical care, despite critical health issues. The government impedes family-appointed lawyers from accessing court documents and representing victims, instead imposing government-appointed lawyers whose identities are not disclosed or refuse to communicate with relatives. Detained lawyers are often convicted during sham closed-door trials, without notification to families nor disclosure of court verdicts for prolonged periods.

My husband Ding Jiaxi and his colleagues always fought for what’s right, despite knowing they risked being disappeared, tortured, disbarred. Their bravery is only equalled by their moral commitment to defending the rights of the most vulnerable, enshrined in China’s constitution and international treaties. Their sacrifice cannot be in vain: governments should stand with China’s human rights lawyers.

Sophie Luo Shengchun, human rights activist and wife of Ding Jiaxi

The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has determined that China has a ‘systemic problem with arbitrary detention which amounts to a serious violation of international law.’

Against this new wave of repression, which has been known as the ‘709 crackdown 2.0’, the 63 signatories call on the international community to urge the Chinese government to:

  • Put an end to its crackdown on human rights lawyers and defenders;
  • Immediately and unconditionally release all those arbitrarily detained;
  • Amend laws and regulations, including national security legislation, its Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure Law, to bring them into full compliance with international human rights standards; and meaningfully cooperate with the United Nations human rights bodies to that end.

Full statement here in English and Chinese

https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/china-unleashing-new-wave-of-repression-against-human-rights-lawyers-global-response-needed/

https://thediplomat.com/2023/07/8-years-after-709-persecution-of-chinese-human-rights-lawyers-continues/

Vietnam Frees Australian democracy activist Chau Van Kham

July 12, 2023

On 11 July 2023 EFE reported that Vietnam had released Vietnamese-Australian activist Chau Van Kham, sentenced in 2019 to 12 years in prison for extremism over his ties to the Viet Tan pro-democratic party.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said he “very much welcomes the release of Chau,” in remarks Monday from Berlin, through Australian public broadcaster ABC.

Chau’s lawyer Dan Nguyen said in a statement through Amnesty International Australia that the activist, who returned Monday night to Australia, is with his wife and two sons. He also thanked the government’s, organizations and individuals’ efforts that fought for his release.

Chau was arrested in Ho Chi Minh City in January 2019 after being accused of entering the country with a false document and sentenced in an express trial to 12 years in prison for extremism charges 10 months later. See: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2020/06/08/chau-van-kham-australian-human-rights-defender-disappeared-inside-vietnams-prison-system/

This was due to Chau, 73, being linked to pro-democratic group Viet Tan, considered an extremist entity in the country but a human rights organization in Australia.

Deputy Australian Prime Minister Richard Marles said Chau was released on “humanitarian” reasons and “in the spirit of friendship which exists between Australia and Vietnam,” according to ABC.

Chau is one of “more than 150 political activists in Vietnam who have been detained for peaceful acts in favor of freedom of expression,” Human Rights Watch Asia Human Rights Director Elaine Pearson said in a statement.

Pearson spoke of journalist Dang Dihn Bach and activists Mai Phan Loi, Dang Dinh Bach, and Hoang Thi Minh Hong among them and urged Australia to continue advocating for their release.

The exact number of political prisoners in Vietnam is unknown, as numbers provided by different human rights organizations have discrepancies.

While Human Rights Watch says the total exceeds 150, Amnesty International said there were 128 political prisoners in the country last year. Dissident organization Defend the Defenders raised the number to more than 250.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-26/dan-phuong-nguyen-chau-van-kham-human-rights-vietnam-730/102646526

Journalist Elena Milashina and lawyer Alexander Nemov severely attacked in Chechnya

July 10, 2023

Rights defenders are sure of Chechen law enforcers’ involvement in attack on Milashina says Roman Kuzhev, СK correspondent

The attack on the journalist Elena Milashina and the advocate Alexander Nemov has to do with Milashina’s publications in which she wrote about human rights violations in Chechnya, human rights defenders have noted.

