text:
Pussy Riot’s Maria Alyokhina: ‘Even in Russia, social media is still an effective method for uniting people’ · Global Voices
Vishal Yashoda Manve

Pussy Riot members Maria Alyokhina (left) andNadezhda Tolokonnikova visiting Washington DC in 2014, shortly after their release from prison in Russia. Photo by Senate Democrats, CC 2.0
Pussy Riot is a loosely-defined, mostly anonymous radical performance art collective from Russia, its members involved in various punk rock, activist theatre.
Two of its members, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and Maria (Masha) Alyokhina, became internationally famous in 2012 when three members of an all-female punk band were detained while attempting to perform in a cathedral of the Russian Orthodox Church. One of the women, Katerina Samutsevich, made a plea deal and was released, while the two remaining members, Tolokonnikova and Alyokhina, were convicted to two years of prison and amnestied after having served 22 months.
Global Voices’ Vishal Manve spoke with Masha Alyokhina at the International Civil Society Week (ICSW) in Belgrade, Serbia.
Vishal Manve: How did Pussy Riot come to be?
Masha Alyokhina: Pussy Riot formed late in 2011. It was a spontaneous decision of different people — activists, artists, filmmakers, musicians — to protest against Vladimir Putin's presidency. There were huge protests all over the country, and Russians made it clear that they did not want this endless presidency, which Putin announced he would hold.
We, as Pussy Riot, performed on the the Red Square in Moscow with a song called Putin Pissed His Pants. It was important for us because we believed that in moments of choice, we needed to not be silent. And then, when the Russian Orthodox Church endorsed Putin as the greatest leader of our country, we decided to go to the Cathedral of Christ the Savior and sang a song called Mother Mary, drive Putin away. We managed to get through the first verse of the song, after which they detained us and opened a criminal case, charging us with “inciting religious hatred.”
Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and I spent two years in prison for this song. Once we got out of prison, we went on with our activism. As recent convicts, we were officially banned from leaving Russia. I cannot legally go out of Russia, fly out, take a train or a bus, but it's important for me to perform. So I jumped ship. As far as our activism is concerned, we are doing a lot of things about prison reform and fighting for prisoners’ rights. Among other things, we created a news website called MediaZona. In 2014, it was a small group of independent journalists mostly laid off from other publications for refusing to cover [the annexation of] Crimea in a way that cast Putin's government in a favorable light. Today, it's one of the most popular online media in Russia.
Alyokhina: No, it's okay. It's not the worst thing which can happen to you, and it's quite funny too because you see these big officers in uniform running after a tiny girl like me. I don't think it's tiring or scary.
Alyokhina: I believe that art is changing both the world and individual countries because it's the only medium which asks uncomfortable questions without giving an immediate answer or a general line of thinking, like politics. Art reflects our reality and that's why it's so powerful.
Alyokhina: I am mostly concerned about the issue of freedom of speech. What Putin is doing has nothing to do with restoring Russia's greatness. It's about repressing people. It's about killing members of the opposition. It's about putting people to jail for a Facebook post, a retweet or criticizing Putin's regime. This is what's happening in Russia. Oleg Sentsov, a Ukrainian filmmaker, received much worse treatment than us for his activism in Crimea. He didn't do anything but was captured in Crimea, transferred to Russia, tortured to extract a confession and convicted to 20 years in a prison camp in eastern Siberia.
Alyokhina: We feel that we are accepted in Eastern Europe and other EU countries. But I think it's important to understand that when you're going back, these people will stay behind, and the only way of staying in touch is via social media. That's why we are doing everything on social media today because even in Russia, it's still an effective method of influencing and uniting people.
VM: How do you handle difficult situations? Does public support matter?
Alyokhina: For me, personally, it's solidarity. Without all the people supporting us, we'd be in trouble. When you're isolated and alone, you are sometimes not quite sure that you have the power to keep going. But when you hear words of support and receive letters from people, you can just feel the difference.
VM: You had warned the world about Donald Trump. How do you feel about the US and its role in the global world order?
Alyokhina: Do I think the United States have changed since Trump's presidency? Of course. I think another cold war of some kind is probably coming, which is very bad. The last one finally ended not so long ago. And it's so tragic and surprising to see history repeat itself so quickly.
VM: What happens if the European Court or UN's jurisdiction over human rights cases in Russia ceases to exist?
Alyokhina: If the European Court of Human Rights ceases to have jurisdiction over Russian territory, this will be a catastrophe for the Russian people. This is a real threat. Sadly, this is where Russia is going.
Alyokhina: In Russia, we are simply not allowed to perform. When we recently tried to put on a show in a small theatre in Moscow, with room for just about 100 people, and for free, with no tickets on sale — the authorities shut down the venue, they still haven't been allowed to reopen. Sometimes, we are asked to perform at one venue or another, we send them over our material, they are very enthusiastic about hosting us — and then they have to cancel because of some vague threats from the state. I can count about 35 instances of this happening.
Day after day, state officials are calling opposition activists “the enemy of the people.” Every day, there is propaganda and the entire machine is working against activists, and sometimes people fall for this propaganda. If you exist in an information vacuum, it is impossible not to believe it.
VM: What do you think about the state of women's rights in Russia?
Alyokhina: I do not separate feminism from politics. Feminism is not a special thing but is very much inside politics. In February 2017, Russia passed a new law that decriminalized domestic violence. It's not a crime anymore. The fine is 80 euros for beating wives and children as well. We have a dark joke in Russia about policemen. When women call the police to report that they have been beaten, the officer asks them to call again when they've been murdered. It used to be a joke, but now it's real. We did discover several cases where police officers ignored calls from women reporting domestic violence. A few of these women are disabled now as the result of domestic violence, and we're helping them sue the police for inaction.
VM: How strong is the women's rights movement in Russia?
Alyokhina: It's mostly a grassroots movement in Moscow, St. Petersburg, and several other cities. Russian women are active politically. But we still don't know how strong this movement is because there is no single collective to which everyone belongs or any credible data. What we do is play charity gigs and donate the proceeds, sometimes several thousands euros, to crisis centers for women which provide aid and support to victims of domestic violence. There is no money from the government to these centers but only from the church or feminist groups.
Alyokhina: After the worldwide #MeToo movement took form, Russian women created a local hashtag, #ImNotAfraidToSayIt (#НеБоюсьСказать). People wrote posts on social media about harassment and sexual violence. That was very huge. Thankfully Russia is not as isolated politically as China but the political direction is very much the same. Just a few months ago, they started debating a bunch of laws that would effectively cut off Russia from the rest of the world. This is straight out of China's playbook. In Russia, you can go to jail for up to three years for a Facebook post.
Alyokhina: It's my dream to come to India and perform for an audience there. I am a fan of Period. End of a Sentence produced by Guneet Monga. I was really happy when I saw the news about it winning an Oscar. I know that India is a very conservative society and there is a lot of work to be done. But if enough people believe and stand against authoritarianism, they will make progress. One thing that you realize when you get involved with activism is that you are not alone. When you are doing your first performance, you can sometimes feel lonely, but then you remember that there are thousands of people in different countries and different conditions who are fighting for the same values.

author: Vishal Yashoda Manve


text:
Trinidad & Tobago promotes equality, but politicians often can’t resist talking race · Global Voices
Janine Mendes-Franco

A screenshot taken from the YouTube video showing the lyrics of Trinidad and Tobago's national anthem, Forged from the Love of Liberty. Video published by DN Anthems.
In April 2019, an audio recording of a woman called Nalini Ramai made the rounds of Trinidad and Tobago's social media channels. In the recording, Ramai was heard complaining to her cable TV provider about the fact that Zee TV, an Indian channel, was pulled from her package. In its place were local programmes featuring the country's prime minister, Dr. Keith Rowley. The customer service representative tried his best to placate her, but Ramai resisted and ended up making racist statements about the prime minister and other people of African descent.
Rowley responded to the debacle by calling on the public to “be alert to [racism] and reject it in all its manifestations”, even as opposition activists suggested that the whole affair might be “a well planted and orchestrated distraction” by the governing party.
A Wired 868 post made it clear:
When Nalini used the [n-word], it is more than descriptive; it is political and can prove irrevocably divisive.
Other commentators, like attorney and former minister of justice Christlyn Moore, have warned about the dangers of such rhetoric:
The fact is that as a nation, we have a problem with civility, identity, and race and gender relations. And our politicians echo this.
In Trinidad and Tobago, the population predominantly comprises two ethnic groups — African and Indian — and the support base of the country's two main political parties, the People's National Movement (PNM) and the United National Congress (UNC), reflect this divide. While Trinidad and Tobago hasn't experienced the kind of ethnically-based political violence that other multi-ethnic countries like Guyana have, many voters cast their ballots based on tribe rather than issues, setting the stage for the cut and thrust on the hustings to veer toward race. All this in a country whose national anthem includes the line “Here every creed and race find an equal place”, and where with sections of the country's Equal Opportunity Act makes certain kinds of “offensive behaviour” actionable.
While people the world over may harbour racist thoughts — and even voice them — within their own communities, the Nalini Ramai incident shows what happens when such ideas are expressed in public, and how politicians can turn such situations to their advantage. Here's a short (and shameful) history of recent political slurs…
January 2013 — In the lead-up to the Tobago House of Assembly elections on January 21, one PNM candidate, Hilton Sandy, referenced the Fatel Razack, the ship that left Calcutta, India on February 16, 1845 carrying the first batch of indentured labourers bound for Trinidad's sugar plantations. Sandy warned voters at a rally:
There is a ship at Calcutta waiting to sail to Tobago; they are waiting to get the results of this election. If you bring the wrong results, Calcutta ship is coming down for you. You must stop that ship. We must not allow that ship to sail and if you don’t want that ship to sail, what you have to do? Is vote the PNM!
Public reaction was split down the middle, with some voters predicting his campaign would suffer and others dismissing the statement by saying, “Everybody does it.”
As veteran Trinidadian journalist Raffique Shah has noted, race has long been a key ingredient in Trinidad and Tobago’s politics:
It was always the not-so-secret weapon to rally the tribes, especially during elections and mostly in core ethnic communities […] the modern Afro-and Indo-based parties perfected the art of appealing to people’s base instincts.
February 17, 2015 — During the country's annual Carnival celebrations, Dr. Keith Rowley, who was still opposition leader at the time (general elections would take place that September) did what most masqueraders would do during the two-day street parade — he “wined” (did a hip-swiveling dance) with a fellow masquerader.
This particular masquerader, however, was of Indian descent (Rowley is Afro-Trinidadian) and supposedly a minor, though it appears she was either a willing participant or the instigator of the dance. Still, the conversation soon became political, with some questioning Rowley's fitness for office.
Satnarayan ‘Sat’ Maharaj, a divisive local religious and political figure who has often used racially charged language, said he was “shocked” at Rowley's behaviour with a “teenager”. Many interpreted such comments as an attempt to demonise black male sexuality — and deflect the racism inherent therein — by focusing on the young woman's age, which was never confirmed.
August 12, 2018 — At a PNM Family Day event, one of the party's constituency groups performed an off-colour skit in which a woman had her yellow sari taken off by men in gorilla suits to expose a red undergarment. Yellow is the colour associated with the UNC, while red is the official colour of the PNM. While the creators of the skit claimed the performance was meant to represent the constituency's increase in support for the PNM in an area that has traditionally voted for the UNC, it drew widespread public criticism for being racist.
The country's Hindu community also took offence, saying that the sari was more than just a piece of cloth, and that the performance was a mockery of the sacred scripture about the disrobing of Draupadi.
Prime Minister Rowley soon apologised for the skit, but hit back at the opposition for accusing the PNM of promoting rape and attacks on women — an attempt, he said, to stir up racial hatred.
September 10, 2018 — Addressing a UNC party meeting, Trinidad and Tobago's opposition leader, Kamla Persad-Bissessar, called Prime Minister Keith Rowley an “Oreo”. She was accused of trying to stir up racial tensions, exacerbated when she brought the country's one per cent into the fray and inferred that Rowley was trying to pander to the interests of the rich and powerful.
As was the case with the sari skit, the Oreo comment made the local blogosphere bristle. Had the opposition leader apologised right away, the issue might have been nipped in the bud. Instead, UNC supporters attempted to defend the statement.
Lawyer and politician Garvin Nicholas, who is affiliated with the UNC, posted on Twitter:
Being called an Oreo is attack on one’s character not on one’s ethnicity and therefore cannot qualify as a racist statement. Additionally, this government is not, as it claims, “leading this country in an stable, inclusive or productive way”.
— Garvin Nicholas LLB, PGDip, LLM – Attorney (@galnic) September 12, 2018
Twitter users were incredulous. On Facebook, the discussion was just as rife, with Denny Ablack, who is of Indian ethnicity, commenting:
Do not get drawn into this ethnic brainwashing. Whether it's Oreo or Calcutta Ship it has no place in our national dialogue. There is nothing positive there for the children of T&T
While Persad-Bissessar eventually posted a statement about her comments on her party's website, the tone was far from contrite.

