Africa - INTER PRESS SERVICE

Thousands of youth gather in Rome on Friday, Mar. 15, to join the climate strike, a global movement that aims to make governments and institutions aware of taking serious steps to implement the Paris Agreements and save the planet. Together First, one of the partners of ICSW, is among the groups urging for a more inclusive, collaborative movement to work towards solutions for all. Credit: Maged Srour/IPS

By Tharanga Yakupitiyage
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 16 2019 (IPS)

Increasingly facing restrictions and assault, civil society from around the world have come together to celebrate and promote people power.

Organised by CIVICUS, International Civil Society Week (ICSW) brought together civil society organisations and activists to discuss the threats and challenges that they face in a world where arbitrary detention, censorship, and exclusion have sadly become the norm.

Together First, one of the partners of ICSW, is among the groups urging for a more inclusive, collaborative movement to work towards solutions for all.

IPS spoke to Giovanna Marques Kuele, non-resident research fellow at Igarapé Institute (Brazil) and a member of Together First’s informal steering group, about the importance of civil society and working together.

Giovanna Marques Kuele, non-resident research fellow at Igarapé Institute (Brazil) and a member of Together First’s informal steering group speaks to IPS about the importance of civil society and working together.

Inter Press Service (IPS): How important is the protection and inclusion of civil society and human rights defenders to you and the global system as a whole?

Giovanna Marques Kuele (GMK): The protection and inclusion of civil society and human rights defenders are essential. While young people are raising their voices to demand inclusion for change, human rights defenders are under attack across the globe, including in my home country Brazil.

During the Civil Society Summit—which took place on the first day of ICSW—Together First endorsed the “The Belgrade Call to Action,” which calls on United Nations member states to take concrete urgent action against the shrinking space for civil society and the increasing reprisals against human rights defenders. Together First relies on the protection of civic space because we—civil society together—are the voices and agents of change that can push for the actions we sorely need to avert existential risks such as climate change.

For us, multilateralism is about more than states. It is about people and organisations working together to achieve a common goal. We at Together First believe that we can no longer rely on the turgid rate of progress by world leaders. Instead, we need to raise our voices and say: we can and must do better. And so we are building a movement that is truly global and meaningfully inclusive. During the ICSW, as a small first step, I met with youngsters who work at grassroots organisations to make sure we find ways to echo their voices, as decisions and actions taken in distance places, like city capitals and New York, can affect their daily lives.

IPS: What are the biggest challenges faced by civil society and human rights defenders today?

GMK: Like many of our colleagues at the ICSW meeting, Together First believes that multilateralism is under threat at a time when we need it more than ever. Global risks such as climate change and weapons proliferation need a collective response. These risks can be grouped into three sets: the ones great powers have not wanted to address (e.g. climate change), the risks insufficiently understood by politicians (e.g. new technologies), and the risks considered too difficult (e.g. the glaring deficit in cyber governance). These risks need collective action. But many governments are overwhelmed. Some are turning inwards, becoming more fiercely nationalist. As a result, the UN—already overstretched and underfunded—is now facing further cuts and struggling to deliver in this difficult environment.

IPS: As a multi-stakeholder group, how does Together First work with and mobilise civil society?

GMK: Together First seeks to build a global people’s movement for a people-centred multilateralism. Together, we want to identify and call for transformative next steps – the most important changes we can make now to address global risks. We also want to raise our level of ambition. The challenges we face are vast and complex; we must demand more than the current glacial pace of change.

Ultimately, we know that if we want to build the effective global governance system we so badly need, we cannot rely on world leaders alone. We must open up the conversation so that, in turn, we can make the system itself transparent and inclusive, where stakeholders play a meaningful role in the decisions and actions that affect their lives.

IPS: What role can the UN play to better promote and protect civil society?

GMK: Together First believes that by harnessing progressive power of civil society and by deploying an innovative and thorough methodology, we can work together to identify feasible and actionable steps to make global governance more effective – and put them into practice.

One of these steps must involve a greater role at the UN for civil society, who are key actors in the policy space and on the ground. What I heard from many people at ICSW is that organisations–as much as they work to achieve SDGs at country level, for instance–do not feel connected to the UN Headquarters, where decisions are ultimately taken. A concrete suggestion is to establish an Envoy for Civil Society—carefully chosen to make sure she or he is able to understand and transmit grassroots concerns to the upper levels.

IPS: As International Civil Society Week comes to a close, what message would you want civil society groups and human rights defenders to take home?

GMK: At ICSW, Together First, with our partners UN2020, made a public call for civil society to share their perspectives and need so we can demand that they are on the table for the UN’s 75th Anniversary in 2020.

Moving forward, it’s essential that our voices are heard at key meetings in the lead up to 2020. On April 23, I will be speaking at an event on building trust in multilateralism organised by the President of the General Assembly and IPI. Please send me your questions and comments via #MultilateralismMatters @TogetherFirst and I will be sure to raise them.

As the theme of this year suggested, ICSW is a testament to the existence of the ‘Power of Togetherness’ – the reality that people and organisations around the world are working together to unlock the potential of collective action. I think the energy of this event showed that we can believe that together it is possible to promote meaningful and inclusive change.

Related Articles

• Civil Society Leaders Meet Amid Protests, Attacks on Rights
• When Youth Take on The Fight to Defend Rights
• Smears, Laws, Lack of Cooperation: Tools Against Activists

The post Q&A: Achieving “Togetherness” appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

This article is part of a series on the current state of civil society organisations (CSOs), which was the focus of International Civil Society Week (ICSW), sponsored by CIVICUS, and which took place in Belgrade, April 8-12.

The post Q&A: Achieving “Togetherness” appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Jomo Kwame Sundaram and Anis Chowdhury
KUALA LUMPUR and SYDNEY, Apr 16 2019 (IPS)

The World Bank’s Enabling the Business of Agriculture (EBA) project, launched in 2013, has sought agricultural reforms favouring the corporate sector. EBA was initially established to support the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, initiated by the G8 to promote private agricultural development in Africa.

Jomo Kwame Sundaram

The New Alliance has been touted as “a new model of partnership” for agricultural transformation in Africa. The Bank has used the EBA to address the land issue in developing countries, particularly in Africa. The effort is strongly supported by the US and UK governments as well as the Gates Foundation, all strong proponents of corporate agriculture.

Emulating the influential annual World Bank Doing Business report, the EBA scores countries on the ease of doing business in agriculture. It purports to measure ‘legal barriers’ to agribusiness and to prescribe reforms in twelve areas, including seeds, fertilizers, trade and machinery.

It advocates reforms in favour of agribusiness. For example, governments should weaken regulations over seeds, fertilizers and pesticides and strengthen foreign agribusiness power and influence. Missing from the partnership are peasants and indigenous peoples whose livelihoods depend on traditional land uses.

Dangerous new indicator
The 2017 EBA report proposed a new indicator on land. Introduced as a pilot for 38 countries, the land indicator is expected to be extended to more countries in the 2019 EBA report. The Bank claims to be seeking to better protect land rights and to ensure more equity in land access.

EBA best practices point to a very different agenda based on promoting large-scale industrial agriculture at the expense of family farmers, pastoralists and indigenous peoples. It is biased towards industrial agriculture and agribusiness, and the intent of the new indicator makes it even more urgent to challenge the EBA initiative.

Anis Chowdhury

The EBA advocates certain reforms and policy measures, raising concerns about its likely impact, if implemented by governments. To enhance land use productivity, the Bank advocates formalizing (private) property rights, easing the sale and lease of land for commercial use, land expropriation and public land auctions.

UNCTAD’s 2009 World Investment Report cautioned that “Greater involvement by TNCs will not automatically lead to greater productivity in agriculture, rural development or the alleviation of poverty and hunger”.

Even joint research by World Bank and IFPRI staff is circumspect about the claimed benefits of large scale commercial farming in light of likely environmental, social and productivity impacts. Large scale commercial farming has often involved environmental degradation, forced evictions and human rights violations, worsening food insecurity and livelihood destruction.

Legal land grabbing
Since the turn of the century, large-scale land acquisitions by transnational corporations (TNCs) in developing countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, have accelerated. Such land targeted by ‘investors’ has often long been used by local people who may not have property titles, often deemed unnecessary.

Land use practices have often evolved with changing demography, ecology, knowledge and technology. Legally, such land may be deemed either public or state land, and/or land to which local communities claim customary rights.

Unsurprisingly, such land grabs have encountered resistance from many opposing expropriation of their land. Some have been successful in delaying, disrupting or blocking new plantations, large farms and ranches.

Enabling land privatization
Much public land in developing countries is used in line with customary practices. Communally managed natural resources — water, forests, grazing land — are generally recognized as essential for sustaining the livelihoods of hundreds of millions of rural poor.

In customary law, land is typically valued as a shared inherited resource, often with deep social and cultural significance. Ignoring this, the Bank is urging governments to privatize public land with ‘potential economic value’ for commercial use, so that it can be put to its ‘best use’.

The Bank has been promoting the formalization of private land ownership to encourage agribusiness investments in capital-intensive agriculture, to increase productivity. Commodifying land will enable more capital-intensive agricultural production as the Bank believes that “undocumented [land] rights pose challenges and risks to investors”.

By scoring countries in terms of ease of accessing land for agribusiness, the new EBA land indicator seeks to accelerate land privatization and to facilitate corporate access to land in developing countries. By enhancing property rights and making land a ‘transferable asset’, its use as collateral for credit is also enhanced.

Marginalizing rural poor
The Bank strategy either ignores or seeks to take advantage of the considerable vulnerability of many family farmers, worsened as the land they depend on for their livelihoods becomes a tradable asset.

The development of land markets increases commercial pressure on land, destroying the livelihoods of many depending on land and the commons—grazing and fishing grounds, and forests.

By promoting land as a marketable commodity, the land indicator inevitably enables greater concentration of land ownership. In economies with ‘formal’ land tenure systems, farmers often lose their land to creditors.

Spreading such property rights will legally facilitate land dispossession, concentration and grabbing. While jobs may be created for some locals, many more may be marginalized without much hope for alternative livelihoods elsewhere.

Thus, facilitating corporate agriculture by concentrating control over land use is likely to exacerbate rural poverty and overall inequality. Land titling, purportedly to protect land users from eviction, thus accelerates dispossession of current land users. Hence, the EBA should be ditched.

Instead, governments should be helped to design food and agriculture policies that empower family farmers, pastoralists and indigenous peoples to address the major challenges of poverty, hunger, malnutrition, environmental degradation, resource depletion and climate change.

Jomo Kwame Sundaram, a former economics professor, was Assistant Director-General for Economic and Social Development, Food and Agriculture Organization, and received the Wassily Leontief Prize for Advancing the Frontiers of Economic Thought in 2007.
Anis Chowdhury, Adjunct Professor at Western Sydney University & University of New South Wales (Australia), held senior United Nations positions in New York and Bangkok.

The post World Bank Dispossessing Rural Poor appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Ambassador Walther Lichem* of Austria is President Inter Press Service (IPS).

By Ambassador Walther Lichem
VIENNA, Apr 16 2019 (IPS)

The past seventy years since the end of the second world war have been marked by profound changes in our international system. Relations between states have become more horizontally structured interactions with a rising significance of the common good articulated and pursued by newly-created international programmes and organisations.

Ambassador Walther Lichem

The international agenda increasingly consists of items addressing internationally and globally-shared challenges of dependencies and interdependencies.

The traditional security and peace focus has been broadened into areas of concern which require contributions and activities not only by states but by international organisations and programmes who jointly with non-state actors such as academic institutions and associations, civil society organisations, the private sector including those who joined the Global Compact, have contributed to a new pattern of leadership in the processes of defining our global goals and in the implementation of the related programmes of action.

Another characterizing element in our Global Agenda related-approach is the inter-sectoral interdependence reflected in the international community’s agenda marked by “AND” – “climate change and international security”, “human rights and societal cohesion” etc.

These agenda—and interrelated-ness—require, however, also institutional integration cutting across the institutional development marked by sectoral segregation. There is a rising need for each agenda sector to be fully up-to-date regarding the entire pattern of global challenges and the related plans of action, using this level of information for the development of institutional integration.

There is also a rising need for information flows between governmental/ intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

The new global agenda benefits from the work and conclusions of academic institutions and programmes, a relationship which regrettably has not yet been fully recognized by the international system.

Many of our important global agenda items based their policy approach on research and academic discourse – e.g. the issue of environmental protection, the concept of sustainability, the process of climate change, the societal development needs and human rights etc.

Another dimension of the pluralisation of global governance affectedness and responsibility is the role of each and every citizen on the globe to know and understand these challenges and assume a rising responsibility in addressing them.

Certain agenda areas, such as environmental protection, the sustainable development and use of our natural resource systems, human rights and human security have given the citizen an almost central role in the achievement of the declared objectives.

Today, every citizen can contribute to the recognition of the dignity of the other and the related human rights. The impact of citizen-focused human rights programmes is visible in human rights cities in all regions of the world. The citizen creating conditions of societal cohesion also essentially contributes to peace and security.

Private sector decisions can make important contributions to both the natural resources related and societal cohesion-related challenges. Academic institutions must adjust their programmes of research and of university education to the global agenda-related challenges.

The cultural sector provides important inputs into the development of values and related behavioural patterns related to the challenges of pluri-identity societies and the integration of otherness.

