text:
Can a beloved Tashkent theatre resist the wrecking ball? · Global Voices
Filip Noubel

“Ilkhom neighbourhood” reads this Uzbek-language side on the premises of the Ilkhom Theatre in central Tashkent. Photo (c): Filip Noubel. Used with permission.
An iconic independent theatre in Uzbekistan's capital is threatened with expulsion, revealing tensions among political and economic elites as Central Asia's most populous country engages in bumpy reforms. As Tashkent changes rapidly, a public campaign is underway to save one of the country's most beloved independent cultural spaces.
Portrait in honour of Ilkhom Theatre founder Mark Weil. Photo (c): Filip Noubel. Used with permission.
From its very beginning, the Ilkhom Theatre in Tashkent distinguished itself as an unusual place. The theatre's name means “inspiration” in Uzbek, and it was founded in 1976 by Mark Weil, an artistic director who managed something quite astonishing: to some extent, he was able to avoid the pervasive censorship of the time. Under Soviet rule, culture was considered another domain of communist ideology, and its purpose was to support the ruling party's line. In a system without a market economy, operating without state subsidies was close to impossible, but Weil found a way — all while retaining a remarkable degree of independence as an avant-garde art director.
The situation changed significantly when Uzbekistan declared independence in 1991: unfettered capitalism, along with unprecedented freedom of expression, swept the country. Many state supported cultural institutions went out of business. Weil once again worked his magic and was able to raise the profile of the Ilkhom Theatre as an renowned space for experimental drama. The theatre was awarded international prizes and managed to survive economically thanks to a mix of grants, devoted theatregoers, its own café and drama school, and support from overseas.
Poster for Mark Weil's play Imitation of the Koran. Photo (c): Filip Noubel. Used with permission.
As Uzbekistan changed its language policy and promoted the use of Uzbek against the previously privileged Russian language, the Ilkhom Theatre also became a rallying point for intellectual Russian speakers, regardless of their ethnicity.
The relative freedom of expression experienced by most post-Soviet states in the 1990s ground to a halt in Uzbekistan after a series of bombings in 1999, and was further curtailed after the 2005 Andijan unrest. While the Ilkhom Theatre managed to preserve some freedom, a huge blow came on September 7, 2007 when Weil was assassinated. The circumstances of his murder remain murky to this day. While his killers were apprehended, some observers situate their motives in the context of a conservative, predominantly Muslim society. For example Weil's play Imitation of the Koran, based on a poem by the Russian poet Alexander Pushkin, provoked controversy in Uzbek society— as did Weil's own homosexuality.
Remarkably, the actors of the Ilkhom Theatre decided to perform on the day after Weil's murder. They argued that “the show must go on,” contributing to yet another legend surrounding the name Ilkhom.
A new chapter commenced in Uzbekistan's history when President Islam Karimov, who had ruled uncontested for nearly three decades, died in September 2016 and was succeeded by former Prime Minister Shavkat Mirziyoyev. The country rapidly embarked on a programme of political and economic reforms with mixed results. While there has been liberalisation in some areas, corruption, lack of access to justice, and censorship still affect Uzbek society deeply.
The Ilkhom Theatre may have survived censorship and economic upheaval, but now it faces another foe: massive urban redevelopment. The unbridled urbanisation of recent years has destroyed many of the Uzbek capital's landmark buildings from the Soviet period. One example was the demolition of the House of Cinema (Дом Кино) in January 2018, a Soviet-era building which hosted international film festivals. The government justifies these moves as progress, part of a move to transform the capital under the banner of  Tashkent City, a US$3 billion mega project that has turned large parts of city centre into a building site.
The Ilkhom Theatre occupies part of the ground floor and the basement of a larger building which also houses the Shodlik Palace hotel. On February 7, the new owners of the building, the Olefos Plaza company, sent a letter to the Ilkhom Theatre, informing them to vacate the premises due to reconstruction works. The letter states that:
Здание внешнее в неприглядном состоянии находится в центре города и своим видом портит общий облик столицы.
The building presents an unsightly exterior and is situated in the centre of the city; its current state spoils the overall look of the capital.
The theatre had a special agreement with the previous owner guaranteeing a rent free lease until 2023, with an automatic extension of the contract for another ten years. However, that contract was superseded in 2017 when the government took over the building and sold it to the Ofelos Plaza company. Following this announcement, supporters of the theatre as well as its staff launched several online campaigns, including the hashtag #saveilkhom, and in Russian,  #спасемильхом on Facebook and Twitter.
In this photo posted by a Tashkent resident, a young girl holds a sign reading “Tashkent needs the Ilkhom Theatre”
Our young hero. Trust me, we work to save this place for you! pic.twitter.com/8KF0wrQlzd
— Nikita Makarenko (@nikmccaren) February 12, 2020
A bilingual website has also been launched to garner local and international support and host petitions. But it seems this is not just an opposition movement. Unusually, one of the voices calling for the preservation of the theatre is that of Saida Mirziyoyeva, daughter of the current president. Mirziyoyeva, who serves as deputy director of the government's foundation for mass media development, wrote the following on February 11:
I'd like to comment on the situation around the Ilkhom Theater. I myself am a fan of the theater and want to assure everyone that we won't forsake it! Ilkhom is the pride of our cultural life!
Photo: https://t.co/OyuTxOc1eH #Uzbekistan #SMirziyoyeva #saveilkhom pic.twitter.com/yuLOiupfhl
— Saida Mirziyoyeva (@SMirziyoyeva) February 11, 2020
While it seems that Mirziyoyeva's statement might have given the theatre a chance to stay where it has existed since 1976, staff at the theatre remain cautious. According to Deputy Director Irina Bharat, the new plan of the building's owners is to reconstruct the whole premises over a period of two years and add new floors, meaning that:
Это, как мы понимаем, будет означать, что понадобится рыть котлован, и наш подвал будет разрушен
As we understand, that they will need to dig a pit, meaning that our basement will be destroyed.
Uzbek documentary photographer and filmmaker Timur Karpov told GlobalVoices that the story was far from over:
Она, как и ее отец, имиджмейкеры, им необходимо иметь позитивный образ в глазах общественности. Сейчас все зависит от того, насколько далеко могут обе стороны зайти. Шансы отстоять есть, но если власти начнут давить на руководство театра, то они сто процентов прогнуться и скорее всего пойдут на компромисс, будут искать новое здание и возможно это затянется на годы.
She [Mirziyoyeva] as well as her father, are image makers, they need a positive image among the public. Now all depends on how far both sides can go. There is a real chance that Ilkhom can survive, but if the authorities start pressuring the management of the theatre, they will have to give in. They'll need to come to a compromise and find a new building. That whole process will take years.
Ashot Danielyan, a poet and rock musician who organises events at the theatre, believes that the theatre requires formal protection from the state, rather than depending on the whims of the building's owners:
Спасти театр можно лишь одним способом- дать ему статус неприкосновенности, как месту исторического и культурного значения. Ильхом- в переводе означает вдохновение, для меня это одно из главных вдохновляющих мест города, с 2007 года мы проводим в театре единственный постоянный рок-фестиваль в Узбекистане, без театра- может исчезнуть и целый пласт альтернативной музыки, ведь для многих молодых групп это единственная доступная площадка для выступлений.
The only way to save the theatre is to make it untouchable, as a place of historical and cultural significance. “Ilkhom” means inspiration. For me, it's one of the most inspirational places in Tashkent. Since 2007, it's where we've been organising the country's only festival of rock music. Without this theatre, the entire alternative music scene could disappear; for many young bands, it's the only available venue for performances.


text:
Chinese censorship demonstrates it can afford the cost of ‘the death of media’ · Global Voices
Oiwan Lam

