text:
Police killings spark protests in Trinidad’s capital · Global Voices
Janine Mendes-Franco

Screenshot of a video shared via WhatsApp and broadcast in a TTT Live Online video, showing police officers returning fire against protestors in east Port of Spain, Trinidad, on June 30, 2020.
On Saturday, June 27, hours after police officer Allen Moseley was shot dead in Morvant, a depressed area in the east of Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago's capital, officers from the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service's (TTPS) Guard and Emergency Branch—the unit in which Moseley served—went into the district and killed three men.
The police claim they were fired upon by the occupants of a vehicle, but security camera footage of the incident circulating via WhatsApp shows at least one of the men raising his arms in surrender.
Following the deaths of the three men, who have since been identified as Noel Diamond, Joel Jacobs, and Israel Clinton, protests erupted in the Morvant area on June 29. Residents blocked the road, burned tyres and other debris, and compared the deaths of the three men to the murder of George Floyd.
Clinton, who was acquitted of theft charges laid against him a few years ago, was suing the state for police brutality over a related beating incident that left him in hospital for weeks.
Lawyers representing the families of two of the deceased referred to their deaths as “extra-legal,” “arbitrary” and “summary executions,” and demanded that the officers involved be suspended from duty while the investigation takes place, a call that was echoed by at least one newspaper editorial and the NGO Womantra.
Commissioner of Police Gary Griffith and Alan Miguel, Chief Investigator at the Police Complaints Authority, the statutory body charged with independently investigating complaints against the TTPS, stated that an investigation the killings had been launched, but on the morning of June 30 the protests continued, blocking main transportation routes in and out of the capital city as people processed through the streets demanding justice and chanting “Don't shoot!”
Some demonstrations reportedly turned violent; at least one video shared on social media channels showed protestors shooting at the police and officers returning fire. A third-floor window at the attorney general's office was shot at. Protest actions also mushroomed, spreading to areas outside of the capital.
At about 11 am on June 30, Minister of National Security Stuart Young held a press conference in which he stated that community residents were being paid to cause civil unrest. He suggested that citizens should consider “who stands to gain” in such circumstances, making the point that “criminal elements are not always who we call gang members”. Protestors have refuted claims of payment.
One aspiring politician, Fuad Abu Bakr, son of Yasin Abu Bakr, the leader of the insurgents who staged an unsuccessful coup d'etat in 1990, was arrested, allegedly for disturbing the peace. Trinidad and Tobago is scheduled to hold general elections later this year.
The unrest was quelled by the authorities shortly after noon Trinidad time (UTC−04:00) on June 30, but the online discussion continued.
Youth activist and law student Kareem Marcelle, who has been advocating for justice in the deaths of three men, condemned the violent protests, explaining that responding to acts of illegality with other acts of illegality is counterproductive. In a public Facebook post, he pleaded:
Personally, I don’t support not encourage violent or destructive Protests! I’m begging y’all let’s not take away from what we want! We need Public Support for this! We can’t hurt nor distress the very same people we want to support our Cause!
Let your voices be heard but PLEASE operate within the confines of the LAW! Don’t defeat the Purpose PLEASE!
Right now the families are cooperating with our Legal Team, the PCA and the TTPS! Let’s not mess this up! Justice have to and will be served!
#MorvantBlackLivesMatter
The unrest is also happening against a disturbing backdrop: over the past year, police killings in Trinidad and Tobago have increased by a startling 86 percent, with 43 people shot dead by police officers so far this year. Facebook user Terry-ann Roy was disturbed by the statistics:
Yal sharing a pic of one of the victims with a gun as if that negates the fact that we have a thing called DUE PROCESS and that the police aren't judge jury and executioners!
All that shows is you have no understanding of what justice means.
#morvantblacklivesmatter
Such protests are also happening within a social system that makes it difficult for people from depressed communities to rise above their current circumstances, reigniting conversations about equitable wealth distribution, systemic racism and police abuse. According to Kareem Marcelle:
Once you’re a young black man from a ‘Hotspot’ and you’re killed by Police Officers; there are many persons in society that AUTOMATICALLY Presumed that:
1. You’re a Criminal
2. Police deserve to kill you
3. Police are always right
4. Your life don’t matter
5. You’re Guilty by default
You know what is the WORST part of it all? Many times its our OWN Black Brothers and Sisters pushing this agenda! And THAT is PRECISELY why many Police Officers feel as if they a Judge, Jury and Executioner!
YOU Empower them when you defend their Actions!
One Twitter post attempted to explain why the protests were happening:
For all those who are wondering why protests are happening pic.twitter.com/Lzob1fhv9j
— Nyomi ??? (@ThomasNyomi) June 30, 2020
Still, many social media users remained at opposite ends of the divide:
Riots are the language of the unheard.
We expect the police to treat them like human beings BECAUSE they ARE human beings.
Stop policing the people who are the victims of police brutality and instead police the actual police. It's their actions under scrutiny… Not protestors.
— Ronelle King (@IAmXilomen) June 30, 2020
While attorney Justin Phelps suggested that the response “needs to be far broader than the investigation of the one shooting”, Minister Young has tried to focus on the “robust” investigatory process of the PCA even as businesses in and around the capital city made the decision to close early, and the US Embassy in Trinidad and Tobago issued a security alert related to “civil unrest”.
Adding fuel to the fire was yet another police killing, this time of a woman in the disadvantaged area of Beetham Gardens. The incident sparked fresh protests in the presence of police officers. The police service put out a press statement shortly thereafter:
The Trinidad and Tobago Police Service (TTPS) wishes to assure the public that the well-orchestrated plan to destabilize the country by a few, has been quelled. So far, 72 persons have been arrested, and others are expected to be charged when investigations are completed.
There has been one casualty — a woman — and investigations are underway to determine the cause of her death.
Intelligence has revealed that this was an orchestrated plan that was led by several gang members, whereby the intention was to use the shooting of the three young men a few days ago, as a front to cover the planned plot to shut down the country.
Amid some public scepticism over the alleged destabilisation plan, the release also stated that the police force remains on high alert, with the nation being kept “under heavy police surveillance” for the next 48 hours.

author: Janine Mendes-Franco


text:
Rift over Solomon Islands’ new ‘One China’ policy makes chaos of COVID-19 response · Global Voices
Mong Palatino

Malaita residents welcome the humanitarian aid from Taiwan. Photos from the Facebook page of Malaita Province Premier Daniel Suidani
A confiscated aid shipment, a provincial leader playing by his own playbook, and an angry Chinese embassy.
These are all ingredients in the complicated COVID-19 response of the Solomon Islands, one of the few countries in the world yet to register a coronavirus case, but one that is still hurting economically from pandemic-related disruptions.
At the heart of the confusion is a very recent diplomatic shift.
After 36 years of diplomatic relations with Taiwan, Solomon Islands recognized China and adopted a ‘One China’ policy in September 2019.
But the Solomon Islands is an archipelago nation and not all the parts of its whole agreed with the decision.
Pro-Taiwan Daniel Suidani, premier of Malaita province — the most populous province in the Solomon Islands — has consistently refused aid from the Chinese government.
And so the province has remained an outpost of Taiwanese influence, a fact that has taken on greater importance as an emboldened Tapei employs COVID-19 diplomacy to boost its international profile.
Suidani has made little effort to play things down.
In fact, on June 8, he dialled up the controversy by issuing a statement hailing Taiwan after it sent rice, face masks, and medical equipment to Malaita:
Fellow Malaitans, we are in a unique and privileged position to have been assisted by a country that has stood against the might of the Wuhan virus.
He also disparaged the national government’s ‘One China’ policy:
What we are doing today to reach out for the protection of our survival is nothing new. It looks new only because of the newly introduced frameworks and institutional set ups. However, the limitations under these frameworks must not be used to limit our ability as a people to find appropriate support in times like this.
These comments were never going to go unnoticed. Foreign Minister Jeremiah Manele swiftly released a press statement criticizing Suidani's “divisive” and “inflammatory” remarks:
Such a divisive statement from a Provincial Premier threatens the unity of the country at a time when we need to work together in keeping COVID-19 from entering our borders and not politicize the virus.
Minister Manele calls for respect for government’s foreign policy and urges those who continue to make provocative and inflammatory statements to stop and work towards building a strong united country.
The Chinese embassy fumed, describing Suidani’s statement as “irresponsible”:
It is noted with deep concern that leaders of the Malaita provincial government have recently made irresponsible remarks and actions against the ‘One China’ policy adopted by the Solomon Islands national government.
The claims and actions by the Malaita provincial leaders are illegitimate, inappropriate, and entirely wrong. It breaches the sovereignty and territorial integrity of China and hurts the national feelings of the Chinese people.
But Malaita's local leader found support in the country's parliament. Peter Kenilorea Jr, the chair of the Foreign Relations Committee demanded to know why the government had failed to express official gratitude for the humanitarian aid provided by Taiwan. Based on the statement published by the SB herald, the lawmaker noted:
There was not even a simple ‘thank you’ from the national government for this humanitarian assistance to one of its largest provinces. The silence on this humanitarian aid by a former diplomatic friend, who is now supposedly an integral part of our new partner, was deafening.
More scandal was still to come.
On June 11, the Malaita provincial government reported that the national police had confiscated a shipment from Taiwan containing medical supplies that were intended for Malaita.
The police said it had confiscated the shipment because it looked suspicious. It claimed that the sender’s address was not proper and that the consignment had not been addressed to the Malaita Provincial Government.
But the media later reported that the office of the country’s attorney general had sent a letter notifying the police that “the medical supplies reportedly being sent by Taiwan to Malaita Province is an Act of defiance of the decisions of the government”.
It further warned that the shipment may “include materials that may be in breach of the Sedition Act.”
On June 24 opposition leader Matthew Wale condemned the actions of the police and the national government:
This is inexcusable, and it only makes a mockery of our efforts to prepare our people against Covid-19 and the State of Emergency.
I, therefore, call on the government to stop dancing to Beijing’s tune and prioritise our people’s health and safety.
An online campaign themed ‘Malaita Lives Matter, Release COVID-19 Equipment’ has since been launched to press for the release of the confiscated medical supplies.
The Malaita provincial government said it is preparing legal action to immediately retrieve the shipment from Taiwan.

