text:
Azerbaijani prosecutors drop controversial charges against political prisoner · Global Voices
Eurasianet

A January 19 rally in support of political prisoner Mehman Huseynov. Three days later, the prosecutors office announced it was dropping charges it had recently made against him. (Photo: Musavat Party. Used first on Eurasianet)
The following is a story by Eurasianet and is republished by Global Voices under a partnership agreement.
Prosecutors have decided to drop criminal charges against an imprisoned blogger and activist, Mehman Huseynov, after President Ilham Aliyev ordered the blogger’s case to be reconsidered.
The surprise termination of the new criminal case was announced on January 22 by the Azerbaijani General Prosecutor's Office.
Mehman Huseynov, 26, is Azerbaijan’s best-known political blogger and is serving a two-year prison sentence on charges that he defamed police officers. He had been set to be released in March, but in late December the Azerbaijani authorities brought new charges against him, claiming that Huseynov had attacked a prison guard. Huseynov denied the new charges, which could have added several more years to his term, and started a hunger strike to call attention to his plight.
“The criminal case against Huseynov was terminated due to the fact that he is young, has not been subjected to disciplinary liability during his term of punishment, took the path of reform, and he has an elderly father who needs care,” the press service of the General Prosecutor's Office said in its announcement.
The news came two days after the government announced that Huseynov had personally appealed to Aliyev, asking him to “order the correct investigation of my case.” He denied that he attacked a guard and said that “If I get a new term, it will be a big blow to my 70-year-old father.” It could not be independently determined whether or not Huseynov wrote the letter. One of Huseynov’s lawyers, Fuad Agayev, told Meydan TV he was unaware of the appeal.
It also followed a large rally in Baku in support of Huseynov on January 19. Organizers said 25,000 people attended, while police put the number at 2,800. In any case, the rally was larger than many expected and appeared to be the largest opposition rally in the country in at least five years. Prominent investigative journalist Khadija Ismayilova, one of many activists who undertook hunger strikes in solidarity with Huseynov, subsequently announced that she was halting her strike, connecting it with the large turnout. “Today’s rally show[ed] that the society is awake and their voice is louder than our hunger’s,” she wrote on Facebook.
Fuad Alasgarov, a senior adviser to Aliyev, said that the president was moved to act following Huseynov’s appeal. “Aliyev has always been sensitive to such kind of requests, followed the principles of justice and humanity, and required the same approach from all state officials,” Alasgarov said.
Huseynov’s fellow activists welcomed the news. “Mehman will be released on March 3, wrote HamamTimes, a satirical publication that Huseynov co-founded, on its Facebook page on January 22. “We congratulate the Azerbaijani people. Unity!”
“The people did it,” wrote Habib Abdullayev, the social media manager for Meydan, on his Facebook page. “If you want something, you have to fight for it.”
But others cautioned against calling it a defeat of the government. “It is a step forward” for the authorities, Ismayilova wrote following the government’s announcement. “I still hope that President Aliyev will find it rational and wise to free all political prisoners. This is not a defeat. This would be a victory taking the country to a new modern level.”
According to Human Rights Watch’s 2018 report, “At least 43 human rights defenders, journalists, political and religious activists remained wrongfully imprisoned, while dozens more were detained or under criminal investigation, faced harassment and travel bans, or fled Azerbaijan.”

author: Eurasianet


text:
Is Fiji’s Online Safety Act a ‘trojan horse’ for online censorship? · Global Voices
Mong Palatino

An Internet gaming shop in Fiji. Photo from Flickr page of Michael Coghlan, (CC BY-SA 2.0).
Fiji’s Online Safety Act took effect this month amid concern that it will be used to censor the Internet.
The law was passed in May 2018 two months after the Attorney-General’s office submitted it for parliament deliberation. The government deemed it necessary to make the Internet a safe space for women and children:
The Fijian Government in its commitment to ensure access to connectivity for all Fijians, has embarked on promoting a safe online culture and environment in hindsight of the recent increase of reports on harmful online behaviour such as cyberbullying, cyber stalking, Internet trolling and exposure to offensive or harmful content, particularly in respect of children.
Fiji has an estimated 500,000 active online users.
The Fiji media was placed under state control after the military staged a coup in 2006. In 2010, the Media Industry Development Decree was passed which recognized press freedom but fears of state reprisal led to self-censorship in the media sector. Meanwhile, the growing use of social media in recent years has allowed citizens to use this platform to share their views, report alternative news, and engage public officials.
Some reports mention that if the Media Industry Development Decree dealt with mainstream press, the Online Safety Act is designed to regulate social media.
Fourteen members of the opposition voted against the Online Safety Bill which they claimed will undermine democracy.
But some supporters of the law disputed this:
Opponents of the Online Safety Bill say that it's undemocratic. What is democratic about lewd pictures going viral? What if it was your daughter or granddaughter? Will opposition take responsibility for that? #FijiNews #FijiPol #FijiParl #Fiji pic.twitter.com/ZbuSTylAxV
— FijiFirst (@FJFirstOfficial) May 16, 2018
Fiji Sun Online, a major news portal, published an editorial endorsing the measure:
The Online Safety Bill if passed will protect Fijians from being victimised on social media as is rampant today. It will make online users think twice before they post things online.
Critics cited part four of the law as problematic since it can be arbitrarily used to intimidate Internet users. This particular provision considers “the posting of an electronic communication with the intention to cause harm to an individual” as an offence and is punishable by five to seven years.
Aside from the prison sentence, those found guilty of violating the law will be fined up to 20,000 FJD (9,440 US Dollars) for individual offenders.
Opponents of the law warned that ‘causing harm’ as an offence is too broad that any dissenting opinion can be interpreted as illegal content.
Jope Tarai from the University of the South Pacific noted that the proposed Online Safety Commission as stipulated under section six of the law appears to mimic and repeat the functions of the police-based Cyber Crime Unit. Aside from creating a new agency that will police Internet content, the law gives broad powers to the Online Safety Commission which “has raised concerns on its possible threat to free speech.”
The scholar also warned that despite the avowed intent to promote safety, the law could lead to the censorship of free speech:
The Act on the surface professes online ‘Safety’, while its vagueness on responsible free speech leaves the act open to being a Trojan horse for online ‘Regulation’ and censorship of dissenting voices.
The claimed intent behind the Online Safety Act is certainly a noble one and long overdue in so far as protecting women, children and victims of irresponsible online behavior is concerned. However, the ‘danger’ narrative creatively cultivated by Fijian state officials ignored the strengths of social media.
During the parliament deliberations, a group of young people enumerated their concerns about the proposed legislation:
We are a group of individual youth concerned about the effect of this Bill on free speech in Fiji. While we appreciate the need to protect children and men and women against revenge porn or unauthorized sharing of their intimate images or videos, we are concerned that this Bill is too widely drafted, that it can be misused by those in authority to punish and prosecute those who share their views, who do not share the same political views i.e. it can be misused to prosecute political opponents, rather than serve its purpose to protect children against cyberbullying or other online abuse.
Finally, the regional media network Pacific Freedom Forum (PFF) warned that the new online safety law will “muzzle” rather than protect Fiji’s citizens. PFF Polynesia co-Chair Monica Miller said:
More than half a million citizens are now affected by this law and they need to be reassured that their rights to share ideas and information won’t be compromised even further.

source: news-globalvoices

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

author: Mong Palatino


text:
Taiwan’s referendum results may have been swayed by an ill-informed public · Global Voices
Winston Chiu

Even after Beijing claimed that the 1992 consensus entails the unification with Taiwan based on “one country two systems”, KMT's newly elected Kaohsiung mayor Han Guo-yu stressed the need to uphold the consensus. Screen capture image.
On November 24, 2018, Taiwan wrapped up its mid-term elections and multiple referendums with the results favoring the opposition Kuomingtang (KMT) party who won a majority of city and county seats from the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
The referendums consisted of 10 questions ranging from LGBTQ rights and same-sex marriage, the choice between “Taiwan” or “Chinese Taipei” at international sporting events, the development of nuclear power, and other topics that touched upon a wide range of issues from human rights to diplomatic relations with China.
The results from the referendums have disappointed LGBTQ and anti-nuclear activists who believe that the public was misinformed. At the same time, several post-election surveys and polls indicated that many Taiwanese may have cast their votes without background knowledge of the issues at stake. The misconception of “the 1992 consensus” and Taiwan's energy supply conditions serve as two typical examples of how the public made ill-informed choices.
In 1992, Kuomintang (KMT), the ruling party at the time, and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) held a meeting which was referred to as the 1992 consensus later. KMT described the outcomes of the 1992 consensus as ‘One China, with different representations’. For the KMT, Taiwan can represent the Republic of China (ROC), and China can represent the People’s Republic of China (PRC). In short, many feel that the wording is vague enough that both sides can read into it in whatever way they want.
During the mid-term election debate, Han Kuo-yu, KMT's candidate running for Kaohsiung city mayor, upheld his party line and expressed his support for the 1992 consensus in the debate. Eventually, he succeeded in his bid to lead in the heart of the ruling DPP's territory. Hence many assumed that those who voted for Han and other KMT candidates do not object to the 1992 consensus. Some commentaries even interpreted the election results as a victory for China.
However, when Han told the media immediately after his victory that he would uphold the consensus and set up a cross-strait working group to rebuild relations with China, his statement immediately triggered a spike in searches for the term “1992 consensus” on Google inside Taiwan — leading many to believe that the Taiwanese public did not pay attention to it and its stipulations.
Google search for ‘the 1992 consensus’ after the election. The data is from Google Trends.
Similar to the Brexit referendum, Google trends also showed similar search patterns. Taiwan netizens’ interpretation of the search drama is consistent with a number of post-election surveys, with the latest survey conducted in early January. The results of the survey show that 55.5% of those polled didn't know what the consensus meant and nearly 44.4% of the survey participants thought the consensus was actually the acceptance of China and Taiwan as two separate entities.
At the same time, China's President Xi Jinping's 2019 New Year speech on cross-strait relations with Taiwan made it clear that, for him, the 1992 consensus entails unification with Taiwan based on “One Country Two Systems” led by the People's Republic of China. Xi's proposal was a wake-up call to many Taiwanese who originally thought that the consensus meant that Taiwan would remain an autonomous self-ruling state.
Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen of the DPP decided to denounce the ambiguous consensus soon after she was elected in 2016. The opposition KMT blamed her for the strained cross-strait relations with Beijing which suspended diplomatic contact with Taiwan, imposed economic sanctions, forced other countries to cut ties with Taiwan and bolstered its military presence in the Taiwan Strait shortly after the president took her stance.
Beijing's sanctions have led to a growing sense of anxiety and insecurity in Taiwan, allowing the opposition KMT to successfully use disinformation to mobilize uninformed Taiwanese to vote against the ruling party.
The passing of the referendum to lift the legal restrictions in the use of nuclear power after 2025 serves as another example of how Taiwanese cast their votes without basic knowledge of the issues at hand.
After the referendum was passed, the Risk Society and Policy Center reported an opinion poll which was conducted four months before the referendum. The results of the poll reflected Taiwanese citizen's misconceptions about the country's energy supply. Nuclear power plants only provided 8% of Taiwan’s electricity in 2017, but 44% of poll participants thought that nuclear power plants were the most important electricity provider in Taiwan.
Hikoyoshi Lu shared the results of the poll on his facebook and commented:
台灣竟然有近44%的人對核電是無知的
這是非常驚人的數字，
如果我們有這麼多國民，連核電占比都不清楚
我們如何期待他們能做出正確的公投決定？
44% of Taiwanese have misperception about nuclear power. The number is shocking. If so many citizens have no idea about the percentage of electricity generated by nuclear power, how can we expect them to make the right decision when they vote for the related referendum?
Taiwan's Social Democratic Party also expressed their worries:
這是一項相當嚴肅的警訊！除了讓我們理解到，未來若要舉辦重大議題公投，各項資訊應更加充分透明外，也應嚴厲批判刻意混淆視聽、意圖使人在不了解公投訴求情況下投票的各式倡議。
This is a very serious warning! Now we know that we need to make the information more sufficient and transparent when we hold referendums for important topics. In addition, we should criticize those arguments that are made intentionally to confuse the voters and misguide the voters to vote when they do not really understand the referendums.
The phenomenon of citizens making ill-informed choices in democracies is a global challenge. The government and media are responsible to help citizens receive correct information. However, without citizen participation in combating the mobilization of ignorance, they will remain passive receivers of information.