Screenshot of “Tencent Dajia” and its last piece of commentary. Via Twitter.
Tencent Dajia, (also called We Tencent  – 騰訊大家), a popular online media outlet posting high-quality commentary, suddenly vanished from the Chinese internet after it published an article headlined “The 50 days of Wuhan pneumonia: Chinese people are all paying the price of the death of media”.
Following the article's publication, the website of Tencent Dajia and its WeChat public account disappeared from the internet. Both Tencent Dajia and WeChat, a popular Chinese messaging and social media app, are owned by China’s biggest tech giant Tencent.
The takedown happened on February 19, the same day three Wall Street Journal reporters were expelled from China in response to the publication of an opinion piece referring to China as “the real sick man of Asia.”
The takedown of Tencent Dajia is considered a new milestone in the tightening of censorship in China since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan. With the support of Tencent, the media outlet has been able to establish itself as a media industry leader, recruiting hundreds of prominent writers and journalists from mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan wince it was launched in December 2012. Despite censorship and restrictions on media freedom in China, the We Tencent’s commentary pieces have become to be considered as some of the best in the industry.
For years, the media outlet had survived China’s strict censorship under the protection of Tencent. After notification from censors, the corporation would usually only take down certain articles, or stop publishing for a period of time in order to do a thorough clean up. This time it deleted the “Daijia” public account on WeChat, and tens of thousands of articles published in the past seven years have vanished.
This sudden instance censorship has shocked many netizens on social media. Many believe that the last published article — “The 50 days of Wuhan pneumonia: Chinese people are all paying the price of the death of media” (武漢肺炎50天，全體中國人都在承受媒體死亡的代價) — was the cause of the takedown.
Many also see the incident as the censor forcing the “mother” corporate, Tencent, to kill its own “son”, Dajia. The following WeChat comment by Tang Min-tao, a human rights lawyer was reproduced on Twitter:
【腾讯“大家”公众号被“腾讯”注销】因一篇文章，腾讯自己的公众号“大家”被“自己”注销，让自己人对自己人下手，这事被做得出来？这篇文章谈的是媒体死亡，最终，导致了“大家”自己死亡。
[Tencent “We” public account was deleted by “Tencent”] Because of one article, Tencent’s own public account “We” was deleted by itself. Who has the power to do this? To let Tencent kill its own product? This article talks about the death of media, and it eventually leads to the death of the “We” itself.
The views expressed in the “50 days of Wuhan pneumonia” article are in fact rather moderate: its writer, a media professional, simply pointed out that press freedom is the best vaccine for epidemic control and the outbreak of the COVID-19 virus in Wuhan was aided by the malfunctioning of the media or the “death of the media”.
According to the writer’s observations, between December 8, 2019 and January 20, 2020, the media functioned as a “pacifier”, as the majority of news reports stressed that the spread of the virus was “under control”, given that experts stated that the virus was not transmissible among humans.
After January 20, as the outbreak spread outside of China, and the authorities decided to adopt emergency measures to contain the spread, the media shifted to producing content with positive messages in order to “touch the hearts” of the Chinese people and motivate them to fight against the virus. The writer pointed out that on January 25, Hubei and Wuhan official media outlets still labelled social media reports on the real situation in the quarantined city as rumors.
The founding editor of “We Tencent” Jia Jia thus believes the takedown of Tencent Diajja was a result of a change in the overall strategy of the government:
《大家》的slogan是我说的六个字：洞见、价值、美感 。这是非常不容易坚持的编辑原则，也是在中国非常稀缺的事务……有良知的文字，会记录描述以及解释我们所遇到的大问题。腾讯《大家》过去正是为这些大问题而生，当然也是为这些大问题而死。
The slogan of “We” comes three words I use: insight, value, beauty. Such an editorial principle is difficult to uphold and very rare in China… writing with conscience involves describing and explaining the big issues that we face. “We” was created to address these big issues, and its death is also related to these big issues.
After the social media uproar following the death of Dr. Li Wenliang, censorship in China has increased to new levels. Since February 6, a notification issued by public security authorities was circulated on a large number of WeChat groups warning against spreading any information concerning the coronavirus from unofficial sources. The result of violating this rule, the notification said, would be permanent deletion of the group.
In Jining City, in China's northeastern Shandong province, unverified claims circulating online said that all WeChat groups of work units such as hospitals, schools, street-level Chinese Communist Party (CCP) offices and other public institutions had been deleted to prevent these groups from leaking information about the spread of COVID-19. The leaders of the work units said the aim of such a decision was to protect members of the groups. Although the Shandong authorities later flagged this news as rumor, in the comment sections netizens said they had experienced such deletions.
Even private family groups are subject to censorship, as an overseas mainland Chinese student noted on Matters News:
今天在家里的微信群里讨论了一下武汉病毒所的学术文章，职业病发作，简单给地给姐夫科普了一下石正丽的论文摘要，居然在半小时之后收到了微信的辟谣小助手的推送。。。。。。
可我这不是谣言，白纸黑字的学术文章，有本事让杂志撤回文章啊。打电话回国，老姐说，说不定因为你，网警已经开始关注我们家的小小家庭群了，太可怕了。
海外还有部分天真的华人觉得这次的疫情会让党的政策有所松动，这真是太天真了。
Today, I discussed an academic article about the Wuhan virus lab. Because of my academic background, I briefly explained the abstract of the paper written by Shi Zhengli. Within thirty minutes, the group received a notification from the WeChat rumors crackdown admin…
But what I have discussed is not a rumor, it is a black and white academic paper. Why don’t you ask the journal to take down the paper if it is a rumor? I called my sister back home in China, she said because of you, the internet police has started monitoring our family WeChat group, this is terrible.
Some overseas mainland Chinese believed that the coronavirus would loosen control over speech, this is alas too naive.
Individual user accounts have also been subjected to permanent deletion. A WeChat user shared her experience on Matters News on 11 of February:
我收到的是“限制登陆，不可解封”。
我申诉了，可是看到帖子说基本是没有可能解封的。看了有同样经历朋友的帖子，他形容的很对，感觉自己像一个幽灵，还能看见别人在群里讨论你，可是你却不能说话了。
最不方便的是很多业务上的朋友是通过微信来保持联系和增进友谊的。
以后我的灵魂和精神只能活在墙外了。这种感觉像是被流放着。因为我们真正关心的，和真正想覆盖到的观众在墙内。
许章润教授据说也被封号了，更严重的是他失联了。我不想失联。和他同一批被封号，我又有些自豪，我又有些害怕。
在墙内，我只乖乖做一只只知道赚钱蝼蚁吧。
I received a notification saying “Permanent restriction to login” on WeChat.
I filed an appeal, but others told me that it was impossible to reopen my account. A friend with the same experience said he was turned into a ghost, as he could see others talking about him in groups, but he couldn’t talk back.
The most inconvenient aspect is that I have so many business friends on WeChat and I have to rely on the platform to keep communications. In the future, my soul and spirit can only survive outside the wall. This feels as being an exile, as I care about what happens inside the walls and want to share my views with people inside the walls.
Professor Xu Zhangrun’s account has also been deleted. The worst is that he is now incommunicado. I don’t want to be like that. Though I am proud that my account was deleted for the same reason as what happened to others [who had appealed for free speech reform on social media]. I am also scared. Within the walls, I can only live like an ant working for its survival without uttering a sound.
the impact of the Wuhan coronavirus

source: news-globalvoices

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

author: Oiwan Lam


text:
Despite calls to move, a women-led protest in India challenges the Citizenship Amendment Act · Global Voices
Anumeha Verma

The main protest area of Shaheen Bagh protests 15 January 2020. Image by DTM via Wikimedia Commons. CC 0
A women-led protest in the Shaheen Bagh neighbourhood of New Dehli, India has caught the imagination of the nation and the attention of the government. What began with a handful of Muslim women protesting against the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) on 15 December 2019, soon converted into a round the clock protest with several locals and other activist groups joining in.
After complaints were filed against the protesters for causing traffic jams, the Supreme Court of India appointed mediators to negotiate moving the protest venue on 17 February. However, the women from Shaheen Bagh are not in the mood to give in and have instead asked the public, “If we can sacrifice so much for this protest, can’t people tolerate a slight inconvenience?”
On 12 December 2019, the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) was enacted into law. The CAA offers citizenship rights to refugees and immigrants from neighbouring countries who belong to specific religious communities; however, this list excludes Muslims. The CAA, combined with a proposed update to the National Register of Citizens (NRC) which mandates proof of ancestry with documents like birth certificates, is thought to be disastrous for the minority Muslim community. If a Muslim is unable to prove their citizenship, which may be complicated due to poor documentation infrastructure, many fear they will lose citizenship and, unlike other religious minorities, will not have a legal pathway to stay in the country.
Fueled by fears that they would lose their homes and their citizenship because of these new measures, the Shaheen Bagh protest soon became a platform for expressing discontentment over the other issues plaguing the country. Unemployment, poverty, corruption and disenchantment with the current government are a few themes that have featured strongly in these protests.
Posters and artwork on a closed storefront. Image by DiplomatTesterMan via Wikimedia commons. CC 0
The women protesting at Shaheen Bagh have been steadfast in their determination and have refused to leave the venue. The protests have inspired similarly fashioned movements in other parts of the country, as concerned citizens showed solidarity with their counterparts in Delhi. Pune, Bangalore, Ludhiana, Prayag Raj and several other places in India have become centers for new protests.
So far, the protesters have garnered support and also ridicule from factions within the ruling party who have maintained that the CAA will not harm the interests of minorities.
Dilip Ghosh, West Bengal BJP Chief on Delhi's Shaheen Bagh protest: During demonetisation, a lot was said about people dying in queues. Now,when women are sitting with children where the temperature is 4-5 degrees celsius, nobody is dying. What amrit (nectar) did they take?(28.1) pic.twitter.com/RN7UaNsYRN
— ANI (@ANI) January 28, 2020
However, some people have come out openly in support of the women of Shaheen Bagh.
This Shaheen Bagh !!
Protestors At Shaheen Bagh Donating Blood !
This Is Humanity & This Mass Revolution Is Against Every Machinery That Goes Against Humanity !
Shaheen Bagh Stand For Every Indian !
Shaheen Bagh The New Definition Of Humanity !!#शाहीनबाग_से_डरा_शाह pic.twitter.com/IRSTZ9X6ca
— Sanwar Ali (@AdvSanwar) February 18, 2020
The current ruling by the Supreme court to move the Shaheen Bagh protest is a result of petitions filed due to traffic hold-ups near the site of the protest. While the Supreme Court has upheld the right of citizens to protest peacefully, it has also made it clear that the right to protest cannot cause prolonged public inconvenience. The Times of India has a live blog updating the mediation efforts.
#ShaheenBagh Dabang daadi, Bilkis Bano (82yrs):
“The HM says he won’t move an inch back on CAA.
We also won’t harm a hair on anyone’s head,
but we won’t move until the law is removed”
“Hamne Angrezon ko bhagaya tha, tum kya cheez ho?”
(We chased the British away, what are you)” pic.twitter.com/X3TFawa3pA
— Einstein ?? (@DesiPoliticks) February 20, 2020
The Supreme Court has granted the women of #ShaheenBagh their right to protest, but has asked them to stop blocking traffic.
But, Shaheen Bagh is much more than just a protest site or a traffic jam
Watch #MintWideAngle with @AunindyoC pic.twitter.com/srGnBsp20G
— Livemint (@livemint) February 20, 2020
The mediators are slated to complete the negotiations and submit a report to the Apex Court by 24 February 2020.
Whether the protesters are forced to move is yet to be seen, however, the women of Shaheen Bagh have claimed a space in the annals of India's protest history.
Check out Global Voices’ special coverage page “Who is paying the cost of India’s declining democracy?“

author: Anumeha Verma


text:
Macedonians shocked over discovery of child ‘fight clubs’ in Skopje · Global Voices
Pavlina Simonoska Arsikj

