Repressive governments are using different and increasingly ‘indirect’ means to silence human rights defenders. Intimidation, administrative restrictions, fiscal regulations aimed at reducing funding, terminating rental agreements, judicial harassment, etc. According to a report by Human Rights Watch of 14 August 2013, Rwanda is practicing a slightly different tactic: wholesale infiltration and ‘take over’ of independent NGOs.
Posts Tagged ‘HRW’
Takeover of human rights NGO: a weapon in the arsenal of Rwanda’s Government
August 22, 2013Ecuador: Clampdown on Civil Society | Human Rights Watch
August 13, 2013On 12 August Human Rights Watch issued a report on Ecuador and urged it to revoke a presidential decree that grants far-reaching powers to the government to oversee and dissolve nongovernmental organizations.
On June 4, 2013, President Rafael Correa adopted a decree [a similar decree in December 2010 was shelved after criticism] that creates new procedures for Ecuadorean nongovernmental organizations to obtain legal status and requires international organizations to undergo a screening process to seek permission to work in Ecuador. Read the rest of this entry »
Snowden gets one year asylum – Kenneth Ross makes good suggestion
August 2, 2013
In the ongoing saga concerning the asylum request by Snowden, Kenneth Ross, the director of Human Rights Watch, makes on 2 August an interesting and courageous comment on Twitter: “Instead of trying to extradite Snowden, Congress should ask him to testify by video as spur to end mass NSA snooping.”
Egyptian NGO bill with big shortcomings in crucial last phase
May 31, 2013
(Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi)
In the context of restrictive legislation to hinder the work of human rights defenders, the Egyptian case deserves urgent attention now. The law on NGOs is being rewritten in this important country and others in the region may follow the example. Despite recent amendments Read the rest of this entry »
Egyptian HRD and MEA Nominee, Mona Seif, under attack
May 3, 2013As readers of this blog know I would have readily reported on any developments surrounding the MEA especially since the Final Nominees 2013 were announced recently. A few days ago a controversy arose around the nomination of Mona Seif, the courageous Egyptian human rights defender who was selected because of her campaign against military trials for civilians. UN Watch, an NGO affiliated to the American Jewish Committee, and famous for its strident monitoring of anything that smacks of criticism of Israel, accused Mona Seif of being a terrorist sympathizer on the basis of 3 older tweets in which she strongly defended the right of Palestinians to resist Israeli occupation. The organisation started a twitter campaign to have Mona recalled as nominee.
Mona Seif, Egypt – Final Nominee MEA 2013
The problem is that I am – in a personal capacity – the Chair of the Jury which is composed of ten of the world’s leading human rights NGOs (see list http://www.martinennalsaward.org). I am a non-voting chair whose only role is to facilitate the process and I do not participate in the selection. The board of the Martin Ennals Foundation also has no role in the selection as the Statutes provide for a fully independent Jury. Only the NGOs on the Jury can vote on the recipient of the MEA. Still, I feel that my capacity of Chair of the Jury obliges me to show restraint in speaking out.
Human Rights Watch urges EU to stand up for human rights in China during Ashton’s visit today
April 25, 2013(EU) High Representative Catherine Ashton should publicly raise concerns over ongoing and persistent human rights violations in China when she visits Beijing, said Human Rights Watch. “As EU’s top foreign policy official, Ashton cannot ignore the deteriorating human rights environment in China,” said Lotte Leicht, European Union advocacy director. “She needs to make it a central part of her agenda in Beijing.” Ashton should also urge top Chinese officials to stop obstructing Security Council action on Syria, including humanitarian access to all civilians in need, and referring jurisdiction over war crimes and crimes against humanity to the International Criminal Court.
In recent months the EU has issued strong statements, including ones at the United Nations Human Rights Council, on China’s use of the death penalty and the crisis of self-immolations in Tibet, among other issues.
The EU also provides some support to human rights defenders in China…..Yet, the EU’s engagement on human rights in China has been extremely weak since Ashton was nominated as the EU’s first foreign policy chief. The more than thirty rounds of the official EU-China dialogue on human rights have had little discernible positive effect for those standing up for human rights in China, and at other levels of political dialogue the EU has failed to give human rights and the rule of law a degree of public attention commensurate with the importance of these issues in China…
…Although the new Chinese leadership has expressed rhetorical support for reform on some key human rights concerns, such as re-education through labor, abuses remain rampant throughout the country. The Chinese government denies people the full exercise of basic rights such as freedom of expression, association, and religion, and systematically suppresses dissidents and human rights activists…
“Ashton should be prepared to tell her Chinese government interlocutors who speak of the need for reform that a good start would be freeing Liu Xiaobo and lifting the appalling and abusive house arrest imposed on Liu Xia,” said Leicht.
