We start the year with a little survey of what New Tactics in Human Rights accomplished in 2013: they trained 114 human rights defenders from the Middle East and North Africa [MENA region] on Strategic Effectiveness method and expanded their capacity in the MENA region for training and mentorship for human rights defenders. New material, including 20 new human rights tactics, were added to the website and there is now a French-language landing page. New Tactics also launched an Arabic version of its website and online community. In the Arabic-language community, it hosted 6 online conversations that engaged 60 human rights defenders from around the MENA region. In its English-language community, it hosted 10 online conversation that engaged 153 human rights defenders. Summaries of all of these conversations can be found on its website. In 2014 it will launch its New Tactics Strategy Toolkit, an online collection of tools to help defenders create effective strategies.
To illustrate the increased use of video and images in the human rights world, just scroll down and get a feel of the amount and variety through some examples, mostly from the end of this year:
Human Rights Watch produced an end-of-year 2013 overview.
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is announces the latest issue of its weekly video news bulletin (episode number 10).
Amnesty International used a slick production to get attention for the fate of Syrian refugees in Europe (not explaining why other regions are not targeted by the way).
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights used this video to address the world on Human Rights Day 2013;
On Human Rights Day, US-based Freedom House recognized the work of HRDs in the Eurasia region with a slide show on:Kazakhstan, Russia, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan.
The International Service for Human Rights in Geneva presents its work with a video.
Human Rights First used YouTube to announce its fundraising live stream for the end of the year.
There are of course many more examples, quite a few referred to in this blog over the years, such as those of the MEA: http://www.martinennalsaward.org/ but a special mention should be made of
the organisation Witnessin the USA which has pioneered the use of video cameras in the hands of human rights defenders.
When the internet some 25 years ago made it possible to send and ‘publish’ almost unlimited amounts texts, the original euphoria in the human rights movement (whose main weapon is after all documentation) was quickly dampened somewhat when it also led to information overkill. Something similar is bound to happen with images which can now be ‘published’ and transmitted as easily as documents (but without the free-text search capacity). On the other hand there will be new possibilities and different ways of getting the human rights ‘stories’ across, especially on mobile devices used increasingly by younger generations.
The True Heroes Foundation– of which I am a founding Board member – wants to follow and use this development in a way that Human Rights Defenders derive maximum benefit from the new information and communication technology. It hopes to do so by making stories and images of HRDs the most eminent entry point for those seeking information on human rights in the near future. Keep following this blog and the website www.trueheroesfilms.org in the coming year for ….I am afraid …yet MORE information!!
With these thoughts, I WISH YOU ALL THE BEST FOR 2014.
(Pussy Riot’s members with their distinctive coloured balaclavas)
The two remaining members of Russian punk band Pussy Riot, whose incarceration sparked a global outcry, have been released under an amnesty law, but Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and Maria Alyokhina dismissed the amnesty as a publicity stunt before the Sochi Winter Olympics in February.They both promised to continue their vocal opposition to the government. The women were jailed in August 2012 after performing a protest song in Moscow’s main cathedral. Alyokhina’s first words and actions after being freed serve as a sign that this fight is likely to go on. The case divided Russia with many feeling the women were being too harshly treated and made examples of as part of attempts to clamp down on opposition to the government. But others felt their actions were a gross offence to the Orthodox faith. The act was seen as blasphemous by many others e.g. in Greece here and was condemned by several Orthodox Churches. However, their conviction for “hooliganism motivated by religious hatred” was criticised by rights groups [AI declared them prisoners of conscience], celebrities [such as Sting, the Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Madonna and Yoko Ono ], anti-Putin activists and foreign governments.
This should make us look again a the issue of blasphemy in general. The crime of criticizing a religion is not always called blasphemy; sometimes it is categorized as hate speech (even when it falls well below any sensible standard of actually inciting hatred or violence) because it supposedly insults the followers of a religion. These crimes—of expressing ‘blasphemy’ or offending religious feelings—are still a crime in 55 countries, can mean prison in 39 of those countries, and are punishable by death in six countries.
Recently, Ireland and the Netherlands started the process of removing some or part of their blasphemy laws. The arguments in these debates have universal validity.
Human Rights First and other NGOs have reported on human rights abuses caused by the use of blasphemy laws around the world. These laws are often vague and can be subject to abuse, either by the authorities or citizens who can accuse a fellow citizen of blasphemy with a personal complaint to the prosecutor. The concept is inconsistent with universal human rights standards, which protect the rights of individuals rather than abstract ideas or religions. Those accused of blasphemy are frequently threatened or attacked even before any investigation. People take to the streets and violence stoked by religious extremists ensues. Blasphemy laws have been used to justify violence and oppression against minorities. Blasphemy laws enable governments to restrict freedom of expression, thought, and religion. Application of the laws can result in devastating consequences for religious minorities. This has been the case for Christians in Pakistan and Egypt, Ahmadi followers in Indonesia, and non-believers in Turkey and Saudi Arabia. In many instances, officials fail to condemn abuses or to hold the perpetrators of violence accountable. And the police often fail to stop violence against religious minorities or to protect those endangered on account of such laws.
In the past few years, several bodies of the United Nations have examined the relationship between freedom of expression and hate speech, especially in relation to religious issues. After extensive consultation with governments and civil society, the Rabat Plan of Action was published by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in October 2012. This document outlines how blasphemy laws are problematic. Since 2011, a new process dubbed the Istanbul Process was launched as a result of resolutions adopted at the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly. The idea is to combat religious intolerance without restricting freedom of speech but whether that is possible is a big question.