Screenshot from video by samoprasaj.mk on “gladiator fights” of children in Skopje. Image by Institute for Communication Studies, used with permission.
A Macedonian news outlet has recently revealed the existence of public, organized “gladiator fights” between minors in the capital Skopje in a story that left citizens astounded.
SamoPrasaj.mk reporters obtained a video showing two boys fighting in a playground while dozens of onlookers, mostly adults, cheer on. A referee can also be spotted in the video.
Residents interviewed in the video say that these fights take place frequently, but that the participants are not from the neighborhood.
A follow-up story by SamoPrasaj.mk revealed that the fight's organizers charge entrance fees, too: 20 denars (less than half of a US dollar) for watching and 300 denars (6 dollars) for recording.
Поголемиот син беше запознаен и знае дека вакви настани се случуваат. Не бил присутен, но ми кажа дека тоа е нешто „нормално за нивна возраст“. Јас бев премногу вознемирена кога го слушнав тоа и му објаснив дека тоа не е нормална реакција на деца да си ги одмеруваат силите. Син ми ми кажа дека се наплаќало за гледање, меѓу другото дека се наплаќало 300 денари ако сакаш да ја снимаш борбата со мобилен телефон.
My elder son told me he knew that these events were happening. He doesn't attend them, but he told me that it was “a normal thing for his age.” I was very upset when I heard that, and explained to him that it is not normal for children to participate into such fighting matches. My son has also informed me that watching the fights came with a charge, including a 300 denars (6 dollars) charge for filming the fight with a mobile phone.
Global Voices contacted eighth-grade students from a school near the playground where one of the videos was recorded. They said they had classmates who have attended those fights, and added that the organizers charge 50 denars (1 USD) per “standard tickets” and 200 denars (3.50 USD) for “VIP” spots in the first row next to the ring.
Meanwhile, local media alleged that the adults attending the fights are also engaging in betting.
It is still unclear whether the police will investigate the events, whose organizers are yet to be identified. In response to an inquiry by newspaper Sloboden Pechat, the Ministry of Interior stated that authorities had taken measures such as notifying the public prosecutor and recommending the police addresses the matter in educational lectures it gives in schools.
Many Macedonians have been dissatisfied with the official responses so far. When reporters approached Minister of Education Arbër Ademi, he merely said that, because the fights take place outside of schools, the ministry has no authority over them.
The playground where the videos were recorded is located in the municipality of Centar, and all nearby schools are under its authority. Still, Mayor Sasha Bogdanovikj claims the children who appear in the videos are not residents of the municipality.
Организирани борби на малолетници, што се наплаќаат за забава, и тоа во Капиштец? Ако тоа се случува во центар на Скопје, да очекуваме дека на други места се одгледуваат деца за борба? Луда Макседонија, жална и назадна
— Meri Batakoja (@mei_botata) February 8, 2020
Organized fights of underage kids, as a form of pay-per-view entertainment, and all that taking place in Kapishtec neighborhood? If such a thing is taking place in the center of Skopje, should we expect that in other places children had been raised to do these battles? Macedonia as crazy, pitiful and backward.
In recent years, similar fighting events involving children have been reported in different places worldwide, including Alberta, Canada; St Louis, United States; in Preston, Great Britain; and Moscow, Russia.
Half of the students aged 13 to 15 worldwide – around 150 million – report having experienced peer-to-peer violence (physical fights and bullying) in and around school according to a 2018 report by UNICEF. According to Macedonian human rights group Helsinki Committee, who recently issued a statement demanding authorities take action against the children “fight clubs,” 42 percent of students aged 13 and 15 in North Macedonia have reported experiencing peer violence.
Other analyses have shown that a significant proportion of victims (36 percent) and perpetrators (18 percent) of hate crimes in North Macedonia are minors. Ethnicity and political affiliation constituted the main grounds for hate crimes in 2018, with a smaller number of incidents involving refugee or migrant status, religious belief, and disability.

author: Pavlina Simonoska Arsikj


text:
Political beliefs divide generations and strain family ties in Taiwan · Global Voices
Huang HungYu

Rally of supporters of the Kuomintang presidential candidate Han Kuo-yu on 21 December 2019. From Han's campaign page on Facebook.
Taiwan's January 2020 presidential elections left a clear winner as Democratic People’s Party (DPP) leader Tsai Ing-wen dominated the polls. However, the Kuomintang (KMT) candidate Han Kuo-yu's defeat was a heavy blow for his followers, many of them over 40-years-old. What has developed is a generational divide with many parents falling on the opposite side of the political aisle from their children. Some parents have even gone so far as to kick their children out of the family home because of these differing beliefs.
After the elections, Facebook support group pages were created with names like “Feeling helpless that my parents are Han Kuo-yu fans” and “Support group for children of parents who are fans of Han Kuo-yu”. These groups are a place to share stories, and also to demand that the KMT apologize for disrupting family ties.
Because most of Han’s opponents are less than 40-year-old, Han fans believe the anti-Han voters have been brainwashed by DPP propaganda. Similarly, young pro-DPP voters insist that Han did not deliver on his mayoral promises in the city of Kaohsiung. During the presidential election campaign, the views of those two groups were diametrically opposed: Han’s supporters did not agree with the Hong Kong anti-extradition movement and prioritized safety over democracy, while Tsai’s supporters agreed with the demonstrators in Hong Kong, as they do not want Taiwan to be politically encroached on by Beijing.
A “support Hong Kong banner” in a rally in Kaohsiung in December 2019. Photo taken by Huang Hung Yu, used with permission
The generational conflicts caused by politics created tensions in many households leading up to the elections with some Han supporters threatening their children into not voting for Tsai. Support group members shared stories about parents confiscating key documents so the children could not vote. Others found out after the elections their children had voted for Tsai, and cut financial support to punish them.
Because a number of high profile young activists, such as Lin Feifan and Chen Weiting from the Sunflower Student Movement, were students from state-owned National Taiwan University and Tsinghua University, Han fans have begun to associate state-owned campuses with the pro-independence movement. Below are some of the stories shared on the support groups:
Message #1379 said:
我家人是會自稱鋼鐵韓粉的那種人
自從韓落選之後
我爸整天嗆年輕人不懂事不會想
甚至所有國立大學都被打成台獨學校
家中有個準備考大學的妹妹
家妹從小很努力成績有機會上台大
但我爸自從韓國瑜敗選後昨晚直接命令我妹（真的命令）
＂妳如果敢去報考台大這種垃圾學校妳就不要回家，台灣前途被妳們這群年輕人害死＂到底在說什麼？對一個沒投票的人講什麼鬼話？
大考快到了，我妹完全受到影響，家裡氣氛變得很差，天啊該怎麼辦？
My family can be described as die-hard Han fans
Since Han lost the election, my dad spends the whole day bad mouthing young people saying they don’t understand anything and can’t think properly
He says all state-owned universities have been destroyed and turned into pro-Taiwan independence schools
My younger sister is preparing to take the entry exams for which she has prepared for years
But since Han’s defeat, my dad ordered (he really did order) her not to enter a garbage place like Taiwan National University, or else she won’t be allowed to return home, adding it is young people like her who destroy Taiwan.
But what is he talking about? To a person who is even too young to have voted?
The entry exams are due soon, my sister is deeply affected and the mood at home is awful. What should I do?
Message #2034 said:
其實一直說著與心相悖的話真的十分痛苦，我也很不想說謊，但是那群家人總是威脅著「如果你們投蔡，就斷了你們生活費，也不要給我們回來了」
這畫面就像當初九合一大選一樣，他們對我說著「你是同志喔，啊你就不要回來投票了，你只是還沒找到對的男人而已，同婚要是過了我們就要全家移民，啊你就在臺灣一個人生活吧」
後來這幾天我就接到電話辱罵等等的，因為妹妹平時不怎麼表態，他們並沒有懷疑她，而是懷疑我，他們說我去臺北讀大學之後都在說讓他們聽不懂的話，更大罵我，說我肯定跑票的事情，說什麼1450啊甚至是過年不要回家、沒有你這個女兒（孫女）、讀書讀假的、你被民進黨洗腦了、不要給你生活費了。
甚至連「韓國瑜沒上都是你的錯！！」這句話都說的出口
In fact, it is painful to say things that are the exact opposite of what I think. I don’t want to lie but my family is always threatening me by saying that “if you vote for Tsai, we will cut off all financial support, and don’t think of coming back home”.
This resembles what happened during the 2018 local elections, they told me “You are gay, you don’t need to come home to vote [Taiwanese need to vote at the place of their official residence, which is often the home of their parents if they are younger], you just haven’t found the right man to marry yet, if gay marriage is passed, we will make sure our entire family emigrates, and you will be all alone in Taiwan.”
After that, I received insulting phone calls for a few days. Since my sister doesn't really speak her mind, they haven't suspected her, but suspect me. They say that after I went to Taipei to study I started speaking about things they don't understand. They cursed me even more saying I certainly voted against Han and that I should go to hell, shouldn't come home for the New Year, that I don't exist in their eyes, that I have studied fake things and been brainwashed by the DPP so they would cut their financial support. They even said things like “Han didn't win because of you!”
Taiwanese people emphasize respect for the elderly and filial piety, as part of their well-established acceptance of Confucian values. As emerges from the messages posted in support groups, certain Han supporters use the concept of filial piety to emotionally blackmail their children into voting for Han.
Message #1448 said:
…….
我忍不住問了爸爸，你覺得韓國瑜有什麼好值得你支持
他反問我，他又哪裡不好？
民進黨各種抹黑打壓、文字獄合理嗎
他能把陳菊做了好幾年都辦不到的路平做好
（他一直很不爽高雄的路坑坑巴巴，尤其小港臨海路）
中間還講了政二代、掏空政府、私菸、甚至去中國化⋯不一一贅述
最後他說了「我後悔生妳這個女兒，讓妳現在來忤逆對付我！」「你們都被民進黨洗腦了！」「以後我們不要再互相往來，我死了也不要拜我」「我應該不要讓妳們念這麼多書」「去中國化就是數典忘祖」「你們就是蠢才會被蔡英文騙」
原來一條平坦的路比不上他的女兒，原來仇恨會讓人面目可憎
國民黨、韓國瑜，拜託你們將我的爸爸還給我！！！
I couldn’t help asking my Dad what he thought was so good about Han Kuo-yu. He then asked me: “What’s wrong with him? All the DPP does is to smear and suppress dissent, is this kind of persecution acceptable? He can achieve what Chen Chun couldn’t do in years: flatten the roads (He has been very upset about Kaohsiung bumpy roads).
Then he said “I regret having given birth to a daughter like you who disobeys her parents. You have all been brainwashed by the DPP. We don’t need to communicate any more. Even when I die, don’t come to pay tribute. I shouldn’t have let you read so many books […] you are so stupid which is why Tsai can trick you!
It turns out a flat road has more value than one’s own daughter, hate can distort one’s face.
Kuomintang, Han Kuo-yu, return my father to me!!!
Message #283 said:
我很愛我爸，儘管他是韓粉。
但我覺得他不相信我愛他，因為我支持蔡英文。
有時候和他起爭執，我就會躲在房間哭。
然後就會持續一整個禮拜兩個人都不說話。
我總是低頭跟他道歉，不厭其煩的告訴他，我尊重他的立場，因為我愛他勝過一切，希望他也同等對我。
但就是沒辦法改善。
一直維持著相見如冰的狀況。
其實好累啊⋯⋯我真的做不到違背良心投給韓國瑜，對不起。
如果您覺得這是不孝，生我賠錢浪費，那我也沒辦法了。
I love my Dad a lot, even though he is a Han fan.
But I think he doesn’t trust the fact I love him, because I support Tsai Ing-wen.
Sometimes when we argue, I end up lying in my room, crying.
And then we might spend one entire week not speaking.
I always bow my head and apologize to him, repeating tirelessly that I respect his position because I love him more than anything, and hope he can treat me as an equal.
But there is no way to make progress. The relationship remains icy.
In fact, I am very tired…I can't go against my conscience and vote for Han, I am sorry.
If you think this is a lack of filial piety, and you cut your financial support, I have no choice.
Many netizens posted on the help group page that Han Kuo-yu and the KMT need to apologize and take responsibility for causing family disputes and generational conflicts because of the election. Han responded with a Facebook post on January 17, calling parents and their children to “stop tearing each other up and to start caring for their families”. Han wrote that parents should not blame younger people for opting to support the opposite candidate. In a democratic society, one needs to accept different opinions, open a dialogue and rebuild rational communication. He also said that young people need to stop using indecent words when describing Han's supporters, and pointed out that parents also need the support of their families, thus everybody needs to listen to each other’s emotions in order to restore normal families.
Even though the election is now over, the generational conflict continues. Lin Zonghong, a researcher at the Institute of Social Research of Academia Sinica, points out that the main cause of those divisions is an uneven distribution of income, wealth, power, and cultural values. The government needs to allocate resources to education, housing justice, and long-term policies in order to reconcile generations.

