martedì 29 ottobre 2013

MALDIVES - Human Rights Commission alleges police intimidation of its staff.

Human Rights Commission alleges police intimidation of its staff thumbnail
The Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) has alleged that the police are attempting to intimidate commission staff members following the start of its investigations into what they maintain is police obstruction of the October 19 presidential election.
“The commission believes that what we are facing now is serious, unprecedented and unjustifiable intimidation from the police. We will continue the investigation, while also ensuring that we continue protecting every one of our team members,” HRCM member Jeehan Mahmoodh has told Minivan News.
Jeehan stated that, after criticising the police for acting outside of their mandate when obstructing the Elections Commissions (EC) efforts to conduct the presidential election on October 19, they have been facing what the commission believes to be attempts by the police to intimidate its staff.
Jeehan said that the police had requested the HRCM provide “complete details” of the staff members who witnessed the police’s actions outside of the EC on the morning of October 19.
“In the history of HRCM, we have never before had such a request, where details of individual staff are asked for in relation to an investigation. This just cannot be done,” Jeehan said.
“We responded, invoking Article 27 of the HRCM Act and informed the police that the commission will not compromise the safety of any of our staff members. We also explained that as this is an ongoing investigation we cannot compromise it by providing detailed information regarding the matter,” she continued.
Article 27 of the HRCM Act has two parts, with part (a) stating that, “No criminal or civil suit shall be filed against the President or Vice- President or a member of the Commission in relation to committing or omitting an act in good faith whilst undertaking responsibilities of the commission or exercising the powers of the Commission or the powers conferred to the Commission by a law”.
Part (b) of the same article says “The Commission can only be questioned or a suit can be filed against the Commission in court regarding a component in a report published by the Commission following an inquiry, should sufficient evidence be available to prove the component is false”.

SRI LANKA - Why is Commonwealth giving Sri Lanka carte blanche to abuse human rights?

BY SALIL SHETTY
(SECRETARY GENERAL, AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL)

Today (Friday, 27 September, 2013) marks a decisive opportunity for the Commonwealth to show real leadership on human rights in Sri Lanka, but one it looks like the organisation will not seize. In New York, a Commonwealth group of foreign ministers, with human rights at the heart of their brief, will meet – but this body has in the past failed to take meaningful action Sri Lanka’s appalling human rights record, and there is no indication that they will do so today.

Today’s meeting takes place less than two months away from a Commonwealth summit to be held in Sri Lanka. The Commonwealth’s silence on human rights abuses in Sri Lanka, past and present, is nothing short of shameful.

If this summit still goes ahead in Colombo in November, leaders of Commonwealth countries will be lining up to shake hands with Sri Lanka’s President Mahinda Rajapaksa – the man who oversaw the army’s defeat of the Tamil Tigers (LTTE) in 2009, in an operation that left tens of thousands of civilians dead and involved such extensive abuses that Sri Lanka has been accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Since then President Rajapaksa has steered his country in what the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has described as “an increasingly authoritarian direction”.

President Rajapaksa will use each photo opportunity with his global counterparts to show that his country has now been accepted back into the international fold, and that past crimes are no longer a concern.

Whoever chairs the Commonwealth Summit usually then chairs the Commonwealth itself for the next two years.

It is extraordinary that the Commonwealth would give such a seal of approval to Sri Lanka. The country’s leaders stand accused of war crimes committed during the last stages of the armed conflict, described in a UN report as “a grave assault on the entire regime of international law”. Today, the government is shoring up its power and slowly but surely dismantling institutions that should protect human rights.

As Chair of the Commonwealth, President Rajapaksa would be expected to help the Secretary-General address any violations of human rights and other Commonwealth values – it’s difficult to think of a bigger irony. Sri Lanka has shown complete disregard for the Commonwealth’s principles. The 2009 Trinidad Affirmation, which enshrines the organization’s values including human rights, reads like a checklist of what the Sri Lankan authorities have failed to do.

The Commonwealth leadership, meanwhile, has so far remained silent – despite repeated condemnation of the persistent human rights problems in Sri Lanka by the UN Human Rights Council, by Sri Lankan civil society, Amnesty International and many others.

During the armed conflict, and in particular during its final bloody months, according to UN estimates 40,000 civilians or more may have been killed. While many died at the hands of the Tamil Tigers, government forces were responsible for the vast majority of casualties. Shelling of areas with a heavy concentration of civilians, including hospitals, extrajudicial executions of prisoners and widespread sexual violence against women and men only begins to describe the horrors the Tamil population in Sri Lanka’s north were put through by the army.

The Sri Lankan government continues to proclaim, in the face of all the evidence to the contrary, that its troops followed a “zero civilian casualties” policy. Its own domestic bodies examining the conflict have been little more than window dressing for the international community. To this day, the alleged perpetrators of one of the most large-scale massacres of civilians in the past decade continue to walk free, with Sri Lanka rejecting continued calls for an independent and credible international investigation into alleged war crimes .

Since 2009, Rajapaksa has sought to concentrate power further for himself, his family and those loyal to him. He has removed presidential term limits, placed key government institutions under his direct control, and continued the use of draconian security legislation that grant the security forces sweeping powers.