source: news-globalvoices

license: Creative Commons - Attribution - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

author: Janine Mendes-Franco


text:
Bolsonaro’s new gun decree could put reporters in danger, says journalism association · Global Voices
Fernanda Canofre

Bolsonaro signs gun decree on May 7 while congressmen celebrate with finger-gun gestures. Photo: Marcos Corrêa, Brazil's government press, CC-BY 2.0
Long before he launched his presidential bid, Jair Bolsonaro's trademark gesture was making imaginary guns with his fingers. Losing Brazil's strict gun control laws was one of his major campaign promises, and now he's trying to deliver it. In January, he signed a decree making it slightly easier for civilians to own a gun, and on May 7, he signed another one easing restrictions even more for 20 different types of professionals.
Those are social workers, traffic agents, lawyers, truck drivers, sitting politicians, and crime reporters, among others. Bolsonaro said during the signing ceremony that the decree is “just within the edges of the law.” “Whatever possibilities the law permits, we went until its limits,” he declared.
The Brazilian Association of Investigative Journalism (Abraji) issued a statement demanding the government to revoke the section referring to press workers. It says:
Nos 16 anos em que a Abraji  oferece treinamentos de segurança a jornalistas em parceria com organizações internacionais como o International News Safety Institute (INSI), o porte de armas jamais foi apresentado como forma de proteção.
Há ações mais indicadas para aumentar a segurança de quem se arrisca para informar a população, como a estruturação adequada do Programa de Proteção a Defensores de Direitos Humanos, Ambientalistas e Comunicadores.
In the 16 years in which Abraji has provided security training to journalists, in partnership with international organizations such as the International News Safety Institute (INSI), carrying guns was never presented as a form of self-protection.
There are more appropriate actions to increase the safety of those risking themselves to inform the people, such as more robust support to the Protection Program for Human Rights Defenders, Environmentalists, and Communicators.
The statement quotes Abraji’s former director, Fernando Molica, who says that “if carrying a gun ensured physical integrity, we wouldn’t have so many cops murdered in the country.” To Molica, the decree is another way of transferring the state's responsibilities to the people:
Com uma canetada, Bolsonaro transformou repórteres em alvo dos bandidos – os caras vão passar a achar que todos nós estamos armados e, que portanto, podemos atirar contra eles, é bem mais provável que eles disparem na nossa direção. Assaltantes terão mais um motivo para abordar caminhoneiros: além de carga a ser roubada, eles, em tese, terão armas que poderão ser arrecadadas.
With the stroke of a pen, Bolsonaro has transformed reporters into targets of criminals, who will assume that we are all armed and might shoot them, making it far more likely that they will shoot against us. Robbers will have another reason to attack truck drivers: besides stealing the load, they will, in theory, have guns to collect as well.
Igor Gielow, a reporter with Folha de S. Paulo newspaper, writes that the threats posed by the decree might have an effect on conflict coverage in Brazil:
O argumento da autodefesa fica prejudicado em um tiroteio: ou você estará de um lado, ou de outro. Levando a interpretação ao limite, o decreto quase impõe que repórteres policiais sejam “embedded”, ou seja, acompanhem as tropas do Estado, como acontece em quase todas as guerras.
Isso seria fatal para a diversidade de pontos de vista necessária a uma cobertura de conflito urbano no Brasil.
The self-defense argument loses its standing when we consider the situation of a shooting: you will be either on one side or another. Taking this interpretation to the limit, the decree practically forces crime reporters to be embedded, that is, to accompany the state's troops, which is the case in most war reporting. That could kill the diversity of perspectives that are crucial in coverages of urban conflict in Brazil.
Shortly after Bolsonaro signed the order, Brazil's lower house speaker Rodrigo Maia said Congress may still veto a few sections of its text:
A gente precisa discutir a questão das armas, a gente não pode fazer uma interpretação excessiva e ampliar ainda mais a violência que existe no Brasil. Vamos avaliar junto com a nossa assessoria sobre o que pode ter sido usurpado e dar atenção a esse tema que tem mobilizado a sociedade brasileira nas últimas horas
We need to discuss the gun issue, we cannot make an excessive interpretation of it and amplify the violence that already exists in Brazil. We will evaluate, together with our consultants, to what extent the decree usurped [the law] and give attention to this subject that has mobilized Brazilian society in the last few hours.
According to NGO Reporters Without Borders, among the 66 journalists that were killed worldwide in 2018, four were Brazilians. A report by Article 19 from November 2018 says: “Journalists and communicators in Brazil are being killed with impunity” and that “bloggers and broadcasters in small towns face the greatest risk of being killed for their investigations.”
The report highlights that “the majority of murders appear to have been carried out by hired hitmen, on the orders of others.” None of the four murdered Brazilian journalists covered crime. Regional director of Article 19 for South America Laura Tresca says in the report:
The death of a communicator has wider implications for Brazilian society. The victims in this report were silenced for speaking out about corruption and crime. Their murders create a climate of fear and self-censorship that prevents others from holding our politicians, authorities and corporations to account.

author: Fernanda Canofre


text:
Chased by dogs on Google Street View Japan · Global Voices
Nevin Thompson

A dog in Japan. Image by Nevin Thompson.
A Google Street View screen capture of a cute dog has gone viral on Japanese Twitter. The image of the adorable hound has been retweeted 100,000 times and prompted a hunt for exactly where in Japan the image can be found.
In May, a person with the Twitter handle ‘Reoemon’ (れおえもん) shared a short video that appears to show a small dog chasing the vehicle capturing imagery for Google Map's Street View.
「Googleマップでめっちゃ追いかけてくるイッヌ」です pic.twitter.com/abvUCW73kv
— れおえもん (@reo_03) May 10, 2019
I'm being chased by a dog on Google Maps!
(Be sure to click the ‘play’ icon in the tweet above)
Others soon took notice of the tweet, and tried to track the dog down for themselves on Street View.
見つけた！！(*`･ω･´)ﾉ pic.twitter.com/KzRjyOc24L
— kaki_3 (@kaki_3) May 10, 2019
I found the dog!!  (*`･ω･´)ﾉ
発見‼からの、
待ってー?\( ˙꒳˙ \三/ ˙꒳˙)/?
すごく好きです✨ pic.twitter.com/XDvYwXgRX6
— peri (@kaname_mochi) May 10, 2019
I found it! The dog seems to be saying “wait for me!” ?\( ˙꒳˙ \三/ ˙꒳˙)/?
I love this! ✨
The dog can be found on Google Maps on Tanegashima, an island off of Kagoshima Prefecture in Kyushu, in southwestern Japan
Some people posted images of other dogs they've found on Street View, that also seem to be chasing after the Google Maps car.
最近僕も追いかけてるイッヌ見つけました。 pic.twitter.com/RRXAbSAlZM
— TOUGH (@abbotsforder) May 10, 2019
I also recently found a dog that appears to be chasing (the Street View car).
And, this being the Internet, others found Street View images of cats in Japan.
千鳥の島の母ちゃんの店
ネッコいた pic.twitter.com/8kYAVKn5ki
— やじ (@yajijovi) May 12, 2019
Cats in front of my mom's store on Chidori Island (Nagasaki).

author: Nevin Thompson


text:
Dear European Commission: Don’t let political parties use our data to manipulate the vote · Global Voices
Valentina Pavel