author: Huang HungYu


text:
Argentine NGO documenting human rights violations nominated for Nobel Peace Prize · Global Voices
Romina Navarro

A member of the EAAF working in exhumation. Photo shared publicly on Facebook.
The Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team (EAAF), a non-profit scientific NGO, was nominated for the 2020 Nobel Peace Prize for its investigative work into human rights violations in Latin America, Africa, Asia, and Europe. The Latin American Council of Social Sciences (CLACSO) and the National University of Quilmes (UNQ) put forward the nomination.
CLACSO y @UNQoficial postulan al Equipo Argentino de Antropología Forense al Premio Nobel de la Paz.
? Leer aquí: https://t.co/BOScqgxIIt #PremiosNobel #NobeldelaPaz #EAAFNobelDeLaPaz pic.twitter.com/dmUiaPqDCU
— CLACSO (@_CLACSO) February 13, 2020
CLACSO and @UNQoficial nominate the Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team for the Nobel Peace Prize.
? Read here: https://t.co/BOScqgxIIt #PremiosNobel #NobeldelaPaz #EAAFNobelDeLaPaz pic.twitter.com/dmUiaPqDCU
— CLACSO (@_CLACSO) February 13, 2020
The EAAF was created in 1984 through the initiative of American anthropologist Clyde Snow, with the purpose of supporting the NGO Grandmothers of Plaza de Mayo in their investigation into cases of missing persons during the last military dictatorship in Argentina (1976-1983). In 1986 they expanded their activity beyond the country's borders and have participated in missions in over sixty countries around the world to date. The EAAF pioneered the use of forensic sciences, particularly the fields of forensic archeology and forensic anthropology, in the documentation of human rights violations.
EAAF members at work in exhumation in Cyprus, 2006. Photo shared publicly on its Facebook page.
One of EAAF’s most important international expert investigations was the mass kidnapping and disappearance of  43 Ayotzinapa Teachers College students in September 2014, in the Mexican state of Guerrero. They were specifically requested by the victims’ relatives, and the investigation garnered considerable controversy because it contradicted the official version given by the government of then-President Enrique Peña Nieto. The search for the students is ongoing.
Along with the organization Justice for Our Daughters, the EAAF conducted another Mexico-based forensic investigation in order to bring justice to hundreds of women who were killed during the 1990s in Juarez, a city bordering El Paso, Texas, in the United States. In South Africa, the EAAF has collaborated with search and identification efforts on behalf of apartheid victims since 2007. In El Salvador, they unearthed thousands of victims’ bones from the 1981 Mozote massacre that was perpetrated by the Salvadoran Army which the EEAF cited in its testimony in the court.
The EAAF in a search and identification mission for missing persons in Chihuahua, Mexico. October 2019. Facebook public photo.
Back in Argentina, along with the search for the people missing from the dictatorship era, the EAAF also participated in identifying Argentine soldiers buried as “NN” (for “no identification”) in the Darwin Military Cemetery in Malvinas, Falkland Islands.
Their work also spans numerous cases of femicides, human trafficking, political and ethnic crimes, and complex cases such as the 1994 attack on the Mutual Association Israelita Argentina (AMIA). In addition, they teach forensic anthropology courses in Argentina and in other countries as well.
The EAAF’s most valued fundamental principles are, above all, a respect for the wishes of the victims’ families and their communities, and attention to scientific precision which has won them great international prestige over their 36-year history. They are known for their considerable sensitivity through every step of the process, from the initial report and investigation to the exhumation and identification of remains and resolution of the case.
Karina Batthyány, executive secretary of CLACSO, stated in a La Nación article:
Cada hueso recuperado, cada resto identificado, es un triunfo de la verdad y la justicia que alimenta la memoria tan necesaria en el devenir de los pueblos. El Nobel de la Paz sería un reconocimiento no solo a la intachable trayectoria de sus integrantes, sino también a cada uno de los casos en los que intervienen, a cada familiar que ha depositado toda su confianza en ellos y recibido su mano amiga.
Every recovered bone and identified remain is a triumph of truth and justice that is essential to nourish the memories people carry with them throughout the rest of their lives and onward to further generations. The Nobel Peace Prize would be a recognition of not only the flawless trajectory of its members, but of each of the cases in which they are involved, and each family member who has placed all of his or her trust in them and received their helping hands.

author: Romina Navarro


text:
Can the anti-infiltration law successfully block pro-Beijing media in Taiwan? · Global Voices
Huang HungYu

Former Taiwanese vice president and Kuomintang honorary Chairperson Lien Chan's calligraphy for the MasterChain platform. Via MasterChain's Twitter.
On 31 December 2019, Taiwan passed a law aimed at countering the influence of “hostile foreign forces” within the country, including a provision for misinformation. The anti-infiltration law has caused heated debate, and many view it as an attempt to curb Beijing's influence in Taiwan. After the law was enacted, pro-Beijing media platform MasterChain announced that it would leave the Taiwanese market in protest. While some worry that the law may have a strangling effect on freedom of speech, others interpret the outlet's departure as proof that the anti-infiltration law is indeed deterring “red media”.
The anti-infiltration law mainly prohibits foreign entities from interfering in elections, lobbying, and political contributions, as well as spreading false information about elections in an attempt to disrupt social order.
During the debate of the draft, the New Power Party (which advocates for Taiwan's independence) proposed several amendments directly targeting “red media” outlets. This included prohibiting anyone from following the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) instruction in commissioning, financing, or controlling broadcast media, and conducting political advertising or publicity on behalf of the CCP. In the end, the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) turned them down because they wanted to maintain broader language related to election manipulation by any hostile foreign government and not specifically the CCP. However, the Mainland Affairs Council went on to suggest that the issue of “red media” infiltration should be discussed within the frame of radio and television laws.
Apprehension about Beijing's influence in Taiwan's media environment is part of larger concerns over what Beijing calls a “united front” or an alliance of political, military, religious, media forces to oppose Taiwan's independence.
Cross-straight political ties figure greatly in MasterChain's operations. The platform launched in April 2019 and went on to become the first Taiwanese outlet given permission to set up an office in China. MasterChain's founder, Chuang Li-ping, penned a book that supports the 92 Consensus, also known as the “One-China consensus”, and the company's operation center and business promotion center are headquartered in two large mainland Chinese cities.
The platform's strategy of hiring a number of former Taiwanese officials as senior media personalities is perceived by experts as an attempt to create a cross-strait intelligence network.
Chang Yu-shao, a researcher at the Cross-Strait Policy Association, points out:
形象宣傳、情報蒐集與組織布建，是中共政治統戰攻勢所必備的指導原則與工作方針，而大師鏈同時具備這三種功能。
Image-making, intelligence and network development are the necessary guiding principles and working principles for the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) “united front” political offensive. Master Chain fulfills those three functions at the same time.
However, there are very few outlets that are as openly pro-Beijing as MasterChain. The majority of pro-Beijing outlets keep their relations to the mainland hidden or indirect, the Want Want Media Group being a typical example.
In the past, Want Want chairman Tsai Yen-ming made statements supporting the CCP's stance and sold pages in his newspapers to the Chinese government. It was even discovered that Want Want group's China Times received subsidies from the Chinese government.
According to sources from Taiwanese independent media platform Up Media, before the January 2020 elections, Tsai Yen-ming told top executives in his media group to stop coverage of the protests against the anti-infiltration law so as to not appear openly pro-Beijing. However, behind the scenes, the media group continued to push the narrative that the anti-infiltration law went against freedom of speech. This was intended to trigger a strong reaction in public opinion and bolster momentum for the pro-Beijing Kuomintang (KMT)'s election campaign.
Although the China Times daily, which belongs to the Want Want group, issued a statement denying any pressure from Beijing, it began to publish a series of editorials before the election condemning the anti-infiltration law, arguing the law was targeting the Want Want Media Group.
In May 2019, several Taiwanese media outlets were invited to Beijing to participate in the “4th Cross-Strait Media Summit“. The event was considered to be a way for the CCP to strengthen the ‘united front’ in the media sector.
The following month, a march was launched in Taiwan to “reject red media and safeguard Taiwan's democracy”. The initiative came from Hwang Kuo-chang, a member of the Legislative Yuan at the time, who called on the government to review a number of laws and propose a draft of the anti-infiltration law.
Given how close relations are between Taiwan and mainland China, China's business interests can easily be covered up leading many media scholars to doubt the eventual effectiveness of the anti-infiltration law.
In addition, the internet is more difficult to police and Beijing can rely on media agencies in Singapore or Malaysia to influence public opinion in Taiwan without being present on the island.


text:
Fiji poet and activist Peter Sipeli promotes storytelling for LGBTQ+ rights in the Pacific · Global Voices
Mong Palatino

