By Niki Kitsantonis Participants carried a giant pride flag in the Athens Pride parade last June.Credit...Spyros Bakalis/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images Greece was expected to legalize same-sex marriage and equal parental rights for same-sex couples on Thursday as lawmakers considered a bill that has divided Greek society and drawn vehement opposition from the country’s powerful Orthodox Church. Although Greece would be the 16th European Union country to allow same-sex marriage, it would be the first Orthodox Christian nation to pass such a law. The country extended civil partnerships to same-sex couples in 2015, but stopped short of extending equal parental rights at the time. Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis had pledged to pass the new measures after his landslide re-election last year. He told his cabinet last month that same-sex marriage was a matter of equal rights, noted that similar legislation was in place in more than 30 other countries, and said that there should be no “second-class citizens” or “children of a lesser God.” In addition to recognizing same-sex marriages, the legislation clears the way for adoption and gives the same rights to both same-sex parents as a child’s legal guardian, whereas to date such rights have applied only to the biological parent. It would also affect the daily lives of same-sex couples, Mr. Mitsotakis told Parliament on Thursday, allowing those with children “to collect them from school, to be able to travel with them, to take them to the doctor.” The bill does not provide same-sex couples with access to assisted reproduction or the option of surrogate pregnancies. It also does not give transgender people rights as parents. Human rights advocates have welcomed the prospect of same-sex marriage for Greece. Maria Gavouneli, the president of the Greek National Commission for Human Rights, an independent public body, called the measure “long overdue.” And Stella Belia, the founder of Rainbow Families, an organization that supports same-sex families, called the legislation “a major victory that we’ve been fighting for for years.” One of the first to benefit from the new law would be Lio Emmanouilidou, a 43-year-old teacher, who plans to marry her long-term partner in Thessaloniki on March 8, which is International Women’s Day. She said she was excited about the wedding and welcomed the bill as “a step in the right direction and a big victory for the community.” She lamented, however, that even with its approval, her partner would still face a “long and expensive” adoption process — costing about 3,500 euros, or $3,750 — to become a legal guardian of Ms. Emmanouilidou’s 6-year-old son, whom the partners have raised together as a family. (Under the new bill, both members of a married same-sex couple would automatically be legally recognized as parents of children the pairs give birth to or adopt.) Ms. Emmanouilidou also said she felt unnerved by the opposition to the measures. But she said that, in her experience, most Greeks accepted same-sex couples and that her school and community treated her family as any other. “Society is much more ready for this than we think,” she said. Yet in a country that remains one of Europe’s most socially conservative, where the traditional family model is still predominant and the influential Orthodox Church views homosexuality as an aberration, the measures have met some pointed resistance. The Holy Synod, the Greek Orthodox Church’s highest authority, argued in a letter to lawmakers this month that the bill “abolishes fatherhood and motherhood, neutralizes the sexes” and creates an environment of confusion for children. Clerics echoed such sentiment in sermons across the country in recent weeks, and some bishops said they would refuse to baptize the children of same-sex couples. Church groups also joined forces with far-right parties to hold rallies in Athens and other cities to oppose the changes. Last Sunday, hundreds of people staged a demonstration outside Parliament, with some holding banners that read, “There’s only one family, the traditional one.” Protesters held signs reading “No” during a demonstration in Athens this month against a bill to legalize same-sex marriage.Credit...Aris Messinis/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images Opinion polls conducted in recent weeks depicted a Greek society split over the issues: In most of the surveys, half of respondents expressed support for same-sex marriage, yet most respondents also said they opposed allowing same-sex couples to adopt children. The bill also fueled dissent across the Greek political spectrum. In the governing New Democracy party, dozens of lawmakers, including a prominent minister and a former prime minister, argued that the legislation weakened the nuclear family and undermined traditional values. The leader of Greece’s Communist Party, Dimitris Koutsoubas, told Parliament on Thursday that legalizing same-sex marriage would “abolish the unity of motherhood and fatherhood.” And the issue caused discord within Syriza, the main opposition party: Some lawmakers said the bill did not go far enough, others were loath to back a conservative government’s bill on what they considered a liberal issue and some worried about winning support in rural areas. Syriza even drafted its own alternative bill, but the party’s leader, Stefanos Kasselakis — who is Greece’s first openly gay party leader and has expressed a desire to adopt children through surrogacy with his partner, whom he married in New York last October — later pressed his fellow lawmakers to back the government’s legislation. Supporters said the changes were a crucial step toward granting full rights to gay people and their children, and opening up minds in a society where traditional heteronormative attitudes prevail. “It’s the best we were going to get from a center-right government with that kind of internal opposition and the entire Orthodox Church pressuring you,” Ms. Belia said. “I’ve got to hand it to Mitsotakis for following through.” © 2024 The New York Times Company

Photos of the SIx Journalists Arrested by Turkish police in Western Turkey Photo Credit: Turkish Minute Turkish special operations police on Tuesday morning detained six journalists, most of whom work for pro-Kurdish media outlets, in simultaneous raids in the western province of İzmir, the private DHA news agency reported. The detained journalists were identified as Gazete Duvar reporter Cihan Başakçıoğlu, Mezopotamya news agency (MA) reporters Semra Turan, Delal Akyüz and Tolga Güney, JINNEWS reporter Melike Aydın and pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Equality and Democracy Party (DEM Party) press worker Fatma Funda Akbulut. The journalists were taken to the İzmir Police Department’s counterterrorism unit for questioning. They have been been denied access to their lawyers for 24 hours and not informed of the reason for their detention. According to DHA, the journalists were detained because they were allegedly involved in spreading “terrorist organization propaganda” on “banned” news websites. The İstanbul-based Media and Law Studies Association has announced on X that it is trying to provide judicial assistance to the detained journalists. Kurdish journalists in Turkey frequently face legal harassment, stand trial and are given jail sentences for covering issues related to Kurds and the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which has been waging a bloody campaign in Turkey’s southeast since 1984 and is listed as a terrorist organization by Turkey and much of the international community. Rights groups routinely accuse Turkey of undermining media freedom by arresting journalists and shutting down critical media outlets, especially since President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan survived a failed coup in July 2016. Turkey is ranked 165th in the Reporters Without Borders (RSF) 2023 World Press Freedom Index, among 180 countries, not far from North Korea, which occupies the bottom of the list. © Designed by Increases 2016 - 2022

By Stephanie van den Berg President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) Judge Joan Donoghue speaks as the International Court of Justice (ICJ), also known as the World Court, rules on Russia's request to throw out the Ukraine genocide case in The Hague, Netherlands, February 2, 2024. REUTERS/Piroschka van de Wouw The United Nations' highest court on Friday ruled that it will hear a case in which Kyiv has asked it to declare it did not commit genocide in eastern Ukraine, as Russia claimed as a pretext for attacking its smaller neighbour. Ukraine brought the case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), also known as the World Court, days after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. On Friday, judges found the court had jurisdiction to hear just a small part of the original case. The judges threw out a request by Ukraine to rule on whether or not the Russian invasion violated the 1948 Genocide Convention. Instead the panel of 16 judges said they will rule at a later stage on whether or not Ukraine committed genocide in the Donetsk and Luhansk areas of eastern Ukraine now occupied by Russia. "It is important that the court will decide on the issue that Ukraine is not responsible for some mythical genocide which the Russian Federation falsely alleged that Ukraine has committed," Ukraine's representative Anton Korynevych told journalists at the ICJ. He added that it was also important that the emergency order by the court in March 2022 -- that Russia immediately halt its military operations in Ukraine -- still stands. While the court's rulings are final and legally binding, it has no way to enforce them and some states, like Russia, have ignored them. In hearings in September last year, lawyers for Moscow urged judges to throw out the entire case, saying Kyiv's legal arguments were flawed and the court had no jurisdiction. On Friday, the judges granted some of Russia's objections but allowed Ukraine's request for the court to rule that there was no "credible evidence that Ukraine is committing genocide in violation of the Genocide Convention" in eastern Ukraine. It could take many months to hear the case on the merits. Ukraine previously argued there was no risk of genocide in eastern Ukraine, where it had been fighting Russian-backed forces since 2014. Ukraine won another small victory at the ICJ on Wednesday when the judges ruled Russia had violated U.N. treaties against the financing of terrorism and discrimination in a different case that dealt with incidents from 2014. © 2024 Reuters. All rights reserved