author: Winston Chiu


text:
Biryani Stories: Is Biryani the national dish of Pakistan? · Global Voices
Qurratulain (Annie) Zaman

Biryani, one of the staples of Pakistani cuisine. Image by Faizan Ashraf. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
This is the first part of our series: “Biryani Stories” – a look at the common culinary culture in South Asian Countries.
The king of South Asian cuisine and a loved-by-all dish is Biryani. The layered preparation, usually with fragrant basmati or kalizira rice, is sprinkled with saffron and has chunks of sumptuous meat. Its trademark smell lets everyone know that it’s a special occasion. It is a very popular dish in Pakistan and the question often arises, “Is this the national dish of Pakistan”?
Once a dish for royalty, today biryani reflects the flavor and traditions of each locality and is a common dish across many places in Pakistan. However, there is a controversy as to whether Biryani is the national dish of Pakistan. It seems that the Government of Pakistan has not declared any food to be the national dish because there isn't just one dish that is popular in every region and such a lavish meal is often out of reach for some Pakistanis. However, Biryani is definitely one of the strong contenders for the title.
Biriyani has its origins among the Muslims of the Indian subcontinent and is popular beyond the region.
Well, Biryani is not just a food. Its an Emotion.. Best invention in the history of Mankind!! ?❤ #food #Biryani #hyderabadibiryani #foodporn
— Nitish Kumar Mishra (@im_nk90) January 5, 2018
The word “biryani” comes from the Persian word “birian” which means “fried before cooking.” This South Asian mixed rice dish has its origins among the Muslims of the Indian subcontinent. It’s part of the Mughlai cuisine that India is famous for which was developed from the 15th century to about the 19th century during the reign of the Mughal empire. The Mughals raised cooking to an art form, introducing several recipes to India like biryani, pilaf, and kebabs.
Biryani was first introduced by the Mughals in Northern India. It was known as pakka Biryani because most of the ingredients are pre-cooked and then assembled in a pot (deg) and then set on slow fire (dum) for final cooking. The Nizam of Hyderabad (a monarch) adapted the preparation of Biryani to Katcha (raw) style in which most of the ingredients are raw and mixed in the deg to the right proportion. The deg is sealed and placed on slow fire until it is cooked to perfection.
Punjabi Biryani. Image from WIkimedia Commons by Miansari66. Public Domain.
Some of the regional flavors of Biryanis in Pakistan include Sindhi Biryani, Punjabi Biryani, Bohri biryani, Afghani Biryani, or the traditional Mughlai Biryani or Hyderabadi style Biryani.
According to food critic Bisma Tirmizi, Sindhi Biryani is a Mughlai twist on the pulao, with a more fierce and exotic taste.
The masala-seeped potatoes, the tangy alloo bukhara (dried plums/prunes), mint and khatta dahi (sour yogurt) render the Sindhi Biryani a different taste, it’s spicier than most regional biryanis and the proportion of the masala to the rice is a little more than of most biryanis on the sub-continental menu.
There is another debate which is common in India and Pakistan regarding whether there should be Aloo (potato) in the Biryani or not. Some like the taste with or without potato. Earlier this year Manal Aijaz, a Pakistani blogger, posted a poll on social media. For the next 5 days, the Pakistani Twitter space was seen taking this poll seriously. Here is the result:
Whichever wins, stays the other is gone forever
— M (@meemelif) January 29, 2018
And new ideas were floated:
Idea: organise “A BIRYANI FESTIVAL” where there are stalls of every kind of biryani, with aloo, without aloo of chicken, beef and mutton. Which ever stall earns more wins. Ceasefire.
— Tabinda (@TabindaTahiir) February 5, 2018
If you would like to have a taste some of the Pakistani Biryanis check out Faatimah's recipe for an easy and traditional Pakistani Chicken Biryani. You can also look at Ainy's recipe for Punjabi Biryani, Pakistani Lamb Biryani among others.
For now, it seems the decision as to whether or not Biryani is the national dish of Pakistan is still undecided.

author: Qurratulain (Annie) Zaman


text:
Kazakh leader’s grandson complains he is passportless after stint in ‘private Russian jail’ · Global Voices
Chris Rickleton

Screenshot of Aisultan Nazarbayev's Facebook account. The man kissing a young Aisultan in the cover photo is Kazakhstan's de facto leader-for-life, Nursultan Nazarbayev.
The grandson of Kazakhstan's all-powerful leader Nursultan Nazarbayev has amazed social media users in the Central Asian country by claiming he is a “person without a passport” after spending time in a “private Russian jail.”
Kazakh users reacted with incredulity to the bizarre post on Aisultan Nazarbayev's Facebook account late on January 23 that the 28-year-old appeared to use to criticise state bureaucracy and police.
“Thanks to them I am currently a person without a passport or registration,” he wrote, referring to migration authorities.
In its first few hours, the post, which began with a philosophical question, was shared more than a hundred times.
Что такое Родина?�Для кого-то это просто место, где ты прописан по паспорту. Для кого-то это место, где тебе хорошо. А для кого-то это страна, с которой ты связан, как дерево корнями связано с землей, и не важно, стоит ли прописка в твоем паспорте и хорошо ли тебе там.
What is a Motherland? For some, this is just a place where you are registered by passport. For others, this is a place where you feel good. And for someone else, this is a country with which you are connected, like a tree is connected through its roots to the ground, and it doesn’t matter whether there is a registration stamp in your passport or whether you are feeling well there.
While there was no immediate proof Aisultan Nazarbayev wrote the post himself, it would be consistent with strange public appeals of his in the past.
Moreover, last month he had thanked Russian authorities for making him “free again, in the full sense of the word” in another cryptic post that he refused to clarify.
Nursultan Nazarbayev's authoritarian rule over Kazakhstan extends back to the period before the country gained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991.
Aisultan Nazarbayev is the son of his eldest daughter, Dariga, 55.
In 2017, while he was serving as the vice-president of the country's national football federation, Aisultan Nazarbayev admitted his authoritarian grandfather had helped him conquer an addiction to narcotics.
Before landing that job, Aisultan had been vociferously critical of Kazakhstan's football authorities and in particular the federation's head of the time, a loyalist of the president who also served as the country's chief of staff.
Aisultan left the post less than a year later and promptly disappeared from public view.
He found his voice again in the January 23 Facebook missive, fuming at the ex-Soviet republic's state organs dealing with migration, which he described as “simply hell.”
But users found it hard to picture Aisultan struggling “like an ordinary citizen” in one of the country's hated “Centres of Service to the Population.”
These centres that deal with registration issues for citizens and foreigners are noted — to put it mildly — for an indifferent approach to customer service.
Почему то мне не верится, что ” автор” сам ходил в ЦОН.
Why is it that I don't believe this “author” visited a (registration centre) himself?
Полетят головы клерков
Now these paper-pushers will lose their heads.
Most surprising for many users responding to the post was Aisultan Nazarbayev's claim he had spent time in “a private Russian jail.”
“Having freed myself from confinement in a private Russian jail, I returned (to Kazakhstan) without my documents — everything had been stolen and destroyed,” Nazarbayev wrote, without mentioning the reason for his apparent incarceration.
This is something! Aisultan Nazarbayev, president's grandson on his Facebook page 12 mins ago said that he has no citizenship now and that he was put in Russian prison by the “close people” whom he trusted. https://t.co/C2OpZL5GZp
— Aigerim Toleukhan (@aygeryma) January 23, 2019
Yet public speculation over Aisultan's whereabouts had been rife for some time due to his silence on social media for over a year after leaving his job in football.
While Aisultan admitted that he could have contacted his 78-year-old strongman grandfather to help solve his apparent undocumented status, he said he was “ashamed to bother the country's leader with an issue that should be resolved automatically.”
Nursultan Nazarbayev's current presidential term ends in 2020. He has never indicated a successor but said in a 2016 interview that he does not plan to hand power over the country of 18 million people to his children.

author: Chris Rickleton


text:
Local radio station in Russia cancels interview with LGBT activists after threats to editor · Global Voices
RuNet Echo