Peter Sipeli during a TEDx talk in Suva, Fiji. Source: Facebook
Fiji poet and activist Peter Sipeli has been campaigning for LGBTQ+ rights through storytelling.
Peter established a poetry shop and collective that organizes readings, slam events, publishes anthologies and collections of poetry, prose or writings of young Fijians. Peter is also known for conducting spoken word sessions to highlight the experience of LGBTQ+ individuals in Fiji.
In an email interview with this author, Peter shared how art is integral to advocacy, talks about the challenges that artists and activists face in Fiji, and highlights the need to rethink how advocacies are conceptualized in the Oceania region.
Peter observed how development issues are framed in many ways that do not totally capture the lived experiences of Pacific Islanders. Peter said colonialism is partly to blame for discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community.
I think the problem we face in Fiji and generally across the Pacific is that the unjust laws that govern the lives of LGBTQ+ people are archaic and the ones created by the British that our people after independence have inherited; and that all these are not only reflected in our laws, but in Christian ideals as well that pervade and blur cultural ideas, and so we are left working to remind our peoples that before ‘contact’ we were quite sexually diverse and sexuality was very fluid.
Peter noted that colonial legacy has prevented Pacific peoples from interacting with each other:
I think the problem even we in the Pacific face is that we are so busy looking down working in our own burrows that we don’t look up to see other people in the Pacific, in Asia, across the world in Africa and beyond. There need to be newer ways of seeing that allows us to look at creative work being used for societal change so we can not only know but to learn from each other.
Too often the utterance that we hear in the Pacific, is ‘Asia, Pacific region’ and Asia is so large that they cannot even see us. The Pacific is broken up in three parts, parts that the colonizers created 1) French Pacific – that is locked from us because of language 2) the North Pacific, that was colonized by the Americans, we are unable to see them because of geographic location … they’re so far north, we know a little about their nuclear history and us 3) the Anglo pacific and we all work in isolation from each other… there are political and trade relations but the people are divorced from each other.
To remedy this, Peter tapped into the arts to create “a newer and more human conversation about rights, about pain and how we Pacific Island people are able to work to repair the rift that was caused by the colonizers.” Peter adds:
The idea behind ‘storytelling for advocacy’ is about remembering. In the Pacific, if you speak truth and do so with power and with resonance about a lived experience, and the levels of fracture of that experience and indicate to different audiences this reality, people understand, people are awakened to our needs and our work for equal rights.
Peter discussed how storytelling, instead of merely relying on legislative lobbying, became an effective approach to advocate for LGBTQ+ rights:
Too often the rights conversation is a linear one that talks about only one aspect of gaining equality, about advocating for rights, through this movement towards legislature and policy shift. I wanted to create a human conversation about the pain that we endure, that ostracization, and unpack that for people to see into. I also allow the talk to delve into scripture and to look deeply at the parts of the Bible that speak against homosexuality and to demystify these aspects for the audience, to again create a conversation about the biblical text and find kinder ways of caring for people.
Peter said storytelling proved ‘transformative’ in the sessions they conducted with the Fiji Women’s Crisis Center and even with members of the military and police.
I think my work through poetry and through the storytelling for advocacy is finding new ways of having a conversation about creating kinder communities for LGBTQ+ people.
Finally, Peter emphasized the need to develop a ‘new way of seeing’ in the Pacific:
I think we need all collectively to find a new way of ‘seeing’ so we might appreciate, learn and thus become humanly connected to each other in a deeper way that can overcome meaningless utterances.
Watch Peter's TEDx talk about ‘storytelling as advocacy’ through this YouTube video

author: Mong Palatino


text:
Rising attacks against journalists for reporting about the conflict in north Mozambique · Global Voices
Alexandre Nhampossa

Military tank of the Armed Forces of Defense of Mozambique on parade on the day of inauguration of President Filipe Nyusi, January 15, 2020. Photo: Alexandre Nhampossa, used with permission
The Mozambican state has been unable to stop the extremist attacks that have plagued the northern province of Cabo Delgado for more than two years already. In addition, there has been an increasing number of threats made against journalists who are covering the issue.
For example, journalists such as Amade Aboobacar and Estácio Valoi, and researcher David Matsinhe, have been arrested in 2019 by state forces for their reports about the conflict.
In a more recent case, Professor Julião Cumbane suggested on Facebook that journalists reporting on the attacks should be silenced by the military, police and secret services, who can use “extra-judicial” methods, if necessary. Cumbane added that news stories about the conflict “demoralize those who have the DUTY to defend our country and glorify its attackers.” Cumbane is also president of the National Company of Science and Technology after being nominated by the government of President Filipe Nyusi in late 2019.
The suggestion of Cumbane is similar to what politics commentator Egídio Vaz wrote on his Facebook page — that the attacks should not be “used to sell newspapers,” and he described the papers reporting on the conflict as “news agencies” of extremist attackers.
Both Cumbane and Vaz echo the public pronouncements of President Nyusi who said that some newspapers write “against sovereignty” in reference to those who report about the attacks and allegedly reveal the fragility of the Defense and Security Forces of Mozambique.
[Os jornalistas em causa] disseminam essa mensagem, escrevem nos seus jornais coisas contra a soberania sem eles terem a consciência que essa defesa está a ser feita por pessoas com grande sacrifício.
The journalists spread these messages, [they] write in their newspapers against sovereignty without being aware that our national defense is courtesy of people [who made] a big sacrifice.
The Media Institute of Southern Africa has also warned about rising threats to freedom of expression in Mozambique. The group warned that threats were primarily aimed at journalists reporting about the attacks. The civil society group Center for Democracy and Development (CDD) has also condemned the media-related attacks and advised journalists to continue performing their duty of informing the public.
O CDD condena veementemente as ameaças contra a liberdade de imprensa e solidariza-se com os jornalistas da Carta de Moçambique, a quem os incentiva a continuarem a informar os moçambicanos e o mundo em geral sobre os ataques em Cabo Delgado.
The CDD strongly condemns threats against press freedom and sympathizes with the journalists, [and] encourages them to continue to inform Mozambicans and the world in general about the attacks in Cabo Delgado.
The attackers are unknown armed people who burn houses, attack schools, hospitals and other public infrastructure, loot goods in private shopping centers, abduct women, among other actions.
The UN Refugee Agency, UNHCR, has estimated that more than 100,000 people had been displaced due to escalating violence. One of the organization's experts told UN News about the deteriorating situation on the ground:
Na ilha de Matemo tive que entrevistar um refugiado que teve que fugir. A vila foi atacada. Um dos filhos ficou para trás para tentar salvar alguns bens da família e para levar junto. Ele foi pego por um desses membros desses grupos armados e acabou sendo decapitado.
On the island of Matemo I had to interview a refugee who had to flee. The village was attacked. One of the children stayed behind to try to save some family assets and to take it with them. He was caught by one of these members of these armed groups and was beheaded.
More than 900 people have been killed already since the attacks began in October 2017, according to South African news publication Independent Online.
As the number of casualties continues to increase, President Nyusi hinted that his government is now open to cooperating with other countries in combating the attacks subject to certain conditions. This was welcomed by the United States of America and Russia which readily extended their offer to help.
The situation of insecurity is also affecting new investments in the province, which is at the center of attention for the implementation of three large projects for the production of Liquefied Natural Gas, with investments in the order of US$ 50 billion.

author: Alexandre Nhampossa


text:
Journalists seek justice as attacks continue in Colombia · Global Voices
Melissa Vida

The cases of Colombian journalists Jineth Bedoya, Edison Molina, and Guillermo Cano, covered by the video co-produced by IFEX and FLIP. Photo montage by Global Voices.
Colombia is infamously known for the dire situation of its human rights defenders. For example, in 2019, more than 107 activists were killed. But the violent consequences of investigating corruption and other abuses also trickles down to journalists.
In a video recently produced by the global network promoting freedom of speech, IFEX, and its local partner, Fundación para la Libertad de Prensa, the narrator states that “when journalists are silenced, the whole of society is attacked.” Without journalism, people could not obtain the necessary information to fully form opinions and participate in society.
The short documentary, which lasts less than 10 minutes, tells the story of three journalists who were attacked in Colombia: two have been killed but one is alive to narrate her own story.
According to IFEX, 15 journalists were killed in Colombia for reasons related to their work between 2010 and 2019, and 942 of them were threatened. For the Committee to Protect Journalists the figures are different — there would have been eight journalists murdered for the same period. In any case, violence committed against journalists has collateral effects: it frightens and silences others in the profession.
There have been recent threats to journalists, too. In February 2020, journalist Edison Lucio Torres received an arrest warrant for not taking down articles he published which exposed a local pastor's finances and lifestyle. The pastor, who filed a complaint against the journalist for ‘damaging his reputation’, had also publicly threatened Edison Luis Torres during a church service three years ago.
Other journalists in Colombia like Daniel Coronell also rang the alarm after receiving threats.
Jineth Bedoya Lima with Hillary Rodham Clinton and Michelle Obama at 2012 International Women of Courage (IWOC) Award. Photo from Wikimedia Commons.
Jineth Bedoya, one of the journalists interviewed by IFEX and FLIP, was kidnapped, tortured and sexually violated in 2000 when she was covering an illegal arms trade case. In early 2003, she was abducted by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and later released.
A decade after she was kidnapped in 2000, Bedoya took her case to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) of the OAS. Since then, several paramilitary men were condemned for the assault.
In July 2019, the IACHR concluded that the State of Colombia did not take the appropriate measures throughout Bedoya's case and will, therefore, take Colombia to Court. “[It] represents a historic opportunity for the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to set a precedent regarding violence against women journalists and the duty of states to provide protection as well as prevent and investigate such crimes,” IFEX wrote.
In the video by IFEX, Bedoya explained her love for journalism:
Lo que realmente me salvo a mi vida fue el periodismo, eso es lo que me motiva todos los dias. Eso fue, que en determinado momento, me salvo del suicidio. Eso es lo que me ha dado animos para seguir enfrentando las amenazas que hoy tengo que afrontar. Eso es lo que me ha motivado para dar esta lucha por la justicia y llevar mi caso a un tribunal internacional.
What really saved my life was journalism, that's what motivates me every day. [Journalism], at one point, saved me from suicide. [Journalism] is what has encouraged me to keep facing the threats that I have to face today. [Journalism]is what has motivated me to  fight for justice and take my case to an international court.

author: Melissa Vida


text:
Justice for Tanzanian journalist Erick Kabendera comes at a steep price · Global Voices
GV Sub-Saharan Africa

