Posts Tagged ‘Global Voices’

« Older posts

Indonesian human rights lawyer Haris Azhar speaks out

May 19, 2024

Haris Azhar

On 17 May 2024 – in Global Voices – Lawyer Haris Azhar shares how the law has been used to intimidate human rights defenders in Indonesia..

Haris Azhar is an advocate, human rights defender, and lecturer in Indonesia who has been involved in human rights work for over 25 years. In January 2024 Azhar, along with another human rights defender, Fatia Maulidiyanti, were acquitted of defamation charges . [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2023/11/14/defamation-indictment-for-fatia-maulidiyanti-and-haris-azhar-two-human-rights-defenders-in-indonesia/]

Here Haris Azhar shares how and why he believes the law can be used as a powerful tool to deal with repression of democratic voices and their rights. Read more from our In My Own Words series here.

My name is Haris Azhar. I would say I’ve been working, in general terms, on human rights issues for the last 25 years. I work across the country in Indonesia on some human rights, issues or situations, and in some conflict areas such as in Papua.

I have been working for and dealing with some vulnerable groups such as labour groups, as well as the indigenous people and victims from the violence as well. These days I practise as a lawyer, I do pro bono and also professional for-profit work where I use the profits work to subsidise the pro bono and public interest legal work. I have also joined some organisations, and I was director for two human rights organisations. So that’s why I’ve been very human rights focused.

In early 2024 me and my friend Fatia were brought to court. We won, and we got a good decision from the court. But this is not the final one, because the attorney general has appealed to the Supreme Court. I think this whole process was meant to serve as an example.

The whole process, especially last year, was intended to be intimidation. The litigation or the pre-trial process was intended to intimidate me [and] not to not say more about the practice of business oligarchs in this country. But myself, lawyers, and groups here said, we would not say sorry. We would not stop speaking, and that those in power could continue their judicial harassment of us and that we would fight them.

And during the fight, a lot of things happened [such as] intimidations, negative accusations and campaigns. They accused us of hoax stories, but actually they did the hoax stories. They took over and intercepted my mobile phone as well. These are the lengths and practices of intimidation in place.

However, the process of the court for people like us, we pretty much don’t really care about the final decisions. We can see the shadow of the prisons, because what the government thinks is important for them is for us to not have democratic voices. There aremany cases by politicians and by business groups that aim to criminalise decent voices, and it has become a [common] practice. There are even consultants that can help you if you would like to know how to criminalise decent/democratic voices.

It’s become an industry against freedom of expression, to show that, “This is what happens if you are against us.” They wanted to show they could bring me to court so the warning was that anyone who becomes the client of Haris should be aware. It was symbolic, and that’s what I mean it is a message to intimidate and to intimidate vulnerable groups especially.

Widespread engagement on human rights, working through organisations, has developed not only my knowledge, my skill, but also my networks. This has also developed my interest in what some of the ways we (as a nation) would like to put on the table with regards to issues of human rights.

As a practising lawyer, we have always believed here that we can use the law [to achieve justice]. However the movement here is not like in South Africa, as an example, where at one point in South Africa there was no real equality. There was no legal institution that could be used to secure fairness. We don’t have that kind of situation here [in Indonesia], but we are still looking for the formalisation of equality and fairness.

We like to use the legal debate, space, and discourse as a way to combat evil, because the law provides the kind of tools or ammunition to attack evil. Those in power hide behind the law and therefore here in Indonesia, most of the battle and discourse always has an element of legality.

I believe that the law is one of the crucial things that need to be handled, in addition to other advocacy issues. Because we know that the law or legal mechanisms are [also] being used by the bad guys, by the oligarchs to justify and legalise their plans and to do their own business. Those in power always say that they have complied with the law, that they uphold the rule of law, but actually we know that the law they comply with is their own creation. It is their own definition. That’s why we [as legal practitioners] need to step in, even though it’s not the popular action to do so.

If those in, and adjacent to, power cannot be left to create what is good and not good within the framework of law. We need to bring in the voices from the ground. We need to bring the voices from the indigenous people. We need to bring the voices from the labour groups, from the students, from the women’s groups, and many other vulnerable groups who are connected to the issues.

This is instead of the politicians and the business groups alone making their own arguments and developing their own definitions. We cannot let them be, and let them take over in that kind of way. Rule of law and legislation, has to be accompanied and coloured by the vulnerable voices and interests. This is why we insist that a part of the campaign, part of the research, is that we take the legal action as well.

The gap between the haves and the political groups on the ground is huge. This has been happening year on year, and it is getting worse every year. The new regulations and legislations that we have here, which very much comply with the interests of the business groups which belong to some politicians, create more loose protection of rights of workers and women. For the youth and the students, they are getting fewer protections for their education and freedom.

There’s no freedom on campus for students anymore, [because of] intervention from the government and the police on campuses. It’s getting obvious these days. So I think we need at least two things. First, figuring out how to protect vulnerable groups, because why they were attacked or would be attacked is because they found irregularities, and problematic issues behind the policies of the government, or the law.

These issues have led to economic issues, social issues, business issues and so the vulnerable groups make a choice where they complain or protest, but they get attacked by police, government and intelligence. That is why we need more collaborations with vulnerable groups.

We also need more friends — lawyers, international advocates, researchers — coming down into the rural areas, and into the urban areas to capture what is happening and make a noise, to campaign. That’s why we need to have the first group that I mentioned before. We need not to deal with the substance of the problem, but with the second layer of the problem, [which is] the attacks of the participation, the effects to the participation. For this we need to have a lot of groups [working on] how to deal with this kind of shrinking space.

We just had the 2024 elections where we campaigned around the threat to our freedoms of speech and expression. Some of the candidates responded very well, but the one that was supported by the current regime didn’t have a strong resonance with what we are saying. In addition to the campaign, along with my criminalisation, myself, some friends and organisations submitted a complaint to the Constitutional Court.

Our complaint was regarding some legal articles which were being used against me and against some journalists. We won the case in the Constitutional Court earlier this year, and an article which had been used to criminalise a lot of people has now been dropped. But this win is very short [lived] because we have some articles within certain laws which allow the police to criminalise speech.

When I said we won, that’s regarding just one article in our criminal code. But in the next year and a half we will have a new criminal code implemented and new articles to criminalise speeches. We will need to challenge those articles in the next two years. It’s like Tom and Jerry, where we play hide and seek. It seems politicians and business need a shield to protect themselves from the public, hence these situations but we keep fighting them using the same law.