Ambulances carry the coffins of Iraqi Shi'ite armed group members who were killed by a U.S. air strike in al-Qaim, during a funeral in Baghdad, Iraq February 4, 2024. REUTERS/Ahmed Saad BAGHDAD, Feb 8 (Reuters) - Repeated U.S. strikes against Iran-backed armed groups in Iraq are pushing the Baghdad government to end the mission of the U.S.-led coalition in the country, the prime minister's military spokesperson said on Thursday. The U.S. military said a strike on Wednesday killed a commander from Kataib Hezbollah, an Iran-backed armed group in Iraq that the Pentagon has blamed for attacking its troops. Spokesperson Yahya Rasool said in a statement the U.S.-led coalition "has become a factor for instability and threatens to entangle Iraq in the cycle of conflict." Talks between the two countries began in January over the future of the coalition. But less than 24 hours later three U.S. soldiers were killed in an attack in Jordan that the United States said was carried out by Iran-backed militant groups in Syria and Iraq and the talks have since paused. Iraq and the United States will resume negotiations on the future of the U.S.-led international military coalition in the country on Feb. 11, the Iraqi military spokesperson said in a statement. Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein called for the resumption of talks in a phone call with U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken on Tuesday. Any discussions over the future of the coalition are expected to take months if not longer, with the outcome unclear. The U.S.-led international military coalition in Iraq was set up to fight Islamic State. The United States has 2,500 troops in Iraq, advising and assisting local forces to prevent a resurgence of the group. Since the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza began in October, Iraq and Syria have witnessed almost daily tit-for-tat attacks between hardline Iran-backed armed groups and U.S. forces stationed in the region. © 2024 Reuters

An interview with Dr. Gregory H. Stanton, Founding President, Genocide Watch Karachi Express Tribune Magazine February 4, 2024 By Hammad Sarfraz Palestinian overlooking devastation caused by Israeli bombing of Gaza. credit: Karachi Express Tribune Last month, the International Court of Justice, the United Nations' highest court, issued an interim ruling, instructing Israel to take all necessary measures to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza. However, the World Court stopped short of demanding a halt to the military offensive against Palestinians in the enclave. In its landmark 84-page case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), South Africa characterized Israel's actions in Gaza as genocide. In response, Israel rejected the allegation, claiming its ongoing military campaign in Gaza is self-defense, necessary to eliminate Hamas, and stating firmly that the conflict cannot stop without achieving this goal. South Africa formally requested the ICJ to issue an immediate cessation of hostilities order to Israel, alleging a violation of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. This convention, established after World War II and the Holocaust, defines genocide as acts such as killings committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. Delivering the 45-minute judgment at the court in The Hague, presiding judge Joan Donoghue, a former US State Department official, rejected Israel’s primary claim that the court lacks jurisdiction to hear South Africa’s case. Subsequently, in its ruling, the court ordered Israel to immediately implement measures to limit harm to Palestinians in Gaza, instructing it to: ● Prevent acts prohibited in the 1948 UN genocide convention, including: killing Palestinians, causing them serious bodily or mental harm, deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction in whole or in part. ● Prevent and punish statements constituting incitement to genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. ● Ensure the provision of basic services and humanitarian aid to address adverse conditions of life in Gaza. ● Preserve evidence related to allegations of genocidal acts. ● Report back to the court within one month on its compliance with the orders. Imbued with historical significance, the ruling by the World Court is seen as a legal and moral victory for the Palestinians. However, analysts contend that, despite the binding nature of the order, the absence of enforcement mechanisms will eventually hinder its effectiveness in safeguarding the people of Gaza from the genocidal war machine. According to ReliefWeb, a humanitarian information service by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), intense Israeli bombardment from air, land, and sea continued across much of the Gaza Strip on 28 and 29 January after the World Court’s ruling, leading to additional casualties, displacement, and destruction. So far, more than 27,000 people have been killed and 66,000 injured in the ongoing Israeli military offensive against Hamas. Gaza’s Health Ministry reports that over half of those killed are women and children. Reports by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the main lifeline for millions of Palestinian refugees in Gaza, the West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, state that an estimated 1.7 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) exist in the war-torn territory. The agency notes that most of them have been displaced multiple times as families have been forced to move repeatedly in search of safety. Since the October 7th attack by Hamas that resulted in a massive military operation by Israel, Gaza’s healthcare, according to WHO reports, remains fragile. The seven partially functional hospitals are only providing limited maternity, trauma, and emergency care services due to the severe shortage of supplies and healthcare workers. While the conflict in the Middle East persists without any apparent slowdown, experts provide mixed responses to the recent ruling by the United Nations’ top judicial body. To analyze the January 26 court decision and the escalating hostilities in the region, the Express Tribune reached out to Dr. Gregory H. Stanton, the founder of Genocide Watch, a nonprofit group that raised warnings ahead of the massacres in Rwanda in the 1990s. In a no-holds-barred interview, Dr. Stanton, also a former professor in genocide studies and prevention at George Mason University, underscores the likelihood of major war crimes and crimes against humanity occurring on both sides of the conflict. He believes that last month’s ICJ ruling carries significant weight, indicating a growing international commitment to enforcing laws against genocide. However, he cautions that if the goal is to prevent war crimes, efforts must be intensified to bring an end to the ongoing conflict, which currently shows no signs of resolution. Palestinian children who hope to play football in rubble left by Israeli bombing. Credit: Karachi Express Tribune ET: How do you view the current situation in Gaza? Would you consider it approaching genocide? GHS: You'll notice in the provisional measures ruling by the International Court of Justice that they did not explicitly state whether it's genocide or not. But they ordered that both parties (Israel and Hamas) commit no acts of genocide. In other words, it's very clear that acts bordering on genocide are, in fact, a possibility here. The reason I say that is because the ICJ's own doctrines about genocide are very narrow. In its Bosnia and Croatia decisions, the ICJ found that the court did not have conclusive proof that Serbia had violated the Genocide Convention. The reasoning the ICJ provided in those cases is that to prove genocide, the ICJ requires conclusive proof of genocidal intent. The ICJ stated that genocide must be the ONLY intent of a state charged with genocide. They found that Serbia also had the intent of "ethnic cleansing" in both of those cases. Therefore Serbia had not been proven to possess ONLY genocidal intent. [I refrain from using the term 'ethnic cleansing,' because I don't believe it is against any treaty in international law. The ICJ should have called it "forced displacement."] There was an additional intent by Serbia. Therefore intent to commit genocide was not proven. That is why I think, in this case, Israel is likely to be let off the hook because it clearly has the additional intent of defeating Hamas. In other words, it's a war intent. Israel can claim many other intentions here, and Israel does. That's why the ICJ is unlikely to determine that Israel has committed genocide. However, it doesn't dismiss the possibility that Israel may be involved in major war crimes and crimes against humanity, both serious offenses under international law. If Israel is committing genocide, that’s a significant accusation, especially against a state founded out of a genocide—namely, the Holocaust. Israel is outraged at being charged with genocide, as if being a victim of genocide means one can’t commit genocide, which is also legally incorrect. Even if genocide has been committed against a people or a state, that state can commit genocide itself. In fact, many countries have committed genocide that still don't want to admit that they did so, like the United States. So I'm unwilling to say that this is a genocide only because I don't make international law. Unfortunately, the ICJ does. The ICJ's doctrine of specific intent for genocide is so wrong that if you liken it to, for instance, intent in ordinary criminal law, it's like saying that if somebody picks up a gun, shoots and kills someone, they can't be charged with murder because they also had the intent to rob the person. It's a fact that the intent of a state has to be even more complicated and more complex than the intention of an individual. No individual can possibly commit an act, almost any act, that only has one intention. So, this doctrine by the ICJ, I think, is fatally flawed. It's also interesting that Joan Donoghue, who is the President of the ICJ, was the leader of those in the US State Department when she was the Principal Deputy Legal Adviser, who would not call the Rwandan genocide a genocide for over three months. She was the leader of that group of genocide deniers. So, in addition to the ICJ's flawed doctrine of intent, you've got a genocide denier as the President of the top UN court. It's very strange