Even the new leadership’s commitment to robustly grappling with rampant corruption – identified as a high priority – is already being called into question. In early April, eight activists were arrested for their involvement in a grass-roots anti-corruption campaign.
China: EU Commitments Demand Tough Response | Human Rights Watch.
Defamation charges against Hall will chill labor rights in Thailand says Human Rights Watch
April 11, 2013Proceedings in this case, brought by a fruit processing company before the South Bangkok criminal court, are scheduled for today April 11, 2013. The charges stem from a defamation complaint filed on February 14 by the Natural Fruit Company Limited against Andy Hall for an investigative report about serious labor rights violations at the company’s factory in Prachaub Kirikhan province. If convicted, Hall faces up to two years in prison. He is also facing civil damages of 300 million baht (US$10 million).“Criminal charges against Andy Hall reflect an attempt to stifle serious reporting on alleged abuses by one of Thailand’s top fruit processors,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Freedom to investigate abuses by corporations is critical to ensure compliance and accountability under Thai law and human rights standards.” The Natural Fruit Company, using a workforce comprised primarily of migrant workers from Burma, asserted that Hall defamed and damaged the company by “broadcasting false statements to public media.”
Hall’s report, “Cheap has a high price: Responsibility problems relating to international private label products and food production in Thailand,” researched and written with the Finnish nongovernmental organization FinnWatch, investigated the production practices of private label juices and fruit sold in Finland, including by Natural Fruit Company Limited. The report alleged that Natural Fruit Company Limited had committed serious labor rights abuses, including poor working conditions, unlawfully low wages, confiscation of workers’ official documents, use of child labor, and excessive overtime. Human Rights Watch, along with an increasing number of states and international authorities, believes that criminal defamation laws should be abolished, as criminal penalties are always disproportionate punishments for reputational harm and infringe on free expression. Criminal defamation laws are open to easy abuse, resulting in very harsh consequences, including imprisonment. As repeal of criminal defamation laws in an increasing number of countries shows, such laws are not necessary for the purpose of protecting reputations. “The prosecution of Andy Hall strikes at the very core of efforts by human rights defenders to end pervasive abuses of workers in Thailand’s export industry,” Adams said. “International companies sourcing from Thailand should raise concerns with the government that using criminal charges to silence rights critics could adversely affect the overall reputation of Thailand’s major export sectors. The Thai government should welcome efforts to protect worker’s rights, not penalize them.”
via Thailand: Defamation Charges Chill Labor Rights Inquiries | Human Rights Watch.
Human Rights Watch Film Festival London starts today
March 13, 2013
This edition will show 19 films covering 16 countries featuring prominently the role of human rights defenders. From 13 to 22 March 2013.
For info an tickets: ff.hrw.org
This also happened in Venezuela: Sabino Romero Izarra did not die but was murdered
March 6, 2013
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, Vice President Nicolas Maduro (right) and National assembly president Diosdado Cabello (left), on December 8, 2012. © 2012 Reuters
While all attention understandably is on the death of the Venezuelan President Hugo Chaves, indigenous rights defender Mr Sabino Romero Izarra was shot and killed while travelling on a road in the Sierra de Perijá, Zulia State on 3 March 2013. His wife survived but sustained injuries as a result of the attack. Sabino Romero Izarra was a prominent defender of the rights of the indigenous Yukpa community, including peacefully campaigning and mobilising against the expansion of large-scale mining developments on indigenous lands. Prior to his killing the human rights defender was continuously subject to acts of harassment, threats and criminalisation, as a result of his work to promote and protect land and indigenous rights in Venezuela.
As a result of his work, Sabino Romero Izarra was continuously threatened, harassed and judicially persecuted. In 2012, the 109 year-old father of Sabino Romero Izarra, Mr José Manuel Romero, was killed as a result of being severely beaten. To date, no-one has been brought to justice for this killing, believed to have been perpetrated by the owner of a local ranch. In 2009, following the occupation of a ranch in Chaktapa, Zulia State, by two communities, including that of Sabino Romero Izarra, the human rights defender was detained for 18 months, accused of being responsible for the killing of three indigenous persons during the occupation. On 14 October 2009, during a national radio programme, Deputy Minister for the Environment Sergio Rodriguez reportedly accused Sabino Romero Izarra of stealing cattle, burning the houses of Yukpa families and using the land title struggle “for his own benefit”. In addition, the human rights defender received a number of death threats, while his home was reportedly raided on a number of occasions by army officers. 
Front Line (http://www.frontlinedefenders.org/) believes to be motivated by his legitimate and peaceful work as a land and indigenous rights defender and leader.
In the meantime New York based Human Rights Watch (HRW) on 5 March issued a general report on “Venezuela: Chávez’s Authoritarian Legacy” Read the rest of this entry »
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 