text:
A Video Game Offers a Rare Nuanced Glimpse Into the 1979 Iranian Revolution · Global Voices
Hamid Yazdan Panah

Screenshot from 1979 Revolution: Black Friday.
For filmmakers, writers and journalists, the nation of Iran remains a compelling subject. But finding a lens through which to view the country that does not include inherent bias, prejudice, or exoticism is a pernnial challenge. Noble attempts on the part of westerners to “uncover” Iran and show its “human side” have often adopted classically orientalist viewpoints that demonize the country and its history. And many of the works produced by Iranians for North American and European audiences have ended up reducing the country's complexity to simpler tropes for easy consumption by for westerners.
A new Iranian-designed video game, however, achieves the rare feat of providing an accessible and authentic narrative on Iran’s history without compromising on either content or creativity. 1979 Revolution: Black Friday provides an entertaining platform for gamers with a taste for history to explore one of the most iconic revolutions of this past century, and relive events from 38 years ago that have had such powerful repercussions on Iran.
Developed by Navid Khonsari, an Iranian living in the United States, the game employs a “choose your own adventure” style, allowing the player to make meaningful decisions tied to the social and political issues of the day and watch as a complex story unfolds with suspense, drama and intrigue. It features numerous touches that evoke a strong sense of recognition for Iranian audiences, while still keeping non-Iranians in the loop. I particularly enjoyed the voice acting, which, although primarily done in English, is peppered with Iranian phrases and expressions.
A tale of two revolutions
The game’s action starts after the revolution, with the protagonist in the dungeons of the notorious Evin prison being interrogated by one of the monsters of post-revolutionary Iran—Assadollah Ladjevardi, warden of Evin and the chief prosecutor of Tehran. Far from taking the simplistic approach of idealizing pre-revolutionary Iran, the game attempts to examine the political climate that led up to the fall of the Shah, thereby providing a balanced view of the forces at work within the country.
Oh Oh Oh! Asadollah Lajevardi… Haj Agha! #1979Revolution pic.twitter.com/yXU4FRPuoh
— Kevin Miston (@kevinmiston) April 5, 2016
The interplay between the protagonist and Ladjevardi is the game’s focal point, contrasting the two opposing sides that fought against the Shah during the events of 1979. Those who took power after the revolution employed many of the same ruthless political tactics as the Shah, while many who opposed the Shah continued their struggle for freedom. In exploring this dynamic the game reminds us that all revolutions have the potential to produce not only darkness and barbarism, but heroic acts of sacrifice, passion and courage.
Choices and consequences
The game centers on the choices your character must face as a result of his activities as an activist and photographer. These include philosophical dilemmas such as whether to support non-violence over armed struggle, or allegiance to family over political allies. The player’s choices produce consequences, and mirror the hard decisions activists must grapple with during any revolution.
The game’s only shortcomings are its relative brevity, and the fact that the story sometimes plays out like a movie as opposed to an action-based game. Apart from these issues, 1979 Revolution: Black Friday is smart, engaging and full of heart.
In the real world, the events of the 1979 revolution remain a point of contention both in Iran and in the diaspora. There are those who justify the Shah’s dictatorship, as well as those who romanticize the events, ignoring the complexity of what came after. It is rare to find an account that is not colored by ideology.
1979 Revolution: Black Friday walks that line with reverence for the time period. Revolutionary groups and organizations that took part in the revolution are treated with respect and properly contextualized within the period. The game provides accurate representations of the diversity of groups involved in the events, including leftists and women, two groups which remain politically disempowered in modern-day Iran.
Finally, the game's attention to detail is remarkable. It includes dozens of historical reference points, from pictures and recordings to depictions of important incidents and events. The streets feature graffiti from the era, and the chants and slogans are the same ones that echoed in Iran more than 30 years ago. This interactive history provides an excellent window into the time period by dropping the player into the middle of the revolution.
1979 Revolution: Black Friday’s most severe critique is reserved for the current government of Iran and its betrayals of the ideals for which so many died. This is in line with the game’s spirit of holding those with power accountable and paying tribute to the ideals that inspired change and hope.
1979 Revolution: Black Friday’s ends, fittingly, with a dedication to “all the parents and children of the revolution”—a reminder that their legacy is one that is as relevant as ever.

author: Hamid Yazdan Panah


text:
“Bodies Die, Countries Don’t”: What the Venezuela Crisis Takes Away From Us · Global Voices
Luis Carlos Diaz

Cartoon by Eduardo Sanabria (Edo Ilustrado). Image caption: May I have a coffee? Image used with permission.
The following is a reprint of an article by Luis Carlos Díaz, originally published in Spanish in Medium and reproduced here with his permission.
Every day that Venezuela continues under the Chavismo government, which has been in power for over 15 years, the country falls further and further. And it will continue to fall because, contrary to what many keep saying, there is no stopping point: countries are bottomless.
Seriously. Two years ago, it seemed everything had already reached its breaking point, but there wasn't yet talk of people searching for food in the trash. Now, they not only look for it, but fight over it. Tomorrow they'll raffle it off or the government will fine whoever throws something in the trash… or who knows what else.
People don't talk about looting as much as they used to. They also don't talk about criminal lynchings, which have been the way groups of neighbors have responded to the lawlessness in the midst of such high crime. There is no mention of dismembered people, who have been proof of the escalation of urban violence in recent years. These things aren't talked about anymore. Not because they have ceased to occur, but because they have become normalized as part of the landscape of the country and its crisis.
Bodies die, countries don't. Things go wrong, but they can get even worse. We could give tons of examples to prove it, but we'll stick with these two: the highest inflation in the world for the fifth consecutive year and the lowest productivity in our recent history. The culprit for this is the centralized economy and the controls created by Chavism to increase their quotas of corruption. You can say that this economic crisis is part of a conspiracy of businessmen and retailers, but has anyone ever met a retailer who makes money in scenarios where he can't sell?
Thinking, as many argue, that there are opponents who want power, not now but later, so they can avoid assuming the costs that would come with a takeover right now is childish. The costs of repairing the country will only rise. Aspiring to conquer a destitute government or municipality is just as useless as continuing to protest from the opposition.
The country cannot feed its population today, and tomorrow it will be even worse off, so the faster the production model, the centralized economy, the corrupt game of exchange controls, prices and distribution change, the less it will cost to take the reins. Venezuela can't cover its own debts, so the sooner there is a change in power and these debts are renegotiated, the better for everyone.
However, in order to restore some institutions, some conditions are necessary, but that will take time. Guarantees are needed that the governance of the next term can be sustained. Because if a group of drug traffickers, corrupt politicians and torturers are in power, they'll be much worse off acting from the opposition with stolen money. That is why it's important to gain some changes in the National Electoral Council. Raising costs to the Armed Forces or the Supreme Court of Justice can be useful. Unlocking the National Assembly's status can help. But there is no guarantee of anything. You know it, I know it. We don't have a manual for living under a dictatorship.
Now, where everything is stuck is how to get to power first. That is why formulas are discussed and there are disagreements. What surprises me is how nearly everyone is lost, including those who speak with strength and security, because even for them, the “infallible plan” that they believe will work collapses quickly.
That is why they have opted to attack each other or point fingers at opponents, because it's easier; because if you put them in power, they start to stumble. A march is organized, but we don't know what will happen next. A protest faces a picket line, but afterwards no one knows what will happen in the face of the second. Disobedience sounds rebellious, but then it doesn't translate. And the opposition majority is circumstantial: the majority will support you if the issue is peaceful. If it's not, they pick up and leave, because the guarantee is certain and most know that their life is worth more than the thugs.
That means, curiously enough, that those who are doing more than others are those who are at the forefront of the dialogue playing many roles, despite being insulted. They are there without knowing what comes next, negotiating with kidnappers, using their language even when this earns the contempt of the dissidents.
But, more interestingly, we cannot stop being unhappy, because they actually need more. Because dialogue alone is useless. Because people cannot stop demanding. Because other countries would like to help but do not understand how, because it is also costly for them. Because every day is worse, every day we can withstand less, and wasting time is losing what our lives could be and what totalitarianism has denied us.
We would like simple worries. We'd like to get a little bit bored. We would like another certainty other than that tomorrow will be worse. Just to switch it up.
Also read our Special Coverage: What Is Happening in Venezuela?

source: news-globalvoices

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

author: Luis Carlos Diaz


text:
Burundi’s Political Instability Is Worsening the Country’s Food Crisis · Global Voices
Liam Anderson