“Propaganda” by Pawel Kuczynski. Image used with permission of the artist.
This opinion article was written by Valentina Pavel, a Mozilla Fellow at Privacy International and member of the Association for Technology and Internet, based in Romania. Opinion articles do not reflect the views of Global Voices.
When the news broke that Cambridge Analytica had harvested millions of Facebook users’ personal data — and then used that information to influence elections — the fallout was swift. The UK-based data mining firm closed its doors, Facebook faced global scrutiny, and people around the world learned how easily democratic elections could be hacked by abusing voters’ personal data.
In the time since the scandal broke, you would think that democracies in Europe would have used all the tools at their disposal — including the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) — to prevent similar wrongdoings in the future.
But the Regulation offers some “flexibilities” for how it is integrated into national law, allowing Member States to introduce some of their own rules. In some cases, rather than protecting individuals’ rights, these exceptions limit freedom of expression, erode privacy, and abet the spread of disinformation. This lack of uniformity in applying GDPR rules could lead to differences in the level of protection of personal data within Member States, including in the context of elections.
The GDPR, which went into force in May 2018, establishes a set of EU-wide rules for the collection, processing and storing of people's personal data.
Alongside other provisions, the rules generally require private companies and organizations to obtain individuals’ consent before collecting their personal data (such as name, email, phone number and other personal and contact information). The GDPR also enhances people's rights, enabling citizens to request a copy of their data.
Although the GDPR is an EU Regulation, national governments were allowed to set some of their own provisions into national law, paving the ways for some of the exemptions for political parties that are described here.
For example, in Romania, lawmakers have introduced an exemption that allows political parties and organisations to process personal data without consent and without protective measures against potential abuses, creating a sort of “wild west” of personal data. For example, the national post office, a public body, has begun offering political parties information about elderly people, enabling political parties to target them with personalised information during the electoral campaign.
Romanian lawmakers have also introduced excessive limits on the use of personal data for journalistic purposes, in a move that could interfere with investigative journalism and prevent public interest stories from being revealed. We have yet to see the effects of this problematic exemption.
However, attempts to use the GDPR as a tool to silence free press were signaled in the RISE Project case. The Romanian Data Protection Authority approached the journalists who were reporting on a politician's possible ties to a fraudulent company, asking for information about their sources and threatening with large fines.
These problematic exemptions lead to a complaint filed with the European Commission, but no action has been taken.
Romania is not the only EU country where political parties have less restrictions for processing personal data. In Spain, the law allows political parties to collect personal information from public sources such as websites and social media. This problematic exemption has been raised with the European Commission since November last year, but six months on no concrete action has been taken by the EU body.
Spanish local elections took place at the end of April and voters will again go to the polls in late May for European elections. Privacy International’s research has shown that there are questions as to whether political parties’ use of personal data comply with the requirements set out by the Spanish Data Protection Authority.
In the UK, the law still permits political parties to process personal data revealing political opinions without obtaining users’ consent. We already know how sensitive this can be — even before Cambridge Analytica, there was Emma’s Diary, a baby care blog that sold personal data belonging to more than one million people to political parties. This is why, despite the provision in the UK law, political parties have been urged to publicly commit not to use the exemption provided in the law to target voters.
Previous abuses of personal data indicate that these exemptions could lead to the following outcomes:
More voter manipulation: Romania’s exemption essentially legalizes Cambridge Analytica’s practices. As a result, political parties can release misleading advertisements that prey on users’ personal anxieties, and influence them to vote for (or against) certain candidates. Around the world, we have seen how online disinformation has played an outsized role in elections for the past few years. These mistakes from the past should provide justification for regulators to step in and prevent more abuses from happening, but this has not yet taken place.
Threats to individual privacy and security: If a political party or advertiser has your personal data, when they get hacked, so do you. By allowing these groups to collect and store vast amounts of personal data without safeguards, millions of Europeans will become more vulnerable to data breaches and security incidents.
Less access to information: In a world of pervasive tracking where tailor-made messages can be targeted at voters, developing a truly informed opinion can be difficult. How can you think critically when you learn only bits and pieces of the story and only receive messages that are designed specifically for your ears to hear? How can there still be free and informed dialogue?
There’s never been a more important time to implement data safeguards: Disinformation has reached new heights, and the EU parliamentary elections are in a few weeks time. It is critical to fix these harmful exceptions before the elections and before damage is done.
On 26 May, EU voters should pressure their parliamentary candidates to put privacy high on their agendas and preserve democratic processes. After the vote, when the new European Commissioners will be appointed, voters should ask them to firmly enforce GDPR and privacy protections.
Loose data processing provisions for political parties can weaken our democracies. The European Commission must do its job by ensuring that GDPR rules are consistent throughout Europe and that everyone's data is protected.
Learn how to turn off targeted advertising on Twitter, YouTube, Facebook and Instagram, with these guides created by Privacy International.

author: Valentina Pavel


text:
Global Voices is seeking an Advocacy Director · Global Voices
Georgia Popplewell

Global Voices is seeking an Advocacy Director to guide our reporting, activism and research on freedom of expression and the digital rights field.
We are seeking candidates with deep knowledge of global digital rights issues, experience conceptualizing and building media, research and advocacy projects, writing about or advocating for digital rights issues, and working with a globally distributed team.
Global Voices is a global, virtual media organization with staff, contractors and volunteer contributors on every continent. Our contributors undertake writing, research, advocacy and translation to highlight stories and perspectives from around the world that are underrepresented in international mainstream media.
We recognize that universal human rights to free expression, access to information, and privacy are being challenged by governments, companies, and other powerful actors worldwide. We believe that the Global Voices community is uniquely positioned to document and explain these threats. Our Advox project aims to leverage our great strength – our networks, our knowledge, and the voices we amplify – to demonstrate the many ways that technology can enable and be used to violate human rights, with a particular focus on free expression.
The Advocacy Director will guide these efforts, both as a leader and as a mentor to our many community members who are working to highlight threats to digital rights and free expression in their own communities. The Advocacy Director will serve as a bridge between the Global Voices community and other key communities and networks of digital rights activists and experts around the world.
The Advocacy Director will work with our distributed community of volunteers and our newsroom team to oversee strategic editorial outputs under the Advox mantle. The Advocacy Director will also be part of Global Voices’ core leadership team.
The ideal candidate will have fluency in English and at least one other language, and at least three years of experience in the following areas:
And have proven skills in the following areas:
All applicants should demonstrate a strong commitment to Global Voices’ mission and values.
Candidates must have consistent, reliable access to broadband internet connectivity, be comfortable working in a wholly virtual environment, and be prepared to make around five international work trips per year. The Advocacy Director will report to the Global Voices Executive Director and Managing Director.
We strongly welcome candidates from outside North America and Western Europe and encourage people currently contributing to Global Voices to apply.
The position is near full-time or full-time but will be treated as a freelance contract.
To apply, please send the following to jobs AT globalvoices DOT org:
Applications will be accepted until midnight EST (GMT -4) on June 15, 2019.

author: Georgia Popplewell


text:
Hong Kong multimedia project commemorates the 30th anniversary of June 4 massacre in Beijing · Global Voices
Oiwan Lam

Image from “I am a journalist, my June 4 story”
To commemorate the 30th anniversary of the 1989 Beijing June 4 Massacre, a group of 60 Hong Kong journalists has decided to document the event with a multimedia publication project: I am a Journalist, My June 4 Story.
It has been 30 years since the rise and fall of the 89′ Democracy Movement (八九民运) in China. The 50-day democratic movement led by students ended with a brutal military crackdown on June 4. A confidential US government document, revealed in 2014, reported that a Chinese internal assessment estimated that at least 10,454 civilians were killed.
Within China, the incident is a political taboo and cannot be mentioned. While in Hong Kong, citizens have attended annual candlelight vigils to commemorate the victims for the past 30 years.
The “I am a Journalist, My June 4 Story” project stresses the role of journalists as witnesses to history and highlights their obligation to tell the truth and share their insights:
It has been thirty years since the June Fourth Massacre. The dead remain unnamed, protesters persecuted and killers at large. Facts are being distorted and rewritten so that the young generation will never know. No journalist should let this happen; in particular those who witnessed the killings. Not only should they retell the tragedy but also their insights into it. That's the obligation of every witness of history.
The 60 journalist's accounts of the incident will be published in book form and released on 4 June 2019. The project will also release one video interview every day starting from May 5. Below is the project's trailer:
The first journalist to talk about the incident in the video series is Ching Cheong. 30 years ago, he was the deputy editor-in-chief of Wen Wei Pao, a Chinese government-sponsored newspaper in Hong Kong. To everyone's surprise, the paper published a blank-editorial to express discontent after Beijing issued martial law on 19 May 1989. Ching Cheong revealed that though people like him anticipated that the older generation in Chinese Communist Party would choose “to kill 100 thousand people in exchange for 20 years of stability”, the newsroom was outraged to see the announcement of martial law:
Another video testimony was given by Leung Wai Man, a Singtao evening news journalist who still keeps a voice record of what she had gone through from June 3 to June 4:
Wong Kan Tai, another journalist from Wen Wei Pao, took leave from the news outlet in May 1989 and traveled to Beijing as an independent journalist so he could record the event from his own perspective. He re-visited Beijing in 1998 after 10 years to continue digging for the truth. He believes the incident is not over and there is still a lot of news to cover.
The project was funded by “People Will Not Forget Foundation” which is managed by Hong Kong Journalists Association.

author: Oiwan Lam


text:
Singapore parliament approves ‘anti-fake news’ law — will this curtail free speech? · Global Voices
Mong Palatino