source: news-globalvoices

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

author: Mong Palatino


text:
Short film demonstrates what it can be like to be black in Japan · Global Voices
Nevin Thompson

Screencap of “Born With It” from Emmanuel Osei-Kuffour Jr.'s public Vimeo account.
“Born With It”, a short film by American director Emmanuel Osei-Kuffour Jr., tells the story of Keisuke Fujii, a young boy who has changed schools after his mother has moved from Tokyo to take up a new job in the countryside. The boy, who is black and Japanese, must endure and somehow learn, own his own, how to deal with the racist taunts of his new classmates.
Osei-Kuffour's short film was originally released in 2015, but has recently seen a resurgence of interest following a June 2020 joint screening held by New York City's Japan Society and the Japan-American Society of Houston.
Osei-Kuffour has worked as a filmmaker in Singapore and Japan, and is now based in the United States. The film's lead is played by Japanese native Dadie Takagasugi, whose mother is Japanese and father is Ghanaian. In interviews, Osei-Kuffour has said he got his idea for “Born With It” after experiencing racism as a graduate student in Singapore, but he says he also based the character of Keisuke on conversations he had with Japanese friends with black heritage and their experiences growing up in Japan.
“I hope that my film will help those that are different feel less isolated and more confident in their uniqueness,” said Osei-Kuffour in an interview shortly after the film's release.
Other short films by Osei-Kuffour are available to watch online, including “The First Time” and “When Doors Open.” “Born With It” can be viewed in its entirety on Vimeo.

author: Nevin Thompson


text:
Remembering the heartbreaking words of Yugoslavia’s war-struck ‘Lost Generation’ · Global Voices
Filip Stojanovski

Photo of Yugoslav People's Army conscript from Bosnia and Herzegovina Bahrudin Kaletović, screencap from Yutel video from 1991. Source: Wikipedia, Fair Use.
The interview is as haunting today as it was 29 years ago, perhaps even more so.
A despondent, scrawny, dark-eyed 19-year-old dressed in army camouflages speaks to a journalist from Yutel, a short-lived Yugoslav newscaster known for its relatively impartial coverage, as he takes cover from enemy forces.
Except he doesn't really know why they are his enemies.
They are, like, trying to secede, and we are, like, trying to stop them…You know the drill, bro, you've been in the army, you know how it is. You must do what you are told. No officers have died, only my friends…
Bahrudin Kaletović was a conscript in the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA). His frank interview, free of the jingoism that was pervading the various parts of Yugoslavia as it began to splinter in the early 1990s, made him a symbol of the “lost generation” that had the severe misfortune of being “fighting age” at that time.
Kaletović's words were recently remembered in a Facebook post written by Bosnian journalist and philosophy professor Dragan Bursać marking the interview's anniversary. The June 28 post earned over 4,100 reactions, including 329 shares.
“It seems to me that Bahrudin is more alive today than many of our contemporaries,” wrote Bursać, noting the distrust that continues to characterize citizens’ relationships with national leaderships in former Yugoslav republics, three decades on.
Mainstream media in the Balkan region tend to avoid revisiting the hows and whys of the wars that caused the breakup of Yugoslavia. The damage done to then-teenage conscripts, whose youth was sacrificed at the altar of nationalism, rarely features in national conversations. This is possibly because many of the architects of those wars and their direct descendants are still powerful today.
Kaletović fought on the Yugoslav side (JNA) in the “Ten-Day War” that finalized the process of Slovenian secession from the Yugoslav federation. It resulted in the killing of 44 JNA soldiers and 19 members of the Slovenian Territorial Defense (TO) and police, as well as 19 civilians. Nearly 5,000 JNA service-members were captured by the Slovenian forces, most of them conscripts who surrendered en masse because they did not want to fight.
This pattern was repeated during the subsequent wars in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, when Macedonian conscripts, officers and cadets surrendered to local forces before making a high-risk journey home via routes patrolled by JNA and Serbian police, or else circumventing them via Hungary and other neighboring countries.
Kaletović's interview was republished on YouTube by the Serbian fact-checking service Istinomer in 2011, as part of a report on the 20-year anniversary of the start of the war. That article describes the origins of the union-wide protest movement led by mothers of the stranded conscripts, including an incident when parents “occupied” the Serbian Parliament for a day, and then traveled to Slovenia to continue the protests.
While the young soldier's words remain an indelible part of the history of the Yugoslav wars, few people outside of modern-day Bosnia and Herzegovina knew what happened to him afterwards.
As journalist Bursać disclosed in his post:
Bahrudin survived the war and all its traps, survived being taken as prisoner of war twice, he survived the front line, but 21 years ago he died in a traffic accident, on the road to his home in Tuzla. He was traveling to visit his family and his newly born son.
Below is a full transcript of the legendary interview.
Reporter: Šta kaže, jeli znate sve podatke, protiv koga se borite i sve to?
Kaletović: Ma otkud znam. Samo znam da pucaju na nas, ništa više.
Reporter: Ne znate ko puca?
Kaletović: Pucaju teritorijalci. Ko bi drugi?
Reporter: A znate li zbog čega se vodi ovaj rat, ova bitka?
Kaletović: Ma otkud znam… Kolko ja kužim, oni kao hoće da se odcijepljuju, mi im kao ne damo. U stvari mi samo hoćemo da se vratimo u kasarne, ništa više.
Reporter: Šta Vi mislite, šta dalje? Kako dalje? Borite se, ili…
Kaletović: Šta ima da mislim, samo živ da ostanem. Jebem ti sunce… Znaš, care, bio si u vojsci, znaš kako je. Šta ti kaže, radiš. A nijedan oficir nije poginuo, sve moji jarani poginuli….
Reporter: Kolko je tvojih drugova poginulo, znaš li danas?
Kaletović: Danas trojica.
Reporter: Nijedan oficir?
Kaletović: Nijedan oficir…
Reporter: …na vatrenom položaju?
Kaletović: …ma šta ne zna gde mi je glava. Nemam pojma, gde se nalazim, koji je dan, kolko ima… Ja ništa ne znam. Ludnica živa. Nikad u životu, ja da pucam u nekog il neko u mene da puca. Gdje to može? To ne može nikako. Ja ne znam stvarno ovo, samo živ da ostanem molim Boga, ništa više. Samo živ da ostanem, majke mi.
Reporter: Kolko imaš godina?
Kaletović: Devetnaest…
Reporter: Kako se zoveš?
Kaletović: Bahrudin.
Reporter: Koliko je poginulo vojnika?
Kaletović: Četvorica svega dosad.
Reporter: Ovdje, na ovom terenu?
Kaletović: Ne ovdje trojica. Jutros trojica poginulo. Dvojica jutros, dvojica. Pa i onaj treći što je bio ranjen – umro. Pa umro! Pa da!
Reporter: Kakvo je stanje u jedinici, kako je?
Kaletović: Šta ja znam… Šta da Vam kažem. Svi molimo Boga da se ovo završi jednom da se vratimo svojim kućama. Ja ne znam … stara sad. Samo staroj da kažem da sam živ i zdrav, ako Bog da da ću se vratiti. Ništa više, eto. Samo to.
Reporter: Želimo ti mnogo sreće.
Kaletović: Hvala! Kažem apelujte preko svih medija, televizije, novina, radija, sve… Da se ovo smiri. Da nas povuku. Oni kažu da mi nećemo da se povučemo. Evo mi ginemo da se povučemo u kasarnu, da se vrate, da nas puste.
Reporter: A gdje je Vaša kasarna?
Kaletović: U Karlovcu.
Reporter: What can you say, do you have all the data, against whom you are fighting and all that?
Kaletović: How should I know. I only know they are shooting at us, nothing more.
Reporter: You don't know who's shooting?
Kaletović: Territorial Defense members are shooting. Who else?
Reporter: And do you know why this war, why this battle is taking place?
Kaletović: How should I know… As far as I can tell, they are, like, trying to secede, and we are, like, trying to stop them. In fact the only thing we want is to return to our barracks, nothing more.
Reporter: What do you think, what next? How next? You'd fight, or…
Kaletović: I have nothing to think about but how to stay alive. Screw this… You know the drill, bro, you've been in the army, you know how it is. You must do what you are told. No officers have died, only my friends…
Reporter: How many of your comrades have died today, do you know?
Kaletović: Three today.
Reporter: And no officers?
Kaletović: No officers…
Reporter: …in the line of fire?
Kaletović: …how do I know, I don't know where my head is. I have no clue, I don't know where I am, what day it is, how many… I know nothing. Total madhouse. Never in my life [did I imagine] I would shoot at someone or that someone would shoot at me. How can this be? It's not right. I really don't know about all this, I just pray to God to stay alive, nothing more. Just to stay alive, I swear on my mothers’ life.
Reporter: How old are you?
Kaletović: Nineteen…
Reporter: What is your name?
Kaletović: Bahrudin.
Reporter: How  many soldiers died?
Kaletović: Total of four so far.
Reporter: Here, in this area?
Kaletović: No, here three. This morning we had three deaths. Two were shot this morning,  two. And then, the guy who was wounded, he also died. Yes, died! For sure!
Reporter: What is the situation in your unit?
Kaletović: I have no clue… What to tell you. We all just pray to God for this to be finally over so we can go back to our homes. I don't know… my mom. Just to tell my mom that I'm alive and well, and that God willing I will return. Nothing more. Just  that.
Reporter: We wish you the best of luck.
Kaletović: Thanks! I tell you, appeal through all the media, TV, newspapers, radio, all of them… To calm this down. To withdraw us. They say we refuse to step down. Here we are dying to be withdrawn to our barrracks, to return us, to release us.
Reporter: And where are your barracks?
Kaletović: In Karlovac [Croatia].

