text:
Global Voices quinceañera: When the Caribbean did the right thing · Global Voices
Janine Mendes-Franco

In this final installment of the series honouring Global Voices’ 15th birthday, we highlight the stories in which people spoke out on tough matters that have been plaguing the region, or stood on the right side of history.
Barbadian Prime Minister Mia Mottley gives a speech at the 108th (Centenary) Session of the International Labour Conference in Geneva, Switzerland, on June 19, 2019. Photo by Crozet / Pouteau, used under a CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 license.
In June 2019, Barbados’ prime minister Mia Mottley, who is proving herself to be one of the most forward-thinking in the region, announced that, in an effort to create more diverse and equitable educational opportunities for schoolchildren, her administration plans to get rid of the controversial Common Entrance exam.
Secondary school entrance examinations in the Caribbean have been around for over a century, a colonial holdover from as early as 1879 in some territories. Though renamed and restructured several times, they have remained as what many experts deem an irrelevant, stress-inducing test that sucks the joy out of learning for 11-year-olds region-wide.
Under the current secondary entrance exam structure, only the top performing students — essentially, those who test well — win access to the best schools. Class often becomes a factor, since parents with good social connections often pull strings to get their children into schools of their choice. Prime Minister Mottley's position is that Barbados must “create an educational system that makes every school a top school” — reform that includes moving away from a curriculum that is heavily slanted towards academics, to include more technical, vocational and arts training.
In other regional territories like Trinidad and Tobago, in addition to laments about the negative effects of such an exam, there have been calls for more inclusivity for special needs children, who tend to be inadequately supported by the public school system.
If Barbados succeeds in this endeavour, it would be history-making; other governments in other CARICOM nations have promised to abolish the exam before and failed.
Screenshot taken from a YouTube video, showing an excerpt from “The Great Hack” related to Cambridge Analytica's alleged work during Trinidad and Tobago's 2010 general elections.
Corruption is one of the root causes of many of the problems regional societies face — from inadequate social services to rising crime rates. Realising this, people across the Caribbean have been speaking out — from Haiti's street protests against the continuing fallout from the PetroCaribe scandal to the arrest of a Trinidadian government official for money laundering, conspiracy to defraud, and misbehaviour in public office.
In fact, Trinidad and Tobago featured heavily in all the corruption stories we worked on this year. Public pressure was integral in forcing the government to drop proposed “undemocratic” amendments to the country's Freedom of Information Act and, after a union leader was charged with sedition, widespread debate ensued about freedom of speech, forcing the government to rethink the Sedition Act.
After Netflix's documentary, “The Great Hack,” premiered in July 2019, discussion was rife over Cambridge Analytica's role in Trinidad and Tobago's 2010 elections, renewing concerns about the ease with which corruption and voter manipulation can go hand in hand.
Even though the Cambridge Analytica scandal was widely reported on globally, the issue of how the company helped manipulate the electoral process in developing nations has been underreported, despite the majority of the company's elections-based clients having been from the Global South — but with Caribbean netizens speaking out about it, awareness of the dangers has now been raised in the region.
Visiting Surinamese Lokono people (Arawaks) at the reinterment ceremony of the First Peoples’ bones at the Red House in Port of Spain, Trinidad, October 19, 2019. Photo by Maria Nunes, used with permission.
This year, the importance of the legacy of the region's Indigenous peoples came through very strongly. Jamaica, for instance, has been experiencing a resurgence of interest in Taino (or Arawak) history: For the first time in 500 years, Jamaica has its first Taino chief (cacique), who was installed in June 2019. A month earlier, the Institute of Jamaica celebrated Taino Day with talks and activities, including the launch of a new illustrated children's book.
Even more significantly, the Jamaican government has been working — via the National Commission on Reparations — to have world-renowned wooden Taino artefacts returned to Jamaica from Britain. Minister of Culture, Gender, Entertainment and Sport, Olivia Grange, who has been spearheading the effort, said of the artefacts:
They are priceless, they are significant to the story of Jamaica, and they belong to the people of Jamaica.
This despite questions over whether or not Jamaican is doing its best to preserve what is left of its indigenous legacy, given the lack of a dedicated Taino museum and concerns over the degree of protection that Taino sites in the country are afforded.
At the southern end of the archipelago, meanwhile, in Trinidad and Tobago, there was an outcry over the proposed name change of the country's airport from Piarco (an Indigenous name) to one honouring the country's first prime minister. But by far the most moving event was the reinterment of the remains of Trinidad and Tobago's First Peoples.
When the restoration of Trinidad and Tobago's Red House — the seat of the country's parliament before the building fell into disrepair — began back in 2013, construction workers found the bones of as many as 60 Tainos. In a long-awaited reinternment ceremony on October 19, 2019, their remains — which date back to anywhere from 125-1395 AD — were finally laid to rest once more.
For the First Peoples community, it was a reclamation of an important piece of their past. At the reinternment ceremony, the Santa Rosa First Peoples’ Chief, Ricardo Bharath-Hernandez, said it was a way for their ancestors to speak to them and a moment to properly commemorate their dead:
Some may look at this ceremony as something that does not matter, neither important nor significant. But just as most of us treat our dead with respect, and use the appropriate rituals in their own tradition, we feel very strongly that the remains of our ancestors should be respected and treated likewise.
Since no country — or region — can go boldly into the future without knowing and understanding its own history, such rekindling of respect for where we have come from as Caribbean people forges a strong sense of hope for where we might go in 2020.


text:
Hirak protests and a presidential election triggered a surge of disinformation in Algeria · Global Voices
Farah Souames

Algeria’s popular protest movement, ‘’Hirak’’ [meaning “movement’’ in Arabic], brought a glimpse of online freedom, but also an aggressive wave of ‘’fake news’’ and disinformation on social media platforms. With little means to confront or fix the problem, the battle against the spread of disinformation is far from over.
Anti-government protesters in the capital Algiers on March 1, 2019. Photo credit: Wikimedia user Adjer [CC BY-SA 4.0]
The protest movement started on February 22, 2019 when then-ageing president Abdelaziz Bouteflika announced his bid for a fifth term in office. Bouteflika later dropped his plan to run again for president, and after 20 years in power, resigned on April 3. However, Algerians have continued to take to the streets to protest against corruption, unemployment and the country’s political elite, including after the presidential election on December 12, considered by the protesters as a ploy designed to keep the old regime in power.
Nassim, an Algerian activist based in France who requested not to reveal his last name, created Fake News DZ  with some friends after noticing an unusual increase in social media activity in Algeria and a surge in widely shared false stories. The page has more than 135,000 followers as of this writing.  Nassim shared with Global Voices a viral ‘fake news’ story:
For me, the most surreal fake news we debunked was not really political; an Algerian NASA engineer participated in the “send your name to Mars” NASA program which is accessible to all and suggested “Hirak Algeria” instead of his name. A journalist or many misunderstood the engineer's tweet and wrote that the next NASA spaceship to Mars will be named “Hirak Algeria”.
Fake news spread like wildfire even on some “trusted” media. A famous TV channel even made a video describing this as one of the biggest accomplishments ever. Months later I still find people believing in this story.
Other cases of mis/disinformation, however,  were more serious since they targeted the protest movement and its activists.
A post by Fake News DZ on May 25, 2019 debunking the false story of a Mars spaceship named ”Hirak Algeria”. Screenshot taken on December 30, 2019 at 13:10 CET.
With the December 12 presidential election approaching, pro-government supporters took to social media to attack anti-government activists. The protesters were targeted and subjected to conspiracy theories, such as accusing them of working for foreign governments, secret services, or paid to spread instability and unrest in the country.
While Twitter is a powerful tool of information, it can also be used to influence public opinion and silence opponents through the use of bot armies.
The number of Twitter users in Algeria is around 450,000. The platform is mainly used by journalists, some football players and national entities such as ministries and public administrations. But compared to other platforms such as Facebook and Youtube, Twitter is not widely used in Algeria. There are 21 million Facebook users in a country of 43 million people.
Yet, since the Hirak started, hundreds of new Twitter accounts, mostly pro-government trolls and bots, have been created.
For example, according to analysts, in September 2019, 723 accounts were created with 474 created in just two days. Subsequently, 190 accounts were created in October and 72 in November, which is pretty unusual, according to Marc Owen Jones, an associate professor of Middle East Studies and Digital Humanities at Hamad bin Khalifa University, Doha.
8/ The sample was incredibly skewed. Since 2008, the average number of accounts created per month in the sample was just 44. However, September saw this number rise to an incredible 723 accounts! That's 12%. 12% of accounts in the sample were created this month – since 2008! pic.twitter.com/H3EpQ23vCx
— Marc Owen Jones (@marcowenjones) September 28, 2019
On September 28, Owen Jones published a Twitter thread analysing a sample of 20,000 tweets from around 5,769 accounts tweeting under the hashtags #notinmyname and #algeriavotes, which opposed calls to boycott the election and were urging people to vote. According to his analysis, the activities of these accounts point to ‘’a clear evidence of a disinformation campaign’’
The thread concluded that at least 8 percent of the accounts encouraging people to vote in the sample were bots.
13/ So yeah, at least 8% of those tweeting for Algerians to go to the elections are probably bots and/or trolls. Stay vigilant. Hopefully @TwitterSafety will suspend them soon. PM if you want the data.
— Marc Owen Jones (@marcowenjones) September 28, 2019
Some accounts have in fact been suspended by Twitter after being reported. Consequently, the suspended users created new accounts afterwards and reached back to their followers.
#Weareallzeghmati is another example of a Twitter hashtag launched by government supporters  to reinforce the argument of the existence of anti-protest or pro-Establishment online campaigns in Algeria.
On November 3, the security forces attacked magistrates who went on a national strike protesting against a new reshuffle. Footage of the attack went viral and internet users slammed Minister of Justice Belkacem Zeghmati. The National Syndicate of Magistrates also called on the minister to resign. A few hours later, #weareallzeghmati was trending on Twitter in Algeria, in support of the minister and the judiciary system. The hashtag was spread widely by newly created accounts.
Beyond the matter of being bots or not, there is an important aspect to take into account about the number and manipulation of social media accounts in Algeria. The troll trend is from both sides. People who were willing to vote were often trolled by the pro-Hirak accounts and vice versa. Exchanges are sometimes loaded with insults and profanities, which does not bring a positive added value to any debate
The presidential election held on December 12 was widely followed and commented in Algeria, even by those who were against the election or believed that the process was rigged. The election took place despite being rejected by the popular movement and mass demonstrations in Algiers and many other cities on election day. Mis/disinformation were also rife, and activists and journalists debunked several fake images and stories including a photoshopped image showing the coach of Algeria's football team voting in the election, and another image showing an old man being attacked by anti-election protesters to prevent him from casting his vote at a polling station in Lyon, France. The latter was debunked by Fake News DZ which traced back the image to a media report published on July 19 about an Egyptian tourist who was assaulted by Romanian police inside an airplane. A 2017 footage used by the state television alleging showing long queues of voters on election day was also debunked.
On December 13, Algeria’s Independent Election Monitoring Authority announced the victory of independent candidate Abdelmadjid Tebboune, a former prime minister and a Bouteflika ally. Tebboune won more than 58 percent of the vote, eliminating the need for a second round.
Although, the election is now over, the future of digital platforms and the battle against disinformation is still blurry, particularly as protests against the ruling elite in Algeria continue to gather momentum.
This article is part of a series of posts examining interference with digital rights through methods such as internet shutdowns and disinformation during key political events in seven African countries: Algeria, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Nigeria, Tunisia, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. The project is funded by the Africa Digital Rights Fund of The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA).