The independence of the judiciary is a fundamental Commonwealth value. In January of this year, the government impeached Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake on charges of misconduct; her real “offence” appears to have been her failure to side with the Presidency.

The administration has cracked down harshly on anyone standing in its way and treats dissent as treason. Harassment, threats, beatings, so-called “white van” kidnappings. Government critics like journalist Prageeth Eknaligoda and activists Lalith Kumar Weeraju and Kugan Murugan have disappeared. The authorities and those acting on their behalf have targeted human rights defenders, opposition politicians, journalists, trade unionists and others, in particular those in still heavily militarized mostly Tamil north.

It would be a travesty to reward Sri Lanka with the Commonwealth Summit and role of Chair for two years, thus giving a member state a free pass for the past and continuing violations and damaging the organization’s credibility, perhaps irreparably.

Friday’s meeting, and the summit in November, still provide a chance to rescue the organization’s reputation. We hope that Secretary-General Kamlesh Sharma and Commonwealth countries seize that opportunity – on behalf of human rights in Sri Lanka and around the world.

Maldive: vuoto costituzionale e pessimismo verso le presidenziali.

Proseguono le discussioni e le prese di posizione dopo la recente sentenza della Corte Suprema, che ha spostato al prossimo 9 novembre le elezioni presidenziali, inizialmente previste per il 19-20 ottobre scorsi. 
Nonostante gli elettori si siano sentiti rassicurati dalla scelta di una nuova data, sperando finalmente di porre fine allo stallo politico, il vuoto costituzionale sembra inevitabile, dal momento che l'insediamento del nuovo eletto avverrà molto probabilmente dopo la fine del mandato dell'attuale Presidente - quadro che non promette nulla di buono per questa giovane democrazia.
Secondo quanto annunciato da Ahmed Fayaz, vicecommissario elettorale, qualora nessuno dei candidati raggiungesse il 50%, è previsto un ballottaggio per il 16 novembre. Il mandato di Mohamed Waheed Hassan scade l'11 novembre. La costituzione prevede che entro quella data venga eletto un nuovo Presidente.
La Corte Suprema ha tuttavia annullato i risultati del voto tenutosi il 7 settembre, in seguito alla scoperta di nomi falsi o di defunti inseriti nel registro degli votanti. La nuova tornata prevista per il 9 ottobre, è stata poi bloccata dalla polizia per la mancata approvazione del registro elettorale da parte di tutti i candidati, come richiesto dalla legge. 
Mohamed Nasheed, che nel voto annullato si trovava in testa con oltre il 45% dei voti, ha accusato Hassan di aver complottato per fare slittare la data. Nasheed ha quindi chiesto le dimissioni di Hassan e la nomina di un rappresentante del Parlamento che controlli il corretto svolgimento del voto. Hassan, che ha rifiutato di dimettersi, ha deciso comunque di ritirarsi dalla competizione per via del cattivo risultato ottenuto nel voto del 7 settembre. 
I cinque anni di democrazia sono stati finora alquanto turbolenti. Nasheed, eletto Presidente nel 2008, mettendo fine ai 30 anni di autocrazia del regime di Gayoom, aveva dato le dimissioni lo scorso anno dopo settimane di proteste da parte dei cittadini, che avevano contestato la sua decisione di arrestare un noto giudice sotto presunte accuse di corruzione. Una commissione locale ha smentito che sia stato un golpe a mettere fine al suo mandato, ma da allora il Paese è rimasto profondamente diviso. 
Dopo le vicende di sabato scorso, e prima che venisse diffusa la nuova data elettorale, è partita una protesta "silenziosa", ampiamente condivisa anche su Twitter tramite l'hashtag mvelection13 - come rivela la seguente scelta di tweet: 

@liivan_sh: unitevi a noi nella protesta silenziosa: pic.twitter.com/H9BAmQBVNK. 

@nautymatox: Maldive, i giovani continuano le  proteste per le elezioni e la costituzione. 

@moyameehaa: le Maldive rimangono uno stato guidato dalla polizia, visto che la commissione per le elezioni indipendenti è stata minacciata dalla polizia che ha fatto cadere il governo eletto. 

@SrshC: Speriamo che il silenzio delle persone innocenti porti giustizia e stabilità nel Paese. 

Anche dopo la notizia sulla nuova data delle elezioni, i netizen hanno continuato a esprimere opinioni, prevalentemente pessimiste.

@DrMelOB: Nuove elezioni si terranno il 9 novembre: magari la terza volta è quella buona. 

@RRRameshRRR: Nonostante l'annuncio della nuova data per le elezioni, si teme che la crisi delle Maldive peggiori. 

@sharifmv: Prima ci battevamo per i diritti dei bambini, ora lottiamo per il diritto alle elezioni. 

@Chaupaari: Le elezioni stanno diventano un altro mezzo per prolungare la dittatura. 

@nAAYf: Seriamente pensate che il 9 novembre ci lasceranno svolgere elezioni libere? e che accetteranno il candidato vincitore? 

