text:
Moldovans elect their first female president · Global Voices
Maxim Edwards

Maia Sandu is set to become Moldova's first female president after winning a landslide victory in Sunday's election.
President-elect of Moldova Maia Sandu in a November 12 campaign video. Image still via Maia Sandu's Facebook page
According to preliminary figures from Moldova's Central Electoral Commission (CEC), Sandu took 57.7 percent of the vote compared to 42.3 percent for the incumbent Igor Dodon. Sandu, a former World Bank economist, ran on an anti-corruption platform, draw investment to one of Europe's poorest countries, reform the judicial system and bring transparency to its scandal-ridden politics.
This was their second duel. Dodon, who is affiliated with the Party of Socialists (PSRM) became president in 2016, narrowly beating Sandu with a five percent lead. Dodon, who flaunts his pro-Moscow credentials, promised “stability” and sang the praises of closer economic ties with Moscow. Sandu, who also leads the Action and Solidarity Party (PAS), is regarded as more pro-European.
Foreign observers generally regard all Moldovan elections as geopolitical, even civilisational, choices between Russia and Europe. But for many voters, the priority is economic. In any case, the country is deeply entwined with both — Moldova does most of its trade with the EU, with which it signed an association agreement in 2014. Meanwhile, Russian soldiers and Russian money guarantee the status quo in Transnistria, a self-proclaimed republic occupying a sliver of land on the left bank of the River Dniester.
Hundreds of thousands of Moldovans have headed East and increasingly West in search of the economic prospects their country cannot offer them. In a country with one of the world's highest rates of depopulation, citizens abroad have an inordinate clout during elections.
Sandu received over 948,000 votes; the highest number cast for any presidential candidate in Moldova's history. Many of these voters were Moldovans abroad — particularly in the EU. The following scenes at a polling station in Germany indicate that emigres are not ambivalent towards politics back home:
This is the queue of Moldovans waiting to vote in the 2nd round of the presidential elections today – at a polling station in Germany. The choice is between the pro-Russian incumbent and his pro-European challenger. pic.twitter.com/I3n4nrqi1b
— Will Vernon (@BBCWillVernon) November 15, 2020
Their engagement has been newly charged by the scale of Moldova's recent political turmoil.
In 2014, a billion dollars was siphoned out of three local banks with the connivance of influential politicians. The scandal enraged public opinion and led to the downfall of former Prime Minister Vlad Filat, one of the country's most powerful men. From then on, Moldova's politics was dominated by the oligarch Vlad Plahotniuc. A succession of nominally pro-European coalition governments led by Plahotniuc's Democratic Party (DPM) faced off against the pro-Russian PSRM and a group of anti-Plahotniuc but pro-European parties, one of which was led by Sandu. By 2018 the EU had declared Moldova a state “captured by oligarchic interests”.
After inconclusive parliamentary elections last spring, Plahotniuc's rule collapsed and he fled the country, leaving the PSRM and Sandu to form a unity government for “de-oligarchisation”. Sandu served as prime minister for a few months, before that government too fell last November at the hands of a no-confidence vote by the PSRM and some of the DPM's remaining MPs.
A second term for Dodon could have been a chance for the PSRM to consolidate its already considerable influence over Moldovan politics.
If Sandu's election is an obstacle to that goal, it may not be an insurmountable one. With a few exceptions — such as appointing the prime minister and calling national referendums — Moldova's presidency is largely a ceremonial office. However, it is a prominent position and allows the holder to set the tenor of political debate. If these gestures clash with government policy, the president can quickly become a real headache for governments of the day, as the DPM-led coalition discovered after Dodon's election.
“The victory of Maia Sandu represents a double revenge — for the ousted government in 2019 and for the lost elections in 2016. The success of Sandu should not be in any case assumed as an absolute support for her political agenda. A big share of voters like and support her and the party that stands behind her. But a smaller segment has voted against Igor Dodon and like other leaders than Sandu, like Renato Usatîi or Ilan Shor”, explains Dionis Cenusa, a Moldovan political analyst and researcher at the Institute of Political Studies at the Justus-Liebig University in Giessen.
“So, in a nutshell, the votes for Maia Sandu is the run-off is not equal to her real popularity at the moment. This should not mean that things can change if her presidency obtains good results“, Cenusa told GlobalVoices.
Therefore Sandu's support came from a diverse group, including her competitors from the first round, the liberal and centre-right politicians Andrei Năstase and Dorin Chirtoacă, whose politics are associated with unification with neighbouring Romania, a position widely loathed by pro-Russian voters.
This time, they were joined by an unlikely ally. Renato Usatîi, mayor of Moldova's second largest city Bălți, took ten percent of the vote in the first round. Usatîi heads Our Party, a pro-Russian populist opposition grouping whose base somewhat overlaps with Dodon's electorate. But when Usatîi did not make it through to the second round, he called on his supporters to vote “against Dodon”.
Along with the looming threat of COVID-19, Usatîi‘s participation strongly distinguished this vote from the presidential race in 2016. But much remained the same — particularly the candidates’ talking points.
Both campaigns accused the other of corruption. Prominent PSRM politician Bogdan Țîrdea suggested that Sandu's allies and leading independent media were the agents of the billionaire philanthropist George Soros, while Sandu's campaign drew attention to a surreptitiously recorded meeting in June 2019 between Dodon and Plahotniuc.
Dodon's campaign materials played some very real concerns among Moldovan voters about “optimisation”, the shrinking of the state sector which Sandu's style of politics has advocated. However, the dominant tone was one of a culture war: flyers suggested that Sandu's election would downgrade the status of the Russian language in Moldova, forbid public celebration of the Soviet Union's defeat of Nazi Germany, and undermine Orthodox Christian values by legalising same-sex marriage. They proclaimed: “Moldova has something to lose!”
These compelled Sandu to release a Russian-language Facebook video on November 12 in which she dismissed each of these accusations.
Dodon has alleged large-scale electoral fraud, but accepted the election result. He now has no other choice: on November 16, Russian President Vladimir Putin congratulated Sandu on her election victory.
In recent interviews with Russian media, such as TV Rain, Sandu has reiterated her desire to preserve strong ties with Russia, even while breathing new life into the 2014 association agreement with the EU. Her key priority with Moscow, she says, is to restore Moldovan exports to Russia, which have been impeded due to poor relations in recent years.
Vladimir Soloviev, a former Moldova correspondent for the Russian daily Kommersant, writes for Carnegie Moscow that the Kremlin might even be able to find a common language with Sandu. The journalist suggests that Russia may have rested on its laurels in recent years, content to sit back as successive unpopular pro-European governments damaged the EU's credibility with ordinary Moldovans. But as Moscow invested its hopes in one politician, he remarks, Brussels had embarked on a wider programme to regain that trust, repairing roads and rebuilding schools. And despite the apparent assistance of Kremlin spin doctors in assisting Dodon, a vague appeal against change was not appealing enough.
The symbolism of Sandu's victory is not trivial, particularly given that she has faced sexist language, attempts to spread falsehoods about her personal life, and criticism from religious figures for being unmarried into her 40s. The hope is that Moldova's first female president can set a new tenor on equality in public life, which the symbolism of the position will certainly allow her.
Crucially, the role will also allow Sandu to call for snap parliamentary elections, which she has already stated is a priority. The stakes will then be even higher.
Moldova’s political turmoil


text:
Barbados removes statue of British naval officer Horatio Nelson for his role in the slave trade · Global Voices
Janine Mendes-Franco

