text:
The fight against disinformation in Bulgaria is almost nonexistent, says journalist Ivan Georgiev · Global Voices
Metamorphosis Foundation

Ivan Georgiev, courtesy photo, used with permission.
This story originally appeared on Meta.mk News Agency, a project of Metamorphosis Foundation. An edited version is published below as part of a content-sharing agreement.
Ivan Georgiev is a Bulgarian reporter and anchor for bTV, one of his country's leading TV stations. He has covered major international and regional events in the past few years and has directed several short documentaries.
In 2012, he was awarded the World Press Institute Fellowship. He is also the holder of several journalism awards, including The National Grand Award for Investigative Journalism, granted by “Radostina Konstantinova” Foundation. He holds a degree in journalism from Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”.
Meta.mk News Agency spoke with him about disinformation and manipulation of public opinion in Bulgaria and on the broader region, focusing on North Macedonia as a potential target for malicious content.
Meta.mk: What are the most noticeable manipulations and disinformation spread through the media in Bulgaria or Bulgarian language?
Ivan Georgiev (IG): We probably need to first differentiate between the main types of fake news thrown into the public space in Bulgaria. A closer look at the problem will clearly outline two main narratives – one directed towards the West (against the EU, NATO, the USA, and Western values in general). And second – fake news, directed against local Bulgarian independent media and journalists, politicians from the opposition, non-compliant businessman, intellectuals, and all those, who dare to criticize the political status quo in the country. They are often referred to as “Soros agents”, “homosexuals”,”traitors”, “supporters of anti Bulgarian and anti Christian conspiracies” and so on. In other words – it’s for internal use only.
However, more often than not, those two disinformation flows overlap each other and cannot be distinctively split apart.
Ivan Georgiev, courtesy photo, used with permission.
Without conducting any scientific content analysis of fake news in Bulgaria, as a working journalist and consumer of local news, I would say that the first type of misinformation is more dominant around here. And there is a clear reason why – when talking to young journalists or journalism students I often refer to one single question: Do you know what the accumulated defense budget of NATO alliance is? Keep in mind Bulgaria is a member state.
In 2017 it was 946 billion US dollars (source: Michael Kofman, CNA 2017).
And do you have any idea about the defense budget for the same period of time of the Russian Federation?
Well, it’s 47.4 billion US dollars.
If you cannot win a conventional confrontation – with guns, planes, tanks etc, it is only natural to transfer the action to the field of the so-called “hybrid war”, as we call it – fake news and control over the information flows are the most effective weapons in this combat. Control of media as well. Controlling people’s trust in media, too.
Bulgaria is a border state between the West and the East. And although the majority of our citizens identify themselves as “pro-EU,” “pro-NATO,” and “pro-Western values,” our country has its deep historical and cultural ties with Russia. That is why it is seen as a weak spot on the European map by the Russian propaganda. That is why headlines, which generally sound like “Norwegian pedophiles want Bulgarian children” or “Europe is banning Orthodox Christianity” are even possible.
Meta.mk: Does Bulgaria have any action plan on countering disinformation and manipulation, and have you seen any progress or impact?
IG: There are several joint initiatives by the EU, as well as several European platforms, which try to reach the local news consumer, but I would say their footprint is minimal to none. Even if there is an actual, specific plan to fight fake news and disinformation in Bulgaria, I haven’t heard of it. In addition, I honestly think there is no sufficient political will to address this problem, since, in the first place, politicians in power and their affiliated businesses benefit to a great extent by all the negative campaigns against the independent voices in the country.
Meta.mk: Have there been any convictions for inciting hatred and causing damage through spreading fake news – disinformation, or hate speech?
IG: There were a few cases of investigation and even one or two preliminary charges, but no final convictions. It may be curious for your readers to learn that back in May 2018 the Member of Parliament with the biggest opposition party at the moment, Mr Tasko Ermenkov, came into public focus after spreading the rumor that the water in our nation’s capital (Sofia) is poisoned and people should not drink it via his Facebook profile. The prosecutor’s office then refused to investigate the case and to press charges against him.
Meta.mk: Are the media associations active in countering disinformation?
IG: I think they have more of a declarative than proactive nature.
Meta.mk: How much is North Macedonia present in Bulgarian media?
IG: As a reporter for the news programs at the biggest and most viewed Bulgarian media, I’ve been covering Macedonia for the past 10 years and I think the ongoing political and social processes in Macedonia are very interesting to the Bulgarian public. Bulgarians are just truly curious about Macedonia and Macedonians. The historical bond determines apparent emotional ties. And local media realized that fact. That is the reason for Macedonia to be present quite often in the news flow in Bulgaria – with video and on-the-ground live reporting, as well as in-depth TV documentaries, written articles online, in the newspapers and all other form of contemporary media. Every other day there are news reports, dedicated to Macedonia. Which, according to my personal experience, is not the same with Macedonian media covering Bulgaria – they do it rarely.
However, in my opinion, the quality of the news reports from Macedonia has improved in the last 10 years and became more comprehensive and in-depth. First of all, the journalists, who cover topics in Macedonia, have now much better background and thus understanding of the political and social processes in the country. Local Macedonian authorities also opened themselves toward foreign media recently much more, compared to the time of Mr Nikola Gruevski governing as prime minister, for example. In addition, Macedonians themselves obviously got used to foreign media crews filming on the streets of Skopje. 10 years ago it was still an exotic view. This also adds to Bulgarian journalists working much easier on Macedonian soil.
Meta.mk: Is disinformation about Macedonia often present in the media? Can you quote some of the most common examples?
IG: I would not say often. As matter of fact, I can remember only a few fake news related to Macedonia which found place in Bulgarian media recently. The first and most blatant one was actually first published by Macedonian media outlets and later on reprinted by Bulgarian media, which didn’t make the effort to check the facts – it was in the spring of 2016, when local Macedonian media published information about a Bulgarian female tourist, who supposedly killed a swan on the Ohrid Lake by grabbing one of its wings in order to make a selfie photo. It was reprinted not only in Bulgaria, but in the UK as well.
Ohrid Lake, the swan, and the tourist who supposedly killed it when taking a selfie. A Media Fact-Checking Service analysis details the spread of this disinformation. Photo by Nakje Batev, used with permission.
Later on we came to know that the tourist was not Bulgarian, but Albanian, and the swan was not killed. The animal was injured and recovered shortly after, fortunately. For those of us, who conduct meticulous content analysis of the Macedonian media, it was just an example of the long lasting trend of negative coverage of Bulgaria in Macedonia. It was, and still is to a certain extend, hard to find a positive story from Bulgaria (or related to Bulgaria) in Macedonian media outlets.
This predominantly negative image of the neighbors was part of the Macedonian political doctrine for many years. Its pinnacle was reached by the time it became obvious we are going to witness significant political changes in Macedonia some 3 years ago. Certain Bulgarian media outlets produced comprehensive coverage of the so called “journalist” Milenko Nedelkovski and some of his acts, regarding a monument in Macedonia, which is part of the Bulgarian heritage there, without taking into account (or simply neglecting) his affiliation to the previous Macedonian government and its “strongmen”. For those of us, who knew more about Mr Nedelkovski, his professional reputation and his history of acts toward political opponents, journalists and independent intellectuals in Macedonia, it was obvious that it would be wrong to put a sign of equality between him and Macedonian journalism. Furthermore, I know there is a new generation of investigative journalists coming up in Macedonia, whose work and efforts in the field should be respected.


text:
Kremlin’s new law against ‘online disrespect’ proves hard to implement · Global Voices
Maxim Edwards