Activists in Madrid protest LGBT rights violations in Russia // gaelx, under CC BY-SA 2.0
Echo of Moscow in Yaroslavl, a local affiliate of Echo of Moscow, Russia’s oldest independent radio network, cancelled an interview with LGBT activists after receiving homophobic threats, the station’s editor Lyudmila Shabuyeva said in a Facebook post:
Вчера поступили угрозы в адрес наших сегодняшних гостей и нас, если мы проведем эфир на тему ЛГБТ.
Я отменяю эфир.
Yesterday we received threats against our guests and ourselves if we proceed with our talk show about LGBT.
I’m cancelling the show.
According to independent newspaper Novaya Gazeta, the show featuring Yaroslavl’s LGBT activists was scheduled to air in the early morning of Wednesday, January 23. The same activists had recently picketed the town’s main square to protest against the persecution of gay people in Russia, notably in the republic of Chechnya. The station invited them to be interviewed about the protest and their experience of being openly gay in provincial Russia.
Shabuyeva’s initial announcement of the show attracted a torrent of homophobic abuse in the comments, including some from local officials, but that didn’t put her off, she told Novaya Gazeta. However, late in the night before the show, Shabuyeva says, a stranger called her on the phone from an unidentified number and told her that if she were to proceed with the scheduled programming, her guests would be met outside the studio with baseball bats. She could also face problems, the anonymous caller threatened. Fearing for her guests’ safety, Shabuyeva cancelled the show and replaced it with another programming.
The picket on Yaroslavl’s main square was part of a national campaign #saveLGBTinRussia aimed at raising awareness about the brutal persecution of gay people in the republic of Chechnya. Similar pickets and rallies were held in other Russian cities.
Родина-мать призывает своих детей (граждан) бороться с ксенофобией и репрессиями в современной России. Очнитесь от её крика! #saveLGBTinRussiahttps://t.co/vpfTmPnCSM pic.twitter.com/blGzqv437E
— !Alliance | Альянс! (@hetero_for_lgbt) 22 января 2019 г.
The Motherland Calls on her children (the citizens) to fight xenophobia and repressions in modern Russia. Let her call awaken you!
[the sign says: RUSSIA’S DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE COULD FIND NO GAYS IN CHECHYA. THEY ARE THERE: IN PRISONS AND IN GRAVES. #SAVELGBTINRUSSIA HOMOPHOBIA=FASCISM
In April 2017, Novaya Gazeta reported that the authorities of Chechnya, a troubled Muslim republic in the south of Russia ruled by a former warlord Ramzan Kadyrov, was waging a brutal campaign of repressions against its LGBT population. Recent reports said the “purge” has been intensifying, with at least two victims dead and dozens held in illegal detention.

author: RuNet Echo


text:
‘Nobody knows what will come next’: Venezuelans rally in strongest challenge to Maduro yet · Global Voices
Laura Vidal

Juan Guaidó, the president of the National Assembly, as he swore himself in as the acting president of Venezuela at a protest in Caracas on January 23, 2019. Photo by Efecto Cucuyo, used with permission.
Every January 23, Venezuela marks the anniversary of the coup d’état that ended Marcos Pérez Jiménez's military regime in 1958, in what is commonly known as “the return to democracy”. Sixty-one years later, thousands of Venezuelans who oppose the government of Nicolás Maduro are taking to the streets hoping the winds will blow the same way.
As we write this story, people are gathering in large numbers in major cities like Maracaibo, Barquisimeto, and the capital Caracas, as well as smaller towns. The rallies were called by Juan Guaidó, the new president of the country's opposition-controlled National Assembly, who earlier this month publicly denounced Maduro's legitimacy and proposed to invoke an article of the 1999 constitution that would install a transitional government with Guaidó as president.
Speaking at a protest in Caracas this afternoon, Guaidó swore himself in as the acting president of Venezuela. Soon thereafter, the United States’ president Donald Trump publicly recognized Guaidó as the country's legitimate ruler, with most governments in the region — such as Canada, Argentina, Brazil and Ecuador — as well as the Organization of American States, following suit (notable exceptions were Mexico and Bolivia).
On the day before, January 22, the United States’ vice president Mike Pence posted a Spanish-subtitled video on Twitter and YouTube in which he directly addressed the Venezuelan people, calling Maduro a “dictator with no legitimate claim to power.” Maduro responded by breaking diplomatic relations with the United States.
#23Ene Miles de ciudadanos marchan a esta hora contra Nicolás Maduro en Venezuela. Esta es una imagen de la Av. Francisco de Miranda, Chacao. https://t.co/UHnWKRRzrL #VenezuelaGritaLibertad pic.twitter.com/cI1B7Y5U2U
— El Espectador (@elespectador) January 23, 2019
#23J Thousands of citizens march right now against Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela. This is an image of Avenue Francisco de Miranda, in Chacao [a Caracas neighborhood]. #VenezuelaScreamsFreedom
Today's events are likely the toughest challenge ever faced by Nicolás Maduro, whose popularity has been shrinking briskly in recent years in the face of economic collapse, food shortages and soaring urban violence in the country. The last time such massive protests threatened his administration was in 2017, after he effectively nullified the powers of the National Assembly. Maduro survived that revolt, which left around 163 dead over the course of several months, and went on to be sworn in for a second six-year term on January 10, 2019, following an internationally condemned snap election in which opposition parties were barred from running.
Read our special coverage: “What's happening in Venezuela?”
Since earlier this month, opposition leaders have been organizing small protests in different areas of Caracas, including in traditional bastions of chavismo. On January 22, a small squad from the Bolivarian National Guard declared themselves in rebellion against the government. The army quickly managed to quell the mutiny, but for the opposition their move sparked hope, as the military is a critical actor in Venezuelan politics and unmistakably the backbone of Maduro's government.
Four people have been killed so far in today's protests, according to independent website Efecto Cucuyo. Police have responded with tear gas and rubber bullets in parts of the Caracas, according to reports from Caroata Digital, another independent outlet, and Provea, a local human rights organization.
#Caraota23Ene | Momento en que efectivos de la PN disparó a personas en la av Francisco de Miranda en #Chacao | Por: @IreneMSola pic.twitter.com/eFMbr0B6sg
— CaraotaDigital (@CaraotaDigital) January 23, 2019
[This is the moment] when agents from the National Police shot people in av Francisco de Miranda [in Caracas]
#23Ene Ahora tanquetas PNB mantienen represión en El Rosal, al menos 30 bombas lacrimógenas han sido arrojadas al cuerpo de manifestantes en los.ultimos 20 minutos pic.twitter.com/o6AD6rhQAI
— PROVEA (@_Provea) January 23, 2019
Tanks from the Bolivarian National Police crack down on protesters in El Rosal [Caracas] At least 30 tear gas grenades were thrown [directly] at protestor's bodies in the last 20 minutes.
Espacio Público also reports crackdowns in Caracas:
#DenunciaEP | GNB intentan robar el celular al reportero de @NTN24ve, Luis Gonzalo Pérez (@luisgonzaloprz), cuando cubría detención de un manifestante en la Plaa Madariaga de El Paraíso, en #Caracas.
Los funcionarios amenazaron con detener a varios periodistas. #23Ene https://t.co/Cm7uxX6oF0
— Espacio Público (@espaciopublico) January 23, 2019
Agents from the Bolivarian National Guard stole the phone of a reporter from NTN24, Luis Gonzalo Pérez, when he was covering the arrest of a protester is El Paraíso. The agents threatened to arrest several journalists.
Meanwhile, technical experts at NetBlocks have reported major disruptions to online traffic:
Confirmed: Major Internet disruptions in #Venezuela amid protests; YouTube, Google search and social media knocked largely offline #KeepItOnhttps://t.co/ZMKgc4SU81 pic.twitter.com/XqXZStWQcG
— NetBlocks.org (@netblocks) January 23, 2019
Government supporters have staged much smaller demonstrations in parts of the country, while some have taken to social media with hashtags such as “The streets belong to chavismo” (#LasCallesSonDelChavismo). But both sides have been using hashtags taken from passages of Venezuela's national anthem: “Let’s shout with verve” (#GritemosConBrío); “Down with the chains” (#AbajoCadenas).
Marco Teruggi, a sociologist who works with state-owned television station Telesur, tweeted that:
Los EEUU le dieron la orden a Guaidó de autoproclamarse presidente y así lo hizo. Abrieron las puertas de un escenario que van a profundizar con altos niveles de violencia y dirán que son inocentes y demócratas. #GritemosConBrio
— Marco Teruggi (@Marco_Teruggi) January 23, 2019
The United States ordered Guaidó to proclaim himself president and he's done it. They've opened the doors for a situation that they will help deepen with high levels of violence, and they will say they are innocent and democratic. #Let’sShoutWithVerve
The outcome of the protests remains to be seen. While the opposition has arguably received its most significant vote of confidence from international leaders since the National Assembly's election in 2015, the military has shown very few signs of breaking with Maduro.
Writing on the independent news site Caracas Chronicles, well-known political analyst Francisco Toro captures the feeling of both hope and uncertainty shared by many Venezuelans, at home and abroad:
Venezuela has lived through so many calamities in the last few years, we always tend to fall into the trap of thinking it can’t get any worse. It can get much, much worse. A civil war would obviously invite international intervention, on both sides. A Caribbean Syria, layered on top of a pre-existing food crisis, could make 2018 look like the good-old-days in retrospect.
(…)
The immediate future is enormously murky, and the uncertainty, understandably, drives everybody a little bit crazy. We all rebel against the simple, obvious truth: nobody knows what comes next.
(…)
In 2014, having the security services pull the plug on the Maduro regime was a fantasy. In 2017, it was a hope. In 2019, it’s the plan.
On social media, many have noted the significance of today's date. The video below reproduces an extract of the speech given by Romulo Betancourt, the former president who returned from exile after the fall of Jiménez on January 23, 1958, and would go on to be president of the country from 1959 to 1964. In his speech, Betancourt called for national unity and defence of democracy.
VIDEO Este es un mensaje de la generación de 1958 para la generación de 2019 acerca de un día que tienen en común: 23 de Enero. Comparte. #23E pic.twitter.com/UOPKwoYKaA
— EfectoEco (@ElEfectoeco) January 22, 2019
This is a message from the 58 generation to that of 2019 about a day they have in common: January 23rd. Share [this video].