@shazzadam: Ho seri dubbi che in questo Paese si avranno elezioni libere. 
 
Infine, martedì la Commissione per i Diritti Umani delle Maldive (HRCM) ha diffuso un comunicato in risposta a una lettera ricevuta dalla polizia, nella quale veniva chiesto loro di fornire prove che ne confermassero accuse secondo cui le forze dell'ordine avevano violato la legge ostruendo lo svolgimento delle elezioni sabato 19 ottobre.   Nel documento viene spiegato che la Commissione ha contattato direttamente il Ministro degli Interni, Ahmed Shafeeu, il quale ha affermato che la polizia stava ‘eseguendo un ordine’ e ‘non agendo di propria iniziativa’.
Lungo sei pagine, il comunicato dichiara che è compito della commissione indagare e attivarsi contro tutte le violazioni di diritti umani, nonché di chiarire al pubblico la propria posizione su determinate questioni e agire di conseguenza anche prima che eventuali indagini procedurali siano terminate.

sabato 26 ottobre 2013

INDIA - Human rights and mental health.

Mental illnesses are the stuff that stigma is made of, and patients’ human rights are often violated, says Sakshi Nanda.
This is the third and last of our favourite blog posts tweeted to @AmnestyOnline on Blog Action Day 2013, when thousands of people came together worldwide to blog about human rights. The views expressed are the author’s own, and do not necessarily represent the views of Amnesty International.
A couple of years back, I worked on a book called ‘Psychiatric Hospitals in India’. I took on the project as a content advisor and morphed into a co-researcher out of sheer interest. I was interested since psychiatry is a field I did not know the ABC of. But as I went deeper into writing, compiling, advising, designing sheets upon sheets full of everything to do with mental hospitals, illnesses, problems and recommendations, I realized it was not just that mental health was a lesser known field but also that it was not covered as extensively by popular media in my surroundings as maybe other similar concerns had been.
Because in so many countries still, mental illnesses are stuff that stigma is made of. And a mental asylum a building housing men, women and even children who have been disowned by their families.
And more often than not, the hospitals are far from asylums but places which, knowingly or otherwise, violate human rights of the mentally ill patients. And this is something that you and I do not read about in the national dailies. Because somewhere, we either tend to not notice or make unseen that semi-nude “mad man” with a matted beard talking to the trees on the side of the road.

The author of this Blog Action Day 2013 post, Sakshi Nanda. © Aseem Nanda

Today, on Blog Action Day, I pen a few paragraphs of information on Mental Health and Human Rights. I am no human rights activist in the true sense of the word. I am not even taking action on the patient’s behalf in this case. I am simply showing you the picture and the perspective that I gathered along the way. Maybe hoping to bring about a change, a change in the mindset which still uses words like ‘mental’, ‘psycho’, ‘schizo’ and ‘retard’ in a loose, irresponsible and utterly insensitive way.
Health, as a right, was included only recently in the United Nations ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’, as Article 25 (Universal Declaration), stating ‘Everyone has a right to a standard of living adequate for health and well-being of himself and his family…’ When we talk of Mental Health, it took a series of revolutionary minds across the globe to emphasise that persons suffering from mental illness shall enjoy the same human rights and fundamental freedoms as all other citizens. They shall not be the subject of discrimination on grounds of mental illness. They have the rights to professional, humane and dignified treatment and will be protected from exploitation, abuse and degradation. Elimination of prejudice and stigma attached to mental illnesses will be aimed at and regardless of age, gender, ethnic group or disorder, they will be treated in the same manner as other citizens in need of health care.
In short, the world recognized the fact that the basic human rights and freedoms of the mentally ill should be respected at all costs. The relationship between mental health and Laws of the Land was established, and even though a dynamic one, laid down set criterion for the treatment of the mentally ill under various governments and nation states.

PAKISTAN - Gli Usa devono rispondere delle uccisioni causate dai droni.

Amnesty International ha diffuso oggi uno dei più completi studi, dalla prospettiva dei diritti umani, sul programma statunitense relativo all'impiego dei droni.

Il rapporto dell'organizzazione per i diritti umani, intitolato "Sarò io il prossimo? Gli attacchi statunitensi coi droni in Pakistan", contiene nuove prove sulle uccisioni illegali causate nelle aree tribali del Pakistan nordoccidentale dagli attacchi coi droni - alcuni dei quali possono essere considerati persino crimini di guerra - e la pressoché totale assenza di trasparenza del programma statunitense.

"Grazie alla segretezza che avvolge il programma sui droni, l'amministrazione Usa ha licenza di uccidere senza controllo giudiziario e in violazione degli standard basilari sui diritti umani. È giunto il momento che gli Usa rendano noto il programma e chiamino a rispondere i responsabili delle violazioni dei diritti umani" - ha dichiarato Mustafa Qadri, ricercatore di Amnesty International sul Pakistan.

"Che speranza di compensazione possono avere le vittime degli attacchi coi droni e le loro famiglie se gli Usa non ammettono neanche la responsabilità di determinati attacchi?" - ha chiesto Qadri.