The statue of Horatio Nelson after it was taken down from its plinth in Barbados’ National Heroes Square, on November 16, 2020. Screenshot taken from a Facebook livestream of the event.
Eurocentric history has, for the most part, remembered Vice-Admiral Horatio Nelson as a courageous and astute naval commander. Statuary honouring his accomplishments can be seen around the world, from London's Trafalgar Square to Bridgetown's National Heroes Square, where Barbados honoured him for his victory off Cape Trafalgar during the Napoleonic Wars, which prevented the island from becoming a French colony and protected key trade access to Britain.
On November 16, 2020, however, after years of calls for the statue to be removed because of Nelson's role in the transatlantic slave trade, the Barbadian government has finally decommissioned it. With the national flag flying proudly over the parliament, Prime Minister Mia Mottley presided over the ceremony, which was livestreamed on Facebook. The date is observed as the United Nations’ International Day for Tolerance.
The event, which included performances of music, dancing and drumming, began with a reading by Cyndi Celeste, whose poem “This Space” aptly conveyed a timeline of how colonialism turned the enslaved “from human to cattle, from person to chattel” — and how Barbadians are now reclaiming the space for themselves:
It is interesting how many tales the cobblestones of a place can hold
How many times a space can dawn a new face,
How many new stories unfold:
Watch this space.
Watch the way this square transforms before your very eyes […]
As the statue was lifted off its plinth to the beat of African drums, dancers enacted the horrors of slavery while a singer performed The Mighty Sparrow‘s “Slave.” Barbadians looked on as the bronze cast of the man whom Sir Hilary Beckles, chairman of the Caribbean Community's (CARICOM) Reparations Committee, referred to as “a vile, racist, white supremacist [who] disposed of black people,” was finally brought down from his pedestal. By the end of the performance, there was a palpable sense of a weight being lifted.
Barbados’ Prime Minister Mia Mottley addresses the crowd at the decommissioning ceremony of the Nelson statue on November 16, 2020. Screenshot taken from a Facebook livestream of the event.
In her address, Prime Minister Mottley said that the statue represented dominance and a display of power, and that its dismantling symbolised the reclaiming of modern-day Barbados:
It is important that we understand that this is a struggle that doesn't end today with the moving of this statue.
She said that an integral aspect of freedom is a liberated mind, and revealed that her phone's screensaver is a photo of Jamaican reggae icon Bob Marley, to remind her that “the mission of our generation is the mental emancipation of our people.” She also praised the work of the CARICOM Reparations Committee, saying that redress is vital for moving forward — for “right things to be done for the wrongs that were perpetrated.”
Noting that Barbados’ history is “not as easy as black and white,” Mottley addressed many of the continued microaggressions that have been handed down as a result of colonialism, including skin bleaching and the policing of black hair:
If we do not know who we are, if we are not clear what we will fight for, then we are doomed to be exploited and to be colonised again, not necessarily in the same way […] but in the way that will allow the mental spaces to be dominated by stories and songs and messages that are not our own, and that are not intended to be able to lift up our people.
While she acknowledged that the statue of Nelson is “an important historical relic,” Mottley said it had no place in Barbados’ National Heroes Square. The plan is to relocate the sculpture, which is more than 200 years old, to a temporary storage site until it returns to public display at the Barbados Museum and Historical Society.
The move is a key step in the redevelopment of Historic Bridgetown, which UNESCO designated as a World Heritage Site. Given Barbados’ intention to remove Queen Elizabeth II as head of state and become a republic before the 55th anniversary of its independence on November 30, 2021, it also represents a symbolic separation from its colonial past.
The ceremony ended with calypsonian The Mighty Gabby singing “Take Down Nelson.”
Spoken word performer Luci Hammans, who participated in Barbados’ march in support of the Black Lives Matter movement on June 13, said on Facebook that she was dismayed about the “absence of recognition for the young people, the recent fighters in this struggle,” who weren’t celebrated “as loudly” as she would have liked — but she also noted the symbolism of the ceremony's inclusion of a Tuk band and stilt walkers:
[…] the choice to play Tuk is not one made lightly. Tuk is our sound of resistance. It is the “engine of the landship,” a survival tactic in which we deliberately display our defiance in the face of colonialism. Those drums and whistles which thundered [Nelson] out of town played the melody of perseverance, the music of generations of black people protecting black people. And I loved to hear it.
Then the Stiltmen, the representation of our ancestors on high looking down on us. A fitting reminder to all of us that we can move him now because of the fight our ancestors started. We are because they were. And I loved to see it.
Barbadian historian Richard Drayton, who is based in the United Kingdom, wrote an article for Third Text journal just over a year ago, in which he compared Barbados’ Nelson statue with that of imperialist Cecil Rhodes in Oxford. He noted that “opponents of the removal of Nelson and Rhodes from their privileged positions in Bridgetown and Oxford have argued that these statues were very old, and were therefore now part of a public culture which should be preserved without revision:”
To remove them would be to “erase” history, in Mary Beard’s phrase. But is leaving these objects as they are not also a kind of historical erasure, a silencing of the past […]?
Is the argument from “heritage” not bound up with an odd contemporary imbalance of attention towards the needs of the present and future vs the legacies of the past, the retrogressive temporality of the neo-liberal moment? The point is not the destruction of “the past,” as if there was ever one monolithic uncontested past, but the renegotiation of which past the present holds up to its face.
In a Facebook update posted after Nelson was removed, Drayton observed that “2020 has broken the spell of the past:”
There is an odd feeling emanating from that now empty plinth. It does feel like a magic spell has been broken. The forbidden has been done […] a powerful energy is being released from where the idol has been broken.

source: news-globalvoices

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

author: Janine Mendes-Franco


text:
Proposed tax on books in Brazil may disadvantage readers in poorer neighbourhoods · Global Voices
Agência Mural

Bolsonaro Government is preparing a new tax on books in Brazil. Photo by Rômulo Cabrera/Agência Mural
This article was written by Renan Cavalcante and Lucas Veloso. It is published here via a content partnership between Global Voices and Agência Mural.
In 2007, writer Alessandro Buzo opened the Suburbano Convicto bookshop. At the time, the Itaim Paulista neighbourhood in eastern São Paulo had no public libraries — schools were the only places where people had public access to books.
Years later, Buzo says access to public reading spaces has gotten easier but the cost of books can still be an obstacle for many people in his neighbourhood. For low-income Brazilians, access to affordable books may get even harder if a proposed 12 percent tax on the purchase of books passes through the Brazilian Congress.
Currently in Brazil, and most Latin American countries, books are tax-exempt. The proposal was put forward in July by Brazil's Finance Minister Paulo Guedes.
Publishing companies like Todavia and Companhia das Letras responded to the news by protesting on social media. Shortly after, Brazilian Senator Randolfe Rodrigues introduced a bill that would give books and publications total tax immunity. The bill is currently open for public consultation.
☞☞ Está no ar a consulta pública do Senado que garante a imunidade tributária aos livros, jornais, periódicos e papel destinado à impressão. Se você é contra a taxação do livro em 12%, vote SIM. #defendaolivro https://t.co/blg4oV3FP6 pic.twitter.com/TYBBko4VWX
— todavia (@todavialivros) September 2, 2020
The Senate's public consultation on guaranteeing tax exemption for books, newspapers, periodicals and papers destined to printing, is online. If you are against taxing books at 12 percent, vote YES #defendthebook
Foi apresentada no Senado a PEC 31/2020, que pretende assegurar a imunidade tributária aos livros, jornais, periódicos e papel destinado à impressão.
? Se você é contra a taxação de 12% sobre os livros, vote SIM e apoie a proposta: https://t.co/EQL88Vlmke.#defendaolivro pic.twitter.com/GNK2Opqdep
— Companhia das Letras (@cialetras) September 4, 2020
The PEC 31/2020 was presented in the Senate which aims to ensure tax exemption for books, newspapers, periodicals and papers to be printed.
If you are against 12% taxation on books, vote YES and support the proposal.
Critics fear that a tax will make it even more difficult for low-income groups to access books and will impede projects that promote reading in poor communities.
In 2019, the average price for a book was 19 BRL (3.54 US dollars), equivalent to 1.8 percent of the country's minimum wage. A survey by Agência Mural showed that, with the 12 percent tax, the highest selling books in Brazil would be on average 5.48 BRL (about 1 US dollar) more expensive. This is more expensive than the bus fare in São Paulo city.
The tax could make access difficult for readers in poorer areas. Photo by Rômulo Cabrera/Agência Mural
The proposed tax has sparked a backlash from entities linked to the publishing market. “The agencies are fully aware of the need for tax reform and simplification in Brazil. But raising book prices will not resolve the issue,” says the manifesto signed by organizations including the Brazilian Book Chamber and the National Association of Bookshops.
The tax is also not well regarded by organizations and projects aimed at encouraging reading and education in poorer neighbourhoods.
“[By making books] expensive, they are prioritizing opening bookshops in high-income malls and neighbourhoods,” Buzo said.
According to data from Observatório Cidadão (Citizen Observatory), city libraries in Sao Paulo's central neighbourhoods have the largest number of books available for adults. This is in stark contrast to the availability of books in the city's outer neighbourhoods populated by predominantly poorer communities such as Marsilac, San Lucas, and Anhanguera.
During a hearing at the National Congress in early September, Economy Minister Paulo Guedes discussed the proposed tax on books, defending programs that would donate books for the poorer. According to him, this would be more effective than giving publishing houses tax benefits, as reported by Agência Brasil. He also mentioned programs of transferred income, like the emergency aid created during the COVID-19 pandemic, to say that people are more concerned with buying food than books.
“We're going to give away books for free for the most fragile, the poorest […] when I buy my book, I have to pay the tax, too. So, it's one thing for you to focus on the aid. It is another thing […] to actually [tax] exempt people who can afford it,” Guedes argued.
Buzo disagrees with the minister's view. “I don't believe that the rich read more than the poor. Go to an event in the city’s outskirts. There are many people reading there. Yes, the rich have more access to books because bookshops are close to their homes and they have money to buy, but reading is another thing”, he says.
According to the results of the Overview of Reading Survey, commissioned by the Pro-Book Institute in partnership with Ibope (a survey institute), price influences 22 percent of Brazilian readers when buying books and is the main factor in choosing a book. But research still indicates that 27 million Brazilians in social classes that earn less than 8,640 BRL(or 1,611 US dollars) per month buy books.
Encouraged to read by her mother and grandmother since childhood, Letícia Souza, a proofreader with a degree in Language Studies, also disagrees with Guedes. “This thinking is absolutely incoherent. I also think that considering that those who buy books are [only] those with higher purchasing power contributes to the alienation of the poorest people from reading and culture in general”.
Suzi Soares, organizer of events such as Sarau do Binho and Felizs (Literary Exhibition of the Southern Area), is suspicious of the government's idea of book donations as a way to provide access to books in poorer areas. “People have to read what they want, nobody else should determine what you have to read,” she says.
Until Soares started working, the books she read were borrowed from a friend. “When I had a bit of money left over it was a joy to go into a bookshop and buy whatever book I wanted. When I had the opportunity to buy, I was very happy.”
Despite everything, she also says she believes that people in the city outskirts will continue reading. “We will end up looking for alternatives as we always have. Recycling, passing books to one another, making the books that are sitting on the shelf move around, so that we can read”.

author: Agência Mural


text:
Violent protests erupt in Uganda following presidential candidate Bobi Wine’s arrest · Global Voices
James Propa