All these new patterns of responsibility and contributions to achievements for our Global Agenda, however, do require qualified information. It must be recognized that complex academic or policy-process related studies and reports are not accessible to the general citizenship including those in positions of responsibility at local and national levels.

Even governmental institutions and the international diplomatic community cannot internalize all the documents which are to serve as a basis for multilateral negotiations.

The development of this new participatory system of global governance with intergovernmental institutions and processes, national governments and local authorities has led to the recognition of an urgent need for qualified patterns of information which translate challenges, achievements and failures to the political responsibilities at local, national and also international levels, to governmental, inter-governmental and non-governmental institutions who have increasingly shaped our Global Agenda and articulated the rising need for societal understanding and information.

Media are the classical providers of such information combining data with assessments and the vision of our common future. Yet, as analysis of the current situation underlines, there is an urgent need to strengthen qualified information systems which would provide not only governmental, intergovernmental and non-governmental institutions and the citizens but also the media with pertinent and needed information.

There is no way into a future of shared global responsibility without a qualified and also ethically committed system of information related to our processes of global change.

There is a need to recognize that such highly pertinent information related to our common future requires recognition and support from the global society as a contribution to our shared global public space.

This implies that support is to be provided from governmental, intergovernmental and non-governmental institutions. A respective policy discourse with participation from these institutions is to be envisaged in order to prevent the decay or elimination of qualified programmes like Inter Press Service.

*Walther Lichem, retired Austrian Ambassador with studies in law and oriental archaeology (Univ. of Graz, Austria) and political science (Univ. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; Institute for Advanced Studies, Vienna) started his professional career in 1966 at the United Nations Secretariat in New York in the field of international water resources with development cooperation missions to Ethiopia (1971), Argentina (1971-74) and to the Senegal River Development Organisation (1980). He was also Rapporteur on international river basins at the International Conference on Water Law (Caracas, 1976) and at the IVth World Water Conference (Buenos Aires, 1982).
Ambassador Lichem undertook major assignments in the UN system at the Human Rights Summit in Vienna in 1992 and as Ambassador to Chile and to Canada, as a member of the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space and as an adviser to the 16 countries sharing the Guinea Current in West and Central Africa on the creation of a regional organisation.

The post Global Governance and Information appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Ambassador Walther Lichem* of Austria is President Inter Press Service (IPS).

The post Global Governance and Information appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Sivananthi Thanenthiran
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, Apr 15 2019 (IPS)

Over a week ago – on April 3 – Brunei, the tiny South East Asian kingdom on the island of Borneo, announced its citizens would face the full force of the Shariah law.

The kingdom has decided to implement the death penalty by stoning as a punishment for homosexuality and extramarital relations, despite global outcry from the LGBT community and human rights advocates against this specific barbaric punishment.

Brunei’s adoption of the Sharia law has been in stages. The first phase began on May 1, 2014. Initial phases dealt with misdemeanours such as indecent behaviour, and then moved to meting out punishments of flogging and amputation of limbs for crimes such as theft and robbery.

However, there has been a deathly silence around the other crimes enumerated within the Sharia laws. This may have been largely due to the fact that the monarchy lacks a vibrant civil society tracking – for obvious reasons, analysing and generating data on government laws and policies, and holding the government accountable.

Sivananthi Thanenthiran

The Sharia penal code was instituted to bolster the Islamic identity of this autocracy of around 430,000 subjects, of which two-thirds are Muslim. The introduction of Sharia at the national level sends chills across the Southeast Asian region.

Already in the autonomous province of Aceh, Indonesia, Sharia laws are fully implemented limiting the dress and mobility of women, and ensuring flogging for a variety of offences is carried out. In May 2017, two gay men were sentenced to be flogged 85 times each for homosexuality, after being filmed by vigilantes.

The Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao also hopes to follow suit in instituting some form of Sharia. Some states in Malaysia have already enacted the Sharia code, and in Kelantan, caning was introduced in 2017.

Brunei’s Sharia laws – akin to several Middle Eastern countries, notably Saudi Arabia – cover a variety of crimes, many of which in modern day parlance fall within the personal realm.

These include consensual sex outside of marriage (both premarital and extramarital sex, termed as adultery), consensual sex between people of the same sex (including women, who show signs of sexual conduct though without penetration), attempting to commit adultery (example given as lying on the bed together), close proximity with a person of the opposite sex, causing a miscarriage, pregnancy out of wedlock, as well as variety of non-crimes such as consuming alcohol and eating during the fasting month.

The state obsession with sex, and legislating sex, has been perennial. In the development of modern thought, most of these activities (deemed criminal by the kingdom of Brunei), are considered as private behaviours of citizens.

The Sharia laws infringe on citizens’ rights to privacy – that sexuality and sexual behaviour is a private matter. One’s sexual activities and sexual orientation should be determined by the individual and not the State.

The Sharia laws then serve not only to enforce compulsory heterosexuality, but only marital sexuality – signalling the state’s refusal to recognise citizens’ rights to privacy and self-determination on matters of sexuality.

The burden on women and girls is also exacerbated by such laws. For example, a Muslim woman who is pregnant or who gives birth to a child out of wedlock is guilty of an offence, and can be fined not more than BND $8,000 (1BND = 0.74USD approx) and/or imprisoned for a maximum of two years.

In most of the countries of the world, pregnancy out of wedlock is not a crime in anyway, and harsh punishments on a new mother do not speak of justice tempered with mercy. And should a woman find herself with an unwanted pregnancy, regardless of marital status, she cannot procure an abortion easily.

Both first trimester and second trimester abortion (characterised in the Sharia laws as miscarriage of pregnancy and ‘miscarriage of a foetus’), voluntary and involuntary, are considered as crimes.

A woman who ‘attempts to miscarry’ a pregnancy can be fined up to BND$12,000 and/or be imprisoned for a maximum of three years. A woman who attempts to ‘miscarry a foetus’, can be fined up to $20,000-40,000 and/or imprisoned for a maximum of five to 10 years, depending on whether the foetus temporarily survives.

These are extremely harsh measures which do not take into consideration women’s lived realities and choices they have to navigate, especially in light of equally harsh punishments for carrying pregnancies to term, if those pregnancies are out of wedlock.

A number of these Sharia laws are applicable to both Muslims and non-Muslims, and in this violates freedom of religion and belief by imposing the laws, beliefs and punishments, of one particular religion on non-practitioners of that religion, to the extent that they can lose their lives for these beliefs.

Theocratic states insidiously apply the machineries of the state to force the state’s religious beliefs on all citizens irrespective of religious affiliation. Freedom of religion must also necessarily include freedom from religion.

The inhuman and archaic punishments enumerated in these Sharia laws – amputation, caning and whipping, stoning in no way demonstrate the golden ideal of justice tempered with mercy. The quality of mercy in meting out punishment is crucial to any society as it means “forbearance to inflict harm, under circumstances of provocation, when one has the power to inflict it.”

Harsh laws hurt people. These Sharia laws then do not testify to puritanical moral rigour: rather they demonstrate the moral failure of the state.

The post Brunei’s Shariah Code & the New Stone Age appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

This article is part of a series on the role of civil society organisations (CSOs), which was the focus of International Civil Society Week (ICSW), sponsored by CIVICUS, in Belgrade, April 8-12

 
Sivananthi Thanenthiran is the executive director of the Asian-Pacific Resource and Research Centre for Women (ARROW), a regional NGO based in Malaysia championing sexual and reproductive health and rights in Asia Pacific. She is also a “SheDecides” Champion for Asia Pacific.

The post Brunei’s Shariah Code & the New Stone Age appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Jan Lundius
STOCKHOLM / ROME, Apr 15 2019 (IPS)

The Academy Awards, i.e. The Oscars, may occasionly award a worthy movie as Best Picture, though it is far from sure they select films with a unique artistic vision, enduring cultural influence and/or innovative qualities. Take for example the plain family drama Kramer vs. Kramer, which in 1979 won Best Picture and Best Director, while Francis Ford Coppola´s by now classical epic Apocalypse Now was awarded for best sound.

The 2019 Academy Awards rewarded the feelgood, racial drama Green Book as Best Picture, while Spike Lee´s sophisticated onslaught on American racism, BlacKkKlansman had to settle for Best Adapted Screenplay. The Mexican Roma won several prizes, including Best Director, Best Foreign Language Film and Best Cinematography, while the Colombian Birds of Passage, suddenly and inexplicably was removed from the list of nominees for Academy Awards.

Birds of Passage may be placed beside avant-garde movies by Sergio Leone, Akira Kusosawa and the lesser known Glauber Rocha. Filmmakers who transformed the classical genres of American cinema, i.e. Westerns and Gangster movies, by refashioning and reinvigoarating them into a new artform. By providing Birds of Passage with the subtitle Once Upon a Time in Colombia, Guerra and Gallego indicated their gratitude to Sergio Leone. Once Upon a Time in the West and Once Upon a Time in America were the titles of films by Sergio Leone, whose work came to be a crucial inspiration for auteurs like Coppola, Scorsese and Tarantino.

Leone has been called cinema´s Great Romantic Poet. In spite of intially being brushed off as a manufacturer of low budget action movies, Leone is now appreciated for his extraordinary talent of combining photo, action and music into a strong, intense unity. Being the son of a cinema pioneer and a silent film actress, Leone grew up as an admirer of Italian grand opera, an aspect perceivable in his movies, where the drama is heightened by aestethics expressed through extreme close-ups, long sweeping shots integrating the landscape with the story, and not the least his use of Ennio Morricone´s music. These qualities originated partly from Leone´s admiration of Akira Kurosawa, just like this Japanese master Leone interspersed his narratives with short, intense and often quite unexpected sequences of sudden violence and frenzy. Lately, film critics have also discovered that below the surface of Leone´s operatic Westerns and Gangster movies lurks a vision of the growth of an American society immersed in greed and corruption. A depiction of moral decline that even if it is more fantastical than realistic, nevertheless is true.

When asked why he called some of his movies Once upon a time … Leone explained that they were ”fairytales for adults”, portrayals of bygone eras seen through a lense that enchanted a harsh reality. His movies are like operas and some may even be viewed as legends with a moral message. Leone´s aesthetics may provide a hint to the imagery and narrative structure of Guerra’s and Gallego´s Birds of Passage. A film in which we are confronted with similar desolate landscapes, panoramic views, sudden oubursts of intense violence, paired with long sequences characterized by reflection and waiting. In the Colombian movie we also find intricate symbolism, expressed through the presence of birds and insects and sometimes specific coulours, like red and black. It is set within a temporary, yet mystical, landscape encapsulated by the lore and customs of the Wayúu people. As Leone´s movies where the narrative is accompanied by Morricone´s mood creating music, the Colombian movie´s score is an integrated part of the tale, with insect – and bird sounds that blend with vibrating, unfamiliar instruments it occasionally creates an almost hallucinatory effect.

Birds of Passage depicts the so called Bonanza Marimbera, when people in the Guajira region of northern Colombia during the 1960´s and 1970´s became involved in big scale drug smuggling to the US, the offset of Colombia´s notorious celebrity as a source for global drug traficking. A fame that eventually gave rise to documentaries, movies and TVseries, offering thrilling tales about mass murderers like Pablo Escobar. However, Birds of Passage is far from being what several reviewers assumed – just another movie about the rise and fall of druglords. It is a multifaceted work of art reminding us that Colombia was the birthplace of the great magical realist Gabriel García Márquez. The author´s maternal family was Wayúu, the indigenous people at the centre of Guerra’s and Gallego´s tale and just like Birds of Passage García Márquez´s masterpiece One Hundred Years of Solitude includes numerous influences from the mystical lore of the Wayúus.

Contrary to the Mexican Oscar winner Roma, where the maid at the centre of the tale was no more than an idealized, but strangely anonymous, indigenous woman, Birds of Passage is told from the perspective of the Wayúu, among whom spririts walk the earth and dreams carry important messages. The Wayúu are not depicted as exploited innocents, they are flawed indiviuals just like the rest of us, victims of greed and passions.

The story begins in the late 1960s. In an arid, windy area Zaida undergoes a ritual, involving a dance to attract presumptive suitors. Rapayet is bent on marrying Zaida, but her mother, the matriarch Ursula, is not happy about him, even if the orphaned Rapayet is nephew of the Word Messenger, a respected elder with important ritual tasks. Ursula demands an extravagant dowry of 50 goats, 20 cows and four precious, ceremonial necklaces. Together with his friend Moises, an alijuna, outsider, without any respect for Wayúu traditions, Rapayet makes contact with a group of American Peace Corps volunteers, who are more interested in making profitable marijuana deals than in development work. Rapayet’s cousin Aníbal, a clan leader who grows marijuana up in the sierra, becomes part of the business and Rapayet can afford to purchase his dowry and marry Zaida.

The Wayúu world where sunglasses, pickup trucks, goats, horses and Cessna planes, comingles with colourful silk dresses and traditions and beliefs of an ageold tribal society, soon becomes affected by the violence and greed of a burgoning drug trade. As fortunes grow, Rapayet becomes entangled in a web of violence, social decline and an impossible duty to uphold of Wayúu rules and morals.