Amnesty International ha esaminato i 45 attacchi conosciuti tra gennaio 2012 e agosto 2013 nel Nord Waziristan, la regione del Pakistan più colpita dai droni.

L'organizzazione per i diritti umani ha condotto dettagliate ricerche sul campo riguardanti nove dei 45 attacchi. Il rapporto che ne è derivato solleva forti interrogativi su violazioni del diritto internazionale che potrebbero costituire esecuzioni extragiudiziali o crimini di guerra.

Nell'ottobre 2012 Mamana Bibi, una donna di 68 anni, è rimasta uccisa in un doppio attacco, portato a termine apparentemente con un missile Hellfire, mentre raccoglieva ortaggi nel terreno di famiglia, circondata dai nipoti.

Nel luglio 2012 18 braccianti, tra cui un ragazzo di 14 anni, sono stati uccisi in un attacco multiplo contro un povero villaggio situato nei pressi della frontiera con l'Afghanistan. Stavano per cenare, al termine di una dura giornata di lavoro.

Nonostante secondo la versione ufficiale si trattasse di "terroristi", le ricerche di Amnesty International indicano che le vittime non erano coinvolte in combattimenti né ponevano alcuna minaccia alla vita altrui.

"Non può esserci alcuna giustificazione per questi omicidi. Nella regione vi sono pericoli reali per gli Usa e i loro alleati e, in alcune circostanze, gli attacchi coi droni possono essere legali. Ma è difficile credere che un gruppo di braccianti o un'anziana donna circondata dai nipoti stessero mettendo in pericolo qualcuno, per non parlare di un'imminente minaccia contro gli Usa" - ha commentato Qadri.

Il diritto internazionale vieta le uccisioni arbitrarie e limita l'uso legittimo della forza letale intenzionale a situazioni eccezionali. Nei conflitti armati, solo i combattenti e coloro che prendono direttamente parte alle ostilità possono essere colpiti. Al di fuori dei conflitti armati, la forza letale intenzionale è legittima solo quanto strettamente inevitabile al fine di proteggere contro un'imminente minaccia alla vita. In alcune circostanze, un'uccisione arbitraria può costituire un crimine di guerra o un'esecuzione extragiudiziale, che sono crimini internazionali.

Amnesty International ha anche documentato casi di cosiddetti "attacchi ai soccorritori", in cui coloro che erano corsi in aiuto alle vittime del primo drone sono stati colpiti da un secondo rapido attacco. Se può esserci la presunzione che i soccorritori fossero membri del gruppo preso di mira, è difficile capire come possa essere fatta una distinzione del genere nel caos immediato che segue a un attacco missilistico.

Gli Usa continuano a basarsi sulla dottrina della "guerra  globale" per cercare di giustificare una guerra senza frontiere con al-Qaeda, i talebani e altri gruppi ritenuti loro alleati.

La promessa di incrementare la trasparenza sui droni, fatta dal presidente Obama in un importante discorso politico del maggio 2013, deve ancora diventare realtà: gli Usa continuano a rifiutare di rendere note persino le informazioni essenziali, fattuali o di tipo legale.

La segretezza ha consentito agli Usa di agire con impunità e ha impedito alle vittime di ricevere giustizia o compensazione. Secondo quanto è noto ad Amnesty International, nessun funzionario statunitense è mai stato chiamato a rispondere di attacchi illegali coi droni in Pakistan.

Oltre alla minaccia dei droni Usa, la popolazione del Nord Waziristan finisce spesso in mezzo agli scontri tra gruppi armati ed esercito pakistano e vive nel costante timore di una violenza da cui non si può fuggire e che arriva da tutte le parti. Il programma Usa sui droni ha così portato altra sofferenza nella regione, dove si vive giorno e notte nel terrore della morte in arrivo da un drone in volo nei cieli pakistani.

"Quello che è tragico è che i droni Usa stanno istillando nella popolazione delle aree tribali lo stesso tipo di paura che in precedenza era associata ad al-Qaeda e ai talebani" - ha sottolineato Qadri.

Come documentato dal rapporto di Amnesty International, la gente del posto non riesce a fare molto rispetto alla presenza di gruppi come i talebani o al-Qaeda nei villaggi e nei distretti.

I gruppi legati ad al-Qaeda hanno ucciso decine di abitanti dei villaggi accusati di spiare per conto dei droni Usa. Gli abitanti di Mir Ali hanno riferito ad Amnesty International che ai bordi delle strade vengono regolarmente ritrovati corpi con su scritto che chiunque sia sospettato di fare la spia per gli Usa subirà la stessa sorte. Hanno aggiunto che, per timore di ritorsioni, non possono denunciare alle autorità locali le azioni dei gruppi armati. Alcune persone che avevano avuto il coraggio di parlare hanno iniziato a subire minacce.

Mentre il governo pakistano afferma di opporsi al programma Usa sui droni, Amnesty International è preoccupata per il fatto che alcuni funzionari e istituzioni, nello stesso Pakistan e in altri paesi tra cui Australia, Germania e Regno Unito, possano collaborare con gli Usa nel portare a termine attacchi coi droni che costituiscono violazioni dei diritti umani.