The “Caucasian Knot” reported that on July 4, Elena Milashina, a journalist of the “Novaya Gazeta” outlet, and Alexander Nemov, an advocate for Zarema Musaeva, were attacked in Chechnya. They were beaten up by masked gunmen when they were on the way from the airport to Grozny, where the verdict in the case of Zarema Musaeva was to be announced. The head of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov, has promised to “sort things out”; and Akhmed Dudaev, the head of the Chechen Press Ministry, have pointed out that “the style of Western intelligence services” is seen in the attack.

Svetlana Gannushkina, the head of the “Civic Assistance” Committee, is sure that the attack had to do with Milashina’s human rights activities. “They were waiting for her there to beat her for her so much writing on human rights issues, conducts inquiries and shows the real Chechnya,” Ms Gannushkina has stated.

According to her version, the attackers are definitely law enforcers. Gannushkina* has also added that the attackers would not be identified and punished. Oyub Titiev, a human rights defender, is also sure that Milashina was the attackers’ target. “Only law enforcers can beat a woman so openly and with such cruelty,” he has stated.

Ruslan Kutaev, the president of the Assembly of Caucasian Nations, is sure that Milashina would have been attacked at any moment while in Grozny.

A criminal case on the attack on Milashina and Nemov can be initiated under several articles, said Galina Tarasova, a lawyer. According to her story, the case should have been transferred to the central office of the Investigating Committee of the Russian Federation (ICRF).

This article was originally published on the Russian page of 24/7 Internet agency ‘Caucasian Knot’ on July 5, 2023 at 08:07 pm MSK. https://eng.kavkaz-uzel.eu/articles/62817

Many other human rights groups reported on this:

https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/case/human-rights-defenders-aleksandr-nemov-and-elena-milashina-attacked-and-severely-beaten-0

https://www.democracynow.org/2023/7/6/elena_milashina_attack

https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/07/04/journalist-and-human-rights-lawyer-viciously-attacked-chechnya

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/07/russia-un-experts-dismayed-violent-attack-against-journalist-yelena

Pressure on India continues to clear father Stan Swamy’s name

July 10, 2023

On 6 July 2023 UCA News reporter reported on efforts at the second death anniversary of the Jesuit priest Father Stan Swamy, who was falsely charged with terror-related laws, See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2020/10/11/the-indomitable-father-stan-swamy-defending-the-adivasis-and-the-dalits-a-cause-of-arrest/

A group of rights activists in India have urged President Droupadi Murmu to withdraw terror-related cases against late Jesuit Father Stan Swamy and 15 other accused in the 2018 Bhima Koregaon violence case.

“It is a false case registered against Father Swamy and others and it should be withdrawn,” said Father Antony P.M, a social activist at a gathering to mark the second death anniversary of the priest, on July 5 in the eastern Jharkhand state. Tributes were paid to the Swamy across the country.

He said a group of activists is appealing to the president, who hails from an indigenous community in eastern India, to use her good office to withdraw “the totally false case registered against right defenders,” Antony told UCA News on July 6.

The activists had gathered in front of the Raj Bhavan, the official residence of the Jharkhand governor, in the state capital Ranchi. It was organized by the Shahid Father Stan Swamy Nyaya Morcha (Martyer Stan Swamy Justice Forum). 

“Father Swamy, who fought for the rights of indigenous people in Jharkhand finally had to die for want of medical care as a prisoner,” said Antony, the director of Bagaicha, a Jesuit social center in Jharkhand, where Swamy lived and worked.

Murmu served as the governor of Jharkhand when Swamy’s residence in Ranchi was raided twice and the federal terror investigative agency arrested him in 2020.

He was accused of having links with outlawed Maoists along with 15 well-known human rights activists accused in a case linking them to a violent clash in Bhima-Koregaon village in western Maharashtra state in 2018. 

The late priest and others including rights activists, lawyers, academicians, and writers, were also charged under the provisions of a draconian anti-terror law, the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), alleging they had conspired to unleash violence in Bhima-Koregaon.

The priest was also accused of sedition and conspiring with Maoist rebels to overthrow the federal government. 