A YouTube screenshot at the scene of Bobi Wine's arrest in Luuka district.
On Wednesday, November 19, several parts of Uganda went into flames with violent riots that left several people killed, following the arrest of Hon. Robert Kyagulanyi, famously known as Bobi Wine, a pop star turned opposition politician, who is running against President Yoweri Museveni in an election slated for January 2021.
Bobi Wine was arrested at a political rally venue in the eastern Uganda district of Luuka, with the police citing that he was holding massive rallies that are contrary to the guidelines given by the electoral commission to curb the spread of COVID-19.
The electoral commission directed that candidates are only supposed to hold meetings with a maximum of 200 people to control on the spread of the coronavirus. Leaders in Bobi Wine’s political party, The National Unity Platform say they always plan for 200 people but people turn up in large numbers to wave and listen to Bobi Wine and they cannot stop them.
The Uganda police confirmed the arrest citing that it was because of the continued violation of the ministry of health guidelines to combat COVID-19.
We would like to inform the public that the Joint Security Task Force in Busoga North, today arrested the NUP Presidential candidate, Hon. Kyagulyanyi Ssentamu Robert, for his continued violations of the @UgandaEC Commission and @MinofHealthUG guidelines https://t.co/QEPY2SDVX2
— Uganda Police Force (@PoliceUg) November 18, 2020
Several presidential candidates and other influential politicians have come out to condemn the arrests, with some suspending their campaigns until Bobi Wine is released and allowed to hold his rallies.
Mugisha Muntu, a retired general that served in Museveni's government as an army commander and is currently running for president on the Alliance for National Transformation card, said he has suspended all of his campaigns until Bobi Wine is freed.
We have decided to pause our presidential campaign activities until our colleagues, @HEBobiwine and @PatrickAmuriat are released and their freedom to campaign guaranteed.
We call upon government to recognise that this isn't business as usual.#ChangeIsComing#CountryBeforeSelf pic.twitter.com/1VFQlSw5ks
— Mugisha Muntu (@mugishamuntu) November 18, 2020
Former presidential candidate Kizza Besigye demanded the release of Bobi Wine and asked the countries funding the Museveni regime to stop funding them, while at the same time calling upon the international criminal court to look into the Ugandan matters.
•Free Hon Robert Kyagulanyi (Bobi Wine) NOW.
•Free Ugandans NOW!
•Ugandans: remain firm &take actions to end captivity NOW.
•@IntlCrimCourt Please process petition of Ugandans; more generous crimes underway!
•Those funding the Rogue NRM/M7 Junta must stop. STOP ODIOUS DEBTS. pic.twitter.com/aM527At2D1
— Kifefe Kizza-Besigye (@kizzabesigye1) November 19, 2020
The Democratic Party presidential candidate Norbert Mao shared a video of people in plain clothes holding guns and firing bullets in Kampala city.
This is totally unacceptable. Let’s avoid the road to Mogadishu! pic.twitter.com/zkb36eLjTV
— Norbert Mao (@norbertmao) November 19, 2020
Several Ugandans also engaged online with the hashtags #FreeBobiWine #StopPoliceBrutalityInUganda to demand Bobi Wine's release and raise awareness about the happenings in the different parts of the country as major TV stations decided not to air the demonstrations live.
Senior politician Kizza Besigye shared a screen capture of NBS TV, one of the stations that have, in the past, actively broadcasted live proceedings of any major events in the country, airing President Museveni's campaign while many parts of the country were rioting.
MEDIA BLACKOUT of what’s been taking place in Kampala after arrest of presidential candidate Hon Kyagulanyi is very OMINOUS!
With several people confirmed dead & tension mounting, NBS Tv is broadcasting LIVE M7’s campaign in Moroto; others quiet!
“Scientific” Campaigns?? pic.twitter.com/i629ab0k3X
— Kifefe Kizza-Besigye (@kizzabesigye1) November 18, 2020
Twitter user Faisal shares a story of a woman who was hit by a stray bullet while she was in a 14-seater public taxi.
In Mukono yesterday, Justine Namambo was hit by a ‘stray bullet’ at Seeta trading centre while travelling in a taxi from Kampala. Her crime was waking up & going to work, just like YOU today. If you support this government, this is what you stand for. Shame on you #FreeBobiWine
— Faisal (Bob Daddy) (@PyeparFaisal) November 19, 2020
Journalist Charles Obbo wonders whether the government still stands for the reasons they stood on to oust the former regimes that used to brutalize Ugandans.
Seen enough of the savagery and brutality from photos and videos of the killings & injuries at the “Bobi Wine riots”/protests today. Uganda President Museveni & and the ruling NRM used to speak of past “primitive regimes”. Does it still mean the same thing?
— Charles Onyango-Obbo (@cobbo3) November 18, 2020
Twitter user Aisha Lee shared a video showing policemen beating civilians while they peacefully evacuated a shopping mall in downtown Kampala.
Now why is he beating them?♀#stoppolicebrutalityinuganda pic.twitter.com/Wv6RZxjaLp
— ???✌? (@AishaLee02) November 19, 2020
This is the second time Bobi Wine has been arrested in the last month with the first one being shortly after his official nomination to run for the presidency. His car was broken into and he was bundled into a police van that delivered him to his home. The police said it was meant to prevent him from gathering crowds which would easily spread COVID19:
The ruling party, in power since 1986, also has several influential people including musicians that make crowded road drives through districts where their candidate, Yoweri Museveni, would be holding rallies. Opposition leaders have criticized the police for protecting these people while using tear gas and bullets to disperse opposition leaders’ crowds.

author: James Propa


text:
After back-to-back typhoons, Filipinos criticize President Duterte’s absence from public eye · Global Voices
Karlo Mongaya

Homes in San Jose, Rodriguez, Rizal east of the national capital Manila are submerged underwater due to Typhoon Vamco (Ulysses). Photo by Anakbayan, used with permission.
#NasaanAngPangulo (‘Where is the President?’) began trending on Twitter as Filipinos criticized President Rodrigo Duterte's absence from the public eye and a lack of government relief efforts following two successive typhoons which hit the Philippines starting on November 1.
Typhoon Goni (or Typhoon Rolly in the Philippines), considered to be 2020's strongest tropical storm, battered Catanduanes Island and parts of southern Luzon in the beginning of November. After President Duterte was conspicuously absent from a government briefing on the typhoon, a briefing which itself was criticized for taking place five hours after Goni made landfall, the hashtag #NasaanAngPangulo began spreading on Twitter.
Bed weather. ? #NasaanAngPangulo pic.twitter.com/iMQDYVURZf
— Malacañang Events and Catering Services (@MalacananEvents) November 1, 2020
The tweet above satirizes a photo of Duterte sleeping. The viral photo was often used by Duterte supporters in previous years to show that he's a simple man who doesn't sleep in a luxurious bed.
Malacañang scheduled a 10:00 AM briefing today about #RollyPH. That’s 5 hours and 10 minutes after landfall in Catanduanes. And the Super Typhoon just made a second landfall over Tiwi Albay. Damn. #NasaanAngPangulo
— Ted Pylon (@TedPylon) November 1, 2020
Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque said no wrong was done since the briefing took place on a weekend. While Duterte himself called his critics “stupid,” saying he had to go home to pay respects to his dead parents on All Souls Day.
#NasaanAngPangulo began trending again on social media after Typhoon Vamco (or Typhoon Ulysses in the Philippines) pummeled the country on November 12, causing some of the worst flooding across the National Capital Region and other provinces on Luzon Island. Despite the recent uproar over Duterte’s absence from the previous typhoon response, he was once again accused of not making appearances or actively coordinating the relief efforts. His officials said Duterte was in fact present at online proceedings of the 37th summit of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) talking about “climate change and disaster risk management.”
Harry Roque,
Today is Thursday, not Sunday, today is not Nov 1 for the President to visit his deceased loved ones. You have no excuse to sugarcoat the President's absence for the #UlyssesPH response. We don't want to hear your lame and stupid excuses again. #NasaanAngPangulo https://t.co/JIe8TlYeMr
— Gun Grex Emocling ?? (@gungrexemocling) November 12, 2020
#NasaanAngPangulo trend doesn't mean that the president needs to directly stop the storm. We need the presence of his leadership, to help, and to protect his people :))
— ً check pinned (@aintmat_) November 12, 2020
#NasaanAngPangulo? IN THE FUCKING MALACAÑANG GOLF CLUB HOUSE ATTENDING A VIRTUAL SUMMIT WHERE HE WILL TALK ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE WHILE HE LETS FILIPINOS DROWN BECAUSE OF THE TYPHOON.
Putangina mo Duterte. #OustDuterteNOW tangina https://t.co/vJd5svC5OS
— Mitzi Jonelle Tan ? #FightClimateInjustice (@mitzijonelle) November 12, 2020
[‘Putangina mo’ and ‘tangina’ are Filipino cuss words.]
When a crisis spans multiple regions, it is the national government that should act.
Since the beginning of this year and every crisis since then to now,#NasaanAngPangulo?
— Peter Cayton, the Stats Guy (@PJACaytonPhD) November 13, 2020
After the typhoon left the country, Duterte assured the public that his government is already on top of the situation. He added in his typical exaggerated way of talking that he even wanted to “swim” with the flood victims “as it was a long time since he last took a bath” but he claimed he was stopped by his guards. Roque also asked Filipinos to just stop asking for the presence of Duterte, adding that asking for accountability was the work of the political opposition. He also added, “…the president is never away, he is always with us.”
But even as Filipinos in Metro Manila and the surrounding provinces were still reeling from the impact of Typhoon Vamco, news about the worst floods in Cagayan Valley in northern Luzon began pouring in. Rainfall from the successive typhoons had filled the Magat Dam and the sudden release of dammed water led to flash floods, submerging large parts of the region. November 13, reverberated with images and sounds of stranded residents pleading for rescue on the rooftops of their flooded homes.
LOOK: Magat Dam opened seven of its spillways on Nov 12 until the morning of Nov 13 when typhoon #UlyssesPH hit N. Luzon. Now, many communities in Cagayan Valley are submerged in water and in need of urgent relief and rescue.
Video originally posted here: https://t.co/i9iAOnm6uu pic.twitter.com/TNH8DDWFfG
— AlterMidya (@altermidya) November 14, 2020
Duterte only appeared on TV the afternoon of the following day, advising stranded residents still waiting for rescue to just wait as “maybe it is still early” and that help is on the way. He lauded “resilience” as a value that allows Filipinos to recover from whatever disaster that comes their way.
No surprise then that the hashtag #OustDuterteNow went viral alongside the calls for help and the hashtag #CagayanNeedsHelp.
In another late-night speech, Duterte focused his ire on Vice President Leni Robredo who he claimed was behind the #NasaanAngPangulo trend. In fact, Robredo never questioned Duterte's absence during the typhoons while her office focused on coordinating relief and rescue operations on the ground. Robredo is a member of the opposition and has been vocal in her criticism against some policies of the Duterte government.
Duterte also condemned students who have been leading calls for academic strikes and breaks in response to the scale of devastation wrought by the typhoons. Calls to end the semester to focus on recovery and relief operations also became calls to oust Duterte whose leadership has been blamed for the suffering facing the nation.
Critics said citizens are largely left to fend for themselves during back-to-back disasters from the COVID-19 pandemic to the recent typhoons. The growing frustration over the Duterte government has spilled over to calls for its ouster even if the next presidential election is still two years away.
Incompetent Leadership.
Delayed Mass Testing.
Rape Jokes.
Undesirable Government Officials.
Poor Disaster Response.
What else? Should we wait until 2022?
Let our voices be heard. #OUSTDUTERTENOW#CagayanNeedsHelp
— Kiyanooo (@N4IK9) November 13, 2020

author: Karlo Mongaya


text:
An internet with borders: A perspective from Pakistan · Global Voices
Guest Contributor