source: news-globalvoices

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

author: Farah Souames


text:
Long live Večerníček: The enduring appeal of a 55-year-old Czech children’s television show · Global Voices
Filip Noubel

Screenshot from the credit sequence of Večerníček, showing the show's iconic character. From Youtube.
Today, January 2, the Czech Republic celebrates the 55th anniversary of Večerníček, one of its most famous children television shows, which has gained cult status and become a major touchstone in Czech identity.
In Czechoslovakia, the Communist ideology paid special attention to young audiences, in accordance with the belief that unlike their peers in Western capitalist countries, children growing up in Socialist countries benefited from special protections and enjoyed unique cultural rights. Books, films, sports, cultural events and other forms of entertainment events were made easily accessible to the vast majority of children, regardless of social standing.
In 1965, the state-owned Czechoslovak television launched a weekly program called Večerníček (Czech for “the little bedtime story”) which started and ended with a credit sequence that has remained virtually unchanged since. The show is ten minutes long, the ideal length to capture the attention of young children, and has always been shown at 18h45 since its inception.
This video marking the 50th anniversary of Večerníček's first broadcast on Jan 2, 1965, features the character embodying the bedtime story wearing his trademark newspaper-made hat and ascending a staircase. The theme music, composed by Ladislav Simon, and the voice-over by a five-year-old boy named Michal Citavý, have remained unchanged and become a shared childhood reference for millions of then Czechoslovaks, and now for Czechs. In many families, the end of Večerníček also marked the children's bedtime, as the show ends with the iconic phrase “Dobrou noc!” (Good night!). Here is an early black-and-white version of it:
In 1999, Czech scientists gave a newly discovered planet (numbered 33 377) the name Večerníček.
For decades, the show, which eventually appeared daily, presented the best of Czechoslovak animation, as well as foreign animation from other Socialist countries. In 1989, when Communism ended in Czechoslovakia, the show began to feature Czech content exclusively. Works that appeared on the show include the now world-famous series Krteček (the Little Mole), which has become one of the major cultural symbols of the Czech Republic.

author: Filip Noubel


text:
Taiwan January 2020 presidential elections: who are the contenders? · Global Voices
Filip Noubel

Screen shot from a BBC video on YouTube rebroadcasting the 3rd presidential debate of December 29, 2019. From left to right, the three candidates for the presidential election: Han Kuo-yu, James Soong and Tsai Ing-wen.
On January 11, 2020, Taiwan will hold key presidential and legislative elections in which three candidates are competing for the post that holds strong political prerogatives: the current President Tsai Ing-wen, the Kuomintang candidate Han Kuo-yu and the minority party leader James Soong. All three represent strongly divergent views on social values, economic development, relations with China and the status of Taiwan.
In 1996, Taiwan amended its electoral code to allow for a direct election of its president. Each mandate is four-year long, and the same person can hold it for a maximum period of eight years, if re-elected for a second time. The president and the vice-president run on a joint ticket and are elected on the basis of first-past-the-post system.
For this seventh direct election, an estimated 12 million Taiwanese are expected to vote. The results of the election should be known in the evening of January 11th, local time.
Tsai Ing-wen [蔡英文] made history when she was elected in 2016 as the candidate of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), thus becoming Taiwan’s first female president, out of the previous six presidents elected since the modified 1947 constitution. She is also the second president running on a DPP ticket to hold the presidential position, after Chen Shui-bian DPP presidency from 2000 to 2008.
Tsai is a 63 year-old former law professor who comes from a family of 11 siblings of mixed Hakka and Paiwan Aboriginal background. She studied law at Taiwan National University and completed her studies in New York and London. Upon her return to Taiwan in 1984, she taught law at different universities in Taipei.
Her political career started tellingly in 2000 when she was appointed chairwoman of the Mainland Affairs Council, a body regulating relations between Taiwan and China. In 2004, she joined the DPP and made a quick career, getting elected as DDP legislator, and in 2008 chairing the DPP, becoming thus the first woman to lead any major party in Taiwan.
Her potential as a serious presidential candidate became clear in 2014 when her party won the local elections by a landslide. On January 2016, she indeed won the presidential election by 56 percent against her Kuomintang opponent Eric Chu who secured 31 percent of the votes.
For the January 2020 elections, Tsai is running with vice-president candidate William Lai.
Tsai’s political agenda can be described as a mix of strong social and environmental policy at home, and a more pronounced distance from Beijing both economically and politically. During her first term, she introduced significant reforms in the labour and pension systems, established marriage equality, and language rights for different communities.
Regarding foreign policy and relations with China, Tsai has repeatedly stated publicly she does not endorse the 1992 Consensus that states in terms open to interpretation that there is only ‘one China’. The Consensus has been used both by Beijing and the Kuomintang in Taiwan as a basis for the status-quo in bilateral relations, and is often referred to as an equivalent of the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ by China. Tsai rejects both notions, pointing out at the crisis that has affected Hong Kong in the past six months and that remains unsolved.
Tsai’s voters are usually younger generations, traditionally regions in the south of the island. The DPP is part of a broader political family named the Pan-Green Coalition [泛綠聯盟] that brings together the Taiwan Independence Party, the Taiwan Solidarity Union, and the New Power Party platform. The coalition mostly operates within the Legislative Yuan, Taiwan’s parliament.
Unlike most prominent politicians and other elections candidates, Tsai is not married and has no children, a rare feature for prominent public figures in Taiwan that is commonly used by opponents as an argument against her.
Tsai maintains a Twitter account at @iingwen
Han Kuo-yu [韓國瑜] is the candidate of the Kuomintang party (KMT) that ruled unchallenged for 55 years, and maintains strong networks across many sectors of Taiwan’s society due to its historical role.
Aged 62, Han is a recently-elected mayor whose parents came from mainland China. Having studied English literature and law, he started his political career in 1992, when he was elected as a legislator to the Legislative Yuan on a Kuomintang ticket.
His political career came into the limelight in 2018, when against all predictions, he won the mayorship of Kaohsiung, Taiwan’s second largest city situated in the south. His victory was remarkable as the south is traditionally a DPP stronghold and no KMT candidate had been elected there in 20 years.
For the January 2020 elections, Han is running with vice-president candidate Chang San-cheng, a former Prime Minister.
Nicknamed the ‘Bald guy’ [光頭], Han is often described as a populist and is known for shifting positions, but also for using strong and often emotional language, which is one of his assets with certain segments of Taiwanese society. His political agenda is based on economic prosperity which he links directly to closer economic and political cooperation with China. His slogan for the 2020 election is “台灣安全 人民有錢” which can translate as “Safety for Taiwan, Money for the People”. Indeed, he often refers to the economic development he undertook as a mayor of Kaohsiung as a blueprint for his national strategy.
Regarding relations with Beijing, he supports closer economic integration, massive tourism from the mainland, and he publicly supports the 1992 Consensus, while he states he is opposed to the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ idea.
Han’s voters are typically older generations, residents of the northern parts of Taiwan. The Kuomintang is also the leading force of what is known in Taiwan as the Pan-Blue Coalition [泛藍聯盟 ] which brings together several parties that share similar ideological values. The coalition includes the Kuomintang, as well as the People First Party, the New Party and the Non-Partisan Solidarity Union.
Han is married and has three children. His twitter account is @Han_Kuo_yu.
James Soong [宋楚瑜] is the chairman of the People First Party (PFP), which is a member of the Pan-Blue Coalition but disagrees with the Kuomintang on certain points.
Aged 77, Soong was born in mainland China and moved to Taiwan with his family in 1949. He later studied diplomacy and political science in Taiwan and in the United States. He rose to prominence in 1974 when he was appointed English secretary to then Prime Minister and President Chiang Ching-kuo. He developed his political career as a ‘New Taiwanese’, supporting the Kuomintang’s first native Taiwanese President Lee Teng-hui in 1988.
Emboldened by his success, he decided to run as an independent candidate in the 2000 presidential elections, which got him expelled from the KMT. Soong lost closely to the DPP candidate, and then created his party. He ran again on a PFP ticket in the 2012 presidential elections, gaining less than 3 percent of the votes. He fared much better in the 2016 presidential elections, collecting almost 13 percent of the votes.
Soong often says he wants to end the blue-green rivalry that has defined Taiwanese politics for many elections. His political agenda mixes priorities that can be found in both the KMT and the DPP. It is generally estimated that by declaring his candidacy, he might be taking away voices from the KMT candidate since his party’s supporters are mostly former KMT supporters.
Soong is married and has two children.


text:
‘A disturbing crackdown on press freedom’: Pakistan arbitrarily blocking Slate.com · Global Voices
Hija Kamran