The 85-year-old activist priest died as an under trial prisoner in a private hospital in Mumbai, the capital of Maharashtra.

“We hereby request Your Excellency to take cognizance of the entire Bhima-Koregaon case wherein the intention of the state and the investigation agencies is highly suspicious and does not inspire any confidence in common citizens,” they said in a memorandum.

“Several independent investigations, including by US-based Arsenal Consultancy, have exposed how the case, based on fabricated evidence, is just a witch-hunt by the state,” it said.

“We request that all the human rights activists be immediately released on bail, the case and prosecution be withdrawn and criminal proceedings be initiated against those responsible for fabricating and planting evidence,” the memorandum added.

It also briefly provided details of the findings from Arsenal Consultancy, a digital forensic lab, that said digital evidence was planted on the computer of Father Swamy and others, leading to their arrest and incarceration.

Antony further demanded the scrapping of the draconian UAPA, under which Swamy was arrested.

“Once a person is charged under the UAPA, he/she is not treated well in jail even if there is no connection with the case remotely,” the priest said, citing the example of Swamy.

Despite suffering from Parkinson’s and other age-related diseases, Swamy was denied bail by both the trial court and the high court before his death.

“If the jail authorities cared for him well or the courts had granted bail in time, I think he would have been with us,” Antony, also a Jesuit, observed.

“The investigating agency has still not filed the charge sheet and activists are languishing in jail. This is a gross violation of human rights,” the priest said. 

Indian Jesuits have approached the Mumbai High Court seeking “to clear his name from the false cases” that led to his arrest, imprisonment and death in custody.

https://www.ucanews.com/news/activists-urge-indian-president-to-clear-stan-swamys-name/101875

Killing of trade union leader, Shahidul Islam, in Bangladesh

July 10, 2023

On 6 July 2023 Oxfam issued a statement that it stands in solidarity with the Bangladesh Garment and Industrial Workers Federation (BGIWF), trade union leaders and all human rights defenders who stand up for workers’ rights and protect human rights.

Oxfam learned of the horrific news of the brutal murder of Shahidul Islam, a union leader who was beaten to death on June 25th for his labour rights activism in Gazipur, a major garment industry hub on the outskirts of Dhaka, Bangladesh. He was an organizer of the BGIWF for 25 years advocating for workers’ rights as a trade union organizer, and was attacked and killed for standing up for basic human rights. We mourn not only the loss of an individual but also the loss of a powerful voice that championed the rights and well-being of workers, including the right to a living wage. We extend our sincere condolences to the grieving family, friends, colleagues and allies mourning his loss.

Kalpona Akter, the president of BGIWF, said: “Shahidul mobilised thousands of workers to join unions, empowering them to become solid factory-level trade union leaders. Throughout his life, he assisted thousands of workers in receiving arrears and severance pay wrongfully denied by their employers. With workers’ needs always in mind, Shahidul and three other union leaders met on the evening of his death to discuss a peaceful resolution to a wage dispute and the Eid-ul-Azha festival bonus. He met his fate due to the industry’s ill practice to promote yellow unionism for years and the neglect of workers’ voices. This needs to stop. Let our workers be free to organize and join unions. Shahid’s contributions to the labour movement were remarkable and will be sorely missed.”

Ahmed Sharif, a union organizer who was wounded in the attack, told the Guardian “As soon as we came out of the gate, a group of assailants grabbed Islam and separated him from us. They started cursing and randomly beating us, particularly Islam, some of them were kicking him mercilessly.”

As an organisation dedicated to the fight to end poverty and injustice, we are deeply concerned by the murder of Shahidul Islam. This tragic incident highlights the vulnerability of union leaders and activists fighting for workers’ rights. Oxfam joins BGIWF in demanding a thorough investigation and ensure justice is served for the death of Islam. We further call on all brands and stakeholders to conduct ethical purchasing practices upholding human rights within their supply chain and paying a living wage. We call on the government of Bangladesh to step up their protection of trade unionists who are exercising their fundamental human rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining.

