AFP News Agency September 25, 2021, 3:44 AM Nicaragua's presidential election campaign officially kicks off on Saturday with incumbent Daniel Ortega's main rivals all under arrest. Nicaragua's long-time President Daniel Ortega will take part in a presidential election with all his main rivals under arrest. OSWALDO RIVAS AFP The 75-year-old, in power since 2007, will be seeking a fourth consecutive term in the November 7 vote despite international condemnation of his government's detention of 37 opposition figures since June. Running on the ticket of his Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN), Ortega has again chosen his wife Rosario Murillo,70, vice president since 2017, as his running mate. They will be up against candidates from five little-known right-wing parties -- the only ones cleared to participate by the government electoral body. "People know that the electoral process will be anything but transparent and that, to a certain extent, it is pre-ordained that the Sandinista Front will win," said former Nicaragua diplomat and analyst Edgar Parrales. Ortega's government has been accused of political persecution for its rounding up of opposition figures in a series of house and night-time raids since June 2, including seven aspiring presidential candidates. The charges against them are rooted in a law initiated by Ortega and approved by parliament in December, widely criticized as a means of freezing out challengers and silencing opponents. The president accuses those arrested of seeking to overthrow him with US backing. The majority are in jail awaiting trial -- in dire conditions according to their loved ones -- and a handful under house arrest. - No credibility - The first person to be detained was Cristiana Chamorro, widely seen as the favorite to beat Ortega but now held on claims of money laundering. Last month, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Nicaragua's November election had "lost all credibility" and accused the Ortega regime of "undemocratic, authoritarian actions." UN rights chief Michelle Bachelet and the Organization of American States' (OAS) human rights arm have urged Nicaragua to release the detainees, but Ortega has refused to budge. Other than the 37 opposition figures, some 100 other Nicaraguans remain imprisoned for their part in anti-government protests in 2018, which were violently put down by the regime. Over 300 people were killed in the crackdown, and thousands were forced to flee the country of 6.5 million people, according to observers. A former leftist guerrilla, Ortega governed Nicaragua from 1979 to 1990, when Chamorro's mother, Violeta Barrios de Chamorro, unseated him to become Latin America's first elected female president. He returned to power in 2007, won re-election twice, and has changed all laws that would prevent him from staying in power. On Thursday, Canada, Colombia, Ecuador, France, Chile, the Dominican Republic, United Kingdom and United States issued a joint statement "declaring to Ortega & Murillo that democracies will reject political repression, human rights abuses, and the dismantling of the electoral system." The government has announced measures to prevent the spread of the coronavirus during campaigning, banning meetings of more than 200 people. Those actions stood in contrast with the government's earlier refusal to impose a pandemic lockdown and its promotion of tourism and festivities involving large crowds. "The weird thing is that the FSLN has been holding massive rallies throughout this year... and now they are beginning to say there should be no gatherings," said Parrales. © 2021 AFP

Human Rights Watch September 20, 2021, 12:00AM EDT Hazardous Detention Conditions, No Due Process, Arbitrary Prosecutions. Lesbia Alfaro, mother of student leader Lesther Alemán, who went into exile after participating in protests against Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega's government in 2018, holds a portrait of her son during an interview with AFP in Managua, on September 14, 2021.© 2021 Photo by OSWALDO RIVAS/AFP via Getty Images. (Washington, DC) – New evidence indicates that dozens of critics the Nicaraguan government arbitrarily detained for months, most of them accused of “treason,” are being held incommunicado and are often subjected to repeated interrogations and abusive conditions, including prolonged solitary confinement or insufficient food, Human Rights Watch said today. The government has charged many with serious crimes without providing substantiating evidence, strongly suggesting that these are politically motivated persecutions in retaliation for opposing the government. The Nicaraguan government headed by President Daniel Ortega has arbitrarily detained 36 critics since late May 2021, in the run-up to presidential elections scheduled for November 7. On August 31, following accusations that the critics had been victims of enforced disappearances because their whereabouts remained unknown, Nicaraguan authorities allowed brief family visits for the first time since their arrests. In late August, the Attorney General’s Office started filing charges against most of them in criminal proceedings that lacked basic due process guarantees. Charges, carrying prison sentences of 15 to 25 years, ranged from money laundering to, most commonly, “conspiracy to undermine national integrity.” “In Nicaragua, President Ortega’s rush to detain critics in horrendous conditions on spurious grounds and without due process ahead of the November elections shows that he has no intention of losing,” said José Miguel Vivanco, Americas director at Human Rights Watch. “Ortega’s government should immediately and unconditionally free all political prisoners, and the international community should keep up the pressure on the Ortega administration to increase the cost of its abusive practices.” On September 7, the Attorney General’s Office ordered the arrest of Sergio Ramírez, a well-known writer and former vice president under Ortega, who