to see the whole Genocide Convention being interpreted by people who, I think, don't understand what specific intent means, and they include at least one major genocide denier, the President of the World Court. ET: How does the ICJ ruling align or differ from previous international legal decisions regarding conflicts that border on genocide? GHS: The only two that directly border on genocide are the Bosnia and Croatia decisions. The South Africa v Israel case does not differ from previous ICJ rulings in other ways as well. This is a typical traditional trajectory for a legal case in the ICJ. The first step is to decide on jurisdiction. The ICJ has decided that it has jurisdiction over the case here because it concerns the interpretation of the Genocide Convention. The Genocide Convention specifically says that the ICJ does have jurisdiction over disputes concerning its interpretation. So, that's the first step. The second step is that one party may request provisional measures against the other party, and in general, those provisional measures are to preserve the status quo. They are usually designed to prevent the dispute from becoming any worse. By saying that Israel must not commit acts of genocide, the Court is simply saying, "Hold the situation where it is. If you are planning any acts of genocide, please don't do them." Remember this: this order also applies to Hamas. The Court is saying to all parties: "Don't commit any acts of genocide." The other thing the Court is ordering Israel to do is they're ordering Israel to preserve any evidence that could affect this case, in other words, any evidence that there were acts of genocide. Well, that's a big order. It's one of the reasons why this case is as important for what it didn't say as what it did say. The Court didn't order a ceasefire. The ICJ has the power to order a ceasefire. And they could have done that. They did try that in the Ukraine v Russia case. One of the reasons the Court didn't order a ceasefire is, I think, they realized they don't have any way to enforce such an order. Courts never want to make a ruling they cannot enforce. It shows their powerlessness. In this case, the ICJ knows it doesn't have the power to enforce a ruling ordering a ceasefire. All the ICJ has the power to do is to order the parties in the case not to do anything further that would harm one side or the other in this case. And that is to order that there be no more acts of genocide if there are such acts being committed now. Palestinian mother and child in rubble of a bombed-out mosque. credit: Karachi Express Tribune ET: If you don't stop the conflict, if you don't order a ceasefire, how do you prevent genocide? GHS: You can't. I think major war crimes and crimes against humanity are being committed. Don't forget that Hamas is still shooting missiles into Israel. Those are also war crimes, targeting civilians. Israel's position is that this isn't genocide. It is a war. And Israel is bound by the laws of war. According to Israel, the laws of war are ones that they follow. I question that. When you're dropping 2,000-pound dumb bombs and destroying 70 or 80 percent of the homes in Gaza, I would call that a clear war crime because it is targeting civilians as well as combatants. Not only that, and think about this: Israel says a lot of the Hamas combatants are in tunnels underneath Gaza. Now, is the best way to destroy tunnels to drop bombs on buildings on the surface? Clearly not. The best parallel is the tunnels at Củ Chi in Vietnam, where there's a whole city of tunnels underneath the surface just outside Saigon, outside Ho Chi Minh City. They provided shelters for a lot of the Viet Cong who were attacking that city. I personally crawled through the Củ Chi tunnels in the 1980's after the war. Those tunnels were a great frustration for the US troops who were trying to destroy the Viet Cong. The tunnels were lined with booby traps and all kinds of other ways that if anybody tried to go into them, they'd likely get blown up. But the Viet Cong used those tunnels right up to the end of the war. When the US got its B-52 bombers to drop 2,000-pound bombs and carpet bomb that whole area where the Củ Chi tunnels were, it didn't stop the use of the tunnels. In other words, bombing doesn't stop tunnels. There were a few areas where they bombed them so severely that, in fact, some of the tunnels did collapse. But they were used right up to the end of the war. If you want to really defeat an enemy that's inside tunnels, you have to go into those tunnels. I don't think there's any excuse for this bombing on the surface. I do think these Israeli bombings are war crimes. ET: What message does the ICJ ruling send to Israel, to Hamas, to the Palestinians, and to the world? GHS: It's a pretty comprehensive order that the ICJ has given with these provisional measures. They ordered six provisional measures. Israel is instructed to: refrain from acts of genocide under the Genocide Convention; refrain from creating conditions of life deliberately calculated to destroy the Palestinian group in part; prevent and punish the direct and public incitement of genocide, such as dehumanizing language and references to historical events promoting genocide; take immediate and effective measures to ensure the provision of humanitarian assistance to civilians in Gaza, which suggests lifting the blockade, which is seen by the UN as a crime against humanity; preserve evidence of genocide; submit a report to the Court within a month on implementation of these measures. It's a robust set of provisional measures. However, the ICJ didn't order a ceasefire, possibly recognizing the limitations of its power in that regard. Palestinian children in front of their bombed-out former apartment building. Credit: Karachi Express Tribune ET: In your opinion, how might the ICJ ruling influence the ongoing conflict and efforts towards peace? GHS: The way I interpret the US State Department's response to the ICJ ruling is that it supports adherence to the laws of war and opposes genocide. Since the ruling did not explicitly state that Israel was violating the laws of war or committing genocide, the US supports the ICJ ruling. In my view, only the United States has the potential to halt this war. The most effective approach would be to inform Mr. Netanyahu that unless he pursues peace with the Palestinians, the U.S. supply of weapons will be discontinued. This, I believe, is the only way to get Netanyahu's attention, given Israel's considerable dependence on American support. It doesn't imply an immediate surrender or giving up, as Israel is fully capable of producing its own weapons and defending itself. However, without American backing, Israel might be compelled to reconsider and eventually strive for peace. ET: Will Israel comply with the ICJ ruling? GHS: I believe it will, because the ICJ ruling doesn't mandate any specific changes to Israel's current behavior. Israel can argue that it's not committing acts of genocide and will comply by preventing incitement and submitting the required report to the ICJ. In essence, Israel can say, "Okay, we'll comply with this." ET: Do you anticipate business as usual after this ruling? Will the atrocities continue? GHS: Unfortunately, yes, I'm afraid they will. I don't see Israel altering its behavior. It's crucial to understand that Israel perceives itself under an existential threat, and history supports that concern. Israel has had to fight four wars against Arab neighbors vowing to destroy it. Israel has emerged victorious in each conflict. The Yom Kippur War was a close call, Israel was saved by support from President Nixon and the US. If not for that assistance, the outcome might have been different. This specific ruling might not change anything, but it could influence those deeply concerned about Israel's bombing. The key message for Israelis is that the US stands with them against the existential threat they perceive. The US won't allow Israel to be defeated. This commitment is vital for Israel, considering the historical trauma of the Holocaust. It's time for Arab countries to acknowledge the Holocaust's reality, declare recognition of Israel, and commit to never attempting its destruction again. While challenging, this acknowledgment is crucial for achieving peace. ET: The International Court has overwhelmingly decided in favor of South Africa, determining there's a plausible risk of genocide. It becomes imperative for the world community to act now. Will the world act? GHS: I'm uncertain about the actions other nations could take to actually stop this war. When war crimes occur, the only solution is to halt the war. It's quite straightforward, isn't it? If there are war crimes, stop the war. That's a lesson I learned during the Vietnam War. There was only one answer: stop it. And, in my opinion, that's precisely what needs to happen here. Unfortunately, it's the one thing not occurring, and we can't compel Israel to do it. Israel argues, "We're under mortal threat. Hitler tried to wipe us out, and we won't let that happen again. Even if we all perish in this war, we'll fight to the last man." This, I believe, is a plausible position for Israelis to take, given their history. ET: Is this ruling by ICJ just a paper tiger? It doesn't have the right endorsement from the US. GHS: I don't consider it a paper tiger because I believe in the rule of law. Written decisions often carry significant weight. The fact that this case reached the International Court of Justice indicates growing international seriousness about enforcing laws against genocide. The Genocide Conventon is not merely a document from 1948. Efforts are being made to enforce it, as seen with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in the 1990s. The real effect is evident, such as when Milošević was eventually turned over for trial, sending a message to dictators worldwide about accountability for genocide, crimes against humanity, or war crimes. This, to me, embodies the essence of the rule of law. ET: Do you expect Netanyahu to be in the same dock as former Yugoslav leader Milošević? GHS: No, I don't. The International Court of Justice itself is a political body, not a purely neutral court. It has an American president, making it a political as well as a judicial entity. Netanyahu won't be tried by the ICJ; it deals with state versus state. The International Criminal Court (ICC) is the only place he could be tried, but Israel isn't a party to the ICC statute (Rome Statute), meaning the ICC lacks jurisdiction. ET: What are your