Image credit: Nick Youngson via Pcipedia.org (CC BY-SA 3.0).
This article was written by Farieha Aziz, co-founder of digital rights advocacy group, Bolo Bhi.
In Pakistan, social media has become an informational battleground for regional and domestic politics.
We have seen foreign disinformation campaigns on Twitter and heavy government pressure on platforms to adjust moderation policies to suit its own agenda This has been backed by repressive new rules targeting speechand even bans on platforms, restoring access to them only if they toe the line There have even been instances where politicians, activists and journalists have found themselves subject to organized campaigns that flagged their social media activities for alleged breaches of the platforms’ rules, which can result in their accounts being suspended or shut down. All of this is in addition to the harassment and pressure which journalists, activists, academics, organisers and participants of women’s marches, and religious minorities in Pakistan have faced for years This harassment is now being driven online by hashtags, but is still backed by very real risks of violence In the push and pull, between governments and platforms, users’ interests are often left by the wayside.
Each time companies reach a middle ground with governments to keep their services operational while cloaking their actions in the interest of users they deal a blow to local advocacy efforts aiming to create a rights-based discourse that holds discretion and powers of corporations and governments to account. The popularity of a platform in any region is dependent on the number of users. For a jurisdiction to appeal as a market for investment, the numbers also matter. Users of platforms perform this function, which platforms and governments both benefit from. But when it comes to what may or may not be available for viewing on a platform, which content gets removed, on which grounds, through what process and recourse available to users, these are decisions made either unilaterally by a company or government, or collaboratively between governments and platforms. Users are not considered to be primary stakeholders by companies or governments, where decision-making is concerned.
For years, civil society in Pakistan has battled against repressive laws and government actions limiting speech. But now, the way that companies frame and enforce their community standards is as much a cause for concern as the laws and mechanisms governments enact to restrict speech. Clearly, whether it is user-based complaints under platforms’ community standards or rules or the process of accepting “legal requests” from governments to remove content or suspend accounts, both have a considerable impact on expression. What these content moderation mechanisms entail, including how decisions are made, and the question of who decides, and whether they should be making these decisions in the first place, requires a lot more attention. But despite the enormous importance of platforms’ decisions, an enormous deficit of transparency remains.
At the 2015 RightsCon summit, civil society organizations called for expanded transparency reports by platforms. The statement read:
…Without greater qualification of the data published and clarity on the process companies follow to determine whether a request is legal or is made by a legitimate legal entity, and how the determination to ultimately restrict content or hand over user data is made, the report’s usefulness to users, researchers, journalists, and advocates is limited.
For transparency to be meaningful and useful, reports must contain more than just numbers and categories. In 2020, we’re no closer to this.
As companies enter markets around the world and, thereby, different legal jurisdictions, applicability of local laws and compliance with them places all kinds of constraints on expression. What were earlier apprehensions or considered threats to a borderless internet is a reality today. This is the age of the internet with borders.
Government requests are typically categorised separately in transparency reports; however, if the nature of the content or accounts identified in the requests happen to violate a company’s rules, they are typically absorbed into sections of the reports that cover a company’s own actions to enforce its rules. What this fails to take into account is the resources state regulators have at their disposal as compared to private individuals, to monitor and report content. Unless all government requests are categorised separately despite falling under terms of service moderation, there will be no way of determining the volume of requests by governments and regulators, which is an indicator of their priorities and a way of holding them to account for the exercise of their powers.
Where does the end-user figure in the companies’ end game to keep their platforms up and running and governments’ attempts to exercise maximum control over them? In Pakistan, it seems the newly revised and approved―but not improved―Removal and Blocking of Unlawful Content (Procedure, Oversight and Safeguards) Rules, 2020, will only exacerbate this dilemma. Opposed by local digital rights groups and foreign platforms through the Asia Internet Coalition (AIC), the earlier version of the Rules required platforms to take down and restrict content within short time frames. Failure to comply would result in fines and a ban on services. Over the summer, the regulator issued notices under Section 37 of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016 and blocked several apps such as, Bigo, TikTok, Skout, SayHi, Tagged, Grindr and Tinder, restoring access only when companies agreed to tailor their content moderation policies to a locally palatable version approved by the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority. News reports suggested not much has changed in the Rules―a public version was only made available on November 18, 2020.
Caught between government overreach and corporate compliance, users are in double jeopardy. The experience of navigating platforms is becoming increasingly cumbersome for them. They are either being driven off platforms completely or forced to remain as silent spectators rather than active participants. Except for those engaged in manipulation, disinformation and abuse, platforms are fast losing their appeal, particularly to journalists and human rights defenders. They must remedy this by deploying resources to understand and address issues faced by users instead of facilitating governments more than they already do.
This article was developed as part of a series of papers by the Wikimedia/Yale Law School Initiative on Intermediaries and Information to capture perspectives on the global impacts of online platforms’ content moderation decisions. You can read all of the articles in the series on their blog, or on their Twitter feed @YaleISP_WIII.

author: Guest Contributor


text:
Beijing’s misgivings with tech billionaire Jack Ma, as seen by Chinese social media · Global Voices
Oiwan Lam