Oxfam stands in solidarity with BGIWF, raising a resounding call for justice in the case of Shahidul Islam and demanding the unwavering safety of workers, union members and human rights defenders. We stand united in their relentless struggle to defend workers’ rights at Prince Jacquard Sweaters Ltd factory and in workplaces across Bangladesh. Together we demand accountability and an end to the systemic violations that perpetuate injustice.

Background

Shahidul and his colleagues were attacked after leaving the meeting with the management of a factory named Price Jacquard Sweaters Ltd to help the workers collect their due bonuses and wages. The factory management refused to comply despite being directed by the Deputy Commissioner’s (DC) office of Gazipur District to pay the workers’ salaries.

This is not the first time BGIWF has been the victim of such a fatal attack. Eleven years ago, in April 2012, another worker leader, Aminul Islam was tortured and murdered. Aminul was also an organizer with BGIWF, a vital contributor to the nation’s striving movement to advance workers’ rights. The murders of human rights defenders exemplify the extreme measures employed to suppress freedom of association in Bangladesh.

The tragic death of Shahidul, along with countless incidents of other workers being silenced by violence and fear, highlight the urgent need for change. Brands are responsible for ethical business practices and need to ensure that their purchasing practices are not leading to exploitation and deprivation of human rights. Brands must guarantee the right to a living wage and just, safe and healthy working conditions for garment workers.

Despite legal provisions, union leaders and activists face many challenges and restrictions such as anti-union discrimination, harassment, and retaliation against union leaders and members. Additionally, labour activists have raised concerns about the composition and independence of worker participation committees in factories. Labour activists argue that these ‘yellow unions’ are established by factory owners to exert control on workers raising concerns of workers’ rights to collective bargaining and discriminatory power dynamics.

Oxfam CanadaOxfam Australia and Oxfam Aotearoa’s What She Makes campaign aims to transform the fashion industry into a more just and equitable space by holding brands accountable for their purchasing practices and advocating for a living wage. A living wage is the minimum amount that a worker should earn in a 48-hour work week and adequately covers workers’ and their family’s basic needs, including food, water, housing, energy, healthcare, clothing, childcare, education, transportation and savings for unexpected events. We stand united with the women who make our clothes, advocating for their right to living wages, freedom of association and labour rights.

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2023/jun/28/shahidul-islam-bangladeshi-labour-leader-shahidul-islam-beaten-to-death-wages-dispute

“G. N.” Saibaba in India continues from his cell

July 7, 2023

INPA02121512

A wheel-chair using, human rights activist and former university lecturer of English, G. N. Saibaba has endured years of cruel, inhumane solitary confinement ©DR

I still stubbornly refuse to die
The sad thing is that
They don’t know how to kill me
because I love so much
The sound of growing grass

OMCT published this impressive story in calling for the immediate release of G. N. Saibaba:

These are the defiant words of Gokarakonda Naga “G. N.” Saibaba, written from his cell in Nagpur Central Jail in the Indian state of Maharashtra. A wheel-chair using, human rights activist and former university lecturer of English, Sai has endured years of cruel, inhumane solitary confinement. Still, his irrepressible resilience shines through. And Sai’s poetry fills a recently published anthology. But he did not write it in verse. In order to evade the prison’s punishing censors, and to disguise his messages of equality, positivity and love, Sai penned letters to friends and his partner of 30 years. These were transcribed, and became his book entitled, Why Do You Fear My Way So Much?

Prison conditions

Now, G. N. Saibaba is much less able to write. Since his erroneous conviction for terrorism-related crimes in 2017, and a sentence of life imprisonment, Sai’s health has progressively deteriorated. Suffering from a heart condition, a brain cyst, a lump in the abdomen and breathing difficulties, his multiple medical conditions require specialised treatment only available in New Delhi. And his disability as a result of childhood polio has been compounded by untreated nerve damage in his left arm, that has spread to his right, leaving him with no strength in his upper limbs. Sai needs support to perform any simple human function like sitting up, eating, drinking or using the toilet, a task which has been assigned to two fellow detainees. His dependency has been underlined by the constant monitoring of his cell. It was only recently – after Sai went on another hunger strike – that the prison authorities agreed to change the direction of CCTV cameras, giving him some semblance of privacy. Before that, his bed and toilet were recorded 24/7. This was a small victory. Despite repeated advocacy by the UN and human rights groups on G. N. Saibaba’s behalf, he is forced to inhabit a small, egg-shaped cell exposed to extreme weather conditions and with little space to move, particularly for someone in a wheelchair as Sai. Given his disability, some commentators believe the conditions of his detention may amount to torture.