Legal institutions are not our institutions yet. They are still their institutions [meaning the powerful]. However to a certain degree, the legal space is an open stage for you to perform, to have a say. I think if we don’t fill the space, it will be filled by those who are not supportive of freedom of speech or freedom of expression.

These are the reasons why I think we have to join legal action. So as to not give space for evil to come in and occupy. Also, legal action is not the only type of work needed. It has to be one among others. For instance there is advocacy work too. But law cannot be neglected and that’s why this current situation (and the coming situations), require more than just focusing on the legal system. It has to be about a collaborative methodology and approach.

https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/ive-been-fighting-for-human-rights-for-25-years-he/

Posted in Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 8, 2024 was again International Women’s Day

March 8, 2024

Like every year, many organisations used the occasion to focus on the role of women human rights defenders. Here a selection of this year’s actions [for earlier posts see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/international-womens-day/]:

Global Voices has released a special coverage called Empowering voices: Women in politics, which explores the state of women’s political participation around the world. 

Human Rights First referred to a new report reveals that WHRDs face increasing harassment and threats from a global movement against gender equality and LGBTQI+ rights. The Kvinna till Kvinna Foundation, a leading feminist women’s rights organization, released Hope and Resistance Go Together: The State of Women Human Rights Defenders 2023,  a report that found discouraging growth in harassment of WHRDs.  The foundation surveyed 458 women’s and queer rights activists and interviewed 25 activists representing WHRDs from 67 countries affected by violence or conflict.

They found that 75% reported facing harassment for their activism, a 15% increase from two years ago, and 25% of respondents have received death threats. Most harassment comes from government authorities, but increased harassment from far-right groups and anti-gender equality actors is also driving these startling statistics. Human Rights Defenders (HRDs) across the world face resistance and violence. In 2022, at least 401 HRDs were killed for their peaceful work. But some of the obstacles facing WHRDs are distinct. https://humanrightsfirst.org/library/recognizing-women-human-rights-defenders-on-international-womens-day/

Human Rights Watch on 7 March carried a piece by Macarena Sáez who says inter alia:

On this International Women’s Day, we march for the one in three women who experience physical or sexual violence in their lifetime. We cheer for countries like Argentina, Colombia, and Ireland that value our autonomy to choose to be pregnant and have legalized access to safe abortion, while protesting that abortion is still or again illegal in many places, including US states like Alabama and Texas. At the same time, we march to honor the women who marched before us, like the Mexican women who organized the first feminist congress in 1916 to push for family law reforms and their right to vote, and the Nigerians who waged their “Women’s War” against colonization and patriarchal laws in 1929. Their struggles sadly mirror the reality of many women around the world today – especially women who belong to historically marginalized groups – who continue to rally against violence and abuse.

Fearing the power of women’s solidarity and collective actions, governments have  stifled women’s speech through restrictions on movement, censorship, smear campaigns, and criminal prosecutions. In highly repressive contexts, like Afghanistan and Iran, women suffer arbitrary detention, and even enforced disappearance and torture, for their activism. Meanwhile, social media companies have not done enough to protect women from online violence, chilling women’s freedom of expression on and offline.    These barriers make it hard for women’s equality to become reality. Gender justice requires an enabling environment in which women can express themselves, speak and spread their political views, and participate in political and public life. Instead of repressing or tolerating the repression of women, governments should recognize our collective actions – and consequent power – and enshrine our rights in laws, policies, and practice. [https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/03/07/womens-voices-have-power-drive-change]

Amnesty International on 8 March highlighted three prominent women who reveal why sexual and reproductive rights are a major human rights issue : Charlotte Bunch, USA Leila Hessini, Algeria Marge Berer, UK [https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2024/03/three-prominent-women-reveal-why-sexual-and-reproductive-rights-are-a-major-human-rights-issue/]

On 8 March 8, 2024 Almyra Luna Kamilla and Rosalind Ratana 
opined in IMHO on “Navigating the storms of repression: The resilience of young women rights defenders in Asia”

[OPINION] Navigating the storms of repression: The resilience of young women rights defenders in Asia

In recent years, Asia has been witnessing rising authoritarianism and shrinking civic space. Among those in the frontlines of resistance are young women human rights defenders. As we celebrate International Women’s Day, let us demand for an enabling world where women human rights defenders can continue their noble pursuits without fear of reprisals.

In Thailand, the royal defamation law is being excessively used to silence criticisms against the monarchy. Meanwhile in Sri Lanka, economic and political mismanagement has sparked peaceful protests that are met with violence and intimidation. The fate of Asia’s political climate hangs by a thread as elections are held across many countries, including Bangladesh, Indonesia, India, South Korea, and Pakistan. Now more than ever, governments across the region are finding ways to solidify their power, putting an even tighter grip on civil society to the detriment of democracy and people’s fundamental rights and freedoms.

Despite such challenges, many are courageously speaking out and taking collective action to reclaim power for the people. This includes young women human rights defenders – or Youth WHRDs – who are claiming space to call out human rights violations and to demand accountability from oppressive governments. [https://www.rappler.com/voices/imho/young-women-rights-defenders-asia/]

The Alliance for Human Rights in Afghanistan (a coalition of 9 major NGOs) urgently appealed to the international community to significantly bolster its support and actively safeguard the human rights of Afghan women and girls, including Afghan women human rights defenders who face persecution for their peaceful campaigns for rights and basic freedoms.

In 2023, the Taliban further intensified its oppressive policies toward women, girls, the LGBTIQ+ community, and religious minorities. Afghan women and girls have seen their rights and prospects increasingly curtailed, from greater enforcement of restrictions on education – including a ban on girls attending secondary schools and universities – to intensifying exclusion of women from political and public life. Women have been banned from a growing list of forms of paid employment, and economic barriers, such as the ban on women registering organisations and undergoing vocational training, have contributed to a sharp decline in women’s participation in the labour market, impeding their right to make a living. This exacerbates financial insecurity, widens gender disparities, and further confines women to the private sphere. Lesbian, bisexual, and transgender women face severe threats, including torture, sexual violence, forced marriage, and death. Victims of gender violence, including those who identify as such, lack minimal legal and practical support. Obstacles to healthcare and education have exacerbated poverty and vulnerability among women and girls. In 2023, new discriminatory restrictions imposed by the Taliban included the closure of all beauty salons, blocking women from overseas travel for study, mandating female health workers in some areas to have a male chaperone while travelling or at work, and prohibiting women from entering a famous national park.