thoughts on the disproportionate bombing from the Israeli forces? GHS: Of course, it's disproportionate bombing. When half of the victims are children and women who could not possibly be combatants, it's clearly disproportionate. If you are going to attack an enemy that is armed and is going to be combatants, you don't drop dumb bombs and destroy 80% of the houses and families of a civilian population and make the families move all over Gaza. And that's what they're doing. When you destroy so much of Gaza, with over half of the victims being civilians, that is definitely disproportionate. So, the question I would ask is, why isn't Netanyahu and his military leaders, his Defense Minister, being indicted for war crimes? These are war crimes. So, even if you aren't going to indict them for genocide, they should be indicted for war crimes. And I would also say that Hamas operatives who committed that massacre on October 7th ought to be indicted for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. That was genocide and also war crimes. ET: Several Israeli publications and papers have reported that Benjamin Netanyahu wanted Hamas to be in power so that he could dilute the collective Palestinian desire for a two-state solution. What are your thoughts on that? GHS: I think that's accurate. I believe Netanyahu is strongly opposed to a two-state solution, which, in my opinion, is the only viable resolution for this situation. Consequently, he did, in fact, look the other way when Qatar was financing Hamas. From what I understand, he may have even encouraged it. So, you're correct. I believe that's why he had no objection to allowing Hamas to continue to be financed. Additionally, it may explain why his intelligence services missed any signs that Hamas was planning to attack Israel on October 7th, despite evidently having received several warnings. ET: Is this conflict being extended to ensure Netanyahu’s political survival? GHS: It clearly is. As you know, he's under indictment for bribery. While he is Prime Minister, he is immune from trial. As soon as he is defeated and is no longer Prime Minister, that trial can go forward. So yes, indeed, he is trying to protect his own survival politically. No question about that. ET: Is the United States a genuine broker of peace? GHS: In short, no. ET: If the United States were a peace broker, it wouldn't supply the weapons used against Palestinians. What are your thoughts on that? GHS: Exactly. The US isn't a broker in this dispute. Other countries, not supplying weapons to either side, could step in. However, being a broker requires trust from both sides. Germany, supporting Israel, is ruled out, as are others clearly favoring Israel or Hamas in the Middle East. I believe the UN, led by the Secretary-General, is a suitable option. The Legacy Project, involving individuals like Martin Luther King III, Nelson Mandela's daughter, and others, is actively working for peace. These honest brokers could have an impact, but ultimately, powers like the US must guarantee peace. A UN peacekeeping operation, if accepted by Israel, could also play a role. The US isn't the honest broker here, but there are credible alternatives. ET: If you could advise President Biden, what would it be? GHS: I'd advise him to clearly tell Mr. Netanyahu that if the bombing of Gaza doesn't stop, we'll cut off all support. However, that will cost Biden lots of votes. He might even lose the next election because of it. I'd also suggest lifting the blockade immediately. Civilians, starving, without water, and under bombardment, can't be considered combatants. How can a six-year-old child be a combatant? I'd emphasize that. If I had full power, I'd bring a Palestinian child orphaned by the bombing to the meeting. That child's presence would have an impact on the President. I think the President would be moved by that. Now, whether they'd even allow it is another question, but I think that they should. President Biden should meet the children of the people who are being killed. President Biden should meet the victims. Copyright 2024 Karachi Express Tribune This is an edited version of the verbatim transcription of the interview published by the Express Tribune at: https://tribune.com.pk/story/2455414/can-the-hague-stop-israel It does not alter the meaning of any statements in the verbatim transcription of the interview.

People in affected areas say they are still waiting for government help after more than 300 deaths and widespread devastation People in Kinshasa’s Pompage district in January after the Congo River overflowed. Photograph: Arsene Mpiana/AFP/Getty Images The Guardian Patrice Citera in Kinshasa 2 February 2024 Tens of thousands of people in the Democratic Republic of the Congo are living in temporary accommodation and waiting for government help after the country experienced its worst flooding in six decades. More than 300 people have died and 280,000 households in more than half the country have been forced to leave their homes since heavy rains started at the end of November. More than 1,500 schools, 267 health centres, 211 markets and 146 roads have been damaged. In January, the government declared a hydrological and ecological catastrophe after the Congo River overflowed, flooding the capital, Kinshasa. The country’s president, Félix Tshisekedi, who won his second term in office in December after a contested election, last week ordered ministers to deal with the crisis. Last Saturday, the minister for humanitarian action, Modeste Mutinga Mutuishayi, was dispatched to oversee the distribution of blankets, pots and tents to 900 households in the capital. But Jackson Lukungula, from Tshopo province in north-eastern DRC, said: “The government remains silent about this flooding. The government is yet to send people to affected provinces. “We have a high school here in Kisangani which is overwhelmed. The government does not act. Many pupils are changing the way they travel to school because the usual streets are flooded.” He said a Catholic convent was under water “but the central government and the provincial government are not acting”. Flooded houses next to the Congo River in the Mbudi area of Kinshasa last month. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images Mado Ekembe, from Cité du Fleuve, a Kinshasa housing estate that lies along the banks of the Congo River, said she was not surprised at the inaction “because we always face flooding without getting help from the Congolese government”. “Our wish is that authorities in our country act like those of neighbouring countries such as Republic of Congo, on the other side of the Congo River. When there is a disaster there, government agents turn up quickly; they brings food and essential items that will help affected people. But here, the authorities don’t do anything. We’ve never seen or heard from the government when such flooding hit us.” At least 17 people have died and 320,000 people have been affected by flooding in the Republic of Congo, whose capital, Brazzaville, sits on the opposite riverbank from Kinshasa. The chief of staff at DRC’s ministry of humanitarian affairs, Jackson Luneno, said people’s needs were still being assessed as water levels and impassable roads made it difficult for officials to visit many of the flooded areas. The ministry is also waiting for the treasury to sign off an emergency budget. “Our challenge has also been money. We have a budget of 2bn [Congolese francs] this year,” Luneno said. “Our humanitarian affairs’ management system is still in its infancy. We are working with UN agencies to design a humanitarian intervention system that will allow us to be always ready when disasters happen.” Japan has donated tents, blankets and mattresses to the relief effort and China has given $100,000 (£78,000) in aid. “We hope others will follow once our teams finish identifying our country’s needs,” Luneno said. A displaced person at a shelter in the Kinshasa area. Photograph: Xinhua News Agency/Eyevine The charity Médecins Sans Frontières has opened an emergency clinic in Kinshasa. So far it has treated 150 people for malaria and 65 for typhoid fever. “Some patients describe anxiety and suicide because they have lost everything,” said Dago Inagbe, MSF’s head of mission in Kinshasa. Emmanuel Yaki, a 70-year-old retired mechanic from the capital’s Kinsuka-Pêcheurs neighbourhood, is selling pieces of wood and furniture that bob past his compound. “This week I sold a doorway for 23,000 francs. It was made of black wood. I grabbed it with a hook. I expect to sell wood and planks to traders.” Most homes in Kinsuka-Pêcheurs were flooded. Yaki was able to save some of his belongings because his house is on two floors. “At the end of every year we experience some flooding, but this time it is too huge,” he said, picking up plastic bottles as they floated past his home. Alice Shabani, 52, is hosting three families who have nowhere to live. “When I heard people screaming that water was invading their houses behind my plot [of land], I did not hesitate to welcome them into my house,” she said. “You feel like crying as though it has happened to you.” Shabani said the water had reached the edge of her property, and worries her house could be damaged if more rain comes. © 2024 Guardian News & Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. (dcr)