Marché de Bubanza, Burundi. 17 August 2014. Credit: Sara, via Wikimedia. Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International
In recent months, East Africa has been hit with a serious food crisis. Extreme and erratic weather, related to the “La Niña-El Niño” weather phenomenon, has led to stock shortages and sent food prices soaring in several countries, including Kenya and Tanzania. Aid agencies are ringing the alarm, calling for immediate action to avoid any repeat of Somalia’s disastrous 2011 famine.
In some cases, however, political instability is compounding the problem.
In Burundi, unpredictable weather patterns, characterised by heavy rains and long droughts, have hit crops. The resulting food shortages have affected school attendance and has even led to starvation-related deaths. In January, humanitarian agencies and the government investigated and called for international assistance, although ministers refuse to describe the situation as being a result of ‘famine’ preferring the term ‘deficit‘ of agricultural production instead.
#Burundi Selon l'Olucome, @BurundiGov devrait faire un appel à la #solidarité internationale pr atténuer la famine pic.twitter.com/oxtYXNnL32
— IWACU Burundi (@iwacuinfo) 23 février 2017
According to Olucome [a Burundian anti-corruption NGO], the government should call for international solidarity to alleviate the famine
Around a quarter of Burundi's population — about 3 million people — now reportedly need food assistance. Food shortages have contributed to displacement, with over 400,000 people becoming UN-registered refugees and an estimated 150,000 internally displaced.
Officials argued the crisis over food is the only reason for the displacement. Yet, in March, the UN’s Radio Okapi in the Democratic Republic of Congo reported on new refugees who were fleeing the country because of political insecurity. Some have returned, but Burundians exiled in Uganda remain sceptical of the government's call to return home, saying that they still opposed President Pierre Nkurunziza's third term.
Ruyigi : la récolte de maïs s'annonce mauvaise à cause des intempéries https://t.co/6g9O0rcpNk #Burundi #BurundiRéel pic.twitter.com/mdtGfml5d2
— SOS Médias Burundi (@SOSMediasBDI) 21 février 2017
Ruyigi [a province]: the maize harvest to be poor due to bad weather
President Nkurunziza's 2015 decision to stay on in power after the end of his two terms in office sparked a political crisis, characterized by “violence, fear, socio-economic decline and deepening social fractures” as International Crisis Group wrote in May 2016. The UN Food and Agriculture Organization said that, while extreme weather has contributed to food-access problems, Burundi’s political insecurity exacerbates it.
Reports of shortages and inflation –13.8% in 2016 – in basic goods have been more common, and banknote shortages further complicate everyday exchanges. The depreciation of the Franc, Burundi's currency, has affected imports, adding to lower production and incomes and hitting many with lower food availability and affordability. The Famine Early Warning System Network noted, though, that a better upcoming harvest could hopefully stabilize “atypically high” prices.
Highlighting the everyday impact, blogger Bella Lucia Nininahazwe described a child’s hardships, going to school hungry, unable to buy everyday items:
Seigneur, mes chaussures sont déjà usées, et je vois déjà le visage de maman s’obscurcir quand je vais lui dire que j’ai besoin de nouvelles chaussures. Je sais déjà sa réponse : «  Tu sais que les prix montent vite ma fille, aujourd’hui je peine à trouver ce que vous allez manger, attends que je trouve de l’argent et je t’achèterais de belles chaussures ».
“Lord, my shoes are already worn out, and I already see my mum’s expression cloud over when I go to tell her I need new shoes. I already know her answer: “You know that the prices are rising quickly my girl, today I can barely find what you’re going to eat, wait for me to find some money and I’ll buy you some beautiful shoes”.”
An increase in malaria cases – linked to climate changes and insecurity – has added another challenge affecting millions, according to the World Health Organization. Burundi's Health Minister declared a malaria epidemic on 13 March. Iwacu newspaper also reported on inflation and shortages making everyday medicines inaccessible to many.
Burundi is among the poorest countries in the world, and as such it generally has less resources and infrastructural capacity to respond to and recover from natural crises. Aid restrictions, as result of the political crises, have created budgetary shortfalls that have impacted the government's response to the food shortage. The country also suffers from corruption – it is ranked 159/176 in Transparency International’s 2016 Corruption Index – which undermines governance.
Some believe resilience to shocks is part of economic independence, as Twitter user Emmanuel highlighted in response to Burundi Minister Alain-Aime Nyamitwe discussing diplomatic relations:
@Ikiriho @AnotherBurundi @nyamitwe Quelle souveraineté pour un pays où 1/4 de la population ont besoin d'une aide alimentaire?
— emmanuel (@emmanuelbuname) 21 janvier 2017
Ikihiro: Important interview: “Burundi is sovereign and Belgium would be the last to know it”
Emmanuel: What sovereignty for a country where ¼ of the population needs food aid?
Some argue climate change is responsible for the crisis and that the famine should not be used to score political points:
La famine qui a sévi au #Burundi,est due au changement climatique et a frappé toute la région.Il ne faut pas l'exploiter politiquement.
— Jean de dieu mutabaz (@JMutabaz) 1 mars 2017
The famine that has hit Burundi is due to climate change and has hit the whole region. Nobody should exploit it politically
Relations between Bujumbura and international partners have unfortunately deteriorated since 2015. In late 2016, Bujumbura deepened its isolation, reducing cooperation with the International Criminal Court and United Nations Refugee Agency among others, while international divisions have also blocked a coherent response to the crisis. The country also rejected a UN Security Council mandated police force to help with stability.
Recently more dead bodies have reportedly been appearing, and prominent NGOs are calling for targeted sanctions. A report by the new UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to the UN Security Council in February expressed concern for continuing rights violations and political repression. He was also troubled by indications that President Nkurunziza would run for a fourth term, which could further deepen tensions.
In response, Vice-President Gaston Sindimwo asked the UN to remove all its Burundi-based staff, complaining that the criticism was misinformed. Officials have also accused Rwanda and the West, especially Belgium, of plotting its overthrow.
An effective short-term response to assist those in urgent need depends on governments, international organizations, and NGOs overcoming or at least working around these tensions, before addressing longer-term issues. Otherwise, many could face grave health risks and further displacement due to ongoing political insecurity now overlaid with serious food and medicine shortages.

author: Liam Anderson


text:
For Venezuela’s Government, Protesting Is “Terrorism” · Global Voices
Laura Vidal

Illustrative Image by andresAzp, available in Flickr: “Evening protests on February 15th in Altamira. Caracas, Venezuela. Published under Creative Commons licence (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
Six protesters have died, President Maduro's government is accused of using torture on protesters to obtain false confessions of “terrorism,” and evidence of police abuse is circulating on social media. Despite the clampdown, the protests in Venezuela haven't stopped since the end of March.
“The money is never enough, there are no medicines, and the streets are full of criminals, and you won't let me protests on top of it all?,” one protester, who was tortured by the police, said in a testimony that is detailed below.
Eleven countries in the region condemned the death of six protesters and issued a public statement urging the Venezuelan government to stop the violence and ensure the security of the protesters who plan to hit the streets again on April 19.
The government-run media continues to call protesters “terrorists” and President Maduro is encouraged his supporters to “take action” on the streets too. Maduro has warned that the protests on April 19 will be confronted by the Venezuelan National Militia, officially known as the Nacional Bolivarian Militia.
Protests in Venezuela started after the separation of power controversy on March 30, when the Supreme Court of Justice effectively nullified the National Assembly, assuming its role and permitting President Nicolas Maduro to take over some functions of the legislature. The decision was short-lived — the court reversed course days later, but protests have continued due to the deep economic, social and political crisis that has shaken the country the last few years.
Protesters are closely following the case of testimony made by the Sánchez brothers, militants of the opposition party Primero Justicia, who admitted, allegedly under torture, that they were responsible of violence during the protests and “terrorist acts” encouraged by the opposition political parties.
From a public post on Facebook, journalist and Global Voices collaborator Luis Carlos Díaz explains the case of the Sánchez brothers (The full text has been translated here by the blog Caracas Chronicles):
[…] el Vicepresidente pidió para ellos y para otras decenas de detenidos “la pena máxima”. Al unísono, el coro de voces oficiales los acusó de “terroristas”. En sus medios de comunicación, pagados con nuestro dinero, llevan días hablando de ‘terrorismo’ para referirse a la gente que protesta. […] Así, dos estudiantes van a una de las peores cárceles del mundo, violando decenas de leyes y dejando una estela de abusos a su paso. Pero sobre todo, lo que me ha costado muchos párrafos explicarte, el militante de base del chavismo lo celebra así: “encerramos a dos terroristas y faltan muchos más”. Para hacerlo están dispuestos a apoyar la tortura, las desapariciones, las detenciones arbitrarias y los juicios amañados. Les da igual. Después de apoyar una dictadura para mantener el poder, ¿qué puede ser peor?
The Vice President asked the “maximum penalty” for them and for others that had been arrested. In unison, the choir of pro-government voices accused them of being terrorists. In their media, payed with our money, they've been referring to protesters as “terrorists” […] This is how two students are being sent to one of the worst prisons in the world, leaving behind them a trail of abuse, and broken laws. What I've been trying to explain in many paragraphs, the chavismo-base militant celebrates it this way: “we've jailed two terrorists, and we'll jail more”. To do it, they're willing to support torture, forced disappearances, arbitrary detentions and show trials. It doesn't matter to them. After supporting a dictatorship to keep themselves in power, what can be worse?
Torture allegations and police brutality are being documented on social and independent media.
Through the online media portal ProDavinci, journalist Valentina Oropeza collected testimonies around one case of police brutality against a young man that was ambushed by police and brutally beaten. He was finally taken to the hospital, where doctors spread the word on social media to contact his parents. The doctors and nurses refused to let their patient go with the guards, and this, it seems, made all the difference:
En el piso empezaron a darme coñazo pero salvaje. Lo que hice fue taparme la cabeza. Me dieron por la espalda, las costillas, los brazos, las piernas. Me dieron con el rolo ese por todos lados. Hasta con la peinilla y con el casco también me dieron por la cara. Me daban puñetazos, patadas y me golpearon con la culata del lanzabombas, me halaron el pelo durísimo, y uno de ellos intentó meterme el dedo por el trasero. Eran como veinte guardias y también había dos PNB (Policía Nacional Bolivariana). A mis [amigos] no los vi más.
They started to beat me savagely on the floor. What I did was covering my head. They hit my back, ribs, arms, legs. They hit me everywhere with that baton of theirs. They even hit me in the face with a helmet and their police machete. They gave me blows, kicks and hit me with the butt of their (tear)bomb-launcher. They pulled my hair really hard, and one of them tried to stick his finger in my butt. They were about 20 guards, and there were 2 PNB (Bolivarian National Police). I couldn't see any of my friends anymore.
And he continues:
Lo más [duro] no fueron los [golpes] sino el psicoterror. Mientras me pegaban me decían: ‘te vamos a matar, mamagüevo’, ‘te vamos a violar’, ‘vamos a acabar con tu familia, maldito’, ‘¿quién te manda a meterte en esto?’. Eso mismo pensé yo: ¿quién me manda a meterme en eso? Pero es que la vaina está muy jodida. El dinero no alcanza, no hay medicinas y la calle está llena de malandros. ¿Y encima no me vas a dejar protestar?
Mi mamá luego me contó que la doctora que me atendió se le plantó al guardia y le dijo que no me podían sacar porque yo era un paciente. Me dijo que las enfermeras, otros médicos, todo el mundo se metió para que no nos sacaran del hospital. Si no, quién sabe qué hubiese pasado . Después los guardias regresaron e hicieron que mi papá firmara un papel que decía que yo estaba bien y que la guardia no me había hecho nada. No tenemos copia de ese papel, no sabemos qué pueden hacer […] Dicen que nos querían imputar por terrorismo, que a todos los chamos que agarren en las marchas los van a condenar por terrorismo. Dicen que hay gente a la que le ponen régimen de presentación y a otra que le dan diez años de cárcel.
The hardest part wasn't the blows, but the psychological terror. While they we beating me they'd say: “we're going to kill you motherfucker”, “we'll rape you”, “we'll kill your family, you bastard”, “who told you to get yourself in this?”. And that was exactly what I thought: who told me to get in this? Things are so difficult. The money is never enough, there are no medicines, and the streets are full of criminals, and you won't let me protests on top of it all?
My mom told me afterwards that the doctor who was treating me was the one who confronted the guard and told him that they couldn't take me because I was a patient. She told me that the nurses, other doctors, everyone got in the way to keep me in. Who knows what would have happened otherwise. After that, the guards came back and made my dad sign a paper saying that I was alright and that they didn't do anything. We don't have a copy of that paper, we don't know what they can do […] Apparently, they wanted to charge us with terrorism. They say there's people that get released on parole and other that get 10 years in prison.
More complaints have been made through Instagram and Twitter, like the one made by Hugo Santaromita, who shared the testimony of a doctor and images of a private hospital in Caracas after police groups allegedly threw a tear gas bomb inside:
Escuchen el testimonio de este médico denunciando el ataque de la GNB con gas lacrimógeno dentro de la Policlínica Las Mercedes #Caracas pic.twitter.com/cdJddjKiaJ
— Hugo Santaromita (@HugoSantaromita) April 11, 2017
Ayer 13-04-2017 a eso de las 7pm iba a entrenar mi Tío en el Trigal Norte (VALENCIA) de 59 años llego el SEBIN y fue secuestrado sin mediar palabras, se lo llevaron a un sitio oculto en Naguagua donde fue amordazado, torturado, golpeado y hasta rapado, bajo amenazas de muerte, por vincularlo presuntamente a la “resistencia” con el fin de interrogarlo para conseguir información acerca de los cabecillas de las protestas contra el gobierno de Nicolás Maduro. Ahogándolo con cojines y almohadas, le raparon la cabeza, la barba, las cejas y lo amenazaron de muerte, lo interrogaron y lo soltaron por su condición, lo iban a matar sin darse cuenta. Cabe destacar que mi tío sufre de un déficit pulmonar producto de un robo. Lo que hacen esos cobardes es sembrarle miedo a la gente para que no salga. Necesitamos salir de este Gobierno opresor y dictator. Fuerza a mis amigos y familiares que están en Venezuela. Pronto se hará justicia! Fuerza, fuerza. ALERTA VALENCIA
A post shared by Maria Fernanda Sanchez (@mafesanchez06) on
Yesterday, April 13 around 7pm my uncle, 59 years old, went to train in the Trigal Norte neighbourhood in Valencia and was kidnapped by the SEBIN (the Bolivarian Intelligence Service) without saying a word. They took him to a hidden place in Naguanagua (anther neighbourhood in the city) where he was gagged, tortured, beaten and had his hair shaven while receiving death threats for being allegedly linked to the “resistance”. They wanted to interrogate him to find information about the leaders of the protests against Nicolás Maduro's government. They suffocated him with a pillow. They cut his hair, eyebrows and beard and threatened to kill him. After the interrogations, they released him for his [bad] condition. They almost killed him unawarely. I should say that my uncle suffers from a lung insufficiency after [he was attacked] during a robbery. What these cowards do is to make people afraid so they don't go out. We'll soon have justice. Keep strong. Be vigilant, Valencia!
Also read our Special Coverage: What Is Happening in Venezuela?