The oppressive environment extends to female activists, NGO leaders and journalists. Notable cases include the arrests of women’s rights activists Neda Parwani and Zholia Parsi, the enforced disappearance and subsequent discovery of Manizha Seddiqi in Taliban custody to date, the arrest of Matiullah Wesa, founder of an NGO advocating for girls’ education rights, and the arbitrary detainment of Ahmad Fahim Azimi and Seddiqullah Afghan—both dedicated girls’ education activists, among many others. Journalists reporting on the Taliban, facing arrests and threats, equally illustrate the difficulties encountered by the media, particularly women, when covering crimes against women or advocating for women’s rights. Collectively, these cases underscore the near-total denial of freedom of expression, gender equality, or any other internationally recognized right in Afghanistan under the Taliban.

Amid this growing oppression, segregation and fear, Afghan women human rights defenders have urged the international community to exert greater pressure on the Taliban. They call on international bodies to involve Afghan women in all negotiations with the Taliban and to facilitate direct meetings between women and the de facto authorities to address their concerns. Afghan women have also stressed the importance of advocacy for women’s rights by external actors based on the voices and realities of women inside Afghanistan. They call for coordinated efforts between organisations inside and outside the country to defend the rights of Afghan women and girls.

https://www.omct.org/en/resources/statements/afghanistan-lifting-afghan-women-from-the-shadows-into-the-light-in-the-face-of-the-taliban

The UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan, Richard Bennett, called on the Taliban to release women human rights defenders as the world marks International Women’s Day.

I reiterate my appeal to the Taliban to respect all the human rights of women and girls in Afghanistan, including to education, work, freedom of movement and expression, and their cultural rights, and I urge the meaningful and equal participation of Afghan women and girls in all aspects of public life. I call on the Taliban to immediately and unconditionally release all those who have been arbitrarily detained for defending human rights, especially the rights of women and girls.”

https://www.ohchr.org/en/statements/2024/03/afghanistan-un-expert-calls-taliban-release-women-human-rights-defenders

On 8 March, Civil Rights Defenders presented 4 woman human rights defenders and asked them to share their message to women around the world.

“The future is women.” – International Women’s Day 2024


On International Women’s Day, the a group of NGOs (ALQST for Human Rights, Amnesty International, CIVICUS, European Saudi Organization for Human Rights (ESOHR), Front Line Defenders, Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR), HuMENA for Human Rights and Civic Engagement, International Service for Human Rights (ISHR),MENA Rights Group, Salam for Democracy and Human Rights) renewed their call on Saudi Arabian authorities to release all women human rights defenders (WHRDs), women’s rights activists and their supporters who are detained in contravention of international human rights standards. The organisations further call on Saudi authorities to lift travel bans imposed on WHRDs and their relatives, and to abolish the male guardianship system. [https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/civil-society-reiterates-their-call-on-saudi-authorities-to-release-jailed-womens-rights-activists/]

The President of Georgia awarded severl with mesla of honor: co-founder of “Safari” organization Babutsa Pataraia, human rights defender Ana Arganashvili, founders of “National Network for Protection from Violence”: Eliso Amirejibi and Nato Shavlakadze and founder of “Vedzeb” organization Tamar Museridze.

https://www.interpressnews.ge/en/article/130159-in-connection-with-the-international-womens-day-the-president-awarded-five-female-human-rights-defenders-with-medals-of-honor

a few more addtions:

https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2024-03-08/secretary-generals-remarks-the-observance-of-international-womens-day-delivered

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/indonesia/launch-women-human-rights-defenders-network-indonesia_en

https://www.unwomen.org/en/news-stories/speech/2024/03/speech-be-the-light-that-brings-hope-and-that-accelerates-progress-towards-an-equal-sustainable-and-peaceful-future

https://iucn.org/es/node/40738 [IUCN President and Director General’s Statement on International Women’s Day]

https://havanatimes.org/features/march-8-womens-day-with-less-rights-in-nicaragua/amp

UN Pays Tribute to Pakistan’s Shaista Ikramullah on International Women’s Day
On International Women’s Day 2024, Jamaica's focus is on protecting women and girls

https://bnnbreaking.com/breaking-news/human/global-women-human-rights-defenders-lead-the-charge-for-equality-and-justice

Posted in Amnesty international, Civil Rights Defenders (NGO), FIDH, Human Rights Council, Human Rights Defenders, ISHR, OMCT | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Interview with labour rights defender Prak Pheaktra

January 20, 2024

On 9 January 2024, Global Voices posted an interview with labour rights defender Prak Pheaktra. [This article by Klaing Kimhuoy was originally published by Prachatai, an independent news site in Thailand. An edited version has been republished by Global Voices under a partner content-sharing agreement.]

Despite threats from the Cambodian government, who claim he is damaging the country’s image, 39-year-old Prak Pheaktra, a Cambodian migrant worker-turned-advocate, is striving to help other Cambodian workers facing unfair treatment from their employers.

In 2000, Pheaktra, who is from Pusat province, came to Thailand to find work. His family was facing financial difficulties after the death of his mother, and his father could no longer afford to send him to school. Chasing the promise of better pay and less strenuous work, he decided to come to Thailand.

Pheaktra started out working as a construction worker in Don Mueang province, but he later faced exploitation and abuse from his employer. Once, his employer withheld wages and threatened legal action against him. Having experienced first-hand the unfair treatment and exploitation of migrant workers in Thailand, he became an advocate so he could help other workers get fair treatment in the workplace.

Pheaktra’s dedication led him to become a Khmer-Thai interpreter for the Ministry of Labour of Thailand in from 2018–2019, where he began studying Thai law. After completing his ministry contract, he joined the Labor Rights Promotion Network (LPN) in 2019–2020 as a Complaints Receiving Officer.

Having worked with both government and civil society, he is now working as an independent advocate for migrant workers. He offers assistance to workers dealing with wage issues, pressure from employers, sexual harassment, and other threats — all pro bono. He also uses social media to educate workers on how to legally live and work in Thailand and warn them of exploitation by brokers. He works with NGOs as part of research projects, including one on child exploitation in Phuket and another on labour abuses faced by fishing boat workers.

However, his advocacy has attracted criticism and threats, including from Cambodian officials, who claim he could damage the Cambodian government’s public image. Last February 2023, when he assisted 10 Cambodian workers in Samut Prakan whose employer wasn’t paying them, he faced some questions from the chief of the Labour Attaché Office at the Cambodian Embassy. When he was in Rayong working on another case, he was asked if he knew that what he was doing could affect the public image of the Cambodian government and was threatened with having his passport revoked.