author: Laura Vidal


text:
Old age, hate speech, press freedom: Critical issues in Nigeria’s 2019 presidential elections · Global Voices
Nwachukwu Egbunike

Voting in progress during Nigeria's presidential election on March 28, 2015, in Abuja, Nigeria. Photo by US Embassy / Idika Onyukwu (CC BY-SA 2.0)
Nigeria will hold a presidential election on February 16, 2019, and all eyes are on this election as a test to prove the strength of Nigeria's democratic norms, values and unity.
This year, there are five main candidates in the race out of 73 total presidential candidates. Two major contenders include the incumbent President Muhammadu Buhari (All Progressive Congress) and the opposition candidate and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar (Peoples Democratic Party).
The other three candidates, Obiageli Ezekwesili, Kingsley Moghalu and Omoyole Sowore, have been termed the “third force” because they lack political experience but still present significant competition.
Amid the cacophony of electoral campaigns and the attendant passion from supporters — both online and offline — here are the key issues that may get lost in the noise.
Nigeria's two major contenders, Buhari, 76, and Atiku, 72, both have long histories of political engagement in Nigeria, leaving many to question their health and longevity as presidential hopefuls.
With the end of longtime rulers like South African President Jacob Zuma, 76, and Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe, 94, who was forced out of power after 37 years as president, it has felt like an end to regimes led by the old and strong men in Africa. But this hope has not lasted. Paul Biya, 84, was re-elected as president of Cameroon, making him the oldest political leader in sub-Saharan Africa.
The health of Nigeria’s leaders became a major political consideration after late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua died in office on May 5, 2010. Yar’Adua's illness and continued absence created a power vacuum because he did not hand it over to his deputy, Goodluck Jonathan, before he traveled abroad for treatment.
Incumbent President Buhari has made about ten trips to the United Kingdom for medical treatment of an undisclosed ailment. He has spent “more than 170 days in London on official medical leave since becoming president in 2015,” according to the New York Times.
Can younger candidates stand a better chance? This year, there are 10 candidates under the age of 40 and 16 candidates between the ages of 45-49. But younger candidates may not fare well because Nigeria’s long history of military rule has embedded a culture of political actors who have both the clout and wealth to fund party politics and this takes time and connections to cultivate.
Buhari and Abubakar both have strong political bases. Buhari has a loyal following in the northern part of the country, while Abubakar is perceived as widely accepted across different tribes and religions in the country. Their ages do not appear to be a factor in garnering support and loyalty.
Nigeria is what's known as an ethnic fault line state — ethnicity and religion have long played a central role in elections and general politics. The 2015 elections showed that the two “major contestants received bloc votes from their various states and geopolitical zones,” according to an article in the Journal of African Elections. Also, ethnic sentiments were used to appeal to voters. Ethnocentric hate speech surged both online and offline, before and after the 2015 presidential elections.
Similarly, in 2017, some Nigerian writers raised alarm over the vile ethnic hate speech that almost consumed the nation. Former President Goodluck Jonathan lost in the polls over his failure to handle the Islamic militant group Boko Haram's bombings that rattled the nation and caused widespread insecurity. Boko Haram's abduction of schoolgirls in Chibok led to a global outcry of #BringBackOurGirls when it was clear to citizens that the government was not doing enough to intervene.
Buhari and Abubakar will both rely on ethnic alliances to win votes. Buhari, a northerner (Fulani/Muslim), has retained Yemi Osibanjo as his vice-presidential candidate in order to garner votes from the southwestern (Yoruba/Christian) part of the country. Abubakar, a northerner (Fulani/Muslim) has picked his vice-presidential candidate from the southeastern (Igbo/Christian) part of the country.
Because Buhari and Abubakar are from the same ethnoreligious group, tensions may not be as high as they were in 2015 elections when Jonathan Goodluck, a southern minority Ijaw Christian, ran against Buhari.
Buhari's administration has been accused of major human rights violations and many hashtags have trended on social media in 2018 calling for the release of detained netizens and journalists.
On March 17, 2016, Nigerian journalist Yomi Olomofe was brutally assaulted and detained by Nigerian police in an attack against free speech. Nigerian journalist Daniel Elombah and his brother, Timothy Elombah, were arrested on New Year's Day 2017 for a story they did not even write. In August that year, Nigerian trader Joe Fortemose Chinakwe was arrested by for naming his pet dog “Buhari”.
Jones Abiri, publisher of Weekly Source, was arrested on July 21, 2016, by state security (DSS) agents at his office in Yenagoa, Bayelsa State. #FreeJonesAbiri trended for several days on Twitter until Abiri was released on August 15, 2018, after a two-year detention.
#FreeSamuelOgundipe trended when Nigerian journalist Samuel Ogundipe was detained for three days by Nigeria’s Special Tactical Squad after refusing to name his sources for a story concerning the forceful prevention of lawmakers by security agents from entering the Nigerian National Assembly in early August 2018.
Deji Adeyanju, a political activist and member of the opposition party, was re-arrested in December 2018 and has been in detention since then due to “a fresh petition.”
Buhari has openly expressed his aversion to a free press and freedom of speech. In an address to lawyers last year, he stated that “the rule of law must be subject to the supremacy of the nation’s security and national interest.”
On the other hand, Abubakar has promised to run “an inclusive governance structure” that will harness Nigeria's diversity and uphold “a just and fair environment where the rights of all citizens are protected by a transparent government.”
Only time will tell how these issues will unfold throughout the election period and beyond.

author: Nwachukwu Egbunike


text:
Caribbean nations hesitate to recognise Venezuela’s Guaidó · Global Voices
Georgia Popplewell

Map of Central America and the Caribbean. Public domain via Wikimedia Commons.
On January 10, 2019, the day Nicolas Maduro was sworn in as president of Venezuela for a second term, the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States (OAS) adopted a resolution declaring Maduro’s election illegitimate and calling for sanctions.
The vote on that resolution divided the OAS’ English-speaking Caribbean member states, with five nations (Bahamas, Jamaica, St. Lucia, Guyana and Haiti) supporting; three (St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Dominica and Suriname) voting against; and five others (St. Kitts and Nevis, Trinidad and Tobago, Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados and Belize) abstaining.
Several of those states still sent representatives to Maduro's inauguration. St. Kitts and Nevis was represented by its prime minister, and Trinidad and Tobago, Antigua and Barbuda and Suriname sent senior government ministers.
Non-interference in the affairs of sovereign nations is a key tenet of the Treaty of Chaguaramas, the foundational document of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), and in March 2018 CARICOM's 15 members reaffirmed this position, firmly rejecting the idea of international intervention in Venezuela's affairs at an Inter-Sessional meeting in Haiti.
But with opposition leader Juan Guaidó declaring himself interim president yesterday in Venezuela, and being recognised by the United States, United Kingdom, Canada and most Latin American states, Caribbean nations may need to decide where they stand.
At the time of writing, only two countries in the English-speaking Caribbean have made statements on the matter, and they happen to be the ones with the most at stake: Guyana, and Trinidad and Tobago.
The Foreign Ministry of Guyana, one of two CARICOM members located on the South America continent, issued a carefully worded statement on Facebook around noon AST on January 24, saying that the Guyanese government is:
“…gravely concerned at the deepening of the political crisis in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and supports calls made at both the regional and international levels for immediate dialogue involving all political and social actors, with a view to the preservation of the democratic process and a return to normalcy.”
Guyana has a right to be “gravely concerned”. The country shares a border with Venezuela whose limits have been disputed for over a century: the portion of land claimed by Venezuela amounts to almost 40 percent of Guyanese territory, and the stakes have become even higher since the discovery of oil off the coast of Guyana. In December 2018, Venezuela's navy intercepted an Exxon-Mobil vessel doing exploration work in Guyana's maritime space.
Writing on Facebook today, Guyanese journalist Orin Gordon called the move “a sensible and solid response”, adding that:
The Rowley govt is getting heat from some quarters in [Trinidad and Tobago] for not recognising Guaido as president (interim or not), but Guyana is also stopping short of that explosive move. There's way too much machismo and bellicosity around this issue. Many of the countries giving implied support to regime change don't share a border (or narrow straits) with a country that could unravel socially, even more than it has recently.
The “narrow straits” Gordon refers to is the 11-kilometre stretch of water that separates the island of Trinidad from the Venezuelan coast. The two countries have deep historical ties, and Venezuelans have moved back and forth between Trinidad and their country for decades.
The silhouette of Venezuela seen from Macqueripe Bay on the north coast of Trinidad. PHOTO: Georgia Popplewell. (CC BY SA)
Trinidadian fisherfolk have clashed with Venezuela's notorious Civil Guard over alleged violations of maritime territory, and in the last decade, Trinidad has received an increasing influx of Venezuelans fleeing the deteriorating economic and political situation in their country, many arriving illegally, and in some cases officially seeking asylum. The official estimate of the number Venezuelans living in Trinidad is around 60,000, which amounts to more than 4 percent of the population.
The two countries also have strong economic ties. In August 2018, Prime Minister Keith Rowley signed a deal for Venezuela to supply the country with natural gas, and critics see Trinidad and Tobago's hesitation to designate Venezuelans entering the country as refugees as pandering to Maduro.
At a press conference yesterday, January 23, Stuart Young, the country's National Security Minister, said that Trinidad and Tobago was prepared to assist or mediate in the Venezuelan situation, but neither endorsed nor denounced Guaidó. According to the local news daily Newsday, Young “emphasised that this country's foreign policy remains one of non-intervention in the affairs of sovereign nations.”
Local newspapers reported that a group of Trinidad-based Venezuelans gathered yesterday in front of the Venezuelan embassy in Port of Spain to voice their support for Guaidó.
Many other countries in the English-speaking Caribbean have enjoyed close and positive relations with Venezuela. In spite of its own travails, the South American nation has been generous with post-hurricane aid, and several Caribbean countries have been beneficiaries of low-interest oil agreements under PetroCaribe, the energy alliance created by the late Venezuelan president Hugo Chavéz.
As journalist Orin Gordon noted yesterday:
The tide would seem to be against Maduro. But what you get when you endorse regime change, is civil war. If the regional powers break Venezuela, guess who picks up the pieces? Neighbouring countries, that's who. Maduro is a dictator, in power through a fraudulent election. That does not make this a good move for those of us who rub shoulders [with] that country.