author: Laura Vidal


text:
Thailand Tells Internet Users to Unfollow Junta Critics on Social Media — Or Face Consequences · Global Voices
Mong Palatino

From Left to Right: Andrew MacGregor Marshall, Dr Pavin Chachavalpongpun, and Dr Somsak Jiamtheerasakul.
Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society is telling Thai citizens to unfriend and unfollow three government critics, lest they be accused of violating the 2007 Computer Crimes Act.
In a public statement dated April 12, 2017, the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) urged Thai Internet users to stop following and sharing posts from the social media accounts of three overseas critics of the military-backed government, Dr. Somsak Jiamtheerasakul, Dr. Pavin Chachavalpongpun, and Andrew MacGregor Marshall.
Somsak is a historian who taught at Thammasat University in Bangkok for two decades until he was fired over his criticism of the 2014 military coup that brought the current government to power. Pavin is a lecturer based in Japan. Marshall is a former Reuters correspondent based in Bangkok, whose book about the Thai monarchy was banned in Thailand in 2011. Aside from being critics of the Thai government, they are all accused of violating the Lese Majeste Law (Anti-Royal Insult Law). All have left Thailand to avoid political persecution.
Below is an excerpt of an unofficial translation of the letter issued by MDES:
To ensure an offense is not committed (intentionally or unintentionally) in relation to the Thailand Computer/Cyber Crimes Act (2007), Thai citizens are urged to avoid following, contacting, sharing (directly or indirectly) the content of the below mentioned people on the internet and social media.
Letter issued by Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society. Image from the Facebook page of Andrew MacGregor Marshall
The army grabbed power in 2014 and continues to dominate the bureaucracy through the Constitution it drafted in 2016. It imposed a strict regulation of the media aside from aggressively implementing the pre-existing Lese Majeste Law, which some analysts believe is intended to silence the opposition and other critics of the junta.
The MDES letter is the latest attempt of the junta to control the media and intimidate its critics. Previously, it “invited” journalists and activists for an “attitude-adjustment session” in army camps. It also jailed an activist for sharing a BBC article about the profile of the country's new king.
The letter does not explain why it is a crime to follow, contact, or share the social media accounts of Somsak, Pavin and Marshall. It also does not describe the alleged crimes committed by the exiled critics.
To avoid unnecessary legal problems for his followers, Marshall immediately urged his Thai friends to unfollow him on Facebook:
I'd like to request everybody who may be at risk to unfollow me immediately and be extremely careful about commenting on or sharing my posts.
You can still read my Facebook page even if you don't follow me.
This is a ridiculous and oppressive order but I don't want any innocent people being targeted just because they follow my journalism.
He also reminded Thai authorities that “nobody ever wins by trying to suppress the truth”:
I am much less of an expert on Thailand than Ajarn Somsak and Ajarn Pavin. I am just a farang [foreigner] journalist doing my best to report the truth, because I believe that Thais deserve to know what is really going on, not lies and propaganda. Thai people are smart enough to think for themselves and decide what is true and what is not. Nobody ever wins by trying to suppress the truth.
Pavin wrote that he and his university colleagues speculated on the limits of the rule:
Some professors and students at Kyodai asked me this morning whether it would be illegal to contact me via FB and send me homeworks to my email, since the Thai authorities warned that in so doing they could be charged…
Instead of reducing the online followers of the three critics, the unintended effect of the letter and the subsequent media hype it generated is increasing the popularity of the banned social media accounts. Marshall wrote that he has accrued an additional 700 Facebook followers since the junta released the letter:
The net change in my Facebook network since the Thai junta told people to sever social media contact is now +700 followers.
This cartoon poked fun at the letter and how it made the critics more famous inside and outside Thailand:
improved version for THE NATION's tomorrow – Beware the Streisand effect @PravitR pic.twitter.com/lH7dvkbyuJ
— stephff cartoonist (@stephffart) April 16, 2017
Despite the absurdity of the ban imposed by the junta, its political impact is no laughing matter. The Southeast Asian Press Alliance warned that the letter “tries to limit the choices of the people and influence their behavior by implying risks of violating the law.”
Jaran Ditapichai, a former Thai Human Rights Commissioner who also fled the country after being accused of Lese Majeste, urged international institutions to look into the issue:
This order not only violates human rights, especially free speech and the right to communication, but also affects all Thai citizens. I urge all international and national human rights organizations to investigate the Thai military government’s abuse of power.
Amnesty International also criticized the MDES letter:
The Thai authorities have plunged to fresh depths in restricting people’s freedoms of expression. After imprisoning people for what they say both online and offline, and hounding critics into exile, they want to cut people off from each other altogether.
Meanwhile, the country's prime minister reportedly ordered government ministries to go after other Internet users in other countries who often “insult” the royal family.

author: Mong Palatino


text:
Critics Say Albanian Parliament Is Trying to Amnesty Crooked Politicians, Under Pretext of Judicial Reform · Global Voices
Alida Karakushi