Singapore parliament passed the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act on May 8, 2019 amid concern that it contains provisions undermining free speech. Photo by Flickr user Teddy Sipaseuth (CC BY-SA 2.0)
Singapore’s parliament approved the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) on May 8, 2019.
Commonly known as the anti-fake news law, POFMA gives broad, unchecked powers to government ministers to determine what online information is “false” and demand that it be censored or corrected.
The Ministry of Law says the legislation will help stop the circulation of “deliberate online falsehoods” which it says are being used “to divide society, spread hate, and weaken democratic institutions.”
But media groups and human rights advocates see the law as another tool to suppress free speech in Singapore. The law will come into force in a national environment where free speech is already under threat, as seen in multiple recent defamation claims against independent media and commentators.
The proposal to make a law aimed at tackling false information was discussed during a parliamentary committee deliberation in 2018. POFMA was introduced in parliament on April 1, 2019. A total of 72 members of parliament voted in favor of the measure while nine opposed it.
Under the law, any government minister can compel website administrators, internet service providers, and even private chat groups to immediately correct or remove ‘fake news’ from their domains. But the law's definition of what counts as fake or false is remarkably vague.
Article 2 states that “a statement may be found to be false if it is false or misleading, whether wholly or in part, and whether on its own or in the context in which it appears.”
Worker’s Party Non-Constituency MP Leon Perera identified three other provisions of the law which could be used to curtail the right to freedom of expression:
Section 2 – defining what a Minister deems a misleading presentation of facts, not only false claims of fact, as correctable;
Section 4(f) defining harmful falsehoods as including those that diminish confidence in the government; and
Section 6, which establishes Ministers as the decision-makers of truth and falsehood in the first instance.
Oxford University’s Project Southeast Asia Thum Ping Tjin explained how the vague wording of Section 4(f) could lead to censorship:
If you criticize the government, even if it’s a legitimate criticism, they can argue that criticism affects public confidence in the government. This effectively criminalizes all criticism of the government.
In a press release, the Ministry of Law clarified that the law does not cover opinions, criticisms, satire or parody. It insisted that corrections are not criminal sanctions, and that “only those who act to deliberately undermine society using falsehoods will be subject to the criminal offences.”
The Ministry also emphasized that the law “will not affect most average citizens,” and that it is a vital piece of legislation, reasoning:
It will help ensure online falsehoods do not drown out authentic speech and ideas, and undermine democratic processes and society. The aim is to keep in place the conditions for Singaporeans, as individuals and civic society, to build a healthy and robust public discourse, informed by the facts.
Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam reiterated during the parliamentary deliberations that the law will only affect “falsehood, bots, trolls and fake accounts” and not free speech. He also argued that corrections ordered by a government minister contribute to transparency:
You put up an article, Government says this is not correct. You carry a correction (and) let your readers judge. What’s the problem? More transparency, the better.
In a letter sent to Singapore’s prime minister, UN special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression David Kaye expressed his concern about some provisions in the measure.
…the Bill confers on select executive officials excessive authority to restrict, censor and punish online expression it designates as “false,” with limited opportunity for appeal.
…I am concerned that this overbroad definition of falsehood will lead to the criminalization and suppression of a wide range of expressive conduct, including criticism of the government, and the expression of unpopular, controversial or minority opinions.
Several journalists signed a joint statement detailing their apprehensions about the law:
By failing to distinguish between a malicious falsehood and a genuine mistake, the proposed legislation places an unnecessarily onerous burden on even journalists acting in good faith. Such a law will hinder rather than encourage the free flow of accurate information. News organisations might feel compelled to withhold important stories simply because certain facts cannot be fully ascertained.
Southeast Asian Press Alliance warned about how POFMA could further restrict press freedom in the country:
This bill clearly demonstrates that the government is setting itself up as the arbiter of truth and falsehood – a manifestly dangerous proposition, especially for a society that is already reeling from a raft of repressive laws.
Singapore-based journalist Kirsten Han, who is also a Global Voices contributor, added that POFMA might be another tool of the dominant People's Action Party (PAP) to silence government critics:
POFMA is thus likely to be yet another weapon in the PAP government’s arsenal against its critics…the legislation is worded broadly enough to give government ministers the option of wielding it selectively against particular targets.
PAP, the ruling party, has been in power in Singapore since the late 1950s.
Tech companies Facebook and Google also are worried about the implications of the new law. Google said the law could “hurt innovation and the growth of the digital information ecosystem” in Singapore and the southeast Asian region.
Jeff Paine of the Asia Internet Coalition said that the restrictive provisions of POFMA could be used as a model in other countries:
As the most far-reaching legislation of its kind to date, this level of overreach poses significant risks to freedom of expression and speech, and could have severe ramifications both in Singapore and around the world.

author: Mong Palatino


text:
Facebook posts trigger more arrests in Bangladesh, worrying netizens · Global Voices
Rezwan

Poet Henry Swapon and lawyer Imtiaz Mahmood. Collage from photos shared widely on social media.
Two people were arrested on May 14 and 15, for comments they had posted on Facebook. The arrests have sparked indignation and concern on social media.
On May 14, poet and journalist Henry Swapon was arrested at his home in Barishal city, located in south central Bangladesh. He has been accused of violating Bangladesh's Digital Security Act.
A member of the small local Christian community, Swapon was previously sued, along with two brothers Alfred and Jewel Sarkar, for “hurting religious sentiments of both Christians and Muslims” on social media.
Bangladeshi poet and editor Henry Swapan was arrested, under digital security act law! #freethepoet #bangladesh #bangladeshiblogger #FreedomOfSpeech pic.twitter.com/MGoCec2nsR
— Shammi Haque (@shammi121) May 15, 2019
According to the Dhaka Tribune, Swapon wrote a post on Facebook criticizing Lawrence Subrata Howlader, the Bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Barishal. The Bishop had elected to hold a scheduled cultural program at a local Catholic church on April 22, 2019, the day after the terror attacks in Sri Lanka. Swapon felt the Bishop should have postponed the festivities out of respect for hundreds of people killed in the attacks.
Other Christians were angry about the tone he took with the Bishop and some even sent him death threats. Swapon has been vocal in social media against all the injustices and corruption in his town.
Netizen Swakrito Noman wrote on Facebook:
বাংলাদেশে ধর্মানুভূতিতে আঘাতের ব্যবসাটা একচেটিয়া মুসলমান মৌলবাদীদের ছিল। এখন দেখছি খ্রিষ্টান মৌলবাদীরাও এই ব্যবসা শুরু করে দিয়েছে। আমার তো মনে হয় এই অনুভূতি ব্যবসায়ীরা একেকজন মানসিক রোগী। রাষ্ট্রের উচিত তার অসুস্থ নাগরিকদের সুচিকিৎসার ব্যবস্থা করা। কবি হেনরি স্বপনকে গ্রেপ্তারের তীব্র নিন্দা জানাই। তাঁর নিঃশর্ত মুক্তি চাই।
In Bangladesh, the tactics of attacking activists with the allegation of “hurting religious sentiments” had been a monopoly of the Muslim fundamentalists. Now we see that conservative Christians are also at it. I think those who feel this way hearing criticism are mentally sick. The state should arrange treatment for these sick individuals. We strongly condemn the arrest of poet Henry Swapon and demand his unconditional release.
On the morning of 15 May, police arrested supreme court lawyer and writer Imtiaz Mahmud in a case filed in 2017 under the country's now-defunct Information and Communication Technology Act, in which a private citizen, Shafiqul Islam, alleged that one of Mahmood's Facebook posts had hurt religious sentiments and incited communal violence in Bangladesh's southeastern Chittagong region.
Imtiaz Mahmood secured an anticipatory bail when the case was originally brought, but a Khagrachhari court issued another arrest warrant against him in January 2019.
Mahmood had commented on ethnic tensions that arose after a Bengali motorcyclist was killed in Khagrachhari, prompting a group of Bengalis to torch a number of houses and shops of the indigenous people in the Rangamati area of Chittagong. Local sources told the Dhaka Tribune that police had taken no measures to control the situation.
Hundreds of similar lawsuits were filed from 2013 until 2018, when the ICT Act was effectively replaced by the Digital Security Act.
Bangladesh crackdown on social media. Police have made a second arrest in less than a day under Digital Security Act. Writer Imtiaz Mahmood was arrested in a case over ICT act on Wednesday morning. #Freedomofexpression #ICTLawhttps://t.co/eH8H38unCr
— Tuhin Das (@tuhinaronna) May 15, 2019
Writer Meher Afroz Shaon posted on Facebook:
তিনি পাহাড় ভালোবাসেন- পাহাড়ের মানুষগুলোকে ভালেবাসেন। ফেসবুকে তাদের নিয়ে লেখেন। তার ফেসবুক লেখায় কখনও ‘জালাও পোড়াও’ তো দেখিনি!
কোথাও কোনো একটা ভুল হচ্ছে..! বেশ বড় একটা ভুল… ভুলগুলোর অবসান হোক।
বি.দ্র: আচ্ছা- ফেসবুকে অশালীন গালাগালি করে যারা পোস্ট করে তাদের নামে মামলা হলেই কি এ্যারেস্ট ওয়ারেন্ট বের হয়!
He loves the mountains and the people who live there. He writes about their rights. I have never seen “violent words” in his writings.
There is something wrong… Something is very wrong. I hope the wrongs will be right soon.
PS: I have seen a lot of posts on Facebook which have violent words and slurs in them. If one sues them, is an arrest warrant issued immediately?
Many netizens have expressed condemnation against both arrests, with some demanding that the law should be repealed.
Expat Bangladeshi Leesa Gazi tweeted:
Absolutely shameful.
The Bangladesh government cannot ensure public safety but prompt to arrest people under the repressive Digital Security Act which is, by the way, against the very spirit of the constitution of Bangladesh. https://t.co/1sFKY10OPV
— Leesa Gazi (@LeesaGazi) May 15, 2019
Journalist Probhash Amin wrote on Facebook:
কবি হেনরী স্বপনের পর অ্যাডভোকেট ইমতিয়াজ মাহমুদ। একে একে রুদ্ধ হচ্ছে মুক্তমত। সকল কালাকানুন বাতিল চাই। মতপ্রকাশের স্বাধীনতা চাই। কবি হেনরী স্বপন ও আইনজীবী ইমতিয়াজ মাহমুদের মুক্তি চাই।
After poet Henry Swapon, lawyer Imtiaz Mahmood (was arrested). Freedom of opinion is being restricted slowly. I want the repeal of all draconian acts. I want the freedom of expression. I want immediate release of Henry Swapon and Imtiaz Mahmood.
Despite concerns about its implications for freedom of expression, the Bangladeshi parliament approved the Digital Security Act in September 2018. The law replaced the notorious Information and  Technology Act, which had also been used as a tool for silencing critical speech online.
The Act criminalizes various types of online speech, ranging from defamatory messages to speech that “injures religious values or sentiments” introducing hefty fines. It also authorizes lengthy prison sentences for using the internet to create public unrest, and for “gathering, sending or preserving” classified government documents using a digital device. The Editors’ Council of Bangladesh said that the Act is “against the freedom guaranteed by the constitution, media freedom and freedom of speech.”
The Act also provides absolute power to law enforcement agencies to initiate investigations of anyone whose activities are deemed harmful or threating.