author: Georgia Popplewell


text:
Sri Lankan tea estate workers take to the streets to demand fair wages · Global Voices
Rezwan

Protest in solidarity with tea plantation workers, who are demanding a daily basic wage of Sri Lankan Rs. 1000. Image via Global Voices content partner Groundviews.
On January 23, 2019, the Thousand Movement, a collective of unions and grassroots activists, held demonstrations in 30 locations across Sri Lanka calling on plantation companies to increase the daily basic salary of tea estate workers to Sri Lankan Rs.1000 (US$5.50) or double the current minimum daily wage. Protesters say that poverty is on the rise among the tea workers as wages stagnate in comparison to the growing cost of living. According to Chinthaka Rajapakshe, Moderator of the Movement for Land and Agricultural Reform (MONLAR):
Recently researchers from the University of Peradeniya found that Rs 27,707 (US$ 152) is needed per month for one person in the estate sector to meet his or her basic needs. But on average these workers get paid less than Rs. 8000 (US$ 44) a month.
Generations of #plantationworkers have propped up our economy by toiling under deplorable conditions from 6am-6pm, come rain or shine. Don’t the producers of the “Pure Ceylon Tea” we proudly boast of deserve a decent day’s wage at the very least? #1000wagehike✊?TODAY @ 3pm #lka pic.twitter.com/eP6y9QXUQF
— Mari (@Mari_deSilva) January 23, 2019
‘Companies say they don't have profit, govt says it doesn't have money, ministers make so many promises, the workers want only Rs. 1000 daily basic wage for the work they do’ – video of the protest along Gasworks Junc to Main Street, Malwatte Rd and Olcott Mw. #lka #SriLanka pic.twitter.com/fLXHpa4TKA
— Groundviews (@groundviews) January 23, 2019
The workers have been protesting since last October after a collective agreement on the salary hikes of estate workers was not signed. The workers rejected a 20 percent (Rs.100) increase proposed by the Employers’ Federation of Ceylon (EFC), an organization that represents plantation companies.
Protest for basic living wage of Rs 1000/ day for #plantation workers ongoing now at Gas Paha junction in Colombo. #CeylonTea #lka #SriLanka pic.twitter.com/tmk0O2bXYq
— Lisa Fuller (@gigipurple) January 23, 2019
On December 6, 2018 hundreds of thousands of plantation workers from all of Sri Lanka’s tea plantation districts began an indefinite strike demanding a 100% hike of thier daily basic wages to Rs.1000 (US$5.50). The protesters called off the strike a week later after the Ceylon Workers Congress (CWC), the main plantation union, ordered them to end all industrial action. Many people from civil society, including school teachers, also rallied for plantation workers.
‘For 200 years, they've built the economy, and the name ‘#CeylonTea‘ – pay the estate workers a fair wage’ – protest in solidarity with estate workers demanding a daily basic wage of Rs. 1000, happening now at Gasworks Junction in Fort. #lka #SriLanka pic.twitter.com/Jmf61tO3NR
— Groundviews (@groundviews) January 23, 2019
Sri Lanka is the fourth largest producer of tea in the world and also the second largest exporter. The country's central highlands and low-elevation areas boast numerous tea estates which benefit from a climate that produces high-quality tea. Over the years, tea from Sri Lanka or “Ceylon Tea” has grown in popularity — almost one-fifth of the teas sold around the world are from Sri Lanka.
The industry employs (directly or indirectly) over 1 million people. Many of the 500,000 tea estate workers are Tamils descended from cheap laborers brought to Sri Lanka from India by the British colonial rulers in the 19th century, and more than half of the workers are women.
Sri Lankan tea plantation workers weighing plucked tea leaves which will determine their daily wage. Image by Flickr user NH53. CC BY 2.0
Traditionally, workers have been paid severely low wages compared to the national average. In many cases, they have to collect 16kg to 18kg worth of tea per day or their pay is halved. They are subjected to harsh living and working conditions, and some of them sustain painful injuries with little medical support from the tea estates.
Approximately a decade ago, they were protesting to increase the daily wage to 500 rupees (US$4 in 2009) from 290 rupees (US$2.5 in 2009). But their demands were not met as the industry was hit by the global recession and some tea estates were forced to lay off workers.
In 2016, their daily wage was increased by a mere Rs.50 to Rs. 500. Over the years, the Sri Lankan Rupee has depreciated while the cost of living has increased. Their daily wage corresponds to US$2.75 in today's currency, so, in essence, their wage has not increased in a decade.
As a result, the poverty level among plantation workers has increased, although the overall poverty in Sri Lanka has declined in the past decades:
(3/3) “Political leaders, if you can survive on Rs 625/day, then we don’t need Rs 1000/day”
Protesters today challenged politicians to live on Rs. 625/day- the same wage proposed for #plantation workers in the collective bargaining agreement. #ceylontea #lka #SriLanka pic.twitter.com/y4zuOpYCc2
— Lisa Fuller (@gigipurple) January 23, 2019
Malaiyaha Tamil tea plantation workers’ struggle for an increase in their basic wage to Rs. 1000 continues. A citizen protest in solidarity will take place from 4.30 – 5.30pm at Liberty roundabout today (Jan 15). Cartoon by Namal Amarasinghe. #lka #SriLanka #Pongal pic.twitter.com/muPWlCsTKX
— Groundviews (@groundviews) January 15, 2019
The government has proposed an all-inclusive wage hike with the increase to be made over a 3-year period. Under this plan, the basic increase would be up to Sri Lankan Rs. 625 in the first year with other allowances, adding up to Rs.1000 daily. Some of these allowances are based on a daily quota of leaves plucked – so many are likely to miss out. The proposed increase in basic daily pay in the second and third years would be to Rs.650 and Rs.675 respectively. However, the demand of the workers is that the daily basic pay should be increased to Rs. 1000.
The tea estate workers have no choice other than to continue their fight for a fair wage if they don't want to succumb to enslavement or absolute poverty.

author: Rezwan


text:
Reports of internet blocks and media censorship as power struggle tensions escalate in Venezuela · Global Voices
Laura Vidal

Detail of illustration by Venezuelan artist Eduardo Sanabria. Taken from his pubilc Facebook profile and used with permission.
As the uncertainty around Venezuela's political situation continues, local and international human rights groups are reporting intermittent blocks to different social medial platforms — including Twitter and Instagram — as well as instances of media censorship.
Reports by VE Sin Filtro and Netblocks indicate that the blocks started on January 21 and intensified from January 23, 2019, when Juan Guaidó, president of Venezuela's National Assembly, invoked articles from the country's 1999 constitution to take presidential powers away from Nicolás Maduro, who has been in office since 2013. Anti-Maduro protests escalated dramatically in the capital, Caracas, as well as in several other parts of the country.
Venezuelans are now on the edge of their seats as an important section of the Latin American community and several key international players — including the United States — expressed their support for Guaidó as interim president of Venezuela. The regional countries that do not share this stance are Mexico, Uruguay, Bolivia and Cuba. Internationally, China and Russia have expressed their support for Maduro.
This long and painful struggle for power in Venezuela, which has cast the majority of the population into dire economic straits, now appears to be at the mercy of both internal negotiations and international pressures.
Meanwhile, controls over information and communication, measures that have been growing stronger in recent years, are becoming more aggressive by the day. According to Guaidó, he was forced to cancel a number of TV and radio interviews, as the the National Commission of Telecommunications (Conatel) forbade the media to utter his name.
Local project VE Sin Filtro (from Venezuela Inteligente) has been collecting reports and running tests, as well as sharing information on how to circumvent the blocks. They have reported on intermittent obstructions to different social media spaces — like Instagram and Twitter — since January 21, in various parts of the country.
#Venezuela blocked @Twitter @YouTube and @instagram this morning #21e.
The block uses SNI filtering, similar to recent @wikipedia block https://t.co/t2qVS4zxLm. IT seems the block has been lifted, but recent blocks have also worked intermittently.
We will update on this thread pic.twitter.com/5EDrmNeWnJ
— VE sin Filtro (@vesinfiltro) January 21, 2019
Carlos Guerra from Derechos Digitales shared an analysis of how such technical strategies control information and communication through the internet in increasingly more intricate ways. According to Guerra, not only are the blocking strategies more complex and sophisticated, they are also more difficult to overcome.
Journalist Luis Carlos Díaz, who is also a Global Voices contributor, expanded on the effects and intentions of the block:
Ya hay información sobre el bloqueo a Instagram en Venezuela. Maduro y Conatel [National Commission of Telecommunications] persiguen las emisiones en Instagram Live que le han permitido a Guaidó llegarle a centenares de miles de personas muy rápido, con más audiencia que la mayoría de los canales de TV (censurada). https://t.co/fwjdwhsDtT
— Luis Carlos Díaz (@LuisCarlos) January 25, 2019
We now have information on the block against Instagram in Venezuela. Maduro and Conatel [the National Commission of Telecommunications] are targeting Instagram Live broadcasts that have allowed Guaidó to reach the hundreds of thousands of people he has very fast, and with a bigger audience than most TV (censored) channels.
It is important to emphasize that the blocks are taking place not simply amid the political crisis, but also in the context of grave concern over a proposed cybersecurity bill that would, according to a report by Access Now, “put the digital rights of Venezuelans — and the entire internet in the country — in jeopardy”.
Other digital rights organizations, like Derechos Digitales América Latina, have denounced the possible effects of the bill and joined a list of experts and researchers in a statement against it:
Este nuevo instrumento legislativo, que expande e incrementa los poderes del Ejecutivo para la vigilancia sobre el internet, se convertiría así en una nueva herramienta de control que vendría a sumarse a más de una década de políticas públicas de restricción del flujo de información y de la libertad de expresión en la web.
This new legislative tool, which would expand and advance the powers of the Executive branch to surveil the internet, could become a new control mechanism that would crystallize more than a decade's worth of public policies that restrict information flows and freedom of speech online.
Reports coming from independent online media outlets note how radio stations around the country and Chilean news channel “Noticias 24 horas” (24 hour news) have either been taken off air, or told to avoid reporting on protests or referring Juan Guaidó as interim president.
The National Union of Press Workers (SNTP in Spanish) also reported that in Maracaibo, in the north-east of the country, the Directorate General of Military Counterintelligence (DGCIM) took over the headquarters of regional TV channel GlobalTV:
#AlertaSNTP | Funcionarios de Contrainteligencia Militar, en #Maracaibo, allanaron sede de GlobalTV y sacaron del aire la señal de este canal regional por transmitir el discurso de Juan Guaidó.
Así lo argumentó el jefe de la Comisión que llegó con 15 patrullas al medio #23Ene
— SNTP (@sntpvenezuela) January 24, 2019
#SNTPAlert Military Counterintelligence agents in Maracaibo took over the headquarters of GlobalTV and took the regional channel's signal off the air for transmitting Juan Guaidó's speech. This was declared by the chief of the commission, who showed up [at Global TV's headquarters] with 15 squad cars.
The SNTP also reported on different orders and warnings issued by the National Commission of Telecommunications (Conatel):
#AlertaSNTP | @NicolasMaduro amenaza con quitar concesiones a medios radioeléctricos. Este #24Ene, @cmrondon fue censurado en su programa diario en @CircuitoExitos, negándole la oportunidad de comentar los hechos del #23Ene que han sido noticia en todo el mundo
— SNTP (@sntpvenezuela) January 24, 2019
#SNTPAlert Nicolás Maduro is threatening to take away radio stations’ operating permits. This January 24, César Miguel Rondón was censored on his radio show, Circuito Exitos, denying him the opportunity to comment on the events of January 23, which made news around the world.
At the same time, community radio station Fe y Alegría was asked to “make revisions” to their programming and leave out certain shows, like the one led by human rights organization Provea. Rafael Uzcátegui, Provea's director, shared the news on Twitter:
Conatel ordena a Radio Fe y Alegría que “revise” toda su programación y excluya a los programas independientes de opinión, como Son Derechos de Provea
— Rafael Uzcátegui (@fanzinero) January 24, 2019
Conatel ordered Radio Fe y Alegría to ‘revise’ its programming and exclude independent opinion shows like ‘Those are Rights’ by Provea
While the protests went on and Guaidó delivered his speeches, most news outlets continued with their regular programming, as reported by Efecto Cocuyo:
Las manifestaciones en pleno apogeo y en Globovisión hablaban sobre obras de teatro a las 11:30 de la mañana. A la misma hora, en sus canales de Youtube, Televen y Venevisión tampoco transmitían lo que ocurría en Venezuela este 23 de enero.
While protests were in their most intense hour, on Globovisión they were discussing theater plays at 11:30 am. At the same time, [TV channels] Televen and Venevisión were not showing any of what was going on in Venezuela on January 23 on their YouTube channels.
These blocks and information controls are taking place in an already limited media ecology, forcing Venezuelans to depend on the internet and independent media outlets to access crucial information. As the international community picks sides and tensions escalate, more controls over both traditional and online media are expected to take place.