Protest in Tirana, April 11. Photo courtesy of “No to Article 449, No to Amnesty for Crimes” Facebook page. Used with permission.
Opponents of amendments to Albania's criminal procedural code appear to have won a major victory this week, following President Bujar Nishani's decision not to endorse the reforms, after two protests in the nation's capital.
Lawmakers who support the legislation say it's a precondition for Albania joining the European Union, but activists and many lawyers say the proposed changes to Article 449 of the criminal code would further weaken the country's judiciary. Critics say the amendments would prohibit the reexamination of court verdicts, “if the purpose [of the hearing] is to worsen the position of the defendant.”
The legislation's opponents say it could amount to “amnesty” and impunity for politicians, as soon as they're exonerated by corrupt judges and investigators. The campaign against the reforms began with an online petition and later organized a protest outside the president's office on April 8, asking him not to sign the legislation.
Protest in Tirana, April 8. Photo courtesy of “No to Article 449, No to Amnesty for Crimes” Facebook page. Used with permission.
On April 11, about a hundred activists held a second protest in front of the parliament building. Lawmakers slipped out a back door, rather than face the demonstrators.
With the president's announced refusal to sign the amendments, the legislation would now return to the parliament for further discussion and possibly a vote to override the president's opposition.
Eager to prevent any override vote, activists have been busy on Facebook, hoping to discredit the reforms. One group's main slogans included “So-called judicial reform,” “No to the amnesty of corrupt politicians,” and “No to article 449.”
Research by anti-corruption organizations like Freedom House and Transparency International has established the suspiciously close connections between judges and politicians in Albania. Last year, the U.S. State Department said several problems — political pressure, intimidation, widespread corruption, and limited resources — all hobbled Albania's judiciary.
Under pressure from the EU, which has made judicial changes a prerequisite for accession negotiations, the Albanian parliament adopted the procedural amendments unanimously last July, prompting critics to sneer that the “most corrupt parliament in national history” suddenly devoted itself to criminal reform.
Critics were made all the more skeptical by the nature of the negotiations: representatives from the EU and United States held the meetings behind closed doors, out of public view. Even President Nishani objected to the lack of transparency, sending an an open letter complaining that his office was being excluded from the negotiations.
Just before the parliament adopted the reforms, the media outlet EURACTIV also revealed that Albanian lawmakers demanded assurances from the EU and U.S. that they could rely on immunity to protect their “lives, families, and power bases,” whatever the legislation's final wording.
Since last summer, European and American officials have refused to comment on media reports that Albania's judicial reforms contradict suggestions by EURALIUS, an EU-funded project to help Albania reshape its judiciary.
The Albanian news media largely ignored the protests, but socialist parliament deputy Vasilika Hysi nonetheless took on her critics in a Facebook post, arguing that the amendments won't weaken the courts.
Hysi also said no amnesty will be provided in criminal cases like the Gërdec tragedy of 2008, when 26 people died when an ammunition depot exploded, or the killing of four protesters in front of the prime minister's building in 2011.
Several lawyers and scholars have challenged Hysi's interpretation of the legislation, saying it would indeed offer amnesty insofar as it treats past verdicts as the valid product of a functioning judiciary.
“No for amnesty for crimes,” a man's sign reads at a protest in Tirana. Photo courtesy of “No to Article 449, No to Amnesty for Crimes” Facebook page. Used with permission.
Albania is currently in the midst of a political crisis, due to the conflict between the ruling majority and the opposition Democratic Party, which has boycotted the parliament and recently confirmed that it won’t take part in the upcoming elections, unless a “technical government” is appointed to administer the country.
Albania's ruling majority, on the other hand, has accused the opposition of foul play, saying it's trying to score political points in an election that it's already lost. The ruling party even threatened to vote on the amendments in the opposition's absence.
The 100 or so protesters who came out to oppose the reforms say they didn't expect to gain much mainstream visibility. They demonstrated, they said, because they fear these amendments could have an even bigger impact on Albania than similar legislation had in Romania, where there were also recent protests.
Demonstrators have argued on social media that the EU should have avoided relying so heavily on Albania's politicians, when reaching out to the country.
After President Nishani rejected the amendment, activist Brizida Gjikondi congratulated his comrades on their success, writing on Facebook to thank “all the Albanians who realized the importance of this cause and joined us.”
Though public interest in Albania's judicial amendments is low, the parliament might still try to override the president's decision, and the reforms’ opponents say they will continue their resistance.

author: Alida Karakushi


text:
Ethiopia’s Human Rights Commission Admits Protesters Were Killed, but Shifts Blame Away From Government · Global Voices
Endalkachew Chala

An October 2016 protest in London by Oromo people over killings and human rights abuses at the hands of the Ethiopia government. Photo by Flickr user David Holt. CC BY 2.0
The Ethiopian government's Human Rights Commission has declared that 669 people were killed during the uprising of 2016, a figure that is significantly lower than other numbers reported by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.
The unveiling of the report took place on April 18 in a parliament that is completely controlled by the government. Addisu Gebregziabher, the head of the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission, read out the commission’s main findings to Ethiopian parliament, which placed the burden of responsibility for the bloodshed largely on opposition groups: “The violence happened because protesters were using guns and security forces had no other options”. Gebregziabher said the “negligence” of security forces was also a contributing factor, albeit a minor one.
Several human rights organizations, however, have reported that it was largely security forces firing on unarmed demonstrators.
Until the movement was subdued in October 2016, when Ethiopia declared a state of emergency, thousands had been demonstrating across Ethiopia. The protests began in April 2014 in Oromia, the largest of nine ethnically federated states, against a plan to expand the territorial limits of Ethiopia's capital, Addis Ababa, into neighboring Oromia villages and towns. The Oromo people have historically been persecuted by those in power in Ethiopia, and the plan was viewed as yet another encroachment on their rights. Over the following months, the protests expanded into other states, with participants rallying behind broader grievances against the government.
The government responded brutally; according to Amnesty International, at least 800 people were killed, while opposition groups and activists put the figure in the thousands.
The report as told by Gebregziabher blames opposition groups, diaspora-based satellite television stations, particularly Oromo Media Network, and social media for exploiting the prevailing “lack of good governance” in Ethiopia to stir violence.
The long-awaited report of the Human Rights Commission's investigation is not available on its website; the state-affiliated Fana Broadcasting Corporate did not provide a link to it in their news report either. However, Al Jazeera has embedded a video that shows Gebregziabher’s presentation in parliament. Most of the news reports are based on the summary that was presented for the parliamentarians, which focused largely on the number of people killed and the losses to property.
The news reports did not indicate if the commission’s report addressed torture, arbitrary detention, and poor prison conditions. International organizations like Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and Freedom House often point to evidence that shows these issues are rampant in Ethiopia. Similarly, the Ethiopian Human Rights Council, the only independent local human rights organization in the country, has also reported their prevalence.
But concrete information about torture, arbitrary detention, and prison conditions have been elusive in past reports from Ethiopia’s Human Rights Commission.
Seyoum Teshome, who himself spent at least four months in prison during the protest, wrote in response to the report: “God Save Us from Subservient Human Right Commission that intimidates the public”.
A day before the release of the report, Ethiopian officials rejected requests by the United Nations and the European Union to send independent investigators to consider the alleged human rights violations. Speaking to BBC Africa, Ethiopian Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn said Ethiopia has independent institutions that can do such investigations on their own.
However, a closer look at the chairperson of the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission Addisu Gebregziabher reveals that he has substantial ties to the government and a significant interest in maintaining the status quo. Previously, Gebregziabher held posts in the Ministry of Federal Affairs and was a deputy chair of the Ethiopian National Electoral Board that supervised the May 2015 parliamentary election, which was won by the ruling party, the EPRDF. The opposition complained of irregularities during and in the lead-up to that vote.
Since November 2015, Ethiopia has followed a devastating cycle of protests and repression. The country's Human Rights Commission published the findings of a similar investigation last June, but in it those responsible for the killings were not held to account, and protests abated only in October 2016 when authorities declared a state of emergency. With Ethiopia’s prisons full of political opponents, the latest report will likely only deepen the impasse if it also fails to address the root causes of the discontent.

author: Endalkachew Chala


text:
Netizen Report: Mexican Journalists Were Threatened Online, Then Killed · Global Voices
Netizen Report Team