Login page for VKontakte, Russia’s most popular social media network. Photo: Maxim Edwards
On 31 March, Yuri Kartyzhev logged onto the Russian social media network VKontakte and called President Vladimir Putin an “unbelievable f***wit.” It was the wrong time for such passions; earlier that month, Putin signed a new law allowing courts to fine or jail people found guilty of making “insulting statements” towards the authorities online. Kartyzhev had the dubious honour of becoming the first person sentenced under the new law; on 25 April this carpenter from a small town in the Novgorod Region was fined 30,000 rubles (480 USD) for his posts; the minimum amount a court can demand for the offence.
A cursory look at the runet reveals dozens if not hundreds of similar statements about the powers that be. Many Russian social media users were appalled; an online flashmob was launched in solidarity with Kartyzhev, or at least the opinions he expressed. The hashtag #Сказочный (“unbelievable” or “magical”) can now be found across the runet in his honour. If it could happen to Kartyzhev, it could happen to them too. And it has: on 15 July, the activist Igor Gorlanov was accused by police in Novokuznetsk of violating the law solely for sharing a link to a MediaZona article containing Kartyzhev’s quote.
Gorlanov’s case may seem particularly absurd, but it is just the tip of the iceberg. On 10 July Pavel Chikov, a lawyer with the human rights organisation Agora, noted on his Telegram channel that, by his count, over 20 court cases have been launched referencing the new law against insulting the authorities. Several months since the enactment of the law, it appears to be applied inconsistently and unpredictably, with several cases thrown out of court and government officials openly criticising its misuse by local elites. Roskomsvoboda, an NGO monitoring online freedoms in Russia, recently remarked that the law had “failed.”
On the day of its introduction, prominent opposition politician Alexey Navalny tested the law by tweeting:
С сегодняшнего дня в России действует закон о запрете оскорбления власти в интернете. Я, Алексей Навальный, заявляю: Администрация президента и правительство РФ – сборище воров, мерзавцев и врагов России. Совет Федерации наполнен негодяями. Единая Россия – партия жуликов и воров.
— Alexey Navalny (@navalny) March 29, 2019
From today, a new law is in effect in Russia which prohibits insulting the government online. I, Alexey Navalny, declare: the presidential administration and government of the Russian Federation are a clique of thieves, scoundrels, and enemies of Russia. The Federation Council is filled with rascals. United Russia is a party of crooks and thieves.
There is a bigger picture to this new law, which was part of a package of amendments also including similar punishments for sharing “fake news.” Both are part of a larger legislative drive towards a “sovereign internet” proposed by senator Andrey Klishas and Duma deputy Andrey Lugovoi in December 2018. Websites which fail to remove the offending material within 24 hours may be blocked by the authorities; Meduza reports that in April, two websites in the city of Yaroslavl faced such demands from state-run media watchdog Roskomnadzor after they refused to delete photographs of graffiti offending Putin painted on the side of the local Interior Ministry building.
Roskomnadzor, which carries some of the burdens of implementing the new law, does not appear to have a clear vision of how to do so. For example, officials involved in the brief ban of the Yaroslavl websites cited irrelevant legislation in their warnings to the editors. Furthermore, in April, BBC’s Russian service reported that Roskomnadzor officials had tried to explain the new law’s ramifications to media managers but could not agree on which specific terms were insulting, concluding that each would have to be examined on a case-by-case basis.
Then again, as with Russia’s notorious “anti-extremism” legislation, perhaps the vagueness of the new law is its rationale. The new amendments to the administrative code’s article on “petty hooliganism” forbid “indecent expressions and obvious disrespect towards society, the state, official state symbols and the constitution of the Russian Federation, and bodies exercising state authority in the Russian Federation.” There are no clarifications as to what constitutes “indecency” and “clear disrespect.”
When asked about the law in last month’s Direct Line, an annual live show where citizens can ask questions of the president, Putin justified its introduction by referencing a similar initiative in Germany. Yet he also expressed concern about its misuse and stressed that it was primarily designed to stop disrespect of state symbols, in a veiled criticism of haphazard attempts to implement the law in Russia’s regions.
For example, on 26 June a court in Abakan, Khakassia, dismissed a case against Vyacheslav Shoyev, a resident of Krasnoyarsk who called Valentin Konovalov, governor of the Siberian region, a “creep and an arsehole” in a Facebook post. Konovalov’s press secretary stated that the governor played no role in the case against Shoyev, suggesting that the arrest had been an autonomous decision by the security services.
Similarly, on 28 June, a court in Tatarstan dismissed a case against Maxim Semin, who according to case materials had posted “negative assessments” of a political party on a VKontake group. The party is not named, but MBK media found the offending post, in a group called “Tipychny Dzhalil” in which Semin called the ruling party United Russia a “gang of thieves and fraudsters,” adding his address and the words “if you are a real man, you’ll know where to find me!” The court ruled that the “negative evaluation of the activities of a political party does not objectively constitute an offence according to [the article].”
Moreover, on 10 July, a court Izhevsk, Udmurtia, fined local hockey player Daniil Fertikov 30,000 rubles (480 USD) for writing an “obscene message” about local governor Alexander Brechalov. The same day Mikhail Fedotov, the Russian government’s ombudsman for human rights, called the court ruling “inadequate” and stressed that the law only prohibited disrespect towards bodies exercising state (i.e. federal) power such as the president and parliament.
“Let’s not forget that disturbances of the public order, when accompanied by foul language in a public place, are considered acts of hooliganism by the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation […] To hand out punishments for swearing on social networks is like trying to kill mosquitoes in a swamp with a fly swatter,” remarked Fedotov.
Another intervention was made on 19 June by Leonid Levin, chairman of the State Duma’s Committee on Information Policy, who suggested that governors and local authorities were overstepping their remit. “The law strictly states that it concerns institutions of power, meaning the president, government, constitution, parliament, and courts,” said Levin. “It should not be used for just any mayor or governor. Unfortunately, we are now witnessing attempts by local regional elites to use this law to settle scores with public figures and journalists.”
Roskomsvoboda noted that the highest number of these cases in recent months have occurred in the Archangelsk region, where local protesters have clashed with the authorities over a planned landfill for trash from Moscow. Several of these cases concerned offensive statements towards the region’s governor Igor Orlov. On 2 July, Svetlana Baksheyeva, a resident of the city of Kotlas in the region, became the first person to have the new law brought against her more than once, due to statements about governor Orlov on VKontakte.
It is hard to say exactly how RuNet users can avoid falling afoul of the new law. Stanislav Seleznev, a lawyer working for Agora, said in a 10 July interview with RFE/RL that in several cases, such as Baksheyeva’s trial, the prosecution did not invoke any independent professional assessments and simply entered the offending words into the court record as self-evident violations of the law.
To be on the safe side, it might be better to avoid Kartyzhev’s words. Or in any case, use them creatively as suggested by Grani.RU:
Если вы из принципа не хотите уходить из “Вконтакте”, то пишите “Путин – сказочный хлебороб! Путин – лор!”.
— Грани.Ру (@GraniTweet) April 24, 2019
If, in principle, you don’t want to leave VKontakte, you can always write “Putin is an unbelievable grain-grower!” [a play on the original word], or “Putin is a Loros!” [an embroidered robe worn by Byzantine emperors, seen on some Orthodox icons; both words sound similar to their less praiseworthy counterparts]

source: news-globalvoices

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

author: Maxim Edwards


text:
‘No VAT on Pad’ protests prompt Bangladesh government to remove proposed tax · Global Voices
পান্থ রহমান রেজা (Pantha)

Image by Clker-Free-Vector-Images from Pixabay
In June 2019, activists in Nigeria demonstrated over their government's intention to reinstate a tax on sanitary pads in the 2019/2020 budget. Last year, amidst protests, India removed a controversial tax on sanitary pads, which was introduced in 2017. Now, Bangladesh joins the global debate on period poverty.
Recent protests called for a halt to the proposed 40 percent value-added tax (VAT) and supplementary duties on imported raw materials of sanitary napkins in the country's new budget. Locally made pads are already subject to a 15 percent Value Added Tax (VAT) on the shelf price, so additional taxes on the imported ingredients would make these products out of reach for many — even those already using hygienic disposable pads.
Amidst calls to break the silence and widespread use of the slogan “No VAT on Pad”, the Bangladesh government, in an unprecedented move, scrapped the proposed tax hike on feminine products — but that doesn't mean they are now affordable for women in Bangladesh.
In rural Bangladesh, women's periods are still a taboo subject. Because menstruation is deemed impure, this imposes many restrictions on what women can do and where they can go. Even women who can afford these products rarely buy them at regular shops, mostly out of embarrassment.
According to 2014 Bangladesh National Hygiene Baseline Survey, during their menstruation cycle, 40 percent of girls miss school, for a median of three days a month.
Many girls miss school during their period. Photo by Firoze Ahmed, via Demotix.
According to a report by the non-profit SNV Bangladesh, over 89 per cent of Bangladesh's 78.4 million women still use old clothes or rags, as many cannot afford disposable sanitary napkins.
The annual market worth of the sanitary napkin industry (including adult diapers) in Bangladesh is around 3 billion Taka (US $35.5 million), 90 percent of which is supplied by local manufacturers. The per-packet price of sanitary napkins is 100-160 Taka (US $1.25-$2), so many in rural areas cannot afford them.
The cost of pads has remained high because of the need to pay existing customs and regulatory duties on the foreign-sourced raw materials needed for local assembly.
According to some manufacturers, the scrapping of the proposed increase in tax, however, won't impact the current price. If the 15 percent value-added tax at the shelves is scrapped, manufacturers say, then the price will come down.
Many women are not aware of the health risks of reusing old clothes instead of sanitary napkins. The 2014 National Hygiene Survey discovered that embarrassment and lack of affordability contribute to women resorting to reusing rags and other available alternatives.
Noting that the use of rags instead of pads increases women's health risk, Facebook user Shamima Islam explained that 73 percent of Bangladeshi women suffer from urinary tract and vaginal infections — which can lead to cancer — all because of a lack of menstrual hygiene.
Sanitary pads are not luxury products but essential. Without proper hygienic protection during periods can cause harm and disease. Proposing value-added tax on sanitary pads is disgraceful and anti-women. https://t.co/7HoqgJCONY
— Leesa Gazi (@LeesaGazi) June 29, 2019
On Facebook, Shahriar Shuvo recommended not only getting rid of the tax, but also introducing subsidies for sanitary napkins:
এদেশে এমপি – মন্ত্রীদের জন্য শুল্কমুক্ত গাড়ী আনার সুবিধা রাখা হয় আর অতিরিক্ত ৪০% ভ্যাট ধরা হয় নারীদের জন্য প্রয়োজনীয় স্যানিটারি ন্যাপকিনের উপর ।
শুধু ভ্যাট প্রত্যাহারই নয় স্যানিটারি ন্যাপকিন সহজলভ্য করনে এর উপর ভর্তুকির দাবি জানাচ্ছি ।
We have duty-free car facilities for our ministers and members of parliament. However, we impose 40 percent tax/VAT on essential menstrual hygiene products for women.
Not only should the taxes be scrapped, I demand subsidies for these products to make them affordable to most women.
Different sections of people also went offline and took to the streets to protest. Here in this video, a small section of university students are seen protesting the increase, forming a human chain in Dhaka's Shahbag area:
Bangladeshi doctor, Sakia Haque, who traveled to all 64 districts of the country raising awareness about reproductive health and hygiene among schoolgirls, commented on the issue:
সারা দেশে যে বলে আসলাম,মিন্সট্রেশনের সময় স্যানিটারি প্যাড ইউজ করবা, unhygienic কাপড় না।।
এখন কিভাবে মুখ দেখাব?
যাদের মাসে আয় ২০০০-৩০০০টাকা, তাদের কাছে আগেই প্যাড কিনা বিলাসিতা ছিল! আর এখন? […]
[During my travels] I requested that every girl should use disposable sanitary pads instead of unhygienic cloths during menstruation. What can I say to them now?
For those who were earning a mere 2,000-3,000 Bangladeshi Takas (US $25-$38) per month, disposable pads were a luxury. And now?
On a feminist website called Nari (Women), Puspita Mondol shared a story about visiting a childhood friend in the Ashulia township near the capital, Dhaka:
২০০৯ সালের কথা। আশুলিয়ায় গেলাম ছোটবেলার বান্ধবীর বাসায়। ও আর ওর বর হামিম গার্মেন্টসে জব করতো। আমার পিরিয়ডের ডেইট মনে ছিলো না এবং হঠ্যাৎ পিরিয়ড হয়। কিন্তু ওর কাছে প্যাড নেই, সেপ্যাড ইউজ করে না। আমরা দু'জন ওর বাসা থেকে বের হয়ে রাস্তায় গেলাম। ছোটো ছোটো বেশ কয়টা ফার্মেসী পেলাম। কিন্তু কোথাও কোন প্যাড নেই। বলে কেউ কিনে না, তাই রাখি না। আমি এতো অবাক হয়েছিলাম! এতো এতো মেয়ে কাজ করে এখানকার গার্মেন্টসগুলোতে আর কেউ প্যাড ব্যবহার করে না! কারণ কী? কতো আর বেতন পায় যারা গার্মেন্টেসে কাজ করে?
She (my friend) worked in a ready-made garment factory along with her husband. I realized it was the time for my period and I did not have sanitary pads with me. I asked her and she said that she doesn't use (disposable) sanitary pads. So we went out to buy these. Usually, these are available in local pharmacies. I went to several pharmacies, and they didn't have sanitary napkins on their shelves. The shopkeepers told me that they don't keep the product on the shelves as (almost) no one buys them. I was immensely surprised as this is an industrial area where many women work. Nobody uses (disposable) pads! Maybe because of the high price, these workers cannot afford them and want to save money.
Part of the challenge in making feminine products accessible is changing cultural norms. For women to realize their right to affordable supplies in order to stay healthy, menstruation must be seen as natural and normal. In an op-ed in the Daily Prothom Alo, Mohammad Syed Bin Abdullah, a law student at Dhaka University, said that a civil awareness movement is what's needed to make the government keep the cost of supplies down, so that feminine hygiene product will finally be affordable for all Bangladeshi women.