The chief of the Labour Attaché Office threatened to revoke my passport if I continued to engage in activities that negatively impact the public image of the Cambodian government. I said, you can block my passport if you think what I am doing is really wrong. I’m not afraid.

He has also faced threats from Thai officials, who he observed can be biased in favour of employers and accuse him of putting excessive trust in the workers. He gave an example of a particular case he worked on where an inaccurate resolution led to a worker being unfairly blamed.

He suggested the need for greater accuracy within the Ministry of Labour’s processes and expressed frustration at being accused of trusting workers too much. He’s urging a more balanced approach to better serve the rights and interests of migrant workers.

Despite the threats he faces, Phaektra persists. “I love what I’m doing right now, and I will continue to help Cambodian workers no matter what,” he said.

Those who have worked with Phaektra described him as kind and dedicated. Prum Somnang, a Cambodian worker at a plastic bag factory, was assisted by Phaektra after being abruptly dismissed by her Thai employer, citing lack of work. Somnang had worked there for ten years and was laid off along with 40 other workers. Her employer wanted to sue her, she said, because she started a protest against the layoff. At the same time, her visa was expiring in seven days, and she needed to find a new job within the week. Her friend advised her to seek help from Pheatra.

“He’s very kind. He helped me get money back from the employer and even assisted me in finding a new job before my visa expired,” Somnang said…

Pheaktra said that one key concern about the lives of migrant workers in Thailand is the risk of falling victim to scams orchestrated by middlemen or company representatives when filing documents. Pheaktra emphasized the need for workers to take charge of their documentation to prevent such scams.

Looking ahead, Pheaktra expressed a commitment to continue social work aimed at assisting migrant workers. Despite the presence of numerous NGOs and institutions offering help, some workers hesitate to seek assistance directly due to concerns about influential individuals associated with these organizations. Pheaktra sees himself as an advocate for migrant workers, standing by their side and addressing their problems.

https://globalvoices.org/2024/01/09/advocate-for-migrant-rights-persists-despite-threats-from-thai-and-cambodian-officials/

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Why tech companies can no longer ignore their role in shaping politics and society

April 25, 2023
A small portrait of Olga Solovyeva

Olga Solovyeva of Advox, a Global Voices project dedicated to protecting freedom of expression online, posted on 19 April 2023 a piece statign that the impact of technology on politics cannot be ignored anymore. It is a long piece that I copy in its totality as it is worth reading and of great rlevance for human rights defenders:

Amidst the rising influence of technology in global politics, particularly in authoritarian regimes, the imperative to acknowledge the political accountability of tech corporations has become increasingly apparent. In recent years, the ramifications of disregarding ethical practices underscore the urgent need for tech companies to prioritize responsible conduct. The manipulation of information online, traffic rerouting, restricting access to the internet, and operating surveillance are some examples of how states can misuse technology. While technology was once expected to become a symbol of resistance and liberation, illiberal regimes now use it to produce various forms of digital unfreedom that extend into material reality. But how do we ensure that Big Tech contributes to democratic practices rather than political oppression?

Why do tech companies have political responsibility?

In an innovation driven sector like technology, legislation cannot keep pace with new developments. Often, neither users nor makers consider the negative consequences of a new technology until they have experienced them, and the industry is left struggling with the ramifications of harm and, as a consequence, its own expanding responsibilities.

In recent years, Big Tech companies have made headlines more often for political events than industry ones. First, the revelations of Cambridge Analytica’s user data harvesting and consequent interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential elections brought public attention to the issues of uncontrolled data collection. However, even since the issues have been flagged up, social networking sites fail to remove mis/disinformation or take action against incidents of violence. Further public discussion questioned social media providers for neglecting the impact of algorithmic feeds on teenagers and young adults, contributing to the mental health epidemic marching through the world. Tech companies are directly involved in international politics, as in Myanmar, where Facebook became the synonym for the internet and eventually a key platform to fuel hatred and incite genocide. There is also the case of Pegasus, an elaborate surveillance software developed by the Israel-based NSO Group, which was used to spy on political activists worldwide.

Digital activists from Global Voices Advox report on the growing use of digital technology for advancing authoritarian regimes worldwide, focusing, among others, on issues such as surveillance, mis/disinformation and access to the internet in different contexts. Autocrats use the whole scale of digital technologies available. In Russia, where the interest of the state lies in keeping opposition views from the information environment, there is a strong emphasis on disinformation and censorship. Tanzania and Sudan are known for internet shutdowns, while in Turkey and Morocco, cases of public digital surveillance have become more common.

At the same time, the tech sector does not necessarily play on the dark side only. Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Elon Musk’s SpaceX continued to support Starlink and provide internet access in Ukraine after the Russian invasion disrupted services. And yet, his recent purchase of Twitter brought multiple controversies, further empowering the attention economy of social media, which leads to fragmentation, polarisation and the decline of the public sphere. It’s impossible to separate tech companies from politics, and their role tends to cause controversy.

Good apple, bad apple

If you’re reading this text from your MacBook or iPhone, you probably have recognized the difference between living in a new information space with much less targeted advertising. In February 2022, Apple introduced its new privacy features allowing users to enable or block personal data tracing from the apps installed on the company’s devices, an innovation with significant political, social and economic consequences.

It’s crucial to understand the business decision that underpins the ongoing debate on personal data ethics and regulation. Protecting Apple users’ personal data means they will not be targeted with personally crafted advertising, and their data will not be used to predict consumer behaviour, which enables users’ right to privacy — one of the central categories of online service providers’ moral responsibilities and, essentially, a human right. This guarantee of the right attracts consumers to Apple products.

At the same time, this architectural decision caused significant distress to the market, as the stock prices of Meta and other social media companies plunged that day. Introducing an opt-out particularly for personal data collection means shrinking their potential advertising revenues as less data becomes available to develop personalized ads.

Apple made a policy-level decision, a milestone in the discussion on issues of user privacy regulation. Effectively, it is a subject of government concern on the intersection of information and business ethics, law and policy. This case illustrates the power of one company, which can be not just a game changer in the conversation on tech regulation but a shock for the industry, pushing other businesses to shift their business models and challenge the dynamics of Big Tech.

What is this decision for Apple? An enactment of an ethical stand signalling its political responsibility? An act of an excellent corporate citizen innovating to enable its customers’ rights for privacy? Or is it a marketing move to boost the sale of Apple products through engaging in a non-market activity? Regardless of the motivation, we have witnessed a tech company making a political change on an international level, since Apple products are in demand and sold worldwide.