"Il Pakistan deve favorire l'accesso alla giustizia e ad altri rimedi giudiziari per le vittime dei droni Usa. Le autorità in Pakistan, Australia, Germania e Regno Unito devono indagare su tutti i funzionari e le istituzioni sospettati di essere coinvolti negli attacchi Usa coi droni o in altri abusi commessi nelle aree tribali che possano costituire violazioni dei diritti umani" - ha sottolineato Qadri. "Le autorità pakistane devono rendere note le informazioni in loro possesso su tutti gli attacchi Usa coi droni e dichiarare quali misure sono state o saranno prese per assistere le vittime di quegli attacchi".

Il rapporto documenta infine come lo stato pakistano non protegga i diritti umani della popolazione del Nord Waziristan: dai civili feriti, morti o costretti a lasciare le loro terre a causa dei bombardamenti, all'assenza di meccanismi giudiziari e di adeguata assistenza medica.
Le autorità pakistane hanno fatto ben poco per portare in giudizio, attraverso processi equi e senza ricorso alla pena di morte, i talebani e i membri di al-Qaeda e di altri gruppi armati responsabili di abusi commessi nella regione.
Amnesty International e Human Rights Watch hanno sollecitato il congresso Usa a indagare a fondo sui casi documentati dalle due organizzazioni e su altre possibili morti illegali e a rendere note all'opinione pubblica tutte le prove di violazioni dei diritti umani.

Le richieste di Amnesty International

Alle autorità degli Stati Uniti:
-rendere pubblici gli elementi fattuali e le basi legali degli attacchi coi droni portati a termine in Pakistan e le informazioni relative a eventuali indagini avviate sulle uccisioni compiute dai droni;

-assicurare indagini rapide, esaurienti, indipendenti e imparziali su tutti i casi in cui vi siano ragionevoli motivi per ritenere che gli attacchi coi droni abbiano causato uccisioni illegali;

-portare i responsabili degli attacchi illegali coi droni di fronte alla giustizia, mediante processi pubblici ed equi, senza ricorso alla pena di morte;

-assicurare che le vittime degli attacchi illegali coi droni, comprese le famiglie delle vittime di uccisioni illegali, abbiano effettivo accesso alla giustizia, alla compensazione e ad altri rimedi giudiziari.

Alle autorità del Pakistan:
-prevedere un adeguato accesso alla giustizia e alla riparazione per le vittime degli attacchi Usa coi droni e di quelli commessi dalle forze armate pakistane, e chiedere alle autorità Usa riparazione e altri rimedi giudiziari per gli attacchi coi droni;

-portare di fronte alla giustizia, mediante processi equi e senza ricorso alla pena di morte, i responsabili delle uccisioni illegali e di altre violazioni dei diritti umani nel Nord Waziristan: attacchi Usa coi droni, attacchi delle forze armate pakistane e di gruppi quali i talebani e al-Qaeda.

-rendere pubbliche le informazioni su tutti gli attacchi Usa coi droni di cui siano a conoscenza, comprese le vittime causate, e su tutta l'assistenza prestata a queste ultime.

Alla comunità internazionale:
-prendere posizione contro gli attacchi statunitensi coi droni e altre uccisioni che violano il diritto internazionale e sollecitare Usa e Pakistan a fare altrettanto. Gli stati dovrebbero esprimere una protesta ufficiale e seguire la strada dei rimedi giudiziari di diritto internazionale ogni volta che venga usata illegalmente la forza letale, da parte degli Usa o di altri stati.

-non prendere parte in alcun modo agli attacchi Usa coi droni che violino il diritto internazionale, evitando anche di condividere strutture o informazioni d'intelligence.

MALDIVES - Presidential polls set for November 9.