Rapayat´s isolation and anguish are mirrored by his surreal, all-white, minmalist mansion in the middle of a flat desertland, where he together with his Zaida sleeps in a hammock, next to a king-size bed. Birds of Passage is a timeless tale of domestic troubles and unfulfilled duties within a declining society. It could just as well be a Shakepearean – or a classical Greek drama. Like such masterpieces it is also poetry, with its striking images and bold compositions like in movies by Tarkovsky and Kubrick. It also has the rich, sensous texture of recent Chinese movies, for example do the flow and rich colour of the womens´ dresses remind of the refined imagery of Zhang Yimou‘s House of the Flying Daggers. The ballad framing, the dreams and rituals within a violent, empty landscape invoke the work of the eccentric Brazilian director Glauber Rochas, whose Black God, White Devil premiered in 1964, the same year as Leone´s first Western, A Fistful of Dollars. Like Birds of Passage Rochas´s movie is an epic and moving work of art, staged within a rural, poor area where mysticism, religion and popular culture are blended into a powerful, bleak and cruel story, accomplished with such vision and skill that another great auteur, Michelangelo Antonioni, exclaimed that “each scene was a lesson in how modern cinema should be made.”

1. With Birds of Passage Guerra and Gallego join ranks with Leone, Kurosawa and Rochas as great innovators, creators of aesthetically pleasing, excellently composed visions of worlds far removed from mundane cliches and plagiarisms of mainstream Hollywood productions. Furthermore, they represent an invigorating voice from the South. That this powerful film may be called an instant classic is that it deserves to be revisited and analysed several times. Its beauty and multifarious craftmanship make it a sequel to other impressive masterpieces.

Jan Lundius holds a PhD. on History of Religion from Lund University and has served as a development expert, researcher and advisor at SIDA, UNESCO, FAO and other international organisations.

The post Birds of Passage: An Instant Classic appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Helen Kidan
LONDON, Apr 15 2019 (IPS)

As the first anniversary of the swearing on Ethiopia’s Prime Minster Abiy Ahmed rolled around last week, Ethiopians – and observers worldwide – marvelled at the pace and scale of radical reform he has brought to the formerly repressed country in the past year.

Abiy has released hundreds of political prisoners, overturned or revised repressive laws and allowed countless political exiles to return, among a number of changes.

But perhaps, one of the most significant moves for the region, has been his ending of the decades-long armed conflict with neighbouring Eritrea with the initiation of a historic peace deal.

The two countries have begun restoring diplomatic relations as part of that peace process. Abiy’s acclaimed reforms have served to brighten the spotlight of criticism on Eritrea for its notoriously brutal repression of citizens’ fundamental freedoms and dissent, which has prompted hundreds of thousands to flee their homeland.

And Eritrea’s long-running crackdown continues to have a particular cost for Eritrean women. While Abiy Ahmed has won wide praise for his appointment of a record number of women cabinet ministers along with Africa’s only female head of state, women in Eritrea struggle to reconcile the gender disparity they face since their own struggle for independence.

There was a time in the country’s history when the role of women occupied a higher status than it does now. Eritrean women played a crucial role during their country’s 30-year war of independence from Ethiopia. They comprised a third of Eritrea’s fighting force and were active across all levels of the military.

But their recruitment to the army’s ranks alongside men had far less to do gender equality than for the need for able-bodied soldiers. Whilst many women found greater gender equality on the war fronts, the cultural gender inequalities persisted.

In these circumstances, they became masculinised. They played the roles of freedom fighters as well as mothers, wives and daughters, and this is what distinguished them from their male comrades.

After independence, when combatants returned to their families, these war hardened fighters were ostracised, looked at as unfeminine and not marriage material.

Many marriages that women fighters had entered into during the war were rejected by their families and many were forced to separate from their husbands. The collapse of their marriages and their stigmatisation had a detrimental effect on them, leading to depression and even suicide.

Whatever rights female combatants gained on the frontline before independence, were slowly eroded after. They received no support for post-war rehabilitation and reintegration back to civilian life where they had to care for their families. With the objective achieved, the government expected them to go home and fit back in.

Many had spent their entire youth on the front in the 30-year war and found it very difficult to adapt to civilian life and earn a living without employable skills.

The two-year border military conflict with Ethiopia that erupted in 1998 led to increased repression inside Eritrea. The war and growing state restrictions impacted all Eritreans but women had it especially hard.

This war and the independence struggle bore a heavy human cost. By official accounts, at least 19,000 Eritrean soldiers were killed in the border conflict. As a result, some 53% of households are headed by women, who in many cases, raised children without fathers.

The many men that were disappeared by the state for expressing dissent also contributed to this hardship. The state’s clampdown on dissent and fundamental freedoms, hurt families and communities and more women were targeted.

Young Eritrean women also suffered and continue to suffer in the military camps – Eritrea has maintained a policy of compulsory conscription – and in detention centres, where they face all forms of gender-based violence.

Since the government has barred any independent NGOs from operating inside Eritrea, it is extremely difficult for women to get the support they need. Existing laws do not help women and as government officials are often responsible for these abuses, most cases go unreported.

Eritrea’s notorious repressive state policies have caused people to flee their homeland en mass as asylum seekers. According to the United Nations’ International Organisation for Migration (IOM), Eritreans comprise the ninth largest refugee group in the world, with almost half a million displaced across numerous countries.

When Eritrean girls and women become refugees in neighbouring countries, many are abused by traffickers, raped and tortured and go on to suffer further human rights abuses.

But at home, they face a blatant gender bias that has increasingly taken root since the independence struggle. The current peace process with Ethiopia is a clear example: there was not a single woman in the high-level delegation that Eritrea sent to Ethiopia for landmark peace talks in June last year.

This illustrates the extent to which women have disappeared from the social, economic and political scene of Eritrean society. There cannot be effective peace if half the population is not allowed to participate in the process at a political and governmental level – not as mere tokens but as effectual politicians, negotiators and mediators.

Eritrean women need to be part of any peace process if it is to be sustainable and ensuring that women have the skills to negotiate for their interests is key in this respect. This will not only have an impact for Eritrean women or Eritrea but also for the region.

The other aspect that holds women back is the fact that they are educationally disadvantaged and economically marginalised and cannot compete for leadership positions. Moreover, they lack the confidence and skills needed to compete meaningfully in the workplace.

This situation is perpetuated when these women leave Eritrea. And we see a much lower participation of women in civil society organisations now compared with the period during the independence war, when participation of women at the grassroots level was far greater.

The last 27 years have really left women side-lined, with no voice and representation and inactive at the grassroots. But many are prepared to change that.

The Network of Eritrean Women (NEW) is an independent organisation established in the Eritrean diaspora with the aim of empowering women and fighting all forms of discrimination. NEW works with different Eritrean women’s groups across Europe and has members in Africa, the United States and the Middle East.

Women’s empowerment is crucial to ensure their voices are heard and needs met. In the face of repression, it is imperative that a space is opened for the feminist perspective in Eritrea and for women to be engaged in the dynamics of their society.

The post From Empowerment During War, Eritrean Women Must Fight Gender Discrimination in a New Peace appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

This article is part of a series on the current state of civil society organisations (CSOs), which was the focus of International Civil Society Week (ICSW), sponsored by CIVICUS, and concluded in Belgrade, April 12

 
Helen Kidan is an Eritrean human rights activist and founding member of Horn Human Rights and Network of Eritrean Women.

The post From Empowerment During War, Eritrean Women Must Fight Gender Discrimination in a New Peace appeared first on Inter Press Service.

More than 200 civil society leaders and human rights activists from some 100 countries took to the streets of Belgrade, Serbia in solidarity with those whose basic freedoms are at risk. They participated in the International Civil Society Week (ICSW), sponsored by CIVICUS, which took place in Belgrade, April 8-12. Courtesy: CIVICUS

By Tharanga Yakupitiyage
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 15 2019 (IPS)

Counterterrorism measures are not only affecting extremist groups, but are also impacting a crucial sector for peace and security in the world: civil society.

Civil society has long played a crucial role in society, providing life-saving assistance and upholding human rights for all.

However, counterterrorism measures, which are meant to protect civilians, are directly, and often intentionally, undermining such critical work.

“Civil society is under increased assault in the name of countering terrorism,” Human Rights Watch’s senior counterterrorism researcher Letta Tayler told IPS, pointing to a number of United Nations Security Council resolutions as among the culprits.

“Nearly two decades after the September 11 attacks, we are seeing a very clear pattern of overly broad counterterrorism resolutions. We are seeing a clear pattern of violations on the ground that are being carried out in the name of complying with binding Security Council counterterrorism resolutions,” she added.

Just two weeks after September 11, 2001, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1373 which called states to adopt and implement measures to prevent and combat terrorism.

Since then, more than 140 countries have adopted counterterrorism laws.

The newly approved Resolution 2462, passed at the end of March, requires member states to criminalise financial assistance to terrorist individuals or groups “for any purpose” even if the aid is indirect and provided “in the absence of a link to a specific terrorist act.”

While the resolution does include some language on human rights protections, Tayler noted that it is not sufficient.

“It is not sufficiently spelled out to make very clear to member states what they can and cannot do that might violate human rights on the ground,” she said.

Blurred Lines

Among the major issues concerning these resolutions is that there is no universal, legal definition of terrorism, allowing states to craft their own, usually broad, definitions. This has put civil society organisations and human rights defenders (HRDs) alike at risk of detention and left vulnerable populations without essential life-saving assistance.

“I think it is irresponsible of the Security Council to pass binding resolutions that leave up to States to craft their own definitions of terrorism…that’s how you end up with counterterrorism laws that criminalise peaceful protest or criticising the state,” Tayler said.

Oxfam’s Humanitarian Policy Lead Paul Scott echoed similar sentiments to IPS, stating: “The Security Council, by being overly broad, is just giving [governments] the tools to restrict civil society.”

According to Front Line Defenders, an Irish-based human rights organisation, 58 percent of its cases in 2018 saw HRDs charged under national security legislation.

Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism Fionnuala Ní Aoláin found that 67 percent of her mandate’s communications regarding civil society were related to the use of counter-terrorism, and noted that country’s counterterrorism laws are being used as a “shortcut to targeting democratic protest and dissent.”

In April 2018, thousands of people took to the streets in Nicaragua to protest controversial reforms to the country’s social security system.

According to the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, over 300 people have been killed, more than 2,000 injured, and 2,000 arrested—some of whom were reportedly subject to torture and sexual violence when detained.

Many of those arrested will also be tried as terrorists due to a new law that expanded the definition of terrorism to include a range of crimes such as damage to public and private property.

At least 300 people, including human rights defenders, face charges of terrorism.

The Central American country said that the law was passed to comply with the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), an intergovernmental body that works alongside the Security Council to combat terrorist financing.

A Civil Society Facing Uncivility

Tayler also pointed to the lack of consequences for States that pass counterterrorism laws that do not abide by their obligations under international law.

In Resolution 2462, member states are told to comply with international humanitarian law when cracking down on terrorist financing but does not require countries to consider the effect of such measures on humanitarian activities such as providing food and medical care.

“In the zeal to be as tough looking as they can possibly can, governments have overlooked very very easy ways to protect those of us who are providing life-saving aid,” Paul told IPS.

The lack of protections for civil society and its impacts was most visible during the 2011 famine in Somalia.

In an effort to restrict “material support” to terrorist groups, countries such as the United States enacted counterterrorism legislation which blocked aid into areas controlled by Al-Shabab.

This not only impeded local and international organisations from doing their job, but one report noted that the constraints contributed to the deaths of over 250,000 people in the East African nation.

The problem has only gotten worse since then, Paul noted.

“The measures imposed by governments are unnecessarily broad and they prevent us from working in areas that are controlled by designated terrorist entities. What they have essentially done is criminalise humanitarian assistance,” he said.

Tunisia has used its terrorism financing laws to shut down a number of civil society organisations.

According to the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor, approximately 200 organisations were dissolved and almost 950 others were delivered notices, referring them to courts on charges of “financial irregularities” or “receiving foreign funds to support terrorism” despite the lack of substantive evidence.

Many of the dissolved organisations provided aid and relief for orphans and the disabled.

All Eyes on Deck

Tayler highlighted the importance of the UN and civil society to monitor how counterterrorism resolutions such as Resolution 2462 are used on the ground.

“While we would love to see amendments to this resolution, pragmatically the next best step is for all eyes—the eyes of civil society, the UN, regional organisations—to focus on just how states implement this resolution to make sure that overly broad language is not used by states to become a tool of repression,” she said.

“The UN and leaders of countries around the world should use International Civil Society Week as an opportunity to take stock of the risk that this trend has posed on both to life-saving aid organisations and human rights defenders and to reverse this dangerous trend,” Tayler added.

Paul pointed to the need to educate both the public and policymakers on counterterrorism and its spillover effects as well as the importance of civil society in the global system.

“Civil society is a key part of effective governance. We don’t get effective public services, we don’t get peace, we don’t get to move forward with the anti-poverty agenda if civil society actors aren’t strong and empowered,” he said.

“If governments aren’t careful about protecting our right to stand up for marginalised and vulnerable populations, everyone will hurt. Not just those populations. It will have an effect broadly on our societies,” Paul added.

Related Articles

• When Youth Take on The Fight to Defend Rights
• Shining a Spotlight on the Strengths & Challenges of Civil Society in the Balkans
• Civil Society, Press Freedom & Human Rights Under Attack in Africa

The post Civil Society Under Attack in Name of Counterterrorism appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

This article is part of a series on the current state of civil society organisations (CSOs), which was the focus of International Civil Society Week (ICSW), sponsored by CIVICUS, and which took place in Belgrade, April 8-12.