Arrest in Delhi

It was 9th May 2014, and G. N. Saibaba was returning home for lunch from his lecturing duties at Delhi University. Without warning, a van jack-knifed in front of the car he was travelling in, forcing it to stop. Sai’s driver was pulled roughly from the vehicle, and replaced by a man in civilian clothing. Two others flanked their captive in the back. G N Saibaba was driven directly to the airport. He was never shown an arrest warrant, and nobody informed Sai’s relatives about his arrest. He was put on a plane to Nagpur, Maharashtra. On arrival, he was transported in an anti-landmine vehicle, in a convoy of commandos armed with automatic weapons. The military clearly wanted to send a message they had detained a hard-core terrorist – not a committed campaigner who has fought most of his life against discrimination and caste-based oppression, and for the rights of women and indigenous Indians.

Activism

G. N. Saibaba grew up in a small, rural community in southern India. Disabled by polio as a young child, he understood early on how unfairness and prejudice are perpetrated. Excelling in school, Sai went on to university where he became involved in student politics. His appointment as a professor of English did not dilute his outspoken criticisms of injustice.

In particular, he became a leading detractor of what became known as ‘Operation Green Hunt’ – a military campaign in central India, home to a large population of several indigenous communities (known as Adivasis), to eliminate Maoists, also called Naxals. Central India has witnessed numerous people’s movements opposing forceful occupation of indigenous land, and the exploitation of ancient forests and rich mineral resources. This military campaign against Naxals was used to quash such movements, leading to numerous human rights violations against civilians.

Conflict in this region dates back to the 1960s. ‘Operation Green Hunt’ began in 2009 – an all-out, on-going offensive by the Indian armed forces to rid the area of Naxals. G. N. Saibaba led the Forum Against War on the People – a solidarity organisation, and an attempt to shine a light on human rights abuses in the region. These atrocities – committed for the most part by the military and paramilitaries – have been well documented. They include extrajudicial killings, multiple rapes, and the deeply disturbing desecration of civilian corpses. It has been estimated more than 2,000 people have lost their lives since 2009.

Conviction

G. N. Saibaba’s advocacy certainly gave pause for thought to national and transnational mining corporations thinking about investing in the region. So, it was inevitable perhaps he would become a target. His persecution began under the Congress government – his Delhi home was raided more than once – and then continued under the BJP, and the prime ministership of Narendra Modi.

At G. N. Saibaba’s trial in 2017, with the courthouse fortified by hundreds of police officers to reinforce the impression of a dangerous extremist, he was tried under India’s anti-terror legislation – the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. With five others, Sai was convicted of alleged links to the banned Maoist organisation.

Judicial rollercoaster

In October this year, the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court ruled G. N. Saibaba’s initial trial had been flawed. The case against him was discharged. The elation he, his family and supporters felt quickly turned to disbelief. The government – infuriated, no doubt by the court’s decision to release an ‘urban Naxal’, a term regularly used to stigmatise human rights defenders – applied for a special sitting of the Supreme Court. The very next day, on a non-working day the special bench of the Supreme Court suspended the decision of the Bombay High Court. This leaves G N Saibaba still in that heavily monitored isolation cell, struggling to negotiate its curved walls in his wheelchair.

Above all, love

G. N. Saibaba’s hope of liberty has once more been dashed. Even so, his spirit is strong. The untreated infections in his hands, and the pain he experiences, means Sai cannot write more than two or three pages a month. But letters from home, especially from his partner, help sustain him.