author: পান্থ রহমান রেজা (Pantha)


text:
Cambodian activists arrested for commemorating the anniversary of political analyst Kem Ley’s death · Global Voices
Mong Palatino

An activist selling t-shirts with this printed quote of Kem Ley was arrested by the police for ‘inciting to commit a felony’. Photo from the Facebook page of Cambodian Center for Human Rights
Cambodian police arrested several activists and prevented public commemoration of the third anniversary of prominent political analyst Kem Ley's murder.
Sopheap Chak of the Cambodian Center for Human Rights described the work of Kem Ley prior to his death:
Kem Ley is most commonly described as a political analyst. Though accurate, this description feels insufficient to capture the work he did, the people he engaged, the bravery he showed, and the message he sent to Cambodians everywhere. Kem Ley was unshaking in his commitment to the truth. He did not let fear or bias sway him, and criticized both the main parties at time, when he felt it was merited.
Kem Ley was killed in a gas station on 10 July 2016 which many continue to suspect was linked to his work as a radio commentator, political analyst, and leader of the Grassroots Democracy Party (GDP).
The police arrested a suspect who immediately confessed that he killed Kem Ley because the latter owed him money. But a study done by the International Commission of Jurists revealed that there were significant gaps in the investigation, trial, and conviction and urged the government to establish an independent probe under the auspices of the United Nations.
Civil society organizations (CSOs) continue to demand truth and justice three years after the killing of Kem Ley. A joint statement signed by more than 20 local and international CSOs highlights the importance of resolving the Kem Ley killing, and to address the culture of impunity under the government of Prime Minister Hun Sen who has ruled the country over the past three decades. An excerpt of the statement reads:
Kem Ley’s killing remains an alarming reminder of Cambodia’s culture of impunity in cases of apparent enforced disappearances, killings and other forms of physical and legal harassment of human rights defenders, labour leaders, monks, journalists, members of the political opposition and other individuals critical of the ruling regime. Kem Ley’s death also occurred in the midst of a crackdown on dissent, and rising restrictions on independent and critical media.
The statement refers to the crackdown of dissenting voices in Cambodia. In 2018, an election was held without an opposition party because it was dissolved by the Court after the ruling party accused it of conspiring with foreign powers to bring down the Hun Sen government. Several independent media outlets were also slapped with charges linked to tax and licensing violations which forced their closure ahead of the elections.
The police prevented groups from holding activities across Cambodia that sought to commemorate the third anniversary of Kem Ley's death.
In the capital city of Phnom Penh, activists Kong Raiya and Soung Neakpaon were arrested under the charge of “incitement to commit a felony” which carries a potential prison sentence of six months to two years. Raiya was arrested for encouraging people to join activities in honor of Kem Ley and for selling t-shirts with this printed message: “You will also be VICTIMIZED even if you do nothing. It’s just a matter of TIME”. This was one of the quotes attributed to Kem Ley.
In a media interview, the police explained why the message on the t-shirts was deemed a threat:
It implies that authorities organized a plan to kill people. This is damaging. It causes chaos and instability in society.
Meanwhile, Soung was arrested for joining a crowd outside the gas station where Kem Ley was killed. He was holding a placard urging an end to extrajudicial killings.
There were several other activists who were also arrested but they were eventually released and only Raiya and Soung were charged by authorities.
Three youths are arrested when they tried to bring flowers and photo of Dr. Kem Ley in order to dedicate to his soul at Caltex mart where he was gunned down 3 years ago #KemLey #Justice4KemLey #RightsKh #PoliticsKH pic.twitter.com/NWkuSBe4bO
— Sar Mory (@morysar) July 10, 2019
Some CSO leaders managed to get inside the convenience store of the gas station where they carried flowers in memory of Kem Ley. The police confiscated the flowers and ordered individuals to remove t-shirts with the image of Kem Ley. Here's a report from the Center for Alliance of Labor and Human Rights:
Attendees were disallowed from wearing t-shirts with Dr Kem Ley’s face, with one representative, Tem Malai, forced to take the shirt off by authorities. Whilst CSOs were inside preparing coffee and jasmine flowers, authorities entered the Caltex Mart and seized the flowers to prevent any commemoration of his death. A Boeung Kak land activist was prevented from entering the Caltex Mart at all and upon arriving at the location was ushered away by the authorities.
Once again, July 10th, I come to a coffee shop with 2 glasses of coffee, one for myself and one for our dearest late Dr. Kem Ley who was gunned down (today) three years ago. I noticed heavy presence of security forces, one of whom came to my table and took away the flowers. pic.twitter.com/QT7qiPRw5h
— Preap Kol (@kolpreap) July 10, 2019
Members of the GDP were also prevented by the police from leaving their office to join the crowd outside the gas station.
JUST IN: Members of #GDP disrupted from leaving its office in #PhnomPenh as they are on their departure for #KemLey‘s three-year anniversary. #Cambodia (Photo: Supplied) pic.twitter.com/ssquVlBdL3
— Chenda KUN (@ChendaKun) July 10, 2019
More than 80 groups signed a statement condemning the arrest of individuals who were honoring Kem Ley:
(The) arrest and charges mark yet another low point in the government’s crackdown on free speech and peaceful assembly in Cambodia.
The accusation that a peaceful gathering merits a prison sentence is a serious and systematic threat to the little remaining space left for freedom of expression in the country.
In response, the government said the opposition and CSOs should stop ‘politicizing’ the death anniversary of Kem Ley.

author: Mong Palatino


text:
Could polygraph testing for Trinidad & Tobago police help create more public trust? · Global Voices
Janine Mendes-Franco

Riot police from the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service (TTPS) outside the St. James amphitheatre in Port of Spain during the Drummit2Summit event in 2009. Photo by Georgia Popplewell, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.
Trinidad and Tobago's Commissioner of Police (CoP), Captain Gary Griffith, plans to introduce routine polygraph tests for members of the police service, starting as early as the week of July 14, 2019.
Polygraphs, commonly known as lie detector tests, measure physiological reactions to a series of questions in order to evaluate whether or not the subject is being deceptive.
In a country facing increasing rates of violent crime, the move is part of an effort to create greater accountability and transparency within the police service, which does not currently hold a high level of public trust. Some police officers have also said they fear repercussions for reporting fellow officers’ wrongdoings.
While the CoP's announcement has garnered support from citizens who feel it is high time the police service is purged of dishonest officers, others are concerned that polygraph testing would violate a law known as the Police Service Act.
In 2007, new regulations presented in the House of Representatives established that potential candidates for the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service (TTPS) must agree to submit DNA information, as well as to undergo polygraph testing, drug testing and psychological assessment. Then-Minister of National Security, Martin Joseph, explained that they made the criteria more stringent because “the quality of officers was critical for the success of the police service”.
Polygraphs have therefore been part of criteria for acceptance, but thereafter, the tests are not routine except in cases of promotion or transfer to special units. Some officers have called this latest move to make polygraph testing a routine “demoralising”.
In other countries where police use polygraph tests, critics have called their accuracy into question. In the United States, for instance, the Employee Polygraph Protection Act (EPPA) bars most private employers from using lie detector tests, either for screening or during the employment period. But supporters of polygraph testing in the TTPS say these kinds of restrictions should not pertain to public service employees.
In one CNC3 TV news report, Commissioner Griffith shared some of the questions asked of officers on the test, including whether or not they receive remuneration for allowing the passage of illegal weapons and drugs into the country.
While the test is not mandatory, Griffith said it was “amazing to note” that so many officers seemed opposed to taking it, especially in the southwestern part of the country — an area with a heavy saturation of illegal drugs, guns and human trafficking.
“Because of the sensitivity of those locations and those units, you must be polygraphed if you want to be stationed there,” Griffith said, adding that he would set an example by volunteering to test himself first. Those who refuse to take the polygraph test in these high-risk areas may be reassigned to another division. He also plans to introduce random drug testing within the service. Griffith understands that some officers may seek legal advice on the matter, to which he replied, “I have court clothes.”
The Trinidad and Tobago Police Service Social and Welfare Association (TTPSSWA) pushed back on the proposed new parameters for polygraph testing, saying that while the commissioner's intention is “commendable”, he needs to communicate to members the rationale for — and ramifications of — these measures. The CoP is coordinating a meeting with TTSPSSWA to discuss the matter.
TTPSSWA President, Inspector Gideon Dickson, said that while the association agreed with the need to rid the police service of rogue elements, it had to be done within the parameters of the law.
Apart from sections of the general public, Commissioner Griffith has received support from professor Ramesh Deosaran, chairman of the Police Manpower Audit Committee, who thinks that polygraph testing will increase morale and boost public confidence. Former head of the Public Service, Reginald Dumas, also had no objection, in principle, but said the legal ramifications needed to be clarified.
In a telephone interview with Global Voices, human resources professional Lara Quentrall-Thomas said that polygraph testing is not new to Trinidad and Tobago or the wider region; in her experience, it is pretty standard practice in the area of national security. “Especially in small societies like ours,” she explains, “where you're very often policing your own community, you want assurances that those in authority are incorruptible.” There should be no argument with the pre-employment polygraph testing, as employers have the right to determine the parameters of candidate evaluation, Quentrall-Thomas says.
While the police service also has the right to undertake additional testing as part of a new standard of employment, she says, it must be done through a process of consultation with the TTPSSWA union representatives: “People don't necessarily have to agree with it, but they must be given the chance to review, consult and give feedback.”
This falls under the principles of natural justice. Best practice dictates that except in extenuating circumstances like war, for instance, or the adoption of new global standards — the terms and conditions of a person's employment should not be changed without consultation.
Thus far, any failed polygraphs can only be used to determine whether to reassign officers; they cannot be used as grounds for firing them.