At the same time, the company engages in other activities that may be seen as controversial. Along with other Big Tech companies, Apple increased its lobbying spending in 2022 as businesses face increased pressure from lawmakers raising antitrust concerns to curb the power of tech giants. Meanwhile, stepping outside the liberal democratic political climate, Apple faces decisions that challenge its political stand. In 2021 the company confirmed storing all personal data of Chinese users inside China-based data centres. China is known for using surveillance as a tool for political prosecution. Even though Apple claimed to maintain a high level of security, journalist sources report that the company handed over the keys to the government. The same year, Apple removed a smart voting app, one of the tools developed by the opposition in Russia to outplay electoral fraud. In both cases, the company’s decision-making had severe and direct political consequences, just like the decision to block personal data tracing on its devices. The only difference was the kind of pressure put on a company by the political system it was operating in.

Where does the political responsibility of Big Tech end?

In 2022 the world saw the global expansion of authoritarian rule, affecting developing states and established democracies. According to the 2022 Freedom House report, only 20 percent of the earth’s population live in a free country, while the remaining 80 percent are equally split between a partially free and not free world. The world is getting more authoritarian, and the political regime of a liberal democracy today is the exception rather than the rule.

Different autocracies pose challenging obstacles to tech companies, which remain the key producers of innovative technology. The role of the state defines the potential expectations of business, and their relationship patterns. In autocracies, political participation and public deliberation face repression through state authorities, and business is shaped by a political economy with the elements of state intervention. The state prevails, and it has more direct control over the company when needed, and the interference in economic life is ordinary and unpredictable. Autocrats are famous for censorship, propaganda, and interventions in electoral systems, all of which are delivered by technology provided by business.

One of the most common examples could be the situation in which a business organization has to obey the law of an authoritarian state to maintain political legitimacy, while the law itself may undermine the moral legitimacy of the company. The case of Apple in China is an example of this. However, it can have different consequences for companies in other countries. For instance, Verizon (the subsidiary that bought out Yahoo! in 2017) was sued for handing data to the Chinese government that led to political prosecution and the torture of dissidents. In authoritarian regimes, legislation is often designed to set out the specific requirements and processes for government agencies to obtain access to personal data, including surveillance purposes. Even though data handovers upon the request, e.g., the subpoena, are common for democratic regimes as well, the difference is how such data is further used and whether there are grounds for balancing it out with other institutional procedures.

Elaborating on the political responsibility of Big Tech

As the intersection of technology and politics continues to expand, grappling with the political implications of new creations becomes imperative for tech innovators. They must take proactive steps to develop robust political responsibility strategies while navigating authoritarian and other ethically fraught environments. Transparency is one way to meet these goals.

The practice of environmental social and governance (ESG) reporting and disclosure on ESG issues is an excellent example of how mandated transparency has led to accountability, and one that can be adapted to technological innovation. Openly revealing who has bought a certain technology will limit the ability of authoritarian governments to abuse it, for example. Additionally, integrating political responsibility as a part of responsible investment portfolios could represent a meaningful step forward to starting an open dialogue about tech, politics and society. This could be done by disclosing on direct political engagement of companies and adding additional transparency about contexts in which business operates.

Yet, such openness would be even more problematic — and potentially impossible — for tech companies that have been developed within the borders and hence the jurisdiction of authoritarian regimes. One of the most illustrative examples is the case of Yandex, a multinational company headquartered in Russia. The company has grown into a major tech player, often referred to as the “Russian Google.” Despite making an occasional compromise with the political system, the company kept the reputation of the most liberal company in the country while showing steady business growth.

However, when Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Yandex faced significant pressure, legislative restrictions, international sanctions and criticism from the public. From the first weeks of the war, YandexNews, daily visited by 40 million people, has been indexing only stories from state-owned media, amplifying the narratives of the “special operation.” Abiding by the law became equivalent to contributing to univocal media coverage dominated by the Russian state.

The war became the most significant trigger that affected the company, as the share price of this prominent business lost over 75 percent of its value. Many company employees, including top management, resigned or left the country in protest of the war led by Russia. Personal sanctions were applied to the company’s CEO and founder. Under pressure, the company sold their media assets to a holding loyal to the state. In December, the company’s founder left Yandex Russia but remained the key shareholder.

Scenarios like these establish a controversial ground for businesses that must come to terms with an authoritarian state’s rules to keep their business going. Albert Hirshman’s “Exit, Voice, Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations and States” suggests a framework of three strategies for responding to the perceived decrease in performance of an organization or a state. Using it as a guide to an organizational strategy, a tech company facing authoritarianism could leave, protest or comply.  However, as the suppression of public dissent usually characterizes authoritarianism, realistically, only two strategies are left: to stay or to go.

Nevertheless, both strategies bring further ethical concerns. With a lot said about the downsides of collaborating with autocrats, how ethical is it towards the employees and customers for a business to leave the declining state? Moreover, the business remains a profit-generating enterprise first of all, and very few countries in the world would make a market for a product so the company’s leadership could keep to the standard of political responsibility. We can’t all live in Norway, after all.

As the influence of tech companies continues to grow, it falls to civil society, journalists, tech users, and watchdog organisations to keep these firms accountable. Demanding transparency and collaborating to come up with new fair policies that could support tech companies in tough contexts could be one way forward. Meanwhile, it is important to educate the public and create incentives for consuming tech other than instant gratification. By working together, these stakeholders can start shaping a more ethical tech landscape, where common good carries more weight than corporate interest.

Why tech companies can no longer ignore their role in shaping politics and society

Posted in Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Portraits of disappeared defenders paraded in Bangkok

September 14, 2022

This article – originally published by Prachatai, an independent news site in Thailand – was republished by Global Voices on 5 September 2022

To mark International Day of the Disappeared on August 30, a dozen people affiliated with the Mok Luang Rim Nam student activist group gathered at Ratchaprasong Intersection in downtown Bangkok. A small parade was held by activists in Siam Square to raise awareness about forced disappearances. The marchers carried portraits of abducted activists, some of whom were later found dead.

The group carried photos of Porlajee Rakchongcharoen, Surachai Danwattananusorn, Wanchalearm Satsaksit, and Siam Theerawut — Thai victims of forced disappearance. Hanging photos of the victims around their necks, some covered their heads with plastic bags in imitation of a suffocation torture technique.