Hundreds of Mexican journalists silently marched in downtown Mexico City in protest of the kidnappings, murder and violence against their peers throughout the country in 2010. Photo by Knight Foundation via Flickr (CC BY-SA 2.0)
Four journalists have been killed in Mexico since March 2, 2017. Although their killers’ motives have not been confirmed in each case, all four journalists reported on corruption and organized crime. All but one are known to have received violent threats both on and offline in response to their work.
Among them was veteran journalist and crime blogger Maximino Rodríguez who was shot and killed as he and his wife were entering a parking lot. Rodríguez, 74, had recently written critically about the activities of a local criminal gang and had received a death threat from a reader just days before his murder.
Rodríguez covered the civil wars in Honduras and El Salvador in the 1980s and had worked with various media organizations in Mexico. In semi-retirement, he was an active contributor to Colectivo Pericú, a blog based in the state of Baja California Sur, where readers can contribute anonymous tips about crime and corruption in the area. This approach to crime reporting has become increasingly common in Mexico, particularly in northern states, where violence against journalists and media offices has become routine.
On March 2, freelance journalist Cecilio Pineda Birto was shot ten times at a car wash after having received numerous death threats in response to his crime-related reporting on his public Facebook page, where he had more than 31,000 followers. Pineda also wrote regularly for the national dailies El Universal and La Jornada de Guerrero.
Veteran crime journalist Miroslava Breach Velducea was killed on March 23 in the state of Chihuahua, where she had worked for multiple major print outlets including La Jornada and El Norte, a leading newspaper in northern Mexico that closed its doors shortly after her death in what the editor-in-chief described as an “act of protest” in the face of the rising risks encountered by their reporters.
Ricardo Monlui Cabrera, who covered politics and the local sugar industry for nearly 30 years, was killed on March 19 in the northeastern state of Veracruz. He had served as editor-in-chief of El Político and was the president of the local journalists’ association. The motive in his killing is unconfirmed.
Documentation from the Committee to Protect Journalists indicates that Mexico is the only country in the world where any journalist has been killed in direct retaliation for their work in 2017. In March, the media freedom organization Article19 Mexico released their 2016 report in which they documented 426 incidents of journalist repression, including physical attacks, legal threats and attacks via digital means.
With demonstrators boycotting recent elections and public violence increasing in the northern Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir,  mobile 3G and 4G connections were cut on April 17. Political party leaders now are urging the state’s chief minister to ban Facebook and WhatsApp in the coming days, in an effort to slow the spread of gratuitous images of violent acts in the region, including one viral video of a Kashmiri protester who Indian military officers tied to a military jeep as a “human shield”. This would be only the latest in a series of short and medium-term cuts to web sites and communication services in recent months.
A Japanese artist was ordered to pay a fine on obscenity charges after she distributed 3D scans of her vagina as part of an effort to raise funds for her art work. The artist has made and presented multiple sculptures of vaginas, none of which have been cause for legal concern. “I’ve always believed that I’m innocent. But the 3-D data is guilty and Decoman (plaster artwork) is not,” Megumi Igarashi told reporters after the verdict was announced.
Ugandan academic and feminist Dr. Stella Nyanzi was charged with engaging in “cyber harassment” and “offensive communication” for posts on Facebook that compared President Yoweri Museveni to “a pair of buttocks”. With 141,000 followers on Facebook, Nyanzi is a leading voice on issues of sexuality and women’s health in Uganda, and has helped drive a nationwide campaign to raise money for sanitary pads for schoolgirls. A few days prior to her arrest, she was interrogated by police concerning her fundraising efforts. She will remain in detention until her next hearing on April 25.
A Russian math instructor is facing charges of making “public calls for terrorist activity” after Russian police traced incendiary online messages to his IP address. Dmitry Bogatov says he didn’t write the messages, and there is ample evidence suggesting that their actual author was associated with Bogatov’s IP address either because he used Tor (Bogatov ran a Tor exit node) or an IP spoofing technique of some kind. The judge who heard his case on April 10 upheld the charges despite flimsy evidence and a strong alibi, and ordered Bogatov be held until his trial on June 8.
On April 14, Telegram voice calls were officially deployed in Iran, however within 24 hours users were reporting calls were blocked. On April 17, Iran’s prosecutor general officially announced the service had been blocked through a judicial order. According to Telegram founder and CEO Pavel Durov, and various mobile operators inside Iran, Telegram voice services are being blocked at the international gateway operated by the Telecommunications Infrastructure Company of Iran.
Critics of the social conservative Russian politician Vitaly Milonov are trying to get him kicked off the social network Vkontakte for using the phrase “Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!” (“Orthodoxy or death!” in Greek), which was judged to be “extremist speech” by a Russian court several years ago. Milonov, a devout religious conservative considered to be the main architect of St. Petersburg’s ban on “gay propaganda”, has a history of using the phrase in his political campaigns.
Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society is urging Thai internet users to unfollow the social media accounts of three overseas critics of the military-backed government — scholars Dr. Somsak Jiamtheerasakul and Dr. Pavin Chachavalpongpun and former Reuters Bangkok correspondent Andrew MacGregor Marshall. The Ministry says that Thais who continue to follow, like or share online content posted by the three men may risk prosecution under Thailand’s Computer Crimes Act.
Civil liberties advocates in the US are urging US Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly to reject any legislation that would require “visa applicants, refugees, or other foreign visitors to provide passwords for online accounts… in order to enter the United States,” asserting that such a requirement violates local and international laws protecting privacy, and that it “would chill the speech and behavior of people around the world.”
A new documentary titled “The Moderators” explores the work lives of content moderators who remove explicit photos on social networks and websites, manually filtering out violent, pornographic and other types of content that would offend most users. The documentary says that there are approximately 150,000 workers responsible for content moderation worldwide, with the largest proportion of them living in India. Note: This film contains graphic images.
Mahsa Alimardani, Ellery Roberts Biddle, Oiwan Lam, Leila Nachawati, Elizabeth Rivera, Nevin Thompson and Sarah Myers West contributed to this report.

author: Netizen Report Team


text:
Puerto Ricans Hold a ‘Vigil for Light and Truth’ to Demand an Audit of Public Debt · Global Voices
Carlos Esteban Cana

“Today, vigil for light and truth.” #AuditNOW.
Various civic and religious organizations came together on April 3 for a mass vigil to call for an audit of Puerto Rico's public debt, which has reached 72 billion US dollars.
The vigil started in front of the Puerto Rican capitol, and continued as a march that culminated in the Plaza de Colón in Old San Juan. The protest was called by the group Frente Ciudadano por la Auditoría de la Deuda (Citizen Front for the Audit of the Debt) and the Coalición Ecuménica e Interreligiosa de Puerto Rico (Ecumenical and Inter-religious Coalition of Puerto Rico).
Those calling for an audit also started a petition on the White House's official page, which currently has 7,727 signatures. This is their demand:
The people of Puerto Rico demand for the politicians, bankers and government agencies responsible for the debt to be held liable for their corruption. We demand a financial oversight and management board with no personal interests in the debt, with a fixed salary attune with our financial reality, and working to benefit our economy.
We are being extorted and we are being enslaved. The people of Puerto Rico refuse to pay a debt that is not ours. We will not choose between education or healthcare. Our elders will not have their pensions reduced. We demand immediate action.
The island – an unincorporated territory of the US – is facing a serious financial crisis. This is why the Center for a New Economy, an independent, non-profit, non-partisan organization focused on promoting the country's socioeconomic development, is proposing a Fiscal Responsibility Law, instead of the Financial Control Board imposed by the federal US government. These are their reasons:
La crisis económica y fiscal de Puerto Rico requiere una reestructuración amplia de la infraestructura fiscal de Puerto Rico. Un esfuerzo impuesto desde afuera sin la participación y convencimiento de los residentes de Puerto Rico corre el riego de enfrentar el rechazo de la ciudadanía.
Puerto Rico's economic and fiscal crisis requires a broad restructuring of Puerto Rico's fiscal infrastructure. An effort imposed from the outside without the participation and conviction of Puerto Rican residents runs the risk of being rejected by the country's citizens.
The event was titled “Vigil for light and truth”. The following are some images from the event:
Participants in the vigil preparing for the march. Photo: Alberto Alonso. Used with permission.
Some of the leaders arrive at the Plaza Colón del Viejo San Juan with a banner that reads “#AuditNOW”. Photo: Alberto Alonso. Used with permission.

author: Carlos Esteban Cana


text:
Surveillance, Privacy and the Right to Know: A Delicate Imbalance in Hong Kong · Global Voices
Varsity