On 18 December 2013, human rights defenders, Mr Alan Morrison and Ms Chutima Sidasathian, appeared at the police station in Phuket province. The two human rights defenders are accused of libel and violating the Computer Crime Act for publishing an article entitled “Thai Military Profiting from Trade and Boat people, Says Special Report”, which was published on Phuketwan website on 17 July 2013. The human rights defenders are due to appear at the police station again on 24 December 2013. Read the rest of this entry »
The Ugandan parliament has now passed the bill that many feared would come one day. Although it does not foresee the death penalty anymore it still puts life jail terms on ‘aggravated homosexuality’. Back on 3 February 2013, Kasha Jacqueline Nabagesera, a Ugandan LGBT activist, who was the 2011 Laureate of the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights, spoke with the Martin Ennals award about the risks and problems.
The Brussels-based NGO ‘Protection International’ held a Global meeting, from 18 to 22 November 2013, bringing teams from the field and its Brussels headquarters together in Mombassa, Kenya. The meeting was an opportunity for teams from Colombia, Guatemala, Indonesia, Kenya, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Thailand to exchange and compare their experiences, strategies and knowledge on security management and the protection of defenders. During the meeting topics were addressed such as the conceptual framework for research on community protection networks, the psychosocial care of human rights defenders, and the use of outcome mapping to strengthen the monitoring of the work done with communities and civil society organizations. The contents of a “Facilitators Guide on protection for human rights defenders” – to be published in early 2014 – was also discussed. [The Global Meeting follows an earlier Latin American Regional Meeting held in August in Guatemala]
The mission to Honduras was made up of Baltasar Garzón, a Spanish jurist and human rights defender; Luis Guillermo Pérez Casas, attorney and head of the FIDH mission; Lisa Haugaard of the Latin America Working Group; Annie Bird of Rights Action; Mirna Perla, former magistrate of the Supreme Court of Justice of El Salvador; Julieta González from APRODEV-Advocacy Program for Central America in Brussels; Susanna Daag from the Copenhagen Initiative for Central America (CIFCA) in Brussels; Hollman Morris, Colombian journalist and human rights defender; Enrique Santiago of the Foro de Abogados of Spain; Beatriz Gil from the Institute for Political Studies on Latin America and Africa (IEPALA) in Spain; and Pascal Paradis from Lawyers without Borders, Canada. The mission was carried out with the support of CIPRODEH.
The report of 20 December 2013 highlights the following:
deep concern over the attacks and threats made against the human rights defenders mentioned in its November 23, 2013 press release, including journalists and those who work to defend women, indigenous and Garifuna territories, natural resources, and the lesbian, gay, transsexual, bisexual, and intersexual community. The mission had access to two blacklists targeting leaders of social and labor organizations, human rights defenders, journalists, and members of the Libertad y Refundación political party and indicating they would be murdered.
concern over the recent and apparently arbitrary transfer of public prosecutors who had been working in the Special Human Rights and Anti-Corruption Prosecutors’ Offices and the impact of these transfers on the work necessary to overcome the high level of impunity in the country.
number of irregularities in the election process identified through multiple reports from diverse sectors of Honduran civil society.
a lack of transparency around the funding of political campaigns and the sources of political party funding.
strong presence of the Armed Forces during the course of the elections.
reports that during the course of the last few days, four people linked to the Partido Libertad y Refundación have been murdered. These numbers are over and above the 39 murders that have taken place since May of last year, mostly of members of the same party.
On 9 December 2013, Ihlam Amiraslanov was granted early release from prison after serving two-thirds of his sentence. He had been sentenced to two years’ imprisonment for illegal possession of weapons on 12 September 2012 in Sabirabad District Court. Ilham Amiraslanov is an active member of Kura Civil Union and a prominent figure in the movement for justice for the victims of the flooding of the Kura River in May 2010. On 8 June 2012, Ilham Amiraslanov was arrested by police officials from the Ministry of Internal Affairs. On 12 September 2012, he received a two-year prison sentence under the Azerbaijan Criminal Code. This conviction was upheld by the Court of Appeal. Ilham Amiraslanov’s trial was marked by serious irregularities, including the refusal by the judge to hear the defense witnesses. Ilham Amiraslanov’s lawyer stated that the charges were politically motivated and that neither the investigation nor the trial were conducted objectively.
For more information on this case, see Ilham Amiraslanov’s page on the Front Line Defenders website.
(Human rights activist Ou Virak talks to the media outside the Phnom Penh Municipal Court last year. Vireak Mai)
A vicious backlash on social media (including death threats) has started against human rights activist Ou Virak in reaction to his call for opposition leaderSam Rainsy to stop inciting discrimination against the Vietnamese. Virak, president of the Cambodian Center for Human Rights, has been attacked on his Facebook page in comments ranging from disappointment to outright vulgar abuse. In a statement released on Wednesday, Virak clarified that Rainsy singled out the Vietnamese in speeches, inciting discrimination against them. Virak said the virulent reaction against him reaffirmed his concerns about using anti-Vietnamese sentiment as a campaign platform in the first place. David Boyle in the Phom Penh Post reports on 19 December 2013 more on how thin and important the line is between opposition and human rights defenders.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 