Illustration by the author.
The Pakistani authorities continue their arbitrary blocking of slate.com, a U.S based online news magazine that covers current affairs, politics, and culture. This is the second time that the website has been blocked in Pakistan in 2019, and the third time since 2018.
Slate was first noticed to be blocked on Pakistani servers in July 2018, reason of which is still unknown. According to the data of Open Observatory of Network Interference (OONI), the magazine was again blocked in June 2019 for its coverage of the Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM), a social movement that demands human rights of the Pashtun community in Pakistan. Whereas, according to NetBlocks data, the latest ban has been in effect since November 2, 2019, without any notification or statement from the authorities.
NetBlocks data shows evident drop in slate.com traffic on PTCL network since 2/11/2019
According to data NetBlocks shared with the author, while slate.com has been consistently blocked on the networks of local Internet Service Providers (ISPs) since early November 2019, different ISPs blocked it on different days. For instance, Nayatel blocked access to the website on November 4 as opposed to others blocking it on the 2nd. Furthermore, Slate has intermittently been blocked on Zong (CMPak Limited) networks. At the time of writing this statement, slate.com is accessible on Zong’s data connection.
Katie Rayford, Director of Media Relations at Slate, confirmed to the author that their website has experienced a 50 per cent drop in traffic from Pakistan since November 1, 2019. She says:
It is deeply concerning that Pakistan, a democratic country with a constitution guaranteeing freedom of speech and expression, would once again choose to block a media outlet dedicated to bringing information and truth to readers and listeners around the world. It is even more alarming [that] officials did so without informing us — and more importantly its citizens — about their reason for censoring our reporting. We ask Pakistani officials for full transparency in their decision-making process and to reverse this disturbing crackdown on press freedom.
Slate has time and again experienced arbitrary inaccessibility in Pakistan, much like in other cases of internet censorship in the country. No official institution has notified the website and users of this blocking. Under section 37 of the 2016 Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) is mandated to regulate, block and take down online content. However, PTA’s powers to block content without prior issuance of notice were challenged at the Islamabad High Court (IHC), which ruled that it is illegal for the regulatory authority to block online content unless it formulates the rules as directed under the Act. PTA is yet to draft and release the said rules.
Pakistani internet users have been experiencing increased online censorship which is part of the authorities’ larger attempt to control and stifle dissent in the country. Multiple instances of blatant online censorship have been reported where either entire websites have been blocked or access to pages or sections of a website restricted. There are also documented cases of complete official bans on coverage of particular issues or event such as coverage of the Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement. TV shows have been taken off-air for criticising state policies, and opposition party members have been barred from giving interviews.
Moreover, ongoing crackdown on freedom of the press and expression has contributed towards the overall hostile situation around journalism and freedom of information in Pakistan. Laws like the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) that legitimise censorship in the ambit of ambiguously defined national security violate people’s fundamental freedom of speech, and the right to information protected under Article 19 and 19-A of the Constitution of Pakistan, respectively.
Freedoms on the internet and of the press continue to decline with each passing year as per the Freedom House annual reports of Freedom on the Net and Freedom of the Press. In a democratic country like Pakistan whose official representatives boast about press freedom in the country on international platforms, attempts to stifle dissent and restrict access to information through unreasonable and unannounced censorship reflects hypocrisy in the way democratic decisions are made in the country.
Freedom of expression and access to information stand as core values of any democratic society, and in order for Pakistan to truly respect the values of democracy, its authorities will have to accept that criticism of state policies and institutions do not constitute anti-state rhetoric, is not a matter of national security, and is also not a foreign agenda. If anything, a crackdown on critical voices is an attribute of an authoritarian government, and such governance contradicts everything that Pakistan’s foundations were laid upon.

author: Hija Kamran


text:
‘Byzantine Pompeii’ archaeological discovery in Greece will be moved to make way for the Thessaloniki subway · Global Voices
Maria Soulis

Construction site of Thessaloniki's Metro seen from the inside of a tunnel. Wikimedia Commons, photo and caption by Geraki, CC-A-SA 3.0
As is often the case in Greece, digging the ground usually brings up archeological sites. Thessaloniki, Greece’s second metropolis, recently witnessed the discovery of a major ancient site while building its metro. Today, government officials, archaeologists, and local residents clash over the solution to preserve the past while modernizing their city.
The Thessaloniki Metropolitan Railway (or Thessaloniki Metro) is an underground urban transport system under construction in Thessaloniki, the second-largest city in Greece, with a population of over one million people in its metropolitan area. The city is often described as Greece's northern capital and is listed to host the first driverless metro system in the country.
Construction began in June 2006 and was originally scheduled to end in October 2012, a symbolic date coinciding with the centennial of the city's liberation from Ottoman rule on October 26, 1912. In September 2018, the first Thessaloniki metro wagon was presented at the Thessaloniki International Fair. Following a recent announcement by current Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, the subway is expected to open in April 2023.
The 11-year construction delay has become an object of online satire.
A major archaeological site was found in 2013 at the location of the future Venizelos Metro Station. At a depth of 5.4 meters, the Roman avenue Decumanus Maximus (later also known as the Byzantine Middle Road) was unearthed, along with shops and houses along the ancient Via Egnatia. A treasure trove of 750 jewels and more than 2,700 burial artifacts were also discovered in other metro stations currently under construction, all testifying to the heritage of Hellenistic and Roman times. International archaeological circles have since characterized the discovery as “Byzantine Pompeii,” as can be seen in this video:
Following the discovery of the antiquities in 2013, the then New Democracy Deputy Minister of Culture Costas Tzavaras ordered their removal from the site in order to continue the metro construction work. Yet this plan was initially stopped following strong opposition from archaeologists and residents. Then Thessaloniki Mayor Yiannis Boutaris successfully appealed the suspension and annulment of Tzavaras’ decision.
After the 2019 parliamentary electoral win of the New Democracy party, the issue of what to do with the antiquities at Venizelos station resurfaced. Following a meeting with the prime minister, the Central Macedonia Regional Governor Apostolos Tzitzikostas said:
Όσον αφορά το μετρό της Θεσσαλονίκης, ιδιαίτερα μετά τις αποκαλύψεις της αναδόχου εταιρείας προτείναμε λύσεις από την πρώτη στιγμή ως Περιφέρεια Κεντρικής Μακεδονίας και επιμένουμε στην θέση αυτή ότι θα πρέπει να συνυπάρξουν αρχαία και μετρό. Να γίνει δηλαδή μία στάση – μουσείο, αλλά για να γίνει αυτό θα πρέπει τα αρχαία να αποσπαστούν, να ολοκληρωθεί η στάση του μετρό και στη συνέχεια να επανατοποθετηθούν.
Regarding the Thessaloniki subway, especially after the revelations of the contractor, we – as Region of Central Macedonia – proposed solutions from the very beginning, and we insist on this opinion, that antiquities and subway should coexist. That is, to make a subway station-museum. But to do so, the antiquities must be detached, the subway station construction works completed, and then the antiquities repositioned.
The Minister of Culture Lina Mendoni reacted by saying during a press conference that her office and the Ministry of Infrastructure had not reached a decision yet and that “when the time comes, they would deal with it.”
To add to the confusion, the current Mayor of Thessaloniki Konstantinos Zervas and local officials have stated they are in favor of the removal and repositioning of the antiquities.
One of the main reasons for such opposite views is that keeping the ruins would require to scrap the central subway station, which could jeopardize a 3.5 billion-euro project co-financed by the European Union. This at a time when Greece's moribund economy sees very few major public projects.
Opposition politicians, archaeologists, and citizens have been outraged by the Greek government's plans to displace the delicate antiquities.
Students of the Department of History and Archaeology of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki are opposed to the government's decision. Additionally, the Christian Archaeological Society has sent an appeal to the prime minister himself.
Byzantinology scholar Paolo Odorico, director of the Center for Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies at Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales in Paris, visited the antiquities of Venizelos Station in 2013. He argued that the displacement of the Byzantine Middle Road would irreversibly destroy the structural authenticity of the antiquities of the monumental set, a value protected by international and Greek law.
Αυτό που έφεραν στο φως οι εργασίες για το μετρό είναι η βυζαντινή Πομπηία! Το καταλαβαίνετε; Και σκοπεύετε να την ξεκολλήσετε, για να την επανακολλήσετε αργότερα; Τρελαθήκατε; Θα κάνετε τις αρχαιότητές σας Lego; Σκοπεύετε να στήσετε τη βυζαντινή Disneyland; Να μας το πείτε! Και να αναλάβετε τις ευθύνες σας.
What the metro construction procedures have brought to light is the Byzantine Pompeii! Do you understand? And do you plan to remove it and reattach it later? Are you crazy? Will you make your antiquities a Lego game? Are you planning to set up the Byzantine Disneyland? Tell us! And take on your responsibilities.
Former Thessaloniki Mayor Yiannis Boutaris also sent a letter to the prime minister speaking on behalf of the newly established “Thessaloniki Citizens’ Movement for the Protection of Cultural Heritage.” The same citizen movement initiated an online petition entitled “Save the Antiquities at Venizelos Station in Thessaloniki.”
Europa Nostra, the pan-European organization for Cultural Heritage, a recognized consultant and non-governmental partner of the European Union, the Council of Europe and UNESCO, addressed a letter to the Central Archaeological Council in support of the antiquities’ remaining at the site.
The decision on the ultimate fate of the antiquities was entrusted to the Central Archaeological Council (CAC), a key body that decides on the fate of sites in Greece. Attic Metro SA, the company building the metro in Thessaloniki, presented its own study advocating for the removal of the antiquities. Following a 14-hour deliberation, the CAC eventually approved the company's proposal. The decision was welcomed by many government officials.
Members of the political opposition, such as former SYRIZA party Deputy Minister of Culture Costas Stratis, had opposite views:
Η γνώμη του Κεντρικού Αρχαιολογικού Συμβουλίου προεξοφλήθηκε από τον πρωθυπουργό σε ζωντανή μετάδοση στη ΔΕΘ. Παραπέμποντας σε τριτοκοσμικό σουλτανάτο. Σίγουρα πάντως όχι σε κράτος που θέλει να λέγεται σύγχρονο, ευνομούμενο, ευρωπαϊκό.
The Central Archaeological Council's opinion was judged in advance by the Prime Minister in a live broadcast at the Thessaloniki International Fair. [As if we were] a third-world sultanate. Certainly not a state that wants to be called modern, favored, European.
There were also both offline and online reactions and protests by netizens:
“Και Μετρό και Αρχαία”. Οι Πολίτες της Θεσσαλονίκης έστειλαν μήνυμα.
“Κύριε Μητσοτάκη Κάτω τα χέρια από το σώμα και την ιστορία της πόλης.”#Thessaloniki #skg #ΜΕΤΡΟ #Βενιζέλου pic.twitter.com/Yg2T0TVu6o
— Αλέξανδρος Τριανταφυλλίδης (@tr_alexandros) December 17, 2019
“Both Metro and Antiquities.” The Citizens of Thessaloniki sent their message.
“Mr. Mitsotakis [Greece's current Prime Minister], hands off the city's body and history!”
Twitter user Fiogkos cited the city of Sofia, Bulgaria's capital, to remind officials that there is a feasible alternative:
Στη Σόφια άλλαξαν 3 φορές τη θέση του σταθμού για να μην μετακινήσουν αρχαία
Read more at: https://t.co/KMdLi6CO1G #μετρο #θεσσαλονικη
— PhD (@fiogkos) December 19, 2019
In Sofia, the metro station's location was changed thrice to avoid transferring antiquities
Read more at: https://t.co/KMdLi6CO1G
Στο θέμα του σταθμού #Μετρό της Θεσσαλονίκης… Τα αρχαία μας και τα μάτια σας, ρεμάλια. Μετρό λέμε και δε βλέπουμε, εδώ και τριάντα χρόνια… Τα αρχαία μας όμως είναι πιο σημαντικά! Κανονίστε την πορεία σας..!
— TO Kathiki (@KathikiMeApopsi) December 21, 2019
About the Metro station in Thessaloniki…Take precious care of our antiquities, you losers. We have been talking about the metro and we have not seen it for the last 30 years…Our antiquities though are more important! Take your own chances!!
An online magazine, HOT DOC, also makes the following accusations:
Φουσκώνουν, έως τριπλασιασμού, το κόστος του έργου με «κατά χώραν» παραμονή των αρχαιοτήτων, για να αποδείξουν ότι η απόσπαση είναι φθηνότερη και άρα προτιμότερη λύση #αρχαία #μετρό https://t.co/oFBnqcd2XA
— Hot Doc (@hotdoc_mag) December 17, 2019
They inflate, up to three times, the cost of the “in situ” remaining antiquities project to prove that the removal is a cheaper and therefore more preferable solution
The Hellenic Archaeologists Association, in a press release, has opposed the CAC decision, stating that the Council's opinion is a dark blot for archeology and announced that it intends to appeal to international organizations and the State Council.
But while the Ministry of Culture's “Unified Fighting Movement” line of workers has identified a redesign study of Venizelos Station with “in situ” conservation of the antiquities and brought it to light, both the Minister of Culture Lina Mendoni and Attic Metro S.A. President Nikos Tahiaos have questioned the study's very existence, describing it as a “purported solution” or as  a “non-existent study.”