I defeat the purpose
of the solitary confinement
by drowning myself
in your letters of love.

https://www.omct.org/en/resources/news/an-academic-is-caged-his-thoughts-are-still-free-resilient-and-undefeated

Nice ‘tit-for-tat’ by Swedish newspaper against Turkish demands to extradite refugees

July 7, 2023

Aftonbladet, the biggest daily newspaper of Sweden published a call where it was stated that the Turkish authorities and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan among them, are making calls, at every opportunity, for Sweden to repatriate some authors, journalists, academicians, and human rights defenders living freely in Sweden by obtaining refugee status, the number of whom ranges between 33 and 130. 

Simultaneously with Turkey requesting Sweden to repatriate its opponents, Sweden is facing the largest organized criminal actions in its history. Almost every day comes reports of armed attacks and killings from all parts of Sweden,” the call states*.  

“It is as if anyone can be killed anywhere at any time. Most of these cruel attacks are being organized by Swedish criminals now living in luxury in Turkey. These criminals have obtained Turkish citizenship and Turkey is therefore arguing that they cannot be returned to Sweden.” 

One such leader of a criminal gang threatening security in our country is Rawa Majid, the leader of the criminal organization called “Foxtrot” (with nickname Kurdish Fox). Another one organizing these crimes belongs to the group called Bandidos .”

“On the one side, Turkey claims to be fighting terrorism and requests that people who are in Sweden because of their political opinions to be returned to Turkey. On the other side, the country is rejecting to return to Sweden criminals of grave offences, people who risk the security and the future generations in Sweden. 

No, this cannot go on Turkey! It is time to act like a serious state. Return the “Kurdish Fox” and the other criminal people from Sweden to Sweden.” 

The signatories of the call:

Kurdo Baksi, Author
Göran Eriksson, Ex-Chief of Stockholm Workers Education Center (ABF) 
Göran Greider, Author, Dala-Demokraten Gazetesi Baş Redaktörü
Pierre Schori, Ex-Minister responsible for Refugees and UN Ambassador
Olle Svenning, Author

https://bianet.org/english/politics/281229-swedish-newspaper-calls-turkey-to-return-to-sweden-the-criminals-who-live-in-luxury-here

Researcher puts bomb under ‘traditional’ protection of human rights defenders

July 7, 2023

On 6 July 2023 Janika Spannagel in Open Global Rights comes with a study of great importance to the work for human rights defenders. The researcher states that “focusing only on defenders’ physical integrity risks undermining the very idea of supporting agents of human rights change” and that there is a need to Rethink campaigns on human rights defenders

Spannnagel’s work featured in this blog before [see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/janika-spannagel/] but this work questions more directly the core of HRD protection.

Instead of summarising I will provide large quotes:

,,,,The theory of change put forward by actors, including Front Line Defenders, International Service for Human Rights, and many others, claims that by protecting local human rights activists, international campaigns can support them in their work to advance human rights protection on the ground. This assumption appears plausible and aligns with prominent accounts in academic human rights literature, where domestic activists’ protection from repression is seen as a way to open spaces for them to challenge the regime and enact change.

That said, empirical evidence from UN casework and the experience of Tunisian defenders shows that this promise has not been fulfilled when it comes to human rights defenders in authoritarian regimes, as I show in my recent book. There, I argue that, while international attention can have important protective benefits, it does little to support individual human rights defenders as agents of change in repressive contexts. [Emphasis added]

The reason for this is that international casework on defenders, including urgent action–like campaigns or UN communications, maintain the traditional focus on physical integrity rights that has guided the long-standing casework on political imprisonment, torture, or enforced disappearances. In doing so, it overlooks the many administrative, discursive, and covert forms of repression that typically bypass international scrutiny more broadly but that often very effectively disrupt and thwart defenders’ work toward change.

The analysis of over 12,000 individual cases of human rights activists taken up by the UN special rapporteur on human rights defenders between 2000 and 2016 reveals that, in almost three-quarters of them, at least one of the violations described fell within the category of physical integrity violations. Detention cases alone made up 56% of all cases raised during that period. In contrast, only 4% of the cases dealt exclusively with softer types of repression, such as travel bans, bureaucratic issues, job dismissals, surveillance, or defamation.