author: Janine Mendes-Franco


text:
How Nigeria uses the law to repress free speech: The case of journalist Jones Abiri · Global Voices
Nwachukwu Egbunike

Nigerian journalist Jones Abiri (third from left) with his legal team, speaks to the media on September 5, 2018. Image by Committee to Protect Journalists/ Jonathan Rozen, used with permission.
In May 2019, Nigeria’s security agents once again detained and charged journalist Jones Abiri for crimes of sabotage, terrorism and cybercrimes that they say he committed in 2016.
The government has targeted Abiri as the publisher and editor-in-chief of the Weekly Source, a daily in the oil-rich state of Bayelsa in Nigeria’s Niger Delta region.
His travails at the hands of security agents represent the height of Nigeria’s state repression of free speech and press freedom. Nigerian leaders have consistently activated various laws to target critics and journalists such as Abiri.
Abiri’s history of arrest goes back to July 2016, when state security (DSS) agents entered his office in Yenagoa, the Bayelsa State capital. In August that year, the DSS accused him of being the leader of a militant separatist group responsible for bombing oil pipelines in the Niger Delta region. Following a global outcry over his arrest, the Nigerian government insisted that his arrest had nothing to do with press freedom and that he lacked official journalism credentials.
Supporters and human rights organizations that came to his defence, however, disagree.
According to the Media Foundation for West Africa:
Abiri, who is the editor of the Weekly Sources newspaper, was arrested on August 2016 on accusations of being part of a separatist group and carrying out terrorist activities. Abiri’s family and colleagues, however, believed his arrest was in connection with a report he published which alleged that the country’s military were planning a coup against President Muhammadu Buhari.
In fact, prior to his arrest, the Weekly Source republished a story alleging that some military officers — in concert with politicians and Niger Delta militants — intended to bomb several crude oil installations to create political instability that would trigger a coup against Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari’s government.
These allegations, denied by the military, were first published by news website PointBlankNews. The US-based publisher of PointBlankNews, Jackson Ude, previously told the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) that people he believes have a connection to Nigerian security services threatened him to remove the story. They also told him that he would face arrest if he returned to Nigeria, Ude told CPJ.
#Nigeria: This July 2016 edition of Weekly Source newspaper was published just days before Jones Abiri, its publisher and editor-in-chief, was arrested by Department of State Security (DSS) agents. He remains in detention without charge or due process. Full paper in thread. pic.twitter.com/t7Bo72nfJv
— CPJ Africa (@CPJAfrica) June 22, 2018
Abiri remained in detention for two years without a trial, before the Abuja Magistrate Court temporarily released him under strict bail conditions on August 15, 2018.
Upon his release, he said that he was forced under threat of violence to write a confession that he was a militant. On September 18, 2018, a Federal High Court in Abuja, the capital, awarded him 10 million Naira (about $27,500 USD) in damages. The presiding judge described the government’s detention of the journalist in the interest of national security as ‘’baseless.”
But this was not the end of Abiri’s prison ordeal.
On March 30, 2019, the DSS arrested him again in Yenagoa and released him the following month in April.
On May 22, 2019, the DSS summoned Abiri to Abuja, detained and charged him with “terrorism, economic sabotage, and fraud” — for crimes he allegedly committed in 2016. Abiri pleaded not guilty, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. He has remained in prison since.
The life of journalist Abiri Jones has been of arrest, detention, perpetually adjourned court hearings, jail in Kuje, jail in DSS underground cells. Right now he is in Kuje prison. His ordeal is far from over. For how long will authorities continue to make life difficult for him?
— Amnesty Int. Nigeria (@AmnestyNigeria) July 1, 2019
Journalism is not a crime. Image by David Alonso/Herramientas, via Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0, February 7, 2015.
Abiri’s charges of sabotage, terrorism and cybercrimes are based on three specific legislative acts: Anti-Sabotage, Terrorism Prevention and Cybercrime Acts.
The Anti-Sabotage Act prohibits the vandalization of petroleum pipelines or the production of crude oil; the Terrorism Act fights all forms of terrorism; the Cybercrime Act addresses the use of computers and information systems to commit crimes.
Violators of any of the three laws run the risk of a death sentence, imprisonment or fines.
The Nigerian government ratified the International Human Rights Law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which both guarantee freedom of expression.
Yet, leaders have consistently abused the law to judicially harass critics and journalists, as in the case of Abiri. In fact, the Nigerian government has a history of using fabricated charges to crack down on freedom of expression and press freedom. According to Amnesty:
Journalists, bloggers and the people that stand up for human rights in Nigeria are constantly being arrested, harassed and intimidated by the authorities. Trumped up charges is one tactic the government uses to jail people who are speaking out against the government.
The Cybercrime Act also has rights groups concerned because of the vague wording that makes it easy for security agencies to continually harass citizens, including journalists, activists and bloggers.
For example, Section 24 of this Act criminalizes the distribution of messages deemed false ‘’for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, ill will or needless anxiety to another or causes such a message to be sent.” In March, authorities used the Cybercrime Act to charge a group of young men for merely criticizing poor conditions and mistreatment of staff and students at their university.
Ambiguous and subjective terms like “inconvenience,” “annoyance” or “insult” make it difficult to determine their definitions. They also afford no protection to the right to offend — an essential part of free expression under threat in Nigeria.
The Terrorism Act also threatens fundamental human rights, giving “broad and sweeping powers” to security agencies to arrest and detain a suspect without “any judicial oversight,” asserts  A. T. Akujobi, a Nigerian legal scholar. According to the International Service for Human Rights, some aspects of the Act are a “criminalization of dissent” because the government can stamp on free speech by labelling it “hate speech, anti-government and anti-security information.”
Jones Abiri’s case exemplifies the precarious state of press freedom and free speech in Nigeria. The state’s power to arbitrarily detain journalists and dissenting voices without trial is often enforced by legislation that violates international human rights treaties ratified by the Nigerian government.
Free speech and a free press are essential aspects of any democratic society. Nigeria should not be an exception.

author: Nwachukwu Egbunike


text:
In Bangladesh, a rickshaw ban for major Dhaka city roads spurs protests and debate · Global Voices
Samaya Anjum