Porlajee Rakchongcharoen is a Karen environmental activist last seen in April 2014 in the custody of Kaeng Krachan National Park officials in Phetchaburi province. [see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/08/22/karen-activist-porlajee-billy-rakchongcharoens-murder-finally-an-indictment/]

Surachai Danwattananusorn, a veteran activist who fled the country after the 2014 coup, disappeared in December 2018 in a neighboring country, and his dead body was later found at the Thai-Laos border. Siam Theerawut also fled in 2014 and was arrested by Vietnamese authorities in 2019 before his reported extradition to Thailand. His whereabouts are still unknown.

Speaking on the occasion, activist Tanruthai Thaenrut said that the group wanted to raise awareness about forced disappearances, to tell people that the government is ignoring these disappearances and silencing the people to make disappearance seem normal.

A 2020 report by the UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances estimates there are at least 75 victims of enforced disappearance in Thailand .

Uniformed police were seen standing guard at the National Police Headquarters on the way to Siam Square. Plainclothes police were reportedly taking photographs of event participants before the event started. When they reached their destination, the Superintendent of Pathumwan police station arrived with other police officers, to quietly monitor the situation.

During the gathering, activists staged a performance symbolizing an abduction. One of the participants placed a black bag over Tanruthai’s head while she was giving a speech. Two others then carried her away while other activists shouted, “Free our friends.”

Mint, a Thai traditional dancer-turned-activist who participated in the march, said that the performance signified that anyone could become a victim of forced disappearance. She noted that human rights lawyer Somchai Neelapaijit was abducted in the middle of Bangkok, and added that the fates of most people who disappeared remain unknown

Portraits of disappeared activists paraded in downtown Bangkok

Posted in Human Rights Defenders | 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

The Unfreedom Monitor: Global Voices adds to the monitoring toolbox

April 5, 2022

On 5 April 2022 Nanjala Nyabola, Advox Director at Global Voices introduced The Unfreedom Monitor, a methodology for tracking digital authoritarianism worldwide

The Unfreedom Monitor is an Advox research initiative that examines the growing phenomenon of networked authoritarianism or digital authoritarianism. “Digital authoritarianism” describes the use of technology to advance repressive political interests. It is not purely confined to authoritarian regimes. Democratic states also use and sell advanced technology to track and/or surveil citizens, spread mis-/disinformation, and disempower citizens’ civic and political participation. Nor is it only states that perpetrate digital authoritarianism—corporations located in democratic countries are key suppliers of the technology that is used. 

The Unfreedom Monitor

Authoritarian regimes have long had a complicated relationship with media and communications technologies. The Unfreedom Monitor is a Global Voices Advox research initiative examining the growing phenomenon of networked authoritarianism or digital authoritarianism.

Download a PDF of the briefing document.

..One major aim of this project is to provide richer context that transcends unique national or thematic situations. It would be an omission to focus solely on the internet and ignore, for example, the effects of the mechanisms of growing repression on press freedom and human rights. In the countries we studied, we found a strong correlation between declining press freedom and growing digital authoritarianism. Information, after all, is the raw material of governance, and both online spaces and traditional media serve the important function of making information available to people and communities to enable them to make independent evaluations of their governments. The impetus to control information on the internet is directly connected to the impetus to control information shared by the press. 

The briefing document provides an overview of key developments in digital authoritarianism in 11 countries and explains the theoretical framework and methodology behind The Unfreedom Monitor project. The document also provides a basis for expanding this research to other countries to deepen our understanding of digital authoritarianism globally, as well as its crucial implications for the future. The preliminary sample of 11 countries was chosen to reflect a range of factors: system of government, approach to human rights (including rankings in indexes), and corporate relations. The countries are: Brazil, Ecuador, Egypt, India, Morocco, Myanmar, Russia, Sudan, Tanzania, Turkey, and Zimbabwe.  

Desk research supplemented qualitative study of a dataset comprising media items exploring issues, events, actors, narrative frames, and responses, to identify trends and patterns of digital authoritarianism. We also conducted weekly seminars with the research team to gain a sense of any cross-cutting themes and commonalities that emerged. One interesting outcome was finding that while clients and their interests may be varied, only a handful of companies—many based in nominally democratic countries—were selling the technology that makes some digital authoritarian practices possible.

Another four researchers also worked with four cross-cutting themes concerning digital authoritarianism to develop an approach that can be used across contexts. These themes were: data governance, speech, access, and information. The tendency with internet research is to think about ideas or development in thematic isolation, and we encouraged this cohort of researchers to think both broadly and deeply about what unites all these separate ideas. 

The report finds that digital authoritarianism is not confined to authoritarian states. Rather, it is a culture—of increasing executive power, legislation, and global capital flows—that allows the state to interfere in citizens’ lives and to stifle or frustrate civic engagement. There is no single predictive factor, but digital authoritarianism is closely related to the contraction of press freedom, and resistance to political transitions. Moreover, it is a transnational process, and the availability of technology in one part of the world will eventually have political consequences in another.

This adds to existing efforts such as: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2021/10/12/report-freedom-on-the-net-2021/

https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2021/04/24/world-press-freedom-index-2021-is-out/

https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2021/12/26/to-counter-domestic-extremism-human-rights-first-launches-pyrra/

https://globalvoices.org/2022/04/05/introducing-the-unfreedom-monitor-a-new-project-of-global-voices-advox/

Posted in Human Rights Defenders | 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , ,

International Women’s Day 2022

March 8, 2022

International Women’s Day is today 8 March and celebratory events are being held around the world. This year’s theme is #BreakTheBias, aimed at imagining “a world free of bias, stereotypes, and discrimination.” While this special day offers hope for gender equity, it is also a reminder of the omnipresent phenomenon of violence against women, which exists regardless of the day, and needs to be addressed in a fundamental way.

See also: https://www.humanrightscareers.com/issues/why-international-womens-day-is-important/

There is too much to choose from (as usual); for last year’s see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2021/03/08/celebrating-international-womens-day-in-2021/]

Still, here some concrete samples:

Upasana Rana reports Global Voices of 7 March on Nepal [https://globalvoices.org/2022/03/07/this-international-womens-day-lets-come-together-against-violence/]

On the same site Njeri Wangari tells us about how Feminist music icons from around Africa to celebrate this International Women’s Day. See her Spotify playlist with hits from artists like Fatoumata Diawara, Cesária Évora, Shishani Vranckx, Thandiswa Mazwai, and more.