author: Filip Stojanovski


text:
Russia scales up electronic voting for key referendum, but misses security issues · Global Voices
Alex Hardy

A poster urging citizens to vote in Russia's upcoming constitutional referendum, stressing amendments on social policy. Moscow, June 2020. Photo (c): Alexey Kovalev. Used with permission.
The delayed Russian referendum on constitutional reform goes ahead this week as the country emerges from many of the quarantine measures imposed over the past few months to control the spread of the COVID-19 virus. The referendum is being held to amend the Russian constitution, and was unveiled in January. The proposed changes most notably mean that President Putin can legally remain in power until 2036 by making him eligible to stand in a further two presidential elections, should he wish to do so.
Read more: Putin supports proposals paving the way for his continued rule
Holding a referendum for these changes is not required by law. Such amendments can and have now been authorised by Russia’s regional legislative assemblies. However, the referendum is seen as a show of public legitimacy for these changes. As such, it is important for the authorities that the turnout is seen to be suitably high. Divided opposition movements have been in debate as to whether or not the vote should be boycotted. Meanwhile, the move towards online voting has been presented by the authorities as a move to protect public safety during the COVID-19 pandemic but it also represents an opportunity for the Kremlin to encourage higher voter turnout.
As this is Russia's first experience of online voting for a national vote, it is to be expected that the promotional material for online voting emphasises both the utility and convenience of online voting but also seeks to reassure users of the security of their ballot. For the upcoming referendum, only eligible citizens in Moscow and Nizhny Novgorod region; the two regions most hard-hit by the COVID-19 pandemic in Russia, may cast their ballots online. These citizens of Moscow and Nizhny Novgorod region will go to the online polls between 25-30 of June. The population of Moscow is around 11.9 million and Nizhny Novgorod region 3.3 million, so these represent a significant number of voters. The time allowed for in person voting has also been extended to cover this time period, in order to avoid queuing at the polls, but there has been a strong push for citizens to use the online voting technology.
The process for voting online for these eligible citizens is as follows: Users register with the local authorities to vote online utilising the Gosuslugi state services portal. To register, users are required to utilise their domestic passport number, pension number or taxation number in order to validate themselves. They then authenticate this account with their phone number. Users accounts utilise simple password protection. Once the account is validated with the above details, users can access the online portal from any computer or smart device and cast their ballot digitally.
Read more: Kremlin expands online voting possibilities amid COVID-19 fears
The videos promoting online voting enthusiastically hail the integrity of the ballot, which it claims is secured by blockchain utilising distributed ledgers. This platform is a result of state collaboration with private firm Bitfury, a company most noted for Bitcoin mining.
Yet some basic security procedures for ensuring the voter is who they claim to be online are lacking. Additionally, while the video highlights how distributed ledgers protect the integrity of individual votes, the attention to security detail is almost entirely focused on the possibility of outside hackers. It does not address either the possibility of abuse internally nor does it consider the potential abuse of voters themselves.
For example, it does not explain what safeguards exist to prevent actions such as voters from casting a ballot twice (both online and then by subsequently voting in person) . The same promotional video also claims that this system is the only system in the world that provides anonymous online voting, a claim which is demonstrably false. Indeed as this analysis highlights there exist alternative e-voting systems with much more rigorous security procedures.
Russia’s neighbour Estonia has been operating online voting since 2005. The Estonian experience with online voting is the world’s most comprehensive and Estonia remains the only country to hold all of its elections (local, European and national) with the option to vote online for all citizens. The original goal of the introduction of online voting in Estonia was to stimulate turnout numbers as well as lower the costs of hosting elections. Whilst the former goal has been relatively unsuccessful (turnout is steady and reflective of most western democracies), the latter has been a success. Estimates suggest that a ballot cast online involves half the costs of casting paper ballots. Whilst overall turnout is largely unaffected thus far, there has been an increasing uptake in the numbers casting their ballot online over time as confidence has grown in a system which also utilises blockchain to guarantee the anonymity of the ballot.
Other nations which have also dabbled with online voting including Switzerland, who have offered online voting for citizens living abroad in 2015 and has periodically introduced online voting within specific cantons. However, as with many other nations, scepticism regarding security has limited the more widespread adoption of online voting, and critics have labelled the Swiss approach piecemeal. Similar approaches have been utilised and subsequently abandoned in Norway.
The Estonian online voting experience is largely defined by the digital identity or eID of users. Every Estonian citizen is automatically issued with a digital identity from the age of 15 which is attached to their state issued ID card (an alternative Mobile eID is also available). The digital identity is integral to casting the online ballot in Estonia. Voters must identify themselves online with their digital identity. For the user’s identity to be authenticated, the user must possess their ID card (which contains a chip) and the 2 PIN codes for that card. The card must be inserted into a card reader in order to generate the private key needed to cast a ballot. The MobileID process meanwhile requires a MobileID compliant SIM card as well as a physical e-ID card for authentication, meaning the voter must have not only valid login details and codes but also physical documentation simultaneously.
A voter must possess an ID card or a phone with the prerequisite MobileID SIM and then combine it with the valid security codes for an online ballot cannot be cast. This ensures, within reason, that the ballot is being cast by the correct person. Furthermore, the ballot can be cast and subsequently changed at any time during the voting period. This is a further security mechanism to prevent coercion, so that if a voter was to be coerced into voting a certain way by someone in person they could subsequently change their vote later. Whilst even these steps have left many outside critics unconvinced of Estonia’s online voting system, they represent an additional layer of security which is absent in the current Russian approach.
Whilst conclusions on the Russian experience of e-voting at this stage are premature, based on the information available there seems to be a notable vulnerability at the users end when compared to the Estonian experience of e-voting using a digital identity. There is also a piecemeal implementation which is arguably reflective of the nature of vote itself as a rushed endeavour. This comes also against the backdrop of falling approval ratings for the president (albeit these ratings are comparably quite high by the standards of western leaders).
There are certain allowances to be made for the first time any procedure is used. But it is important to note that e-voting has been used fleetingly for more low-key local votes in recent years. This experience could and indeed should have been used to improve security procedures, as could consultation with other nations already utilising e-voting. Online voting cannot be introduced overnight and will invariably develop over time, as the Estonian experience demonstrates, but the failure to learn from others experiences should not install confidence in voters that the current Russian approach to e-voting is rigorous enough to be considered secure.
It is vital to note that any online transaction will never be 100 percent secure and this is true of e-voting also. E-voting always carries an inherent risk and requires significant trust in the state to properly and impartially conduct the voting process, as well as protect the integrity of votes themselves. Citizens must fundamentally believe that neither the state, nor outside actors, nor fellow voters themselves will manipulate the process covertly. This applies equally to both Russia and the western states cited within this analysis. Trust comes from the wider actions of a government but can be enhanced by the safeguards and procedures built into the online process.
Significant research will be required to further explore Russia’s e-voting experience after the event. Indeed the online turnout promises to be one of the most interesting aspects of a referendum where the result is all but certain. Especially given there have been reports of employees in public institutions being coerced to register to vote online.
Nevertheless, based on what we know thus far, there is some reason to doubt the integrity of Russia’s e-voting based on the procedures and lack of safeguards.
This article was originally published by oDR, openDemocracy's section on Russia and the post-Soviet space. It is republished here with permission, and has been edited for style.

author: Alex Hardy


text:
US and Venezuelan politicians accuse Maduro of instigating violence during BLM protests · Global Voices
Gabriela Mesones Rojo