Rickshaws in Dhaka. Image by blackthorne57 used under Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC 2.0)
Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh, is known as the bicycle rickshaw capital of the world. In the past five decades, rickshaws have been integral to Dhaka's commuting and short-distance travel. Dhaka is one of the most densely populated cities in the world and it has long struggled to handle the increasing volumes of traffic.
A ban on rickshaws from traversing three major expressways came into effect starting on 7 July in an attempt to address the increasing traffic congestion in the city. However, the ban was met by protests from rickshaw pullers and some commuters. The decision to ban bicycle rickshaws from some major roads has caused many to debate the traffic issues affecting the capital and question the lack of alternatives for commuters.
There are an estimated 600,000 rickshaws in the city, though less than 100,000 are licensed. They are eco-friendly, slow, and less prone to accidents. But the mixture of rickshaws, auto-rickshaws (or three-wheelers), motorcycles, buses, and cars on the road makes for chaotic and unpredictable traffic. There are often no separate rickshaw lanes separating this slow traffic on most of Dhaka's roads.
Rickshaw traffic in Dhaka. Image via Flickr by Sandro Lacarbona. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
The authorities barred all cycle rickshaws and other unauthorized motorized rickshaws such as battery-operated rickshaws in three important roadways and decided to replace them with extended bus service.
Subsequent to the announcement, public controversy surfaced as several thousand rickshaw-pullers took to the streets to protest and others expressed concern through their social media platforms. For several days, the demonstrators occupied major roads causing severe congestion that spilled over into nearby areas.
Rickshaw-pullers’ strike to protest ban#Dhaka #Bangladesh #rickshaw pic.twitter.com/qGTmHzSZlr
— munware alam nirjhor (@munwarenj) July 9, 2019
#Bangladesh Ban on rickshaws in parts of capital #Dhaka brings rickshaw pullers on the road to #protest, roads blocked and office goers suffer pic.twitter.com/1R8bHwzrv9
— Redwan Ahmed (@redwanxyz) July 9, 2019
#Rickshaw_pullers in #Dhaka_Bangladesh demonstrating on the streets protesting ban on major roads. pic.twitter.com/YUbISBRslc
— Rashad Ahamad (@RashedRatan1) July 8, 2019
The Rickshaw-pullers are saying that the ban was passed without providing an alternate income or income rehabilitation program for them.
Govt authorities impose a ban on the movement of rickshaw on certain streets of the city without
1. Ensuring a proper income rehabilitation programme for the rickshaw pullers and their family.
2. Ensuring an… https://t.co/aSTRWwZsOL
— Zulfiker Hyder (@ZulfikerHyder) July 9, 2019
Besides rickshaw-pullers, the owners who make a living from renting these three-wheelers also joined the demonstrations and held press conferences putting forth an ultimatum for the official withdrawal of the ban. They complained that the authorities did not talk to them and arbitrarily imposed the bans.
Commuters also expressed their frustrations regarding the difficulties they will face while traveling, suggesting other measures that could have been taken instead of (or prior to) imposing the ban out of the blue, such as providing a rickshaw lane or creating better public transportation systems, while limiting the number of private cars allowed on the road.
Facebook user Dewan Maruf Shuvo writes:
রিকশা বন্ধ হয়ে গেলে আমি চড়ব কিসে, এটা যেমন চিন্তার বিষয়। তেমনি এই লক্ষ লক্ষ মানুষের কর্মসংস্থানের কথাও চিন্তা করা লাগবে।
If Rickshaws are banned I need to find out what alternative ways I can commute. And we need to think of alternative incomes of these hundreds of thousands of people (rickshaw pullers).
In a separate argument, experts and urban planners stressed having an “integrated communication system” based on multi-mode transport, stating the need for adequate alternatives to rickshaws as a mode of public transportation.
Bangladesh Institute of Planners (BIP) organized a press conference in the capital to collectively discuss the outcomes of the announced ban. At present, rickshaws account for approximately 40 percent of Dhaka's transportation methods, its usefulness contributes to its widespread popularity.
Although making roads off-limits to rickshaws can be a temporary remedy, traffic congestion will not ease up if the restriction is not imposed on private cars.
On the other hand, people supportive of the decision laid out a different set of arguments in favor of the ban on social media platforms.
Facebook user Sumon Khan wrote:
#রিকশা জাস্ট মেইন রোডে চলাচল নিষেধ করা হয়েছে। মেইন রোড থেকে ২৫/৩০ ফিট ভিতরে গলি রয়েছে সেখানে চালানো তো নিষেধ করে নাই। তাই না জেনে মন্তব্য, সমালোচনা করা ঠিক না।
The Rickshaw ban is only meant for the main roads. There are many lanes and sub-lanes where they can still ply (in short distances). So get all the information before criticizing something.
Mohammad Tauheed, a TED Senior Fellow and the Academic Coordinator at Bengal Institute myth busted some of the opinions floating on social media:
রিকশা মিথ
১. রিকশা জরুরি:
মোটেই না। ? হাঁটুন! ঢাকা শহরের সকল রিকশায় চড়া দূরত্বই হাঁটার যোগ্য দূরত্ব। [..]
২. রিকশা গরিবের বাহন:
রিকশা ভাড়া উবার প্রিমিয়ামের কাছাকাছি এখন [..]
৩. রিকশাওয়ালারা গরিব, অসহায়:
রিকশাওয়ালারা তেমন গরিব নয়। তাঁদের মাসিক আয় ২০ হাজার টাকার উপরে, যা অনেক চকচকে অফিসে নতুন যোগ দেওয়া স্নাতক বেতন হিসেবে পান না। [..]
Rickshaw myths:
1. Rickshaw is necessary:
Not at all! ?Just walk! The short distances you ride on rickshaws are walkable.
2. Rickshaws are commuters for the poor:
Rickshaw fares these days are are close to the rate of Uber Premium.
3. Rickshaw pullers are poor, helpless:
Wrong. They are not that poor. Some of them earn more than 20,000 BDT (USD $237) per month, which is more than the salary of a graduate joining a new job.
The authorities have urged the rickshaw-pullers to stop protesting and invited them for more discussions. They also vowed to make Dhaka rickshaw free in the next two years.
The 20.10 kilometers long Dhaka's Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) metro rail service is expected to open on 2021. Until then, the solution to the complex traffic problem in Dhaka would remain elusive.

author: Samaya Anjum


text:
Is Trinidad and Tobago ready for a liberal political party? · Global Voices
Jada Steuart

Screenshot of Progressive Party leader Nikoli Edwards, taken from a YouTube video “Why the Progressive Party Was Started”, uploaded by Let's Talk About iTT.
A new political party will officially run in Trinidad and Tobago's next general elections, scheduled to take place in 2020. The Progressive Party, which takes a reformist approach to the country's problems, is a younger, more liberal contender for the 41 seats in the country's House of Representatives — but with a two-party system and a nation entrenched in identity politics, there are no guarantees that the group will find its place in local politics.
The two main political forces in the twin-island nation are the incumbent, the People's National Movement (PNM), which has a strong Afro-Trinbagonian support base, and the United National Congress (UNC) — the opposition —  which performs well in constituencies with predominantly East Indian residents, the country's two largest demographic groups.
Both parties operate against a backdrop of public mistrust. Transparency International's 2018 Corruption Perceptions Index gave Trinidad and Tobago a score of 41, ranking the country at Number 78 out of 180 — one notch lower than its 2017 position.
Such a perception is not unwarranted. Citizens have accused both parties of rampant corruption and criticised both for a lack of efficient leadership. This, combined with the rise in crime and slow economic movement, has made members of the public crave an alternative political solution.
The Progressive Party, which officially launched on June 16, 2019, says it offers the public something new.  In a radio interview on Power 102.1 FM, interim party leader, Nikoli Edwards, was asked how he thought his party would do against the PNM and the UNC. He said that the 2020 election will be “a defining moment” for the country:
Are we going to continue to do the same things over and over and expect a different result or are we willing to try something different?
Edwards, a former independent senator and a well-known personality on the young political scene, has said that the party’s goals include prison reform, the legalization of marijuana and abortion, protecting the rights of the LGBTQ+ community and investing in the renewable energy sector.
The local prison system has battled its share of corruption allegations, marijuana use is still against the law — even though the current PNM administration has promised to decriminalise cannabis for personal consumption — and abortions are also illegal except in very specific cases.
When it comes to religious views, the country is very conservative, so the influence of these groups increases the challenge of creating a safe culture for LGBTQ+ people. Economically, resource-rich Trinidad and Tobago still heavily relies on its oil and natural gas; attempts at economic diversification have not been slower than expected.
Edwards has stated in many of his interviews that this push to create the party came from not seeing his values reflected in the modus operandi of the two current political powerhouses. His party has no current or former members of parliament; instead, it's youth-centered, filled with “new and fresh faces who want to build this country”.
A lack of experience is one problem the party may face. Another is how they will — or will not — break the two-party system.  For years, the PNM and UNC have interchangeably won the majority of seats in parliament, but with the public tired of the same political strategies and accusations of corruption against elected representatives, the 2020 election provides an opportunity for new political parties to emerge — and possibly even win seats — but it won't be an easy fight.
The Progressives seem realistic about their chances in the next election, given the limited lead time and the strong loyalty the two main parties enjoy. They maintain, however, that the need for a drastic change in the country outweighs their fear of trying:
If Trinidad and Tobago is to be a country that prospers, there must be an active attempt by the population to shape the new wave of politicians rather than dismissing anyone who offers themselves for national service. While skepticism is understood in these times, […] dissuading persons with genuine interests in national development from politics will not do any good. The work has started and the idea of a two-party system with an infinite expiration date will be challenged because it must be for all our sakes!
But how will the party's liberal views sit with a religious, conservative country? In Trinidad and Tobago's multi-religious society, different religious organisations often unite against issues like abortion and gay rights.
Despite this, Trinidad and Tobago's high court declared a landmark ruling in favour of LGBTQ+ rights, declaring that sections of its Sexual Offences Act related to anal sex were unconstitutional. Still, there are conservatives — especially among older voters — opposed to such issues, which potentially shrinks the voting pool for the new party. For other segments of the population, though, a party with such open views is long-awaited:
The beauty of #framing is that you don't have to source #statistics, you simply have to throw a number out there and stick by it. #religion
— Taran Rampersad (@knowprose) June 12, 2018
It is difficult to predict at the moment how the Progressive Party will fare at the 2020 polls. While many feel that political change is urgently needed, only time will tell if this young, liberal party is the one to set that change in motion.

author: Jada Steuart


text:
Brazil’s top court criminalizes homophobia and transphobia · Global Voices
Isabela Carvalho