author: Maria Soulis


text:
Chinese propaganda slogan ‘unifying Taiwan by force’ is losing its threatening edge · Global Voices
Oiwan Lam

Screenshot from a count down timer on 2020 take-over of Taiwan.
Mainland China's public call for “unifying Taiwan by force” (武統台灣) surged after Tsai Ing-wen of the pro-Taiwan independence Democratic Progress Party (DPP) won the Taiwanese presidential election in 2016.
Unification with Taiwan is a significant agenda goal for Chinese president Xi Jinping’s national revival project as outlined by his report at the 19th Communist Party Congress in 2018. In his new year speech on cross-strait relations in 2019, Xi again stressed that unification with Taiwan would be based on Hong Kong’s “One Country and Two Systems” model and “unifying by force” remained an option.
However, to the chagrin of mainland Chinese online patriots, worries about growing popular support for Taiwanese pro-independence DPP has led Chinese Communist propaganda to downplay this hawkish narrative ahead of the 2020 Taiwanese presidential elections.
The idea of “unifying Taiwan by force” has been around for many years and has garnered public support among mainland Chinese nationalists. In April 2016, the CCP affiliated outlet Global Times conducted an online poll in which 85.1 percent of respondents supported  “unifying Taiwan by force”. Later that year, Global Times invited retired People Liberation Army (PLA) general Wang Hongguang to its annual conference where Wang advocated for military tactics to unify China with Taiwan claiming that the PLA was set to take over Taiwan by 2020.
More recently, in April 2019, a mainland Chinese Scholar Li Yi was invited by Taiwan’s Chinese Unity Promotion Party to speak about cross-strait unification in Taichung city. After he arrived in Taiwan, he started publicizing his military unification views on Weibo and warned that if Taiwan's Kuomintang (KMT) and DPP parties could not accept the “One Country Two Systems” model, the only answer would be “unifying Taiwan by force”. He also implied that if KMT’s candidate Han Guo-yu became president, the unification process would take about 10 years through peaceful negotiation. However, if DPP won again unification would happen much sooner as China would opt to deploy armed forces. He said:
總之我們先起草一個《和平協議》，然後大軍壓境，給台灣20小時簽字，不簽就攻過去，那他們（台灣）就簽了嘛，這很簡單的事。
All we have to do is the draft a “peaceful unification agreement”and deploy our troops. Give Taiwan 20 hours to sign the agreement or we launch the attack. Their only option is to sign it, the whole thing is very simple.
The KMT’s pro-China stance is appealing to Taiwanese who are in favor of economic prosperity and political stability. Li Yi’s military unification threat is considered a strategy to consolidate KMT’s supporting base. Around the same time as Li Yi's talk, hawkish discourse about “unifying Taiwan by force” circulated widely on social media. Some even used the term “keep the island but not the people” (留島不留人）to threaten Taiwanese into supporting the Kuomingtang’s “peaceful unification” political stance.
The prolonged Hong Kong protests have indicated to the Taiwanese people that “One Country Two Systems” is a dead-end. During the past six months, Beijing's threat to send the PLA to Hong Kong with a number of military parades at the border area has failed to stop Hongkongers from protesting. The city's fearless struggle against China's political control has inspired young Taiwanese to resist Beijing's influence in Taiwan.
This is also having an effect on the upcoming Taiwanese election. According to an ongoing poll measuring popularity for KMT's Han Kuo-yu and DPP's Tsai Ing-wen, after the Hong Kong anti-extradition protests broke out in June, Tsai's support rate surpassed Han's by 1.8 percent. By August, Han's support rate had dropped to 38.7 percent from 46.2 percent in May.
Han Kuo-yu faced strong criticism for his pro-China and pro-unification stance and, in order to rescue his election campaign, was forced to denounce Hong Kong’s “One Country Two Systems” model with an “over my dead body” vow.
In the wake of the Hong Kong protest movement, Beijing has also changed its political rhetoric regarding Taiwan. In contrast to its pro-military unification 2016 speaker, the Global Times invited Taiwan pro-peaceful unification scholar Chang Ya-chung to address the 2019 conference. While Chang did mention that “unifying Taiwan by force” is useless as the U.S. only sees Taiwan as a bargaining chip and would not care if Taiwan becomes another Afghanistan, the theme of his talk was meant to argue against “One Country Two Systems” saying that it is a model for a “father and son” relationship while China and Taiwan are actually “brothers”. However, Global Times twisted the headline of his speech transcript to “Friends in mainland China, please do not talk about ‘unifying Taiwan by force’ in such a casual manner” (“大陆朋友，可否不要动辄就对台湾谈‘武统’？”).
Chang’s speech was published by a number of state-affiliated media and social media outlets. However, online patriots did not buy this peaceful unification stance. A large number of angry comments were directed at Chang:
九又七分之六: 张亚中我们不是你兄弟，我们是你爸爸，关系要摆正，台湾永远是儿子。
九又七分之六: Chang Yachung: We are not brothers, we are your father. The relation should be clear, Taiwan is always the son.
竹旸Du: 集体怼张亚中。。“一国两制”你不要，“一国一制”你要不要？
竹旸Du: Let’s rebuked Chang Yachung… if you don’t want “One Country Two Systems” how about “One Country One System”?
On 1 January, to commemorate the 41st Anniversary of issuing Message to Compatriots in Taiwan China Central Television released a video on Deng Xiaoping’s effort in paving the way to the unification with Taiwan.
While official propaganda is downplaying the discourse on “unifying Taiwan by force”, online public opinions are more extreme and militant:
晶晶-kkw: #告台湾同胞书41周年#梧桐之后，留岛不留人
晶晶-kkw: #The 41th Anniversary of Issuing Message to Compatriots in Taiwan# After unifying Taiwan with force, keep the island but not the people.
卢晓周: #告台湾同胞书41周年#统一台湾的条件已经成熟，我们的武力足以在完成台湾顺利统一的情况下，还能够阻止美国进行武装干涉，这是其一。
其二，台湾的内部状况不允许我们继续拖下去，寄希望于台湾人投诚来归是不现实的，会犯机会主义的错误，趁着现在岛内还有一部分人对大陆，对中国还有认知，抓紧时间统一，不要等到岛内没有一个朋友才去动手，将坐失大好时机。
其三，现在动手，可以顺利推进东亚一体化建设，就可以把美国力量彻底挤出东亚，解除我们的心腹大患，这样一来，我们就可以把东亚、中亚、俄罗斯连成一片，欧亚大陆彻底打通，这样中国就有了与美国最后争雄的本钱。
其四，顺便就解决了香港问题，台湾统一，东亚一体化，美国退出东亚，就可以顺利对香港进行彻底改造。
卢晓周: #The 41th Anniversary of issuing Message to Compatriots in Taiwan# It is time to unify with Taiwan. Firstly, our military strength can stop the U.S from intervening.
Secondly, it is unrealistic to expect Taiwanese to opt for unification. Now a substantial part of Taiwanese population still have some knowledge about China, we have to take action now. If we wait until there is no more friend in the island, we will lose the opportunity.
Thirdly, if we take action now, we can force the U.S out of east Asia and link up East Asia, Middle-east and Russia. Then we can compete with the U.S.
Fourthly, unifying Taiwan by force can solve the Hong Kong problem. When the U.S stepped out of East Asia, we can transform Hong Kong completely.
However, the narrative about “unifying Taiwan by force” is losing its threatening effect on social media. In Taiwan, pro-independence activists highlighted mainland Chinese extremist comments such as “keep the island but not the people” to consolidate the belief that Taiwan should cut the connection with China before it is too late. Chang Yachung also told Global Times’ readers that whenever mainland Chinese officials recited the position to unify Taiwan by force, Tsai’s popularity increased a few points.
As for Hong Kong, after protesting for more than six months against Beijing's political encroachment, netizens turned the narrative of “unifying Taiwan by force” into a practical joke. On the last day of 2019, community members from popular online forum Hong Kong Golden Forum mocked China’s military threat by organized an online flash mob countdown to the 2020 PLA. The countdown was widely reported in Taiwanese media outlets.

author: Oiwan Lam


text:
What is at stake in Taiwan’s January 2020 presidential elections? · Global Voices
Filip Noubel