text:
Russia’s isolationist ‘sovereign internet’ bill worries experts and users alike · Global Voices
Christopher Moldes

Experts call the idea of cutting off Russia from the global internet infrastructure far-fetched and technically unfeasible // Alexis Lê-Quôc under CC2.0
After a bill was introduced in the Russian State Duma (the lower chamber of Russia’s bicameral legislative branch), the Russian government soon plans to discuss the feasibility of creating a so-called “sovereign internet” system. This system would purportedly safeguard networks within Russia from foreign information attacks, and calls for significant government oversight to facilitate this. So far, several major Russian tech companies have supported the move, some tepid reservations notwithstanding.
A Russian ”sovereign internet” would consist of a series of measures aimed at creating a vast infrastructure of internet oversight. Investigatory media outlet The Bell broke down the main points of this proposed system. First, data would have to pass between internet service providers through newly created “traffic exchange points”, each of which would be uniquely identifiable, like an IP address. The measure envisions a web of such exchange points connecting all of Russia, with all internet traffic leaving the country being funneled through them.
The bill’s authors are Duma representatives Andrei Lugovoi and Andrei Klishas. Both are not new to the internet regulation scene. Lugovoi played a role in creating the mechanism for blocking websites deemed extremist, and Klishas has been busy working on other legislation that bans insults of state officials and “fake news”. When it comes to the “sovereign internet” bill, both claim that cyber security concerns were their motivating factor in drafting the legislation. Their thinking was influenced by the United States’ recent posturing regarding Russia and cyber warfare: in the event of such a foreign cyber threat, centralized control of the entire Runet could be established. All external connections would theoretically be cut off while preserving the internal Russian connections between the various exchange points, presumably allowing the Runet to continue operation unhindered.
To this end, the bill additionally provisions the creation of a national domain name system (DNS) registry.  DNS allows for websites to be more readily accessible. Rather than having to point your browser to a specific IP address, DNS allows you to navigate via much more manageable URLs, like globalvoices.org. However, DNS relies on servers across the globe. By creating a domestic DNS, the government is trying to ensure that the Russian internet could effectively cut itself off from the larger, worldwide internet and continue to operate, under government supervision.
However, some IT experts have expressed concerns that this system only serves to dramatically increase the scope of Roskomnadzor’s powers. Roskomnadzor, the Russian federal media regulatory agency, has recently explored options for streamlining enforcement of content restriction. The “sovereign internet” plan calls for providers to install special equipment to take measures against digital threats.  This equipment will also automatically block web pages and material on Roskomnadzor’s blacklist. It therefore comes as no surprise that any discussions of a ”sovereign internet” system would include these sorts of censorship provisions.
Though the bill has not yet been taken up for consideration in the Russian State Duma, the government has already consulted Russian tech giants and IT groups. Both Yandex and Mail.ru, two of Russia’s largest IT companies, expressed support for the proposed system. Yandex’s director of network infrastructure development said that this system has come just in time for the defense of the Russian internet.  Mail.ru’s vice-president and technical director explained his company’s support:
Если все угрозы, против которых он направлен, реализуются, в первую очередь пострадают компании, чей бизнес связан с интернетом. Даже если все те меры, которые предлагаются в законопроекте, никогда не пригодятся, их наличие позволит индустрии чувствовать себя более спокойно
If all the threats [the system] is directed against came to fruition, then internet companies would be the first to suffer. Even if the measures suggested in the bill are never put to use, their existence would allow the industry to feel more at ease.
Both companies, however, said that more work needs to be done before the system could ever be put into action. Other tech companies took their criticism further, pointing out that there were serious deficiencies and oversights in the proposal. Almost all were unanimous in the need for further discussion.
Some have pointed to the colossal costs associated with building the infrastructure required, and lamented that this would only lead to further monopolization of the Russian internet provider market. Larger companies that can eat the cost of building and maintaining the system would be able to ensure their continued existence (and therefore access to government funds), while smaller enterprises would effectively be cornered out.
This is to say nothing of the technical expertise required to establish and utilize this network without any hiccups. Given that the Russian government has not had the best track record with blocking even one mobile app (as well as VPNs), the idea of cutting off the Runet from the rest of the world and maintaining its functionality is far-fetched for many experts.
Technical feasibility aside, the idea is not playing well with Russia’s youth. Several were asked on video if they could accept using an isolated Runet, cut off from the rest of the world. Here are some of their reactions:
[Man 1]: This infringes on my rights; limits my possibilities. What is the point of doing this? For what? To control us?
[Woman 1]: It would be very hard. We would get used to it, of course, but it would be hard.
[Woman 2]: I would be very upset if Instagram went down.
[Man 2]: Young people will use books to educate themselves.  I am ready. When I turned off my internet at home, I started to think what I would do. Read interesting books!

author: Christopher Moldes


text:
Guinea has struggled under President Condé, but Russia backs his quest for a third term · Global Voices
Abdoulaye Bah