Xinhua's cryptic line: “Don’t talk casually, don’t do things casually, and people should not be casual”. Image from the Stand News. Used with permission.
Earlier this month, the financial world was shocked by the sudden suspension of Ant Group's initial public offering (IPO), set to debut on the Hong Kong and Shanghai stock market on November 2. With 34 billion USD in proceeds, it would have been the world's biggest stock debut in history.
Ant Group, formerly known as Alipay, is the world's highest-valued fintech company. It has over 730 million users, mainly located in mainland China, who rely on its multiple financial services to shop, take small loans, transfer money to each other, and invest their savings. Alibaba, who Jack Ma cofounded, owns a one-third stake in Ant Group, rendering him the latter's controlling shareholder.
One day before Ant Group announced it was putting the brakes on the IPO, Ma and other senior executives were summoned to a closed-door meeting with China's banking regulator. Ant Group released a brief statement saying that the meeting was about “the health and stability of the financial sector.” Naturally, widespread speculation that the Chinese government had intervened to thwart the company's move followed suit.
Then, on November 12, the Wall Street Journal revealed, citing anonymous Chinese official sources, that President Xi Jinping personally made the call to halt Ant Group’s stock exchange debut.
The news confirmed a belief shared by many Chinese netizens: That President Xi distrusts Ma. After all, he wouldn't be the first to get into Xi's crosshairs, whose presidency has been distinguished by a relentless crackdown on billionaires who don't toe the party line.
In 2017, Chinese-Canadian businessman Xiao Jinhua was abducted in Hong Kong and taken to mainland China, where he remains in jail. Around the same time, businessman Guo Wengui went into exile to the U.S. and transformed himself into an anti-China activist. Other billionaires recently arrested and charged with corruption or economic crimes are Ye Jianming, former Chairman of CEFC China Energy Company Limited, and property tycoon Ren Zhiqiang.
Ma has long proclaimed to be his mission to transform China’s stiff and outdated banking system. Ant's financial services, in his view, help channel capital to small businesses and ordinary citizens, while weathering the risk of bad debt with artificial intelligence — or, to put it simply, a private credit score system.
As in many other countries, Ant group and other fintech businesses have so far operated under looser regulation than traditional banks in China. Borrowers do not need to present guarantees for their micro-loans but agree on higher interest rates. Such conditions present a huge risk of default, which is why Chinese regulators plan to introduce new rules of supervision and management to the sector. It is anticipated, for example, that the new regulations would restrict Chinese banks’ funding to fintech companies.
New regulations aside, many Chinese netizens are wondering how political was the decision to halt Ant Group's IPO, and have dig through the internet to find clues.
In addition, it seems that Ma, a once-celebrated innovation hero in China, has taken a reputational hit — at least judging by recent comments on Weibo.
Even before the WSJ reported on Xi's involvement, Chinese netizens have searched for clues on China's state-owned media as to why the IPO had been suspended.
Many pointed to a cryptic article published on Xinhua on the night of the closed-door meeting. The headline of the article says “Don’t talk casually, don’t do things casually, and people should not be casual” (話不可以隨口，事不可隨心，人不可隨意). The article also shows a painting depicting a horse striding over clouds; In Chinese, horse is 馬 (“ma”) and cloud is 雲 (“yun”) — that's Jack Ma’s Chinese name.
Above the painting, the article says: “Everything has its costs, if you don’t have the capital, don’t do whatever you want.” (任何事情背後都有代價，如果沒有資本，就不要隨心所欲。)
Brian Cheng posted a screenshot of the painting on Twitter and asked about Jack Ma’s whereabouts:
Where is Jack Ma Nowadays?
In Jail or in Sky. #Jack Ma (馬雲 =Horse Cloud)
# Photo by XinHua Daily pic.twitter.com/DUfe8lue3Q
— Brian Cheng (@BrianCh98370549) November 8, 2020
Meanwhile, netizens interpreted the “don't talk casually” of the article's headline as a reference to a talk Ma delivered at a conference in Shanghai on October 24 in which he outlined his bank-transformation mission.
They have circulated on social media a chart, produced by Chinese finance news outlet Caixin, showing the distribution of Ant Group’s shares.
@LifetimeUSCN posted the chart on Twitter, highlighting the fact that the family of former Chinese president Jiang Zemin has a stake in the Group:
近年，《財新》起底誰，誰倒霉。《財新》最新起底螞蟻金服了。從字面上看，中共高層只有江澤民家族控制的博裕資本占股。顯然，中共內部分贓不勻。 pic.twitter.com/tBG4RvqWmL
— LT 視界 (@LifetimeUSCN) November 12, 2020
In recent years, Caixin often brings down people with its investigations. Its most recent investigation is on Ant Group. From the chart, we see that among the top ranking CCP members, only Boyu Capital, controlled by Jiang Zeming’s family, has direct holding in the group. It is pretty clear that the distribution of interest has lost the balance.
After the WSJ story, more “evidence” of Xi Jinping's distrust of Jack Ma emerged on Weibo.
One much-circulated item was a video compilation (via Twitter) of Jack Ma’s public speeches between 2015 and 2018. When asked whether his fund for young entrepreneurs would be open to young people who had participated in the 2014 pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong, Ma replied “why not?”
In 2018, when delivering a speech about Hong Kong’s role in China's Belt and Road Initiatives, he praised Hong Kong’s “One Country, Two Systems,” saying that if the same political system was introduced to Zhejiang, where Ant Group's headquarters is located, the city would prosper.
Recent comments on Weibo slammed Jack Ma's public speeches for not sticking to the party line. For example:
以前东林党不肯像国家交赋税，现在有人希望浙江像香港那样搞一国两制，这样可以像香港那样不必向国家交一分钱税收与财政收入，请问是何居心？
Once the Donglin Movement (back in late Ming Dynasty) refused to pay tax to the nation, now someone wanted to see Zhejiang taking up Hong Kong’s One Country Two Systems model and to evade tax like Hong Kong. What’s the intention behind such a suggestion?
杰克马别以为做了联合国贸易和发展会议青年创业和小企业特别顾问、联合国数字合作高级别小组联合主席、有了联合国红色特别通行证就可以随心所欲，有人做了国际刑警组织主席，不照样被查！
Jack Ma, don’t you think that your position as co-chair on the UN High Level Panel on Digital Cooperation and UNCTAD Special Advisor for Youth Entrepreneurship could empower you to act independently. Remember the former head of the Interpol was investigated. [Former Interpol chief Meng Hongwei was charged with bribery and sentenced to 13 years and 6 months in jail by a Chinese court in January 2020 — ed.]
Conspiracy theories also circulated on Chinese social media. The following one has been cross-posted by many Weibo and WeChat users:
他利用各种手段，一路绿灯，短时间内迅速暴富，站在了财富的峰巅！奔跑在时代的前沿！
他引领的互联网金融，不仅加速了经济的发展，也使大量的实体经济消亡；他不仅使近亲的许多人成了富豪，也使更多的人沦为穷人；他大力挞伐体制的漏洞，却不愿接受制度的制衡；他倡导公平公正，却只想自己一个人一路绿灯；他利用银行的钱赚钱，却极力欲推倒银行；他讥讽中国的银行为“当铺”，却自己痴迷于高利贷[…]
美国人一直想摧毁中国的金融体系，进而全面压榨中国，穷尽伎俩，没有得逞！这次非常危险的被马云用一己之力几乎得逞了！所幸，庙堂还有清醒的人！挽国家金融大厦于即将倾覆之时，国之幸甚！民之幸甚！
He has used all means to get the green light on and became the world’s richest in such a short period of time. He is riding on the tide of the era!
He led the fintech sector and drove economic growth, but also killed the offline economic sector; he made his associates rich, but he also drove many into poverty; he slammed the system but he refused to be checked by the system; he advocated for fairness, but only he got a green light; he used the banks’ money to make money, but he wanted to overthrow the bank system; he said Chinese banks were outdated but he enjoyed being a loan shark…
The American has been so eager to destroy China’s finance system so as to suppress China. Yet, its plot has failed. This time Jack Ma almost succeeded. Fortunately, we still have smart people in charge to save the finance system from falling. This is a blessing for our country and for our people.
Many find the political purge and shift of public opinion on Chinese social media appalling. Twitter user @songma said:
看了下微信群里转的文章，已经把蚂蚁金服定性成“诈骗集团”了。???
马云老师的成功经验，从人人羡慕到人人喊打，在这个14亿人口的大国，也只用了一个星期的时间。
— Song Ma? (@songma) November 5, 2020
Read some articles circulated on WeChat, now the Ant Group is labelled as a “scam group”. Everyone was jealous about Jack Ma’s success, but in this country with 1.4 billion population, it just takes one week to turn him into a villain.
Analysts anticipate that Ant Group will resume its IPO after Beijing introduces the new set of regulations for the sector. But it remains to be seen whether Jack Ma's reputation will be restored.

author: Oiwan Lam


text:
Solomon Islands bans Facebook for ‘harmful content’ · Global Voices
Mong Palatino

Students studying at a computer lab in University of South Pacific Solomon Islands Campus. Photo from Flickr account of the Asian Development Bank, (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
The Cabinet of Solomon Islands has issued a temporary ban on Facebook for what it considers ‘harmful content’ disseminated on the social media platform. It is unclear when the ban will begin and how long will this last.
The ban was proposed by Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare and Communication and Civil Aviation Minister Peter Shanel Agovaka.
Agovaka told Solomon Times why the Cabinet came up with this decision:
Abusive languages against Ministers, Prime Minister, character assassination, defamation of character, all these are issues of concerns.
The use of the internet now in Solomon Islands needs to be properly regulated to safeguard our young people from harmful content. At the moment there is no legislation to govern the use of the internet and even young kids can be able to download harmful stuff from the internet.
Agovaka said the government has not yet finalized the details with internet service providers about how the ban will be enforced. He added that press freedom will not be affected since citizens can still publish or air their sentiments on other media platforms.
There are 120,000 Facebook users in Solomon Islands.
The announcement garnered widespread criticism which prompted Permanent Secretary of Communication and Aviation Moses Virivolomo to clarify that Facebook is merely being suspended. But the official gave no timeline about the suspension.
The Facebook ban or suspension is seen by critics and the opposition as an attempt to silence citizens who are exposing irregularities in government.
Opposition Member of Parliament Peter Kenilorea Jnr reminded the Cabinet about the importance of upholding freedom of expression in a democracy:
As leaders, we will face resentment from factions of a demanding and at times dissatisfied public. Much of the dissatisfaction and mistrust, whether real or perceived, will be aired. Sometimes these need to be aired. After all, we, leaders, need to be held accountable by the electorate that place us in positions of power. We need to face the music from time to time. This is democracy.
But as leaders, let us not attack one of the main pillars of democracy upon which our nation rests – the freedom of expression. Let us not mute the voices, however angry, of those that we have sworn to serve.
Malaita Provincial Premier Daniel Suidani, a local official, also disagreed with the decision to ban Facebook:
Do not go into public life and make laws and decisions for your own good or for your own protection as is seen with the banning of Facebook.
Doing this will only lead to further frustrations. You can be guaranteed that going against your people only leads to failures.
The business sector is not supportive of the ban. Jay Bartlett, the board chairperson of the Solomon Islands Chamber of Commerce and Industry (SICCI), said the Cabinet should be focusing on other more important matters:
It is the Government’s prerogative to make such a decision, but as a Chamber we believe that there are other pressing issues that requires our collective focus.
Ms Gloria Hong, a member of SICCI representing small businesses, argued that Facebook is an essential platform to interact with consumers.
Using social media helps us to build brand awareness, increase our customer base, and connect with customers.
In my view, banning Facebook is a threat to businesses, especially the small businesses who cannot afford to run advertisements on radio, newspapers and on TV.
Tourism Solomons CEO Josefa ‘Jo’ Tuamoto warned about the repercussions for the tourism industry:
It goes without saying the platform has become vital in our efforts to keep the Solomon Islands top of mind and competitive on the world tourism stage for the time when things return to normal.
No other social media platform comes even close to what we have been achieving with Facebook.
And not just for our tourism sector, but for all Solomon Islands businesses and the wider community in general which uses Facebook as a key means of communication across our 992-island archipelago.
In a letter sent to the Solomon Times, Floyd Manata from Port Moresby said banning Facebook is not the solution:
We need to be very careful about dealing with certain things regarding this time where the world technology is changing every 6 months. Today it's Facebook next year probably TikTok. But hey think again is this the best solution to the problem?
Before you ban Facebook you should establish or come up with policies that will facilitate the issue of cyber crime and cyber security. Do we have one in place at the moment?
Facebook told ABC Australia that it is ready to discuss the issues raised by the Solomon Islands government:
We’re reaching out to the Solomon Islands government to discuss today’s decision.
This move will impact thousands of people in the Solomon Islands who use our services to connect and engage in important discussions across the Pacific.
Amnesty International’s Pacific Researcher Kate Schuetze said the ban will deprive users of vital information that can save lives during a pandemic.
Given how important it is for people to quickly access information in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the government may not just place political discourse and participation at risk, but even lives. Total bans on websites or internet information providers will almost never be justifiable under international human rights law.
Dan McGarry, an independent journalist living in Vanuatu, has a proposal for Pacific governments which are unhappy over the social impact of Facebook and has considered plans to censor or ban the popular social media website:
Pacific governments need to start a dialogue, not just with social media giants, but with other national regulators too. They need to learn from others’ mistakes, and leverage others’ successes.

author: Mong Palatino


text:
During the Cold War, Latin American intellectuals found solace in communist Prague · Global Voices
Filip Noubel