Hong Kong police’ s cybersecurity center. Hong Kong Government photo via HKFP.
This story was written by Nancy Mak, Grace Liyang, Rammie Chui and originally published on Varsity, a magazine run by students from the School of Journalism and Communication at the Chinese University of Hong Kong on March 31 2017.
Joshua Wong Chi-fung made numerous headlines in 2014 as the youngest of the pro-democracy activists who led Hong Kong's so-called Umbrella Revolution, in which tens of thousands demonstrated in an effort to demand voting rights for Hong Kong citizens.
But this was not Wong's first foray into high-profile activism, or the scrutiny that can come with it. When was just a 15 year-old, Wong led the student group Scholarism in a campaign against compulsory patriotic education in Hong Kong’s schools in 2012. This was the first time that he suspected his phone calls were being intercepted:
I heard strong echoes in my phone, I thought it could be wiretapping. I could hear my own voice and there was a lot hissing noise.
It was not just Wong’s phone. Scholarism was disbanded last year, but while it was still operating, there were constant concerns about hacking and theft. One documented incident took place in 2015, when the group noticed documents had been downloaded from its Google account. Scholarism confirmed that an unknown account from Nanjing called “Eastern hunting hawk” had broken into the account and downloaded personal data relating to Scholarism’s members and volunteers over the years.
Wong suspects there may have been other thefts too:
That is why during the Umbrella Movement, all the members of Scholarism, ranging from the most well-known to the least-known, were all on a blacklist and couldn’t enter the Mainland. We think that the blacklist came from the stolen Scholarism membership list.
At the time of the hack, experts suggested it may have been state-sponsored given the political sensitivity of the group.
Wong, who is now the secretary general of the political party Demosisto, believes there are insufficient safeguards to protect citizens’ privacy, particularly from law enforcement agencies.
The Hong Kong police made arrest appointment with four members of student activist group Scholarism, including Wong, on 16 January 2015. Photo from inmediahk.net's Facebook page.
For instance, police can carry out a house search without a court warrant if they have reason to suspect that a person to be arrested is inside the premises. People arrested for political actions may also have their personal communication devices seized. After Wong was arrested at Civic Square on September 26, 2014, his phone and computer were taken away and only returned after half a year.
During this half year, no one knows what they did with my computer and phone. As to whether they could get into my devices, I think it’s not hard to hack into a computer.
In a bid to protect the personal privacy of Hong Kong citizens, the government has enacted several ordinances, including the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance in 1995 and the Interception of Communications and Surveillance Ordinance (ICSO) in 2006. But Wong’s examples show how citizens can have their privacy compromised and their communications intercepted, especially when they happen online. Despite the relatively strong protections for telephone and postal mail communication privacy, neither of these laws covers Internet-based communication at all.
The objective of the Privacy Ordinance is to protect a person's right to keep their data private. According to the ordinance, every Hong Kong citizen should follow six data protecting principles when handling personal data. The principles require that entities collecting data notify clients/citizens about the purpose of the data collection; use the collected data only for the purposes stated at the time of its collection; provide public disclosures about what types of personal data they hold and how the data is used.
In certain circumstances, such as for the protection of Hong Kong security and in the prevention and detection of crimes, exemptions are allowed. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data is an independent statutory body which oversees the enforcement of the Privacy Ordinance.
The Interception of Communications and Surveillance Ordinance was implemented to regulate the communications interception and surveillance conducted by law enforcement agencies, such as the police and customs. The Secretariat for the Commissioner on Interception of Communications and Surveillance (SCIOCS) is an independent oversight authority appointed by the Chief Executive on the recommendation of the Chief Justice.
Under the ordinance, law enforcement must obtain judicial authorisation to carry out any covert surveillance in cases where there is a high level of intrusion, for instance when an officer enters a person's home or private property and installs a covert surveillance device. In other cases, law enforcement must obtain approval from an authorising officer in their department prior to beginning their investigation.
Although acts of interception and surveillance require authorisation, Lokman Tsui, an assistant professor at the School of Journalism and Communication in the Chinese University of Hong Kong, says the authorising bodies are often just a rubber stamp. According to the SCIOCS annual report to the Chief Executive in 2015, a total of 1,481 authorisations (including fresh and renewed authorisations) were issued. Only two applications for interceptions were refused. “The office basically approved all requests,” says Tsui.
Michael Mo Kwan-tai, a campaigner in digital communication at Amnesty International of Hong Kong, says oversight of the ordinance is too weak and can lead to misuse:
There are guidelines, but in practice, how much they comply, you know, is another question.
Mo adds that violations of the ordinance constitute civil rather than criminal offences and the penalties have no deterrent effect while the SCIOCS lacks the authority to take follow-up action:
SCIOCS is a commission but not a department, it is very hard for us to expect them to have such huge capacity like a department to carry out investigations.
The Chinese University of Hong Kong's Lokman Tsui points out another glaring shortcoming of the Interception of Communications Surveillance Ordinance, which is that it does not cover data requests from law enforcement to telecommunication companies and internet service providers (ISPs). The ordinance only regulates wiretapping, and the interception and surveillance of communications made through postal mail and the telephone. But as previously mentioned, it does not cover online communication at all. This leaves citizens with no protection in regard to interception and surveillance via Internet-based communication platforms like email and mobile messaging apps.
Internet-based and digital communications are not only unprotected by Hong Kong's laws — they also introduce many relatively new ways to track a person's behavior and activities. Telecommunication companies have access to users’ personal data such as their browser history, their IP addresses and geographical locations. Law enforcement agencies are not required to get court warrants before requesting that telecommunication companies hand over their users’ personal data, and it is up to the companies to decide whether to do so.
According to statistics released by the Innovation and Technology Bureau, the police filed 3,448 requests to ISPs for user information in 2016. This is the highest number of requests among all government departments and the main reason given for the requests was crime prevention and detection.
Cartoon by Doaa Eladl.
Information on how the government requests user data can also be found in the Hong Kong Transparency Report, published annually by the Journalism and Media Centre at the University of Hong Kong. The report tracks government requests to information communication technology (ICT) companies for their users’ data and for removal of online content, as well as how overseas ICT companies respond to such requests. The 2016 report shows a declining number of data requests to ICTs, from 6,008 in 2013 to 4,637 in 2015. However, the government has sent more requests to social media companies, especially to Facebook which has seen a more than two-fold increase in 2015 compared to 2014. There were 184 requests made in 2015, compared to 59 in 2014 and the number of accounts involved increased from 89 to 415 between the two years.
The report found that overseas ICT companies rejected 40 per cent of the data requests from the Hong Kong government. Benjamin Zhou Suibin, the Hong Kong Transparency Report Project Manager, says law enforcement are not legally obliged to provide a court warrant when requesting users’ data. It is wholly up to the company to decide whether to comply. Zhou says overseas companies will release transparency reports annually to disclose how they responded to government requests, but local ISPs do not. He thinks smaller local companies usually just hand over users’ data because they do not have teams of lawyers to evaluate the requests.
The Keyboard Frontline, an internet freedom advocacy group, conducted a project called “Who’s on your side?” in 2015 which reviewed Hong Kong local online service providers’ levels of transparency and respect for user data privacy. Glacier Kwong, the spokesperson for Keyboard Frontline, says “the findings imply that many Hong Kong local ISPs don’t have the awareness to protect users’ personal data.”
Kwong says local ISPs collect excessive data when users register for an account. For instance, to register for an online discussion forum, users are asked for details such as their occupation and income as well as their email. Kwong says ISPs have no clear and comprehensive legal guidelines on how to handle data requests from the government:
If ISPs give users’ data to LEAs [law enforcement agencies] upon request every time, LEAs may form a habit of abusing the procedure.
Kwong adds that because local ISPs do not release transparency reports on how they handle the government’s data requests, customers are unable to ascertain when and whether their personal data has been disclosed.
This can have serious consequences for users. For instance, several netizens were arrested for posting comments on Hong Kong Golden Forum encouraging people to take certain actions, such as charging police cordons during the Occupy Movement protests in 2014. Kwong says officers would not have been able to identify the posters unless Hong Kong Golden Forum passed their relevant data to the police. She points out the definition of “public security” in the ICSO is unclear:
This is very scary. Is it that any form of social activities can be intercepted with this excuse? This will lead to a white terror; it may even affect the Hong Kong’s freedom of speech and assembly.
Craig Choy Ki, the convenor of the Progressive Lawyers Group, says the government has abused existing statutes to arrest social activists on laws that were intended for other purposes. For instance, activists have been charged with “access to computer with criminal or dishonest intent” which was originally implemented to handle hacking and computer fraud. Using this law, police can take away activists’ personal computers and mobile phones.
Mobile phones are held aloft during a pro-democracy protest on September 30, 2014 in Hong Kong. Photo by Flickr user Pasu Au Yeung. CC BY 2.0
Raphael Wong Ho-ming, vice-chairman of the League of Social Democrats, says there should be laws regulating the confiscation of mobile phones by the police. Wong’s phone was seized while he was filming a policeman who tried to snatch his protest banner during the visit of Zhang Dejiang, the National People’s Congress chairman, last year. He was arrested and his phone confiscated – which he says was an intrusion of his privacy. Wong fears that the police may not have only looked at relevant information but also have wanted “to search for new information to add new charges on me.”
Wong demands that every citizen’s privacy should be protected but he also insists that the government should disclose its information to the public because the public has the right to know.
Indeed, there are two sides to the argument for privacy protection. While privacy advocates argue there is not enough regulatory protection of citizens’ privacy, the government cites the need to protect its own “privacy” when it does not want to disclose government officials‘ or corporate activities.
Commenting on government privacy policy, Mak Yin-ting, a member of the Press Freedom Subcommittee of the Hong Kong Journalists Association, said:
Privacy and the freedom of the press is very unbalanced now, obviously it tends to protect privacy more.
Mak says the government always uses privacy protection as a reason for not disclosing information to the public.
Mak also argues that the ordinance regulating interception and surveillance, the ICSO, should include professional privileges for journalistic work. Mak points to a case revealed in the Surveillance Commissioner’s 2009 annual report, in which the judge allowed law enforcement agents to continue intercepting communications even though they had told the judge that journalistic materials were included in the interception.
If interviewees know they are being intercepted, then no one dares to tell the truth in the conversation. If there is no freedom of communication, will there still be freedom of expression?

author: Varsity


text:
The Viral Video That Showed a Kashmiri Man Tied to an Indian Military Jeep · Global Voices
Rezwan

Image via Twitter/ Moonis Elahi
Update April 28, 2017: A previous version of this post identified the man who appears in the video as a protester. He has since spoken publicly about the incident and maintains he was not a part of the protests, and was returning home from voting when military personnel beat him and tied him to their vehicle.
Screenshots from a video of a Kashmiri man tied to an Indian military vehicle, to use him as a “human shield” against demonstrators pelting stones, has gone viral.
The video is from the recent by-poll election in Srinagar on April 9, the summer capital of India's northernmost state Jammu and Kashmir. More than eight Kashmiris were killed and dozens more were wounded during the election as Indian security forces opened fire on protesters. The Indian government has said that dozens of military personnel were injured by protesters pelting stones.
Pro-independence protestors boycotted the elections and a little over 7 percent of the 1.2 million registered voters in Kashmir participated in the by-poll. The elections for a vacant seat in the lower house of the Indian Parliament Lok Sabha recorded the lowest voter turnout in the history of the region.
More than half a million Indian military personnel are deployed in India's northernmost state Jammu and Kashmir, which remains one of the most densely militarized zones in the world. Many Kashmiris reject Indian rule over Kashmir and have been fighting for independence or a merger with Pakistan, since 1989.
The larger Kashmir region was geographically divided between India and Pakistan when the two became separate states in 1947. In Indian-ruled Kashmir, where an independence movement as been heating for decades, more than 70,000 people have been killed reportedly by Indian security forces, amidst reports of serious human rights violations by the Indian government under the guise of the 1978 Public Safety Act and the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. Both provide the basis for military impunity in the region.
During the recent clashes the heat of the violence was felt on social media.
This video was widely shared on social media. A voice in the background can be heard shouting in Hindi “stone throwers will meet a similar fate” as the vehicle passes through the streets of Kashmir.
The video was soon picked up by politicians, such as Omar Abdullah, an ex-chief Minister of the region. Abdullah's tweet was shared by many and created outrage.
This young man was TIED to the front of an army jeep to make sure no stones were thrown at the jeep? This is just so shocking!!!! #Kashmir pic.twitter.com/bqs4YJOpJc
— Omar Abdullah (@abdullah_omar) April 14, 2017
Indian Occupation in one picture #Kashmir pic.twitter.com/zrCM6qPZbq
— Irshad Nabi (@kashmir_rise) April 15, 2017
#Kashmir This is Farooq Ahmad Dar from Chill village of Beerwah who was tied with ropes and was used as a human shield by RR Indian Army pic.twitter.com/psi40uCOJ0
— Musa Kashmiri (@Musa_Kashmiri) April 14, 2017
Indian army's human shield is too poor to file a complaint. Anyone wish to assist him? #kashmir https://t.co/rWWEedLEei
— Dr Rita Pal (@dr_rita39) April 19, 2017
The Indian army is reportedly investigating the incident. However, a section of Indian media and the Attorney General were seen trying to justify the action of the security forces saying the “human shield” idea was innovative and it saved lives of the security forces. And there were also condemnations of the actions of the pro-freedom protests. More videos emerged of the protesters indiscriminately attacking the security forces and shouting “Go India, Go back” slogans.
Here is another video – another side of the restraint debate in Kashmir. We should be outraging over this as well? No? Because hypocrisy? pic.twitter.com/UAOoAbVTA0
— Junaid Azim Mattu (@Junaid_Mattu) April 14, 2017
This is what our security forces have to face in #Kashmir . You wont see bleeding Heart Liberals talking about this >? pic.twitter.com/nA1XTJPTo4
— Nation Wants To Know (@PawanDurani) April 15, 2017
It's raining stones. That's what India's security forces have to endure almost daily in Kashmir. Do watch. pic.twitter.com/QLbPo1JtQ5
— Rahul Singh (@rahulsinghx) April 14, 2017
Kashmiri blogger Aarif Muzafar points at the selective condemnation and biases of the India media in portraying the news on Kashmir:
Few days ago, a video of Kashmiri boys attacking CRPF men in Budgam went viral. In no time, ‘prime time’ shows were set to condemn the assault forgetting the eight murders that had just taken place. [..]
Aarif continues:
The question whether beating of the CRPF men is justified or not is a matter of great debate. Of course, human dignity cannot be challenged at any cost whatsoever. But let’s tell the truth about India’s presence in Kashmir. If I start from my own person, I can extensively deliver firsthand accounts of the violence that I have been an eyewitness to.
During an assembly election in our village a long, long time ago, I was used by the army as a human shield, which is a globally acknowledged war crime. My father and my uncle had fled the village overnight to evade the continuous harassment and my elder brother had also escaped to some other place. I was the only male member at home. I was nine or ten. The army took me to the suspicious and sensitive places and I was left free after an hour long search. In her Independence Day speech last year, Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti herself acknowledged the use of human shields in Kashmir.