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Photo credit: Flickr/Eneas De Troya (CC BY 2.0).
This story is part of our special coverage on Black Lives Matter and anti-black racism.
During the first half of June, as thousands marched to support the Black Lives Matter movement in major US cities, people started sharing photos and videos of demonstrators waving socialist slogans or Venezuelan flags in the United States.
Some demonstrators wore hats with the colors of the Venezuelan flag, others had bags and t-shirts portraying late Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez or Che Guevara, leading to rumors — going all the way up to the Trump Administration — that Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro was connected to the protests.
Demonstrations began after the May 25 police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and quickly spread across all 50 states. Anti-racist protests have slowly diminished in size but continue to spread around the world, leading to calls to defund police departments and to take down historical statues connected with slavery or colonialism.
The rumors that Maduro was somehow behind violent acts reached the Trump administration, as reported by the Miami Herald. A senior Trump administration official, who preferred to stay anonymous, told the newspaper:
We are aware of efforts by individuals linked to America’s adversaries, including the illegitimate regime of Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro, to instigate conflict, help incite violence, and divide Americans by exploiting peaceful protests.
US Republican Senator Rick Scott also highlighted similar theories and stated that the US government would investigate any operatives tied to Latin American dictators who instigate conflict in Miami as part of the protests.
Reports that the Maduro regime and other LatAm dictators are supporting violent instigators at protests in the Miami area.
We will NOT allow it. Anyone with ties to these regimes that incites violence will suffer the legal consequences of their actions! https://t.co/xY6PHVOJ1x
— Rick Scott (@SenRickScott) June 3, 2020
Scott did not offer evidence for the allegations about Latin American socialist leaders’ role in the violence, lootings, and acts of vandalism during the US protests. During a press conference, he quoted a right-wing Diario Las Américas news report. The White House, for its part, declined to discuss “non-open source information” that had led to this assessment.
Meanwhile, Julio Borges, a leader of Venezuela's parallel government who took on the role of Presidential Commissioner for Foreign Relations of Venezuela, also tweeted a similar statement.
De nuevo el régimen aparece como promotor de la desestabilización, ahora en EEUU.
La dictadura utiliza medios de comunicación y grupos vandálicos para promover la violencia. Maduro es una amenaza para la democracia del continente, por eso debemos centrarnos en sacarlo del poder. https://t.co/kMzkCDy8DS
— Julio Borges (@JulioBorges) May 30, 2020
“Again the regime appears to be a promoter of destabilization, now in the United States. The dictatorship uses the media and vandalism groups to promote violence. Maduro is a threat to democracy on the continent, so we must focus on removing him from power.”
The tweet came after well-known Grayzone journalist Max Blumenthal, often seen as a propagandist for chavismo — Hugo Chávez's brand of socialism — was photographed wearing a Chávez t-shirt at the protests in Washington DC.
I’ve seen a lot of people talking about this photo of someone wearing a Chavez T-Shirt at the protests in Washington DC last nigh.
It’s Max Blumenthal from Greyzone wearing the shirt while he was recording the protests.#Venezuela pic.twitter.com/bTkwf863MD
— CNW (@ConflictsW) May 30, 2020
Dolar Today, one of the biggest tabloid media platforms in Venezuela with 3.7M followers, repeated Borges’ sentiment.
¡FUE PLANEADO! ¿Foro de Sao Paulo detrás de los disturbios en Washington D.C.? https://t.co/oaLmUJi7b6
— DolarToday® (@DolarToday) May 30, 2020
IT WAS PLANNED! Is the Sao Paulo Forum behind the disturbances in Washington D.C.?
Foro de São Paulo, or the São Paulo Forum in English, is a conference of socialist political parties and other organizations from Latin America and the Caribbean. It was created in 1990 with the goal of becoming a counterweight to neoliberal policies.
Blaming foreign socialist governments for protests has further polarized politics in Venezuela. The editor-in-chief of right-leaning media Panam Post, Orlando Avendaño, criticized Juan Guaidó, whose claim to the Venezuelan presidency is recognized by the US and other countries, for not openly showing support for the US government during the Black Lives Matter protests. In 2019, Guaidó made a claim to the presidency which is recognized by more than 50 countries.
Panam Post opposes Maduro, but also criticizes Venezuela's largest opposition bloc led by Guaidó, as it would not vocalize enough support for the United States.
La existencia del interinato está condicionada a la permanencia de Trump en la Casa Blanca. EEUU es, sin duda, nuestro mayor aliado. Trump lleva dos semanas con el país ardiendo, con manifestantes tratando de tumbarlo, y Guaidó no ha dado el primer gesto de apoyo. Inaceptable. pic.twitter.com/9XCPlStjDZ
— Orlando Avendaño (@OrlvndoA) June 9, 2020
“The existence of the interim opposition government is conditioned by Trump's stay in the White House. The United States is, without a doubt, our greatest ally. Trump has been with the country bursting with protests for the last two weeks, with protesters trying to topple him, and Guaidó has not given the first gesture of support. Unacceptable”.
However, statements about foreign meddling during civil uprisings are nothing new. When protests were sparked in Chile after the rise of public transport prices in the capital Santiago de Chile, President Sebastian Piñera and the local media reported a high presence of Venezuelan protestors. Yet, this would not be atypical as there are now about 500,000 Venezuelan migrants in Chile. Journalist John Bartlett compares both historic movements’ coverage in the press:
Same model, same scapegoat pic.twitter.com/MVaTez8K3l
— John Bartlett (@jwbartlett92) June 10, 2020

author: Gabriela Mesones Rojo


text:
Hongkongers braved the newly enacted national security law with a leaderless protest · Global Voices
Oiwan Lam

Thousands of protesters took to the street on July 1 defying the newly enacted national security law. Image from inmediahk.net
On the 23rd anniversary of the Handover of Hong Kong to China and on the day Beijing's draconian national security law for the city was enacted, thousands of protesters defied the police ban to take to the streets.
The July 1 protests led to the arrests of 370 people. Some were charged with participating in unauthorized assembly and obstructing law enforcement while 10 were charged under the new national security law.
Seven police officers were injured, with one stabbed in the arm by a protester during the chaos.
The Hong Kong Police Force banned the Civic Human Right Front from hosting the annual July 1 rally, citing pandemic control regulations, leaving the protesters to rally leaderless.
Despite the heavy police presence, thousands of protesters went “shopping” in various commercial malls at Causeway Bay and flooded the streets at around 3 PM.
As the riot police chased away the protesters from main roads with pepper spray, batons and water cannon, they sheltered in smaller streets and alleys before marching back to the main road whenever they felt safe.
#HongKongSecurityLaw :day of defiance as protests break out in #HongKong, about 370 arrested. Thousands of demonstrators play cat and mouse with police across Causeway Bay, Wan Chai, shouting slogans, an officer stabbed in clash. Officials celebrating 23rd anniversary of handover pic.twitter.com/3RaaPZkEys
— NRao (@kamireddynrao) July 2, 2020
The majority of the side streets along the main roads were flooded with protesters, chanting the slogan “Five demands, not one less” and “Hong Kong independence is the only way out”:
Ignore the threats from #CCP, #HongKong communist govt, police, and the new draconian law, massive civilians marching in #CausewayBay towards #VictoriaPark. Chanting the prohibited slogans:
“Independence of Hong Kong is the only way out!”@appledaily_hk#無懼惡法#七一遊行 pic.twitter.com/uQQYLmeveQ
— Nikki? (@nikki_miumiu) July 1, 2020
The number of protesters that turned out was huge considering the fact that every individual had to overcome their fear of being arrested.
Under the current state, the mere act of singing a protest song in the street can invite a body search by armed police:
7.1 HK Handover 23rd Anniversary
A female is being stopped and searched by the police officers while she was singing #CanYouHearThePeopleSing near #Sogo department store .
Photo / Cezzna #USP #HKProtest #CausewayBay pic.twitter.com/lxk5uhE9v3
— UnitedSocialPress 社媒 (@USPhongkong) July 1, 2020
The first case of an arrest citing the national security law involved a man displaying a HK independence flag.
[BREAKING] In #CausewayBay, #HKpolice has arrested a man with a HK independence flag with the #NationalSecurityLaw. He would be the first arrest of the National Security Law.#HongKong #HongKongProtests
Source: RTHK pic.twitter.com/4RXiCvIRgr
— HK antielab frontline updates (@antielab) July 1, 2020
In addition to risking political arrests and prosecutions, protesters took physical risks as well:
We are no rioters, please take a look of this video, and you will know we are always there to help each other despite all the threat and risk. I am so proud to be a Hongkonger. #HKPoliceTerrorists #HKProtests https://t.co/IrUDkX7bnL
— hkisdying (@hkisdying4) July 2, 2020
At around 8 PM the riot police charged Time Square — a landmark shopping mall in Causeway Bay — with pepper spray and arrested a number of protesters:
One huge banner summed up the defiant mood of protesters. “We f***ing love Hong Kong,” the banner read.
Photo taken by Oiwan Lam

author: Oiwan Lam


text:
LGBTQ+ community and politicians salute Montenegro’s new law on same-sex partnerships · Global Voices
Filip Stojanovski

Montenegrin activists at the 2013 SeaSide Pride in Budva, holding signs reading “I'm like you,” “For marriage equality,” “Love is love,” and “I vote for love.” Photo by LGBTQ+ Forum Progres, CC BY-NC-SA.
Montenegro's parliament has adopted a law on life partnership for same-sex couples, making Montenegro the first country in the Western Balkans to legally recognize same-sex marriage.
The law passed on July 1 does not include provisions to allow same-sex couples to adopt children. In all other aspects, their rights are the same as for heterosexual couples, including property rights, inheritance, social and health security.
Non-governmental organizations LGBTI Forum Progres and the LGBTIQ Social Center, as well as their constituent communities, applauded the adoption of the law, congratulating all LGBTQ+ persons on the historic achievement:
Činjenica da je konačno usvojen Zakon o životnom partnerstvu ima neizrecivo velik značaj za sve LGBTI osobe u Crnoj Gori. Ovo je nesaglediv pomak naprijed za crnogorsko društvo, na naročitu radost cjelokupne LGBTI zajednice. Kao organizacija koja niz godina zagovara pravno prepoznavanje istopolnih zajednica i kao aktivni učesnici Radne grupe koja je kreirala ovaj Zakon, veoma smo srećni zbog ovakvog ishoda koji smo dugo čekali. Sada ostaje ono ključno – primjena ovog zakona u praksi – što je sljedeći veliki korak u procesu zaštite ljudskih prava LGBTI osoba.
The fact that the Law on life partnership has finally been adopted has unspeakably enormous importance for all LGBTI persons in Montenegro. This is an immense advancement for Montenegrin society that has filled with joy the entire LGBTI community. As an organization which advocates for legal recognition of same-sex unions, and as active participants of the Working Group that created this bill, we are so happy with this long-awaited outcome. Now a key issue remains — implementation of this law in practice, which will be the next great step in the process of protection of human rights of LGBTI persons.
Montenegro has come a long way in the fight against homophobia over the years.
In 2013 the First Pride was subject to physical violence, incitement to killings and other verbal abuse from about 200 counter-protesters.
In 2015 the Montenegrin authorities banned the Pride March deeming it “too risky”, with police claiming it could not protect the marchers from threats of violence by homophobic groups.
More recently, the Pride Marches in 2017 passed without incident, while the one in 2018 featured high-ranking political figures.
Last year the parliament failed to pass the bill on same-sex partnerships due to the lack of a quorum.
President Milo Đukanović, who has held top executive positions in the Montenegrin government since 1991, saluted the development, portraying it as proof that the country is moving in the direction of the “most developed democracies in the world.”
Još jedan korak ?? ka društvu najrazvijenih demokratija svijeta!
Usvajanjem Zakona o životnom partnerstvu osoba istog pola, ?? po prvi put pravno uređuje istopolne zajednice! #LGBT@UNHumanRights@EURightsAgency@ILGAEurope
— Milo Đukanović (@predsjednik_cg) July 1, 2020
One more step of Montenegro towards the company of the most developed democracies in the world! By adopting the Law on life partnership of persons of the same sex, Montenegro is legally regulating same sex communities for the first time!
Prime Minister Duško Marković also welcomed the adoption of the law.
Ovo je veliki iskorak u pravom smjeru za crnogorsko društvo, njegovu demokratsku zrelost i proces integracije. Ravnopravnost i jednaka prava za sve osnov su ljudskih i evropskih vrijednosti. Zahvaljujem LGBTIQ zajednici na dijalogu i doprinosu. U evropskoj Crnoj Gori nema i ne treba da bude mjesta za diskriminaciju po osnovu seksualnog opredjeljenja.
This is a great step forward in the right direction for Montenegrin society, its democratic maturity and integration processes. Equality and same rights for all are the cornerstone of human and European values. I want to thank the LGBTIQ community for dialogue and contribution. There can be no room for discrimination based on sexual orientation in a European Montenegro.
The ambassadors of the United Kingdom and the United States welcomed the adoption of the law, too.
Activist Bojana Jokić from the LGBTI Forum Progress sounded a note of caution, however, referring to recent limitations imposed on public gatherings:
Iako je današnje glasanje velika stvar za Crnu Goru, želim kratko da se osvrnem i na dešavanja koja minulih sedmica potresaju naše društvo. Kao aktivistkinja i građanka sam zabrinuta zbog ograničavanja ljudskih prava i sloboda kojima svjedočimo, a koja nas podsjećaju da niko od nas nije slobodan i jednak dok svi u društvu nisu slobodni i jednaki.
Even though today's vote was a big thing for Montenegro, I would like to shortly address the issues from the last several weeks that have shaken our society. As an activist and citizen I am concerned in regard to limitations of human rights and freedoms, which remind us that nobody is free and equal until everybody in the society is free and equal.