Brazilian writer Jorge Amado and his son (fourth from left ro right) and Czech journalist and playwright Jan Drda (first from left to right), at Dobříš, a Czech castle that served as a residency for Czech and international writers, in 1950. Photo from the Paloma Amado archive, used with permission.
Before COVID-19, Prague was visited every year by millions of tourists looking for cheap beer and spectacular architecture. In the 1950s, on the other hand, the capital of then-Czechoslovakia attracted a very different crowd of travelers: Leftist intellectuals from around the world looking to see what life was like under socialism.
Many of those political tourists came from Latin America and included literary giants such as Jorge Amado and Gabriel García Márquez. Long forgotten, this shared history is now slowly being rediscovered and reassessed in the Czech Republic.
As the Cold War unfolded, both the West and the Soviet Union engaged in intensive propaganda efforts to demonstrate the superiority of their political and socio-economic systems, usually targeting audiences in Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America. And both sides saw art as one an effective way to relay this message.
In the USSR, the All-Union Society for Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries, or VOKS as per its acronym in Russian, had as its mission to invite public intellectuals and writers from all over the world to the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc countries, about which they were encouraged to write.
Czechoslovakia, having joined the Eastern Bloc in 1948 after its Communist Party orchestrated a coup, was one of such destinations. Besides Jorge Amado and Gabriel García Márquez, the country received writers from Argentina (Raúl González Tuñón), Brazil (Graciliano Ramos), Chile (Ricardo Latcham, Pablo Neruda), Cuba (Nicolás Guillén), and Mexico (Efraín Huerta, Luis Suárez). Some traveled alone, others as part of larger delegations.
Prague thus became a cultural leftist hub from the 1950s onwards, gathering both burgeoning and established leftists writers such as Turkey's Nazım Hikmet and the Soviet Union's Ilya Ehrenburg.
Pablo Neruda, in fact, may have taken his artistic name from 19th-century Czech writer, poet, and journalist Jan Neruda (the Chilean poet was born Ricardo Eliécer Neftalí Reyes Basoalto). He never admitted this, but photos of him walking Neruda street in Prague, or posing before restaurants and pubs named “Neruda,” offers some solid ground for speculation.
Michal Zourek, photo used with permission
Global Voices spoke to Michal Zourek, a Czech academic focusing on the ties between the Eastern Bloc and Latin America. Zourek, who authored the 2018 book “Československo očima latinskoamerických intelektuálů 1947-1959” (“Czechoslovakia in the eyes of Latin American intellectuals from 1947 to 1959″, which was also published in Spanish), explains what motivated those intellectuals to accept such invitations:
V Latinské Americe existovala celá řada autoritářských režimů, které pod záminkou potlačit levicovou subverzi masivně potlačovaly lidská práva. Proto latinskoameričtí umělci sympatizující s komunistickou ideologií dostávali z východní Evropy jistou materiální a morální podporu. Pokud jde o svědectví z těchto cest, tak texty ze čtyřicátých a padesátých let jsou obecně plné entusiasmu. Je videt, že na intelektuály z rozvojových zemí musely některé aspekty udělat velký dojem. Zejména pak kultura. Zmínky o vysoké kvalitě divadelních představení, zázemí škol a knihoven, jakož i velká sečtělost obyvatel, se v textech často opakují.
There were a series of authoritarian regimes in Latin America that massively repressed human rights, alleging the need to suppress leftist subversive forces. This is why Latin American artists in favor of communist ideology would get material and moral support from Eastern Europe. Regarding the testimonies of their travels, the texts written in the 1940s and 1950s are usually full of enthusiasm. It is clear that certain aspects [of socialist societies] made a big impression on those intellectuals coming from developing countries, particularly the state of the culture scene in Eastern Europe. There are many mentions of the high quality of theater plays, school infrastructures and public libraries, and the high level of people's education.
Zourek goes on to explain how Prague and Moscow were a safe place for those intellectuals to make contacts and meet each other. “It wasn't rare that famous intellectuals from Latin America met for the first time in Eastern Europe,” he said. “In their home countries, it wasn't possible because the authoritarian and anti-communist governments in place simply wouldn't allow it.”
Eastern Europe, Zourek says, played a crucial role for Latin American literature — if it wasn't for the international communist movement, it is possible that the fabled 1960s generation of writers wouldn't have been so influential, including in the West. “The works of engaged authors came out in enormous prints [in Czech, Polish or Russian], much higher than the ones in their mother languages, and all of this happened behind the Iron Curtain,” he said.
Pablo Neruda's bust in central Prague. Photo by Kenyh from Wikipedia, used under CC BY-SA  3.0 licence.
When visiting Prague or other places in Czechoslovakia, leftist intellectuals, who were mostly men, were treated like VIPs: They would stay in luxury hotels, have their expenses paid for and access to bilingual guides, receive writing honoraria, and eventually have their works translated into Czech or Slovak.
Those who were provided writing residencies would stay for long periods of time, notably in the Dobříš castle, the siege of the Union of Czechoslovak Writers from the 1940s to the 1990s. Some stayed even longer as they gained political asylum.
As Zourek explains:
Byly jim placeny cestovní výdaje a během pečlivě naplánovaného programu jim byl prezentován značně idealizovaný obraz místního života. Hosté na oplátku po návratu šířili pozitivní dojmy prostřednictvím cestopisů, článků a přednášek. Fenomén “politického turismu” byl důležitou součástí sovětské propagandy. Jednalo se o dlouhodobě plánovanou strategii, jejíž počátky můžeme hledat záhy po říjnové revoluci. Důležitou úlohu v ní sehráli právě intelektuálové, které Sovětský svaz toužil získat na svou stranu a následně je využít v ideologické bitvě.
They had their travel expenses paid for and during their very carefully designed travel program, they were offered to see only the most ideal aspects of local life. In return, the foreign guests would spread their positive impressions via travelogues, articles and conferences. This phenomenon of “political tourism” was a key component of Soviet propaganda, a well planned strategy that started immediately after the 1917 Russian revolution. A major role was assigned to intellectuals that the Soviet Union wanted to have on its side to use them later in its ideological struggle with the West.
Jorge Amado (on the left) and Nicolás Guillén (on the right) on their way to China at a train station in the USSR, January 1952. Photo from the Paloma Amado archive, used with permission.
One interesting exception in this idealized vision and description is Gabriel García Márquez, the Colombian Nobel laureate in literature who visited Eastern Germany, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary and the USSR in 1955 and 1957. He did so partially on his own, and when officially invited, found ways to escape the official program to enquire by himself. In his book,”De viaje por Europa del Este” (“Journey Through Eastern Europe”), his descriptions of Eastern Europe are much more nuanced.
In the first chapter, Garcia Marquez describes Eastern Germany in unflattering terms, as in this scene where García Márquez enters a restaurant for breakfast: “What people had for breakfast would be the equivalent of a full meal in the rest of [Western] Europe, and would be much cheaper. But those people looked destroyed and bitter, and ate enormous portions of meat and fried eggs without any joy.”
In another chapter about Moscow, he writes about the taboo topic of Stalin's cult of personality, quoting his Russian guide who says: “If Stalin was still alive [he had been dead since 1953], we would have a Third World. Stalin was the bloodiest, the most rancorous and most egomaniac figure in Russian history.”
Gabriel García Márquez (first from left to right) on Moscow's Res Square in August 1957. Photo from Michal Zourek archive, used with permission.
In Czechoslovakia, communism ended in the fall of 1989, and in the successor states of Slovakia and the Czech Republic, the socialist past is usually regarded as a dark period of human rights violations, travel restrictions, and forced obedience to Moscow.
Such view colors Czech and Slovak historians’ approach to the leftist intellectuals who visited the country during those times. As Zourek, who studied in the Czech Republic and in Argentina, notes:
Během mých univerzitních studií jsem sice zaslechl zmínky, že v Československu pobýval Pablo Neruda či Jorge Amado, ale neměl jsem představu, že se jednalo o fenomén tak výrazný. Jinými slovy, že intenzivní kontakty mezi oběma regiony existovaly již před kubánskou revolucí. Roli zde možná hraje určitý despekt k těmto autorům. Mnozí na ně nahlížejí jako na idealisty či užitečné idioty, kteří svou návštěvou vyjádřili sounáležitost s režimem, který se neštítil násilí a perzekucí. Celá problematika je ale mnohem komplexnější.
During my studies in university, I heard a few mentions about Pablo Neruda and Jorge Amado spending time in Czechoslovakia, but I had no idea that this was such a deep phenomenon, that both regions had such contact even before the Cuban Revolution [1959]. This is perhaps due to the scorn with which those authors are now held [in the Czech Republic and Slovakia]: many consider them to be idealists or useful idiots who, with their visits, supported regimes that engaged in violence and persecutions. The issue is of course much more complex than that.
While those authors have long been celebrated in their home countries in Latin America, their legacy is only now resurfacing in the Czech historical discourse. García Marquez’ travelogue was translated to Czech for the first time in 2018 (“Devadesát dnů za železnou oponou“), while the others remain largely unknown.
Zourek shares his personal experience to explain why the process of reassessment is so challenging:
Krátce po střední škole jsem navštívil Chile, kde univerzita byla plná sovětských vlajek, portrétů Lenina, v knihkupectví se prodávala díla Marxe a Engelse. Myslel jsem si, že ta ideologie je mrtvá, nechápal jsem, jak někdo může obdivovat zločinnou ideologii, která omezovala svobodu slova, bránila lidem studovat, realizovat sny. Tento antagonistický postoj obou regionů ke komunismu je primárně dán zcela odlišnou historickou zkušeností. Proto se domnívám, že při hodnocení komunismu je třeba se oprostit od rodinné anamnézy, která mnohdy brání vidět tento transnacionální fenomén v jeho mnohobarevnosti. Tento přístup mi bohužel stále u mnoha českých historiků chybí. Myslím, že není náhodné, že politika komunistického Československa ve třetím světě se těší většímu zájmu v zahraničí nežli mezi českými badateli. Teprve v posledních letech se to začíná měnit a myslím, že to do určité míry souvisí s postupným vystřízlivěním české společnosti z antikomunismu. Věřím, že v následujících letech vznikne řada prací, které poukážou na to, že komunistické Československo dělalo v rozvojovém světe obdivuhodné věci, na které se nepodařilo po roce 1989 úspěšně navázat. Například na poli kultury.
Soon after secondary school, I visited Chile, where the university was full of Soviet flags, portraits of Lenin, where bookstores would be selling the works of Marx and Engels. I thought that ideology was dead, and couldn't understand how anyone could admire a criminal ideology that limited freedom of expression, prevented people from entering university, fulfilling their dreams. This antagonistic position of both regions in regard to communism is due mostly to very different historical experience. This is why I think that when we assess communism, we have to separate ourselves from our family experience and history, which often doesn't allow us to see this transnational phenomenon in its full diversity. Unfortunately, that dissociation is still not happening for a lot of Czech historians. I don't think it is surprising that people in the developing world have more interest in the policies of Communist Czechoslovakia than their peers in the Czech Republic. It has began to change a bit in the past years, and I think this is thanks to the gradual reassessment of the communist period by Czech society. I believe that in the coming years we will see a series of works showing that communist Czechoslovakia did remarkable things in the developing world, which were mostly abandoned after 1989, for example in the area of culture.