author: Rezwan


text:
A São Paulo City Councilor Surprised Schools With an Inspection for ‘Leftist Indoctrination’ · Global Voices
John Razen

Banner seen in a protest in Brasilia in August 2015 saying “Stop Marxist indoctrination, no more Paulo Freire”. Photo: Author unknown/shared widely on social media.
A surprise visit by city councilor Fernando Holiday to schools in São Paulo reignited the controversy around the campaign “Escola Sem Partido”, or School Without Party, which claims to combat “ideological indoctrination” in schools, but is seen by its critics as an instrument for censoring teachers and students.
On 3 April, Holiday popped into two municipal schools in São Paulo unannounced with the objective of investigating incidences of “indoctrination” by teachers. The visit was broadcast live on his Facebook page, where he said:
Vamos fiscalizar (…) o conteúdo que está sendo dado em sala de aula, isto é, se está havendo algum tipo de doutrinação ideológica, se os professores estão dando aquilo que realmente deveriam dar, de acordo com a grade curricular, ou se tem professor entrando lá com camiseta do PT (Partido dos Trabalhadores), do MST (Movimento Sem Terra), jogando tudo pro alto e fazendo aquela doutrinação porca que a gente já conhece.
We are going to check […] the content that is being taught in classrooms, that is, if there is any type of ideological indoctrination, if the teachers are teaching what they really should be teaching, in accordance with the curriculum, or if there are teachers entering there with a T-shirt of the PT [Workers’ Party], or of the MST [Landless Workers Movement], throwing everything up in the air and doing that damn indoctrination that we already know.
Fernando Holiday, 20, was elected to São Paulo's city council by the right-wing party Democratas (DEM) in 2016, helped there by Movimento Brasil Livre (Free Brasil Movement), or MBL, for which he acts as national coordinator. The MBL was at the front of the protests which brought about the impeachment of ex-President Dilma Rousseff, and today galvanizes the popular base of Michel Temer’s government and São Paulo mayor João Dória Jr.
MBL is a vocal supporter of the Escola Sem Partido campaign, which has the stated objective of combating “ideological indoctrination” in secondary schools. Supported above all by conservative sections of Brazilian society, the campaign starts from the presumption that there is a predominance of teaching content which would be identified as having a “left-wing” worldview, spanning from defending minority rights to sex education and criticism of economic liberalism.
Holiday's live video sparked a wave of demonstrations against Escola Sem Partido and the city councilor's inspections. Secretary of Municipal Education Alexandre Schneider reacted in a Facebook post, stating that “the councilor exceeded his mandate and cannot use his position to intimidate teachers”.
São Paulo city councillor Fernando Holiday in one of the schools he visited on 03 April. Screenshot/Facebook
On 13 April, UN rapporteurs sent a communique to President Michel Temer’s government, criticizing legislative projects stemming from Escola Sem Partido. The report, signed by the special reporters on education, freedom of expression, and freedom of religion, stated that the movement’s proposals are vague and could “cause censorship and self-censorship of teachers”.
After the communique’s publication, the movement’s founder, Miguel Nagib, published a Facebook post calling it “dishonest”. Federal Deputy Marco Feliciano, who is a minister of the Universal Church and is known for his homophobic views and support of the Escola Sem Partido, uploaded a video on his YouTube channel claiming that the UN’s opposition showed that the campaign was “on the right path”.
The movement was created in 2004 to denounce and repress what its supporters considered to be practices of ideological indoctrination in schools. Its manifesto proclaims that the country’s classrooms are used as places for the dissemination of political ideologies and content which could be in conflict with the moral and religious convictions of students’ parents. Nagib often says that the practice is a “notorious fact”, without, however, presenting empirical evidence that supports such a claim.
Since 2014, the movement has been bringing legislative projects to the Chamber of Deputies, the Federal Senate, and various legislative state assemblies in Brazil. One such initiative of theirs was passed into law in the state of Alagoas in 2016, but in the end it was revoked by the Supreme Federal Tribunal in March – the court decided that the state legislature did not have the power to legislate on general norms for education.
Their proposals aim to include conditions on political and ideological neutrality in Brazil's Education Law, as well as create mechanisms for controlling the professional activities of teachers. Critics assert that it would result in the violation of teachers’ freedom of expression and a policing of the school environment that would compromise the free flow of ideas.
There is, for example, no fixed definition of what constitutes, or not, the practice of indoctrination, except for the vague stipulation that a teacher must present the main opinions on a topic. It is not clear if subjects which have, in practice, an academic consensus, such as the evolution of species or global warming, would be treated as controversial.
Another controversial point in Escola Sem Partido’s program is the attempt to censor content which could be seen as “gender ideology” – a concept not used in the humanities, but pushed by some conservative circles that opposes gender fluidity and the increasing societal acceptance of sexual diversity.
While their legislative projects are being debated in Congress, the movement continues gaining space in society and institutional politics. In May 2016, Education Minister Mendonça Filho found himself in his office with actor and well-known supporter of Escola Sem Partido, Alexandre Frota. Frota was received as a representative of Revoltados Online, a right-wing activist group whose Facebook page ended up being deleted for propagating hate speech.
Another example is that of Ana Caroline Campagnolo, 25, who brought a legal case against her former master’s degree supervisor, Marlene de Fáveri, 57, a researcher in gender studies at the State University of Santa Catarina. Campagnolo, who has substantial support from MBL and Escola Sem Partido, is asking for 17,500 reais (5,700 US dollars) in damages for feeling discriminated against by Fáveri for identifying as Christian, conservative, and anti-feminist.
After his statement on Facebook, Secretary of São Paulo's Municipal Education Alexandre Schneider was the target of a massive trolling campaign by supporters of Fernando Holiday and MBL.
City councilors Sâmia Bonfim and Isa Penna, both of the Partido Socialismo e Liberdade (Socialism and Freedom Party) publicly declared their support for Schneider. Their telephone numbers were then leaked on social media, leading to them receiving threats. The case reached São Paulo’s Department of Digital Crimes, which is investigating the website JornaLivre, linked to MBL, for its involvement.
According to the newspaper Folha de São Paulo, Schneider submitted his resignation after what he considered to be a lack of support from the mayoral office in the face of the attacks, but São Paulo Mayor João Dória Jr. then convinced him to stay. However, the mayor denies that the resignation request even happened and is taking a neutral position in the dispute between the secretary and the councilor, claiming that “both aggravated it, and both had reasons”.
Meanwhile, Fernando Holiday, who also faces accusations of having used undeclared resources in his electoral campaign (a practice known in Brazil as “caixa 2”, “cash-box 2”), said on his Facebook page that he will continue to “invigilate” the municipal schools of São Paulo.

author: John Razen


text:
Gazans Protest Against ‘Massacre of Salaries’ by the Palestinian Authority · Global Voices
Marwa Fatafta