To view documentary, click on image. YouTube Documentary Raises Alarm About Demoralized Nigerian Army Truth Nigeria February 6, 2024 By Mike Odeh James [Kaduna] A YouTube documentary has exposed how corruption, unpaid salaries, mistreatment of junior officers and stingy welfare checks have demoralized the Nigerian Army. The narrator warns of the risk of soldier corruption and mutiny. A Youtuber identified simply as “I Love Jesus” posted a documentary on 30 January , 2024, that gave a vivid description of how demoralized soldiers refused to respond to distress calls of villagers under attack by radicalized terrorists. The documentary, shot in Pandogari in Niger State, North Central Nigeria, also stated that the soldiers prevented local vigilantes from going after the assailants. The incidents in the documentary appear to be factual. Politicsnigeria on January 28, 2024 reported the story referred to in the Jan 30 video by the anonymous videographer. “In the aftermath of the recent abduction of 31 villagers in Jagaban village, Pandogari community of Niger State, North Central Nigeria, residents are raising concerns about the efficacy of military presence in the area,” according to the narrator. “A group of more than 50 terrorists reportedly targeted the village, striking around 11 p.m. on Thursday. Despite distress calls, local residents claimed that the security forces stationed in the vicinity remained inactive during the attack. “Assailants, armed and dangerous, fired shots in the air, instilling fear throughout the villagers. While some villagers managed to escape, 31 individuals were abducted, and a middle-aged man lost his life for resisting the attackers,” according to “I Love Jesus.” “The village’s proximity to the Joint Security Task Force based in Pandogari, just two kilometers away, is especially concerning. Locals allegedly called the security team in a desperate attempt to get help, but they supposedly got no answer. “Moreover, the security personnel allegedly stopped the local vigilantes from intervening, and they gave no justification for their actions. “The Daily Sun reports that the villagers informed the security task force about the attack and the kidnapping of individuals, but they failed to respond. The security task force prevented the local vigilantes from pursuing the bandits, despite their willingness to do so. “We are not sure why they resisted going after the people (bandits) and prevented the neighborhood vigilantes from attacking the bandits,” the narrator says. Soldiers underpaid, maltreated, and demoralized Map showing distance between Pandogari and Minna Courtesy Google map Giving reasons why the military personnel in Pandogari behaved the way they did, the Youtuber read an anonymous letter written by a Nigerian soldier to the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of Nigeria and dated Jan. 27, 2024. The narrator explained that the salary of an average Nigerian soldier is N50,000 (50 USD), which is way below what can take care of the basic needs of his family. Furthermore, soldiers are forced to buy uniforms, boots, and other kits. The letter is verifiable. Sahara Reporters published it on January 28,2024. According to the letter, soldiers who are on the war front have not received their allowances of N35,000 (40 USD) since last year. “Additionally, they are not well compensated or provided with adequate time to visit and care for their families. It is disheartening to witness Master Warrant Officers, who have risked and dedicated 30 precious years of their lives to serving this great nation, being assigned only menial tasks without proper consideration,” according to the narrator. Responses from Military Veterans Truthnigeria queried retired military personnel to assess the documentary’s claims. A retired officer in the Nigerian Navy agreed that the allegations raised by the soldiers are well founded but explained that soldiers should not complain since they signed for it voluntarily, Navy Captain Umar Bakori told TruthNigeria in an exclusive interview. “Joining the military is a voluntary service, while getting a salary is a privilege. When you apply to join the Army or Navy, you have the right to choose whether to apply to be an officer or an order rank and file. “We have terms and conditions of service for officers, ratings (for non-officers), and other files; however, there is room for improvement. The officers are trained and paid to think for the other soldiers. So those complaining are really not patriotic,” according to Bakori. Bakori further agreed that the salary of a soldier or rating may be N50,000 today; however, he noted that a few years ago, N50,000 was a lot of money. “Few years ago, N50,000 was a very huge amount of cash, but with the coming of these administrations, inflation has devalued its worth,” he said. For retired Staff Sargent Mordecai Funom, the allegations of the anonymous soldier are justified. “Today, our soldiers are paid just N50,000; this is a package that cannot take care of the soldier alone, not to mention his family members, Funom told TruthNigeria: “Added to that, the soldiers are not paid their allowances on time by their superior officers, even if the money is available. These situations breed a crisis of confidence in the ordinary soldier. “Many unpatriotic soldiers may be forced to accept bribes from terrorists in order to get by. That is why you see that people on the Plateau and Benue are complaining that some military personnel have sold out or compromised,” Funom said. Senator Ali Ndume, the former chairman of the Senate Committee on Army, told Channels Television on January 30, 2024, that he condemned the poor remuneration for security agencies, saying that recruits are paid less than N50,000. “The recruits are paid less than N50,000 in some cases. How can you pay somebody money that cannot buy him a bag of rice, and you expect him to go and sacrifice and put in his best?” Ndume said. “How can you pay a Nigerian soldier, for example, an allowance of N1,200 as his daily money and pay him N2,000 only as duty tour allowance and put him in the theater?” Some from Lagos, Oyo, and Ondo moved to Maiduguri,” he asked. “Their parents are expecting that they will send them something monthly, and you pay the guy N50,000 or less. These are the major challenges that the government must rise to. Right now, we don’t have enough security agencies or personnel to handle the security challenges” Ndume added. Soldiers Mutinied Due To Salary Delays, Corruption David Adakole Ida Photo Courtesy Mike Odeh James When salaries are delayed, when soldiers are unnecessary subjected hardship and corrupt practices, soldiers tend to react negatively, according to David Adakole Ida, special representative of Africa Region Headquarter, International Human Rights Commission, Nairobi Kenya. “All these ( delay of salaries ) occurs very regularly in Nigeria and mutinies have occured due to such unfavorable situations,” Idah, told Truthnigeria. “In 2106, the personnel of the 21st Brigade of the Nigerian Army, stationed Borno State went on rampage over unpaid allowances running into hundreds of thousands of naira, and bad treatment by their commanders. The soldiers almost killed their Senior officers,” Ida said. ” The same thing happened in March 2021, Soldiers of Operation Lafiya surrounded the headquarters of Operation Lafiya Dole and shot into the air for over 6 hours The mutineers cited non-payment of allowances and poor equipment as reasons for their actions, Idah added. Mike Odeh James, a conflict reporter based in Kaduna, reports on crime and corruption for Truthnigeria. Copyright 2024 Truth Nigeria

Ahmadi worship place blockaded by Pakistani security forces By Nasim Malik Ahmadiyya Muslims are once again deprived of their voting rights, at all levels, as Pakistan prepares for nationwide parliamentary elections in February 2024. The right to vote is a basic human right in a democracy. Ahmadis are denied this right by devious and discriminatory laws and rules in Pakistan. Discriminatory provisions in Pakistan’s electoral law effectively exclude members of the Ahmadiyya community because of their religious beliefs. To register as voters, Ahmadis must either renounce their faith or agree to be placed in a separate electoral list that categorizes them as “non-Muslim.” Self-identification as Muslims, however, is a cornerstone of Ahmadiyya religious belief. Because of this, Ahmadis, who number more than 500,000 in Pakistan, have in practice, been denied the right to vote in local, provincial, and national elections. In 2002, Pakistan abolished an electoral system in which Muslims and Non-Muslims registered and voted in separate categories. The government also created a separate category for Ahmadis. Since then, all Pakistani citizens vote according to a single electoral list except the Ahmadis, who vote on a separate list. Pakistan’s most recent elections law, the Elections Act 2017, retained those provisions regarding the status of the Ahmadis. Under Pakistani law, if someone objects to any voter being identified as non-Muslim, the election commission can summon the person to declare they are not Ahmadi, otherwise they are added to the non-Muslim list. Rather than deny their beliefs, most Ahmadis end up not voting at all. According to the 2018 report of the EU Electoral Observer Mission: “Although steps were taken to ensure participation of minorities in the electoral process, the situation of the Ahmadi community remains unchanged. They are still registered on a separate electoral roll, contrary to constitutional provisions on the equality of citizens and against international law.” Pakistan’s upcoming elections cannot be considered free and fair if an entire community is effectively excluded from the electoral process. Religious disagreements do not justify denying people their right to vote. Pakistani authorities should allow the full and equal participation of members of the Ahmadiyya community in the general elections and beyond. Such human rights violations contravene Article 25 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) which protects citizens’ right to vote. The ICCPR expressly prevents distinctions being made on the grounds of religion. Pakistan has signed and agreed to abide by the ICCPR and by putting in place legislation which effectively prevents Ahmadi Muslims from voting, Pakistan acts in direct contravention of international law. This disenfranchisement has been repeatedly criticised by major international organisations including the UN Human Rights Council, the European Union, the State Department of USA, the Parliamentary Human Rights Groups of UK, Sweden, Holland, Belgium, Germany, France and the Asian Human Rights Commission. Human rights groups have repeatedly expressed their deep concern over the lack of attention to the serious human rights violations perpetrated against the Ahmadiyya community around the world and called on the international community to step up efforts in bringing an end to the ongoing persecution of Ahmadis. On July 13, 2021, UN human rights experts expressed their deep concern over the lack of attention to the serious human rights violations perpetrated against the Ahmadiyya community around the world and called on the international community to step up efforts in bringing an end to the ongoing persecution of Ahmadis. We once again urge the international community to pressure the Government of Pakistan to honor its responsibility to provide equal rights for Ahmadis as all its citizens, ensure freedom of religious practice to Ahmadis. The Government of Pakistan must bring its laws and practices in conformity with international standards as ordained by Article 2, 18 and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Article 25, 26.