is an outspoken critic of the current government. Ramírez fled Nicaragua in June after testifying in one of the cases against political opponents and remains abroad. The Attorney General’s Office has also prosecuted and ordered the arrest of several journalists and academics living or exiled abroad. Since August, Human Rights Watch has conducted phone interviews with 19 people who have information about 28 of the 36 cases of people arbitrarily detained since late May. Human Rights Watch is withholding the identities of the detainees whose cases were discussed and of the interviewees for fear of reprisals. Human Rights Watch also reviewed official sources, including police records, Attorney General Office news releases, court documents, media reports, and publications by local and international human rights groups to corroborate their testimonies. Family members who were finally able to see the detainees, in some cases after months, described abusive prison conditions, including insufficient food and limited outdoor exercise, daily interrogations without legal counsel present, and, for some, prolonged solitary confinement. Prolonged solitary confinement – that is, solitary confinement that lasts 15 consecutive days or more – amounts to torture and is prohibited under international law, Human Rights Watch said. Between May 28 and September 6, the government unleashed a wave of arbitrary arrests to pave the way for President Ortega’s re-election to a fourth consecutive term in November. Police arrested seven opposition presidential candidates and 29 government critics, including political opponents, journalists, human rights defenders, students, and business and community leaders. In some cases, police used violence during the arrests, including beating people who were not resisting arrest. Thirty-two of those arrested are being held at the Direction of Judicial Assistance prison (also known as El Chipote), where critics of the Ortega government have been tortured in the past, and four are under house arrest. Nicaraguan authorities have initiated investigations against most of them for allegedly “asking for military interventions,” “organizing terrorist and destabilizing acts with funding from foreign powers,” “requesting, exalting, and applauding the imposition of sanctions against Nicaragua and its citizens,” and “inciting foreign interference in Nicaragua’s affairs.” Police cited provisions of a recent law prohibiting so-called “traitors,” defined in sweeping terms, from running for or holding public office. One presidential candidate was accused of “money laundering” through a press freedom organization, together with two other members of the organization. Since February, an amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure has allowed prosecutors to hold detainees for up to 90 days without charge, and in almost all cases involving government critics, the courts have permitted detention for up to 90 days. Most critics have been prosecuted for “conspiracy to undermine national integrity” through procedures that lacked the most basic due process guarantees. Many have been held incommunicado for months without family visits or access to their lawyers, despite numerous petitions to the courts. The authorities barred the critics’ lawyers from participating in public hearings and imposed public defenders instead. For months, most lawyers had no access to court documents, despite repeatedly requesting them. In cases where Human Rights Watch was able to review the charging documents, prosecutors had often failed to identify specific acts by the defendants to support the charges. The acts they did identify were often behavior that is protected by international human rights standards on freedom of expression and should not be criminalized. In many cases, prosecutors repeated the same allegations verbatim against various people in different files. In every document Human Rights Watch reviewed, the prosecutors justified serious charges of undermining Nicaragua’s “national integrity” solely based on claims that the accused had given interviews to media outlets, shared WhatsApp messages, participated in meetings, or signed letters expressing their support for sanctions against Nicaraguan officials, calling for free elections, or demanding international condemnation of the government’s abuses. Some detainees have chronic medical conditions or require regular access to medicine, yet judges have failed to answer petitions by their legal teams requesting access to medical examinations. Prison guards have sometimes received or requested medicines from relatives, but in some cases, authorities have refused to allow relatives to deliver medical supplies. In addition to the 36 detentions carried out since late May 2021, Nicaraguan rights groups report that another 104 people perceived as critics were detained earlier and remained in detention as of August. Many had been held for over a year, and they faced similarly abusive detention conditions. Trumped-up Charges Human Rights Watch was able to review formal prosecution documents outlining evidence against 14 government opponents and found in each case that the prosecution had failed to allege acts that were appropriate to criminalize. In nearly all of the indictments reviewed, though some were issued on different days and signed by different prosecutors, the language describing the charges was exactly the same. They accused the detainees of “conspiring against the Nicaraguan state and society to perform acts aimed at affecting the sovereign and independent state” and of “belonging to an organized crime group that is structured with the purpose of committing serious crimes against the security of the State and its citizens.” Based on the indictments, between 2019 and 2021, most of the 14 detainees had allegedly sought or supported “economic, commercial, and financial sanctions against Nicaragua,” “incited foreign interference in domestic affairs,” and/or promoted “destabilizing acts