The post Civil Society Under Attack in Name of Counterterrorism appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Youth activist Abraham M. Keita is the founder of the Liberia-based Giving Hope to Children Foundation and is among a growing movement of youth activists who are fighting for the defence of civil liberties and demanding that government act on important issues. Credit: A D McKenzie/IPS

By A. D. McKenzie
BELGRADE, Apr 15 2019 (IPS)

Abraham M. Keita says he was nine years old when a girl of thirteen was sexually assaulted and strangled in his home community in Liberia.

The anger, outrage and sadness he felt would lead him to start advocating for children’s rights – participating in marches, organising protests and going up against the powerful, in a country where sexual abuse of children is among the worst in the world, according to United Nations figures.

Keita will turn 20 years old later this month, and he says he has already spent half of his life as an activist for change.

“I’ve been marching since I was 10,” he told IPS with a quiet smile.

A tall, slim young man, with a thoughtful air, Keita was among the strong representation of youth activists at the annual International Civil Society Week (ICSW) meeting, held this year in Belgrade Apr. 8-12.

Co-hosted by the Johannesburg-based global civil society alliance CIVICUS and Serbian association Civic Initiatives, the event brought together more than 850 delegates from around the world. Keita and other activists, such as 17-year-old Gabriel dos Santos of Brazil, were invited by the organisers to join the discussion on how to build movements for change.

Keita, the 2015 winner of the International Children’s Peace Prize (an annual award from the Amsterdam-based Kids Right Foundation to a child who “fights courageously for children’s rights” – winners include Nobel Prize laureate Malala Yousafzai), is also the founder of the Liberia-based Giving Hope to Children Foundation.

He is among a growing movement of youth activists who are fighting for the defence of civil liberties and demanding that government act on important issues such as protecting children from violence, ensuring sustainable development, and reducing global warming, according to ICSW organisers.

“The youth engagement in ICSW in general is always extremely important to achieve the creation of partnerships among diverse groups and to continue raising awareness of the contributions young people offer to civil society spaces,” said Elisa Novoa, CIVICUS’ youth engagement coordinator.

During the event, youth activists sent out a message calling for civil society to “open up the space” to diverse groups.

“Civil society should understand the importance of sharing power and enabling inclusion in a meaningful and uplifting manner,” their statement said. “We as young people of diversity acknowledge and recognise the importance of having voices of vulnerability at the forefront of change. We need to redefine how we provide solutions and build togetherness.”

Activists also requested trust from donors, encouraging sponsors to be bold in funding organisations that are truly youth led.

For many such groups, a central theme is protecting the vulnerable, a position that Keita has taken. He told IPS that he grew up among vulnerable children, living in poverty in a slum in the Liberian capital Monrovia with his mother and siblings – his father was killed before he was five years old, during Liberia’s brutal and long-lasting civil war.

Different sides in the conflict used children as child soldiers and sexually abused many of them, as reports by the UN and other organisations have shown. That legacy continues, with a high number of girls and women being assaulted, while most of the rapists go unpunished.

According to Liberian government figures, from January to September 2018, nearly 900 sexual and gender-based cases of violence were reported, including 500 rape cases of which 475 involved children.

The statistics provide “alarming evidence that we are still not dealing with this problem in an effective manner”, said Liberia’s President George Weah last October, as quoted in local media.

Keita points out that since many incidents of sexual violence go unreported, the number of children affected is much higher than in official data. Furthermore, cases of sexual violence are not prosecuted quickly enough.

“Hundreds of cases are still in the courts, and the perpetrators are roaming freely,” he said.
The problem is rooted in all levels of society and includes civil society as well as government representatives, with individuals responsible for protecting children being charged with sexual abuses.

In 2017, a Liberian lawmaker allegedly raped a 13-year-old girl, making her pregnant. Keita organised protests against the powerful individual and was himself arrested and charged with “criminal coercion”, he said.

These charges were eventually dropped. The lawmaker meanwhile appeared in court, spent two days in jail, and since 2017, activists have not been able to locate the girl or her family, Keita told IPS. He and other advocates are still pushing for prosecution of the case, even if that may lead to their own detention, he added.

Arrests and smears are among the official tactics used to suppress youth advocates, similar to those used against human rights defenders in general, said ICSW delegates. Members of the public, too, sometimes think that youth activists are misguided and can tend to dismiss their work.

But as youth around the world join forces, their campaigns for rights and environmental action are becoming a growing force.

In Belgrade, youth volunteers assisted with the organisation of ICSW, including being monitors for the closing event – a symbolic “run for freedom” around the meeting’s venue, through a few of the city’s streets, as part of new initiative Freedom Runner.

Dušanka, a 20-year-old Serbian university student studying international affairs and political science, told IPS she had volunteered because she intended to work in civil society, was interested in diversity and wished to make a difference.

“I want to help all people,” she said. “People are different but we’re all equal. That’s a message to the world.”

Along with their idealism, youth activists are aware of the risks they run. Keita told IPS that he sometimes felt a “little afraid”, and that his mother and family members worry too.

“But whatever happens to me, I want to act so things will change, [and] not continue being the same,” he said.

Related Articles

• No Story Worth Dying For?
• Smears, Laws, Lack of Cooperation: Tools Against Activists
• Civil Society Leaders Meet Amid Protests, Attacks on Rights

The post When Youth Take on The Fight to Defend Rights appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

This article is part of a series on the current state of civil society organisations (CSOs), which was the focus of International Civil Society Week (ICSW), sponsored by CIVICUS, and which took place in Belgrade, April 8-12.

The post When Youth Take on The Fight to Defend Rights appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Mouna Ben Garga
TUNIS, Apr 12 2019 (IPS)

Sometimes a peak into the future reminds us just how stuck we are in the past and present.

It was the talk of the Middle East’s largest annual media industry gathering: a robot journalist – the region’s first – that wowed some 3,000 industry leaders and practitioners at the Arab Media Forum (AMF) in Dubai recently.

In an address titled “Future News Anchors”, the robot, known as A20-50, waxed lyrical about robots that would report ‘tirelessly’ all day, every day and be programmed to do any task.

At a conference organised around the theme, “Arab Media: From Now to The Future”, it was ironic that journalism produced by programmed automatons was held up as a glimpse of what the future held for media in the Arab world.

Ironic because, considering the state of journalism in the Middle East, it doesn’t sound as much like the future as the region’s present and past.

Looking at news output in this polarized landscape, it often seems that journalists (and their organisations) are like robots, programmed to produce and promote certain political agendas ‘tirelessly’, all day, every day.

From Egypt to Kuwait, most news outlets support specific positions, usually those espoused by the companies or organisations that own or control them – often either toeing the official line or supporting rival agendas or political opposition.

Following the 2013 coup in Egypt and the civil wars in Syria, Yemen and Libya over the past decade, the pro-government media used the fear of instability and war to silence citizens and twist the facts.

For instance, the Egyptian mainstream media convinced its audience that the 2013 massacre of more than 900 people in Cairo was the only way to fight against terrorism.

In the context of the Middle Eastern media coverage of the killing of the Saudi journalist Khashoggi, both Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya television channels took up positions in front of the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul and resumed the fierce row between Qatar and Saudi Arabia, from there.

The truth was lost in this fierce political conflict and the Arab viewer had to cross-check the presented facts with other international reporting. This implicit bias and lack of balance polarized Arab public opinion and pushed news consumers to social media in search of trusted factual information, crushing the credibility in traditional media.

And when they aren’t busy working to manipulate bias in news coverage, Arab authorities are old hands at plain old media repression. Not surprisingly, nations in the Middle East and North Africa again find themselves at the bottom of Reporters Without Borders’ World Press Freedom Index of 2018.

Across the region, journalists and media organisations are under attack for their reporting – from intimidation to arrests, detention, prosecution and the shuttering of outlets. Four Arab countries – Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Syria – top the list of the world’s worst jailers of journalists ,according to the 2018 press freedom report by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).

Egypt jailed the most number of journalists on “false news” charges – 19, amid heightened global rhetoric about so-called fake news; The murder of exiled Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi agents in the country’s Instanbul consulate illustrated the extreme lengths the Gulf kingdom’s leaders would go to stop published criticism.

And in Syria, 13 journalists were killed in 2017, and more than 40 journalists and citizen-journalists are currently detained, kidnapped or have disappeared.

In this complex context of divisions, repression and lack of public trust, the future of trustworthy Arab media is in the hands of alternative media, journalists’ unity and active citizens.

Since the Arab spring, independent journalism platforms such as Daraj, Nawaat in Tunisia, and Beirut-based Raseef22 have emerged, offering alternative narratives that counter state propaganda and mainstream media self-censorship.

But the challenges for these organisations are their limited reach – many mainstream news consumers consider them elitist and targeting “intellectual” users – and their financial sustainability.

The key here is inclusivity. One of the most successful news outlets is AJ+ Arabic, a project that grew out of Al Jazeera’s Incubation and Innovation Group, focusing exclusively on social platforms targeting millennials.

The other major challenge – financial survival – calls for new, sustainable journalism business models developed around new forms of storytelling and original content production supported by creative funding approaches including crowdfunding and data sales or services, for example.

Empowering citizen journalism is another possible solution to producing independent media in the Arab world. Indeed, citizen journalists, young bloggers, and active tweeps are not governed by the same relationship between the state and media professionals and are authentic voices and channels to the Arab street – they speak its language and represent its concerns and challenges.

Alternative media leaders need to build the citizen capacity beyond data collection and reporting to include online security, storytelling and counter-narratives. Increasing the transfer of these savoir-faire to citizens would amplify more voices to tackle the polarization effect through facts.

But of course, there is a place in the future of quality Arab media for professional journalism. Professional bodies have a role to play in fight for press freedom in the region.

Local unions have to wage numerous battles for their own independence through advocating for better legislation that affords greater protection to reporters and that prohibits prosecutions for reporting.

They have to promote the development of more journalistic organisations and more actively resist government attempts to contain and control the media by positioning themselves as defenders of free, independent media, creating strong alliances with alternative media, citizens journalists and social media influencers.

They need to be inclusive to promote a positive narrative about the role of the media in citizens’ lives and bridge the social gap between journalists and the general public to increase support for stronger independent media.

As a major regional proxy war rages on in the region, dominating headlines and geopolitical agendas, the battle for a future independent Arab media that is trusted and trustworthy, is one that seeks to do away with robotic journalists and organisations programmed only to serve the interests of the powerful.

The post Hard Battle Ahead for Independent Arab Media appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

This article is part of a series on the current state of civil society organisations (CSOs), the focus of International Civil Society Week (ICSW), sponsored by CIVICUS, which concluded in Belgrade, April 12

 
Mouna Ben Garga is an Innovation Officer with CIVICUS, a global alliance of civil society organisations.

The post Hard Battle Ahead for Independent Arab Media appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 12 2019 (IPS)

The civic space in several African countries, including Tanzania, Burundi, Zambia, Sudan, Mozambique, Somalia and Eritrea, is gradually shrinking – and mostly under authoritarian leaders and repressive regimes.

The attacks are directed largely against human rights and civil society organizations (CSOs)— and specifically against the news media.

The UN Human Rights Office in Burundi was closed down last February at the insistence of the government, with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet expressing “deep regrets” over the closure, after a 23-year presence in the country.

“Since the UN Human Rights Office in Burundi was established in 1995, for many years we worked with the Government on peacebuilding, security sector reform, justice sector reform and helped build institutional and civil society capacity on a whole host of human rights issues,” Bachelet noted.

She said the Office helped ensure the incorporation of a human rights dimension to the implementation of the Arusha Agreement, which was the bedrock of the country’s stability for many years.

The Office played a leading role in the establishment of the independent National Commission on Human Rights, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, in legislative reforms and in the emergence of strong civil society organizations, Bachelet added.

Taking a wider look at the status of human rights and CSOs in the African continent, Judy Gitau, Regional Coordinator for the Africa Office of Equality Now, told IPS “civil society is under attack by repressive regimes in various African countries”.

One example is Tanzania, she said, where the State is clamping down on basic freedoms like association and peaceful assembly, with CSOs facing threats of closure if they highlight human rights violations.

“Not even freedom of expression is spared as all manner of laws are being introduced and invoked to limit civil society and media from expressing themselves online or on other written or published platforms.”

In Tanzania, she pointed out, the attack on civil society is now going beyond freedom of movement and association to daily operations, with some of actors being required to inform state officials of their day to day activities.

NGOs are also anxious about the security of their data and information within their premises, and the privacy of their internal and external communication.

“Burundi caused the United Nations to shut its local human rights office after 23 years, indicating that as a government it had made sufficient progress in human rights, so that the existence of the U.N. office was no longer justified.

However, opposing reports indicate that since 2015, when the incumbent President indicated he would run for a third term, contrary to Burundi’s Constitution, human rights violations have been rampant in Burundi, and this includes attacks against civil society activists highlighting violations of the constitution.

“The presence of an independent intergovernmental body in a State experiencing some form of civil unrest may result in the monitoring and recording of violations that can potentially be used in future international criminal proceedings.

So, it is telling, she said, that the UN local office would be shut down in Burundi at a time when there is a surge in reported violations occurring.

“It is most unfortunate that these developments are ongoing whilst meanwhile at the regional level there are also challenges, with the African Union shrinking its State accountability platform by limiting the engagement of civil society at the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights and the African Court. ”

Addressing reporters April 2, Robert Palladino, Deputy Spokesperson at the US State Department said the US is also deeply concerned by the Government of Burundi’s decision to extend indefinitely the suspension of broadcasts by the Voice of America (VOA) and to revoke the operating license of the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC).