text:
Made in China: The draconian details of Hong Kong’s national security law · Global Voices
Oiwan Lam

HK government's press conference on the national security law. Image from The Stand News.
The text of the newly enacted national security law of Hong Kong (HKNSL) was first released to the public at 11:00 PM local time on June 30. It was not passed through Hong Kong's legislative council (Legco) and went into effect immediately.
The law defines four kinds of criminal acts — secession, subversion, terrorism and collusion with foreign power — in vague terms that can criminalize a wide range of speech and protest acts.
The maximum penalty for all these offences is life in prison.
The implementation of the law is under China's purview and mainland security agencies will not have to follow local Hong Kong laws during operations in the megapolis.
For this reason, many are proclaiming the end of “One Country, Two Systems.”
Major news outlets have developed explainers of the law.
Here we take a look at some of the major concerns as raised on Twitter.
Like many Hongkongers, China reporter Allen-Ebrahimian was taken aback upon reading Article 38 of the law:
Oh my god am I reading this right???
Article 38: The law applies to persons who do NOT have permanent resident status in HK and commit crimes under this law OUTSIDE Hong Kong.
Did Beijing just grant itself sweeping extraterritoriality to…everyone on the planet?
— B. Allen-Ebrahimian (@BethanyAllenEbr) June 30, 2020
Indeed, according to article 38 of the law, any individual that supported Hong Kong's protests for political autonomy could fall under the law's jurisdiction when entering Chinese territories including Hong Kong and Macau.
The majority of the individuals targeted would be overseas Chinese and Hongkongers holding foreign passports, but foreign organizations and nationals could also be subjected to the law if it were found out that they were committing any of the five illegal activities stated in article 29:
- waging a war or threatening to use force to seriously undermine China's sovereignty, unification and territorial integrity;
– seriously disrupting the formulation and implementation of laws in HK and China;
– rigging or undermining an election in HK;
– imposing sanctions or blockage, or engaging in other hostile activities against HK and China;
– provoking by unlawful means hatred among HK residents towards HK and the Chinese government.
Against this background, Canada which has seen two of its citizens jailed for spying in China has issued a travel warning for its citizens regarding Hong Kong:
#HongKong: National security legislation came into effect on July 1. You may be at increased risk of arbitrary detention on national security grounds and possible extradition to mainland China. https://t.co/au9O2eyPsm pic.twitter.com/tbb4e37UU8
— Travel.gc.ca (@TravelGoC) July 1, 2020
The vague definition of offences can be seen throughout the law. For example, physical assault and vandalism of private and public facilities can be interpreted as terrorist activities under article 24.
As pointed out in a statement by Amnesty International, the definition of “national security” in the newly enacted law is so vague that it prevents anyone from knowing how and when they might transgress it.
Such a vague definition could result in the criminalization of online speech. In fact, said Beijing’s Hong Kong and Macau Office deputy head Zhang Xiaoming in a press briefing, the meaning of inciting hatred could be as broadly defined as spreading rumors about HK police force.
Hong Kong Citizen News’ journalist Alvin Lum posted on Twitter:
Breaking: HKMAO deputy Zhang Xiaoming cited rumours on police's handling of Prince Edward station on August 31 last year could be viewed as inciting hatred against police, thus violating national security law. pic.twitter.com/kJTJLoaTTz
— Alvin Lum (@alvinllum) July 1, 2020
Under this definition, many political slogans, like the popular slogan “Corrupt cops, may your whole family die!”（黑警死全家！) that condemn police violence in protests, could be viewed as undermining national security.
As previously revealed, Beijing will set up a National Security Office (NSO) in Hong Kong to oversee the local implementation of the law, collect and analyse national security intelligence as well as handle national security offence cases (article 48 and 49).
Yet, many were shocked to learn that article 60 specifies that Beijing’s secret police shall not be subjected to local jurisdiction when performing their duties:
Really let this sink in: the NSL creates a secret police branch in Hong Kong that is not subject to HK law. They can do anything, wave an ID at local law enforcement, and walk away. The potential for abuse is infinite.
— 伯昏無人 (@Baakfanmouyan) June 30, 2020
Article 55 meanwhile gives that NSO the power to exercise jurisdiction over cases under three sets of circumstances:
- if the case involves a foreign country or external elements;
– if local authority is unable to effectively enforce the law
– if the case involves a major threat to national security.
Once the cases fall under the NSO's jurisdiction, China's Supreme People’s Procuratorate can name “relevant procuratorates” to oversee prosecution, while the Supreme People’s Court can name “relevant courts” for trial.
The law also expands the power of local Hong Kong security authorities significantly.
The law requires the Hong Kong government to set up three national security bodies, namely the Committee for Safeguarding National Security (CSNS), a national security department under the Hong Kong Police Force and a specialized prosecution division under the Department of Justice.
It is worth noting that it specifies in article 16 that the Hong Kong police's national security department head must “observe the obligation of secrecy”, which means the head shall not answer to public inquiries, including inquiries made by the Legislative Council, on the department's work.
It is also worth noting that the department will be able recruit qualified professionals and technical personnel from outside Hong Kong, most likely from mainland China.
Secret trial will become a legitimate practice as article 46 gives the Secretary of Justice the authority to decide on whether a case shall be tried without a jury in High Court on the grounds of protection of state secrets, involvement of foreign factors, protection of personal safety of jurors and their family members, among others.
There is no other local institution, not even the court, that can question the decision made by CSNS, as article 14 of the law gives immunity to the authority from judicial review.
A number of law professors pointed out that the new law will undermine the common law practice in Hong Kong, as the power of interpretation is in the hands of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPC), according to article 65 of the law. HK-based lawyer Antony Dapiran explains the situation in plain language:
What does the national security law mean for HK’s rule of law? We now have a major piece of criminal law, with penalties of up to life imprisonment, which no HK lawyer or judge can definitively interpret, advise upon or apply. Think about that.
— Antony Dapiran (@antd) June 30, 2020
Even without Beijing’s direct intervention, the power of the Hong Kong Chief Justice is seriously undermined, as according to article 44, the Chief Executive was given the power to appoint the judges that will handle national security court cases.


text:
Milan Kundera’s first Czech biography: Another public dressing-down in his homeland? · Global Voices
Filip Noubel