Presidential polls set for November 9 thumbnail
The Elections Commission (EC) has set the first round of presidential elections for November 9, after the police forcibly brought a Supreme Court-ordered revote to a halt on October 19.
“We have decided to hold the first round of presidential elections on November 9, and if necessary, a second round on November 16,” Elections Commission President Fuwad Thowfeek said.
The Supreme Court annulled the first round of presidential polls held on September citing electoral fraud despite unanimous domestic and international praise over a free and fair vote. The apex court delineated 16 guidelines to hold a revote by October 20.
According to the guidelines, the EC must obtain signatures from all candidates on the voter registry. However, the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) and Jumhooree Party (JP) refused to approve the lists and police stopped the election an hour before polling was to begin. The move has prompted widespread international concern and Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) protests.
Thowfeek said the EC had held meetings with the President, the cabinet and political parties on the earliest possible date for a new election.
“We have said, when we get to a certain point, when a certain party doesn’t do what they must do, it should not affect the entire election. If that is the case, we will never be able to hold an election,” Thowfeek said.
“They assured us they will not allow for these kind of obstructions in the upcoming election. Ministers have given us commitment that they will find a solution and facilitate this. That is why we have started work again. If the same thing happened as before, this is not something we must do. We are starting work again because we are confident there will be an election. I am certain we will succeed this time,” he added.
During the various meetings, the government had said it would provide facilities to verify fingerprints re-registration forms – one of JP and PPM’s conditions for approving the voter registry. The EC has said the commission does not have the capacity to do so.
The EC will continue to follow the Supreme Court’s guidelines, but will seek to change them in the future, Thowfeek said. In a previous interview on Television Maldives (TVM), he described the guidelines as “restrictions.”
“I hope the government considers these restrictions in the future and finds a solution. Otherwise, holding elections will become impossible and that affects the most fundamental [right] in a democracy.”
After technical information regarding the EC’s database was shared with the Supreme Court during the vote annulment hearing, Thowfeek said the EC’s server had been compromised with external actors accessing the database and changing data. However, he believes the security glitches will be fixed before the upcoming election.
“We are working with the NCIT [National Center for Information Technology]. They have not given us a report yet. They are working non-stop. We are certain when the election comes, we will be able to block everyone out of our system and they will no longer have access to our data. We are proceeding with the assurance given to us by technical people,” Thowfeek said.
The EC said within the next three weeks, it would allow registration for new eligible voters, and re-registration for voters who will be voting in a different location other than their home island. However, voters who re-registered for October 19 will not need to submit re-registration forms again.
President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan has said he does not wish to stay on as President even one day beyond the end of the presidential term on November 11. If no candidate wins over 50 percent in the first round of polls and a second round needs to be held, interim arrangements will have to be made. The Supreme Court has previously said Waheed’s government would continue until a new president is elected.
The JP and PPM have pledged their support to Waheed staying on, but former President and Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) presidential candidate Mohamed Nasheed has called for Waheed to resign, allowing a transitional government under the Speaker of Parliament to oversee elections.

MALDIVES - The Maldives sits in for democracy.

The Maldives sits in for democracy thumbnail
Non-violent sit in protests have swept through the Maldives, with thousands of citizens deprived of their constitutional right to vote determined to shut down the country until elections are held.
“We will continue to protest until we can get an election. The protests symbolise that this country has no where to go without an election. Everything has to stop, everyone has to stop and think,” MDP MP and Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor told Minivan News today.
Police arrived at the Elections Commission (EC) in the early morning of Saturday (October 19), forcibly preventing the scheduled election going ahead, in the apparent absence of explicit orders to do so from either the courts or the executive.
Police had also previously obstructed the run-off election which was due to be held on September 28.
Chief Superintendent Abdulla Nawaz told the press yesterday that police had “made the decision ourselves” after “seeking advice” from, among others, President Dr Mohamed Waheed and Attorney General Azima Shukoor, after the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) and the Jumhooree Party (JP) had refused to sign the final voter lists.
The Supreme Court’s guidelines issued following its annulment of the September 7 election’s first round of polling said the EC was to hold elections before October 20 with the support of relevant state institutions, EC Chairperson Fuwad Thowfeek has noted.
Once the midday torrential rain abated, Maldivians nationwide spontaneously began staging non-violent sit in protests demanding that their right to vote be upheld on Saturday (October 19).
At around 2:40pm on Saturday 30 protesters gathered outside of the People’s Majlis (Parliament) in Male’, and refused to move when asked to by police.


venerdì 11 ottobre 2013

PAKISTAN - Malala vince il premio Sakharov.


Malala Yousafzai durante un suo intervento a New York, 
il 25 settembre 2013. (Carlo Allegri, Reuters/Contrasto)

Malala Yousafzai ha sedici anni e da quando ne ha undici si batte per difendere il diritto delle ragazze pachistane allo studio. Il 10 ottobre 2013 ha vinto il premio Sakharov per la libertà di pensiero, assegnato ogni anno dal parlamento europeo.

http://www.internazionale.it/news/pakistan/2013/10/10/malala-vince-il-premio-sakharov/

Maldive. Il voto sulla rivoluzione dei backpaker - di Elena Russo.

Maldive. Fino a ieri un paradiso del lusso. Ora aperte anche ai backpacker e ai viaggiatori di ceto medio. Ma la "svolta democratica" dell'arcipelago che ha nel turismo la sua prima risorsa rischia - in parte lo ha già fatto - di ritorcersi contro lo stesso piccolo stato dell'Oceano Indiano. Al contrario dei turisti di lusso, confinati nei loro eremi dorati, isolati dalla società civile maldiviana, in luoghi dove tutto è lecito - bere alcolici, sposarsi, divorziare, consumare rapporti prematrimoniali - i nuovi utenti approdano nei centri abitati. Soggiornano in economiche guest house di proprietà di abitanti locali: in altre parole, contaminano la popolazione residente e le ferree regole islamiche cui è costretta a sottostare.

Il problema è nato con l'elezione di Mohammad Nasheed e la sua riforma del 2009. Una "rivoluzione" che ha prodotto la stessa destituzione del primo presidente maldiviano eletto democraticamente, con le successive elezioni vinte dallo stesso ex leader, annullate dalla locale Corte suprema a settembre, e nuova chiamata alle urne per il prossimo 19 ottobre. Un evento che presenta non poche incognite.