Amnesty International issued a statement “International Women’s Day: Dramatic deterioration in respect for women’s rights and gender equality must be decisively reversed“

  • Alarming assaults on women’s rights around the world in 2021/22. 
  • Legal protections dismantled, and women human rights defenders now at unprecedented risk.
  • Protection and promotion of women’s and girls’ rights and support for women human rights defenders crucial, including for Covid-19 recovery. 
  • Governments must act decisively to reverse regressions and uphold human rights for women and girls. 

Catastrophic attacks on human rights and gender equality over the past twelve months have lowered protection for and upped threats against women and girls across the globe.  On International Women’s Day, the organization called for bold action to reverse erosions of human rights for women and girls.   

 “Events in 2021 and in the early months of 2022 have conspired to crush the rights and dignity of millions of women and girls.  The world’s crises do not impact equally, let alone fairly. The disproportionate impacts on women’s and girls’ rights are well-documented yet still neglected, when not ignored outright.  But the facts are clear. The Covid-19 pandemic, the overwhelming rollback on women’s rights in Afghanistan, the widespread sexual violence characterizing the conflict in Ethiopia, attacks on abortion access in the US and Turkey’s withdrawal from the landmark Istanbul Convention on Gender Based Violence: each is a grave erosion of rights in its own terms but taken together? We must stand up to and stare down this global assault on women’s and girls’ dignity,” said Amnesty’s Secretary General, Agnès Callamard. [see https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/03/international-womens-day-dramatic-deterioration-in-respect-for-womens-rights-and-gender-equality-must-be-decisively-reversed/]

Human Rights Watch focuses on Afghanistan: On International Women’s Day, we should remember Afghanistan, and consider what the state of women’s rights there means for the struggle for gender equality worldwide. The Taliban were notorious for violating women’s rights when they ruled Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. So, when the Taliban took control of Afghanistan again on August 15 last year, Afghan women’s rights defenders were deeply skeptical that the new rulers would be any different from the Taliban that controlled the country before, despite their pledges to respect women’s rights. They were right.

In less than seven months since taking over, the Taliban have:

  • closed most girls’ secondary schools;
  • created barriers to women and girls pursuing higher education;
  • banned women from most paid employment;
  • abolished the Ministry of Women’s Affairs;
  • restricted women’s movement including blocking them from leaving the country alone;
  • dismantled Afghanistan’s system that provided protection from gender-based violence;
  • created barriers to women and girls accessing health care;
  • beaten and abducted women’s rights protesters;
  • silenced female journalists;
  • banned women’s sports; and
  • appointed a men-only administration.

Afghanistan is not the only country where women’s rights are under attack this International Women’s Day. But the speed and extent of the obliteration of women’s rights in Afghanistan is a warning to women around the world about the fragility of progress toward equality, how quickly it can vanish, and how few will defend it. We should all be in solidarity with Afghan women; their fight is a fight for women’s rights everywhere. [See: https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/03/08/standing-afghan-women-and-girls-international-womens-day]

Caitlin Fitzsimmons in the Sydney Morning Herald of 6 March argues that “International Women’s Day highlights climate justice as a feminist issue”. Women are on the front lines of the global climate crisis, making up 80 per cent of the 21.5 million people displaced every year by climate-related events. [See: https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/international-women-s-day-highlights-climate-justice-as-a-feminist-issue-20220303-p5a1ba.html]

On International Women’s Day, UN Human Rights stands with women and girls human rights defenders of all ages, backgrounds & identities leading our collective struggle to protect our climate and environment. See.g.:

Meet Brianna Frueran, a Pacific climate change activist fighting for her native Samoan islands’ survival.

Meet Mya Pol, a content creator from the United States who advocates for disability rights and educates people about environmentalism on her social media platform.

https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/03/1113872

Posted in Amnesty international, films, HRW, Human Rights Defenders, UN | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Even simply remembering Kem Ley is forbidden in Cambodia

July 16, 2020

Cambodia continues to block memorial activities honoring murdered political analyst Kem Ley [See: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/07/12/third-anniversary-kem-ley-murder-cambodia-impunity/]

Individuals and groups were blocked by police and local authorities in Cambodia from holding activities commemorating the fourth anniversary of the death of political analyst Kem Ley.

Kem Ley was killed at a gas station on July 10, 2016. Many suspect the murder was linked to his work as a commentator and political analyst. He was murdered days after he gave a radio interview about a Global Witness report detailing corruption under the Hun Sen government, which has ruled the country since 1985.

On July 8, a group of monks and young activists were prevented by police from holding a memorial service at the gas station where the late analyst was killed. They were forced instead to hold their prayers on a sidewalk more than 100 meters from the site.

A young man wearing a shirt with Kem Ley’s face printed on it was arrested that day. The next day, a group of youth leaders were blocked by security forces from travelling to Kem Ley’s family home in Takeo.

Another convoy of monks and activists was blocked on July 10. But supporters of the slain commentator continued to honor him by embarking on a march of several kilometers. Chheang Sinath, a tuk-tuk (three-wheeled vehicle) driver and member of the Independent Democracy of Informal Economy Association, criticized authorities’ actions in an interview with VOD news:

We just came to participate and show respect. Just participating and remembering [Kem Ley’s] sacrifice for society is seen as a wrongdoing [by authorities]. This is not appropriate unless we hold a demonstration or protest something. This is just a ceremony to pay gratitude to him, but authorities tried to stop us.

Venerable Bo Bet, a monk from a Phnom Penh pagoda, expressed frustration that his group of 10 monks was not allowed to pay respects to Kem Ley:

We want to pay respects at the place he was killed, and we will also hold ceremonies at other places. We come here and want to burn incense. We want to hold funeral rites at the site. We want to remember his good deeds here because we do this only once a year.

Kem Ley’s wife and kids were forced to seek asylum in Australia after his death. Bou Rachana thanked supporters of her late husband for their efforts.

See also; https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2020/06/17/swedens-aid-to-cambodia-refocuses-on-civil-society/

https://globalvoices.org/2020/07/15/cambodia-continues-to-block-memorial-activities-honoring-murdered-analyst-kem-ley/

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Defenders | 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , , ,

Ali Gharavi of the “#Istanbul10” speaks about his experience and his hope

May 6, 2020

Ali Gharavi is a consultant working with human rights defenders, their organisations and communities. He is one of ten people who were arrested in Turkey in July 2017 at an information management and well-being workshop on Buyukada island. The hashtag #Istanbul10 was used in the sustained advocacy efforts that called for the dropping of all charges against them and their immediate release. [see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2020/02/16/turkey-who-will-defend-the-human-rights-defenders/]

In March 2020, ahead of an anticipated – but since postponed – verdict hearing, Ali spoke with IFEX Regional Editor Cathal Sheerin about how his experience being arrested in Turkey and jailed for four months has affected his life and informed his work. “While I breathe, I hope: In conversation with Ali Gharavi of the #Istanbul10″ (interview published through a partnership between Global Voices and IFEX).