From left to right: Kundera's work in Turkish, the first Kundera's biography in Czech by Jan Novák, and Kundera's work in Chinese. Photo by Filip Noubel, used with permission
At 91, Czech-French author Milan Kundera enjoys cult status among millions of readers around the globe. But in the Czech Republic, the author is mostly ignored, often accused of scorning his home country, and of having collaborated with the communist-era State Security. His first and non-authorized Czech biography was just released in Czech in late June, relaunching a national debate about his controversial persona.
Portrait of Milan Kundera by Elisa Cabot is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0
Milan Kundera is often described as being the 20th century Central European writer par excellence: he grew up in Czechoslovakia, experienced WWII, joined the Communist Party, studied literature and cinema, endorsed communist ideology but later became disillusioned with it, and eventually fled to France — a country of which he became a citizen in 1981.
His works include 10 novels, a collection of short stories, four plays and many essays, as well as poetry. While he started writing in Czech, he gradually shifted to French in his exile, and considers himself a French author now.
Kundera's ascension in the West was stellar: in a Literary Review issue of 1985, novelist and literary critic Olga Carlisle didn't hesitate to write:
In the 1980s, Milan Kundera has done for his native Czechoslovakia what Gabriel Garcia Márquez did for Latin America in the 1960s and Solzhenitsyn did for Russia in the 1970s. He has brought Eastern Europe to the attention of the Western reading public, and he has done so with insights that are universal in their appeal.
One of his most famous novels “The Unbearable Lightness of Being” (Nesnesitelná lehkost bytí) talks about a womanizer and his many love-stories, and is a reflection on relationships and eroticism. It also mentions the 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia by Soviet troops, after which Kundera left his country, and sought asylum in France in 1975.
The book was made into a film in 1988 by US director Philip Kaufman, further propeling Kundera towards global fame:
Kundera reached a global audience through countless translations in over 40 languages, and he is mentioned by many successful authors as an inspiration for their work. He has also been nominated for many years as a Nobel Prize candidate in literature.
But there is one country where Kundera is far from recognized as a key literary figure: the Czech Republic
From the moment he started writing in French in 1975, Kundera distanced himself from Czechoslovakia. And while most Czech exile writers returned — at least to visit when Communism ended in 1989 — Kundera waited until 1996 to pay his visit.
Since then he has always visited the country incognito, and is known for refusing media interviews. He also blocked or delayed the publication of his books in Czech. His famous novel “Life is Elsewhere” was first published in Czech in 2016, 43 years after it was published in France.
Jean-Dominique Birerre, author of his first biography in French published in 2019, explains in an interview he gave to Czech Radio Prague International in May 2019 how most Czechs view Kundera:
J’ai l’impression qu’une partie des Tchèques, des intellectuels entre autres, lui reprochent premièrement son passé communiste et deuxièmement, le fait d’être complètement invisible même après la révolution de Velours : de ne participer à rien…alors qu’il aurait pu être un grand homme dans son pays.
I am under the impression that some Czech people, including intellectuals, blame him first for his communist past, and secondly for being completely invisible even after the Velvet Revolution: that he did not take part in anything…even though he could have been an important figure in his country.
Kundera's statements and attitude have reinforced the stereotype shared by many in the Czech Republic that exiles “had it easy” as they did not have to endure the years of censorship, lack of basic goods, travel bans under communism.
But the major blow to Kundera's image in the Czech Republic came in November 2008 when the most influential weekly Respekt came up with a rather sensational but well researched article saying it had proof that Kundera cooperated with the Czechoslovak State Security, reporting on critics of the regime.
The news created an international scandal, with several Nobel Prize-winners denouncing the article as a hate campaign against Kundera, who denied the accusations but refused to provide explanations, and elected not to sue the media outlet.
The past two years have reignited the debate around Kundera. In late 2019, Kundera invited to his Paris flat the Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš, who is widely regarded as a corrupt figure under investigation for years by the European Union on accusations of conflict of interest and embezzlement of European funds.
Soon after this visit, Kundera was given Czech citizenship, having lost his former Czechoslovak citizenship in 1979 by orders of communist authorities in Prague.
While most people would agree Kundera deserves to obtain a Czech passport, the conditions under which it was achieved struck another blow to his public image in the country, since Babiš is believed to have been an agent of Czechoslovak State Security.
Jsem rád, že jsem to před rokem inicioval a vážím si toho, že jsem mohl ??https://t.co/RthCcUVUnX
— Andrej Babiš (@AndrejBabis) December 3, 2019
I am glad that I initiated this [giving Czech citizenship to Kundera] a year ago, and I value the fact that I was able to do it.
The publication in June 26 of his first biography in Czech, written by by Jan Novák and called “Kundera Český život a doba” (Kundera: A Czech Life During that Period) covers the writer's life up to 1975 when he was still living in Czechoslovakia. Understandably, the book is a sensation. Book reviewers, literary critics and the media have already weighed in on its controversies.
Novák, who himself lived in exile in Chicago for many years, and spent four years researching his book, gave a 25 minute long video interview to the Internet TV channel DVTV on June 26, in which he accuses Kundera of “lying about his biography” and making himself a “victim” when he was actually a beneficiary of the Communist system. Novák never met with Kundera during his work on the book.
Kundera never denied he believed in Communism: in 1954, he wrote a long poem, “Poslední Máj” (The Last May) praising Communist hero Julius Fučík. In 1963, he was also awarded the Klement Gottwald State Award for his play “The Owner of the Keys” (Majitelé klíčů). Back then, only the most loyal artists were selected for this supreme prize. But Kundera has since distanced himself from those works, and does not mention them in his list of published books.
Pavel Kosatík, a major essayist and expert on Czech identity, reacted to Novák's book on June 17 on Facebook:
Z víceméně stejných zdrojů jsem vyčetl něco úplně jiného než Novák, což je normální, ale proč musí mít černobílý hnojomet 900 stran, jsem nepochopil. Ta kniha je tou monotónností až komická: kdykoli se má nějak vysvětlit nějaký další Kunderův čin, Novák vybere vysvětlení padoušské. Když mě někdo štve (protože tohle je téma Novákovy knihy), proč to nestačí říct jednou větou?.Proč hned tzv. literatura.
I read pretty much the same sources but my conclusion is very different from the one reached by Novák, which is normal, but I don't understand why this thrashing needs to be 900-pages long. This book is so monotonous it becomes comical: whenever he needs to explain an act by Kundera, Novák chooses to paint him as a villain. When I am angry at someone (because this is the topic of Novák's book), isn't one sentence enough to say it? Why write a so-called book.
In the Týdeník Echo Ondřej Štindl wrote a long article “Další kolo bitvy o Kunderu” (Next round in the Battle of Kundera):
Optimista může chovat naději, že jednou zdejší debata o Milanu Kunderovi překoná tu mnoho let trvající neurotickou fázi. Také je možné, že čas střetů a slovních válek vystřídá doba zapomnění a lhostejnosti. Bylo by to hořké a groteskní, svým způsobem i docela kunderovské.
An optimist can still hope that there will be a time when the debate around Milan Kundera will overcome its long-lasting neurotic phase. It is also possible, that the time of clashes and wars of words will be followed by a time of forgetting and indifference. This would be bitter and grotesque, thus in its own way, very Kundera-like.

author: Filip Noubel


text:
Everton Weekes, last of the ‘Three Ws’ of Caribbean cricket, dies at age 95 · Global Voices
Emma Lewis

Cricket ball. Photo by Luke Hayfield on Flickr, CC BY 2.0.
Beloved Caribbean cricketer Sir Everton Weekes passed away at his home in Christ Church, Barbados, on July 1, after suffering a heart attack in June. He was the last surviving member of the famous “Three Ws” of West Indies cricket, the other two greats being Sir Clyde Walcott and Sir Frank Worrell. This formidable trio, all Barbadians, were contemporaries, and were all knighted for their contribution to the sport.
Weekes, a hard-hitting right-handed batsman who made his test cricket debut weeks apart from Walcott and Worrell in 1948. Together, they formed part of the first West Indies side to win a test match in England in 1950. It was a significant milestone for cricket lovers in the region, and sparked joyful victory celebrations among the relatively small West Indian population in London.
Cricket West Indies tweeted their condolences on Sir Everton's passing:
Our hearts are heavy as we mourn the loss of an icon. A legend, our hero, Sir Everton Weekes. Our condolences go out to his family, friends and many fans around the world. May he rest in peace. ?? pic.twitter.com/RnwoJkhjPd
— Windies Cricket (@windiescricket) July 1, 2020
The West Indies’ Players’ Association also mourned his death:
WIPA extends sincere condolences at the passing of Sir Everton Weekes. We salute a great West Indies icon; Sir Everton made an invaluable contribution to the sport, his country and the region, we were blessed to have him among us, may his soul rest in peace. pic.twitter.com/T6EDBxhVgo
— WIPA (@wiplayers) July 1, 2020
Barbados’ Prime Minister Mia Mottley called Weekes “a legend of the game […] who indeed made cricket the sport of gentlemen” and “a global citizen, with Bajan roots.” On a personal note, she added, “For me, he was one of the most brilliant men, with a turn of phrase and a sense of humour second to none.”
With his “can do” spirit, Weekes was a huge inspiration not only in Barbados, but the wider region as well. Born into a poor family Bridgetown, Barbados, on February 26, 1925, Weekes’ home was in Pickwick Gap, close to what is now the Kensington Oval cricket ground.
He left school at 14 and served in the Barbados Defence Force from 1943–47, which afforded him the opportunity to play cricket at the club level. At age 22, he was selected to play for the West Indies against a visiting England team. That 1947 match was the start of an extraordinary run for Weekes: Not only did he score 100 runs in that match, he went on to strike four more consecutive centuries in matches in Delhi, Bombay and Calcutta, India, later that year.
Weekes’ record of five consecutive centuries stands unbroken to this day.
An Australian sports blog noted that Weekes achieved such excellence despite the challenges for black cricketers during the 1940s and 1950s:
Due to the era in which he played, his career was affected by a racial controversy. Weekes, despite his greatness as a cricketer and man, never captained West Indies. [George] Headley became the team's first black captain for one test in 1948 but it was not until Worrell in 1960 that West Indies appointed their second non-white skipper; after Weekes’ career had ended. Sir Everton bore the injustice with typical good grace.
Eleven years after his stunning run of centuries in 1947, Weekes retired with a thigh injury, but continued playing first class cricket until 1964. He became a successful coach in Barbados and coached the 1979 Canadian World Cup team, while serving on the executive of the Barbados Cricket Association. In 1994 he was appointed as an International Cricket Council (ICC) referee and in 2008 was inducted into the ICC’s Cricket Hall of Fame. He was knighted in 1995, the same year he was awarded Barbados’ Gold Crown of Merit and received the country's highest honour, the Knight of the Order of St. Michael and St. George (KCMG).
Former Australian cricket captain Ian Chappell reminisced about Weekes (who later in life became a champion Bridge player) and his “quirky sense of humour:”
It was sad to hear of Everton's passing at age 95, but he wouldn't abide any long faces. Everton Weekes was a great Barbados champion who epitomised living life to the full.
Cricketing blog ReadScoops also paid tribute:
It’s been a tough time for cricket fans across the world because you know that there hasn’t been any sporting action taking place. To make matters worse […] one of the legends of the game of cricket is no longer with us […] Caribbean iconic cricketer, Sir Everton Weekes.
48 test matches for West Indies saw him scoring 4,000+ test runs at the highest level which included 15 centuries and of course, 1 international wicket as well. His international career was a long one which spanned between Jan 1948 to March 1958, inspiring thousands and contributing much to the rise of cricket in the West Indies.
Tributes poured in online from cricketing nations the world over. A New Delhi blogger tweeted:
Cricket world has lost an icon and the West Indies a true champion. Long live the legend of Sir #EvertonWeekes
— caught@point (@caughtatpoint17) July 1, 2020
Another Indian cricket blogger declared that Weekes’ passing was the end of an era:
END OF AN ERA
Everton Weekes the first & only batsman to score 5 Test Hundreds in 5 consecutive inngs – passed away at the age of 95.
141 v England, Kingston 1948
128 v India, Delhi 1948
194 v India, Mumbai 1948
162 & 101 v India, Kolkata 1949#EvertonWeekes #Cricket #YESCric pic.twitter.com/ME5Xt722nn
— YESCric (@YesCricNow) July 1, 2020
Weekes played for Bacup in the UK's Lancashire League for seven seasons, starting from 1949. On its website, the League shared:
Sir Everton was regarded as the finest batsman to play in the Lancashire League. Speaking to Paul Yates in 2010, the late Ken Barnes recalled playing against Sir Everton:
‘He was the typical swashbuckling West Indian batsman. Allow him to get his eye in and the match was over. But he was so entertaining and such a gifted crowd pleaser that he would always give you a chance of taking his wicket due to his aggression and risk taking.’
Meanwhile, the University of Sheffield commemorated Weekes by tweeting a photograph of the statue of the “Three Ws:”
#EvertonWeekes RIP. One of the greatest test batsmen for #WestIndies. Pictured here with the other two of the three W's, Clyde Walcott and Frank Worrell pic.twitter.com/4dUTTfO8Ww
— From Pitch to Plinth (@SportingStatues) July 1, 2020
The statue is located in the park opposite the 3Ws Oval, a cricket ground dedicated to the trio, at the University of the West Indies’ Cave Hill campus in Barbados. Both Worrell and Walcott are buried at Cave Hill. In an interview with the UK's Telegraph newspaper, Weekes joked:
I’m the only person on Earth who knows, to an inch, where he is going to be buried.
The Australian Cricket Network shared on Facebook:
Worrell and Walcott are buried alongside each other at the Three Ws Oval in Barbados and while there is no confirmation yet about Weekes’ final resting place, there is a vacant plot for the third member of the trio, should his family wish.
The ICC in its obituary quoted the late cricket commentator Tony Cozier on the legacy of the “Three Ws”:
In the fading days of British colonialism, all three broke the long-standing racial barrier of a sport always held as a badge of excellence by the islands of the cricketing Caribbean.
Quite fittingly, when the West Indies cricket team plays three matches in England this July, the team, captained by another Barbadian, Jason Holder, will wear Black Lives Matter logos on their playing shirts.