The Ecuadorian justice system has recognized that this Amazonian community is the rightful owner of 42,360 hectares in Pë'këya, an area that contains the tribe’s most important sacred places Two members of the Siekopai Nation in a ceremonial act in 2023. The Siekopai people will finally be able to return to their ancestral home, to Pë'këya, a territory within Ecuador, along the border with Peru. The area is where this Amazonian tribe lived for centuries, until they were expelled in 1941, due to the war between the two countries. According to a ruling issued on Friday, November 24, the Ecuadorian government has guaranteed them ownership of a piece of the jungle: a total of 42,360 hectares, also known as Lagartococha. The judicial decision (the second one related to this case) is “historic,” explains Justino Pianguaje, the head of the Siekopai Nation, who spoke with EL PAÍS by phone. For the first time, Ecuador has recognized an Indigenous population’s right to “possess a territory that has been declared a protected area.” Pianguaje points out that this ruling can serve as a precedent for other Indigenous communities that are trying to regain control of their land. The 2008 Constitution of Ecuador recognizes the right of “Indigenous communes, communities, peoples and nationalities to maintain possession of ancestral lands and territories and obtain their free allocation.” But there was an exception: the spaces included in the National System of Protected Areas, for which the regulations contemplated transfer (essentially, the ability to reside on the lands), but not full ownership. In 2017, the approval of the Organic Law of Rural Lands and Ancestral Territories opened the door for protected spaces to also return to the hands of their original owners — something that has just happened with the return of Pë'këya to the Siekopai. The community has about 720 people in Ecuador. There are more than 1,000 in total, with members of the tribe living in Peru. The court has also obliged the Ministry of Environment, Water and Ecological Transition of Ecuador to apologize publicly to the Siekopai, in a ceremony set to be organized within its territory. The judges ruled that the ministry “failed to fulfill its obligations to guarantee the rights of the Siekopai Nation.” According to Piaguaje, the recovery of Lagartococha was the “key” to preventing the disappearance of a community that has been struggling to return home for more than 80 years… a community that was doomed to “disappear.” “This piece of land is what will allow us to continue existing as an ancient people, as a people who have shown that we are Amazonian, with a different culture, a different wisdom and a different language,” explains the head of the Siekopai. The connection of this town with its land and its past is intrinsic to its essence and its reason for existing. “Many believe that we want to return for the sake of beauty, but that’s not the case. My grandfather was there, drinking yagé (ayahuasca); my grandparents’ home was there. That’s why we continue to feel [a connection] and want to return. It’s not a problem of land — it’s a matter of the spirit, of not suffering anymore,” argued Maruja Payaguage, before the three judges of the Provincial Court of Justice of Sucumbíos, who ruled on granting ownership of Lagartococha to the Siekopai. Piaguaje was able to share the ruling in an assembly with his people this past Monday. The text recognizes the suffering that Payaguage mentioned, which was particularly experienced by the Siekopai elders, due to not being allowed to return safely to their territory. “Cesario Piaguage Payaguage — at 112-years-old — wished he could die there, to be able to fulfill his ritual cycle. Like him, many other grandparents died without being able to be at peace spiritually,” the document states. “Cesario died on April 5 without seeing his dream come true,” Piaguaje laments. Upon restoring the land to the Siekopai, the Ecuadorian court also mentioned the testimony of “children, adolescents and women. [They demonstrated] how knowledge about the name, location and use of plants, fishing or hunting practices, goldsmithing — and even ritual practices related to the transition to adulthood, gestation, or upbringing — and the explanation of their origin as a nation are only possible to know and experience in the Pë'këya zone.” A Long Battle Of the 100,000 hectares that originally made up Lagartococha — where other Indigenous groups now live — the Siekopai have recovered just over 40%, a total of 42,360 hectares. “Fortunately, they contain the largest number of sacred places for us, where our link with the lagoons and the spirits of the jungle is,” Piaguaje explains. Among those places, the head of the Siekopai Nation mentions Ñañokomasira, where the ancient wise men of his community “reached an agreement with the mythological beings of water” to settle a war. There’s also the sacred river Emuña, as well as Kwiñajaira, “a historical site where our grandparents found medicinal plants to defend themselves against diseases,” Piaguaje notes. It’s precisely in this location where the ancestors of the Siekopai made kwarawëko (“syrup” in the Paikoka language). Their descendants used this during the Covid-19 pandemic. Piaguaje claims that it worked much better than “modern medicine.” This fight — according to Piaguaje — was started by his grandfather, Cecilio Piaguaje, when the Ecuadorian-Peruvian War ended in 1942. “After the conflict — which separated Siekopai families between Ecuador and Peru — he wanted to return to his territory. He began to look for a way to reunify his people, but he never succeeded due to harassment.” The sentence itself recognizes this persecution. “This Amazonian people had to leave Pë'këya for reasons beyond their control resulting from the war between Ecuador and Peru in 1941 [and also because of] other conditions of dispossession. They have attempted to permanently return since then, despite the threats, harassment and obstacles that have existed, derived from the militarization of the border and the subsequent creation of the Cuyabeno Wildlife Reserve.” Jesuit manuscript from 1753 with terms in Paikoka, the language of the Siekopai. To recover the land, it was necessary to demonstrate that they were the original inhabitants. Coming from a culture that has an oral tradition, this meant that they had few materials to support their claim. However, several Jesuit documents — including an anonymous manuscript from 1753 — demonstrated that the Siekopai had been living in Lagartococha for centuries. The text — preserved by the New York Public Library — contains about 1,200 words in Paikoka. “The oral tradition of the Siekopai is very precise, but in this document, [the translation from Spanish to Paikoka is strong],” affirmed Argentine researcher and anthropologist María Susana Cipolletti, during a phone interview with EL PAÍS this past May. She participated in the judicial process as a witness. For “the right to restitution to exist,” it’s essential that “the Indigenous people maintain contact or a relationship with these ancestral territories in one way or another,” according to the Ecuadorian judges. The ruling states that this condition has been proven: “It has been demonstrated that the Siekopai Nation is the ancestral owner of the territory of Pë'këya, with which it has maintained a historical, spiritual, cultural and material relationship that has been essential in the creation and development of their cultural identity and worldview and that is essential for their physical and cultural survival.” “I finally feel an internal peace, for having demanded respect for the rights of the Siekopai and having guaranteed this territorial space for current and future generations,” Piaguaje celebrates. He is convinced that this result will allow his people to “avoid extinction.” © EDICIONES EL PAÍS

By Anton Troianovski Bi-2, one of Russia’s most popular rock bands, performing in Dubai last year. Members of the band were arrested in Thailand last week for an immigration violation, where, their supporters said, Russian officials spent days pushing Thailand to deport some of them to Russia.Credit...Andrea DiCenzo for The New York Times In Bangkok this week, members of an antiwar Russian-language rock group were fighting deportation to Russia, detained in what supporters described as a cramped, hot, 80-person immigration holding cell. On Wednesday in Moscow, the lower house of Parliament passed a law that will allow the Russian government to seize the property of Russians living abroad who, in the words of the legislature’s chairman, “besmirch our country.” The two developments, though thousands of miles apart, reflected the same grim calculus by the Kremlin: Using new legislation and apparent diplomatic pressure on other countries, it is turning the screws on Russia’s sprawling antiwar diaspora. “Historic Russia has risen up,” President Vladimir V. Putin said at a meeting with backers of his presidential campaign on Wednesday, reprising his contention that the time has come to cleanse Russian society of pro-Western elements. “All this scum that’s always present in any society is being slowly, slowly washed away.” Under the law, any Russian, even those in exile, found to be engaged in “crimes against national security” — including criticizing the invasion of Ukraine — could have their assets confiscated. Mr. Putin is expected to sign the law, though it is not yet clear how widely or aggressively the Kremlin plans to use it. But the law’s quick passage — it sailed through the rubber-stamp State Duma unanimously — is another signal that the Kremlin, having stamped out dissent at home, is increasingly turning its attention to criticism from abroad. Hundreds of thousands of Russians fled after the war began, including many celebrities who can still reach their fans through platforms like YouTube, which remains accessible inside Russia. President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia during a campaign event on Wednesday in Moscow. He said unwelcome elements of Russian society are being “slowly, slowly washed away.”Credit...Maxim Shemetov/Reuters Among the first to feel this increasing pressure are popular performers who have drawn large audiences in places popular with Russian émigrés like Dubai and Southeast Asia. In recent weeks, Russian antiwar celebrities have accused Thailand and Indonesia of bending to Russian pressure to cancel their shows, while an antiwar rapper found himself banned from re-entering the United Arab Emirates, his adopted home. The most dramatic case unfolded after members of the rock group Bi-2, originally from Belarus and one of Russia’s most popular bands, were arrested in Thailand last week for an immigration violation. Their supporters said Russian officials spent