This decision raises serious concerns for the freedom of expression enshrined in article 31 of Burundi’s constitution as well as for Burundi’s international human rights obligations.

“We call on the government to rescind its decision, and we urge the Government of Burundi to allow all journalists to operate in an environment free from intimidation. A free and independent media is indispensable to a vibrant, functioning democracy and to free and fair elections in 2020,” he declared.

Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch (HRW) has condemned the ban on Tanzania’s leading newspaper, The Citizen, pointing out it is part of a series of attacks on freedom of expression by the government of President John Pombe Magufuli.

Last year several CSO, including the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) urged Magufuli to end attacks on journalists and acknowledge the critical role that the civil society and independent media play in promoting peaceful coexistence.

‘‘This is all part of a wider pattern of repression targeting freedom of expression over the past few years including creating an excessively high fee to blog, criminalizing posting certain content online, fining TV stations, and prohibiting the publication of independent statistics without government permission”, HRW warned.

In March CPJ welcomed a ruling by the East African Court of Justice (EACJ) that multiple sections of Tanzania’s Media Services Act restrict press freedom and freedom of expression, and called on the Tanzanian government to repeal the act.

Last week, the CPJ and 37 other CSOs also issued a joint statement urging Mozambican authorities to immediately and unconditionally release community radio journalist Amade Abubacar, who has been in pre-trial detention since his arrest on January 5.

On the situation in conflict-ridden Sudan, Clement Nyaltesossi Voule, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression criticized the excessive use of force against peaceful protesters in Sudan.

According to one report, over 20 people have been killed and over 100 injured since 6 April—besides widespread arrests and attacks on journalists by the security forces.

A UN Commission of Inquiry has called on Eritrea to investigate allegations of extrajudicial killings by its security forces, including torture and enslaving hundreds of thousands, going back to 2016.

And in a policy briefing released in March, titled “Shrining Space in Zambia: Time for Action”, ActionAid said Zambia has a range of statutes that gives the country very broad powers to silence free expression and limit freedom of assembly.

“Some of these laws, like the 1930 Penal Code, were first used by the British to crack down on anti-colonial movements. Others such as the NGOs Act, Independent Broadcasting Act, and the proposed Cyber Crime Act, were recently introduced to regulate and restrict newer forms of speech and association”.

In a statement released here, Bachelet reminded the authorities in Sudan of their overarching duty to ensure the protection of the human rights of all people and to refrain from the use of violence.

“This is a very critical, volatile moment for Sudan and there is deep uncertainty and unease about the future,” Bachelet said.

“We are closely monitoring developments and call on the authorities to refrain from using force against peaceful protestors, and to ensure that security forces and judicial authorities act in full accordance with the rule of law and Sudan’s international human rights obligations.”

She said “the crisis in Sudan has its roots in human rights grievances – economic, social, civil and political rights. The solution must also be grounded in human rights. I call on the Government to address the people’s demands. There needs to be a concerted effort, with the meaningful participation of civil society, to work to resolve these grievances.”

The writer can be contacted at thalifdeen@ips.org

The post Civil Society, Press Freedom & Human Rights Under Attack in Africa appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

This article is part of a series on the current state of civil society organisations (CSOs), which is the focus of International Civil Society Week (ICSW), sponsored by CIVICUS, and scheduled to conclude in Belgrade, April 12

The post Civil Society, Press Freedom & Human Rights Under Attack in Africa appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Jua Kali founder Laurah John. Jua Kali is a social enterprise tackling waste management and helping to reduce reliance on St. Lucia’s only landfill. Courtesy: Laurah John

By Alison Kentish
CASTRIES, Apr 12 2019 (IPS)

Jua Kali is a social enterprise tackling waste management and helping to reduce reliance on St. Lucia’s only landfill, which will reach the end of its lifespan in 2023. The company, with its slogan ‘Trashing the Idea of Waste,’ hosts waste collection drives through pop up depots that encourage residents to bring in glass, plastic and tin cans in exchange for supermarket shopping points.
This is happening as St. Lucia, like other small island states, faces climate resilience issues with freshwater quality and deterioration in marine and coastal ecosystems.
Jua Kali is the brainchild of Laurah John. She talks to IPS about why she established Jua Kali and the challenges that she has faced on the project.

Excerpts of the interview follow:

Inter Press Service (IPS): Tell me about your background.

Laurah John (LJ): I am a purpose driven, creative rebel and sustainability change agent or at the very least I try to embody those traits through my work with Jua Kali Ltd. – a profit-for-purpose, social enterprise that seeks to provide innovative and sustainable resource recovery solutions to address waste management issues in Small Island Developing States through strategic partnerships.

Before Jua Kali, I was a Social Development Practitioner/Short-term Consultant for the World Bank and Caribbean Local Economic Development project. I was also employed with the Ministry of Social Transformation.

IPS: What led you to establish Jua Kali Ltd.?

LJ: In 2012, I completed a Master’s in Urban Studies from the Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, Canada. My master’s thesis, “Wasted Lives: Determining the Feasibility of Establishing a Test Case Resource Recovery Programme in the Urban Poor Community of Faux-a-Chaud, Saint Lucia” sought to explore Resource Recovery as a tool for alleviating urban poverty, enhancing environmental sustainability and bettering communities. This research formed the basis of a business idea that led me and an eight person team to win the 8th [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation] UNESCO Youth Forum Startup Weekend in 2013 and led to the creation of Jua Kali Ltd.  in August 2014.

IPS: Tell me about your slogan, ‘Trashing the Idea of Waste’.

LJ: We acknowledge waste as a design flaw in how we built our societies and do not see it as acceptable. We are challenging the public to re-think the concept of waste and question consumption patterns and how that contributes to the problem. We are empowering consumers to recognise that they have the right to leverage (their dollar) and demand that producers create better quality products that address the end-of-life reality of their goods.
Producers take limited resources to create goods that are bought then thrown out. If we no longer believe that waste is acceptable, it means that this product, once utilised, needs to feed into some other process for continuity – closing the loop!

IPS: How do you host collection drives and are you satisfied with public reception?

LJ: The collection drives are based on the Pop Up shop concept – hence the name Pop Up depots – where we set up shop with our tents, tables, chairs and army of volunteers, to create an area where the public may drop-off used household materials like plastic bottles and containers, glass jars and bottles, as well as cans and tins. In return, they receive points on their Massy Stores Loyalty Card. We set up twice a month.

We are very satisfied with the public’s reception! From our very first day back with the depots (Mar. 2, 2019), many people came up to us to say how happy they were that the depots had resumed, what a great initiative it is, and that they hoped it was coming back for good – encouraging words that reinforced that we are on the right path.

IPS: What are some of the challenges you face in this project?

LJ: Raising awareness is our biggest challenge. Airtime is expensive and although we have some sponsorship in this regard, much more is required to have a consistent presence to remind the public of the depots. Additionally, where people receive their information changes depending on what part of the island they reside. This requires a communications strategy that is both robust and multidimensional, pulling on a variety of platforms to target different audiences.

IPS: Where do you see Jua Kali in 5 years?

LJ: As a regional leader in socio-environmental stewardship.

IPS: Why is waste diversion and reduction so crucial to the climate change and environmental discussion?

LJ: To appreciate the importance of waste diversion and reduction activities and their contribution to the climate change and environmental discussion, we must first understand the severity of their impact. Typical disposal and treatment of waste in a landfill can produce emissions of several greenhouse gases (GHGs), most significantly methane, which contributes to global climate change. Other forms of waste disposal also produce GHGs though mainly in the form of carbon dioxide.

Additionally, improper waste disposal can create or exacerbate disasters, for example, by clogging waterways leading to flash flooding and creating hazardous public health conditions by contaminating water sources, creating breeding grounds for disease borne vectors such as mosquitoes. Furthermore, on a small island like Saint Lucia with a limited landmass, sending our trash to a landfill takes up valuable productive land. There has to be a better way!

IPS: Do you think the Caribbean is giving sustainable waste diversion and reduction due attention?

LJ: More and more, Caribbean countries are giving attention to the waste issue, primarily because of how visible it has become with the increased use of plastics, the international campaign against plastic pollution and the detrimental impact this can have on tourism based economies. There is also a growing awareness and research to highlight the negative impact of waste on water quality and fisheries. As such, this is driving action towards supporting initiatives like ours. Could it use more attention? Definitely, but we are making headway.

I would like to encourage the public to believe that small, individual actions to reduce or divert waste together will make a difference! #bethechange

Related Articles

• Anguilla’s Fishers Share their First-Hand Knowledge About Climate Change and its Impact
• Scholar Questions ‘Techie’ Approach to Dealing with Climate Change
• Helping St. Vincent’s Fishers Maintain an Essential Industry in a Changing Climate

The post Q&A: Building Resilience through Waste Diversion and Reduction appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Delivering services through a faith-based NGO in Zimbabwe..." Credit: Walter Keller, third-eye-photography.jimdo.com

By Azza Karam
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 12 2019 (IPS)

Since 2008, a number of articles/opinions have been written, on the nexus between religion and development.

In chronological order, the articles first made the case for why ‘religion matters’ to the attainment of developmental objectives, noting how religious leaders are critical to changing social norms which can be in contradiction to human rights, and noting the extent to which faith-based organisations (FBOs) have anyway served as the original social service providers known to human kind.

Around 2014, the articles continued in the same vein, i.e. making the case that partnering with religious actors was an increasingly recognized necessity within the UN itself, but also for other governments and non-governmental development partners.

Except this time, the argument incorporated some of the political facets of religion. At the height of the ISIS/so-called Islamic State terrorism, the articles argued for recognition of the value of religious engagement, whether it was intervening in combatting Ebola or seeking to counter violent extremism.

In 2015 and 2016, the call was to acknowledge that increasing partnerships with religious NGOs, for health, education, nutrition and other aspects of development, was “the new normal” for development practitioners.

Azza Karam

Moreover, the argument was that such partnerships were in and of themselves, a means of countering the narratives of violence and extremism in communities.

In 2017, however, another note crept into the analysis on the intersections between religion, development and foreign policy: a note of warning.

The caution noted the increasing preference, undertaken by certain governments, in promoting more direct partnerships with religious NGOs in other countries, rather than supporting multilaterals to scale up successful partnership initiatives for the SDGs/Agenda 2030.

The article noted that the interest on the part of some governments to circumvent multilateral partnerships and aim for direct support to specific religious NGOs abroad, carried a “…danger … that such efforts will be misconstrued as the new colonial enterprise in international development, playing into rising religious tensions globally.

History is replete with examples where mobilizing religious actors in other countries, no matter how well-intentioned, can create some rather unholy alliances”.

In fact, this was the beginning of a now ongoing concern wherein ‘religion’ and ‘religious engagement’, somehow delinked from people’s faith and/or beliefs, are increasingly perceived as an element in the toolbox of development and foreign policy praxis – i.e. a transactional commodity.

This can take many forms. Including an increasing convening of FBOs as ‘non traditional partners’ to be hosted and feted around policy tables, building new NGOs and INGOs around ‘religion’ and ‘religious engagement’, formulating business propositions around these themes, and now, increasingly, seeking to tap into the financial resource bases of some of these faith-based entities (largely Islamic ones).

A few of the most skeptical voices are now noting (mostly in private conversations) that ‘add religion and stir’ could be argued to be ‘the new flavor’ in the market of international development.

But being in the ‘toolbox of practices and approaches’, per se, is not unhelpful. On the contrary, development – writ large to include peace, security and human rights – is a series of learned processes.

By now it is even a cliché to say that there is no one-size fits all development intervention. By extension therefore, different ‘tools’ are needed to assess what or which intervention works, and what may not, in diverse contexts.

And there is a significant body of evidence built, which proves that FBOs are key actors in development, and that investing in partnerships with FBOs is cost-effective and socially transformative (see the Joint Learning Initiative on Faith and Local Communities – https://jliflc.com/

But when ‘religious engagement’ can be part of a transactional approach, are there guarantees that the link to people’s faith, and belief systems, will not be forgotten, overlooked, or worse still, appear to be abused?

The fact is, FBOs symbolize, and in some cases, epitomize and uphold, what many people actually believe in. That is also why many FBOs can draw upon the regular contributions of believers (e.g. donations and collections in churches and zakat contributions).

Many FBOs are pleased with the secular policy makers’ increased attentions, and eager for more as they see this as a vindication of their particular wisdom and unique value-added.

But some are beginning to voice an increasing skepticism, “[W]e feel as though we are treated, at best, as a rubber stamp… instrumentalised to serve already agreed upon agendas…” is not an uncommon refrain.

The increase in the number of meetings (mostly of the same groups of FBOs) is not necessarily accompanied by equivalent financial and/or political support to actual multi-faith collaboration or advocacy.

Nor are these multiple convenings, leading to innovative governmental or intergovernmental support for broader, integrated civil society engagement for human rights, in an era of shrinking civic space globally.

Some of the smaller FBOs are slowly beginning to question the time they are devoting to answer the increasing meetings hosted by some governments and organisations.

Their presence at these increasing number of meetings, the FBOs argue, is likely contributing to enhance the appearance of the conveners’ image as ‘sensitive to religious sensibilities’; as being ‘concerned for freedom of religion or belief, or for religious minorities (often not in their own back yard but in other countries), and/or appearing to be savvy enough to address the ‘missing link’ in development and peacemaking interventions.