author: Emma Lewis


text:
How COVID-19 affects education for people with disabilities in Ghana · Global Voices
Wunpini Fatimata Mohammed

When COVID-19 hit Ghana, many students with special needs shifted to online learning and had to use digital platforms not designed for people with disabilities. Photo of a person using a mobile phone in Ghana by Amuzujoe, July 22, 2019, via Wikimedia Commons CC BY 4.0.
In Ghana, education has undergone a series of reforms, but the educational experiences of people with disabilities (PWDs) are often neglected.
As the coronavirus hit Ghana, researchers have looked at its impact on working-class students and students in rural areas, but not specifically on students with special needs — especially when it comes to online learning.
Hearing-impaired and visually-impaired students faced several technical, economic, and social challenges when COVID-19 hit and they shifted their learning online.
Currently, hearing-impaired and visually-impaired students at many higher education institutions use Zoom, Telegram and WhatsApp for learning — digital platforms that were neither built for virtual learning nor for people with visual and hearing disabilities.
Many hearing-impaired students were separated from their sign language interpreters and lacked assistive devices like hearing aids. This especially impacted hearing-impaired students with limited knowledge of sign language. Visually-impaired students were separated from their sighted friends who usually assist them.
In a WhatsApp conversation with Global Voices, Esinam Aleawobu, a hearing-impaired student at the Presbyterian College of Education in Akropong, shared her experiences with e-learning:
Sometimes some tutors will use audio instead of caption. But I am deaf, I can’t hear on audio. That means an interpreter is supposed to translate it for deaf people. I have to meet the interpreter through the Zoom app. But unfortunately, we can’t meet often due to network connection problems and some phone problems.
When tutors realized that audiovisual lectures in video formats burdened students with internet data costs, they explored lesson delivery methods like audio PowerPoint lectures which still used audio and visual elements but reduced the internet data costs. In Ghana, on average, 1 gigabyte of internet data costs 10 Ghana cedis ($1.72).
According to Julius Yaw Klu, a visually impaired student at the Presbyterian College of Education in Akropong, his 4-year-old phone is outdated and does not fully support easy access to online lectures:
The problem that I faced with audiovisual is the same problem I have with the PowerPoint. Sometimes it takes about 30 minutes for me to be able to access the lecture. Sometimes I have to wait for the class to end so that I can borrow a computer and use it to access the lecture.
Daniel Kwarko, a visually-impaired student at the Presbyterian College of Education in Akropong, shared a similar concern with using his phone to participate in e-learning:
Most of the documents we get, the phone can open it, but it cannot read it. And it is difficult for those of us who are visually-impaired. And sometimes you cannot find someone to read it for you. You cannot find someone to always be there to read your notes for you. The phones cannot read the PowerPoint and the slides but the laptop does all those functions. You can even use the laptop to convert documents so that they can be accessible for JAWS [a screen reader program].
These hearing-impaired and visually-impaired students say that providing up-to-date laptop technology could tremendously facilitate online learning.
Ghana’s 2015 inclusive education policy “guarantees a learning environment which is barrier-free and enables all learners, including those with disabilities, to move about safely and freely, use facilities and participate in learning and all aspects of school life.”
But research shows that one in five children ages 6-24 with a disability “has never attended school and those who are in school are often stigmatized and face discrimination.”
Despite efforts to make education more inclusive, visually-impaired and hearing-impaired students face a digital divide when it comes to e-learning. This divide not only marginalizes students with disabilities but also exacerbates inequalities in Ghana’s teacher education system.
Mohammed Salifu, a professor and executive secretary of the National Council for Tertiary Education (NCTE), told Global Voices in a phone interview that stakeholders are implementing measures to address the e-learning needs of students with special needs:
We need to make sure that all the interventions we are making are actually tailored to their needs. So the college principals have been proactive in communicating to us. We are partnering with various organizations to address these interventions. These days there are global partners coming in to make submissions regarding how they can help. Even UNESCO [United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization] is trying to provide these funds to support special needs students. I wouldn’t say that we have comprehensively addressed all the issues, but we are working toward them.
Transforming Teacher Education and Learning (T-TEL) is also working in Ghana to ensure e-learning inclusivity for hearing- or visually-impaired students. For example, they allocate funds for Braille curricula material, provide smartphones for digital access, and make text-to-speech converters available.
The 2006 Persons with Disability Act stipulates that public buildings must be made accessible, but a study found that most public buildings in Ghana are not disability-friendly.
Mainstream educational spaces are not conducive for PWDs, and the few existing special needs schools in Ghana are grossly underfunded and under-resourced.
At the Akropong School for the Blind, three students share one set of Braille learning materials because of limited funding, according to a Ghana Broadcasting Corporation (GBC) report. The head of the primary department, Simon Adedeme, described this situation as a hindrance to teaching and learning.
In many higher education institutions, faculty, administrators and students tend to have very limited knowledge and lack the resources to deal with the structural marginalization of students with disabilities.
Many PWDs are encouraged to pursue vocational training and other types of physical labor work while generally being discouraged from intellectual pursuits in various areas of higher education.
Only three of Ghana’s 46 colleges of education have been designated as centers for inclusive education where PWDs can gain a bachelor’s degree in education and train to become basic school teachers.
Enrollment of visually-impaired and hearing-impaired students across these three institutions remains low despite recent efforts to improve facilities and attract more people with disabilities into the teaching profession.
It is imperative to work closely with students with special needs to ensure that genuine inclusion and access are actualized and sustained. This requires working actively to implement all relevant policies so that PWDs are not left at the margins of education in Ghana — during the pandemic or after.

author: Wunpini Fatimata Mohammed


text:
India bans TikTok, 58 other apps amid rising anti-China sentiment, border clashes · Global Voices
Vishal Yashoda Manve