This distribution far from represents the everyday experience of human rights defenders in authoritarian states—instead, it is reflective of a humanitarian instinct in human rights casework to privilege cases that are considered most severe. One could argue that UN communications, and perhaps attention-based campaigning more broadly, are inherently humanitarian, not transformative instruments. But one should ask: What, then, is the purpose of focusing on human rights defenders, as opposed to any victim of repression? [Emphasis added]

The priority given to physical integrity violations has two important adverse consequences. First, we can see that the data profoundly shape our understanding of what human rights defenders are struggling with. For example, on the basis of such data a CIVICUS report claims that in order to repress civic space, states resort “most often” to detention of activists, attacks against journalists, and excessive use of force against protesters. The human rights community’s own focus on violent repression thus paradoxically misleads us to believe that this is where most attention is needed.

Secondly, this focus reinforces a protection gap for violations that fall outside of the conventional notion of state repression as physically harmful and as undeniably politically motivated. Research on repression highlights that authoritarian states engage in repressive substitution, where they replace highly scrutinized coercive tactics—typically harder and overt types of repression—with softer and more covert measures. The case of Tunisia under Ben Ali aptly illustrates the strong impact of such tactics on defenders’ ability to carry out meaningful work.

When analyzing the further development of cases taken up by the UN, I also found that, while some positive effects of the UN’s attention could be identified for most of them, many did not see an actual improvement relative to the reported violations over the course of the next year; where they did, it was mostly an easing of harder repression. Ultimately, there is a real risk that governments continue to use hard repression to increase their bargaining power and then pass off a release from prison as a costly concession, while in reality imposing softer but equally effective measures against the activist in question.

With this problem in mind, what could be done differently? Casework that follows a transformative logic should not seek to maximize the reduction of physical harm—the humanitarian logic—but should define protection needs in terms of safeguarding a defender’s ability to do effective human rights work. 

Those engaging in casework and campaigns on human rights defenders should actively revisit their priorities in terms of the violations they tend to address. Far too often, softer repression remains unreported, unnoticed, and not acted upon, which effectively creates a twilight zone in which authoritarian states can comfortably stifle opposition voices without risking much pushback. We owe it to the countless number of human rights activists around the world to ensure that the label of “human rights defender” does not merely serve to laud their heroism and excite donors and the media, but that it is dedicated to fulfilling its promise of human rights change.

https://www.openglobalrights.org/rethinking-campaigns-human-rights-defenders/index.cfm

For the more traditional approach, see e.g. https://www.ipsnews.net/2023/07/recognising-human-rights-defenders-remarkable-agents-positive-change/

EU directives for SLAPPs and Media Freedom: a long journey

July 2, 2023
Protesters hold photos of slain journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia outside the office of the Prime Minister of Malta on Nov. 29, 2019

Maria Psara – writing for Euronews of 27June 2023 – says that European Union member States are trying to water down the directives for SLAPPs and Media Freedom…European lawmakers are accusing member states of trying to water down EU legislation aimed at strengthening protections for journalists and media freedom. 

The European Parliament’s Legal Affairs Committee (JURI) will on Tuesday vote on an anti-SLAPP directive first proposed by the Commission in April 2022 and that would enable judges to swiftly dismiss manifestly unfounded lawsuits against journalists and human rights defenders.  [see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/04/28/eu-finally-moves-on-law-to-protect-media-from-legal-abuse-slapps/]

It would also establish several procedural safeguards and remedies, such as compensation for damages, and dissuasive penalties for launching abusive lawsuits. The JURI vote will form the basis of the Parliament’s position in negotiations with member states if it is also endorsed by the plenary in mid-July.

SLAPPs or Strategic lawsuits against public participation are a particular form of harassment used primarily against journalists and human rights defenders to prevent or penalise speaking up on issues of public interest. The Commission’s proposal has been dubbed as the ‘Daphne Law’ in honour of murdered Maltese journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia.