days pushing Thailand to deport some of them to Russia, where the musicians could have faced prosecution for criticizing the war. By Wednesday, the rockers had escaped that fate thanks to the intervention of Israeli and Australian diplomats, who arranged for all seven band members to be deported to Israel, according to the group’s lawyer, who requested anonymity for security reasons. (Four are citizens of Israel, and one of Australia.) The extent of the Kremlin’s efforts to get the rockers sent to Russia was not clear, but on Tuesday, the group said in a statement that the Thai authorities had canceled an earlier plan to deport some of them to Israel after Russian diplomats visited the immigration center where they were being held. Analysts and human rights advocates consider the case a stark demonstration of the Kremlin’s increasingly aggressive efforts to punish Russians speaking out against Mr. Putin abroad — especially when they do so in non-Western countries that are interested in maintaining good relations with Moscow. Fans watching Bi-2 perform last year in Dubai. The lead singer has written that Putin’s Russia evoked “only disgust and squeamishness.”Credit...Andrea DiCenzo for The New York Times “This is a special operation,” said Dmitri Gudkov, an exiled Russian opposition politician who is close to Bi-2, referring to what he described as Russia’s efforts to get the band members sent to Russia. “Their task is to grab someone big outside the country to show that they can grab anyone, anywhere.” The rock group’s brooding hits are part of the soundtrack of the early Putin era, and in later years the group was rubbing shoulders with the Russian elite at marquee events — performing, for example, at Mr. Putin’s annual economic conference in St. Petersburg in 2019. But by last year, Bi-2’s lead singer, Igor Bortnik, was writing that Putin’s Russia evoked “only disgust and squeamishness.” Russia’s Foreign Ministry denied interfering in the Bi-2 case in Thailand, but it referred to the band members soon after their detention as “sponsors of terrorism.” A Russian lawmaker, Andrei Lugovoi, said the country was awaiting Bi-2’s deportation “with open arms” and predicted: “Soon they’ll be playing and singing on spoons and metal plates, tap dancing in front of their cellmates.” (Mr. Lugovoi is no stranger to Russian intervention abroad, having been charged by Britain in 2007 with poisoning a Putin critic in London.) Thailand, which has stuck to a largely neutral stance on the war in Ukraine and is a prime destination for Russian tourists, said it was following established procedure. Asked by a reporter on Wednesday about the potential deportation to Russia of Bi-2 band members, the country’s foreign minister, Parnpree Bahiddha-Nukara, said that if they are found to have “committed illegal acts,” then Thailand “has to follow the process.” Thailand is a popular destination for Russian tourists.Credit...Jorge Silva/Reuters The band released a statement from its concert organizer, VPI Event, acknowledging that it had failed to obtain the right visas for the band’s Jan. 24 show on the Thai island of Phuket. But VPI asserted that the Thai authorities’ decision to arrest the performers — rather than sanction the concert organizers — was unusually harsh. “We are making every effort to free the performers, but we are facing unprecedented pressure at every stage,” the company’s statement said while the musicians were still behind bars, adding that shows in Thailand by two other Russian antiwar performers had been canceled in recent weeks. “The campaign to cancel concerts under pressure from the Russian consulate began in December.” Some pro-Kremlin figures have started praising Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs for getting more aggressive in putting pressure on antiwar Russians abroad. “The M.F.A. has really gotten to work in this regard,” Sergei Markov, a pro-Kremlin political analyst who appears frequently on Russian state television, said in a phone interview. Russian diplomats, he added, have been “actively informing” foreign governments in recent months about Russians who have “gone over to the enemy’s side.” Alisher Morgenshtern, a rapper who had criticized the war and moved to Dubai, said last Friday that the United Arab Emirates had banned him from re-entering the country. Ruslan Bely, an antiwar comedian, had two shows in Thailand canceled in January. Another Russian comedian who opposes the war, Maksim Galkin, last week announced a show in Bali, Indonesia, days after Russian state media reported that his two planned shows in Thailand had been canceled. But last weekend, Mr. Galkin told his 9 million Instagram followers that the Bali show, too, was canceled. The Indonesian authorities, he wrote, had turned him away at the border and told him they were doing so at the request of the Russian government. “It’s funny,” Mr. Galkin wrote, that the Russian state was expending so much effort on “the maniacal persecution of dissenting artists abroad.” The head of the Bali regional office of Indonesia’s Ministry of Law and Human Rights, Romi Yudianto, said he was not familiar with Mr. Galkin’s case but that Indonesia “has its own sovereignty” and the right to reject unwanted visitors. But Mr. Markov, the pro-Kremlin analyst, described the pressure on antiwar performers, as well as the new law allowing the confiscation of the property of Russians criticizing the war, as part and parcel of the same government effort. “This is a message to those who are against Putin,” but aren’t sure how loudly to voice their disapproval, Mr. Markov said. It is a reminder to them, he said, that if they do speak up, even outside Russia, “don’t think that you’ll be fine.” © 2024 The New York Times Company

UN Human Rights Council Engagement Remains Vital to Ensure Justice for Atrocity Crimes Thagbsiwaran Sivaganawathy holds a photo of her daughter, Thageswaran Susanya, at a protest for relatives of the disappeared on May 13, 2019 in Mullaitivu, Sri Lanka. © 2019 Allison Joyce/Getty Images (Geneva) – The Sri Lankan government’s proposed law to create another body to investigate wartime abuses replicates previous failed efforts, ignores the needs of victims, and falls far short of meeting Sri Lanka’s international legal obligations, Human Rights Watch said today. Sri Lankan authorities continue to silence and repress families of victims and their communities 15 years after the armed conflict ended. The Commission for Truth, Unity and Reconciliation in Sri Lanka Bill was published on January 1, 2024, following limited consultations in 2023 and government pledges to investigate human rights violations and war crimes committed during the 1983-2009 civil war with the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and in its aftermath. It excludes widespread abuses committed during the left-wing Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) uprising of 1988-1990. Instead of providing truth, justice and redress, the proposed law appears designed to deflect international pressure over the lack of accountability for atrocity crimes and to persuade the United Nations Human Rights Council to end its scrutiny of Sri Lanka. “A credible truth and justice process is desperately needed in Sri Lanka, where wartime abuses resulted in tens of thousands of deaths and enforced disappearances,” said Meenakshi Ganguly, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “However, the government’s continuing repression of victim communities and its protection of alleged perpetrators shows a lack of will to deliver justice, ensuring that this commission will fare no better than previous ones.” The bill states that the new commission would produce a “truthful record” of violations committed during the war, make recommendations on reparations, and propose measures to prevent a recurrence. While the commission would also be able “to refer matters to the relevant law enforcement or prosecuting authorities … for further investigation and necessary action,” those authorities are already supposed to take up such cases, but routinely fail to do so. Successive Sri Lankan governments have blocked investigations, stalled trials, and silenced victims, in violation of international legal obligations to prosecute or extradite people responsible for serious crimes. Since the 1990s, the government has created at least 10 similar commissions, at leave five of which have concluded reports. Many victims say they have “commission fatigue” and see no use in testifying again, risking re-traumatization and possible threats from the security forces with no expectation of justice and redress. In 2023, after the government announced its plans to establish a new commission, numerous organizations representing conflict victims and civil society groups—especially in the most conflict-affected Northern and Eastern provinces—joined four separate joint statements rejecting the government’s approach and instead said it should act upon the work of previous commissions, while “building confidence” by ending ongoing abuses. The current government, like its predecessors, has a record of making human rights pledges to deflect international pressure while continuing abuses and blocking meaningful reform and accountability. Many victims see the proposed commission as an attempt to persuade UN Human Rights Council member countries to end the council’s scrutiny, a view supported by statements from President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s office. The proposed commission resembles the 2010-2011 Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. After this commission failed to achieve its stated objectives, the Human Rights Council in 2015 passed the first of a series of important resolutions to advance accountability for atrocity crimes committed in Sri Lanka. From 2015 to 2020, when Wickremesinghe was prime minister, the Human Rights Council adopted resolutions with the endorsement of Sri Lanka that envisaged a “hybrid” justice mechanism including both foreign and Sri Lankan staff. In 2021, after a new Sri Lankan government repudiated this process, the council established an international evidence-gathering project to support possible future prosecutions abroad. Meanwhile, the current government has continued to repress fundamental rights. In January 2024, the government presented two bills in parliament that threaten the right to freedom of expression. According to the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Anti-Terrorism Bill, to replace a law that has long been used to target minorities and perceived government opponents, “grants wide powers to the police – and to the military – to stop, question and search, and to arrest and detain people, with inadequate judicial oversight.” The Online Safety Bill, adopted by