Entrance to the National Palace Museum in Taipei, with an inscription reading 天下為公, an expression attributed to Confucius that can be translated as ‘society belonging equally to all’. Photo by Filip Noubel, used with permission.
While Taiwan is often hailed as one of the most advanced democracies in Asia, this democracy is still quite young as the island only emerged from a harsh dictatorship a little over 30 years ago. Thus large questions of what should be its political, social, economic, environmental, and cultural model dominate the political debate and surge during elections.
Taiwan started its democratic transition in the late 1980s. In 1986, the first opposition party to the dominating Kuomintang (KMT) party, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was established and allowed to run for local elections that same year. In July 1987, martial law was officially lifted, after it had been in place for nearly forty years. Subsequently, media outlets were allowed to operate freely, and multi-partyism became a regular feature of Taiwanese political life. Since then, Taiwanese society has been actively exploring different models of development — a process that continues to this day.
A highly contested issue during the election campaign is the economic future of Taiwan. The island underwent rapid industrialization that turned it from a recipient of US foreign aid in the 50s and 60s to a major economic player in Asia where it now ranks as the 7th economy for a mid-size population of 23 million. Like other Asian Tigers, it diversified its economy and invested in technology, growing at a rate of over 7 percent during most of the 80s and 90s. Today, foreign trade remains the driving force of the economy, with a heavy dependence on both the US and China. In 2019, the average monthly salary was approaching 40,000 Taiwan dollars [US$1,300] and the unemployment rate was below 4 percent.
Despite overall positive economic indicators, Taiwan is now facing several challenges, chief among them are the comparatively low wages in the context of other Asian economies. Combined with rising real estate prices, this explains why some Taiwanese experience a sense of economic stagnation.
While the DPP is advocating for less trade dependency on China and aims to strengthen ties with South and Southeast Asia, the KMT sees the future in a deeper integration with the Chinese economy, a strategy that is actively promoted by Beijing via a number of special measures, such as special economic privileges in the mainland for Taiwanese workers and companies.
This is probably the most sensitive and polarizing issue, and not just during election season. Often called Cross-Strait relations in reference to the Taiwan Strait separating the island of Taiwan from mainland China, they continue to shape and reshape the political, economic, military and cultural discourse of all political actors in Taiwan.
For the Pan-Green Coalition led by the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), China is considered anything from a threat to, at best, an economic partner whose role needs to be reigned in. The narrative is that while China is unlikely to launch a military attack, it is trying to ‘colonize’ Taiwan economically and to manipulate Taiwan’s democracy via disinformation. Opposition to closer relations with China launched the 2014 Sunflower Student Movement. Developments in Hong Kong also have reinforced this view. The latest expression of an overall suspicion of Beijing’s intentions towards Taiwan is the December 2019 adoption of the Anti-Infiltration Law that seeks to prevent foreign countries from spreading disinformation, a law that can lead to up to five years in prison if proven guilty.
For the Kuomintang (KMT), closer economic integration with China is the best channel for a rapprochement across the Taiwan Strait. The KMT has thus, in the past, actively supported the Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement (CSSTA) in 2013 which is part of the overarching Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) of 2010.
While not directly or openly articulated by the campaigning parties, the issue of sovereignty and possible independence of Taiwan is very present in the back of the current political discourse.
For the KMT, Taiwan remains the Republic of China that was created in mainland China in 1912, and eventually moved to Taiwan after it lost to the Communists in the civil war in 1949.
For the DPP, the issue is much more nuanced. While it does not openly call for Taiwan's independence, mostly because it would antagonize Beijing as well as a significant part of the Taiwanese population, it maintains that Taiwan is a sovereign state. At times, it also suggests certain sympathies with the idea of dropping the reference to the term ‘China’ in its name. One of such hints includes Tsai’s choice for her vice-presidential candidate William Lai, who is known for having stated publicly in 2018 that he would ‘work towards Taiwan’s independence’.
Beijing has stated that any declaration of independence by Taiwan would trigger a military response.
In the presidential campaign, this issue plays out in the field of diplomatic relations. Following Washington’s recognition of Beijing as the ‘sole China’ in 1979, most former diplomatic allies of Taiwan have over the years switched their allegiance to mainland China. The number of Taiwan’s diplomatic partners is dwindling every year, and is now reduced to 15, as Taiwan lost two allies, Kiribati and the Solomon Islands to Beijing in September 2019.
The US plays an essential role in Taiwan’s economic and military strategy. It assisted Taiwan heavily in the 50s and 60s, and is now Taiwan’s 2nd trade partner, after China and before Japan. The two countries are currently considering a bilateral trade agreement, following Washington’s signing of the Taipei Act that pledges to support the island more robustly. More recently, there have been indications that the Taiwanese economy is benefiting from the ongoing US-China trade war.
Militarily speaking, the US acts as the main guarantor of Taiwan’s security sustainability through a series of acts and regular arms sales. As China is beefing up its military capacity, Taiwan is increasingly dependent on its US ally and has recently required Washington to assess its own military capacity. The reactions to the 2 January helicopter accident in which Taiwan’s Army Chief lost his life demonstrates how important that issue has become.
In Taipei's central Da'an Forest Park, visitors can bike and produce energy used to power water fountains. Photo by Filip Noubel, used with permission.
The environment is a question getting traction among Taiwanese voters. Historically, the green movement is linked to the democratization of the country since the late 80s when environmental protests multiplied and challenged the policies of the KMT, and for the first time, forced polluting businesses to close down. Today people are mostly concerned with air pollution, which is a result of domestic industries but also pollution coming from China, and nuclear energy. Taiwan is prone to strong earthquakes, and following the Fukushima nuclear plant disaster in Japan of 2011, opposition to the three currently active nuclear plants in Taiwan has mounted. Yet a 2018 referendum voted to retain nuclear energy, though by a mere 59 percent vote in favor. While the DPP’s official line has been to out phase nuclear energy, the KMT shares contradictory messages as to where it stands on the issue.
Finally, one issue that often sits on the generational faultline relates to moral values, particularly in the context of family, gender, and traditional roles. Like most East Asian societies, Taiwan is shaped by the Confucian value system that was co-opted by the KMT and diffused through its political discourse, the education system and social programs.
Then end of martial law and the political alternative with the DPP have since diversified views and brought significant improvement in the area of gender equality and the rights of the LGBTQI+ community. Tellingly, in 2016, Taiwan elected its first female, unmarried and childless president Tsai Ing-wen.
Scene from the Taipei 2019 Gay Pride, the largest in Asia, re-enacting mythical figures from ancient Chinese history. Photo by Filip Noubel, used with permission.
Conservative forces, drawn by large parts of the KMT, and certain Christian groups, have vowed to counter what they describe as an ‘attack on traditional values’, with a focus on the school system that now teaches sex education turning the school into a new political battleground.


text:
Fiji netizens say #PlasticFree campaign is misleading · Global Voices
Mong Palatino

A road side market in Fiji. Flickr photo by Jared Wiltshire, Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)
Fiji has banned the production and sale of single-use plastic since 1 January 2020. But some netizens have pointed out that the #PlasticFree slogan used by the government is misleading because thicker plastic is still allowed in the country.
The ban on single-use plastic is meant to protect the environment and preserve the natural beauty of the Oceanian nation:
We've finally stopped the sale & distribution of single-use plastic bags which harm our land & our marine life & also dirties our environment making it unattractive for our tourists who'll choose other destinations if we aren't careful.
Plastic bag litter diminishes #Fiji‘s beauty & can hurt our tourism industry which thousands of Fijians rely on for their livelihoods.
From 01 January 2020, single-use plastic bags will be banned to protect our environment.#FijiNews #TeamFiji #FijianGovernment #PlasticFreeFiji pic.twitter.com/gWfHslFI1o
— Fijian Government (@FijianGovt) December 30, 2019
The ban means single-use plastic can no longer be sold in supermarkets, retail outlets, restaurants, food courts, municipal and roadside markets, and commercial centers.
There will be a fine and prison penalty for manufacturers and retailers found guilty of violating the ban.
Consumers can opt to pay 50 cents for a reusable eco-bag.
There was confusion during the first week of implementing the ban. Both market vendors and buyers were unsure about what type of packaging materials can still be used. Some outlets were warned for using single-use plastic, as shown in this video of officials conducting a random inspection:
The government clarified that plastic with less than 50 microns is banned while plastic with higher than 50 microns is considered a reusable material. A micron is a unit of measurement with 1,000 microns in a millimeter.
We have banned single-use plastic bags. this means that any bag under 50 microns is banned from the Fijian market unless they form an integral part of product packaging. Plastic bags above 50 microns are internationally classified as reusable bags.#FijiNews #PlasticFreeFiji. pic.twitter.com/f5hDErjfDw
— Fijian Government (@FijianGovt) January 6, 2020
Reacting to this clarification, some netizens accused the government of deceiving the public with its #PlasticFree campaign.
Ummm what happened to #PlasticFreeFiji??? Banning single use plastic for more plastic???? Where is the sense in that?
— Michelle My Belle (@MiaVampira1013) January 6, 2020
All plastic bags, no matter how many microns used, will end up polluting the environment. Just say y'all need more money, jeez. I see you charging extra for more microns. And remove that #PlasticFreeFiji because there will be more plastic now than there ever was.
— retr0 (@wyn_jordyn) January 6, 2020
I'm not blaming the govt at all! I am asking how disallowing one thin plastic bag to then allow a thicker plastic bag is actually banning single use plastic bags. This is whole exercise is to change peoples behaviour, you don't do that by giving them an equally bad alternative.
— Talei Tora (@TaleiTora) January 6, 2020
So Fiji put a ban on single use plastic bags only to replace it with thicker plastic bags (for fruits, vegetables and meat). What!? #teamfiji pic.twitter.com/A0P2877kI0
— Rahul Parmar (@RahulPa29821958) January 4, 2020
A deleted post from the government’s Twitter account was shared to highlight that the ban does not cover ‘thick’ plastic:
This is the deleted tweet. More proof that no one in @FijianGovt knows anything about plastic! https://t.co/XMnZagyLuO pic.twitter.com/bpQVBKfvF0
— ?Angry Kpra? (@angry_kpra) January 6, 2020
Ministry of Economy Head of Climate Change Nilesh Prakash said that enforcing the ban will lead to some difficulties initially but the long-term goal is to change people's mindset and behavior:
In every jurisdiction rather I would say, when this ban was imposed, it was chaotic. You look at developed countries because plastics have become so convenient for us. It’s readily available, it’s light in weight, but I think it’s about creating that transition, it’s about changing that mindset that we need to have overtime.

author: Mong Palatino


text:
Internet disruption: different terms for different tactics · Global Voices
Advox