On June 13, Brazil's top court ruled that homophobia and transphobia should be framed as crimes under Brazil's existing racism legislation.
There are no laws in Brazil's penal code that explicitly address prejudice or violence based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The court says the new ruling addressed a legislative omission that failed to protect Brazil's LGBTQ+ population.
Those who commit acts of violence against LGBTQ+ peoples could be punished with prison sentences of one to five years. Those are the current penalties for discrimination based on ethnicity, skin color, race, religion, or nationality according to a penal code provision in place since 1989.
The 11-member Supreme Court voted 8-3 for the criminalization in response to a lawsuit moved by the Brazilian Association of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transvestite, Transgender, and Intersex (ABGLT, in Portuguese) and the Popular Socialist Party (PPS).
Dia 13 de junho de 2019: o Brasil se torna o 43º país no mundo a criminalizar a homofobia e a transfobia.
Conforme a decisão do STF, se torna crime “praticar, induzir ou incitar a discriminação ou preconceito” em razão da orientação sexual da pessoa.#ÉCrimeSim #LoveWins #AEQSE pic.twitter.com/JUHavYGFJE
— #AgoraÉQueSãoElas (@AEQSE_) June 13, 2019
June 13, 2019: Brazil becomes the 43rd country in the world to criminalize homophobia and transphobia.
According to the STF decision, it becomes a crime to “practice, induce or incite discrimination or prejudice” because of the sexual orientation of the person.
Image by Grupo Gay da Bahia, used with permission.
In addition to punishing acts of violence, the court's decision makes it a crime to deny educational and professional opportunities, as well as access to public services and government buildings, based on sexual orientation. The promotion of discriminatory attitudes or events on social networks and other media could also be punished under Brazil's racism law.
Brazil has one of the highest murder rates of LGBTQ+ people in the world, coming behind Mexico, the United States, and Colombia.
In 2018, 420 LGBTQ+ people were killed — one every 20 hours, according to the Bahia's Gay Group, one of the oldest LGBTQ+ rights groups in Brazil. Of those, 72 percent were homicides, and 24 percent were suicides.
When stating her vote for criminalization, Justice Cármen Lúcia said that “all prejudice is violence, all discrimination is a cause of suffering.” She noted that discrimination often begins at home, separating families and friends, and added:
Não há como negar a jurisdição a todos a quem foi negado, às vezes, o direito à vida. Na maioria das vezes, o direito à liberdade e à dignidade, pela ausência de uma legislação ainda 30 anos depois do início de vigência dessa Constituição.
We can't deny jurisdiction to those who have been denied, at times, the right to life. Most of the times, the right to freedom and dignity, due to the absence of legislation still 30 years after the entry of this constitution.
Justice Luiz Fux, another vote pro-criminalization, said that “symbolic violence is as alarming as physical violence” and that a law that identifies homophobic and transphobic behaviors as such can help to change the people's culture. He says “there is a global concern about the epidemic levels of homophobic violence,” but legislators remain inert and oblivious.
Over the past 20 years, there have been several attempts to introduce legislation that criminalized homophobia in Brazil, but the religious and conservative culture kept them from advancing in Congress.
Fernanda Gonçalves, a criminal lawyer based in Rio de Janeiro, has told Global Voices that some legal experts say that the decision violates the so-called “principle of legal reserve,” which means that a criminal offense can't exist without an existing law:
No Brasil, temos três poderes independentes – Legislativo, Executivo, e Judiciário. A função característica do Legislativo é criar leis e a do Judiciário é julgar. Enquadrar atos homotransfóbicos na lei de racismo via interpretação, em tese, extrapola a função do Judiciário, por mais nobre que seja a intenção e a causa envolvida.
In Brazil, we have three independent powers — Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary. The characteristic role of the Legislative is to create laws and the one of the Judiciary is to judge. Framing homotransphobic acts in the law of racism via interpretation, in theory, extrapolates the function of the Judiciary, even if the intentions and the causes are noble.
She says there is a danger when the Supreme Court, composed of justices appointed by the president rather than elected by the people, creates a criminal law:
E se, no futuro, um Presidente da República eventualmente nomeia ministros do STF que decidem que a Lei Anti-terrorismo se estende para atos praticados por ativistas e integrantes de movimentos sociais? Abre-se um precedente perigosíssimo.
What if, in the future, a president eventually appoints justices who decide that the anti-terrorism law extends to acts practiced by activists and members of social movements? It opens a dangerous precedent.
A few activists and researchers have cited the mass incarceration of the country's black and poor population as yet another issue to be considered in creating another penal provision. Brazil has the third-largest prison population in the world after the United States and China.
That opinion is shared by Iran Giusti, an activist and founder of Casa 1, a space in Sao Paulo that welcomes LGBTQ+ people who have been expelled from their homes. Speaking with Global Voices, Iran he says we must be cautious:
Precisamos rever todo o nosso sistema penal e carcerário. Quem é punido no país? Quem é encarcerado no Brasil? Basta olhar os dados para saber que são as pessoas negras.
We need to consider our entire criminal and prison system. Who is punished in this country? Who is incarcerated in Brazil? All one need to do is look at the data to conclude that it's black people.
It was also by a Supreme Court ruling, in 2013, that same-sex marriage was made legal in Brazil. The same decision grants gay couples the right to adopt children.
Foto: Antonio Cruz/Agência Brasil, use permitted with attribution.
The ruling contrasts with Brazil's current political landscape as president Jair Bolsonaro was elected in 2018 on an explicitly homophobic platform. In the past, he said that he would rather have a dead son than a gay son. Recently, he spoke out against gay tourism in Brazil.
Acreditamos que o punitivismo não deveria ser o caminho para regulamentação, mas, por enquanto, que vivemos em uma sociedade que só se reorganiza a partir de leis, é uma determinação importante. #lgbt #lgbtqia+ #transgender #vidastransimportam #vidaslbgtsimportam #pride pic.twitter.com/iY3YwjTfoO
— Erica Malunguinho (@malunguinho) June 13, 2019
We believe that punitivism should not be the way for regulation, but for now, since we live in a society tha only reorganizes itself with laws, it is an important decision. #lgbt #lgbtqia #transgender #translivesmatter #lgbtslivesmatter #pride
Earlier this year, Jean Wyllys, one of the first openly gay Brazilian legislators, gave up his seat at the Chamber of Deputies after receiving death threats. He says the threats were ignored by the federal police. Another gay man, representative David Miranda, took over Jean's seat. In late May, when the Supreme Court's deliberation on homophobia was resumed, David tweeted:
Amanhã estaremos acompanhando o retorno dessa importante votação no Supremo Tribunal Federal. Não podemos fechar os olhos para tantos e tantas de nós que são violentadas e morrem diariamente.
#LGBTfobiaMata #ÉCrimeSim #CriminalizaSTF pic.twitter.com/iKYWnRpbtC
— David Miranda (@davidmirandario) May 22, 2019
Tomorrow we will be following this important vote in the Supreme Court. We cannot close our eyes to so many of us who are abused and die daily. #LGBTphobiaKills #ItsACrime #CriminaliseItSTF
In early May, David proposed a new bill that aims to curb violence against LGBTQ+ people. On a Facebook post, he explained:
Se aprovada, essa Lei poderá garantir uma série de medidas protetivas que poderão salvar milhares de vidas. Será um avanço civilizatório importante em tempos de obscurantismo. Mais um passo em direção à construção de uma sociedade verdadeiramente mais justa e democrática.
If approved, this bill could guarantee a series of protective measures that will save thousands of lives. It will be an important civilisational advance in times of obscurantism. One more step towards building a truly just and democratic society.

author: Isabela Carvalho


text:
Outrage in Moscow after opposition candidates barred from local election · Global Voices
Maxim Edwards

Police block the entrance to the local electoral commission in Moscow, where locals gathered to protest in support of opposition politicians whose candidacies were rejected. From SotaVision’s YouTube video “Народ вышел в Москве”
Russian language social networks are flooded with videos of people demanding that their signatures be recognised as valid. The online flashmob, using the hashtag #Допускай (“let them through”), comes after several opposition candidates who hoped to run in September’s Moscow Duma elections were rejected by the city’s electoral commission.
Графолог, который проверял подписи @IoannZH назвал поддельной подпись моей мамы!!! ААА При том что она ставила ее при мне, понимаете! pic.twitter.com/pbPircx0jQ
— Александрова (@katia1520) July 16, 2019
Графолог, который проверял подписи @IoannZH назвал поддельной подпись моей мамы!!! ААА При том что она ставила ее при мне, понимаете!
— Александрова (@katia1520), Twitter, 15 July 2019
Why do these signatures matter? In order to contest a local or mayoral election, independent candidates have to collect signatures from between five and ten per cent of the members on their city council, in a procedure known as the “municipal filter.” Critics of this bureaucratic hurdle see it as an attempt to prevent unwelcome competitive candidates from reaching the ballot. In recent years, those critics have even included Russia’s central election commissioner Ella Pamfilova. In February, the Russian authorities proposed lowering the upper limit on the filter, but critics argue that nothing less than its complete abolition can bring truly competitive politics.
A protester in Moscow holds a billboard in support of registering independent opposition candidates. Photo courtesy of Marc Bennetts.
In Moscow, it looked as though several of these candidates would pass the filter, potentially forcing pro-government candidates to contest a heated race. (Interestingly, candidates affiliated with the ruling United Russia party are running as independents in this vote. As such, they were also subject to these rules, but do not appear to have faced the same problem with signatures.)
So when the municipal filter failed, state-appointed “handwriting experts” stepped in, and discovered palpably absurd reasons to invalidate hundreds of signatures. This is not a new tactic; it was also used in the Moscow municipal elections of 2014. But this time, the scale is more audacious.