author: Rezwan


text:
30 years after the Tiananmen Massacre: An interview with survivor Zhou Fengsuo · Global Voices
Hong Kong Free Press

Zhou Fengsuo (circled) was no.5 in the Beijing police wanted list after the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre. Photo: Zhou Fengsuo.
The following post is originally written by Kris Cheng and published by Hong Kong Free Press on 12 May 2019. The edited version is republished on Global Voices under a content partnership agreement.
Ahead of the 30th anniversary of the Tiananmen Massacre, HKFP asked several survivors of the crackdown to answer a set of questions about the tragedy and share their views on China’s future.
The 1989 massacre ended months of student-led demonstrations in China as the military was deployed to suppress protesters in Beijing. It is estimated that hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people died.
Zhou Fengsuo was a fourth-year physics student at Tsinghua University in 1989 who became a student leader of the Beijing Autonomous University Students Union during the movement. He now lives in the US and HKFP last spoke to him in 2014 when he visited Hong Kong during the Umbrella Movement protests. Zhou had previously worked in finance and currently serves as president of the group, Humanitarian China.
HKFP: It is becoming more and more difficult to demand responsibility for June 4th. Do you still have any hope?
Zhou Fengsuo: The Chinese Communist Party must bear responsibility, this is the most important thing. Those directly responsible were, of course, the families of ex-Chinese leaders Deng Xiaoping and Li Peng.
We have our views on how to seek responsibility – in my view, if a democratic government seeks responsibility from them, the wealth of the two families must be taken away, including their next generations.
To seek responsibility is to seek justice, and the beginning of that is to find the truth. For example, how did they decide how to kill people? Why did they kill people? Truth is important for finding out who is responsible.
It is a very big problem in China that people who committed these evil acts did not take any responsibility. We have to make an example of those who committed evil acts – regardless of where they went – we must seek responsibility.
We have evidence that clearly points to the families of Deng Xiaoping and Li Peng. Some have proposed placing two kneeling statues at the Liberty Sculpture Park [in the US] close to the June 4 monument. This is what we can do on the civil side.
HKFP: Is there any particular experience you recall vividly after leaving China?
Zhou Fengsuo: I was jailed for a year after 1989. I was in exile in Yangyuan County in Hebei Province. I left China in early 1995.
I fought for my opportunity to leave China. I went through a long process – I earned a scholarship to study physics [at a US university] but I was not given a passport. I protested and marched and fought for my passport.
Zhou Fengsuo. File photo: Tom Grundy/HKFP.
HKFP: Some 1989 activists are still in China. Are you concerned about their condition? What can be done for them?
Zhou Fengsuo: Humanitarian China [a group Zhou co-founded] has been helping them by providing financial assistance, getting information about their situations and advocating for them. They include the Tiananmen Mothers, [Chinese] residents who were against the violent crackdown, and wanted students. We have been helping them in all kinds of ways.
Many are under oppression because of the 1989 protests and the commemorations afterward. They include the '89 alcohol bottle case, and Zeng Guofan of Jiangxi Province who was arrested last year for commemorating June 4 – these are the people we are concerned about.
The most important thing is that we need more people to talk about their stories. The authorities were very barbaric in these cases, and there weren't many people in China who would speak out for them.
They also include Professor Xu Zhangrun and Jiang Yanyong – we need to care about them. Many people have sacrificed their freedom. Liu Xianbin was jailed for more than 20 years in 1989. We need to pay attention to them because the Chinese Communist Party hopes that they will be forgotten after 30 years.
HKFP: 30 years have passed and many relatives and parents of the victims have passed away. Do you regret being unable to visit your family for decades?
Zhou Fengsuo: I have no regrets about not being able to go home to visit my family. I have talked about it many times – the Communist Party wanted me to come back and make a fortune. But I said, if I come back, I will not visit my family, I will not do business. I will talk about June 4 for my whole life anywhere, and it will be my top priority when I return to China.
The work I do overseas will continue in China. I don’t really like the sentimentality of the subject of returning home. This is something that the Chinese Communist Party has exploited. It wanted to make coming home a sentimental thing – this is not acceptable. If I come back, I will do everything to overthrow this regime, I have said this many times.
HKFP: After 30 years of huge changes, where do you see China going in the future? Do you see any hope that it will turn out better politically?
Zhou Fengsuo: To tolerate the existence of the Chinese Communist Party is not only dangerous to Han people in China but to people in Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong, Macau and the whole world.
This is the reality we are facing. We allowed this regime – which killed people using tanks in 1989 – to continue to exist, the US did business with it. It was – and is – the shame of the international community.
We will never reconcile, we must fully resist.
HKFP: In terms of recent developments in China, two of them are particularly alarming: The crackdown on lawyers and the phenomena of forced confessions. How do you see these developments?
Zhou Fengsuo: We cannot be optimistic about China’s situation. The madness of Xi Jinping has its own basis in Chinese society, namely the middle class pretending to be ignorant and the young generation who are being brainwashed.
This is very scary for a country’s future and a great challenge to the world’s development of peace. Xi Jinping’s madness and stupidity is a representation of this country. China will have to pay a heavy price for it in the future.
I believe that forces pushing for change inside China – bottom-up or top-down – were almost non-existent. It may likely be the case that we need to force China to change through the confrontation between countries.
But our principles won’t change, regardless of whether China will change. We demand a regime which has respect for freedom, dignity, and life. Regardless of how dark the situation is right now, we will persist.

author: Hong Kong Free Press


text:
Anti-Muslim attacks stoke tensions and incite fear amongst mourning Sri Lankans · Global Voices
Rezwan

Muslims praying In Sri Lanka. Image by IHH Humanitarian Relief Foundation. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
On 12 May, anti-Muslim violence was allegedly sparked over a Facebook post by a Muslim trader in coastal Chilaw town located 80 km away from Sri Lanka's capital, Colombo. Within hours, mobs began attacking mainly Muslim-owned buildings and houses in other cities in the North Western province. By 13 May, around 500 houses, shops, mosques, and other religious centers were damaged, one person was killed, and ten others were seriously injured. The authorities imposed a curfew in the entire country until the morning of 14 May, amid fears of the attacks spreading.
The authorities also temporarily blocked a number of social media networks and messaging apps, including Facebook and WhatsApp, to control the situation.
The scale of the anti-Muslim violence in Sri Lanka over the last few days is just remarkable. Like previous episodes in the country, none of this is simply “organic” rioting. https://t.co/HW2FWmHIzn pic.twitter.com/ZeLBWMtdDI
— Amarnath Amarasingam (@AmarAmarasingam) May 15, 2019
This comes in the wake of the 21 April 2019 bomb attacks on churches and hotels during Easter celebrations, which killed 258 people and rattled the country. As details of the Easter events emerged, locally based radical Islamic groups were identified as the attackers and many of the perpetrators died in suicide bombings. Many feared that the local Muslim community would be targeted as a scapegoat for the terrorist acts, against the backdrop of century-long violence by the Sinhala majority against minority Tamils, Muslims, and Christians.
Tisaranee Gunasekara describes how the recent violence started in a blog post for Groundviews:
The outburst of anti-Muslim violence began on 12th Sunday in Chilaw (the inciting incident seemingly was a Facebook post by a Muslim trader with deficient English and a cavalier attitude towards punctuation; it was translated into Sinhala by a Sinhalese whose knowledge of English was even poorer). Within hours, the violence spread to other parts of the North Western Province and to Gampaha district. Undeterred by the curfew or the presence of the security forces, the mobs attacked and burnt, as they did in Digana in 2018, Aluthgama in 2014 and nationally during Black July.
As of now, the worse of the violence seems over. Even so, this is only a reprieve. If the perpetrators of this week’s riots are not brought before the law, fast, a new outburst is bound to follow.
The Facebook post quoted the Muslim trader as saying, “Don’t laugh more, 1 day u will cry,” which allegedly caused people to believe it was a warning of an impending attack.
Images and videos of the destruction caused by mob retaliation were being circulated on social media:
A small glimpse of what Muslims in Sri Lanka are waking up to right now. Several homes, mosques, and businesses destroyed. #SriLanka pic.twitter.com/UhEMUJzqiF
— Amarnath Amarasingam (@AmarAmarasingam) May 14, 2019
An extremist Buddhist mob attacked a Muslim owned supermarket this in Sri Lanka last night.#terrorism pic.twitter.com/VrHNkda7Xe
— CJ Werleman (@cjwerleman) May 14, 2019
Takes a lifetime of hard work to build and moments to burn it all to the ground… pic.twitter.com/gAt99xZGPD
— Zahrah Imtiaz (@Imtiaz88Zahrah) May 14, 2019
1. #LKA ‘s largest Pasta factory owned by a Muslim burnt to the ground by mobs. The operations at this factory had begun only several months ago. Employs over 70% Sinhalese staff. Witnesses say a group of at least 500 mobs destroyed the factory #Minuwangoda pic.twitter.com/0lMgFUYgXU
— Usman Ali ?? (@usmanali_la) May 14, 2019
There is an indication that hardline Buddhist groups were behind these anti-Muslim attacks. Police have arrested 78 suspects for the violence and unrest especially in Kurunegala, Kuliyapitiya, Nikaweratiya, and Chilaw. According to the authorities, the situation is now under control.
Police checking CCTV video footages to identify more suspects over tense situations prevailed last few days. So far 78 arrested and remanded – Police spokesperson #LKA #SriLanka #CommunalAttacksLKA pic.twitter.com/lOzeaCZzbp
— Sri Lanka Tweet ?? (@SriLankaTweet) May 15, 2019
At Groundviews, Gitendra E Chitty asks Sri Lankans for peace and solidarity in these difficult times:
Sri Lanka must bring its communities together, no matter what race or creed. Because these attacks were not against Christians or tourists. These mobs were not against Muslims. They were against each and every one of us, and their damage to our mindsets and our morals and our sense of belonging is real – for Sinhalese, and Tamil, and Muslim, and Burgher, and every other ethnic and religious group.
Journalist Chathuri Dissanayake tweets:
The flames of hatred belongs to no religion, it destroys everything in its path, Minuwangoda, Sri Lanka, May 14, 2019 pic.twitter.com/0i9Hq2GXDt
— Chathuri Dissanayake (@ChathsD) May 14, 2019
IT specialist Afzal says:
Our National Flag and Our National Anthem brings us together under one name Sri Lanka, while our communities are fighting with each other forgetting that they are destroying everyone as a whole. Wake up and have a look at what it means to be as one! #SriLanka pic.twitter.com/HtBCwZAdAV
— Afzal (@TonyStarkLK) May 15, 2019


text:
Brazilians took to the streets to protest Bolsonaro’s education cuts · Global Voices
Global Voices Brazil