Graph showing which countries shut down the internet most. Creative Commons License: CC BY-ND.
As the internet progressively becomes an intrinsic part of our daily lives — from communicating with friends and applying for social services, to studying and working — staying connected is no longer a luxury but a necessity. In this context, internet shutdowns have evolved into a human rights issue with the power to severely disrupt people’s lives. Apart from the documented negative economic impacts, intentional internet shutdowns can be weaponized to silence dissent and stunt protest movements. However, internet shutdowns are on the rise with 196 intentional internet disruptions recorded in 2018 alone. In 2019, Global Voices covered internet shutdowns in Zimbabwe, Myanmar, Mauritania, Ethiopia, Iraq, and Ecuador to name a few.
An internet shutdown is defined as “an intentional disruption of internet or electronic communications, rendering them inaccessible or effectively unusable, for a specific population or within a location, often to exert control over the flow of information’’. Read more at accessnow.org/keepiton.
Now more than ever it is vital for internet users to understand the different vocabulary being used to describe different types of internet disruptions and how they work. One or all of the following tactics can be used to intentionally disrupt the internet.
“What is Bandwidth?” Image by Nusha Ashjaee / Lifewire
Bandwidth is defined as “a measurement of the amount of information that can be sent between computers, through a phone line, etc.” An internet connection with high bandwidth can send data (like a video or an image file) faster than a low bandwidth connection. Bandwidth throttling refers to the intentional limitation of bandwidth which can be translated into a limitation on the speed with which a set amount of data can move. One of the ways this can happen is when an Internet Service Provider (ISP) intentionally slows down internet service (at the request of a government body) making the connection so slow it is basically unusable. This can happen on a network-wide level or can be used to target specific apps and websites. This tactic is often used to prevent the spread of videos, photos or audio files as these require higher bandwidth to share.
According to Access Now’s 2018 #KeepItOn Report, “throttling is much harder to verify than other forms of shutdowns”. This is because, in areas where internet infrastructure is not well developed, people may confuse intentional throttling with the technical difficulties they frequently face.
The use of throttling has been covered by Global Voices in different countries and regions around the world.
From 7-9 May 2019, Kazakhstani internet users were unable to access major social media networks due to nation-wide throttling which coincided with planned demonstrations by opposition leaders on 9 May.
Also in May 2019, Indonesia was rocked by protests in the capital, Jakarta, after defeated presidential candidate Prabowo Subianto blamed systemic cheating and rigged election results for his loss at the polls. As protesters took to the streets, the Indonesian government throttled connectivity to specific social media apps.
Image from VEsinfiltro Twitter account.
Other shutdowns take the form of platform-specific blocking also known as “content blocking” or “partial shutdowns”. Sites and apps like Instagram, Telegram, WhatsApp, Twitter and Facebook can be targeted while other websites are still available for use. In some countries where platforms like Facebook are synonymous with the internet itself, platform-specific blocking severely limits access to the internet. Platform-specific blocking has become more common during moments of civil unrest and elections as a means to prevent large-scale protest organization. According to NetBlocks, during the October 2019 protests in Iraq, multiple ISPs blocked access to Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, Instagram and other social media and messaging apps. Many governments claim that these blocking tactics are a method to prevent the spread of misinformation and to quell the possibility of violence.
In 2019, Global Voices reported on cases of platform-specific blocking in Venezuela, Turkey, Ecuador, Iraq and more.
In late January 2019, after Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaidó invoked articles in the country’s constitution to attempt to take power from President Nicolás Maduro, anti-Maduro protests erupted in several parts of the country. According to internet observer organization VEsinfiltro, blocks to Instagram, Twitter and Youtube were recorded. Journalist and GV contributor Luis Carlos Diaz stated that this was a way for Maduro’s government to prevent Guaidó’s message from reaching a wider audience.
In June 2019, Ethiopia saw three major internet disruptions, including a preemptive shutdown due to a national exam that lasted three days, an unexplained internet blackout the lasted for at least 100 hours and a shutdown due to political violence in Amhara State, Ethiopia’s second-largest region. After the public regained access to the internet, specific sites like Facebook and WhatsApp were still unavailable until August.
The most drastic of all the internet disruption tactics is a complete internet shutdown also known as a “blanket shutdown”, a “kill switch” or a “blackout”. While the previously mentioned tactics still allow people to access the internet, albeit in a limited fashion, internet blackouts mean that connection to the internet is cut. This can happen unintentionally when there is damage to undersea telecommunication cables, but it is most common when governments turn it off intentionally. When this happens, governments work with service providers to shut down access to all forms of internet connection making digital security tools that are usually effective at bypassing internet blocks, like Virtual Private Networks (VPNs), unusable. However, internet infrastructure is designed to be decentralized so completely shutting down the internet is a very complex task if not currently impossible. During what is commonly known as a blanket shutdown, the internet is often still available for a limited sector of the population such as government officials.
Blanket shutdowns began to gain notoriety when the Egyptian government cut off access to the internet during political protests in 2011. Since then, blanket shutdowns have been employed in many countries including India, Chad, Indonesia, Zimbabwe and recently in Iran.
Civil unrest erupted in Zimbabwe after the government announced plans for a 150 percent hike on fuel prices in January 2019. The military was deployed to quell the protesters and the government implemented a complete internet blackout from 14 January to 20 January 2019.
In August 2019, when the Indian government revoked the special status given to the state of Kashmir and Jammu, a communications blackout was imposed which included shutting down the internet and cutting off access to mobile and fixed telephone lines.
Shutdowns on the rise. Image by Access Now. Creative Commons: CC-BY.
As the number of internet shutdowns continues to grow, civil society organizations are sounding the alarm and using their collective power to demand that governments view access to the internet as a fundamental human right.
In Uganda, several organizations penned a letter to the African Union asking them to condemn Uganda’s 2016 decision to shut down the internet. In early December 2019, civil society groups from Indonesia sued the Indonesian government for enforcing an internet shutdown in the Papua and West Papua regions after the eruption of student protests.
However, despite valiant efforts on the part of activists and civil society, the different forms of shutdowns are still on the rise and 2020 doesn't look like it will be any different.

author: Advox


text:
Six years after deadly crackdown of garment strike in Cambodia, families say no hope for justice · Global Voices
VOD

Workers carry an injured protester after a clash with armed forces on Veng Sreng Street in Phnom Penh on 3 January 2014. (Photo and caption by Panha Chhorpoan/VOD)
This edited article by Saut Sok Prathna is from VOD News, an independent news site in Cambodia, and is republished on Global Voices as part of a content-sharing agreement. Translated from the original article on VOD Khmer
On 3 January 2014, thousands of garment workers went — as they had for weeks — onto the streets in Phnom Penh to protest for higher wages. At the end of the day, four of them were dead. One remains missing.
The workers were met by a violent crackdown in front of Canadia Industrial Park along Veng Sreng Street by special forces who fired bullets into the crowds on 3 January 2014.
The wife of victim Sam Ravy, Chheav Phanith, in tears told attendants about an anniversary event:
Every day, my daughter asks ‘Mom why don’t we have a daddy? Mom, why do I not have a papa like the others’
At the Center for Alliance of Labor and Human Rights (Central), Phanith on Friday (3 January 2020) called on the government to take responsibility.
I would like to ask the government to please find a solution for all families of the dead, find justice for them.
But Vorn Pov, Independent Democracy of Informal Economy Association president, who was beaten up during the crackdown, on Thursday (2 January 2020) said justice was unlikely.
So far, justice seems as far away as the horizon, or like searching for a needle in the bottom of the sea. We have not yet seen the light of justice for us.
At the event on Friday, Pov said the country would only have peace if social justice was achieved.
Peace is possible only if there is peace through the physical and the mind, and those of us who suffered injustice do not yet have peace of mind. So I think that there is no peace as long as there is no social justice.
Khim Soeun, father of Khim Sophat from Svay Rieng province who went missing during the crackdown, echoed similar sentiments, saying he was not confident the government would find justice for the families. “[I] would like to appeal to all international organizations to find justice for my family.”
But, on 2 January 2020, Justice Ministry spokesman Chin Malin said that the government had to prevent an uprising during the protests, which he said was led by a party. He told VOD over WhatsApp:
If this group [of workers] are really hurt or are missing, then the responsibility will fall on the group or political party that organized the uprising and led them to hold violent protests to overthrow the government.
But Sam Sary, the brother of Pheng Kosal who died after being shot, said it was the government’s responsibility as the protest was not related to politics and workers had merely demanded an increase of their minimum wage to $160 a month.
The opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party had expressed solidarity with the workers and the protest coincided with demonstrations against 2013 elections, which the opposition claimed was rigged.
Soeng Senkaruna, a spokesman for the Cambodian human rights group Adhoc, said that those who ordered the forces to violently crackdown on the workers bore responsibility.
Therefore, our civil society has insisted on forming an independent research or investigation team … that is not within the government. So far, we have not seen any action taken to find the perpetrators who shot and killed the workers.
According to human rights NGO Licadho’s statistics, 38 people were injured during the protests, mostly by bullets, and 23 union leaders and activists were arrested and imprisoned for five months. Six union leaders were sentenced to two years in prison each in December 2018, although their sentences were all suspended.

author: VOD


text:
‘Where it hurts’: A Brazilian online campaign raises awareness about abuse by health professionals · Global Voices
Fernanda Canofre