On 14 July, former independent parliamentarian Dmitry Gudkov described the signature invalidations as “another filter” and that “the time for overcoming it is catastrophically short.” Gudkov, who also hoped to run in Moscow, appealed via his Telegram channel for candidates to collect written confirmation from people whose signatures had been declared invalid. Several opposition candidates, such as Konstantin Yankauskas, have launched pages on their websites which allow local residents to check whether their signature was invalidated, urging them to publicly confirm their support again.
Big names in the Russian opposition, many of them linked to Alexey Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation, have been barred from the race. They include former independent parliamentarian Dmitry Gudkov, liberal opposition activist Ilya Yashin, and Lyubov Sobol, a lawyer and leading figure in Navalny’s organisation. (Sobol declared a hunger strike in protest at the electoral commission’s conduct on 14 July.)
For the past several days, thousands of protesters have braved the rain and the police to gather on Moscow’s Trubnaya Square to demand the registration of independent opposition candidates and meetings with Valentin Gorbunov, the head of the Moscow local electoral commission.
But they have largely gone unheard. Ilya Yashin, another influential Russian opposition politician, writes:
Всё, меня официально снимают с выборов. Основание: превышение брака в подписных листах. Все наши аргументы были просто проигнорированы. Отказались рассматривать письменные заявления граждан, подтвердивших свои подписи. Даже выслушать избирателей, пришедших на заседание, не стали: их просто не пустили.
Представитель Мосгоризбиркома Дмитрий Реут скалился: «Ну откуда мы знаем, может, вы их мотивировали? Оснований не верить экспертам нет». Ну то есть если эксперт говорит, что вы вносили данные в подписной лист не сами, то вы просто не имеете шансов доказать обратное. Мнение эксперта важнее заявления самого избирателя.
That’s it, I’ve officially been removed from the elections. The grounds: too many irregularities in the lists of signatures. All our arguments were simply ignored. They refused to look at written declarations from citizens confirming their own signatures. They refused] to hear voters who turned up to meetings: they simply were not allowed entry.
The chairman of the Moscow city electoral commission Dmitry Reut said: “Well, how should we know, maybe you encouraged them? There are no grounds to not believe the experts.” Well, that means that if an expert says that you didn’t enter your details into a list of signatures yourself, than you simply have no chance of proving otherwise. An expert’s opinion is more important than the declaration of the voter.”
— Ilya Yashin, Facebook, 15 July 2019
Even the signatures of prominent public figures have been invalidated; Yashin gave his signature in support of Dmitry Gudkov, a former independent Duma deputy who is running in Moscow. As the online magazine Snob reports, Yashin’s signature was invalidated on the grounds that he did not fill out the date himself.
There are now several reports of signatures and data from the handwritten lists being incorrectly entered into the electoral commission’s databases. Ivan Zhdanov, a lawyer for Alexey Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation and independent candidate in Moscow, argued on Twitter that these misspellings were probably intentional, sharing an example of one woman’s patronymic, Vladimirovna, being entered into the register as “Vladimimrovna.”
А тем временем продолжим. Горбунов сказал, что читает наши соцсети. Пусть прочитает. Это как? pic.twitter.com/NJ1Of5ktuo
— Ivan Zhdanov (@IoannZH) July 15, 2019
In the meantime, let’s continue. Gorbunov says he’s reading our social media posts. Let him read. How’s this?
— Ivan Zhdanov (@IoannZH), Twitter, 15 July 2019
Alexander Zamyatin, a local politician and editor of Russian Mirror, a zine about inequality in Russia, noted the following:
Чтобы понять уровень идиотизма происходящего оцените следующий факт. В подписях за единоросса Зверева нашли нашего товарища Александра Фирсова, который точно не подписывался за него. Зато его же настоящую подпись за Янкаускаса рабочая группа признала недействительно.
— Александр Замятин (@zamyatin_aa) July 15, 2019
To understand the level of idiocy, consider the following fact. Among the signatures in support of United Russia’s candidate Zverev was discovered the name of our comrade Alexander Firsov, who certainly didn’t sign in support of him. Therefore, the working group declared his real signature for Yankauskas to be illegitimate.
— Александр Замятин (@zamyatin_aa), Twitter, 15 July 2019
Bizarre stories are surfacing in St Petersburg, which holds a gubernatorial election in September. Fontanka, a local newspaper, reported that 15 signatures in support of a candidate from the opposition party Yabloko were declared invalid because the nominees had written the words “political party” in lowercase letters. Independent candidate Irina Fatyanova shared the following case:
26.96.2919 – неверная дата взятия подписи в листе, где остальные даты людей из той же семьи стоят 26.06.2019. ИКМО Смольнинское, я иду в ГИК и СУД и вернусь в качестве Кандидатки, потому что проголосовать большинством за то, что есть месяц 96-й в году – маразм! Сюр.
— Фатьянова Ирина (@irmachinsky) July 8, 2019
26.96.2919 – an incorrect date taken from a list of signatures, where the dates given by other members of the same family is 26.06.2019. To the Smolinskoye district electoral commission: I’m going to the general electoral commission and the COURT and will return as a candidate, because there will be a majority vote against the insane idea that there is a 96th month in the year. It’s surreal.
— Фатянова Ирина (@irmachinsky), Twitter, 8 July 2019
Elena Rusakova, running in Moscow’s 37th district, even wrote on Facebook that the signature of Vikor Sheynis, one of the authors of Russia’s constitution, had been declared invalid by the electoral commission. When the prominent sociologist Grigory Yudin discovered that his signature in support of Rusakova had been declared “non-existent,” he shared the following existential reflections:
С моим несуществованием можно было бы как-то смириться. Я бы постепенно привык к тому, что все вокруг смотрят мимо меня и театрально шагают сквозь меня, когда я протягиваю руку. Однако вместе со мной нет ещё моей мамы, сотен моих соседей по округу и десятков тысяч других москвичей. Все мы – призраки. We are the nobodies.
Так вот, как московский призрак я хочу сказать, что всё это могло произойти только по одной причине. Потому что кто-то сверху сказал «чтобы вот этих кандидатов на выборах не было, а как вы будете это решать, меня не волнует, и больше ко мне с этим не приходите». И как всегда бывает в таких случаях, такая команда ровно в таком виде была спущена до окружных избиркомов, которые получили её в последний момент и решили действовать как придётся. А поскольку все подписи были настоящими, то им пришлось объявлять живым людям, что их нет
I could come to terms with my non-existence. I could gradually get used to people looking straight past me and theatrically walking through me as I stretch out my hands. However, beside me are still my mother, hundreds of my neighbours and tens of thousands of other Muscovites. We are all ghosts. We are nobodies.
So, as a Moscow ghost, I want to say that all of this could only have happened for one reason. Because someone up above said “get rid of those candidates; I don’t care how you do it, but don’t bother me again.” And as always happens in these cases, this task was delegated lower down, to the district electoral commissions, which received it at the last moment and did what was necessary. And since all the signatures were real, they had to declare to living people that they did not exist.
— Greg Yudin, Facebook, 17 July 2019
Yudin demanded that Moscow’s mayor Sergey Sobyanin meet “non-existent” Muscovites to explain himself. It appears to be a widespread sentiment; Ivan Kurilla, a professor at the European University at St Petersburg, concluded that social protests of recent years had not been forgotten, and that the opposition movements of 2019 were of an entirely different, and more resolute, character than those of 2011:
И это ощущается всеми: молодые политики идут на обострение, власти ужесточают позицию, отбрасывая видимость законности, – все это из-за все более различимого гула в “зрительном зале”.
Young politicians go head-first into confrontations, the authorities now tighten their position, disposing with the veneer of legality. And all of his because of the ever more noticeable murmurs at the back of the “observers’ gallery.”
— Ivan Kurilla, Facebook, 16 July 2019


text:
The organization and future of the Hong Kong anti-extradition protests · Global Voices
Oiwan Lam

Screen capture from Brew Note cafe's Youtube channel.
In the wake of the 2019 anti-extradition protests that swept Hong Kong, local cafe Brew Note hosted a public salon to discuss the new generation of protesters on the island. The guest speaker was Professor Francis Li, director of the School of Journalism and Communication at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, who shared insights into how protesters were able to organize on such a large scale and discussed the future of the movement.
The series of protests began in March 2019 in response to the Hong Kong government's attempt to amend the Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation. If it had passed, the proposed bill would have empowered the Chief Executive and the local courts to handle case-by-case extradition requests from territories with no prior agreements, including Taiwan and China. Massive mobilizations on June 9 and 16 were successful in suspending the bill from being discussed by the Legislative Council. However, protesters were outraged by the police crackdown of the June 12 protests and demanded that the government investigate police misconduct and that Chief Executive Carrie Lam resign.
The anti-extradition campaign, which saw more than 2 million people take to the streets on June 16 alone, has shocked everyone in Hong Kong. The scale of the response has led many to ask how the protests were organized and how they were able to mobilize the largest protests in Hong Kong's history. Professor Francis Li's observations shed some light on these questions. Below is a summary of Li's presentation:
While many people thought that the anti-extradition protest was a leaderless campaign, Li clarifies that a central organizing body was initially involved to help coordinate them. The anti-extradition campaign was kickstarted with a rally on April 28 hosted by the Civic Human Rights Front (CHRF), a local NGO coalition. The massive rallies on June 9 and June 16 were also hosted by CHRF as the law requires that all demonstrations have a police permit. Moreover, the coalition has strong connections with the pan-democratic sector and Li adds that a majority of its supporters are political liberals and moderates.
In addition to a central organizing platform, Li highlights the many other periphery protests and actions mobilized online through the LIHKG forum and Telegram mobile message channels. He was also quick to note that these spontaneous networks were not associated with the CHRF and the members of these platforms were not following instructions from the CHRF or any other pan-democrat lawmakers. During the campaign, the public figures acted like facilitators by providing assistance to the already protesting crowds. Li states that if a public figure attempted to make a speech or give instructions in any way during the protests, the crowds would boo at them. They didn’t want to be led.
On the LIHKG forum and Telegram open groups, popular comments, and suggestions were pushed to the top. The protesters would use the platform for brainstorming protest ideas, and someone would pick up the most popular ones and form a team to follow up and draw a plan.
Li compared this method to a kind of open source technology organization where someone proposes a central code and another person easily picks it up afterward to develop their own products. A decentralized organization model like this is considered more creative and effective. It encourages participation and the cost of failure is minimized as many teams are in operation and one or two failures would not affect the whole production line.
For Li, new communication platforms such as LIHKG and Telegram facilitate this type of decentralized organization. Telegram allows for public channels with tens of thousands of subscribers while LIHKG’s Reddit-like crowd ranking function allows people to know opinions are the most popular.
Below is an initial survey on the demographics of the anti-extradition protesters conducted by a multi-university research team that Li belongs to:
A majority of the young people who participated in the protests only started paying attention to the anti-extradition issue around the end of May after students and alumni from hundreds of secondary schools signed a joint campaign.
According to the survey done on June 21, among the young protesters, 86-89 percent found telegram to be an important communication channel for organizing.
As for the role of the CHRF, 81 percent of the young respondents who were 20 years old or younger found the platform important, 74.6 percent of the respondents between the ages 21 to 25 found it important, and 65.5 percent of the respondents between the ages 26 to 30 found it important. In short, Li notes, the younger the protesters, the more they recognized the important role of CHRF.
On the question of whether or not they agreed with the view that radical protests would cause a negative social reaction, the research team found that 62.2 percent aged 20 or younger agreed, 54.8 percent between the ages 21 to 25 agreed, and 53.3 percent between 26 to 30 agreed.
According to Li, the decentralized organizational model works well for single-issue defensive campaigns but it might not necessarily be the best long-term approach. After the government redraws the bill and the campaign puts forward a list of new demands, without a centralized organizing body, it would be difficult to negotiate with the government as no one can represent the campaign.
There are different types of social movements, one is an issue-based campaign, like the 2014 Umbrella protests and the anti-extradition protests. These can lead to long-term movements like those seen after the July 2003 rally, when a large number of online independent media outlets emerged. Similar developments were observed after the 2014 massive democracy protests when some protesters formed activist groups advocating for “localism” and some started community-building work on a grassroots level.
According to Li, how the anti-extradition protesters find their own position in the movement is still an open question.
More stories about the Hong Kong anti-extradition protests on Global Voices.