Member states, which together form the Council of the EU, have however sought to water down the text, drawing criticism for the Commission.

“I would like to express my regret concerning the weakening of the remedies against abusive court proceedings, in particular the deletion of the provision on compensation of damage and the weakening of the provision on award of costs,” Didier Reynders, Commissioner for Justice, said earlier this month after member states agreed on their negotiating position. 

Parliament is seeking to redress that with German MEP Tiemo Wölken (S&D), the rapporteur on the draft directive, telling Euronews: “We made it stronger and we also added other provisions such as a creation of an ‘one stop shop’ which the SLAPPs targets can contact to receive help by dedicated national networks of specialized lawyers, legal practitioners and psychologists.”

It is not the first time member states are accused of trying to water down a proposal on media freedom.  Earlier this month, a deal among the 27 member states on the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) made a lot of eyebrows rise, because of a planned exemption to allow for the wiretapping of journalists. The regulation, first proposed by the Commission in September 2022, included safeguards against political interference in editorial decisions and against surveillance. The EU’s executive wanted to put focus on the independence and stable funding of public service media as well as on the transparency of media ownership and the allocation of state advertising.

“We have welcomed in particular as a political symbol the draft regulation for EMFA, as the Commission for the first time has adopted a legislative act dealing with all media, a traditionally sensitive subject dealt with at national level only,”  Renate Schroeder, director of the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), told Euronews. Yet, the EPJ and other NGOs, still criticised the proposal as “not ambitious enough”.

“In particular we believed that Article 4 on the protection of journalists’ sources and protection from surveillance has not met Council of Europe standards. We also advocated for stronger binding rules on media transparency,” Schroeder added.

But member states are seeking to add an exemption to Article 4, introduced by France and opposed by Germany only, that would allow them to spy on journalists in the name of national security.

The original proposal sought to ensure that governments could not “detain, sanction, intercept, subject to surveillance or search and seizure” journalists in order to uncover their sources, unless “justified by an overriding requirement in the public interest” while the deployment of spyware was to be restricted only to “serious crimes”. 

The Council’s is hoping to broaden the number of offenses allowing such surveillance from 10 to 32.

“The text doesn’t protect journalists anymore and thereby makes the Act almost useless for journalists’ protection at least,” Schroeder said. 

“It still proposes useful tools when it comes to independence of public service media, transparency on state advertisement, some minimum rules on media ownership and on editorial independence. But yes, some member-states are afraid of journalism and thereby give hands to illiberal countries such as Hungary who oppose the Act. We hope the European Parliament will be firm, but we are not too optimistic,” underlined the director of EFJ.

However, on 12 July, with 498 votes to 33 and 105 abstentions, MEPs adopted their negotiating position on new rules to protect those working on matters of public interest like fundamental rights, the activities of public officials or corruption allegations.

On 27 February 2024, the European Parliament formally adopted that text, which has now been published. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=105f78e8-27de-4fa3-99b1-6ed97c4d659f

See also: https://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2023-07-11/local-news/Protection-of-journalists-in-the-EU-MEPs-back-rules-to-stop-abusive-legal-cases-6736253272

for Latin America, see: https://www.article19.org/resources/inter-american-commission-on-human-rights-ensure-protection-against-slapps/

https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/06/26/meps-accuse-eu-countries-of-undermining-attemps-to-protect-journalists

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-9-2023-0223_EN.html

https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/08/23/record-number-of-abusive-slapp-lawsuits-filed-in-europe-in-2022-report

and then on 30 November 2023: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2023/11/30/council-and-eu-parliament-reach-provisional-agreement-on-eu-law-protecting-journalists-and-human-rights-defenders/

and on 29 April 2024 the UN came with: https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/brochures-and-leaflets/impact-slapps-human-rights-and-how-respond

Finally:

https://commission.europa.eu/news/new-eu-rules-protect-against-strategic-lawsuits-against-public-participation-enter-force-2024-05-03_en

https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/05/07/joint-statement-civil-society-reaction-adoption-eu-directive-combating-violence