Tik Tok in Chat. Image via Flickr by Christoph Scholz. CC BY-SA 2.0.
The border clashes and the stand-off between Indian and Chinese security forces in the Galwan valley on June 15, reached naught after India, Asia's third-largest economy, decided to impose an interim ban on the wildly popular Chinese video-creation platform TikTok and 58 other apps due to “security issues” on Monday, June 29, 2020. There are also speculations of India advising domestic telecom companies to refrain from using Chinese telecom hardware, particularly Huawei and ZTE.
In the weeks following the border clashes after India reported the death of 20 soldiers, instances of anti-China protests were rampant across the country with many trade groups burning Chinese products, and social media users warning Indian citizens of buying China-made products. This has prompted Chinese brands like Xiaomi to cover their signages with “Make In India” banners to prevent instances of vandalism. Make in India is an Indian government-promoted campaign encouraging companies to manufacture their products in India and benefit the Indian economy.
In the wake of these bans, the use of Indian apps with similar functionalities to those of banned Chinese apps like Tik Tok, Helo, and WeChat increased. One such app — Chingari — saw an increase of 100,000 users in just 30 minutes.
The June 15 clashes were the first deadly violence between Chinese and Indian forces in 45 years after decades of carefully-cultivated economic ties. For example, Chinese smartphone makers established factories in Southern India to cater to a growing demand for low-cost Chinese smartphones.
India is a key market for ByteDance's TikTok with roughly over 30 percent of its global users coming from India, estimated at 120 million users. Losing the Indian market could throw a spanner into the company's valuation as the firm readies for an IPO listing.
The Indian government termed the Chinese-owned applications as “prejudicial to sovereignty and integrity of India, defense of India, the security of the state and public order.”
The government further said it had “received many complaints from various sources including several reports about the misuse of some mobile apps available on Android and iOS platforms for stealing and surreptitiously transmitting users’ data in an unauthorized manner to servers which have locations outside India.”
Besides TikTok, India also banned music and image sharing app ShareIt, UC Browser, short video sharing app Likee, messaging and social media app WeChat, and streaming service Bigo Live.   Chinese state media Global Times described the ban as Modi government's “political crackdown on Chinese companies”.
Yet, tech researchers pointed out that the ban does not include any of the Chinese apps that deal with financial transactions using the Indian government-regulated payments system Unified Payments Interface (UPI), and have access to private data of users.
.@logic: They haven't touched any of the UPI apps coming from China such as MiPay, etc. which handle more sensitive data including Aadhaar, biometric (facial recognition) and financial data. This is not an economic warfare angle at play, but these particular apps.
— MediaNama.com (@medianama) June 30, 2020
In recent weeks, India's government procurement website barred the selling of Chinese-manufactured goods asking global e-commerce giants Amazon.com and Walmart to show “Country of Origin” tags on goods sold. In addition, local media reports reported that India has been delaying the clearance of imported goods from China in ports, especially electronic items.
In a statement, TikTok India noted:
We have been invited to meet with concerned government stakeholders for an opportunity to respond and submit clarifications. TikTok continues to comply with all data privacy and security requirements under Indian law and has not shared any information of our users in India with any foreign government including the Chinese government.
The #AntiChina sentiment on social media currently driven by border conflict is not a new phenomenon. Anti-China sentiments have been on the rise since Doklam stand-off in 2017. Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, Indians were blaming China and advising their fellow citizens from using China-made goods and services due to security or privacy issues.
Joining the chorus of #AntiChina sentiments, a village in India's Maharashtra state, Kondhawe-Dhawade, announced a boycott of products from China, adding to the optics of nationalistic sentiments.
Indian dairy company Amul had its Twitter account blocked briefly in June, after it posted advertisements that read “Exit the dragon?” hinting at China's boycott in the Indian social media ecosystem.
#Amul Topical: New Delhi bans 59 Chinese apps! pic.twitter.com/f01D1gNBLt
— Amul.coop (@Amul_Coop) June 30, 2020
Many Twitter users questioned Prime Minister Narendra Modi's campaign, “PM Cares Fund”, for receiving money from Chinese smartphone brands and continuing official presence with @MyGov account on TikTok. The MyGov on TikTok account was eventually deleted, and Modi also quit micro-blogging website Weibo.
Beijing-New Delhi diplomatic relations were always relatively frosty but had witnessed a thaw due to economic relationships and an increase in imports-exports in recent years. India-China trade relationship is estimated at over $90 billion, with around $50 billion in the latter's favour. Plus, India is highly dependent on chemical API's (active pharmaceutical ingredients) needed for manufacturing medicines and vaccinations and electronic components powering India's large manufacturing industry, imported from China.
On July 1, Indian Minister of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Nitin Gadkari said the country would not allow Chinese companies to participate in highway projects through any joint partnerships. He further said Chinese investors would not be allowed in various sectors. The Indian telecom ministry has also asked telecom providers and other private companies to boycott all future deals and equipment upgrades involving China.
Economist and policy analyst Mohan Guruswamy  said:
Nothing will come of this current call for a ban. If there is no escalation of events at the border, I see Modi taking a trip to China in December.
Industry veteran Deepak Jain, who heads Automotive Component Manufacturers Association of India told Livemint:
These (imports) are components in which India currently does not have the manufacturing capability and probably because of the scale we have gone to China for sourcing. Hence there should be no knee jerk reactions to China.
Analysts warn that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi should recognize that if India takes this path, “it has scant ability to hurt China economically, but it has plenty of ability to hurt itself”.

author: Vishal Yashoda Manve


text:
Justice, inclusion and an economy for all: Australian activists mobilise at Virtual Progress 2020 · Global Voices
Kevin Rennie

Virtual Progress 2020 Final Plenary – Courtesy Australian Progress with permission
You would think that activists, especially those working for nonprofits, would be fed up with online meetings after months of video communication from home due to COVID-19. Think again!
The Centre for Australian Progress is a progressive change organisation, supporting change agents with training programs and networking. Its flagship event attracts 1500 participants every second year at Melbourne Town Hall. This year it went online for two full days (June 23-24).
Promoted as ‘a rapid response online conference being urgently organised to respond to intersecting crises’, Virtual Progress 2020 certainly lived up to expectations. Some 1500 people paid to register for the two-day event that involved 225 speakers, with many from overseas, more than 60 sessions, and more than 5000 live chat messages.
There were surprisingly few glitches during the live streamed plenaries, panel discussions, case studies and Zoom-based interactive workshops, plus a few side events and live performances. #VirtualProgress2020 trended on Twitter.
There were few surprises regarding the topics and issues covered. Australian Progress will be posting full recordings from plenaries and breakouts for participants over the next couple of weeks.
The impact of #BlackLivesMatter was everywhere. Recent nationwide public protests in Australia have highlighted black deaths in custody, policing and indigenous incarcerations. The story of Aunty Tanya Day illustrated the depths of these ongoing issues. Tanya died in a police cell in 2017 after hitting her head several times. She had been arrested for public drunkenness after falling asleep on a train:
Systemic racism so cruelly highlighted by the opposite treatment of the drunken white woman picked up & driven home by police WHILE Tanya Day was in her cell, suffering the consequences of outdated, often racially-focused public drunkenness laws – Apryl Day#virtualprogress2020
— Andi Snelling ? (@AndiSnelling) June 23, 2020
Many aspects of COVID-19 recovery were explored such as the economy (stimulus, public debt, disaster capitalism, workers’ rights); the environment and climate change.
A grim but really important reminder from @McKenzieAmanda: just because we're living through the COVID crisis, it doesn't mean that the climate crisis has gone away. #VirtualProgress2020
— New/Mode (@NewModeInc) June 23, 2020
Business as usual was not seen as an option:
“We need to talk about the way the economy serves people and gives them a good life” No government gets a cookie for balancing a budget @DawsonEJ #VirtualProgress2020 @StephanieKelton
— Jessica Wheelock (@Jessicawheelock) June 23, 2020
Michele O’Neil, President of the ACTU (Australian Council of Trade Unions), highlighted the ongoing struggle against trends such as casualisation and exploitation of the workforce:
Listening to @MicheleONeilAU at #VirtualProgress2020
“Because for years we've been campaigning around the issue of insecure work, we were prepared for something we couldn't have expected.” #Covid19 #COVID19Aus
— Kelly ⬛?? (@dblplusgoodful) June 23, 2020
Other key issues included domestic violence, refugees and people seeking asylum; disability, accessibility and tackling ableism.
Carly Findlay is an appearance activist who led a discussion about the best principles and practical takeaways to make projects and communications more accessible. Afterwards, she shared some her ideas on her blog:
Many words are ingrained into our vocabulary as casual ableism – especially “idiot” and “lame”, and mental illness slurs like “crazy” and “OCD”. There are also turns of phrase like “tone deaf”, “crippling”, and “blind to” that are harmful.
…I ask you to stop using disability slurs please. Don’t justify them. Call them out when family and friends use them.
Disability Activist Carly Findlay at Progress 2017 – Screenshot from author's video
A side event considered the implications of the fight for democracy in Hong Kong:
‘The Hong Kong people have no choice. The city is our home. We want to keep our home, to be free, and we hope to keep our human rights protected. Especially for the next generation’ Bonnie Leung #VirtualProgress2020 pic.twitter.com/rSuljGaco6
— Australian Progress (@ausprogress) June 24, 2020
There were many shared themes throughout the two days.
There was considerable focus on the best practice for change. Marshall Ganz, who is well-known for his work in community organising, led the way:
Mobilising – is aggregating individual resources and deploying them somewhere – there's a place but – organising is building power, and retain it..
You need to do both… Ganz #VirtualProgress2020
— Australian Progress (@ausprogress) June 23, 2020
A message shared by many participants was that those with lived experience of the issues must be a central part of addressing solutions. As Kera Sherwood-O’Regan, indigenous and disabled multidisciplinary storyteller and rights advocate from Aotearoa (New Zealand), put it: “Nothing about us without us. We know our community.”
U.S. disability rights and inclusion activist Imani Barbarin agreed: “We’re not here for decoration. We have something to say.”
At the final plenary, All in for a feminist recovery, Tuisina Ymania Brown, LGA (International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association ) World Co-Secretary General spoke powerfully about the challenges:
Do what WOMEN have done for millenia! We weave. We merge. We intersect. We connect. We interlace. We rinse and REPEAT until we have one gigantic unseverable umbilical cord connecting us to the mother of us all – ONE HUMAN RACE – ONE PLANET – ONE HUMANITY.
Despite endless whining on social media about online meetings during the pandemic, Virtual Progress was extremely well received.There appeared to be little criticism of the running of the conference and no trolling. Well known Melbourne activist and advocate Asher Wolf, who was a speaker on a couple of panels, had previously raised issues about registration costs, accessibility and inclusion during past Progress events.
Australian Progress promised to act on these and has done so for this conference.
Wolf was prominent in exposing the Federal government’s Robodebt program, which has since been declared illegal. Her determination has been an example for many:
“No matter what ways they break you, you still have to be able to form a fist” – fighting words from @Asher_Wolf! She says laughter and camaraderie in the #NotMyDebt movement were also crucial to beating #robodebt. #VirtualProgress2020
— Alyssa Robinson (@thatsironical) June 24, 2020
Nicole Paris, a panellist in 2019, was fulsome in her praise of this year's event:
fair to say I been a “critical friend” (annoying hassler?) of @ausprogress over years. This program wld have been inconceivable 5 yrs ago (tho my idea of a good time). Free places for mob, more accessible scholarships & truly diverse speakers. Yay for growth #VirtualProgress2020
— Nicola is (@peacenicsta) June 24, 2020
Linh Do tweeted this cartoon by Desiree Llanos Dee (@deslikesdoodling on Instagram):
What an amazing #VirtualProgress2020. Thanks to everyone who came along! I can't wait to catch up on the content in the coming month. ? pic.twitter.com/h4R0aLNQQs
— Linh Do (@lmdo) June 24, 2020
Nevertheless, many activists will be looking forward to the next “in the flesh” event at the town hall.

author: Kevin Rennie