L'arcipelago delle Maldive, prossimo all'equatore e con le sue 1190 isole coralline bagnate dall'Oceano Indiano, è una delle mete turistiche più esclusive del mondo; quando gli Arabi iniziarono a percorrere frequentemente le rotte commerciali verso il sud-est asiatico, le divennero un importante punto di scalo. I commercianti arabi esercitarono una forte influenza culturale sulla popolazione locale, che a partire dall'XI secolo si convertì gradualmente all'Islam tanto da divenire sultanato nel 1153.

L'islamismo praticato alle Maldive ha caratteristiche particolari per il suo essere venuto a contatto sia con le antiche tradizioni locali che con i costumi e gli stili di vita dei molti turisti occidentali che visitano le isole. Le donne, ad esempio, nella capitale usano camminare anche senza velo, mentre nei villaggi, più isolati, le ragazze dopo la pubertà usano coprirsi su tutto il corpo ad eccezione del volto.


Con i suoi 26 atolli naturali e 202 isole abitate di cui un'ottantina adibite a villaggi turistici, l'arcipelago è stato da sempre popolata da visitatori che, dopo essere sbarcati nell'aereoporto del paese, con una barca veloce raggiungevano il loro resort costoso e trascorrevano una settimana di relax ignorando gli abitanti del paese che li circondava.

Per decenni si è deciso di mantenere i turisti, prevalentemente ricchi, sulle isole disabitate separati quindi dalla popolazione locale di fede musulmana: "Dal momento che le Maldive sono un paese musulmano, abbiamo sempre sostenuto l'idea che l'industria del turismo dovrebbe essere separata dalle isole abitate ", dice Mauroof Hussain, vice presidente del partito conservatore Adhaalath.

Ma negli ultimi cinque anni, una riforma del 2009 di Mohamed Nasheed, primo presidente eletto democraticamente, ha autorizzato i maldiviani ad aprire le proprie pensioni a prezzi inferiori anche sulle isole popolate che hanno visto così aumentare l'arrivo di turisti europei, americani e asiatici, di mezzi economici inferiori ma più numerosi per quantità. Con il loro modo di viaggiare indipendente (ci sono perfino i backpacker) e non organizzato, un budget limitato, mezzi di trasporto locali e alloggi a basso costo stanno dando il via ad un nuovo modo di vivere le Maldive. 
 

sabato 5 ottobre 2013

Bangladesh must overturn all death sentences.

The death sentence imposed against a Bangladeshi MP convicted of crimes against humanity is not the way to bring justice to the many victims of the country’s war of independence, Amnesty International said today.
“The many victims of horrific abuses during Bangladesh’s independence war and their families have long deserved justice but the death penalty is not the answer. One human rights abuse cannot make amends for another,” said Abbas Faiz, Bangladesh Researcher at Amnesty International.
“Bangladesh must overturn the death sentence against Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury and all others. The death penalty is the ultimate cruel and inhuman punishment and can never be a way to deliver justice.” 
Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury, six-time Member of Parliament from the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party, was found guilty of crimes including genocide and torture committed during Bangladesh’s war of independence with Pakistan in 1971.
His family has said that he will appeal the sentence. 
“We urge the Bangladeshi government to ensure that Chowdhury’s appeal complies with international law and standards relating to fair trials, and without recourse to the death penalty,” said Abbas Faiz.
“The Bangladeshi authorities must also impose a moratorium on executions as a first step towards abolishing the death penalty.”
Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception, regardless of the nature or circumstances of the crime; guilt, innocence or other characteristics of the individual; or the method used by the state to carry out the execution.

MALDIVES - UN frets over Maldives tensions-

The United Nations is anxiously watching rising tensions in the Maldives and joined calls Friday for a suspended presidential election runoff to be quickly organized.
UN officials are so concerned that a special briefing for the UN Security Council has been held on the Indian Ocean tourism magnet.
The Maldives' supreme court called off a presidential runoff vote scheduled for last weekend between former president Mohamed Nasheed and Abdulla Yameen, a half brother of former strongman Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.
There have been almost daily demonstrations since.
"We continue to follow the situation in the Maldives with concern in light of the mounting tension" since the postponement of the election, said UN spokesman Martin Nesirky.
UN leader Ban Ki-moon has released several statements calling for calm and for Maldivians to "renew their commitment to the constitution and rule of law, and work towards creating enabling conditions for peaceful, credible run-off elections to take place as soon as possible," Nesirky stressed.
UN Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs, Oscar Fernandez-Taranco, who has acted as a UN envoy to the Maldives, briefed the Security Council on Wednesday.
The UN official warned the 15-nation council that there was "a potential for trouble" and that recent democratic gains are "under threat," said a diplomat who was at the meeting.
Gayoom was the Maldives' authoritarian leader for three decades up to 2008.

MALDIVES -Human Rights Commission condemns government’s “intimidation” of NGOs.

The Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM) has condemned the government’s use of  “threats and intimidation” against civil society groups.
HRCM officials have also met with the Maldives Police Service to discuss allegations of the misuse of strip searches following recent demonstrations.
Writing to the Home Ministry, the commission reported that it had “condemned the infringement of the right to freedom of association as [an] expression of these two organisations”.
The letter also called upon the ministry to refrain from “unlawful sanctions” and activities that prevent such groups from working for the protection of human rights.
The HRCM pointed to Article 2(c) of the Human Rights Commission Act, which obligates it to support and protect these NGOs in the their work.
State Minister for Home Affairs and the Registrar of NGOs Abdulla Mohamed last week declared that the Tourism Employees Association of the Maldives (TEAM) and Transparency Maldives (TM) were under investigation for “unlawful acts” and warned NGOs that organisations acting outside of law would be dissolved.
The Maldivian Democracy Network has also condemned the minister’s remarks.
Transparency has publicly called for the Supreme Court to respect the constitutionally mandated election schedule, after it noted no significant issues during its extensive observation mission covering the first round of presidential polls.
The group has also questioned the integrity of the Supreme Court bench prior to its decision to delay the second round of voting.
The integrity of the court has become a running theme during the ensuing demonstrations, with particular attention drawn to Justice Ali Hameed’s alleged appearance in a string of sex-tapes.
TEAM – an industry body representing some 5000 resort workers – has threatened prlonged strikes, saying that the Supreme Court order “destroys the principles of democracy we have embraced and voids articles of the constitution.”
Transparency Maldives – an affiliate of Transparency International – states its mission as improving “transparency and accountability in all sectors” as well as increasing awareness of “corruption and its detrimental effects on society and development”.
The HRCM has also met with the police after being made aware of allegations that strip searches were being used in an unnecessary and discriminatory manner following the arrest of protesters.
Allegations of arbitrary and frequent use of pepper spray, beating, strip-searching, frisking, handcuffing and drug testing of Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) supporters were heard during the Parliamentary Privileges Subcommittee this week.
During the HRCM’s meeting with police, it stressed its belief that strip searches were a “degrading and inhuman treatement” that was to be avoided whenever possible.
The HRCM urged the police to obtain the detainee’s consent and the authorisation of a senior officer before conducting such a search, as well as ensuring that those carrying out the search are adequately trained.
In a statement issued on Wednesday (October 2), police said they were authorised to frisk and conduct strip-searches under Articles 32-36 of the the Police Powers Act.
The articles state that police are authorised to use such procedures if they have reasonable grounds to believe the detainee may hold an object to harm themselves or another, or an object for intoxication, or an object to commit an illegal object.

martedì 1 ottobre 2013

Maldives Election Fiasco: “Betrayal of Democracy” - By Sudha Ramachandran


RTX142J6


An Indian Ocean archipelago of more than 1,992 coral islands scattered across the Equator, the Maldives is known for its emerald green waters and pristine beaches. Visiting tourists usually view it as a tranquil paradise. Maldivian politics, though, have rarely been peaceful.
A British protectorate until 1965, the Maldives has been under authoritarian rule for most of its post-Independence years. Maumoon Gayoom ruled with an iron first for 30 years. Yet he was not immune from challenges. In 2003, mass protests erupted over torture in prisons. These quickly snowballed into a powerful movement for democracy, forcing Gayoom to introduce political reforms. Those reforms in turn culminated in a new Constitution, legalization of political parties and multi-party elections to the presidency, parliament and local councils.
Gayoom’s authoritarian rule ultimately ended in 2008, although his influence remained strong. Mohamed Nasheed of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) defeated Gayoom to become the country’s first democratically elected president.
Nasheed and the MDP faced enormous difficulties. With Gayoom-era appointees and cronies firmly entrenched in the judiciary, bureaucracy, police and military, the Maldives’ nascent democracy was stymied. Meanwhile, anti-democratic forces joined hands with religious conservatives and accused Nasheed of working with Jews and Christians and undermining Islam. Almost from his first day, Nasheed was at loggerheads with the judiciary. Officials in various state institutions ignored the Executive in making decisions, undermining Nasheed’s authority. Massive demonstrations against the president and the MDP were organized, plunging the archipelago in unrest and instability.
Then, on February 7 last year, Nasheed stepped down. Was it voluntary or was he pushed? In a New York Times op-ed, the former president claims the later, writing of police officers and army personnel loyal to the previous regime mutinying and forcing him “at gunpoint, to resign.” He continued, “I believe this to be a coup d'etat and suspect that my vice president, who has since been sworn into office, helped to plan it.” This account is denied by the vice president – now president – Mohammed Waheed, who claims that Nasheed “resigned voluntarily.” Dismissing coup allegations, Waheed says that he became president through “a constitutional transfer of power,” after Nasheed resigned.
Eighteen months on, Maldivians continue to heatedly debate the events of February 7. Early last month, they finally got the chance to have their say in a presidential election. The result was emphatic, yet not decisive: Nasheed won 45.5% of the vote. His opponents – Abdulla Yameen of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) (25.35%), the Jumhooree Party’s Gasim Ibrahim (24.07%) and the incumbent Waheed (running as an independent) (5%) – were left trailing far behind. The outcome? A run-off.
Scheduled to take place on September 28, the run-off vote was to be a clash between Nasheed and Yameen. The latter is Gayoom’s half-brother.
READ MORE: http://thediplomat.com/2013/10/01/maldives-election-fiasco-betrayal-of-democracy/