Erick Kabendera coaching journalists. Photo by Pernille Bærendtsen, used with permission.
On February 24, 2020, Tanzanian freelance journalist Erick Kabendera was released from prison but faces hefty fines on charges of money laundering and tax evasion.
The beleaguered journalist entered into a plea bargain with the Kisutu Resident Magistrates Court in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, after spending seven months behind bars, according to a report by BBC Swahili. During his time in prison, Kabendera was denied medical attention and was prevented from attending the funeral of his mother, who died while he languished in prison.
On July 29, 2019, six plainclothes policemen forcefully removed Kabendera from his home in Dar es Salaam, and took him into police custody. Police say Kabendera had failed to obey a summons to investigate the status of his Tanzanian citizenship. But authorities soon switched track and accused Kabendera of money laundering, tax evasion and organizing unspecific crimes. These types of financial crimes prevented him from the option of bail.
Between January to July 2019, Kabendera “knowingly furnished assistance in the conduct of affairs of a criminal racket, with intent either to reap profit or other benefit,” and during that time, he failed to pay his taxes on $75,000 USD worth of income, according to the original charge sheet, as described by Reuters.
As a journalist, Kabendera has been critical of Tanzanian President John Magufuli’s administration and has spoken out in favor of press freedom. Human rights activists saw Kabendera's arrest as a way to instill fear among journalists and others critical of the ruling party and current administration.
The day after his release, prominent writer and columnist Elise Eyakuze wrote a moving letter to Kabendera in The East African:
Erick, I pray that you are faring as well as you can. It was a shock of course to hear of your arrest on charges of money laundering, tax evasion, crime, but not entirely unexpected considering the difficult times that the media is facing. Freedom of speech has always been dangerous business, Tanzania being no exception. But we had our halcyon days, didn’t we?
Kabendera's family and supporters welcomed the news of his release, but the fact that he had to pay a hefty fine for his freedom and plead guilty on these economic crimes charges was a major disappointment. Many have expressed their concern on social media how his case was handled.
Amnesty International's director for East and Southern Africa tweeted:
“While it is welcome news that Kabendera is out of prison close to seven months later, it is outrageous that he had to pay such a hefty fine to gain his freedom.”
Deprose Muchena, Amnesty International's Director for East and Southern Africahttps://t.co/nnJkXfwv7l
— Я¡ž¡ (@IzRizi) February 25, 2020
The organized crime charge was dropped, but Kabendera was convicted on tax evasion and money laundering charges and he was fined a total of 273 million Tanzanian shillings ($118,000 United States dollars), according to The Citizen.
Muthoki Mumo, Committee to Protect Journalists’ sub-Saharan Africa representative, said:
We welcome the end of Erick Kabendera’s nearly seven-month imprisonment on charges that were transparent retaliation for his critical journalism. … However, we are deeply concerned that even after months in detention without the prospect of bail, during which he suffered illness and lost his mother, Kabendera’s ordeal is not yet over as these cripplingly heavy fines continue to hang over his head.
According to CPJ, ‘‘the court ordered Kabendera to pay a fine of 100 million Tanzanian shillings ($43,000) for the money laundering charge, a fine of 250,000 shillings ($108) for the tax evasion charge, and 173 million shillings ($75,000) in compensation for the tax evasion.’’
Kabendera already paid some of these fines, but the remaining tax evasion compensation must be paid over a six-month period, according the BBC and a statement from Tanzania Human Rights Defenders Coalition.
Netizens on Twitter sounded the alarm on the conditions of Kabendera's release.
Opposition politician Zitto Kabwe, Leader of Alliance for Change and Transparency (ACT Wazalendo),  met with Kabendera at his home in Dar es Salaam, hours after his release and tweeted:
Great to meet and hug Erick Kabendera @kabsjourno at home. So sad that my friend will live, at least momentarily, with a criminal records for crimes he didn’t commit. The extortionist state under @MagufuliJP really wanted to break this honest man. His crime? Journalism #Tanzania pic.twitter.com/GRJi85bOsk
— Zitto Mwami Ruyagwa Kabwe (@zittokabwe) February 24, 2020
Writer Kizito Makoye tweeted to defend Kabendera's innocence:
I still firmly believe the charges against Erick Kabendera are 100% false, he has been forced to buy his freedom out!!
— Kizito Makoye (@kizmakoye) February 24, 2020
Renowned human rights activist Boniface Mwangi of Kenya lashed out at the Magufuli administration on Twitter over the Kabendera case using the Swahili language hashtag #UhaiNaHakiTanzania, which means “life and rights Tanzania”:
Erick Kabendera was jailed illegally and blackmailed to sign a plea bargain. @MagufuliJP is a dictator and Tanzania is slowly becoming a police state. Magufuli is a polished version of Idi Amin, Moi and Kagame. #UhaiNaHakiTanzania https://t.co/pyd2yYkZr2
— Boniface Mwangi (@bonifacemwangi) February 25, 2020
To which the Club Magufuli Twitter account replied:
No matter how much hatred you spew against Tanzanians, Erick Kabendera will forever be a convicted felon!
— Club Magufuli (@ClubMagufuli) February 25, 2020
While Kabendera walks free, there are still other human rights activists and journalists who are in jail or remain missing.
Journalist Azory Gwanda, who was investigating high-profile killings in the Rufiji area, went missing in November 2017. In July 2019, Tanzanian foreign minister Palamagamba Kabudi announced during a BBC interview that Gwanda was dead, sparking demands for a full investigation into the circumstances of his mysterious disappearance and alleged death. But through a government spokesman, Kabudi later denied that the journalist was dead.
Human rights activists Tito Magoti and Theodory Giyani, who were both detained in December 2019, remain behind bars on accusations of financial crimes. The courts adjourned their case for the fifth time, according to the Legal and Human Rights Center, where Magoti worked as a program officer.
Human Rights Watch has called Magoti and Giyani's arrests troubling, especially in the months leading up to the presidential elections in October:
These arrests come as Tanzania’s human rights record continues to deteriorate under President John Magufuli. Since 2015, the government has cracked down on civil society by passing repressive laws, censoring media, and arresting government critics, including journalists and several opposition politicians.
Last year, police arrested Erick Kabendera, who had written for several international outlets critiquing Tanzanian politics. Like Magoti, he was also charged with non-bailable offenses of economic crimes, and has been in detention since last July awaiting trial. If Kabendera’s case is any indication, Magoti could also face several months awaiting trial.
These arrests are especially troubling as Tanzania gears up for general elections later this year. Rather than stifling dissent, the government should be allowing healthy debate and upholding the freedom of expression, which is guaranteed in its own constitution.

author: GV Sub-Saharan Africa


text:
Migrant workers in Thailand organize against exploitation by the country’s fishing industry · Global Voices
Timothy Ginty

Members of the Fishers’ Rights Network display first aid kits after participating in a health and safety training session. Photo used with permission.
Off the shores of Thailand, a seafood industry flourishes and feeds the multi-billion-dollar global appetite for tuna, prawns, and squid. But in the ground zero of the global supply chain for seafood, exploitation and debt-bondage are standard workplace practices.
The men who work the boats are in the main Burmese and Cambodian nationals driven from their homelands by poverty and attracted by the promise of a salary and remittances. To get to Thailand and to find an employer, most of these workers use the services of migration brokers and employment agencies, who can charge exorbitant prices for the papers and passes they provide.
These fees, ranging from 15,000 to 30,000 THB ($500 to $1,000 USD), are far beyond the means of most of the workers. Their new employers in the fishing industry usually pay the fees, and thus workers begin their jobs heavily indebted to the boat owners. Once they start their jobs, many foreign workers wait six to twelve months before they see any wages. If they wish to leave, boat captains can withhold their passports, insisting that the debt be worked off, with interest, before departure.
In recent years, consumers have become increasingly aware of the systematic exploitation of migrant workers in the Thai fishing industry. Media reports, films and fisher memoirs detailing dangerous workplace practices, thirst and starvation, physical abuse, lack of medical care, twenty-hour long shifts without rest, and the system of debt-bondage have put pressure on Thai authorities to act.
In early 2019, Thailand became the first country in Asia to ratify the International Labour Organisation’s Work in Fishing Convention, which aims to ensure decent living and working conditions for fishing industry workers. This represents an important step towards regulating the Thai fishing sector, but according to Ussama Kaewpradap, lead organizer at the Fishers’ Rights Network, this convention may be yet another ‘paper reform':
[Reforms] have been poorly implemented and only minimally enforced. Although there have been a lot of changes in the industry in the past few years, fishers have seen little direct benefit and still toil in poor working conditions.
Speaking to Global Voices by email, Ussama explains that since ratifying the Work in Fishing Convention, the Thai government has begun a process of stakeholder engagement that will help shape the final legislation that will give effect to the Convention. These stakeholders, she notes, include government authorities, the boat owners’ association, and non-government organizations, but not the fishers themselves.
This is because migrant workers are still denied the right to freedom of association under Thailand’s 1975 Labour Relations Act, which prevents migrants from formally joining trade unions and serving on union committees. Until the Thai government ratifies the International Labour Organisation’s conventions on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, exploitation and abuse will continue.
Not only are migrant workers in Thailand not permitted to unionize, they are also permitted to work in only one economic sector. Burmese and Cambodian fishers, for instance, cannot seek work in manufacturing or agriculture. And if they do leave a job, they must find a new employer within just 15 days or their visas will be terminated.
Because Thailand's 1975 Labour Relations Act recognizes only those trade unions led by Thai nationals, the Fishers Rights’ Network exists in a state of legal limbo, as it is primarily composed of Burmese and Cambodian migrant workers. This, however, has not stopped the  Fishers Rights’ Network from organizing fishers in their workplaces, educating fishers on their rights, training them in workplace health and safety, developing their skills to take collective action, and advocating for their rights to Thai authorities, seafood companies, and international bodies. Ussama adds:
By building a union, fishers have the power of a united voice to demand structural and systemic changes in the industry.
Members of the Fishers’ Rights Network display first aid kits after participating in a health and safety training session. Photo used with permission.
In a country where migrant workers fear deportation, and in an industry where employers often physically abuse workers, the process of union-building is a slow task that requires building relationships of trust amongst fishers. Once trust has been built, organizers can provide fishers with first-aid kits and training, education on rights, and skills for taking action.
One of those organizers, a young Burmese former fisher named Chan Myae Aung, spoke with Global Voices by email. Chan Myae Aung recounts his days working on a fishing boat before becoming a union organizer with the Fishers’ Rights Network:
The fishing boat was very dangerous. We were surrounded by dangerous machines, and they became even more dangerous because we weren’t trained properly on how to operate them.
Because of negligent workplace health and safety practices, Chan Myae Aung has been injured possibly for life. He adds:
Chan Myae Aung, an organizer of the Fishers’ Rights Network. Photo used with permission.
Once, my wrist was hit by a rope running through a winch, and it took me two months to recover. To this day, my wrist still has not fully healed and I still have pain and problems moving it. My employer gave me 5,000 Baht ($120 USD) for the injury and medical treatment, and that was all. Nowadays, when I lift heavy things, I always have a sharp pain in my wrist.
About a year before he became an organizer, Chan Myae Aung helped organize a strike on board his fishing boat.
Our captain wanted to fish in a restricted area (offshore a national park), and many of us were concerned because we had heard about a group of fishers that had recently been arrested because they followed their captain’s order and got caught fishing in a restricted area. Those fishers went to jail, but their captain was granted bail. I was afraid that the same thing would happen to us, so we decided as a group to stop work.
The strike action convinced the boat captain to avoid the restricted area return to port. The fishers avoided potential arrest and deportation.
Until Thailand recognizes the right of fishers like Chan Myae Aung to form a union, their welfare will continue to be dependent on a host of unwilling, unable, or unwanting regulators, police officers, and boat owners. Chan Myae Aung emphasizes the aim of their union building:
Building our own union is the only long-term solution to fix problems. With our own union, we will be able to fight for ourselves, and win the kind of respect and dignity we deserve.