On January 9, 2019, Alexander Bregadze, the Russian Federation's ambassador to the Republic of Guinea, sent his New Year's compliments to Alpha Condé, president of the West African country.
Screen capture from a video of the Russian Ambassador giving his speech by Africa Guinee TV on YouTube [in French]
He filmed the video greeting in Conakry, the capital, where his diplomatic office is located — and in his speech, broached a particularly sensitive subject — the possibility of Guineans changing the constitution to allow President Condé to seek a third term after his current tenure expires in 2020:
Depuis que la Guinée est devenue la Guinée d’Alpha Condé, elle est vraiment en marche. Monsieur le Président vous êtes un exemple phare pour la jeunesse guinéenne. Malheureusement, le principe d’alternance qui domine beaucoup de Constitutions dans le monde, mais pas toutes heureusement, impose la mentalité de revanche: ‘C’est notre tour, maintenant c’est nous qui devons diriger le pays…’
Mais les Constitutions ne sont pas ni dogme, ni Bible, ni Coran.
Since Guinea has become the Guinea of Alpha Condé, it is truly on the march. Mr. President, you are a beacon to the youth of your country. Unfortunately, the principle of political succession, which dominates many constitutions in the world, not all happily, entrenches an attitude of payback: ‘It's our turn now, we must run the country…’
But constitutions are neither dogma, Bible, nor Quran.
“Constitutions adapt themselves to reality”, he continued in Condé's presence, making it clear that reality did not adapt itself to constitutions: “Even for Christians, there's the New Testament and the Old.”
According to the ambassador, all is well in Guinea. And yet, the facts reflect another reality.
Teachers went on a general strike this year that lasted three months, unemployment is growing nationwide, and Guinea was found to be the chief country of origin for illegal migrants entering Europe in 2018, with a staggering statistic of 13,068 people.
Yet, the ambassador went on:
Sous nos yeux la Guinée devient le pays le plus électrifié de l’Afrique. D’une année à l’autre,  on circule mieux sur les routes entre Conakry et les régions guinéennes.
Before our eyes, Guinea is becoming the most electrified country in Africa. Year after year, the roads between Conakry and the regions are getting easier to drive.
In an article for the newspaper Vision Guinée, journalist Pathé Bah writes that Ousmane Kaba, a former strategic adviser of President Condé, acknowledged in a public intervention:
La Guinée est dans l’obscurité, Il n’y a pas d’électricité dans notre pays. C’est pourquoi, je me suis battu pour avoir l’argent pour construire Kaleta sur le Konkouré. On se bat pour avoir beaucoup de barrages sur le Konkouré, parce que cela fait avancer le pays.
Guinea is in darkness. There is no electricity in our country. That is why I have fought for the money to build Kaleta [a hydroelectric power station] on the Konkouré [river]. We are fighting to get many reservoirs on the Konkouré, because it takes the country forward.
As for the country's economy, the finance minister estimates the level of growth at 5.8 percent for 2018, with an inflation rate of 8 percent.  The African Development Bank reckons that Guinea marked growth in the gross domestic product (GDP) of 6.6 percent in 2016 and 6.4 percent in 2017 — but that didn't stop the ambassador from declaring exaggerated numbers to indicate growth:
… Over the last few years, we have seen an increase of between 10.5 percent in 2016, and from 6 to 7 per cent in 2018, with a forecast of 7 percent in 2019 … Do you know many countries in Africa which are doing better?
The ambassador added road conditions to his litany of praise for the president. However, Alimou Sow, an eminent Guinean blogger, shared a contradictory experience on his blog:
Je suis debout dès potron-minet pour affronter, en solitaire, le tronçon jugé le plus difficile, Conakry-Kindia — 135 km que l’on accomplissait, il y a quelques années, en un peu moins de deux heures montre en main. Maintenant, il faut rajouter deux heures supplémentaires pour crapahuter sur la même distance devenue un parcours de rêve pour un rallye raid de type «Paris-Dakar», tant la route est en piteux état.
I've been up since daybreak to confront, alone, what is judged to be the most difficult stretch, Conakry-Kindia — 135 kilometers, which one could complete, a few years ago, in a little under two hours by the stopwatch. Now, you must add two more hours to crawl the same distance, turned into a dream route for an endurance rally à la ‘Paris-Dakar’, so perilous is the state of the road.
In 2016, members of the Guinea Bloggers’ Association launched a campaign to draw attention to the state of the country's roads, and show their exasperation via the hashtag #montronsnosroutes [let's show our roads].
“The Guinea Bloggers Association will start a campaign to denounce the state of the road in Guinea. The idea is to share a photo on social media with the #ShowOurRoads hashtag.” Launch image for the de Guinea Bloggers’ Association's campaign #montronsnosroutes. Used with permission.
The Russian ambassador's speech has caused embarrassment to both civil society and the diplomatic community. Guinea's opposition leader, Cellou Dalein Diallo, castigated the diplomat's attitude in these terms, quoted by Balla Yombouno in the newspaper Le Djely:
Il a été manipulé par Alpha Condé [le Président de la Guinée] lui-même. Et nous savons qu’il est le représentant d’une grande nation, d’un grand pays qui a participé activement à la décolonisation du continent africain, et qui a eu une relation exemplaire avec la Guinée dans le respect du principe de non-ingérence dans les affaires intérieures […] Nous allons essayer aussi de saisir le gouvernement russe pour faire état de cette prise de position …
He has been manipulated by Alpha Condé himself. And we know that he is the representative of a great nation, a great country which actively participated in the decolonisation of the African continent, and which has had an exemplary relationship with Guinea in respect of the principle of non-interference in internal affairs […] We will be striving to contact the Russian government to press this position …
Speaking on behalf of civil society activists, Gabriel Haba, president of the Citizen Action Brigade, expressed  indignation sparked by the ambassador's support; journalist Ibrahima Sory Barry posted about it for Aminata.com:
La question de l’alternance est une question de souveraineté. Et la souveraineté appartient au peuple. Il n’est pas du rôle d’un ambassadeur de dicter à la Guinée sa destinée. C’est de l’ingérence dans les affaires internes de notre pays.
The question of political succession is a question of sovereignty. And sovereignty belongs to the people. It is not part of an ambassador's role to dictate Guinea's fate. It is an interference in our country's internal affairs.
The civil society organisation Cellule Balai Citoyen (Citizen's Sweep Up) published a press release, which read in part:
La Guinée vit sous le risque d’un embrassement sans précèdent susceptible de découler d’un forcing politico-social en faveur d’un 3e mandat en violation de l’actuelle constitution mais aussi de l’éthique dans la gouvernance démocratique. Cette tentative qui se fait de plus en plus sentir peut être source d’une violence politique aux graves violations de droits de l’homme dans notre pays qui peine encore à cicatriser le lourd passif dans cette matière, de l’indépendance à nos jours.
Guinea is at risk of an unprecedented embarassment which is liable to unleash a sociopolitical impetus for a third term in violation of the current constitution and indeed, the ethics of democratic governance. This increasingly palpable attempt could give rise to political violence with serious human rights violations in our country, which is still struggling to make good the heavy legacy of this kind from independence to our own time.
On Facebook, writer and commentator Ibrahim Marie Sanoh wrote:
C'est fort abstrus que ce soit un étranger qui doit saluer les prouesses du pouvoir guinéen et plaider à ce qu'il lui soit accordé d'autres années pour faire du pays le plus électrifié du contient le plus industriel du monde, tandis que le peuple qui l'a investi manifeste une cruelle indifférence et ne pipe mot.
It's pretty peculiar that it takes a foreigner to pay tribute to the Guinean regime's feats, and plead for it to be given more years to make the country the most electrified in the world's most industrial continent, while the people who have brought it to power manifest a cruel indifference and have nothing to say.
Meanwhile, the behaviour of other ambassadors attracted the attention of Guinean blogger Nouhou Baldé:
Cette déclaration est tellement grave que le silence des autres n'est pas à excuser si facilement. D'autant que certains de ceux qui ont pris la parole par la suite (l'ambassadeur du Maroc, le représentant de la Banque mondiale…) ont dit ne pas dire mieux que le russe. Personne ne s'est désolidarisé de cette déclaration et aucune ambassade n'a publié un communiqué…
This declaration is so serious that the silence of the rest can't so easily excuse it. All the more so as some of those who have spoken up since (the Moroccan ambassador, the representative of the World Bank…) have said the same as — that is to say, no better than — their Russian counterpart. No one has disassociated themselves from this declaration and no embassy has published a communiqué …
On January 14, security forces dispersed a demonstration outside the Russian embassy, which civil society organisations had organised in protest over the ambassador's comments.

author: Abdoulaye Bah


text:
How will propaganda shape Nigeria’s 2019 presidential elections? · Global Voices
Nwachukwu Egbunike

Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari campaign sign on the side of the road. Photo by Clara Sanchiz/RNW, February 28, 2015 (CC BY-SA 2.0)
Nigeria will hold presidential elections on February 16, 2019. Based on the 2015 elections, propaganda may play a major role in deciding the fates of this year's presidential hopefuls.
The two major contenders, incumbent Muhammadu Buhari of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar of the People's Democratic Party (PDP), are already engulfed in propaganda wars targeted to discredit each other ahead of the elections.
Abubakar's recent visit to the United States made news because ten years ago, he was linked to a multi-million dollar business scandal with a U.S. congressman. The U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs also accused Abubakar of money laundering and bribery. Therefore, it was assumed that he would never be allowed back into the U.S.
But Abubakar has always asserted his innocence, insisting that then-President Olusegun Obasanjo had framed him as a “corrupt person” after the two had a falling out in 2006. Abubakar had served as Obasanjo's vice president and was accused of sabotaging Obasanjo's third term bid because he had presidential aspirations of his own.
Atiku Abubakar, former vice president of Nigeria. LSE Africa Summit, London, April 23, 2016. [Non-Commercial 2.0 Generic Creative Commons (CC BY 2.0)/ Flickr]
Obasanjo long maintained that Abubakar could not visit the United States because he had a “case to answer“, suggesting that if he did visit, he'd be arrested and arraigned on corruption charges. Indeed, in 2016, the United States Department of Justice stated that public court records “do not show cases filed against a defendant named Atiku Abubakar”.
Over the past few months, there had been rumours of planned U.S. trips and subsequent cancellations due to visa restrictions, reinforcing the rumours.
On January 17, 2019, Abubakar's tweet announcing his arrival in the U.S. prompted much celebration on Twitter with the trending of multiple hashtags including #AtikuNowThatYouAreInTheUS mirroring the hashtag #BabaNowThatYouAreBack created to celebrate Buhari's return to Nigeria in 2015.
However, new conspiracies arose about why Abubakar was not arrested while in the U.S.
Presidential media aide Lauretta Onochie alleged that Abubakar was not arrested because Nigerian Senate President Bukola Saraki presented him as one of his aides. It was rumoured that Abubakar and the PDP had signed a $1.1 million yearly lobbying contract in September 2018 with “a key member of U.S. President Donald Trump's political operation” to gain free passage into the U.S., according to Popular Information, a US-based media outlet.
But this was quickly dismissed as false because the dates did not line up:
#FakeNews How did Atiku who was not declared the PDP presidential candidate until 7/10/18 sign on a lobbyist on 21/9/18 as stated on your attached document?  cc @AfricaCheck @FactCheckNgr https://t.co/jwZSfwoiRg
— Edward Israel-Ayide (@wildeyeq) January 21, 2019
Just like Abubakar, Buhari has also had to contend with propaganda.
A rumour has persisted for months that President Buhari had died and that a clone named Jubril was acting in his stead. The president has consistently denied the allegations as “ignorant rumours”.
One of the questions that came up today in my meeting with Nigerians in Poland was on the issue of whether I‘ve been cloned or not. The ignorant rumours are not surprising — when I was away on medical vacation last year a lot of people hoped I was dead. pic.twitter.com/SHTngq6LJU
— Muhammadu Buhari (@MBuhari) December 2, 2018
Though it was never proven, it was suspected that these rumours emanated from Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the separatist Biafra movement — Indigenous People of Biafra.
Propaganda played a major role in Nigeria's 2015 presidential elections. Supporters of then-President Goodluck Jonathan of PDP and Muhammadu Buhari of APC both launched falsehoods against each other in order to garner exaggerated partisan support. Media scholar Olubunmi E. Onafuwa asserts that keywords and phrases were used to target opponents’ characters:
Keywords such as, incompetence, corrupt, sexist and religious fanatic, dictator, deceit, forgery, false promises, misappropriation of public funds and extortion, were employed to describe both 2015 presidential candidates via social media. Critics of Muhammadu Buhari described him as representing a ‘return to an ugly past which is best forgotten.’ Goodluck Jonathan was deemed ‘clueless’ about the administration of Nigeria, who allegedly allowed crime and corruption to flourish under his administration.
This “exaggerated posturing for support” heightened tension during the 2015 elections, with APC supporters asserting confidence in Buhari's certain win. PDP supporters, however, countered APC confidence by announcing biased statements such as “APC popularity is only on paper” through the media.
In 2015, the APC also utilised other propaganda tactics to destabilise PDP opponents’ campaigns to win the elections. They depicted PDP as corrupt and composed of “crooks and treasury looters“. The APC directly targeted the PDP, insisting it was filled with corruption and sympathisers of Boko Haram, an Islamic militant group. According to AllAfrica:
As this was being done, the APC used the tool of raising the alarms to perpetually put the ruling party and even security agencies on the defensive. These alarms included constant ‘discovery’ of plot to either assassinate its presidential candidate or to arrest some of its leaders.
The PDP was so rattled by numerous accusations lodged against them that former President Goodluck Jonathan recently said:
Propaganda may help you win elections but can’t help you govern and that is what APC has seen in the last 32 months.
The validity of the allegations and rumours surrounding both major candidates cannot be independently verified. Yet, propaganda's role in discrediting the candidates during 2015 presidential elections may be a telling sign of more of the same during forthcoming elections next month.