Screengrab of a protest in Gaza against the PA's salary cuts. Source: Pal+ عربي
Earlier this month, large demonstrations erupted in the Gaza Strip to protest a decision by the Palestinian Authority (PA) to cut the salaries of its public and security employees in Gaza.
The PA, a donor-dependent semi-governmental body that governs the Israeli-occupied West Bank, have slashed the salaries of its employees in Gaza by 30 to 70 percent under the pretext of a financial crisis caused by shrinking foreign aid.
Palestinians condemned the PA’s decision, describing it as a “massacre of salaries”. On social media, the Arabic hashtag for ‘massacre of salaries’ was used as well as “Abbas robbed us”, referring to the president of the PA, Mahmoud Abbas.
للصورة أن تتكلم#عباس_سرقنا#مجزرة_الرواتب pic.twitter.com/bSWwO97xoF
— علي ريان | غزة (@alirayyyan) April 5, 2017
The photo speaks for itself. #Abbas_Robbed_Us #MassacreOfSalaries
On April 8, 2017, tens of thousands of Palestinians demonstrated in Gaza City against the salary cuts. Protesters chanted for the PA’s Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah to “go away” and called for the Finance Minister Bishara to resign.
طالبوا بإقالة رئيس الحكومة رامي الحمد الله .. اعتصام لموظفي السلطة الفلسطينية في قطاع غزة، رفضاً لخصم الحكومة 30% من رواتبهم.#مجزرة_الرواتب pic.twitter.com/ED72e2JkeO
— شبكة قدس الإخبارية (@qudsn) April 8, 2017
They called for head of government Rami Al Hamdallah to resign… the protest of PA's employees in Gaza against the 30% cut of their salaries. #MassacreOfSalaries
Hamdallah defended the PA’s salary cuts in a press conference, saying that it was necessary to “manage financial crises suffered by the Palestinian government due to reductions in international funds.”
He further blamed Hamas, which governs the Gaza Strip, for exacerbating the financial crisis, alleging that Hamas “keeps its income for itself, while the PA has spent more than 17 billion dollars in the Gaza Strip during the last 10 years.”
Palestinian civil society organizations in the West Bank organized a sit-in in front of the prime minister’s office in Ramallah. However, PA security forces closed all roads leading to the building in order to thwart the protests.
The PA employs around 56,000 people in Gaza. After Hamas took over control of the Strip in 2007, Abbas demanded public employees to abandon their jobs and sit at home while still getting paid their regular salaries. Those who ignored the call and continued their work under the government of Hamas received little to no salary at all.
The PA's discriminatory decision deepens the political chasm between Hamas and Fatah, the party that Abbas belongs to and the largest faction of the confederated multi-party Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). In 2006, Hamas won parliamentary elections which lead to a conflict between them and Fatah, with the latter ending up controlling the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Hamas controlling Gaza.
Following Hamas’ electoral win, Israel launched a crackdown, arresting up to 450 members of the party and keeping them in administrative detention. Recently, Palestinian protesters demanded an end to security coordination between the PA and the Israeli government following the killing of well-known activist Bassel Al-Araj in Ramallah.
Hamas called the salary-cut a “new conspiracy” against Gaza. Salah Al Bardawil, a member of the Hamas political bureau, said that Hamas does not accept to be threatened and will not “kneel to political pressure.”
The chair of the Palestinian Union of Public Employees in Gaza, Aref Abu Jarad, called this step “a crime” against tens of thousands of Palestinian families in Gaza.
The justification of the Council of Ministers that the PA is going through a financial crisis is a lie since cuts included salaries of Gaza employees only and not West Bank employees.
A number of Fatah leaders in Gaza have resigned in protest against the PA's unjust measure.
The United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process Nickolay Mladenov has also voiced his concerns over the decision:
Over the past decade, Palestinians in Gaza have lived through four conflicts, with no freedom, unprecedented Israeli restrictions, a dire humanitarian crisis, high unemployment, an ongoing electricity crisis, and the lack of political perspective.
While the Palestinian government needs to ensure its fiscal sustainability under increasingly difficult economic conditions, it is important that reforms or decisions to reduce expenditures are fairly distributed and made with consideration to the harsh conditions under which people in Gaza live.
The Gaza Strip has suffered from inhumane economic and living conditions as a result of a 10 year-long military blockade imposed by the Israeli government following Hamas's parliamentary elections victory in 2006 as well as the numerous Israeli wars or offensives on Gaza, the most recent of which was in the summer of 2014.
كاريكاتير لوضع #غزة #مجزرة الرواتب pic.twitter.com/RSWBFzVkvY
— نضال الوحيدي -فلسطين (@nidalalwaheidi) April 9, 2017
Caricature on the situation in Gaza. #MassacreOfSalaries

author: Marwa Fatafta


text:
Japanese Metal Legends LOUDNESS Turned Away at US Border · Global Voices
Nevin Thompson

Akira Takasaki, lead guitarist for LOUDNESS. “Just devastated.” Image by Wikimedia user Frank Schwichtenberg. Own work. License: CC BY-SA 3.0.
Japanese metal band LOUDNESS was reportedly denied entry into the United States on the night of April 18 after arriving in Los Angeles to start a North American tour. The band has regularly toured the United States over the past 30 years, and this is the first time it has been turned away at a port of entry.
Fans and observers immediately blamed stricter immigration policies, such as the attempted “Muslim ban,” enacted by the new Trump administration since taking office January. Other pointed out that ever since the 9/11 attacks in 2001 it has become more difficult for foreign music acts to tour the United States, prompting them to wonder if the US, like Japan during the Edo period, is entering its own “period of isolation” (鎖国, sakoku).
LOUDNESS was supposed to kick off its North American tour on April 19 at Reggie's, a nightclub in Chicago. Reggie's broke the news to ticket holders on Facebook, blaming “new” border policies for the cancellation:
Due to the new strict policies the US government has placed on foreigners entering the country, Loudness was denied entry into the United States and sent back home this morning.
Known for such classics as “Crazy Nights” and “Crazy Doctor,” LOUDNESS got its start as a band in 1981 in Japan, and took the world of heavy metal and glam rock by storm over the next decade. The group has continued through ups and downs over the past three decades, maintaining an enthusiastic fan base both in Japan and around the world.
The news that the band had canceled its latest tour quickly spread across social media.
LOUDNESSが、米国への入国が許可されなかかったため、予定されていた米国ツアーは全てキャンセルとなっています。トランプ政権が設けた、外国人に対しての厳しい入国審査政策のために、LOUDNESSは入国を許可されなかったそうである。https://t.co/OZ3GlXVai6
— Martin Fackler (@facklernyt) April 20, 2017
LOUDNESS has canceled all upcoming American tours dates following being denied entry to the United States. Strict new rules on foreign visitors to the United States seems to be to blame.
Article: “LOUDNESS denied entry to the United States.” Because the band has been denied entry to the US because of tough new rules, its tour has been canceled.
Band members confirmed what had happened. After returning to Tokyo, bandleader, multi-instrumentalist and “guitar god” Akira Takasaki tweeted:
27時間のフライトの末、ホームタウンへ戻った。無念。
— Akira Takasaki (@loudness222) April 19, 2017
After spending 27 hours in the air I'm back in Osaka. Just devastated.
Singer Minoru Niihara wrote on his blog that LOUDNESS had never been denied entry to the United States before.
Some fans seemed resigned to the fact that it would be more difficult for bands to tour the United States during the Trump era:
LOUDNESSの入国拒否は氷山の一角なのか、トランプ政権により今後日本のバンドやアーティストがUSツアーが出来なくなる可能性が…
— ゆう@チラシの裏 (@you7030uc) April 19, 2017
LOUDNESS's problems at the border may be just the tip of the iceberg. During the Trump administration there's the possibility that bands and other artists will no longer be able to tour the United States.
Rumors immediately swirled about why the band had been denied entry. One fan wondered whether US customs and border agents had searched band members’ phones and found a reason to bar them:
おそらく、facebookアカウントやSNSなどの情報から、沖縄関連のキーワードが引っかかった方がバンされたのだろう。
SNSの書き込みを理由に、アメリカへ入国拒否される時代になったということだ…‥
＞LOUDNESS ツアーキャンセル
— tweet ☯ meme (@_Eugene___) April 19, 2017
Maybe [immigration] found some keywords associated with Okinawa base protests when searching their Facebook accounts and texts. We have entered the era when you can be denied entry into the United States because of what you text.
Local residents of the Japanese prefecture of Okinawa have long opposed the presence of American military bases there. Recently, protests have focused on the construction of a new facility in an ecologically sensitive area.
Others pointed out that many bands from other parts of the world have been having problems at the American border, especially if they arrive without proper documentation. One commenter wondered if LOUDNESS has arrived on tourist visas (渡航visa), which may not allow them to legally play in front of paying audiences in the United States:
東欧のバンドに渡航visaが降りなくて予定されていたUSツアーをキャンセルせざるを得なくなった話はこの間聞いたけど、ついに日本のバンドでも渡航NGだってよ。Loudnessでダメなら多分皆無理だよな。アメリカ、鎖国でもするつもりか？ヨーロッパや南米はOKのままであって欲しいなぁ。
— 椎名 令 @4/30渋谷RubyRoom (@rey_shiina) April 19, 2017
I've heard stories of bands from Eastern Europe arriving on tourist visas having to cancel their tours after being denied entry, so now it's Japanese bands arriving on visitor visas that are being denied entry. If LOUDNESS can't get in, then no one can. Is the United States entering its own “period of national isolation”? I hope Europe and South America remain open.
According to an interview in the Chicago Tribune newspaper with the management of Reggie's, the night club where LOUDNESS was supposed to kick off its American tour, the problem did seem to be that rules regarding paperwork have become more strict since the band's last tour in the United States:
Reggie's owner, Robby Glick said he spoke to the band's PR rep who cited an issue with “exemption papers,” which were acceptable for entry the last time the band visited the U.S., but denied this time around.
“It's a little bit harder,” says Glick. “I don't know if it's a product of the administration or if Loudness was flying by the seat of their pants, but there is a difference since our new president came in.”
LOUDNESS's agency told Japan Today that the band had been able to tour the United States in the past with proper invitation letters but that the immigration this time requested visas for the musicians.
The band is not alone. A recent story by Seattle's The Stranger detailed how there is seemingly no consistent pattern to international artists getting turned away at American airports.

author: Nevin Thompson