author: Timothy Ginty


text:
“Parental pin”: the Spanish far-right’s fight to control public education · Global Voices
Lourdes Sada

Screenshots of false images shared by the far-right party Vox to support their policy of a parental veto in schools. Created by the author using images from maldita.es CC BY-SA 3.0
Since the start of 2020, the Spanish far-right political party Vox intensified its policy campaigns months after having enforced the approval of its “parental pin” regulation in the Spanish Autonomous Community of Murcia, in southeastern Spain. In Murcia, the regional government — a coalition between the conservative parties Partido Popular and Ciudadanos — needs Vox's support to vote its budget.
This “parental pin”, referring to security systems on mobile phones, has been applied in schools in Murcia since September 2019, and Vox wants to extend this initiative to Madrid and Andalusia. Spain is now caught in an incendiary debate on public education.
Vox argues that parents have the right to educate their children as they see fit, and therefore want parents to give their “express authorisation for any subject, discussion, workshop or activity that touches on socially controversial moral questions or on sexuality” given in schools by non-staff members.
By using this parental veto, parents in Murcia can prevent their children from participating in extra-curricular discussions and workshops.
These workshops focus on a variety of topics, such as sex education, misogynistic violence, gender equality, LGBTQI diversity or immigration, all of which are topics that Vox calls “indoctrination” by “lobbies”, reflecting the stance of the most traditional denomination of the Catholic Church.
Groups such as the National Federation of Lesbians, Gays, Transgender People and Bisexuals say that the workshops they organize fall under Spanish education law, which highlights “values in favour of personal freedom, responsibility, democratic citizenship, solidarity, tolerance, equality, respect and justice, as well as assistance in overcoming any type of discrimination.”
The Minister for Education, Isabel Celaá, declared that the “parental pin” goes against this law. She filed a contentious-administrative appeal against the policy and wants it immediately suspended.
The Student's Union and the feminist group Libres y Combativas (Free and Combative), meanwhile, have called for a general strike on 6 March to protest against a “regression to Francoist brutality.” According to analysts, Vox brings back ideas from the dictatorship of Francisco Franco, who ruled over Spain for almost four decades.
The debate is fierce on social media, where people have been expressing their opinions on the policy. The Minister for Equality, Irene Montero, clearly expressed the government's position on the matter:
PP y VOX siguen empeñados en cuestionar a los profesores y profesoras de este país, en atacar la escuela pública y las instituciones que nos permiten vivir en común. La educación en igualdad y afectivo-sexual es un derecho. https://t.co/7OscZZHIZ8
— Irene Montero (@IreneMontero) 24 January 2020
PP and Vox persist in their questioning of teachers in this country and attacking public education and the institutions that allow us to live side by side. Education on equality and on affective-sexuality matters is a right. https://t.co/7OscZZHIZ8
— Irene Montero (@IreneMontero) 24 January 2020
Many used humor in criticizing the policy:
- Buenas tardes, ¿usted es el profesor de Historia del Arte de mi hijo?
– Sí.
– Quería informarle que mañana no asistirá a clase por el pin parental.
– ¿Y eso?
– Porque impartirá Barroco y somos una familia neoclásica. No puede adoctrinarlo con semejantes delirios churriguerescos
— José de León (@Jose_de_leon) 21 January 2020
“Good afternoon, are you my son's History of Art teacher?
“Yes.”
“I just wanted to let you know that he won't be in class tomorrow due to the parental pin.”
“Why's that?”
“Because you're teaching them about Baroque and we are a neoclassical family. I won't let you indoctrinate him with these Churrigueresque delusions.”
— José de León (@Jose_de_leon) 21 January 2020
Aplicarle el pin parental a tu hijo para que no se esconda a fumar entre las clases de Masturbación Colectiva y Adoración a Satán.
— Antílopez (@antilopez) 22 January 2020
Putting the parental pin on your child so that they don't sneak out to smoke between Group Masturbation and Devil Worship classes.
— Antílopez (@antilopez) 22 January 2020
Twitter user Anzarda expressed doubt about the influence teachers have on their students:
Me parece enternecedora la fe que tiene la derecha en los profesores. No soy capaz de que pongan una tilde y voy a ser capaz de que se hagan maricones….
— Anzarda (@Anzarda1) 18 January 2020
It's adorable how much faith the law has in teachers. They can't even teach us how to spell correctly and yet they're able to turn us gay…
— Anzarda (@Anzarda1) 18 January 2020
Some personalities have been defending the veto like Pablo Casado of the Partido Popular and current leader of the opposition in Parliament:
Mis hijos son míos y no del Estado, y lucharé para que este Gobierno radical y sectario no imponga a los padres cómo tenemos que educar a nuestros niños. Saquen sus manos de nuestras familias. https://t.co/9sbwdbxZrm
— Pablo Casado Blanco (@pablocasado_) 17 January 2020
My children are mine, not the State's, and I will fight to ensure that this radical and sectarian government doesn't instruct parents how to educate our children. Get your hands off our families. https://t.co/9sbwdbxZrm
— Pablo Casado Blanco (@pablocasado_) 17 January 2020
In the middle of this controversy, Vox is accused of launching a campaign of misinformation, trying to show why the parental veto is needed. Their members and supporters circulated a series of images and videos on Twitter with messages indirectly related to educational activities.
Different websites exposed these far-right hoaxes, especially fact-checking websites such as Newtral or Maldita.es.
Iván Espinosa de los Monteros, Vox's representative in Congress, had to give an explanation during an interview with broadcaster RTVE about a video which a Vox political candidate had shared online. Although the video is from an artistic performance filmed in Brazil, Iván compared it to sex education in Spain:
¿Por qué es necesario el pin parental que Vox propone? Para que los padres puedan negarse a que sus hijos les enseñen este tipo de burradas. (…) Aunque lo que hayamos visto ahí sea una ‘performance’ es una burrada. (…) Así adoctrinan a menores de seis años en sexología en las escuelas de La Rioja.
Why is Vox's parental pin policy necessary? So that parents can refuse to let their children be taught ridiculous things like this. (…) Although what we see here is a performance, it is still ridiculous. (…) This is how children under six are being indoctrinated in sexology in schools in La Rioja.
Vox has been sharing hoaxes about the topics in the extra-curricular activities for a long time. Fact-checking website Maldita Hemeroteca has compiled several of these hoaxes:
Zoofilia, fetichismo con los pies, relaciones sexuales homosexuales entre niños: Lo que Vox afirma (erróneamente) que enseñan en las escuelas para defender el “pin parental”.
Todo ahora en @Juliaenlaonda https://t.co/x333wmnMge
— MALDITA HEMEROTECA (@Mhemeroteca) 21 January 2020
Bestiality, foot fetishes, homosexual relations between children: Vox incorrectly claims that these are what schools are teaching in order to defend their “parental pin”.
Available now at @Juliaenlaonda https://t.co/x333wmnMge
— MALDITA HEMEROTECA (@Mhemeroteca) 21 January 2020
The controversy doesn't seem to respond to a real demand from parents. Journalist Rosa Roda, who is from Murcia, wrote that:
265.000 alumnos de Infantil, Primaria y Secundaria y ni una sola queja o denuncia registrada en la Consejería de Educación por actividades o charlas complementarias inadecuadas en colegios e institutos de la región de Murcia.
[there are] 265,000 children in pre-school, primary school or secondary school, and not one complaint or allegation was made to the Department of Education regarding unsuitable extra-curricular activities or discussions in schools in the region of Murcia.
The same can be said for Madrid, where Vox also intends to impose the parental veto:
El consejero de educación de Madrid (PP) ha dado datos sobre las quejas por charlas en los colegios: “Con un 1.240.000 alumnos, 53.000 docentes,1.200 centros tenemos constancia de UNA por escrito y DOS en twitter. Fue la inspección y comprobó que no había ocurrido nada”.
— Adela Molina (@adelamolina) 20 January 2020
The Minister of Education in Madrid (of the Partido Popular) has provided the following data regarding complaints made about discussions in schools: “With some 1,240,000 students, 53,000 teachers and 1200 schools, we have recorded ONE complaint made in writing and TWO on Twitter. This investigation was carried out and the result was that nothing had happened.”
— Adela Molina (@adelamolina) 20 January 2020
The controversy has been intensifying and peaked when Twitter suspended Vox's Twitter account for “inciting hatred,” when Vox told socialist MP Adriana Lastra that they weren't going to tolerate “public money financing paedophilia.” At the time of writing, the account remains suspended.
Twitter users were unable to resist pointing out the irony of this suspension:
Que Tuiter le haya aplicado el Pin Parental a la cuenta de Vox se coloca como firme candidato a momento poético del año.
— Miguel Montejo (@miguelmontejo74) 22 January 2020
Twitter applying the Parental Pin to Vox's account is in the running for the most poetic moment of the year.
— Miguel Montejo (@miguelmontejo74) 22 January 2020

author: Lourdes Sada


text:
Verifying the 2020 presidential elections: An interview with the Taiwan Fact Check Center · Global Voices
Huang HungYu