Campaign's official illustration.
Warning: This story contains graphic descriptions of instances of sexual assault.
Brazilian actor and activist Nina Marqueti was 16 when she was a victim of sexual abuse by her pediatrician. On a consultation about stomach problems, she says he pulled down her pants and touched her genitals.
At age 28, she decided to address her assault on her theatre play A Flor da Matriarca (“The matriarch’s flower”). After that, she started a campaign inviting others to tell similar stories.
Through the hashtag #ondedoi (“where it hurts”), Brazilian women are sharing experiences of abuse by doctors and other health professionals. Abuses include sexual orientation discrimination, body shaming, and sexual assault while being examined.
The campaign was organized with the help of seven Brazilian feminist collectives. According to the official website, the campaign will try to transform the stories into data and map cases of abuse in Brazil, as well as establish a support network for survivors.
The hashtag went viral on Twitter on December 9. The following day, the campaign created an official account to retweet people's stories. Here are some of them:
#ondedoi a primeira vez que fiz ultrassom transvaginal o médico fez o exame sem lubrificação adequada e comigo chorando de dor pq ele estava com pressa já que iria embora as 17hrs.
O meu exame estava marcado para 17hrs e eu só chorava no banheiro ao tirar o avental
— caliê (@caliemartins) December 11, 2019
The first time I had a transvaginal ultrasound the doctor did the exam without adequate lubrication, I was crying in pain, all because he was in a hurry as his shift was supposed to end at 5 p.m. My exam was scheduled at 5 p.m. and I cried in the bathroom while changing my clothes.
A primeira vez que eu fui ao ginecologista depois de perder a virgindade ele introduziu o dedo no meu canal vaginal e eu contraí involuntariamente.
Ele disse que eu ia ”dar muito prazer aos meus parceiros” porque eu era ”muito apertadinha” #ondedoi
— Krishna✨ (@kribshna) December 9, 2019
The first time I went to a gynaecologist after loosing my virginity, he introduced his finger into my vagina and I contracted it involuntarily. He said I was going to give “a lot of pleasure to my partners” because I was “very tight.”
A 1ª vez que fui sozinha ao gine o médico me disse q precisava usar a mão pra “ter certeza q tava tudo bem”, então ele introduziu os dedos e passou a mão no meu corpo , ele dizia q só estava me mostrando onde eu ia sentir prazer, fiquei sem reação e nunca contei o ngm #ondedoi
— debˢᵖᶠᶜ ?? (@dadsdeborah) December 9, 2019
The first time I went by myself to a gynaecologist, the doctor told me he would have to use his hand to be sure everything was okay, he then introduced his fingers in me and started to caress my body, he said he was just showing me where I would feel pleasure, I had no reaction and never told this to anyone.
Depois de sofrer aborto e sangrar por 1 mês, chorando durante o atendimento, o médico gargalhou e perguntou “mas você não sabe o que é uma coisa chamada camisinha?”. Ele é um dos diretores da maternidade #ondedoi https://t.co/hgzP9emons
— mari? (@marioneraposo) December 9, 2019
After suffering a miscarriage and bleeding for a month, I was crying during a medical consultation, and the doctor laughed and asked: “but don’t you know what a condom is?”. He is one of the directors of a maternity hospital.
ele se levantou, e ficou roçando sua parte íntima ereta no meu joelho. Eu senti medo e vergonha daquela situação. Paralisada. #ondedoi
— Ana Luíza Cotta (@analuctt) December 10, 2019
[first tweet]:I went to a gynaecologist who was recommended to me by an acquaintance with the intention of getting an IUD. All the time he stood too close when talking to me, leaning against my body. I felt my heart stop for a moment when he went to examine me and afterwards, as soon as I sat up (naked)…
[second tweet]: He stood up and started rubbing his erect privates on my knee. I felt scared and ashamed with the situation. Paralised.
fui no médico pq tava com o estômago doendo muito, ele mandou eu levantar a blusa, tocou na minha barriga, desceu a mão até minha bunda e disse “da próxima vez pode vir com menos roupa” #ondedoi
— plutão (@nativadobar) December 10, 2019
I went to a doctor because my stomach was hurting a lot, he told me to lift up my shirt, touched my belly, moved his hand down my butt and said that next time I could come wearing less clothing.
The hashtag also gathered many stories of lesbian women who said they've experienced mockery and contempt by doctors because of their sexual orientation:
minha primeira vez no ginecologista, ele me perguntou se eu namorava, disse que sim, uma menina. Ele parou a consulta, buscou uma bíblia na estante e começou a ler pra mim. #ondedoi
— tia lésbica (@himynameislaurs) December 10, 2019
My first time at a gynaecologist, he asked me if I was in a relationship, I said yes, with a girl. He stopped the consult, reached for a bible on his shelf and started to read it to me
Fazia acompanhamento com uma ginecologista, ela sabia que eu era lésbica, mesmo assim ela se recusava me examinar e falava que eu tinha que perder a virgindade. #ondedoi
— Beatriz (@beablood_) December 11, 2019
I used to consult with a gynecologist, she knew I was a lesbian, still she would refuse to examine me and said that I had to lose my virginity.
a 1 vez que fui no ginecologista foi com um médico homem eu tinha 16 anos e ele ficou fazendo piada sobre a minha orientação sexual perguntando quem era o homem ou mulher e que eu era mt bonita pra ser lésbica depois fez exame de toque me senti 1 lixo fiquei anos sem ir #ondedoi
— myllena dalla (@stwrtdalla) December 9, 2019
The first time I went to a gynaecologist it was a male doctor, I was 16 and he kept joking about my sexual orientation, asking who was the man and the woman in the relationship, that I was too pretty to be a lesbian, after that he did a touch exam, I felt like trash and didn’t go again to a doctor for years.
This user shared her experience of having a physician mock her self-harm scars:
1a vez q eu fui numa gineco ela olhou minhas cicatrizes (automutilação) e disse que era td drama, q ela já tinha tratado pacientes com doenças de vdd (câncer) e q ngm fazia isso e q n sei o q
e completou com: a hora q tu quiser se matar msm me fala q te digo os remédios #ondedoi
— hey, adora (@lusbian) December 10, 2019
The first time I went to a gynaecologist she looked at my scars (self-harm) and said it was all drama, that she had already treated patients with real diseases (cancer) and that none of them would do that etc, then she added that, whenever I really felt like killing myself, I should just tell her and she would name the right drugs.
Other users shared their stories about being body-shamed during their appointments:
#ondedoi o PSIQUIATRA começou a falar sobre meu peso e a questão da saúde (mas disse q n tinha nada). Porém comentou q eu tinha q emagrecer pra ficar mais elegante pro meu pai e pro meu namorado. PSIQUIATRA, eu saí nervosa de lá chorando, era pra mim ter saído mais tranquila
— carolena (@schneidcarolina) December 11, 2019
The PSYCHIATRIST started to talk about my weight and health issues (but said I didn’t have any problems). However, he commented that I should lose weight so I would be more elegant to my father and to my boyfriend. PSYCHIATRIST, I left the clinic crying, when I was supposed to leave calmer.
#ondedoi Minha primeira vez na ginecologista ela me disse que eu tinha Síndrome dos Ovários Policistos e me mandou fazer academia e depilação a laser, pois eu não iria querer ser gorda e peluda
— só quero me formar logo (@danizinhadcd) December 11, 2019
My first time at the gynaecologist she said I had polycystic ovary syndrome and told me to go to the gym and to have laser hair removal because I wouldn't want to be fat and hairy.
The official site for the campaign also gathers news stories about similar cases. They include that of Roger Abdelmassih, a leading in-vitro fertilization doctor in Brazil who, in 2009, was sentenced to 278 years in prison for rape of 52 patients and attempted rape of 39 others.

author: Fernanda Canofre


text:
Ahead of Taiwan’s presidential election, KMT accuses DPP of  ‘green terror’ and Beijing echoes · Global Voices
Oiwan Lam

Former KMT chair Eric Chu Li-luan wore a T-shirt with an X over “green terror” in July 2019. Photo from Chu's office via Taiwan Apple Daily News.
Taiwan's Pro-Beijing Kuomintang (KMT) party has shifted its 2020 presidential campaign strategy in the past few weeks. Instead of focusing on how Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) strained relation with China has adverse impacts on Taiwan’s economy, KMT has begun accusing the party of “green terror” — or suppressing pro-Beijing political dissent by legal means.
The political label “White Terror” has been attached to KMT as the party had ruled the country under martial law for more than 38 years. During that period, at least 140,000 individuals were convicted of political crimes in military courts, according to official records. Between 1950 to 1954, the number of executions was between 4,000 to 5,000. Among the convictions during the “white terror” period from 1947 to 1989, 8,296 were speech-related and 1,061 of the accused were executed.
In contrast, the DPP’s founders were victims of the “white terror” and the party’s image is generally associated with universal human rights values.
However, over the past two decades, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has attempted to influence Taiwan’s politics by sponsoring Taiwanese media groups, such as Want Want China Times Media group. In recent years the CCP has spread disinformation as a means to influence the election and Swedish democracy watchdog V-Dem’s 2019 global report describes Taiwan as the world’s most targeted place for disinformation tactics.
Information operations have included the spread of fake news stories, bots and falsified social media accounts, propaganda, and hacking. Much of this disinformation originates from China in order to interfere in elections and referendum.
In response, the ruling party under President Tsai Ing-wen has introduced new laws to block China’s interference and very often, these laws are controversial as they imposed restrictions on political activities.
The most controversial of these political measures is the Anti-infiltration Law. The DDP introduced the Anti-infiltration Bill to the Legislative Yuan on 25 November. This came two days after confessed former Chinese spy William Wang Liqiang’s open accusation that China infiltrated Taiwanese politics by paying three major news networks (CitiTV, China Television and Eastern Broadcasting Co) to broadcast news designed to negatively affect the pro-independent party ahead of the 11 January elections.
The Taiwanese Legislative Yuan passed the Anti-infiltration Law on 31 December 2019, just two weeks ahead of the Presidential election.
The law bans “hostile foreign forces” from campaigning, lobbying, making political donations, disrupting social order by spreading disinformation related to elections. Individuals or organizations which receive funding by agencies of “hostile foreign forces” violate the law and face a maximum penalty of five-year imprisonment and a fine up to around US$332,000.
The hasty legislation has raised some scrutiny and the KMT deemed it “green terror” which aims to silence political dissent.
While the DPP has clarified that the law would only criminalize individuals and organizations who are paid by “hostile foreign agencies” and would not repress independent political views, the KMT continues to spread the “green terror” narrative.
On 4 January, the KMT stated in a press conference that 30 netizens had been victimized by the DPP’s “green terror”. Thus far, the most controversial case was the prosecution of a netizen for violating Article 63 of the Social Order Maintenance Act. According to the article, individuals who spread rumors “in a way that is sufficient to undermine public order and peace” would be subjected to detention for not more than three days or a fine of not more than of NTD 30,000 (or approximately US$1,000 dollars).
The netizen's message was posted on Facebook on 13 October 2019 and accused the DPP of controlling Taiwan’s media regulator the National Communication Commission. It went on to say that Taiwanese media outlets dare not report on the spread of Dengue Fever in Tainan due to political pressure.
The Taiwanese court dismissed the case on 2 January 2020 as the rumor was not “sufficient to undermine public order and peace”.
Although the investigation and the charge may have a silencing effect on citizen expression, thus far, an individual’s freedom of expression is still protected by the Taiwanese court.
The political label “green terror” has also been widely circulated on mainland Chinese state-affiliated media and social media outlets.
On 31 December 2019, Chinese Communist Party-affiliated Global Times and Hong Kong-based pro-Beijing media Wen Wei Po both published news on the passing of Anti-infiltration Law in Taiwan. The two media outlets both commented that the law is a form of “green terror” and will bring Taiwan back to the martial law period.
A number of Weibo and WeChat based media outlets such as Today Taiwan (今日台灣）, China Taiwan Net（中國台灣網）, Taiwan Weekly (台灣一周重點) have reported on the situation using the “green terror” discourse in the same or even more exaggerated manner.
In some cases, the news has been intentionally distorted to spread a fake sense of “green terror”. On 31 December, CCP affiliated Guancha.cn published an article titled “As a part of a coordinated effort on the passing of Anti-infiltration Law, Taiwan authorities arrested more than 10 Taiwanese Communist members” (为配合“反渗透法”过关 台当局一天抓10多名台湾共产党成员). The media outlet interviewed Lin Te-wang (林德旺), who is the head of the Taiwan People's Communist Party (TPCP), who said that the suppression that the party faced was worse than Chiang Kai-shek’s dictatorship during the martial law period in Taiwan. When cross-checked with news reports back in Taiwan, the police were actually investigating corruption allegations concerning TPCP’s involvement in organizing a sponsored tour to mainland China in early December.
It is well documented that the CCP's United Front Work Department has been using sponsored tours to China as a means to exercise political influence overseas. In this particular case, the Taiwanese police interviewed more than 60 individuals concerning the tour and the news did not have much coverage in Taiwan as it was a regular investigation and no one had been arrested.
The poll on the popularity of presidential candidates was closed on 1 January, it was predicted that Tsai Ing-wen will have a landslide victory. However, some pro-KMT scholars believe that the hasty passing of the Anti-infiltration Law would discourage the DPP’s liberal supporters from endorsing the party line and instead swing voters into supporting KMT’s presidential candidate Han Kuo-yu and candidates for Legislative Yuan.
The results are still to be seen as Taiwan's Presidential and Legislative Yuan elections are scheduled for 11 January 2020.