Protesters in Rio de Janeiro: Our weapon is education | Image: Marianna Cartaxo / Mídia NINJA/Used with permission
On May 15, thousands of Brazilians took to the streets in all 26 states and the Federal District against the Bolsonaro government's slashing of federal funds to education that will affect dozens of universities and schools.
At the end of April, Brazil's government announced cuts of 30 percent on a so-called discretionary budget, which goes towards expenses such as electricity, water, general maintenance, and research. When considering the total federal budget for higher education, the cuts would amount to around 3,5 percent. Besides, the government has suspended funds for 3,500 publicly-funded postgraduate scholarships.
From Paulista Avenue in São Paulo, a traditional gathering spot for protests, to far away indigenous lands in Alto Rio Negro, near the border with Colombia, people went out to defend their public education. In Viçosa, Minas Gerais, a crowd of around 5,000 people marched with umbrellas under heavy rain.
WOW. Drone footage of the huge crowd of protestors gathered on on Av Paulista in São Paulo to protest the education & science funding cuts.#15M #TodosPelaEducação #TsunamidaEducação #NaRuaPelaEducação #MarchaPelaCiência pic.twitter.com/BmHEYBuF9F
— March for Science (@MarchForScience) May 15, 2019
Brazil has 69 federal universities and a large number of state universities, all offering undergraduate and postgraduate education completely free of tuition, and several community-oriented services such as extension courses, legal assistance offices, and hospitals.
Initially, the cuts would apply to only three federal universities, but they were later extended to the entire federal network. Bolsonaro's Education Minister Abraham Weintraub says that they're not “cuts” but a “contingency of expenses.”
Weintraub has justified the cuts because public universities are “places of mayhem.” When asked by reporters to name examples of such “mayhem,” he mentioned the presence of social movements in campuses, and “parties with naked people.”
Weintraub was appointed as minister in early April after his short-lived predecessor's administration became involved in a series of controversies. The new minister often voices rightwing conspiracy theories, such as that crack cocaine was introduced in Brazil as part of a communist plot, and that he wants to erase “cultural Marxism” from universities.
Some university deans have said that the cuts might impede them from “opening their doors” as early as the second semester of 2019. The Federal Prosecutor's Office has sent a report to the attorney general claiming the cuts violate Brazil's Constitution.
Rio de Janeiro you look BEAUTIFUL! Hundreds of thousands are occupying Avenida Presidente Vargas as night falls to protest the budget cuts to science and education.#15M #TodosPelaEducação #TsunamidaEducação #NaRuaPelaEducação pic.twitter.com/8MIn91crKX
— March for Science (@MarchForScience) May 15, 2019
Researchers at the Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG) who study WhatsApp groups in Brazil have detected conversations around universities on that messaging app in the days following the budget cut's announcement. The study has developed a tool that monitors WhatsApp groups and is widely used by fact-checking agencies in Brazil. Lead researcher Fabrício Benevuto said on a Facebook post on May 8:
São monografias/dissertações/eventos ridicularizados por seus títulos e temas. São imagens de pessoas peladas em festas (que nem são nas universidades) e protestos e memes dizendo que os alunos das federais levam mais de 12 anos pra formar, pois só usam drogas. Claramente é um esforço orquestrado. Trabalho de profissional. Segue o mesmo estilo da campanha eleitoral. Quem financia essa fábrica de desinformação?
[The images include] monographies/dissertation/events mocked by their titles and topics. There are images of naked people in parties (that aren't even in universities) and protests and memes that say university students take 12 years to graduate because they're on drugs all the time. It's clearly an orchestrated effort. A professional's job. It's the same style of the electoral campaign. Who finances this factory of disinformation?
An article by website Ciência na Rua (“science in the streets” in Portuguese) claims that public universities produce 95 percent of scientific research in Brazil. A study by the United States’ consultancy Clarivate Analytics in 2018 points out that on the top 20 universities with the most prominent research production, 15 are part of the federal network.
On the day of the protests, Minister Weintraub was summoned to testify about the budget cuts in the lower house of Congress.
“Bolsonaro is the enemy of Education”
“Education is an act of Love and Courage”#TsunamiDaEducacao pic.twitter.com/sEEOb5wDxz
— Nirmukta (@Nirmukta) May 16, 2019
Meanwhile, Bolsonaro was in Texas, in the United States, where he met former US president George W. Bush. When asked about the protests, the president said:
É natural [que haja protesto], agora a maioria ali é militante,  não tem nada na cabeça, se perguntar 7×8 pra ele, não sabe.  Se você perguntar a fórmula da água, não sabe, não sabe nada. São uns idiotas úteis, uns imbecis, que estão sendo usados como massa de manobra de uma minoria espertalhona que compõe o núcleo de muitas universidades federais no Brasil.
It’s natural [that protests happen], now, the majority of people there are militants with nothing inside their heads. If you ask the result of 7 times 8, they won’t know. If you ask about the composition of water, they won’t know, they know nothing. They are useful idiots, imbeciles, and are being manipulated by a canny minority that commands many federal universities in Brazil.

author: Global Voices Brazil


text:
In Hong Kong, the sexual connotation of Ikea’s new tofu ice cream ad creates controversy · Global Voices
Oiwan Lam

Online campaign #we love holding hands and hate eating tofu. Photo via Scholars Alliance for Sexual and Gender Diversity's facebook page.
An online advertisement about tofu ice cream released by Swedish furniture company Ikea in Hong Kong has stirred up controversy on social media.
The Chinese language online ad released on May 3 reads: “You can eat my tofu whenever you like”. On social media, it was attached with a note: “You guys can eat (my tofu), but please be gentle.” In Cantonese slang, “eating someone’s tofu” (食豆腐) means taking sexual advantage of a woman through verbal or physical harassment.
In response, feminist activist group Gender and Sexual Justice in Action demanded the company take down the ad and criticized its sexual connotation on Facebook:
…營造出一種女性嬌羞期待自己身體被「吃豆腐」的效果。而心領神會的大眾不論男女則爭相配合這一語境，表達對「吃豆腐」的躍躍欲試、急不及待。
性別化的信號釋放與對該信號的回應，便構成了一次符號的強化，女性的身體作為隨時可以侵犯甚至期待著被侵犯的對象，這一概念就這樣以看似毫不相關的「雪糕廣告」或者「笑話一則」的方式反覆被強化。
[The ad] generates the image of a woman wishing for her body to be eaten like tofu. The public gets what it means and expresses their urge to “eat someone’s tofu”. The sexual connotation was released and it attracts responses that reinforce the pre-existing gender-sexual relation. The ice-cream ad once again treats woman’s body as an object [desires] to be taken advantage of [by man].
The feminist group's comment attracted a huge number of remarks which attacked the group for reading too deeply into the ads and killing the joke. The furniture company also refused to take down the ads and replied to the group:
We have been working hard to communicate in a playful yet positive manner, so our customers may better understand our offers. The latest Tofu-flavored Sundae promotional post “speaks” for itself to emphasize the silky taste.
A majority of online voices sided with Ikea and more vocal attacks on the feminist group emerged. Deeply troubled by the online reactions, on May 9, a group of 20 civil society organizations jointly filed an official complaint to the Equal Opportunity Commission. The joint letter demanded that the commission investigate the incident:
While the popular furniture brand regards sexual harassment as a joke in its promotional materials, it encourages people not to regard sexual harassment as a serious problem, creating a hostile environment and making it harder for the victims to speak up.
On the social media front, another civil society group, Scholars Alliance for Sexual and Gender Diversity, launched an online campaign #we love holding hands and hate eating tofu.
The campaign calls upon same-sex friends or couples to upload a photo of themselves eating ice-cream while holding hands. The campaign aims to praise the culture of LGBT friendly ads and to express disapproval of Ikea’s tofu ads.


text:
Jamaica’s ‘Voices for Climate Change’ spreads its message with music · Global Voices
Emma Lewis

Screenshot from the YouTube video “Voices for Climate Change Education – 2019 Campaign,” published by Panos Caribbean. The organisation has launched an eight-month climate change community awareness campaign in four communities across Jamaica: Rocky Point and Lionel Town in the parish of Clarendon, Ridge Red Bank in St. Elizabeth and White River in St Ann.
From reggae and dancehall music to jingles extolling the virtues of everything from laundry detergent to fast food, the way to any Jamaican’s heart is through song — prompting Panos Caribbean, a media-savvy non-governmental organisation, to take a musical approach to spread its environmental message. The organisation has been successfully sharing critical information with the public through its Voices for Climate Change project.
Those voices rang out loud and clear at the historic United Nations Conference in Paris (COP21) in 2015. There, Jamaican singer and songwriter Aaron Silk joined forces with other musicians — including Belizean performer Adrian Martinez — to advocate for a 1.5-degree limit to global warming.
The musical message, which supported the position of Small Island Developing States, was considerable, influencing the aspirations reflected in COP21’s final document.
Years later, the “1.5” message continues to resonate in the eastern Caribbean, where singers have intertwined St. Lucian poet Kendel Hippolyte’s words with their own lyrics in order to ensure the message hits home.
Community artist Sammy Junior, from Rocky Point, Clarendon (a community impacted by sea level rise and coastal erosion) at a workshop on Climate Change Messaging in Jamaica on March 14, 2019. Photo by Emma Lewis, used with permission.
The climate change crisis in 2019 is even more urgent than it was four years ago and in Jamaica, rural citizens from farmers to fisherfolk are heeding the wake-up call. Artists, schoolchildren and community members came together in different parts of Jamaica — Kingston, Lionel Town, Ridge Red Bank and White River — for four days of workshops during the months of March and April. There, they honed their communication skills and learned about the impact of climate change. Powerful lyrics emerged, ideas flowed and eye-opening field trips provided on-the-ground perspectives:
Mama Earth she a bawl
Deep inna di forest weh di trees dem a fall
Look pan di reef, see di fish dem small,
Give dem little time, mek dem grow big and tall.
Mother Earth she bawls
Deep in the forest where the trees fall
Look upon the reef, see the fish how small
Give them a little time, make them grow big and tall
Artists from Kingston, Clarendon and Spanish Town working together on lyrics at the Climate Change Messaging workshop. Photo by Emma Lewis, used with permission.
With Panos’ launch of a new Caribbean theme song for Earth Day, the Jamaican group is booked solid for school and community concerts, as well as the Read Across Jamaica initiative and tree-planting sessions. Lyrics like these, delivered to a roots reggae rhythm and infused with dancehall vibes, somehow manage to hit home:
Mother Nature yearns for life
The more the factories burn, she cries.
When will we learn, and be wise?
The more the ice caps melt, the sea rise.