with funding from foreign powers” aiming to “discredit the legitimate government of Nicaragua.” The specific actions that prosecutors claimed justified these indictments include the following behaviors protected by international standards on freedom of expression or association: Sharing an Organization of American States (OAS) resolution on electoral reforms needed in Nicaragua via WhatsApp. Participating in a WhatsApp group with other government opponents in which they exchanged “written documents” on issues ranging from government repression to lack of compliance with an OAS resolution. Giving interviews to independent media outlets in which detainees supported sanctions against government officials or demanded the “application of Article 21 of the Inter-American Democratic Charter,” which allows for the suspension of Nicaragua from the OAS. Posting an article on social media that describes sanctions against Nicaraguan officials or a photograph of a meeting with a senior US government official with a caption saying that during the meeting they had discussed the “importance of unity in the search for a civic, peaceful and negotiated solution that guarantees electoral reform ahead of the elections.” Holding meetings with foreign governments and international institutions, including OAS officials and European Parliament members. Participating in a virtual conference calling on the Nicaraguan people “not to exercise their right to vote.” Signing a letter to the president of the Democratic Party in the United States, thanking him for bipartisan support for “censoring and sanctioning the dictatorship of Daniel Ortega.” Using international cooperation funds to “create organizations, associations, and foundations to channel funds, through projects or programs that deal with sensitive issues such as sexual diversity groups, the rights of indigenous communities, or through political marketing on topics such as free expression or democracy.” None of these alleged acts mentioned in the prosecutors’ documents are appropriate to criminalize, as they constitute protected activities under international human rights law, Human Rights Watch said. In one case in which a presidential candidate and others linked to the Violeta Chamorro Foundation, a press freedom group, are being accused of money laundering, the prosecutors claim the accused have used funds “for purposes different from those for which the organization was created” and that they have funded “people and organizations” that have “aimed at destabilizing” the “economic and social development of the country.” However, the only specific allegation in that indictment is that the organization received more international funding than it allegedly reported to authorities. The document says nothing about how the alleged unreported funds were used. Even if there were no requirement to prove how the funds were used to open an investigation into allegations of money laundering, the fact that prosecutors include unfounded allegations about destabilization attempts in the indictment, together with the timing of the detentions and prosecutions, which occurred at the beginning of the recent wave of arrests of opponents, raise serious concerns about these charges. All the indictments list testimonies as evidence against the accused, but they do not provide an account of what the testimonies say nor an analysis of how the testimonies provide meaningful evidence to substantiate the charges. Detention Conditions Until August 30, authorities held most detainees incommunicado, without allowing family visits or communication with their lawyers, in violation of Nicaragua’s Constitution and Code of Criminal Procedure. The length of incommunicado detention varied from 8 to 92 days. Despite multiple requests from the detainees’ legal teams, the authorities did not release information on the whereabouts or detention conditions of most of them. In some cases, when families brought food and water, prison guards at El Chipote verbally and surreptitiously confirmed that the detainees were there. Although the Nicaraguan Code of Criminal Procedure requires allowing a detainee to communicate with a family member or lawyer within three hours of the arrest, most were held incommunicado for 30 days or more by the time the Attorney General’s Office authorized family visits on August 30, in a news release posted online. As of September 2, critics’ relatives had been allowed one visit at El Chipote that lasted 20 to 30 minutes. Most family members only learned they would be allowed to see their loved ones on the day of the visit or a few days in advance. Guards used cameras to photograph and videotape anything they were carrying, relatives said in a public statement, as well as the visit itself. Family members relayed the detainees’ complaints of abusive conditions and painted a bleak picture of the detainees’ lives. Common concerns included insufficient food, isolation, lack of time outside, cold cells, lack of blankets and mattresses, and lack of access to bathrooms. Although detainees receive food, generally rice and beans, relatives reported that it is insufficient. The authorities have refused to give them more food, they said, and several detainees have lost significant weight. Since being arrested, some detainees have been interrogated daily, in some cases twice a day, without their lawyers present. Authorities ask about “coup” planning, “trips to the United States,” and “whom they met with and who financed them.” In some cases, authorities have told detainees that they will never see their families again or that “they have been forgotten by their families,” or threatened to “arrest” loved ones if detainees refuse “to cooperate.” In a context in which they have no contact with the outside world, many told their families and lawyers that they thought “they had been abandoned.” Two said they had “suicidal thoughts” or that they “would not last much more in these conditions.” Detainees say they cannot talk to each