text:
Beijing’s new top man in Hong Kong says he hopes city will return to ‘the right track’ · Global Voices
Hong Kong Free Press

Luo Huining. Photo: Apple Daily. Non-commercial use.
This post was originally written by Kris Cheng and published on Hong Kong Free Press on 6 January 2020. The following edited version is published on Global Voices under a content partnership agreement.
The new director of Beijing’s Liaison Office in Hong Kong has said that he eagerly hopes the city will return to the right track.
Luo Huining, 65, previously served as the governor of Qinghai province. He replaced Wang Zhimin who served as director since September 2017.
Saturday’s appointment of Luo raised eyebrows since he has no experience in terms of managing Hong Kong matters or foreign affairs.
On December 28, Luo was also appointed deputy chairman of the financial and economic committee of the National People’s Congress – a role afforded to those soon set to retire. He took on the position just a week before he was sent to Hong Kong.
Meeting press at the Liaison Office in Sai Wan on Monday morning, Luo said he used to work on the mainland but was not unfamiliar with Hong Kong:
This will be a new mission, a new challenge to me. I will do my work well – with sincerity and true emotion.
He praised Hong Kong and its role in China’s opening up and modernisation:
The motherland offers Hong Kong the strongest backing.
Since last June, protests over a now-axed extradition bill have evolved into sometimes violent displays of dissent against police action amid calls for democracy and anger over Beijing’s encroachment. Demonstrators are continuing to demand an independent probe into police behaviour, amnesty for those arrested, universal suffrage and a halt to the characterisation of protests as “riots.”
Luo said the situation in Hong Kong over the past six months was worrying:
We all eagerly hope Hong Kong can return to the right track. As President Xi Jinping said in his new year remarks, without a harmonious and stable environment, there will not be a home where people can live and work in peace.
He said the “One Country, Two Systems” formula offers the best advantages for Hong Kong:
I believe that, with the hard work of Chief Executive Carrie Lam, the government, and all sectors of society, the Chinese constitution and the Basic Law will be fully implemented in Hong Kong, the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ principle can be implemented smoothly and successfully in the long-term [and] the long-term prosperity and stability of Hong Kong can be ensured.
“I am fully confident about that,” he said, raising a fist. Luo did not answer reporters’ questions as he left.
The Xinhua report which revealed Luo’s appointment did not elaborate on what his predecessor Wang’s next position may be. Wang had the shortest term out of all directors since the office’s establishment in 2000.
Pro-Beijing news site Bastille Post cited sources as saying that Wang had returned to Beijing and is set to become the deputy head of the Central Institute for Party History and Literature Research.
After democrats won the District Council election by a landslide in November, a Reuters report cited an unnamed Chinese official as saying that the Liaison Office had misjudged the city’s situation and its chief, Wang Zhimin, may be replaced. The Chinese Foreign Ministry claimed the report was false. In early December, Wang vowed to continue with his duties in Hong Kong.
Veteran China watcher Johnny Lau said during an RTHK City Forum programme on Sunday that Wang’s removal marked a tactical change for Beijing:
This is not a change of policy. A tactical change means that the high-pressure tactics of the past six months, including tolerance of the police abuse of power and violence… cannot go on… [T]he response from Hong Kong people was very strong. Thus, the [policy] change temporary.
He said Luo, with a relatively strong background in economics, may focus more on livelihood issues:
But we have to continue to see whether the hardline policy of Beijing will change.

author: Hong Kong Free Press


text:
Belize gets serious about ocean conservation with new Fisheries Resources Bill · Global Voices
Kori Tuitt

A Belizean fisherman spotted on the way to Turneffe Atoll. Photo by Serge Melki on Flickr, CC BY 2.0.
Belize has taken a major step to address ocean conservation with its Fisheries Resources Bill, which passed its first reading in the country's House of Representatives in December 2019. The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), an international nonprofit organisation, has partnered with Belize on the bill, which seeks to institute effective management solutions for overfishing.
Climate change, overfishing and pollution are major issues when it comes to preserving ocean habitats and marine life in Belize, but this new legislation hopes to protect marine life and ensure that overfishing does not lead to other problems like diminished resources for people who rely on them.
To find out more about the bill and the next steps for Belizean environmental conservation, Global Voices conducted an email interview with Eric Schwaab, senior vice president for the EDF's oceans programme.
Eric Schwaab, senior vice president for the EDF's oceans programme. Photo courtesy Mr. Schwaab, used with permission.
Belize has long been a leader in using marine-protected areas [MPAs] to conserve its coral reefs. And those MPAs had important effects by enhancing fish, lobster and conch abundance inside the no-fishing zones by 300 to 600 percent. Three factors led Belize to seek more comprehensive management approaches: the need to address illegal fishing from both inside and outside the country; the need for complementary fishery management regulations that rebuild and sustain fish populations both inside and outside of protected areas; and the need to strengthen community ownership of, and support for, sustainable fishing practices. Building on the earlier successes with protected areas, by 2011, the Belizean government approved the use of rights-based fisheries management trials at Glover’s Reef and Port Honduras Marine Reserve. Those were huge successes with all parties and a major reduction in illegal fishing was achieved almost immediately.
Glover's Reef. Photo by MagaCirce on flickr, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.
GV: What happened next?
ES: In 2016, given the demand from fishers from other parts of the country, Belize incorporated fisher-co-management through a new ‘managed access’ approach with new scientific processes under an adaptive management framework. Under managed access, fishers and fishing communities control their future through co-management, giving them access to fish in specific geographic areas of the fishery, and responsibilities to help manage the areas and observe regulations.
In 2018, Belize used the new-found fisher confidence in the effectiveness of management and growing consensus among scientists, fisheries managers, fishers, and national security interests as a springboard to expand MPA coverage to over 12 percent of its waters. Large, new MPAs were created on the national border to the south, where illegal fishing was of greatest concern. These initiatives showed how these tools could work, and also what needed to be done with the foundational fisheries management legislation in the country, both to properly undergird managed access and to reinforce the obligation to expand sustainable management to all types of fisheries. Belize has seen a dramatic drop in illegal fishing and is beginning to see an improvement in the health of its reefs since this approach was implemented.
The new Fisheries Resource Bill will close important gaps in fisheries governance in Belize and create a strong and comprehensive foundation for sustainability of the coupled MPA and Managed Access programmes. The new law clarifies the duties of all management partners, and clarifies the roles of various government bodies for management of both fisheries and MPAs. It also establishes new management requirements for a wider range of species important for local people  — including vulnerable coastal communities — and also for the coral reef ecosystem itself.
GV: Has this approach been scientifically proven to be effective?
ES: New science that we have published shows that keeping the total amount of all types of fish above known thresholds will help fight the negative effects of climate change and warming waters on coral and reef health. This approach was first identified by Wildlife Conservation Society scientists in the Indian Ocean, validated by EDF scientists in the Caribbean, and now is being applied in Belize. Applying sustainable fisheries management, coupled with a strong MPA network, will enhance overall finfish abundances and help promote coral reef ecosystem health around the world as a major tool to help fight the impacts of climate change.
Turneffe lighthouse. Photo by Serge Melki on flickr, CC BY 2.0.
GV: Can you explain how you went about implementing it?
ES: We introduced this approach in Belize through workshops with fishers, managers and scientists and are now set to implement trials with the first design workshop scheduled for late January [2020] at Turneffe Atoll.
While the finfish trials could go forward without the bill, the new legislation creates a duty for effective management for a wider range of species. The combination of the trials and the new law can rapidly spread this approach nationwide, using the existing adaptive management framework and managed access approaches. The new law will close loopholes that might otherwise impair the overall success of the programmes.
These steps together bring Belize into the forefront of nations managing their marine resources both in the coral world, and throughout the developing tropics.
The new legislation systematically establishes all of the legal requirements for every key pillar of effective, comprehensive marine resource and fisheries management. It creates a new fisheries council to coordinate, arbitrate stakeholder issues and advise the government in fisheries management practices. It defines the requirements for effective management, including fishery management planning, and also establishes fishing priority areas where new ideas can be trialed and long-term fisheries production can be prioritised.
It clarifies agency responsibilities and citizen duties related to marine and internal waters reserves, and establishes comprehensive licensing, compliance, monitoring and surveillance systems. It creates a basis for broader regional cooperation in fisheries and marine resource governance for improved cooperation with Mexico, Guatemala and Honduras. It also addresses key issues related to wider marine governance, including flagging of vessels and performance related to international agreements (such as the port states measures). In short, the new law is a comprehensive framework for enduring marine governance in Belize.

author: Kori Tuitt