text:
Nigeria’s retired military generals battle for influence in 2019 presidential elections · Global Voices
Nwachukwu Egbunike

As Nigeria prepares for another presidential election in February, retired military generals turned politicians are key to understanding Nigeria's political space. Nigeria has been ruled by either former generals or those who have their support since 1999 when democratic governance returned.
Olusegun Obasanjo, former President of Nigeria. [Creative Commons (CC BY 2.0)/ Flickr, June 27, 2011.]
The recent public feud between former President Olusegun Obasanjo and the incumbent President Muhammadu Buhari — both retired military dictators — has a great impact on next month's elections.
In a rare open letter to Buhari, Obasanjo has accused him of plans to rig the 2019 elections. He wrote:
Democracy becomes a sham if elections are carried out by people who should be impartial and neutral umpires, but who show no integrity, acting with blatant partiality, duplicity and imbecility.
Obasanjo insisted that Buhari would not deliver “free, fair, credible and peaceful elections” and warned that what “is happening under Buhari’s watch can be likened to what we witnessed under Gen. Sani Abacha.”
In 1998, Sani Abacha, a military dictator, had called for general elections but it became obvious that Abacha had no intention of handing power over to civilians. The five political parties at the time endorsed Abacha as their sole presidential candidate. Now deceased, Abacha became infamous for his repression of human rights and corruption. Obasanjo alleged that Buhari was towing the “same path” as Abacha “in mad desperation.”
Shehu Garba, the media assistant to President Buhari, dismissed Obasanjo's letter:
The elections starting in February will be free and fair as promised the nation and the international community by President Buhari.
Olusegun Obasanjo, former military head of state (1976-1979) and later Nigeria’s democratically elected president (1999-2007), has consistently criticized successive governments in Nigeria.
Last year, Obasanjo had advised Buhari not to seek re-election as president but to “consider a deserved rest at this point in time and at this age.” This advice caused ripples in Nigeria because Obasanjo was a strong supporter of the Buhari’s candidacy during the 2015 presidential elections.
Prior, Obasanjo had scolded Goodluck Jonathan in a public letter written in 2013, Obasanjo accused Jonathan of “driving the country to the precipice and allowing deceit, corruption and mutual distrust to tear at the fabric of the nation.”
Ironically, Obasanjo had also supported Jonathan's election in 2011. And in 2007, he promoted the election of Jonathan Goodluck's predecessor, Umaru Musa Yar’Adua. However, Obasanjo went against Yar’Adua when the latter became sick and did not hand properly hand over power to Jonathan, his then deputy.
Former Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan with newly sworn-in President Muhammadu Buhari during his inauguration ceremony on May 29, 2015. Public Domain photo from the US State Department.
Nigeria’s political landscape is held by retired generals or their cronies. Obasanjo, for instance, has been instrumental in the emergence of Nigerian presidents from 2007 to 2015. However, unlike civilians – Yar’Adua and Jonathan – who he promoted and also criticized, Buhari is somewhat different.
Although Obasanjo supported Buhari’s election in 2015, he cannot fully take the praise alone. This is because Buhari’s ascendance to power was made possible by his allegiance with Bola Tinubu’s defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN). Buhari’s Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) later merged with ACN, in February 2013, to form the All Progressive Congress (APC) .
In addition, Buhari a former military head of state (1983-1985) is a member of the ‘club’ of retired generals who have dominated Nigeria’s political space. Therefore, as harsh as Obasanjo’s reprimand might sound, a lot depends on the dynamics of the power block to which they both belong.
Obasanjo is not alone, however, in his criticism of Buhari.
Theophilus Danjuma, a retired general, had in March last year accused “the Nigerian armed forces of aiding the ongoing killings in Nigeria.” Danjuma, a former chief of army staff and later minister of defense, chastised the military for taking sides in the pastoral/farmer crisis in the country, but especially in his home state of Taraba. Similarly, Danjuma recently raised an alarm about plans to use “the police and soldiers” to manipulate the 2019 elections.
Similarly, in February last year, former military head of state Ibrahim Babangida publicly advised President Buhari not to stand for re-election, arguing that 21st century Nigeria needs to tap younger generations. He believes that there “comes a time in the life of a nation when personal ambition should not override national interest.”
But it may be a while before Nigeria gets a civilian president who has no links or backing from the retired generals ‘club’.


text:
Uganda deports three senior telecom employees citing espionage · Global Voices
GV Sub-Saharan Africa

An MTN mobile money stand in Gulu Town, Uganda. PHOTO: Fiona Graham/WorldRemit (CC BY-SA 2.0)
Uganda's leading telecom company MTN is going through a tough time after Ugandan police arrested and later deported its chief marketing officer, Olivier Prentout, back to France, on Saturday, January 19, 2019, following several hours of questioning at Entebbe International Airport on his return from a business trip.
The following Monday, on January 21, Annie Tabura, a Rwandan national and the general manager of sales and distribution at MTN, was also arrested as she arrived at the company's headquarters in Kololo, Kampala. She was taken for questioning at the Special Investigations Division before being deported that same day.
In a report by the Ugandan police, they accused Tabura and Prentout of using their offices to access information and tap calls which compromised Uganda's national security.
Press release pic.twitter.com/8nnJWghOhQ
— Uganda Police Force (@PoliceUg) January 22, 2019
“We found that it was very necessary to go through the due process of deporting them,” Polly Namaye, Uganda's deputy police spokesperson, said in an NTV interview.
Namaye confirmed the two had been under investigation for “quite some time” and were deported because “we thought if they remained [in Uganda] during the course of the investigation, it may cause … further problems and compromise.”
\\
MTN Uganda confirmed the deportations through a tweet:
Both Mr. Prentout and Mrs. Bilenge have been deported from Uganda to their home countries, France and Rwanda respectively.
MTN Uganda, together with all its employees, remains fully committed to operating within and respecting the laws of the country.
Management.
— MTN Uganda (@mtnug) January 22, 2019
On Wednesday, January 23, Elsa Mussolini, the general manager of mobile money, was also called to the Special Investigations Division for questioning together with the chief executive officer and general manager of corporate affairs before Mussolini was also deported to Italy that day.
It was reported that Mussolini told her colleagues through a text that the police accuses her of inciting violence, claiming that she transferred a huge amount of money to musician and legislator Robert Kyagulanyi, famously known as Bobi Wine, during the demonstrations against the 1 percent Mobile Money tax and the UGX 200 daily social media tax. Bobi Wine was one of the few legislators that took it to the streets to fight the tax, arguing that they were meant to rip off youth and poor Ugandans.
Ugandan newspaper Daily Monitor reported:
It’s alleged that Ms. Mussolini, in one of her parting shots, disclosed that her deportation was in connection with the legislator. However, when asked … whether security agencies were investigating MTN executive for funding Mr Kyagulanyi’s campaigns against mobile money taxes, police spokesperson Fred Enanga said: ‘That is not a national security concern.’
On Wednesday, at the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, the president of Uganda, Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, who has ruled for the last 33 years, met with the MTN Group CEO, Rob Shuter, and the telecom giant reported that the meeting focused on MTN's position toward the development of Uganda:
MTN Group CEO @ShuterRob met with His Excellency, President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda at the World Economic Forum to reaffirm MTN Group's commitment to Uganda and discuss recent developments in the market. #WEF2019 pic.twitter.com/GBuPvptmqs
— MTN Group (@MTNGroup) January 23, 2019
However, in a tweet, the president stated that he advised the telecom giant to allow more Ugandans to buy shares in the company as this will reduce the heavy repatriation of profits. He failed to mention anything about the deportation of the expatriates.
In Davos, Switzerland, I met the MTN Group Chief Executive Officer, Rob Shuter, discussing with him an array of issues. I advised @mtnug to work towards floating shares on the Uganda Stock Exchange so that Ugandans can partly own the company. pic.twitter.com/6cWmzZkq6B
— Yoweri K Museveni (@KagutaMuseveni) January 24, 2019
Prior to this saga, in July 2018, MTN Uganda server officers were raided by police and four servers were disconnected. There has been no clear statement on whether the deportations are linked to the office raid or totally independent:
MTN Uganda is a subsidiary of MTN Group, a South African owned multinational telecom company. MTN Uganda opened up in 1998 and celebrated its 20th birthday last October.

author: GV Sub-Saharan Africa


text:
Why are Armenian displaced persons still living in a hotel, 30 years after fleeing Azerbaijan? · Global Voices
Chaikhana.media

The Naira hotel in Yerevan is a home to refugees from Azerbaijan. Photo taken from Chai-Khana.org. Used with permission.
The following is a story by Chai-Khana.org and is republished by Global Voices under a partnership agreement. Text and video by Aren Melikyan and Hermine Virabian.
Today, the hotel is home to three generations, including the grandchildren and the children of the people who were forced to flee Azerbaijan in the 1980s, during the period leading up to the Karabakh conflict. Despite the wait, they have not lost hope that one day they will be given houses in Armenia.
For years, many of their calls and written pleas for help have fallen on deaf ears. Even those who have received answers from officials got nothing but promises.
After thirty years of living in 11-square-meter “apartments” in a building notable for its poor infrastructure, some families are demanding new living quarters from the state. But they fear in doing so they risk losing the rooms they have at Hotel Nairi.