author: Oiwan Lam


text:
Former news anchor threatened for speaking out on crime in Trinidad and Tobago · Global Voices
Flora Thomas

Screenshot of former media personality Colleen Holder, who spoke out against criminal activity in her community of Oropune Gardens. Image is a still from a YouTube video “Let's Talk Tobago, Episode 250″, uploaded by the Tobago House of Assembly.
Trinidad and Tobago's Housing Development Corporation (HDC), a state agency that provides public housing assistance, has been criticised for not doing enough to curb crime in many of its communities. The most recent critique touches on incidents at Oropune Gardens, a housing estate in northern Trinidad.
Fed up with the lawlessness in Orupune Gardens and its impact on her quality of life as a resident of the area, former national television news anchor Colleen Holder spoke out in early July 2019, via a letter to the editor that was shared on several news sites. Now, her life is under threat.
Following another murder in her neighbourhood, Holder said:
We are starring in a monthly episode of CSI Oropune Gardens. […] Our community Whatsapp chat group has been lighting up with residents expressing their fear, frustration, irritation, anger at this situation that seems to be spiralling out of control.
On June 26, residents invited Brent Lyons, HDC's managing director, to attend a meeting to discuss how the could take back control of their community. In place of Lyons, HDC sent a representative from its facilities management team who was ill-equipped to address matters like illegal activities and occupancy, flouting of community rules, and maintenance issues such as poor lighting and overgrown bushes that compromise residents’ safety.
Holder acknowledged that Lyons and Housing Minister, Edmund Dillon, had recently done a walk-through in the community, but she said the visit happened “during working hours when most residents would not have been at home”:
The blame for the spiralling crime in the community rests with the HDC. They are fully aware that they are not enforcing the rules that will allow the community to remain safe. […]
This situation predates both Mr. Lyons and Mr. Dillon, but it has persisted. We have persons harbouring criminals, hiding weapons, facilitating the crime.
Like many in the community, even though Holder has been a victim of crime herself, she doesn't want to move, saying, “The criminals are the ones who need to pack up and leave.”
On July 5, the HDC said that although “the safety and security of residents in all HDC communities are issues which the corporation gives serious consideration […] there are several issues at play at Oropune Gardens which require a multi-pronged and multi-agency approach for resolution”.
Maintaining that it “cannot be held solely responsible for all of Oropune Gardens’ issues”, the HDC said that the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service “remains the sole entity responsible for the investigation of criminal activity”.
The HDC subsequently began to take action against people in breach of community rules.
As for death threats against Holder, both the Commissioner of Police, Gary Griffith, and the Minister of National Security, Stuart Young, are aware of the situation; police patrols around Holder's house have increased.
The silver lining — if there is one — is that Holder says the community has been “riled up into unity”:
They are saying now that this is not her fight but our fight and now I don’t feel like I’m standing on my own. — Colleen Holder
Commentator Noble Philip has been supportive of Holder and clear on the need for the HDC to meet its responsibilities. In a post at Wired 868, he noted that “a 2015 study done in East Port of Spain showed that dysfunctional institutional resources, like the HDC, was the largest defining difference between high performing and crime-ridden communities.”
In another post, Philip took citizens to task for not being more outspoken in support of Holder:
We, in our comfortable homes, mutter about Colleen’s bravery but we keep our heads down. […]
Colleen’s tongue has brought her a death threat, yet her speech has been liberating. Silencing speaks to power in relationships; the powerful possess the capacity to silence us all, not just Colleen. Through intimidating violence, they heighten the consequences of us speaking up. […]
Yielding to this enforcement of silence makes crime more prevalent. Criminals want to be anonymous and free from prosecution. They want to eliminate all who would disseminate information about their actions. […]
The actions (and lack thereof) of the HDC has brought us to this place. They refuse to acknowledge the existence of a Residents Association, thereby making this all about a single campaigner […] the focus is on one person, a woman who dared to persist.
The police are still in the midst of their investigation of the threats against Holder.

author: Flora Thomas


text:
Netizen Report: In Nigeria and Russia, laws against online ‘insult’ put internet activists on thin ice · Global Voices
Netizen Report Team

The Madonna 7 outside the courthouse. Photo provided by Vivien Douglas and used with permission.
The Advox Netizen Report offers an international snapshot of challenges, victories, and emerging trends in technology and human rights around the world. This report covers news and events from July 6 – July 19, 2019.
Rules against online “insult” have long been a feature of cybercrime and other internet-specific laws around the world. While they may be intended to reduce online harassment — which can have a stifling effect on free speech — such policies also can be abused by government authorities seeking to curb critical speech of a political nature.
One recent example of this trend has been at issue in Nigeria, where seven students and alumni of the privately-owned Madonna University in the Niger Delta, Nigeria could face up to seven years in jail over social media posts denouncing poor conditions and mistreatment of students and staff at their university. Nigerians on social media are advocating for their exoneration, calling them the “Madonna 7.”
One member of the group appears to have been targeted for running a WhatsApp group where people discussed concerns about the school administration, including allegations that administrators had locked up a staff member who had spoken critically about school policies.
All were granted bail on July 3 and released from a detention facility where they had been held since March 2019 after being charged under Nigeria’s Cybercrime Act. They are accused of sending “false messages” through social media which caused “annoyance, inconvenience, danger, insult, injury, criminal intimidation” to Madonna University and its chief security officer, Titu Ugwu.
Meanwhile in Russia, activist Igor Gorlanov was accused by police in Novokuznetsk of violating a March 2019 law against making “insulting statements” towards state authorities online on July 15. The activist had shared a link to a MediaZona article about Yuri Kartyzhev, a carpenter who had the dubious honour of becoming the first person sentenced under the new law after he called Vladimir Putin an “unbelievable f***wit” on VKontakte.
On July 10 Pavel Chikov, a lawyer with the human rights organisation Agora, noted on his Telegram channel that, by his count, more than 20 court cases have been launched referencing the new law against insulting the authorities.
On July 5, #ArrestAntiPakJournalists trended on Twitter with over 28,000 tweets shared within a few hours. The hashtag went viral soon after a Twitter account named @IK_Warriors posted a tweet calling for the arrest of journalists belonging to what they described as “the pro-Indian, anti-Pak media group.” The tweet, which called on others to join the campaign, was accompanied by a photo of a list of journalists to be targeted.
The tweets mainly targeted journalists who criticize the government and the military. The @IK_Warriors Twitter account (IK refers to Prime Minister Imran Khan) bears a picture of Khan and the logo of the ruling party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf or PTI. “We are standing for the truth and right [sic]”, the bio of the @IK_Warriors account reads. A cricketer-turned-politician who has been in office for just under a year, Khan's critics say he was hand-picked by the military.
Responding to the #ArrestAntiPakJournalists hashtag, Mubashir Bukhari, executive editor of the Truth Tracker, told Global Voices:
Anyone who gives an alternate solution to the policies of the government or the military is labeled as anti-Pakistan or a traitor. Such trends are not only threatening and intimidating journalists but also putting the life of journalists at risk.
Mauritanian authorities restored access to the internet after disrupting it for 10 days following the disputed presidential elections of June 23 and resulting protests. The Ministry of the Interior reportedly ordered the shutdown for security reasons, although activists and human rights groups believe the real aim was to prevent the opposition from mobilizing protesters.
A coalition of digital rights and free expression groups are calling on telecommunication company MTN to push back against government demands to disrupt internet access following a five-week shutdown in Sudan. The South Africa-based MTN, which is a leading internet provider in the country, implemented the block as military forces in Sudan violently repressed peaceful protesters, cutting off a critical channel for people to report abuses and access emergency medical services. An open letter signed by Access Now, African Freedom of Expression Exchange, Committee to Protect Journalists, NetBlocks, Paradigm Initiative and others says that by pulling the plug, the company contributed to human rights violations.
The OpenPOWER Foundation, a non-profit consortium led by Google and IBM and established to improve interoperability of certain kinds of computing hardware, is working with the Chinese company Semptian, according to a report from The Intercept. Semptian has built multiple powerful technical surveillance tools that authorities in China, the Middle East and North Africa have used to vacuum up people’s private emails, texts and web browser histories. The partnership has enabled IBM and US chip manufacturer Xilinxon to collaborate with Semptian to build a microprocessor that enables computers to efficiently analyze immense amounts of data. A Semptian representative told a reporter posing as a customer that beyond China’s well-known digital dragnet, the firm has set up a mass surveillance system in an unnamed country within the MENA region.
Facebook is facing a $5 billion fine from the US Federal Trade Commission for privacy violations related to the Cambridge Analytica data breach, in which the analytics firm used private information it improperly harvested from 87 million Facebook users to influence voters approaching the 2016 US election. The penalty would be the largest ever imposed by the Commission against a technology company, but privacy advocates still say the figure amounts to a slap on the wrist for Facebook, which pulled in more than $15 billion in revenue alone in the first quarter of 2019.
(Can’t) Picture This 2: An Analysis of WeChat’s Realtime Image Filtering in ChatsJeffrey Knockel and Ruohan Xiong, Citizen Lab
Are we just ticking boxes? Bringing up and expanding notions of gender in internet policy and governance –  Smita, GenderIT.org
Afef Abrougui, Ellery Roberts Biddle, Maxim Edwards, Nwachukwu Egbunike, L. Finch, Leila Nachawati and Qurratulain Zaman contributed to this report.

author: Netizen Report Team