Ali Gharavi. Credit Annie Game
CS: How do you feel about the upcoming hearing? I feel a combination of anticipation and anxiety. It’s been a roller coaster of emotions over the last almost three years and the verdict was supposed to have been reached at the last hearing. In terms of realistic outcomes, we’ve talked about two or three possibilities with our families, lawyers and the authorities in Sweden. I’ve been trying to keep my wits about me and not putting all my eggs in one basket, but we’re pretty optimistic that the outcome could be acquittal.

What makes you optimistic for acquittal? I’m only nominally optimistic really because these things can turn on a dime. At the hearing before the last one, the prosecutor said that – of the ten of us plus Taner Kılıç – he would accept acquittal for five because of lack of evidence, but the rest he wanted to convict. I was in the acquittal group. All of us are quite adamant, however, about not having this ‘split’ decision.

Why do you think you were divided into two groups? It’s really hard to say. Two of us in the acquittal group – Peter Steudtner and I – are not Turkish, so it’s possible that they want to remove the international angle from all of this. However, that’s just my speculation. It’s actually quite arbitrary, and I think this is partly because they have no evidence. It might even be a way to ramp this down: Let’s acquit half of them now and then acquit the rest in a trickle.

…..
How aware were you when you were detained of the advocacy that was taking place on your behalf? What impact did it have on your morale? Maintaining my morale was one of the biggest challenges for me. I was held at four different sites. At one point, they transferred us to the anti-terrorism headquarters for interrogation, which sounds like – and was – quite a harrowing experience. ……

I’ve done letter-writing campaigns in the past, and I never knew for sure if they had any effect on the people who were in jail, but having been on the inside, I can say that those moments were life-saving. Sometimes my lawyer would search for my name on Twitter and print out all the tweets that had been posted that week about me; there was also this Twitter campaign, #haikusforAli, and demonstrations in Brussels, sit-ins in front of embassies. All of those moments reminded me that people on the outside were thinking of me and mobilising. I’m not exaggerating when I say that those were the things that saved me when I was in the depths of an abyss.

How has the experience affected how you work?  The kind of work I’d been doing was intended exactly for this kind of situation, where you need to pay attention to the whole person, not just their devices or the organisation’s activities. Because of my incarceration, I now understand that at a molecular level. For me, the whole experience has placed a higher premium on understanding people – who they are, where they are – as a big part of how we can actually help them regardless of whichever aspect of their work we’re trying to assist them with. One thing the experience revealed was how inadequately resourced and researched care and crisis response is: how do you care for not just the person incarcerated, but also his family, the community around him, his colleagues?

Once the crisis is ‘over’ the assumption is that life goes on as usual, whereas there’s actually recovery that needs to be done. Often there’s also a massive financial burden due to legal costs and the inability to work for a while. After my release I went to Berlin and arrived into a very supportive debriefing environment. It’s a very privileged situation to be in – those ten days were very helpful in making me understand that I’d be going through this trauma and recovery and that it’s not just business as usual. There was a crowd-funder created for me so that I didn’t just have to drop back into work, and there was physical and psychological therapy too. I knew it intellectually, but now I know it viscerally, that just because you get released the trauma doesn’t just go away. It takes years to be functional again. People assume that when you recover you’re going to go back to being who you were, but that’s not true.

Would you ever return to Turkey? It would be very difficult for me to feel safe there, but I would go, if only in order to ‘get back on the horse’. If the verdict doesn’t go the way we expect, then I’d be incarcerated if I turned up there, so I obviously wouldn’t return. I love Turkey – the people and the environment – and I feel like a big part of my life and friends is now off-limits to me. But I dream of when I’ll be able to go back, hug the people who were inside with me and eat baklava with them. As Cicero said: ‘While I breathe, I hope.’

The humanity of what I experienced in detention was humbling. Regardless of why those people were incarcerated with me, they – that young 19-year-old who spoke to me in German, and others – were an amazing source of inspiration and support. During the toughest times I’d be angry with them, but they were amazingly unwavering. I’ve heard via word of mouth that those two supposed ISIS members are now back with their families and all is well. I owe them a big debt of gratitude.

Most of the time I was incarcerated alongside political prisoners who faced trial on specious charges, or who had been (and continue to be) detained for years on end as they wait for an indictment. And now we hear that despite the mortal threat of COVID-19 sweeping through the prison system, those prisoners will stay behind bars.

[see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2020/03/20/corona-virus-threatens-human-rights-defenders-in-detention-egypt-and-turkey/]

‘While I breathe, I hope’: In conversation with Ali Gharavi of the #Istanbul10

While I breathe, I hope: In conversation with Ali Gharavi of the #Istanbul10

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Defenders | 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

UAE finally free Osama al-Najjar after detaining more than five years.

August 9, 2019

Osama Al-Najjar remained in detention, despite completing his jail sentence. Photo Credit: activist’s Twitter account

On 9 August 2019 Global Voices reports that the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have freed activist and political prisoner Osama al-Najjar after detaining him for more than five years. [see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/06/13/political-prisoners-in-the-emirats-are-detained-indefinitely-even-after-release-date/]

”Two other detainees, Badr al-Bahri and Othman al-Shehi, whose initial sentences expired in April 2017 and July 2018 respectively, have also been freed”, the International Campaign for Freedom in the UAE (ICFUAE) said in a statement. Al-Bahri and al-Shehi were arrested over their links to al-Islah, which was a legally registered Islamist political movement in the UAE before it was banned by authorities in 2014.

Many political prisoners remain in detention in the UAE, despite repeated calls from human rights groups for their release. Prominent human rights defender Ahmed Mansoor is currently serving a ten-year jail sentence over comments he posted online. Prior to his arrest in March 2017, he campaigned online on behalf of jailed activists in the UAE, including Osama al-Najjar. Academic Nasser Bin Ghaith is also serving a ten-year jail sentence over tweets critical of the UAE authorities. [see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/ahmed-mansoor/]

UAE frees activist Osama al-Najjar after 5 years in detention

Posted in Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

« Older posts