Screen capture from Taiwan Fact Check Center.
Presidential election debates are usually occasions for candidates to explain their policy platforms and hone their presentation skills, but very few viewers actually check on the factual details of their speeches. However, this year's Taiwanese presidential election was different. For the first time, the Taiwan Fact Check Center fact-checked the live, televised 2020 presidential debates on December 29, 2019.
Fact-checking outlets are on the rise around the globe in response to misinformation, and Taiwan has also caught up with the trend. The Taiwan Fact Check Center was established in July 2018, and since its inception, it has conducted fact-checks on controversial topics, establishing its credibility among Taiwanese people. After a live debate among the three presidential candidates (current and newly re-elected Taiwan president Tsai Ing-wen, Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu and Chairman of the People First Party James Soong) the organization faced real challenges as it attempted to release a fact-checking report on the same night of the live debate.
Global Voices’ Chinese language editor Huang Hung Yu interviewed Summer Chen, the chief editor of the Fact Check Center, to learn more about the debate night.
Global Voices (GV): Why did the center decide to conduct simultaneous fact-checking on the presidential debate?
Summer Chen (SC): Public affairs are one of the major concerns for the Taiwan Fact Check Center. During the presidential election debate, candidates explain their stances and policy platforms on a number of social and political issues. All of these issues are within the arena of public affairs.
GV: Did you consult other overseas fact-checking organizations in preparation for the project?
SC: Last October, we contacted other fact check organizations in the 2019 forum on professional fact-checking in Asia. We found out that many overseas fact-checking organizations (in Indonesia, for example) collaborate with local political beat journalists to conduct presidential debate fact-checking as they are more familiar with political news and have ties with political analysts.
Originally, we also planned to work with other journalists, but ended up doing the fact-checking on our own, as we needed to set a standard, a workflow and topics for the team. It would indeed take too much time to communicate with other organizations on the common framework which is used to analyse other election topics in addition to the presidential debate.
GV: How did the center prepare to fact-check the presidential debate?
SC: We made a list of potential debate topics based on their previous policy speeches: the 2020 presidential election policy presentations, the 2018 Kaohsiung Mayoral election debate and previous presidential election debates. The topics were economics, public security, transportation, culture, military affairs, cross-strait relations etc. Then we divided the topics into content that could, or could not be verified.
GV: How do you decide what can be verified?
SC: If the content is backed by official and authentic documents or has been reported by multiple media outlets, it can be verified. If it comes from an opinion report, we have to look for other media sources. For example, when we fact-checked a claim that “Taiwan legislators sing in Cross-Strait exchange trip in China”, we gathered news reports from the Chinese government-affiliated “China Review News” as well as reports from Taiwan United Daily News, Liberal Daily or Apple Daily as cross-references. And we only checked the factual aspects of the resports, not the opinion parts.
If the content is not backed by facts or historical events we cannot verify it. For example, the claim that “Han Kuo-yu is the biggest beneficiary of the internet army” cannot be verified, as there is no academic study or research about the exact definition of “internet army” (trolls). We cannot make up the definition.
In addition, we also analyzed the presentation style of the presidential candidates. Since Tsai Ing-wen is more careful in her presentation, much of her content can be checked. As for Han, his presentation is tainted with strong opinions and we can only focus on specific topics to verify. Hence, we cannot compare the credibility of the two candidates based on the number of their mistakes. Mistakes cannot be measured like this.
GV: How did you conduct fact-checking simultaneously during the television debate?
SC: We had two fact-checkers taking turns listening to and transcribing the debate. Another verifier picked out the topics in the transcript, and the chief editor then decided if the content should go through the verification process. Once I made the decision to proceed, another reporter began the fact-checking process, first by looking into the reports and documents that we had prepared for the topics. If we did not have related information in our documentation, the reporter had to find another way to verify the content.
As our verification report was written by the team in a shared document, the chief editor did the first proofread. Then Hu Yuan-hui, our center's advisor and professor at the Journalism and Communication Department of the National Chung Cheng University, went through a second round of proofreading. In the process, if professor Hu decided that the report needed more backup information, he would work with the team to fill in the gaps. Finally, the report was published online.
GV: For the presidential election debate, the center used a different set of categories to flag or label verification results. Why did you make this adjustment?
SC: Usually we use “wrong”, “correct”, “partially wrong” to flag verified content. During our preparation, we felt that the “right” and “wrong” labels may generate an anchoring bias for the audience. Hence, we changed the flagging system with nine other labels including “consistent”, “inconsistent”, “partially inconsistent”, “inconsistent and non-backed claim”, “impartial”, “non-backed claim”, “position shifted”, “correct but claim non-backed”. Our hope is that the audience can think deeper about the content and make their own judgement.
GV: What challenges did you encounter during the verification process?
SC: During the elections, government bodies released a lot of data to backup certain claims. For example, the Kaohsiung city government released its achievement report to backup Han Kuo-yu’s speech. The Executive Yuan, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and other administration bodies had also released data during the election. But in the past, they did not release regular data reports and hence we could not compare with past records.
For example when we checked on Han Kuo-yu’s claim that 40,000 factories and companies had been shut down in 2019, the Ministry of Economic Affairs had given us data as clarification. However, it had not provided us with previous data nor explained to us the reason behind the shut down, hence we flagged the content as “no previous data to back the comparison”.
GV: How did netizens react to the verification reports?
SC: After we published our report that night, netizens gave us a lot of feedback. In particular, audience members with professional backgrounds, including legal experts, left comments and pointed out some of our errors. We had to go through another verification process in response to some of the comments. Some netizens asked why we did not work on certain topics as well. After an internal discussion, we chose some of the suggested topics and published another round of verification reports on December 31.


text:
‘Delhi is burning’: 17 dead and hundreds injured in clashes over anti-citizenship law protests · Global Voices
Rezwan

Locals in New Delhi protest against the Citizenship Amendment Act and the National Register of Citizens. Image via Wikipedia by DoiplomatTesterMan. CC BY-SA 4.0
In the northeastern district of India's capital, violent clashes between protesters from opposite sides of the citizenship law debate came to a violent head starting 23 February 2020. The situation is ongoing and has since turned into a riot. The disputes coincided with US President Donald Trump's visit to the country and has led to the deaths of at least 17 Muslim and Hindu civilians — including a policeman. Over 150 people have been injured, many from gunshot wounds which protesters claim came from pro-CAA protesters. Five metro stations and some schools remain closed in North East Delhi. Protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) have been ongoing, both nationally and internationally, since December 2019.
On 22 February, around 200 women gathered near the Jaffrabad metro station in North East Delhi and started a sit-in protest against the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA). The protesters blocked the entry of the metro station as well as an adjacent road, a move that has been likened to the ongoing peaceful Shaheen Bagh protests in another part of Delhi. The women at Jaffrabad carried national flags and shouted “Azaadi (freedom) from CAA, NRC” slogans in front of the police.
Security Update
Entry & exit of Jaffrabad have been closed. Trains will not be halting at this station.
— Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (@OfficialDMRC) February 23, 2020
The crowd grew larger on 23 February when an opposing rally in support of the new citizenship law was led by Kapil Mishra, a local leader of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Reportedly, Misra gave an “ultimatum” to the Delhi police to clear the roads blocked by the protesters.
A ruling party leader flanked by a senior police official issues an open warning. No one has acted against him -neither the police or his party. 24 hours later, violence in east Delhi spirals, the police seem adrift. #chronology https://t.co/dEYS9zMSjf
— Sreenivasan Jain (@SreenivasanJain) February 24, 2020
The clashes ensued as anti-CAA protestors were beaten up and both groups began throwing stones at one another. Police used tear gas to bring the clashes under control.
However, clashes continued the following day as new incidents of violence were reported from nearby Muslim-populated areas.
VIDEO : #Chandbagh
Delhi is burning, this is what the goverment wanted.
Delhi is made into war zone by Rightwingers!
Sab yaad rakha jayega! #DelhiViolence #DelhiBurning pic.twitter.com/dnyTfCvusK
— CAA / NRC Protest Info. (@NrcProtest) February 24, 2020
#DelhiViolence | Hindu mobs are throwing petrol bombs across the road at Muslim houses in Kabir Nagar.
LIVE updates: https://t.co/l0D8zN9XBn
— scroll.in (@scroll_in) February 25, 2020
Journalist Vijayta Lalwani recounts the scene of violence in an article at First Post:
As a shop was set ablaze in Delhi’s Maujpur area on Monday afternoon, a middle-aged man with a saffron tikka on his forehead repeatedly asked reporters to stop filming the arson. “Bade dinon ke baad Hindu jaaga hai,” he said. “Hindus have woken up after long.” He did not want to identify himself, other than as a supporter of the Citizenship Amendment Act. [..]
“Five police officials were filling stones in a battery rickshaw and sending it there [towards Maujpur Chowk],” said Kazim, a 30-year-old resident of Jaffrabad. “This is a conspiracy.” He alleged the police were on the side of the CAA supporters and were arming them for a future clash.
Srishti Srivastava at The Wire.in interviewed a pro-CAA/NRC protester who admitted burning a mausoleum:
They (meaning the Muslims) have entered (India) only through the barbed wires. Just make a count of them. You know about Census; they should not be so many here. At least half of those who have been sitting (at the protest sites) have entered (India) through the barbed wires (meaning illegally).
On 25 February, Al Jazeera reported that a mosque had been vandalized. Shops and vehicles including a fire truck were also torched in Jaffrabad and Maujpur.
Update Ashok Nagar, Delhi 6.00pm: A mosque has been vandalised by Hindutva terror forces, as they brazenly revisit their demolition tactics. We see complete inaction from @delhipolice, @HMOIndia , @PMOIndia and @arvindkejriwal.#DelhiRiots #DelhiBurning #DelhiViolence pic.twitter.com/jOsrAzVCP8
— Shaheen Bagh Official (@Shaheenbaghoff1) February 25, 2020
Very volatile in Yamuna Vihar. We’ve seen mobs of men carrying sticks and stones. There’s been arson. We were being stopped from filming. You can someone yelling that at the end of video. #DelhiBurning #DelhiViolence pic.twitter.com/5QrRnsieM5
— Yogita Limaye (@yogital) February 25, 2020
A Gurdwara has given shelter to Muslim families fleeing Hindutva mob in NE Delhi.
(Not giving exact location as it may endanger Sikhs as well. Will inform over DM if people may need to go there)#DelhiBurning
— Aditya Menon (@AdityaMenon22) February 25, 2020
The Chief Minister of Delhi Arvind Kejriwal condemned the violence and appealed to local members of the legislative assembly and the people to hold the peace. He also mentioned that there is a severe shortage of police in Delhi to tackle the violence.
People on social media shared their opinions:
No protester wants riots. No rioter wants protests.
— Hansal Mehta (@mehtahansal) February 24, 2020
Look at ‘em. How old they could be? The seeds of communalism & hatred sown by Hindutva terrorists, took them out on the streets with bludgeons! This brain-dead generation will decide who will rule our nation! Detox them, get them back, else we're doomed forever #DelhiBurning pic.twitter.com/PEJuejqHWZ
— Suvarna Haridas (@Suvarna_haridas) February 25, 2020
This is the most horrific video I have seen today. It's worse than actual murder when the ruling party's elected MLA is asking people to shoot in the middle of a riot.
Yes this is @BJP4India MLA abhay verma from Laxmi Nagar#DelhiBurning https://t.co/zyirEB503T
— Preeti Sharma Menon (@PreetiSMenon) February 25, 2020
Sadly there is no happiness in the streets outside, as the CentralGovt condones violence unleashed by its own supporters, & the StateGovt wrings its hands helplessly, claiming that cheap water& electricity are more important than lives, principles or social harmony. #DelhiBurning https://t.co/9eevU7IJ6Y
— Shashi Tharoor (@ShashiTharoor) February 25, 2020
First Post and The Times Of India are live updating news about the protests.
Read our special coverage Who is paying the cost of India’s declining democracy? for more details on the protests against the citizenship laws in India.

author: Rezwan