author: Filip Noubel


text:
Voices in a Bangkok rally a day after police used water cannon and tear gas against protesters · Global Voices
Prachatai

Thousands gathered in Ratchaprasong, Bangkok to condemn police violence in the dispersal of pro-democracy protests. Photo from Prachatai. Used with permission.
The original version of this article was published by Prachatai, an independent news site in Thailand, and was edited and republished by Global Voices as part of a content-sharing agreement.
Thousands gathered at Ratchaprasong in central Bangkok on November 18 to protest the authorities’ use of force against protestors the day before. They were also there to decry a parliamentary vote to reject a constitutional amendment draft proposed by civil society group iLaw and backed by over 90,000 voters.
Only 2 out of 7 draft amendments passed the first reading: the one by the government coalition and one of those by the opposition, both to amend Section 256 allowing the establishment of a Constitution Drafting Assembly.
[One of the demands of the protest movement is the rewriting of the military-drafted constitution which guarantees military control of the bureaucracy. The parliament accepted on first reading the proposal to establish a Constitution Drafting Assembly but rejected other amendments such as removing the senate power to vote for the prime minister and delegitimizing orders of the military-backed government after the 2014 coup.]
Prachatai spoke to some of the protesters at Ratchaprasong, most of whom said they would like to see the country change for the better.
Nugul Ratiyapinun attended the protest to show support for the proposal to amend the Constitution in order to implement democratic reforms in governance. Photo from Prachatai. Used with permission.
Nugul Ratiyapinun was at the November 17 protest near the parliament compound. Despite being tear-gassed, he came to the protest at Ratchaprasong the next day.
I want to see the people accept change in the country. Most of the people must live with the reality that the world has changed now in terms of economics and communications. Thailand should adapt too. The constitution should truly grant the rights and freedoms of the people, [as a full-fledged democracy, not a half-fledged one as it currently is.
He explained that the appointment of 250 senators by a junta-appointed commission, plus the regulation that a third of them must approve the first reading of the amendments showed that the minority has more power than the majority, which made him feel that Thai democracy is not real.
Young protesters who call themselves “highland youngsters for democracy group”. Photo from Prachatai. Used with permission.
A group of three men who called themselves “highland youngsters for democracy” was also at the protest. They said that they came from a Pga K’nyau ethnic community (also known as Karen) in Tak Province, and said they would like to see more change as the conditions in their community are severely underdeveloped.
We came to protest. We would like a new prime minister, because Prayut didn’t come into office legitimately. He recruited the 250 senators himself, he chose them himself, and then the senators elected him as prime minister.
Another member of the group said that he is studying at Ramkhamhaeng University and was following the parliamentary discussion on the draft constitutional amendments. He said he was angry that parliament did not approve the draft that was backed by the people, and because of the use of violence against protesters on November 18, so he decided to join the Ratchaprasong protest.
Protesters at the rally. Photo from Prachatai. Used with permission.
In front of the police headquarters, P., 15, was standing with the group of protesters shouting at police officers. She said that she was angry with the authorities for their use of force against the protesters on November 17, even though she was not there.
I was very angry that they did this. We are the owners of the country. This country is not their country as they say, but what they are doing is a great insult to us. We are out here to demand our rights in proposing constitutional amendments.
But look at what they did to us. Water cannon. Loudspeaker trucks. Batons. Shields. Personally, I think it’s not fair. If you want to be democratic, but you have no justice, then you shouldn’t call yourself democratic, but we’re a dictatorship right now.
Right now I’m in Mathayom 4 (Year 10). In 6 years, I will finish 4th year (of university). I have to find a job. If he stays for another 2-3 years, that has to have an effect until when I’m working. I will not accept a life without getting what I should get. The tax I pay is not what I deserve. I feel that I have to come out to demand my rights. My friends, my younger siblings, or my children in the future should have a better life than this.
As she is not yet 18, P. is too young to sign her support for the constitutional amendments proposed by iLaw, but she said that the current constitution is not fair for the people and written in favour of those in power.
P. asked us not to show her face because she cannot tell her family members, except for her father, that she is joining the protest.
My father said that, in the end, the person who has to make a life is me, not him, so it is my right to come out or not to come out to call for my rights.
P. told us that she tried to explain to her mother, who is worried about her safety, that she is going to benefit from the constitutional amendments, that she is going to have a better life. She said that her mother tries to understand and that her mother supports the pro-democracy movement but does not see good things about coming to the protests.
Yesterday, she saw violence, so I tried to explain to her that we weren’t violent. The other side was violent. She said that in any event it’s violent and that if I go, it’s still dangerous. She’s okay with me supporting this side, but she’s just not okay with going to protests.
Meanwhile, children’s rights and welfare advocates were seen stationed in front of the Central World mall, where they formed a group called “children in the mob” to spread information about children’s rights, statistics about children and young people affected by protest crackdowns, and how to take care of teens in protests.
Ruangthap Kaeokaemchan, a member of the group, said they held this activity to inform the protesters about safe spots for young people for first aid in the protest as well as the way to take care of them if a crackdown took place.
She said the right to political expression is the right of young people. They should be protected from the time they arrive at the protest until the time that they return home. Unlike in other countries, protests in Thailand have never been safe enough for children to join. The authorities should not respond to a peaceful movement by violence.
We are not saying that we invite the children to protests. But we are saying what you should have in mind when you come to a protest. And safety is an important thing to be aware of. Parents or the leading figures must also be aware. But the venues of protests in Thailand have never been made safe at all.

author: Prachatai


text:
Stop playing politics or face a ban, Nintendo warns Animal Crossing gamers · Global Voices
Hong Kong Free Press

Joshua Wong, via Twitter / HKFP file photo.
The following post was written by Candice Chau and originally published on Hong Kong Free Press on November 21, 2020. This edited version is republished on Global Voices under a content partnership agreement.
Japanese video game giant Nintendo has told players of its hit game Animal Crossing: New Horizons to stop adding political or commercial content. The warning came after a variety of users worldwide – including Hong Kong pro-democracy campaigners – started sending messages of this nature.
The game has been a hit since its launch in March, selling over 20 million copies by September. It allows users to craft tools, decorations and other creature comforts from scratch on their own deserted islands.
Nintendo told businesses and organisations to “refrain from bringing politics into the game,” and said those who breached the guidelines could be banned.
However, some users have utilised its features — which include communicating with one another via direct messaging, sending postcards, updating their passport status and creating bulletin-board posts — to send political messages.
In Hong Kong, some players have been creating pro-democracy and anti-government content, including flags with protest slogans such as “Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our times,” funeral photographs of Chinese leader Xi Jinping, and “villain-hitting” sessions aimed at Hong Kong’s leader Carrie Lam.
The game has since been pulled from Chinese grey market online shopping platforms.
United States President-elect Joe Biden is among those who hoped to capitalise on the game’s popularity. Prior to the election, Biden’s campaign launched its own virtual island, allowing players to “volunteer” at the island’s campaign headquarters and visit polling stations. Under the new guidelines, the island is likely to be banned:
Nintendo bans brands from using Animal Crossing: New Horizons for politics https://t.co/LOk8cosUmP
— Eurogamer (@eurogamer) November 19, 2020
Activist Joshua Wong told Hong Kong Free Press that he had taken part in a number of virtual protests in the game this year:
What Animal Crossing represented was not just entertainment during lockdown, but also a reflection of happenings in real life. It provides an alternative when institutional channels of expression are restricted…It is a shame that Nintendo overlooked the significance of this game.

author: Hong Kong Free Press


text:
The greatness of Caribbean writer Jean Rhys · Global Voices
Janine Mendes-Franco