parliament on January 24, “will give authorities unfettered discretion to label and restrict expressions they disagree with as ‘false statements,’” the high commissioner’s office said. New speech-related offenses carry lengthy prison terms. The government has also continued to target those campaigning for truth and accountability. On January 5, the authorities arrested and detained Sivananthan Jenita and Meera Jasmine Charlesnise, who have campaigned for years seeking answers after the enforced disappearance of their relatives for protesting against President Wickremesinghe during his visit to the north. In December, nine ethnic Tamils were held under anti-terrorism legislation for commemorating war dead. Government agencies continue to appropriate Hindu and Muslim religious sites and lands occupied by Tamil and Muslim communities on a variety of pretexts, in some cases to convert the sites into Buddhist temples or transfer them to members of the majority community. These actions violate the right to freedom of religion or belief and are in direct opposition to the government’s purported goals of promoting “reconciliation” and addressing the causes of conflict, Human Rights Watch said. The new commission’s proposed mandate would overlap in ill-defined ways with existing but nonperforming agencies, including the Office of Reparations, established in 2018, and the Office of Missing Persons, established in 2017. On January 9, Sri Lanka’s parliament passed legislation to formalize yet another institution with an ostensibly similar purpose, the Office of National Unity and Reconciliation, which was created in 2015. Concerned governments should decline to fund or endorse the new Commission for Truth, Unity and Reconciliation, because it would not uphold Sri Lanka’s international obligations to address impunity or provide redress and does not have the support of victims and affected communities. Instead, they should work to ensure that the Human Rights Council mandate is renewed and enhanced to pursue accountability for past crimes and help end ongoing abuses. “The actions of President Wickremesinghe’s government to silence dissent, protect and promote alleged rights abusers, and discriminate against minority communities give no grounds to believe that the latest ‘reconciliation’ plan will turn out differently from past commissions,” Ganguly said. “The government should start dealing with the past in good faith, by using the evidence already collected to advance accountability and stop persecuting victims and their families who demand justice.” © 2024 Human Rights Watch

Sierra Leone’s poorest communities have long been prey to human traffickers. Climate change is making things worse. Two women look on to the site where their homes used to be after the mudslide in Regent, Freetown, in August 2017 [Olivia Acland/Al Jazeera] By Olivia Acland Published On 29 Jan 2024 Freetown, Sierra Leone – Zainab – last name withheld – sits in a dimly lit office in the Sierra Leonean capital Freetown, plugs a number into her phone, and inhales sharply. A man picks up after two rings. “I hear you are offering jobs in Lebanon,” the 29-year-old Sierra Leonean social worker tells him. “Life is so hard here, I want to get out. Can you help?” The man gives her an address in Waterloo, a densely populated town 32km (20 miles) south of Freetown, and tells her to bring 3 million Leones ($150) as an initial downpayment. She hangs up and dials a contact at the Transnational Organised Crime Unit, a police division trained by the US embassy to catch human traffickers. “It can be difficult to reach the perpetrator,” says Emmanuel Cole, head of the unit. “Sometimes we lure them to us by making them believe someone is interested in their programme.” It is not the first time that Zainab has helped to set up an undercover sting. Four years ago she was trafficked to Oman. Since escaping a family home where she was forced to work for free and was sexually assaulted, she has made it her mission to help others who might also be tricked into going abroad. “I try not to be afraid,” she says. “I know I am doing the right thing.” Freetown, built across a peninsular, is very susceptible to floods that have driven more people in search of a better life abroad at all costs [Olivia Acland/Al Jazeera] A worsening problem Human trafficking is classed as using force, coercion or fraud to send someone to a new destination, to profit from them. While official data is scant, experts say the problem is rife in Sierra Leone. With youth unemployment at nearly 60 percent and the majority of the population surviving on less than $3 a day, there are thousands of people for traffickers to prey on, who long for better opportunities overseas. They often target women, touting well-paid jobs in the Middle East. “You are sold a lifestyle,” says Vani Saraswathi of Migrant Rights, a Qatar-based advocacy group. The agents offer jobs as nannies, hairdressers, maids or shop assistants in countries including Lebanon, Oman, Dubai, Kuwait and Turkey. But when their clients arrive in the destination country, their passports are often seized and they are forced into unpaid labour in people’s houses. Many young women report being sexually abused. “They said I was a slave and didn’t need to be paid,” says one woman who went to Oman to work as a maid, “when we were alone in the house, the man would have sex with me, he held a knife to my throat and said he’d cut me if I screamed”. Those monitoring the problem say it has worsened in the last three years. “There has been an increase,” says Christos Christodoulides, head of the UN Migration Agency in Sierra Leone. “The vulnerability has increased too.” While some victims of human trafficking manage to escape, many stay locked in gruesome situations for years. Ninety-nine percent of the 469 Sierra Leonean domestic workers in Oman, interviewed in the last two years by the non-profit Do Bold, said they had been trafficked. A third of them reported being sexually abused. Climate change is exacerbating the problem. Sierra Leone is ranked in the top 10 percent of countries vulnerable to climate change despite having contributed just 0.003 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions since 1950. A third of its population lives on the coast, making their homes vulnerable to worsening floods. Some of the country’s islands are going underwater, forcing residents onto ever-shrinking sandbanks. There is a “serious increase” in the number of people who have been trafficked after their houses have been destroyed by floods or mudslides, says Sheku Bangura, who runs the Advocacy Network Against Irregular Migration (ANAIM) that supports returnee migrants and helped rescue Zainab from Oman. Each year, flash floods tear through Freetown, ripping down houses and killing civilians. The city recorded more than 400 floods in 2021 and 2022, which resulted in hundreds of casualties. After heavy rains last summer, torrents of muddy water poured into ground floor wards at Connaught, the country’s biggest hospital, damaging equipment and putting patients at risk. Bad harvests brought on by unpredictable rainfall are driving farmers into the city, where overcrowded settlements on precipitous hillsides are increasingly vulnerable to mudslides. In 2017, after unusually heavy rain, a mountaintop collapsed on the settlement below it, killing over 1,000 people as they slept. Some of Freetown’s poorest communities live in areas such as Kroo Bay which are very prone to floods [Olivia Acland/Al Jazeera] ‘They used shovels to hit us’ Saccoh Kamara was trafficked to Dubai shortly after a mudslide tore through his house, killing his father and three-year-old son. Early in the morning on August 14, 2017, Kamara returned from work at a construction site to find his village had been buried in mud and rubble. The mudslide happened at around 6am when his son and father had been asleep inside the house. “We never recovered their bodies,” he says. After a fortnight in hospital where he was treated for shock, Kamara, now 36, began to rebuild his life, moving in with a cousin on Freetown’s waterfront. When that house was also destroyed in floods—increasingly common as sea levels rise—he decided to leave Sierra Leone for good. A trafficker promised him lucrative work on a supermarket checkout in Dubai. Instead, he was put to work, unpaid, in a frozen food warehouse. Imprisoned there for seven months, he worked around the clock, resting for just an hour at a time on the floor in a corner. “They used shovels to hit us,” Kamara says. “When I wanted to rest they would come and beat me.” After escaping and being deported back to Sierra Leone, Kamara started volunteering at ANAIM, Bangura’s advocacy group, trying to prevent others from falling victim to predatory traffickers. Increasingly unpredictable weather is driving farmers into Freetown [Olivia Acland/Al Jazeera] Police sting Before leaving the police station on the back of a motorbike driven by an undercover policeman, Zainab dons a large pair of sunglasses. “I don’t want him to remember me,” she says. As they reach the meeting point, four more policemen, two of them armed with Kalashnikovs, wait in a van nearby.  Soon a slight man in his forties approaches Zainab on foot. She tells him she is struggling to pay school fees for her younger siblings and that she got his number from a friend, Adama – whom she knows was tricked into unpaid labour in Lebanon. The man nods sympathetically and says he can help: He sent 18-year-old Adama to Beirut last year. This is enough for Zainab who presses the call button on her phone inside her pocket. Moments later, she turns away as the policemen rush from their hiding place to seize the trafficker, frightened he will remember her face. Since Sierra Leone passed a new law in 2022 introducing a minimum sentence of 25 years for anyone convicted of human trafficking, dozens of agents have been arrested. However, just three have been convicted – and one of them was acquitted shortly afterwards. Traffickers often bribe their way out of jail or call on political contacts to pull strings. In the absence of a robust justice system, “the best prevention is education so that people ask the right questions when they are offered a job”, says Saraswathi of Migrant Rights. Yet even education carries risks. Bangura’s ANAIM hosts a weekly radio show in which returnees tell cautionary tales of being trafficked. In one episode, he implored victims to come forward with details of traffickers, implying that he already had a database of agents. The next night his office door was broken down and two computers stolen. “I feel we are fighting an endless battle,” Bangura says. “But I have committed to fight it.” This story was produced in collaboration with Source Material. © 2024 Al Jazeera Media Network