Yet other international FBOs, by now well-versed in engaging with certain policymakers, are taking the opportunity to stipulate thinly veiled conditionalities for their engagement. Peacemaking, environmental stewardship, protection of children and minorities, are all ‘good’.

But gender, gender equality, gender identity, comprehensive sexuality education, reproductive health, reproductive rights, sexual rights, and/or family planning, are all no-go areas for some of the well-established FBOs.

The price for engagement on one set of issues with these partners, therefore, may well be the forgoing – or silencing – of the human rights – and dignity – of others.

Other faith-based partners are viewing the governmental and intergovernmental interest in their methodologies, and now, increasingly, in their resourcing modalities (e.g. in Islamic financing) with more suspicion.

Barely accusatory questions such as “are you interested in partnering with us or in picking our brains?” and “why are you interested in our money all of a sudden?” are now heard in more than one meeting whether in Stockholm, New York, Cairo or Buenos Aires.

Certainly such questions can be dismissed as misunderstandings or lack of awareness, or shrugged off by those whose convictions are so strong that the right thing is being done. But would it be wise, perhaps, to pause and reflect on the root causes which may be inspiring such questions in the first place?

Are we honoring multi-religious civic collaboration for sustainable development, or are we possibly risking making religious engagement a transactional enterprise – and thereby forgoing some of the most difficult human rights?

The post Religion & Development: An Enhanced Approach or a Transaction? appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Dr. Azza Karam is a Senior Advisor at the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), Coordinator of UN Interagency Task Force on Religion, and Professor on Religion and Development at the Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.

The post Religion & Development: An Enhanced Approach or a Transaction? appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Credit: CIVICUS

By Lysa John
BELGRADE, Apr 11 2019 (IPS)

It is an incredible privilege to welcome you all to the ‘International Civil Society Week’. I am going to remind us of the reasons that make it so important for us to be here in Belgrade this week.

This is our 16th global convening of civil leaders and 4th edition of the International Civil Society Week in particular – following on from events held in South Africa, Colombia and Fiji.

Our first World Assembly, as it was known then, was held in Hungary in 1997, and this time we have gathered in the Balkans – and we are very grateful to our peers in Serbia for hosting us.

Serbia currently features on the CIVICUS Monitor’s “Watch List” which draws attention to countries where there are serious and ongoing threats to civic space.

By hosting ICSW 2019 in Serbia, we hope to shine a spotlight on the strengths and challenges of civil society in this region, and find ways to amplify and support their efforts.

Civic freedoms are currently under attack in 111 countries. In other words, over six billion people face serious challenges in the exercise of freedoms of expression, association and peaceful assembly which are essential to an empowered and enabled civil society.

There is a continuing crisis facing civil society organisations and activists across the world – a global civic space emergency. Our job is to find ways to ensure this does not become the ‘new normal’.

We cannot be the generation that lost the fight to protect civic freedoms and democratic values. We owe the citizens, civic leaders and communities of the future a significantly stronger basis to organise for and achieve their rights.

There aren’t many people in the world who can genuinely claim to wake up every morning thinking about how to make the world a more just, more honest and more compassionate place. And yet, we have close to 1,000 people in this very room who do just that.

With over 900 delegates from 100+ countries gathered here, you can safely expect to meet every major form of civil society that works to defend and promote human rights worldwide – ranging from community groups, social entrepreneurs, academic organizations, campaigning networks, think tanks and foundations — in one place over the next few days.

We have the opportunity to connect lessons and inspirations while we are together here. Yet it is the changes that we will test and activate when we return to our personal and professional spaces that make being here worthwhile.

This could be refreshed strategies to challenge discrimination and exclusion or new ways to demonstrate innovation and accountability as a sector.

Our deliberations must reflect the urgency and intent required to make the changes we need to see in the real world – and in this gathering right here we have exactly the kind of determination and optimism needed to see this through. Thank you for being here – we wish you a truly inspired week!

I cannot end without thanking again our hosts in Serbia, Civic Initiatives and the Balkans Civil Society Network, for their warm and generous hospitality without which we wouldn’t be here.

A special mention is also due to the hosts of the previous ICSW held in Fiji – the Pacific Island NGO Forum – who are also here. Thank you for the lessons and achievements of our last gathering, which has enabled us to be more prepared and more ambitious this year.

The post Shining a Spotlight on the Strengths & Challenges of Civil Society in the Balkans appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

This article is part of a series on the current state of civil society organisations (CSOs), which is the focus of International Civil Society Week (ICSW), sponsored by CIVICUS, and scheduled to conclude in Belgrade, April 12.

 
Lysa John, Secretary-General of CIVICUS, in her opening address to the International Civil Society Week (ICSW)

The post Shining a Spotlight on the Strengths & Challenges of Civil Society in the Balkans appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Infringements of press freedom and the targeting of journalists is one of the topics being discussed at the International Civil Society Week (ICSW 2019) - an annual gathering of civil society leaders, activists and engaged citizens taking place in the Serbian capital Apr. 8-12. Courtesy: CIVICUS

By A. D. McKenzie
BELGRADE, Apr 11 2019 (IPS)

“Stay safe. There’s no story worth dying for.”
That’s the message to journalists from Nada Josimovic, programme coordinator of Amsterdam-based media rights organisation Free Press Unlimited.

Most journalists would agree with her. But beyond the threat of physical harm, women reporters and journalists of colour run another risk: being harassed online, with the spouting of sexist and racist venom.

This, of course, happens to rights defenders as well, all over the world. But in the case of women, the harassment is “sexualised … sometimes with threats of rape,” said Josimovic.

“How does one protect oneself?” she asked, during a panel discussion on press freedom at International Civil Society Week (ICSW 2019) – an annual gathering of civil society leaders, activists and engaged citizens taking place in the Serbian capital Apr. 8-12.

Co-hosted by the Johannesburg-based global civil society alliance CIVICUS, the meeting is focusing on a range of issues that include infringements of press freedom and the targeting of journalists.

As the event took place, news surrounding the deaths of media workers continued. On Apr. 11, the Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), Audrey Azoulay, issued a statement condemning the killing of a sports reporter in the north-western Mexican town of Salvador Alvarado on Mar. 24.

“I condemn the killing of Omar Iván Camacho Mascareño,” stated Azoulay. “I trust the investigation underway will enable the authorities to bring the perpetrator of this crime to justice.”

Mascareño, of local radio broadcaster Chavez Radiocast, was found dead with signs of severe head trauma and injuries indicating that he had been beaten to death, according to media reports.
UNESCO issues its “condemnations” on a regular basis, given the frequency of attacks.

The UN agency has the mandate to promote the safety of journalists and does so “through global awareness-raising, capacity building and a range of actions, notably the UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity”, according to the organisation.

This includes a module on Combatting Online Abuse: When Journalists and Their Sources are Targeted, but Josimovic and others stress that enough isn’t being done to end the specific harassment of women journalists.

“I think that media outlets don’t have good support systems for this kind of attacks,” she told IPS. “The legal aspect is also complicated.”

Social media companies, for instance, will not reveal the address of the perpetrators when the targeted individual complains, she said. Additionally, there is sometimes a lack of solidarity from editors and colleagues who have never experienced the harassment.

“Because it’s not happening in the real world, people kind of minimise the effect,” she added. “But women in general face more harassment on-line. In every sector, it’s there.”

Anyone who has doubts about this has only to look at some of the reports via the International Women’s Media Foundation, she said.

Rights activists say that broad coalitions were needed to promote the protection of rights and that journalists and human rights advocates need to work together. Courtesy: CIVICUS

Because of the similarity in methods used to attack rights defenders globally, press freedom groups and civil society organisations should increase ways of working together, said some delegates at the ICSW meeting.

Vukasin Petrovic, senior director for programme strategy at Washington DC-based rights monitoring organisation Freedom House, said that broad coalitions were needed to promote the protection of rights.

“Journalists and human rights advocates are the centrepiece of any strategy,” he told IPS. “The protection of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly are in the interests of both.”

Responding to a question about required journalistic “distance” and impartiality, he acknowledged that sometimes the relationship between the media and civil society can become too close.

“We do need transparency and accountability on all sides,” he said. “But building coalitions can make advocacy more powerful.”

For Dragan Sekulovski, executive director of the Association of Journalists of Macedonia – a country that’s “a champion when it comes to wiretapping” – part of the defence of media needs to come from the sector itself.

That includes promoting quality journalism and “leaving this to the audience to judge”, he said. In this way, public opinion may swing in favour of the media, helping to deter attacks and harassment.

“Quality” journalism requires resources, however, and as various media groups point out, the sector has been ravaged over the past years by job losses, low pay, copyright abuses and other ills.

This is compounded by declining public trust – because of a range of factors, including smear campaigns, accusations of purveying “fake news”, journalists’ own behaviour, and, of course, calling media “the enemy of the people” as American President Donald Trump has done.

According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, many of Trump’s tweets so far as president has “insulted or criticised journalists and outlets, or condemned and denigrated the news media as a whole”.

It has thus become an uphill battle to get some sections of the public to see the importance of journalists’ work, and to engage actively in protecting media freedom, said activists at the ICSW meeting.

“Media organisations need to engage with citizens to make them understand why (citizens) need them,” said Josimovic.

Whether this would stop the attacks and harassment, especially of women journalists, is anyone’s guess. The issue will no doubt be raised again during discussions May 1-3, when the “main celebration” of UNESCO’s World Press Freedom Day takes place in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Related Articles

• Attacks on Media in the Balkans Sound Alarm Bells for Democracy
• Smears, Laws, Lack of Cooperation: Tools Against Activists

The post No Story Worth Dying For appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

This article is part of a series on the current state of civil society organisations (CSOs), which will be the focus of International Civil Society Week (ICSW), sponsored by CIVICUS, and scheduled to take place in Belgrade, April 8-12.

The post No Story Worth Dying For appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Ulysses Dorotheo
BANGKOK, Thailand, Apr 11 2019 (IPS)

The image of a smoking toddler from Indonesia horrified the world but did little to motivate local policy makers to enact measures to protect children and youth from the harms of tobacco use. Indonesia has one of the world’s highest smoking rates where two out of three men and about 40 percent of adolescent boys smoke.

Cigarette prices in Indonesia are among the cheapest in the region, where a pack of Marlboros is sold for as little as US$ 1.70, while local brands or loose sticks are dirt cheap ($ 0.05 per stick), easily affordable to the nation’s 65 million smokers.

Indonesia has a complex tobacco taxation structure of 12-tiers, dividing between machine-made white cigarettes, machine-made Kretek cigarettes, hand-rolled cigarettes, size of manufacturing factories, and more. Annual increases in tobacco tax are small, having little impact on cigarette prices to reduce consumption, especially among the poor, who form the bulk of smokers.

In 2017, the Ministry of Finance issued a Regulation on Tobacco Excise Tax to increase tax for 2018 and at the same time stipulated a roadmap for the simplification of tax tiers, reducing from 12 tiers to 5 tiers by 2021.

The tier simplification roadmap was viewed as a win for public health, as fewer tiers will close the tax and price gaps and reduce the incentive for smokers to switch to cheaper cigarettes. However, a year later, in November 2018, the simplification roadmap was suddenly revoked thereby cancelling the tax increase and tier reduction.

In his review of hundreds of news articles, Mouhamad Bigwanto, a public health researcher from the University of Muhammadiyah Prof. Dr. HAMKA, saw pro-tobacco industry groups unfold a systematic, tactical plan that led to the defeat of the tobacco tax increase and tiers simplification.

Documented in Tobacco Industry Interference Undermined Tobacco Tax Policies in Indonesia, released by the Southeast Asia Tobacco Control Alliance (SEATCA), his findings illustrate the tobacco industry’s plan to present the industry as being crucial to the economy, while simultaneously undermining and derailing the tobacco excise policy through a coordinated multi-pronged strategy.

In mid-2018, the Coordinating Ministry of Economic Affairs released a new Tobacco Roadmap on the importance of the industry. This Tobacco Roadmap was the product of Independent Research and Advisory Indonesia (IRAI), a think-tank that the Ministry engaged, whose founder and head was the former CEO of Sampoerna Foundation, the charity arm of PT HM Sampoerna, which is owned by one of the world’s biggest cigarette manufacturers. IRAI lists Sampoerna Strategic, a tobacco-related entity, as one of its clients.

The pro-industry Tobacco Roadmap rationalizes the importance of the tobacco industry to the economy and argues for its protection and growth until 2045, rehashing past arguments used by the industry to oppose tobacco control.

It formed the basis to initiate and support measures to reject tobacco tax increase and simplification. The Roadmap was introduced and explained to various government departments including with the Ministry of Health.

Various pro-tobacco industry front groups were mobilized to build support and create public pressure. These groups vocalized a consistent main message that increasing tax will ruin the industry that employs 6 million workers, resulting in massive unemployment and reduction in government revenue.

The messages of these groups were all well-aligned, echoed, and re-echoed to reinforce one another. Media coverage of their messages reached a crescendo at the appropriate time. On cue, academics and research institutes generated and released evidence that rejected tax increase and tiers simplification.

A prominent religious organization which has a powerful voice in the Muslim majority country issued a clear message that the government must revoke the excise simplification plan. Champions from relevant government ministries, such as Labor and Industry, made pro-industry statements that influenced the decision-making process up to the highest executive level (President’s level).