Moderator Shahidha Bari (top left) discusses the impact of the late writer Jean Rhys on Caribbean literature with United States’ writer, translator and academic Lauren Elkin (top right), British novelist and journalist Linda Grant (bottom left), and Trinidadian poet and book blogger Shivanee Ramlochan (bottom right) during an online event on November 19, 2020 facilitated by the Royal Society of Literature, the NGC Bocas Lit Fest and the British Library. Screenshot taken from the livestream of the event.
The late Dominica-born writer Jean Rhys, best known for her novel “Wide Sargasso Sea” — a creatively daring, strongly feminist, and brazenly anti-colonial counter to Charlotte Brontë's “Jane Eyre” — is considered an integral part of the literary canon, but what makes her so great?
In celebration of the Royal Society of Literature’s 200th birthday, and the 10th anniversary of the premier Caribbean literary festival, the NGC Bocas Lit Fest, a panel that included American writer Lauren Elkin, British novelist Linda Grant, and Trinidadian poet Shivanee Ramlochan attempted to answer that question via an online event that was streamed on November 19.
“Wide Sargasso Sea” is told from the point of view of Antoinette Cosway, Rhys’ take on Bertha Mason, the mad wife of Mr. Rochester in Brontë's classic. Although now hailed as a masterpiece (TIME magazine named it among the 100 best English-language novels since 1923 and Bocas Lit Fest deemed it one of the “100 Caribbean Books That Made Us”), it was a controversial piece of work when it was published in 1966.
Yet, though many of the panellists called it a “perfect” novel, “Wide Sargasso Sea” was not the sum of Rhys’ work. Her career spanned decades, from her early novels set in Paris to her unfinished autobiography, which was published in 1979, the year she died.
Jean Rhys is a household name across the Caribbean due in large part to the fact that “Wide Sargasso Sea” is a staple of the education curriculum — but this was not the only reason Shivanee Ramlochan suggested that Rhys’ importance could not be understated.
“The sensibility and force of her literature have endured in ways that perhaps some people may not have expected,” she explained, noting that Rhys’ themes remain relevant to “the issues of power, subordination, obedience and who writes what narratives” — issues Ramlochan says the Caribbean space will likely always grapple with.
Novelist Jean Rhys’ childhood home in Roseau, Dominica, taken in May 2006, 14 years before it was demolished. Photo by Janine Mendes-Franco, used with permission.
In May 2020, Rhys’ childhood home in Dominica's capital, Roseau, was demolished to accommodate commercial construction, an act that Ramlochan found “instructive”:
[…] on the one hand for someone like me it’s an unbearable tragedy, but in looking at the responses of Dominicans [some] question the legitimacy of Rhys to that climate […] the idea of why a white Dominican woman who spent scant time in Dominica should be venerated in a certain way. So the response to Rhys is not just one thing [it's] an interweaving of complex parts of what makes Caribbean identity or a Caribbean writer.
Although all members of the panel were fans of the writer, they each had different experiences when reading Rhys for the first time.
Lauren Elkin, now 42, first discovered Rhys when she was in her 20s and living in Paris (many of Rhys’ early novels were set in the French city). She recalls being “entranced by this stark, sinewy, sensual, and incredibly lush and complex view of the world [and] her interrogation of what it is to be a woman […] who doesn’t quite fit in.”
Linda Grant, who called Rhys “the great stylist”, began to consume her writing in the 1970s. Rhys, she says, managed “to have stripped bare the essence of what it was to be female in a world which was anti-feminist […] For the first time, we saw what happens to women in a men’s world.” Grant was also drawn in by Rhys’ “extraordinary prose”:
I don’t know what she’s doing, I cannot see how she does it. There are no rhetorical flourishes, […] The sentences are short, they are quite unadorned, there’s very little in the way of adjectives or adverbs and then suddenly you turn a page and everything has led you on to being punched in the solar plexus by one sentence. It’s perfect. She’s like Bach. She writes in a way that is pellucid; you can see through it – and it seems to be coming from a very precise place in her brain where she is totally in control of what she’s saying. I would place her among the highest ranks – Virginia Woolf, James Joyce.
Ramlochan, meanwhile, said that her relationship with Rhys has been “the defining one” in her career as a poet and writer.
While some misunderstand Rhys, reducing her to “this doomed passive figure”, Elkin described the author's work as:
[…] a complex feminist project, asking us to look beyond the sleeping with men to get by. [Rhys] is a major social writer condemning her social system, not just lamenting her lot. She's a major ethical voice, asking us to reassess.
Others criticise the autobiographical elements in Rhys’ work, which Elkin believes denies the author her craft.
Noting that Rhys once said, “I begin with a fact and then something happens to it”, Elkin dubbed her “the originator of auto-fiction”, adding, “It's not reductive to say that she’s exploring the chemistry of what happens when you put the two together on the page.”
From Nobel Laureate Derek Walcott to more contemporary voices like Tiphanie Yanique, Caribbean writers have been inspired by Rhys, perhaps partly because of her anti-colonial stance.
Being from the Caribbean, Ramlochan said, “It’s easy for me to look at a character like Mr. Rochester and understand how he feels hard done by a place he only ever expected to colonise and [use] to his own ends. Colonisers don’t expect a hard time.” Describing Rhys’ response to this as “appropriate”, she explained:
You can appropriate and you can decimate and you can rape and pillage, but the place that you are damaging can damage you back — and you just might have to admit that you can deserve that.
It was a bold position to take at the time “Wild Sargasso Sea” was written, and the novel was likely one of the first Caribbean books published from the perspective of a character in an existing work.
From “Good Morning Midnight”, a culmination of Rhys’ 1930s novels, to her magnum opus, discovering — or re-discovering — Rhys is a journey well worth taking.
As Ramlochan put it, “These times feel like they are demanding a certain kind of revelation and I truly think I’m going to find it in returning to Rhys.”


text:
Somali journalists say new media law will muzzle free press · Global Voices
Mohamed Adan Ishak

Media workers in Somalia face arbitrary detentions, targeted assassinations and repression under draconian media laws, December 12, 2012. Photo by Tobin Jones via Wikimedia  / AMISOM public domain CC0 1.0.
With the recent passage of a controversial media bill into law by Somali President Mohamed Abdullahi Farmjo, Somalia’s media workers worry about what may lie ahead for journalists who are already struggling in a hostile media environment.
The bill, signed on August 26, contains 41 articles on the media and how they should conduct their work. The law will restrict media workers and will give the state unrestrained power over the media.
Why are civil societies and the media crying foul over the bill?
According to Abdalla Mumin, secretary-general of the Somali Journalist Syndicate, a press rights group, the recently signed media law will bring the press under the direct government control as if all media is state-run media. This violates the constitution and paves the way for a more restrictive environment in which journalism becomes a crime.
He wrote an impassioned tweet on the matter in August after the bill passed:
When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.
— GEORGE R. R. MARTIN, A Clash of Kings pic.twitter.com/GsGRrPpxw2
— Abdalle Ahmed Mumin (@Cabdalleaxmed) August 28, 2020
The media bill decries that the government will issue licenses to journalists and can withdraw at any time, for any reason, if the journalist is deemed too critical. The Ministry of Information accredits journalists rather than a press association or independent, nongovernmental media organizations.
The law clearly allows the state to control and direct media workers whether they are working for the state-run media or otherwise. This holds media practitioners as hostages to the state and compromises their impartiality. There is no place other than authoritarian states where media workers seek licenses and accreditation from the government.
In August, top press chief Abdinur Mohamed Ahmed said 16 articles have been omitted from the bill and others amended in an interview with BBC Somali. But media associations still decry the bill and deem it oppressive.
Former President Hassan Sheikh initially signed the controversial bill into law in 2016, and ever since, media associations and civil society groups have led campaigns to reverse the law due to its draconian nature. Progress was made when the current president came to power and ordered a review of the law, but the review alone did not meet the demands of media practitioners and civil rights defenders.
On August 31, former Information Minister Mohamed Abdi Hayir remarked that Somalia is not the only country where the government issues media licenses, during a talk show hosted by Universal TV (a Somali satellite TV station). In response, the Somali Journalist Syndicate Secretary Mumin lashed out at the information minister, accusing him of copying from dictatorial states where freedom of the press is nonexistent.
Somalia’s media community are also protesting the bill’s call for the formation of a media council, wherein the government will have unparalleled hegemonic power over all media associations.
The nine-member council, consisting of three members from independent media, three members from civil society, and three government members, will have the final say on holding media workers accountableThey will also look into the complaints against the media and make decisions about license withdrawals from media houses. But media organizations consider this council a “censorship” board and are worried that ahead of Somalia’s upcoming elections, this could prove problematic for dissenting voices.
Somalia’s media is flourishing despite constant challenges.
According to the Committee to Protect Journalists’ impunity index, Somalia is among the most dangerous places for a journalist to work. CPJ says 26 murders of journalists in Somalia remain unsolved. Although the number of murder cases has declinedharassment from authorities persists in the form of illegal detention, arbitrary arrest and denied access to information.
Some Somali media workers have paid the ultimate price for their chosen profession. Since 2017-2020, 11 journalists were killed and their perpetrators have not yet been held accountable. This culture of impunity creates an environment where journalists fear for their safety and therefore hesitate to report.
Eleven journalists were killed in the country in the past four years: 3 in 2017; 4 in 2018; 2 in 2019 and 2 in 2020, making the country to remain as one of the most dangerous places for journalists across the globe. @sjs_Somalia @forfreemedia pic.twitter.com/31MvfNI7yC
— Somali Media Association- SOMA (@SomaliMedia13) November 3, 2020
Journalists also face the risk of arbitrary detention, either due to critical Facebook posts or conducting interviews that authorities don’t approve of.
The latest victim of a government crackdown on media is Abdullahi Kulmiye Addow, a broadcast journalist who interviewed an Islamist-leaning businessman who is critical of the Somali government and African Union peacekeepers. After Addow’s radio station released a trailer for the interview, agents from the Somali national intelligence and security agency raided his home on the night of October 18, and kept him at their headquarters for five days. He was later released when his radio station agreed not to air the full interview in exchange for Addow’s release.
Editor Abdul Aziz Gurbiye, of Goobjoog media, a privately owned media house, was arrested on April 14, over a Facebook post in which he alleged that Somali President Mohamed Abdullahi Farmajo appropriated a COVID-19 ventilator machine for himself that was meant for public use. Five days later, he was released on bail. After two months of back and forth, a court battle ensued that ended in a guilty verdict, and Gurbiye was charged with spreading false information and offending the president’s honor. He was sentenced to six months but was allowed to pay a $200 fine instead of imprisonment.
Press associations and media owners have come together to warn against the implementation of the media law. They allege that Osman Dubbe, the new information minister, is seeking support from the international community and that he sent a solicitation letter to potential donors on November 7, to support the law’s implementation.
On November 18, Somali media associations called upon Dubbe to come to the negotiating table for a thorough review of the bill.
During today's journalists consultative conference in #Mogadishu, we jointly raised our concerns on attempts by the new Minister of Info to hastily implement
the draconian #Somali Media Law, safety of the working journalists & denounced the rise of threats against the press. pic.twitter.com/sF6KG4NpHm
— Somali Journalists Syndicate – SJS (@sjs_Somalia) November 17, 2020
Since the 1991 fall of the military regime, the media landscape has shifted from a single state-run media to multiple outlets. But with remnants of the old draconian law still existing and applied, any gains made may be in vain.
Media associations and civil society groups in Somalia have loudly protested against the imposition of this law that will hamper free press and shrink an already narrowing political space. Without a free press, justice disappears and authoritarianism takes over.

author: Mohamed Adan Ishak