author: Emma Lewis


text:
Netizen Report: Amid WhatsApp attacks, advocates launch legal challenge against Israeli malware maker · Global Voices
Netizen Report Team

Stylized photo of surveillance cameras. Image by Corey Burger via Flickr (CC BY-SA 2.0)
The Advox Netizen Report offers an international snapshot of challenges, victories, and emerging trends in technology and human rights around the world. This report covers news and events from May 10 – 17, 2019.
On May 13, WhatsApp users in multiple countries were targeted with malicious software developed by the Israeli company NSO group and deployed by governments that had purchased the software.
The software appears to have taken advantage of a technical flaw in WhatsApp, that has since been repaired. The attacks were uniquely malicious because of the ease with which they can infect a person’s device — by simply receiving a call or message, a user could unknowingly enable the software to install itself on their device, giving attackers broad access to their private communications and activities.
NSO Group is the creator of the notorious spyware Pegasus, which the company exclusively sells to governments, typically making contracts with law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Once installed, the software ostensibly allows the attacker to see and document everything that victims do and say on their devices, capturing messages, location and many other pieces of data. It has been linked to attacks on activists and journalists in Mexico, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, where it was found on a device belonging to now-jailed human rights defender Ahmed Mansoor.
In response to this and other attacks that have been documented in recent years by advocacy and tech research groups including The Citizen Lab at University of Toronto and Amnesty International, the Bernstein Institute for Human Rights at New York University and Global Justice Clinic are taking legal action in an effort to stop the company from selling this type of software. They have filed a legal challenge demanding that Israel's Ministry of Defence revoke the export license of NSO Group.
Their petition argues that NSO Group is violating international human rights law by allowing governments to target human rights activists, as opposed to aiding them solely in “fighting crime and terror,” as dictated by their licensing agreement.
NSO Group is also facing lawsuits filed by individuals accusing the company of helping the governments of Mexico and the United Arab Emirates to surveil members of civil society. Late last year, a Canada-based Saudi dissident filed another lawsuit, alleging that the software had allowed Saudi authorities to snoop on his communications with journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the lead-up to Khashoggi's October 2018 murder at the Saudi embassy in Istanbul.
Safety tips: How to protect your device and update your WhatsApp
A group of government leaders, tech companies and civil society experts met in Paris on May 15 to discuss the role of the internet in preserving public safety and human rights in the aftermath of the attacks on two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand in March 2019. Several of the governments and companies later signed a non-binding document known as the “Christchurch Call,” a set of principles and commitments concerning the creation and distribution of viral, violent content online.
Spearheaded by the government of New Zealand, the Christchurch Call aims to be “consistent with principles of a free, open and secure internet, without compromising human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of expression” and indicates that any regulation resulting from the deliberations should adhere to international human rights standards. The call also urges internet companies to provide greater public transparency about their policies and processes for removing (and appealing the removal of) violent content.
Google, Facebook, Twitter and Amazon have joined the call. Alongside New Zealand and several EU governments, Australia, Canada, India, Indonesia, Japan and Senegal have signed on. The US declined to sign, with the White House citing its “respect for freedom of expression and freedom of the press.”
The Somali government announced that it will shut down access to social media platforms from May 27-31, in an effort to prevent secondary school students from cheating on end-of-year exams. The exam period was postponed in early May, after officials discovered that a copy of exam answers had leaked online. The secretary of education made the announcement on state television on May 13 and offered no details on which platforms would be blocked.
Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for East Africa, Seif Magango, criticized the move, arguing that Somali officials should “explore ways to secure the integrity of the exams without resorting to regressive measures that would curtail access to information and freedom of expression.”
Singapore’s parliament approved the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act on May 8, 2019. Commonly known as the anti-fake news law, the Act gives broad, unchecked powers to government ministers to compel website administrators, internet service providers, and even private chat groups to immediately correct or remove ‘fake news’ from their domains. But the law's definition of what counts as fake or false is remarkably vague.
In a letter to Singapore’s prime minister, UN special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression David Kaye wrote:
“I am concerned that this overbroad definition of falsehood will lead to the criminalization and suppression of a wide range of expressive conduct, including criticism of the government, and the expression of unpopular, controversial or minority opinions.”
Two men in Bangladesh were arrested after private citizens filed lawsuits against them concerning posts they had written on Facebook. One, Henry Swapon, had criticized a local bishop. The other, Imtiaz Mahmood, had commented on ethnic conflict in the country’s Chittagong region.
Swapon is now facing charges under the Digital Security Act, a 2018 law that criminalizes various types of online speech, ranging from defamatory messages to speech that “injures religious values or sentiments.”
Afef Abrougui, Ellery Roberts Biddle, L. Finch, Rezwan Islam, Mong Palatino and Taisa Sganzerla contributed to this report.

author: Netizen Report Team


text:
Why are Colombian indigenous peoples protesting against President Ivan Duque? · Global Voices
Kati Hinman

Screenshot of the video shared by the Cauca's Regional Indigenous Council. The video shares images of the protests that took place in the South West of the country earlier in April.
Indigenous, Afro-Colombian, and farming communities are staging mass protests around Colombia against President Ivan Duque's National Development Plan. The plan comprises an array of directives that, among other things, will encourage foreign investment in large-scale mining and agribusiness which could threaten indigenous territories.
In March 2019, indigenous communities shut down a major highway in the Cauca region for 25 days. On April 25, they were joined by other social movements in leading a national strike. Besides threats to indigenous rights, strikers have protested against budgets cuts in education and the slow implementation of the 2016 Peace Accords — of which Duque, who's still to complete a year in office, is an outspoken critic.
Indigenous peoples have referred to the demonstrations as “mingas,” a Quechua word meaning “collective work” widely used in protest movements in South America.
#ParoNacional | Comunidades indígenas, campesinos, campesinas y afros de Tado, se movilizan desde tempranas horas a lo largo de la vía Pereira-Quibdo en el marco del Paro Nacional #SeValeProtestar pic.twitter.com/YNOOB1oxNd
— Colombia Informa (@Col_Informa) April 25, 2019
#NationalStrike | Indigenous communities, farmers, and afros of Tado, are mobilizing from the early hours of the morning all along the highway from Pereira to Quibdo as part of the National Strike #It'sWorthItToProtest
The National Development Plan includes reforms in different sectors, such as education, energy, and agriculture. While Duque claims the programs will lift 3,4 million Colombians out of poverty, critics counter that it benefits primarily private corporations. Indigenous minga leaders are particularly concerned with the aspects of the plan that might challenge their right to prior consultation on development projects on their territories.
While the government has agreed to negotiate with indigenous leaders about the plan, a final agreement is yet to be reached. According to the newspaper El Espectador, the amount of land the government is willing to protect on behalf of indigenous peoples are way below of what the communities demand:
La diferencia entre lo que ofrece el gobierno de Iván Duque y lo que piden las comunidades indígenas para despejar la vía Panamericana es abismal. El Ejecutivo habla de 1 500 hectáreas para resolver las necesidades de todas las organizaciones que integran la minga, mientras que el requerimiento de los organizadores de la protesta es de 40 000 hectáreas
The difference between what Iván Duque's government offers and what the indigenous communities are asking for in order to open the Panamericana highway is abysmal. The President talks about 1,500 hectares to resolve the needs of all the organizations that make up the minga, whereas the requirements of the organizations that are protesting is 40,000 hectares.
Signed between former President Juan Manuel Santos and the leaders of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, the country's largest guerrilla group, the 2016 Peace Accords ended the country's five-decade internal conflict by proclaiming a definitive ceasefire in exchange for participation by former FARC members in institutional politics.
The Peace Accords have also created protections to prevent the accumulation of land by individuals and foreign companies in rural areas. It prioritized land redistribution and designated a few areas for indigenous, Afro-Colombian, and farming communities who have been severely affected by the long conflict. Unequal land ownership in rural areas was a major reason why FARC group took up arms in the 1960s.
However, full implementation of the agreement has remained elusive as many conservative sectors in Colombia are staunchly against those terms. Meanwhile, smaller armed groups remain active in the countryside, where they have staged deadly disputes for control over FARC's former territories. As a consequence, the number of killed social leaders in rural areas has skyrocketed since the Accords’ signature. While figures vary depending on how a “social leader” is defined, the Colombian ombudsman's office says 460 social leaders have been killed between 2016 and March 31, 2019.
Duque, along with his main ally, former President Álvaro Uribe, is among the most prominent detractors of the peace agreement. In recent months, he has attempted to weaken the authority of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP) a judicial body created by the Accords to try both guerrilla and government actors suspected of war crimes. Many groups are outraged at those measures, which they say could undermine the chances of true reconciliation.
People shared their reasons for joining the April 25 strike with the hashtag #VamosAlParoPor (We Are Going to Strike For) and #MingaNacionalPorLaVida (National Minga For Life).
#VamosAlParoPor la Minga Indígena, porque exijimos protección para los líderes sociales, los excombatientes y en respaldo a la JEP y a la implementación de los acuerdos de paz. Por mejores condiciones laborales para el magisterio y las centrales obreras. @C_Pueblos @cutcolombia pic.twitter.com/3wFAsyTeDZ
— Juan Camilo (@JUANCAELBROKY) April 25, 2019
We are going to strike for the indigenous minga, because we demand protection to social leaders, former fighters, in support of the JEP and the implementation of the peace accords. For better labor conditions for teachers and workers’ centrals.
La Pulla, a YouTube channel of political commentary, delved into the growing tension in a video titled “Esto pasa cuando el Estado ignora a su gente” (This is What Happens when a Government Ignores its People), where they examine the long history of government neglect in the countryside, particularly the departments of Cauca, Nariño, La Guajira, and Catatumbo. The journalist states:
La minga nos recuerda que eso no es el único lugar donde viven incumpliendo la gente y le hacen pistola cada vez que pueda. Vemos cuatro regiones del país que el estado ignora por completa.
The minga reminds us that it is not the only place where people live with unfulfilled (promises), with the government flicking them off every time it can. We see four regions of the country that the state ignores completely.
No definite solution has been given to the minga's and strikers’ demands, so protests are likely to continue in the coming months.