In contrast, voices from health groups supporting tax increase and simplification were less in frequency and magnitude compared to the pro-tobacco industry voices, such that at the end of 2018, following strong pressure from various pro-tobacco industry groups and institutions and systematic interference from the tobacco industry, the Government announced it will not increase the excise tax in 2019 and revoked the simplification roadmap.

The cancellation of the tax increase and annulment of the simplification roadmap show both the might of the tobacco industry in influencing policy makers and the vulnerability of the Government to industry interference.

While the tobacco industry’s strategy to defeat tax increase may not be new or novel, the willingness of policy makers to respond positively to the industry is astounding when juxtaposed against current global awareness on the harms of tobacco use.

Across the globe countries are setting target dates to become tobacco-free, but the Indonesian government is moving purposefully in the opposite direction to protect the tobacco industry for the next two decades, unmindful that about 230,000 Indonesians are killed annually by tobacco-related diseases.

Paradoxically, at high level meetings, Indonesia has committed to implement the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which include a target to achieve health for all by reducing tobacco use.

Clearly other measures are needed to protect public health policy from being undermined by commercial interests. These include:

• • Adopting a government code of conduct that regulates interactions with the tobacco industry and its affiliates to ensure transparency and prevent industry interference.

 

• • Prohibiting institutions and individuals with tobacco industry ties from developing tobacco control policies because of their clear conflict of interests.

 

• Requiring political parties to disclose their funding sources as part of good governance.

*SEATCA is a multi-sectoral non-governmental alliance promoting health and saving lives by assisting ASEAN countries to accelerate and effectively implement the evidence-based tobacco control measures contained in the WHO FCTC. Acknowledged by governments, academic institutions, and civil society for its advancement of tobacco control movements in Southeast Asia, the WHO bestowed on SEATCA the World No Tobacco Day Award in 2004 and the WHO Director-General’s Special Recognition Award in 2014.

The post Revealed — A Roadmap to Defeat Tobacco Tax & Keep Indonesians Addicted appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Dr. Ulysses Dorotheo is Executive Director of the Southeast Asia Tobacco Control Alliance (SEATCA)*

The post Revealed — A Roadmap to Defeat Tobacco Tax & Keep Indonesians Addicted appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Exterior wall of the Welikada Prison, Colombo. Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena said he would reinstate executions after more than 40 years and apply death sentences to those convicted of drug offences. Credit: Ranmali Bandarage/IPS

By Tharanga Yakupitiyage
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 11 2019 (IPS)

While figures have dropped, the “inhuman” use of the death penalty still remains too common worldwide, a human rights group said.

In a new report, Amnesty International found that global executions fell by almost one-third last year, making it the lowest rate in at least a decade.

“The dramatic global fall in executions proves that even the most unlikely countries are starting to change their ways and realise the death penalty is not the answer,” said Amnesty International’s Secretary General Kumi Naidoo.

“This is a hopeful indication that it’s only a matter of time before this cruel punishment is consigned to history, where it belongs,” he added.

For instance, Burkina Faso abolished the death penalty in 2018, while both Malaysia and the Gambia declared an official moratorium on executions.

In Iran, where the death penalty is an all too common form of punishment, executions fell by a whopping 50 percent.

Despite the positive news, the use of the death penalty has continued, violating basic human rights including the right to a fair trial and the importance of ensuring dignity and respect.

According to Amnesty International, there were 2,531 death sentences globally in 2018, just a slight decrease from 2,591 reported in 2017.

Though there was some progress, Iran still continues to account for more than one third of all recorded executions.

In fact, approximately 78 percent of all known executions were carried out in just four countries: Iran, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, and Iraq.

Hồ Duy Hải is among 600 people under the death sentence in Vietnam, and still remains at risk of execution.

Convicted of theft and murder, Hồ Duy Hải said he was tortured and forced to sign a “confession” which he later retracted.

In 2015, the Committee on Judicial Affairs of the National Assembly found serious violations of criminal procedural law in the handling of Hồ Duy Hải’s case.

“It has been 11 years since he was arrested and our family was torn apart. I can no longer bear this pain. Just thinking about my son suffering behind bars hurts me so much,” his mother Nguyễn Thị Loan told Amnesty International.

“I would like the international community to help reunite my family. You are my only hope,” she added.
While exact figures are unknown, China is still the world’s top executioner with potentially thousands of people sentenced to death each year.

The death penalty is applied in a range of offences including non-violent offences which violates international law and standards as they do not classify as the “most serious crimes.”

In June 2018, authorities in Lufeng city in southeastern China conducted a “mass sentencing rally” where 10 people were charged for drug-related offences and executed.

Elsewhere, the use of the death penalty has been reintroduced which, in some cases, is happening in countries that have had a decades-long moratorium.

Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena said he would reinstate executions after more than 40 years and apply death sentences to those convicted of drug offences, like the Philippines.

The government even posted a job advertisement seeking an executioner with “excellent moral character” and a “very good mind and mental strength.”

Sudan resumed the implementation of death sentences after a hiatus in 2017, including the sentencing of Noura Hussein.

Hussein, a young Sudanese woman, was married against her will to Abdulrahman Mohamed Hammad at the age of 16 and was raped when she refused to consummate the marriage.

When Hammad tried to rape her again, Hussein defended herself and in the struggle, he sustained a fatal knife injury and died.

Despite evidence of self-defence, Hussein was convicted and sentenced to death, prompting global outrage.

“I was in absolute shock when the judge told me I had been sentenced to death. I hadn’t done anything to deserve to die. I couldn’t believe the level of injustice – especially on women,” Hussein told Amnesty International.

“My case was especially hard as at the time of sentencing, my family had disowned me. I was alone dealing with the shock,” she added.

Though the death sentence was overturned, it has only been replaced with a five-year prison sentence and financial compensation of 8,400 dollars. Still, prosecutors are pushing to reinstate the death sentence in her case.

The global struggle is still far from over, Naidoo noted.

“Slowly but steadily, global consensus is building towards ending the use of the death penalty…from Burkina Faso to the U.S., concrete steps are being taken to abolish the death penalty. Now it’s up to other countries to follow suit,” he said.

“We all want to live in a safe society, but executions are never the solution. With the continued support of people worldwide, we can – and we will – put an end to the death penalty once and for all.”

Related Articles

• Death Sentences Keep Sliding, Says Amnesty International

The post People Do Not “Deserve to Die”: Injustice of Death Penalty Persists appeared first on Inter Press Service.

By Susan Wilding
GENEVA, Apr 11 2019 (IPS)

Anti-government protesters invading Serbia’s state-owned television station, demanding that their voices be heard. Journalism bodies writing to the Albanian prime minister over plans to censor online media outlets. A Belgrade corruption-busting reporter forced to flee his house that had been torched; a Montenegrin investigative journalist shot in the leg outside her home.

These are just some of the violations emerging from the western Balkans as a clampdown on media freedom – and civil liberties – undermines Serbia’s and Montenegro’s bids to join the European Union.

It’s little wonder that Serbia tumbled 10 spots to rank 76th on the 2018 Reporters without Borders Press Freedom Index, which states bluntly: “Serbia has become a country where it is unsafe to be a journalist.” Its neighbours fare little better: Albania is in 75th place, Kosovo is ranked 78th and Montenegro is a dismal 103rd.

Smear campaigns against courageous journalists; impunity for those assaulting media players; collusion between politicians and brown-envelope reporters; high levels of concentration of media ownership in a few hands; threats of cripplingly expensive litigation; the chilling effect of self-censorship on reportage. The list of media abuses in the Balkans goes on and on.

Belgrade, Serbia is playing host to International Civil Society Week, running thro Friday April 12, bringing together over 900 delegates to debate solutions to some of the world’s most pressing challenges. Some of the questions on the agenda will be: What more can we, as civil society, do to ease this stranglehold on free expression? How can we raise our voices to protect individual and media liberties?

Such restrictions on the media are incompatible with participatory democracy, which depends on three fundamental human rights – freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of association and freedom of expression – which are also protected under international law. Any government that claims to have free and fair elections, and claims to be a democracy, cannot deny its citizens access to information and the right to be heard.

According to findings by the CIVICUS Monitor, an online platform that tracks threats to civil society in 196 countries, states are generally using two types of tactics to restrict civic freedoms, and the crack down on media freedoms is no exception.

The first is legal: imposing or enforcing laws that restrict democratic freedoms and criminalise free speech. For example, this includes bringing trumped-up judicial charges against journalists or media houses, thereby diverting energy and resources from watchdog journalism.

The second type comes in the form of extrajudicial means and are even more contemptible: including intimidating the media into submission through carefully coordinated smear campaigns and public vilification, and sometimes through physical intimidation and outright repression.

While such states may make an elaborate show of using (or abusing) the laws of the land to rein in the media, such censorship is clearly a perverse parody of democracy – an expression of a growing trend in which the ‘rule by law’ replaces the rule of law.

Sometimes these attacks on media are coming from “strongmen” leaders with the ambition of concentrating power and eliminating any checks and balances. In other instances, we see these kinds of restrictions imposed by governments that feel threatened and see media clampdowns as another way to hold onto power.

A weakened state or leaders who came to power through dubious means or with a small majority are likely to mute the civic space to cling to power. It may therefore, not be surprising that it’s happening in the Balkans, given the area’s fraught political history.

When popular dissent swells against unpopular policies and actions, a vulnerable state’s first target is the media, because of their potential role in unseating power. It is also something we see as a classic copy-and-paste tactic: questionable leaders see their regional neighbours getting away with it, with few if any repercussions, and follow suit.

Even the online space – the ultimate democratic arena of the 21st century, where the gladiatorial thrust and parry of views is essential to robust debate – is not being spared in this battle to seize ideological control of the marketplace of ideas.

Some countries have already shown that it’s entirely possible to shut down or control social media platforms, denying citizens their fundamental right to participate in debate and in policymaking.

The reasons that States give for silencing media vary but often include similar statements such as journalists are writing “defamatory” articles or disseminating “fake news”. Often, they maintain, the reportage is “unpatriotic”, “goes against our culture or values” or “does not advance our nationalist agenda”.

With the restrictions on media freedoms increasing in the Balkans, we should be highlighting the situation and sharing tried and tested strategies for pushing back and opening the space for a free and independent media.

We should be concerned that the world so easily shifted its attention away from the region after the terrible conflict that claimed so many lives 20 years ago. Why did we not linger a while to monitor the aftermath? Do we turn a blind eye to human rights abuses, as is the case in China and elsewhere, as long as there is peace, development and economic prosperity?

The post Attacks on Media in the Balkans Sound Alarm Bells for Democracy appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

This article is part of a series on the current state of civil society organisations (CSOs), which is the focus of International Civil Society Week (ICSW), sponsored by CIVICUS, and scheduled to conclude in Belgrade, April 12.

 
Susan Wilding is the head of the Geneva office at CIVICUS, a global alliance of civil society organisations.

The post Attacks on Media in the Balkans Sound Alarm Bells for Democracy appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Source: https://pixabay.com/de/users/qimono-1962238/

By Heike Kuhn
BERLIN, Apr 10 2019 (IPS)

What happens worldwide on Fridays, a regular working day and consequently, a school day? We are all witnessing that students do not attend their classes: During the week of March 15, 2019, according to www.fridaysforfuture.org, there were at least 1.6 million striking students in more than 125 countries on all continents. Students ask their governments and parents: “Why should I be studying for a future that soon may exist no more, if no one does anything to save that future?” And they pledge: “Dear adults, use your power!” The youngsters gather in front of their town halls, exposing signs and pictures #Fridaysforfuture or #Climatestrike.

How did this global movement start? It all began with the activism of one person, a girl from Sweden. Who is that girl? Greta Thunberg is a Swedish student, aged 15 in 2018. Due to the hot summer in 2018, causing severe fires in large forests in Sweden, she decided on August 20 to boycott school lessons until the general elections in her country on September 9 would have taken place. And she did. Her motivation: To advocate for the obligations voluntarily taken over by the Swedish government to reduce carbon emissions as foreseen by the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.

But even when the elections had taken place, she continued to boycott school lessons on Fridays. As a climate activist she has become a role model for thousands of students all over the world. In the following months, students followed her, in December 2018 there were more than 20.000 students in about 270 cities “on strike”, in Japan, Finland, USA, Australia and Germany. And these demonstrations do continue – every Friday, having now reached the impressive number of 1.6 million participants. You can listen to Greta Thunberg’s impressive speech addressing political leaders at the climate conference in Katowice (COP 24) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbDnPj0G0wY). What is her message to all these leaders and politicians? She argues that the adults in charge only speak about green growth because they are too scared to take measures which could be unpopular. From her point of view, the wrong decisions taken in the last decades are the cause for the mess we are in today. And she explains to the powerful leaders that they are not mature enough to take responsible decisions, even this burden is left to the children. Whereas in industrialized countries people can enjoy wealth, people in developping countries, especially children, suffer and are threatened with regard to their future.

This is a powerful statement. In the meantime, Greta has celebrated her 16th birthday. She has the Asperger syndrome, a mild form of autism. However, she is capable to come up with a clear view and responsible position with regard to the future and the action needed. Her view is much clearer than the one of adults, among them politicians, entrepreneurs or each of us. With strong impetus she explains that she does not understand why governments and citizens would not act, as climate change is threatening all of us.

We all know that climate change is a reality, only very few persons still deny the facts and the evidence behind it. Climate is changing rapidly, deepening the abyss between those who can adapt and protect their lives – the rich – and those who are directly exposed to it, many poor people in Africa, Asia or Latin America. They are threatened by floods, avalanches, tsunamis or simply because of drought. Climate change is the reason for people to leave their villages thus becoming refugees. Climate change makes childhood much harder for so many girls and boys worldwide or even destroys childhood at all. Far too often there is no education which is the most important way out of poverty and which creates perspectives for families.

At the same time, everyone is talking about sustainable life styles, but what is really happening? As citizens and as customers we see and feel our share. When taking the car or air plane even for short trips, we know we could easily walk or take the train. When consuming too much meat, we know we could eat less. Furthermore, we still use too much fossil fuel or witness the ongoing deforestation of tropical rainforests. However, we are perfectly aware that giving up some of these climate threatening habits would be very easy for us – so why are there so many obstacles?

Coming back to Swedish activist Thunberg and her recent presence in the media: Greta was invited to the World Economic Forum in Davos/Switzerland in January 2019 and there she talked to the powerful leaders of our governments. How did she get there? By train, of course, which meant she was travelling for 32 hours from Stockholm to the Alps. Once again, she delivered a most impressive speech, claiming that our house is on fire: A short summary of her key note: In Davos, where the focus is on economy, finance and growth, these seem to be the main global problems. As to Greta a turnaround is urgently needed, since financial success comes with an unthinkable price tag. Citing the scientific findings of the IPCC, she refers to the short deadline for homo sapiens to stop the emissions of green house gas. And she clearly states that this change will be uncomfortable to many of us. She urges leaders to take influence on political decisions and reminds them that the bigger their platform is, the bigger their responsibility is, too.

Who listens to Greta? Which politicians and leaders take action after the global movement fridaysforfuture? In my country, Germany, Chancellor Angela Merkel has complimented Greta on her activism and expressed sympathy for the global movement (a slight irritation after a comment of Chancellor Merkel during the Munich Security Conference in March 2019 has been discarded). But where is the action needed? Let us remember that global leaders voluntarily agreed on two major texts in 2015: the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. Whereas SDG 13 asks for taking urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts, showcasing the political will of all the subscribing 192 countries, the legal character of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change is a binding one. What action have leaders taken since then in order to fulfil their ambition and legal obligations? In 2015, Greta was 13 years old, in 2018, when analysing the global climate situation, she started her activism. In between, on the occasion of the International Women’s Day on March 8, Greta Thunberg was proclaimed the most important woman of the year in Sweden in 2019. On March 31, she received the German Special Climate Protection award (Goldene Kamera). And three Norwegian MPs have nominated her as a candidate to receive this year’s Nobel Prize for Peace.

From my point of view, the most important consequences of Greta’s wake-up call are the fact that it brings about a global discussion for the change needed. Furthermore, it causes incentives for real leaders and reasonable politicians to act today. I personally hope that Greta will be right in her analysis of the IPPC’s report that there is still a short deadline left for homo sapiens to stop the emissions of greenhouse gas and safe our planet. And, hopefully, that Yuval Noah Harari, the author of the famous bestseller “Sapiens” may revise his conclusion at the end of his book, that in the course of seventy thousand years homo sapiens has become the master of the entire planet and, at the same time, has become the terror of the ecosystem.

The post Fridays for Future – following Greta Thunberg! appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Michel Forst, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders next report will focus on impunity, as only about 5 percent of attacks on rights defenders have been investigated and the perpetrators “brought to justice”. Credit: AD McKenzie/IPS

By A. D. McKenzie
BELGRADE, Apr 10 2019 (IPS)

The murder of Brazilian politician and human rights activist Marielle Franco just over a year ago and attacks on other rights activists around the world have galvanised civil society organisations, with the United Nations heightening its own strategy to protect rights defenders.
However, some countries aren’t interested in cooperating with civil society or international governmental bodies and even actively engage in smear campaigns against rights advocates.

“An increasing number of states have now refused to cooperate with the UN,” said Michel Forst, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, in the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

“They don’t want to invite any more special rapporteurs to visit the countries or to produce reports,” he told journalists at a press briefing during International Civil Society Week (ICSW 2019), an annual gathering of civil society leaders, activists and citizens taking place in the Serbian capital this week, Apr. 8-12.

The meeting – co-hosted by the Johannesburg-based global civil society alliance CIVICUS – has brought together more than 850 delegates who are focusing on issues ranging from “the crackdown on media freedom to emergency assistance for NGOs under attack”. It is also addressing the “power” of solidarity alongside greater accountability.

Forst said he was attending the event to learn from the participants. His next report, to be presented during the UN General Assembly in the fall, will focus on impunity, as only about 5 percent of attacks on rights defenders have been investigated and the perpetrators “brought to justice”, he told journalists.

A growing problem in protecting rights defenders is the way in which some states try to defame activists, Forst said. In regions from Europe to Latin America, there are on-going campaigns to discredit rights advocates, and public opinion can be influenced by the derogatory terminology.
“These campaigns are dangerous for defenders,” he said. “They are called ‘enemies of the state’, they are called ‘promoters of western values’, they are (said to be) ‘against development’.”

In some countries, activists are also accused of having links to terrorism and of opposing progress when they try to block projects that are disastrous for the environment or for indigenous peoples.

“What is also a matter of concern for me is that these campaigns are led by politicians, by political actors, prime ministers, ministers of foreign affairs, ministers of defence,” Forst added.

He said the Belgrade ICSW meeting was important for activists to see that what is happening in their home country or region may also be taking place elsewhere, so that they can try to build bridges and strengthen links.

The meeting has in fact highlighted similarities in methods of repression around the world – methods that include not only physical attacks, but surveillance, travel bans, on-line harassment and the use of government structures and legislation to try to suppress freedoms.

Even as the ICSW meeting takes place, rights organisations elsewhere have been issuing alarms about breaches of civic and media rights. Separately from the event in Belgrade, rights organisation PEN America on Apr. 9 warned that the “Trump administration’s targeting of journalists has reached a new level”.

The group pointed to reports from the U.S.-Mexico border (and leaked documents from a Department of Homeland Security whistle-blower) indicating that “U.S. government agencies have been tracking and monitoring over 50 individuals, mostly journalists and immigration advocates, as they report on the humanitarian situation” at the U.S. southern border.

Government entities have reportedly participated in the “tracking and monitoring of these journalists, including the creation of a U.S. government database containing sensitive personal information”, PEN America said. The group called the database “a shocking and unwarranted violation of journalists’ First Amendment rights” and “an appalling violation of press freedom”.

In France, meanwhile, the national branch of Amnesty International criticised a French “anti-riot” law that could threaten freedom of assembly and expression. The law, adopted by parliament, would allow police to systematically search protestors, and, despite certain assurances, it “remains a serious infringement on public freedom and the balance of power”, Amnesty France stated Apr. 9.

The law comes as France’s Gilets Jaunes (or Yellow Vests) continue their protests, with thousands marching on Apr. 6 in Paris and other cities for the 21st weekend in a row. Certain lawmakers say the legislation is necessary to prevent further destruction of property and life-threatening fires started by protestors during some of the demonstrations.

But France also uses other legislation “to target those defenders who are trying to help and rescue migrants coming to Europe via the Mediterranean sea,” said Forst, who is French.
“We’re seeing more and more the criminalisation of (rights) defenders”, through the use of the law, he said.

In Serbia, anti-government demonstrators are set to intensify their actions Apr. 13 — the day after ICSW 2019 ends — with what promises to be the biggest gathering since protests began last December.

Protestors are calling for free and fair elections and greater media freedom. (Last month some forced their way into the offices of Serbia’s state-run television network, to show dissatisfaction with what they called one-sided reporting.)

At the opening ceremony of ICSW, Serbian activists slammed President Aleksandar Vučić for repressive policies, often without naming him, and some called for protection of the media.

“We will stand up for freedom of journalists… the freedom not to be threatened in any way,” said Maja Stojanovic, of Serbian organisation Civic Initiatives, a co-host of the meeting.

Ahead of ICSW, Serbia was added to a watchlist of “nations where civic freedoms are under serious threat”. The watchlist – released by the CIVICUS Monitor, an online platform that tracks threats to civil society across the globe – said Serbian authorities have “orchestrated a smear campaign against demonstrators, labelling government opponents as ‘paid’ activists working against Serbian interests”.

The confused and disquieting developments in many countries further highlight the need to find cross-border solutions and to create links between rights defenders, Forst said.

The European Union, for instance, has guidelines for embassies of member states abroad on “how to protect rights defenders”, and funding is available for embassies to relocate individuals at risk, Forst told reporters. In addition, a network of shelter cities exists (the number of these is growing with continued attacks).

But it is difficult to relocate at-risk female activists who may have children, and here, too, there is often lack of cooperation or agreement on asylum requests.

While some countries can effectively help rights defenders in far-off regions, they seem powerless when it comes to their own neighbours.

Still, defenders are becoming “more efficient” in forming local, national and international networks, Forst said. “It is a battle … solidarity is important.”

He said the good news is that some countries that were “blocked in the past” are now granting access to international bodies to help protect defenders and to end impunity.

In contrast to states like the Philippines that are dangerous for rights defenders and don’t wish to “do anything to solve the problem”, other countries “like Mexico, Colombia, Honduras, Brazil now – maybe – do recognise, because of the number of killings … that they need to solve the problem,” Forst added.

In Brazil, meanwhile, activists and others are still asking: who killed Marielle Franco?

Related Articles

• Women Activists Protest Torture & Imprisonment Under Repressive Regimes
• Civil Society Leaders Meet Amid Protests, Attacks on Rights
• Grassroots Organising Points the way in Fight Against Rising Repression

The post Smears, Laws, Lack of Cooperation: Tools Against Activists appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

This article is part of a series on the current state of civil society organisations (CSOs), which will be the focus of International Civil Society Week (ICSW), sponsored by CIVICUS, and scheduled to take place in Belgrade, April 8-12.

The post Smears, Laws, Lack of Cooperation: Tools Against Activists appeared first on Inter Press Service.

A refrigerator being transported by cart.

By Joyce Msuya
NAIROBI, Kenya, Apr 10 2019 (IPS)

Our planet is heating up. 2018 was the fourth-warmest year on record, with peak temperatures engulfing the planet – from 43°C in Baku, Azerbaijan, to the low 30s across Scandinavia. The last four years have been the hottest since records began in 1880.

It is no surprise, then, that demand for cooling is growing. In just one part of the cooling sector, the number of air conditioners in use is expected to rise from 1.2 billion today to 4.5 billion by 2050 – boosted by the growing spending power of the global middle class.

We should not stop this growth in cooling. Almost one third of the world’s population faces dangerous temperatures for over 20 days a year, while heatwaves cause 12,000 deaths annually.

We need to provide equitable access to a technology that protects against extreme heat, keeps food fresh and vaccines stable, and so much more.

But we are stuck in a vicious cycle. As the planet warms, we need more cooling. More cooling means more power: energy demand for space cooling is projected to at least triple by 2050 – consuming the same amount of electricity as China and India today.

This means more planet-warming emissions – predicted to rise 90 per cent over 2017 levels by 2050. And back to the start of the cycle we go.

There is, however, a way out. A swift and targeted move to clean and efficient cooling can limit climate change, allow us to safely increase access to cooling for those who need it most and, according to the International Energy Agency, save up to USD 2.9 trillion globally through 2050 by using less electricity.

To accelerate the transition to clean and efficient cooling, we need a unified effort. As of last week, we have this effort, in the shape of the Cool Coalition – a new global effort led by UN Environment, the Climate and Clean Air Coalition, the Kigali Cooling Efficiency Program, and Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL).

We formed this coalition now because we have an unparalleled opportunity with the Kigali Amendment, which began its work on the first day of 2019.

This amendment is an add-on to the Montreal Protocol, the global treaty that saved the ozone layer. Under it, nations have agreed to phase down the use of refrigerants that are thousands of times more potent greenhouse gases than carbon dioxide.

Cutting down on these gases, known as HFCs, can deliver up to 0.4°C of avoided warming by the end of this century. This is a great result on its own.

However, a strategy that takes advantage of the refit and redesign of cooling equipment to increase its energy efficiency may double the climate benefits. There are also opportunities in “smart” buildings, designed for efficiency and natural cooling. We should look at shifting power for cooling to renewable sources – although without the efficiency measures, cooling would consume all of the world’s projected renewables capacity by 2050.

Coalition members are already acting. UN Environment is promoting clean and efficient cooling through its District Energy in Cities initiative. Rwanda has put in place a national cooling plan that includes standards and labels for refrigerators and air conditioning.

Danish engineering firm Danfoss is rolling out cooling solutions that are more energy efficient and climate friendly. But we need help.

We need national and local governments, businesses and civil society to make concrete pledges to help achieve this transition. The Coalition’s champions are seeking to secure such commitments ahead of the 2019 Climate Action Summit, called by the UN Secretary-General. Join us and help keep ourselves, and the planet, cool.

The post Staying Cool is Creating a Vicious Cycle on our Warming Planet appeared first on Inter Press Service.

Excerpt:

Joyce Msuya is Acting Executive Director, UN Environment

The post Staying Cool is Creating a Vicious Cycle on our Warming Planet appeared first on Inter Press Service.