author: Kati Hinman


text:
A tale of two parents: Georgian drag artist on hostility, acceptance and learning to love life · Global Voices
OC Media

The following is a version of a partner post by Tamuna Chkareuli that first appeared on the website OC Media.
Drago — a stage pseudonym — is a 17-year-old boy from Rustavi, Georgia. He is a make-up artist, a fashion model, and a drag performer. Everywhere he walks, he gets unapologetic looks —  openly wearing women’s attire, with dyed hair and make-up, he does not expect anything else. The courage to be himself, he says, comes from his mother, who always supported him along the way.
“I’ve had many different interests since I was a little boy. I always had long hair, was friends with girls, and never wanted to participate in boyish games. There were attempts to change me, mostly from my father, but I would always resist.”
“This resistance was what I grew up with. I remember once he tried to cut my hair while I was asleep, but I woke up and he couldn’t do anything. He took me to a boxing class and bought me boxing gloves, but that didn’t work either.”
“My father sometimes ambushes me in the street, asking me to at least dress ‘normally’. But I don’t want to hide who I am. And it was not just him, but other male relatives too. For my own safety, I ended all relations with my uncle and my grandfather.”
“My mother was the only bright light of my life. She was always by my side and till this day, stands by me no matter what. In my childhood, she would always resist my father and defend me, and now, after years, it’s the other way around. I often defend mum when people tell her nasty things — that happens a lot. The majority of it comes from my father, but for the last four years, luckily, we have lived separately and I feel free.”
“My father wanted, because of my identity, to deprive us of the flat in Rustavi and throw me and my mother out, but thanks to support from the Equality Movement [a queer rights group], we won the case in court.”
“We are much happier now. I’m a happy person and have everything I’d ask for thanks to my mother. I’m dreaming about going abroad and becoming a professional make-up artist, and she supports this idea. Of course, at first, she didn’t like what I did. But I have quite a decent income from my work, and she likes that I’m independent.”
“At school, everyone accepted me surprisingly well after some time. They knew me well and no one was aggressive towards me. I was the first one to dress differently in school and was bullied because of this, but there was never any physical violence. I think they also knew that I was aware of my rights and would always defend them.”
“I was only 13 when I first called the police — they [the attackers] tried to take off some of my personal belongings that looked different. I have had to call the police almost every year since then.”
“My mother was the person who taught me the most important thing — I need to be able to survive alone. There are situations when no one will help me, except myself.”
“The latest attack happened around two weeks ago, when I was sitting in a minibus, and a man punched me from outside and tried to escape. I took down the contact information of witnesses, I went out and photographed the car plate from outside, and I memorised the attacker’s face. I was able to identify him later, and now he’s about to face justice.”
“I would love to have a family in the future, and also raise my child with acceptance, no matter what. A true parent loves their child no matter who they are. My father is not a true parent to me, and I’m not ashamed to say that.”
“My classmates, friends, and people in my neighbourhood in Rustavi also recognise me and help me. They know me better than my father ever did. I’m proud that I have come so far being who I am and didn’t give in. I have several relatives who share this point of view, among them the husband of one of my mother’s relatives who genuinely worries about my safety.”
“For May 17 [International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia, and Biphobia], he asked me to go on a picnic with them to stay safe. My mum is not that afraid, by the way. There are many things that have changed for the better in society, and we are hopeful.”
“May 17 is a day of fighting hate for me. It’s a day of standing together and I feel it’s the most important day for queer people. Unfortunately, this beautiful day was stolen by the [Georgian Orthodox Church] and became the day of Family Purity.  Well, I would like to tell them that our families are pure too, and we can join them in their celebration.”
“I would say to those who want to talk to their families but are afraid — have the courage to make the first steps. If you do it carefully, you have a good chance of being accepted. But it also depends on the parent. And I don’t think that a parent has to have ‘modern thinking’. There is nothing modern about the idea you should love your child.”

author: OC Media


text:
Angola cancelled a public tender after suspicions of fraud, indicating divisions in government · Global Voices
Simão Hossi

Front page of newspaper Jornal de Angola on the tender won by the company Telstar. Taken by Dércio Tsandzana, 19 April 2019 and used with permission
The Angolan president João Lourenço cancelled, on 18 Abril, the public tender for the fourth mobile phone operator in the country, arguing that the winner Telstar did not meet the necessary requirements to deliver the service. The president’s decision could indicate divisions in the Angolan government.
The company Telstar was created in January 2018 with a capital stock of 200,000 Kwanza (around 600 US dollars), and its shareholders are the general Manuel João Carneiro (90 per cent) and the businessman António Cardoso Mateus (10 per cent), according to the Portuguese newspaper Observador. Manuel João Carneiro’s rank was awarded by the previous president José Eduardo dos Santos, according to the Angolan online news outlet Club Net.
The Observador reported that 27 companies participated in the tendering process opened by the Ministry of Telecommunications and Information Technology, under José Carvalho da Rocha.
On 25 April, João Lourenço signed an order which establishes new rules for opening the new invitation to tender, according to the newspaper Jornal de Angola.
After the results of the first tender were made public, many Angolans questioned the integrity of the process. Some, for example, highlighted that winner Telstar did not even have a website. Skit Van Darken, an editor and event organizer, said on Facebook:
A Telstar – Telecomunicações, Lda, constituída a 26 de Janeiro de 2018, com capital de 200.000 Kwanzas…de acordo com o Diário da República, cujos accionistas são o general Manuel João Carneiro (90% do capital), na reforma, e António Cardoso Mateus (10%).
O accionista maioritário tem ligações à empresa Mundo Startel, uma sociedade de capitais anónimos, registada na INACOM, o regulador das telecomunicações, com licença de telefonia fixa, entretanto expirada. Uma empresa que nem se quer website tem!
EU NÃO ACREDITO SE QUER QUE EXISTIRAM OUTROS CONCORRENTES
ESSE PAÍS É UMA DESGRAÇA
Telstar – Telecommunications, Ltd, formed on 26 January 2018, with capital of 200,000 Kwanzas… according to the [newspaper] Diário da República, whose shareholders are the general Manuel João Carneiro (90 per cent of the capital), in retirement, and António Cardoso Mateus (10 per cent).
The majority shareholder has links to the company Mundo Startel, a limited liability company, registered at INACOM, the telecommunications regulator, with a landline licence, although expired. A company that doesn’t even have a website!
I DON’T EVEN BELIEVE THAT THERE WERE OTHER COMPETITORS
THIS COUNTRY IS A DISGRACE
Meanwhile, Joaquim Lunda, a journalist and frequent social media commentator, praised the president’s action and even thought that the minister in question ran the risk of being fired for these failings:
Agradeço e é de louvar a decisão tomada pelo Presidente da República, João Lourenço em anular o concurso público que atribuiu à empresa angolana Telstar a licença para a quarta operadora de telecomunicações em Angola. Havia muitas reticências e muitos pontos por esclarecer no assunto. Não se reconhece idoneidade numa empresa que foi criada em 2018 c/ capital social de 200 mil kwanzas em ser lhe atribuído a tal empreitada.
Tenho a plena certeza que os dias do Ministro das Telecomunicações e das Tecnologias de Informação, José Carvalho de Rocha, estão contados. Após o desaire que foi o ANGOSAT 1, agora mais este que testemunhamos hoje, duvido se o “Dread” vai resistir.
Apreciemos os Cenários…Nas Calmas!!”
I appreciate, and it is praiseworthy, the decision taken by the president of the republic, João Lourenço, to annul the public tender which awarded the Angolan company Telstar the licence for the fourth telecommunications operator in Angola. There were many reservations and a lot of points to clarify around the issue. One doesn’t see the aptitude in a company which was created in 2018 with capital stock of 200 thousand kwanzas to be awarded such an undertaking.
I am completely certain that the days of the Minister of Telecommunications and Information Technology, José Carvalho de Rocha, are numbered. After the failure of ANGOSAT 1, now also this that we witness today, I doubt if “Dread” will make it.
Let’s enjoy the show… calmly!!”
The president’s decision came after the same minister led the project, in 2017, for the satellite Angosat 1, also characterized by problems.
For Adriano Sapiñala, a deputy of Angola’s biggest opposition party, the case shows disorganization within the government:
JLo tem de andar a combinar bem com os seus auxiliares porque ontem o Ministro de tutela dizia que o tempo das reclamações tinha terminado e por isso a Telstar teria avançado com os passos subsequentes sendo ela vencedora do concurso fraudulento e hoje JLo vem e anula o concurso!! Vocês comunicam assim tão mal?
Agora ou o Ministro coloca o seu cargo à disposição (demitindo-de) ou então JLo tem de o exonerar porque se anulou o concurso é porque não correu bem e para não beliscar ninguém inocente, que se apurem responsabilidades!!
JLo [João Lourenço] has to organize his team well because yesterday the minister responsible was saying that the time for complaints had ended and so Telstar would have gone ahead with its next steps given that it was the winner of the fraudulent tender and today JLo comes and annuls the tender!! You communicate so badly?
Now either the minister makes his position available (resigning) or then JLo has to fire him because if he cancelled the tender it is because it did not go well and to not affect anybody innocent, they need to establish responsibility!!

author: Simão Hossi