other. At least nine detainees are only allowed to go outside once a week for a few minutes; some are not even allowed that. Authorities have held some detainees in prolonged solitary confinement in cells from which they cannot look outside. Some detainees are having trouble sleeping. Family members say that some are forced to sleep with the lights on. Many are held in cells without mattresses or blankets and are forced to sleep on a concrete floor. Nights are particularly cold, but family members say prison guards have repeatedly refused to accept blankets from them. There are no bathrooms in some cells and detainees held in them relieve themselves in holes. Due Process Detentions and investigations of government critics in Nicaragua have been marred by serious due process violations. In most cases investigated, authorities denied the detainees’ right to meet with their lawyers of choice for months. Lawyers filed petitions asking judicial authorities to allow them to meet with their clients. In some cases, the authorities failed to respond. In the majority of cases, the lawyers chosen by the detainees were barred from hearings, including the “special hearing for the protection of constitutional guarantees,” in which the court decided to extend detainees’ pre-trial detention to 90 days, and the preliminary hearing, in which detainees learned the charges against them. For both types of hearings, a public defender was appointed in the majority cases. The hearings have been closed, in contravention of Nicaraguan law, which establishes that hearings should generally be public. Between early June and September, the Attorney General’s Office announced each day which “special hearings” had taken place that day or the day before, but in four cases it did not communicate whether they had occurred. At least three detainees said they had not participated in their hearings. For months, defense lawyers had no access to documents on proceedings in their cases that would normally have been posted on the judicial authority’s website – or to the physical files – including records of the hearings that should have been registered online. When Human Rights Watch searched online for the files in several cases against government critics or opponents, no records were available. In some other cases that did not involve government critics or opponents, court documents, including public hearing proceedings and the prosecutor’s charging documents, were accessible. In several cases, lawyers have filed one or more briefs asking courts to allow them to meet with their clients and access the case files. As far as Human Rights Watch has been able to determine, the authorities consistently failed to reply, at least until very recently. As pre-trial hearings began on September 2, some court documents were uploaded to the website, which allowed lawyers to access some court files. In most cases, lawyers filed several writs of habeas corpus. In some, the court indicated that the writ had become inadmissible once a “special hearing for the protection of constitutional guarantees” had been held. Others were rejected because they were filed within the 48 hours allowed by law for police to investigate the cases. After the conclusion of the 90-day pre-trial detention period that Nicaraguan law now allows during an investigation, the Attorney General’s Office began filing criminal charges against at least 35 of the 36 jailed critics. Most have been charged with “conspiracy to undermine national integrity,” defined as “acts that undermine or divide Nicaragua’s integrity” or that “[render] Nicaragua to foreign control.” Possible sentences range from 15 to 25 years in prison and include disqualification from holding public office or running for election. By September 15, pre-trial hearings aimed at establishing whether the evidence warranted proceeding to trial had been held at El Chipote prison for at least 26 detainees, handcuffed and surrounded by police. Lawyers were not allowed to meet privately with clients before the hearings, affecting the quality of the defense and violating the detainees’ right, under the Code of Criminal Procedure, to communicate freely and confidentially with counsel. In most cases, families were not allowed to attend the hearings. In some cases, the lawyers received court documents from the Attorney General’s Office detailing alleged evidence against their clients hours or a day before the pre-trial hearing. In at least one case, the lawyer representing one of the detainees entered the hearing having had no prior access to the prosecutor’s charging document or any document related to the case. In another case, a lawyer was notified that hearings for two of the detainees he represented had been scheduled for the same time in different rooms. The authorities refused to accept the lawyer’s request to change the time or date of one of the hearings. In all 26 hearings, courts extended pre-trial detention. The prosecutor asked that all cases be admitted as “complex prosecutions,” which allows the Attorney General’s Office to ask for pre-trial detention of up to a year, instead of the three months allowed for ordinary trials. Judges approved the requests in all 26 cases. Defense lawyers have experienced escalating harassment and prosecutions, and some have been forced to flee Nicaragua. Others remain, facing threats. Two were arrested and prosecuted for “conspiracy to undermine national integrity.” Applicable International Standards Detention Conditions The United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, known as the Mandela Rules, establish that “all accommodation provided for the use of prisoners and in particular all sleeping accommodation shall meet all requirements of health, due regard being paid to climatic conditions and particularly to cubic content of air, minimum floor space, lighting, heating and ventilation.” In particular, the Mandela Rules stipulate that “the sanitary installations shall be adequate to enable every prisoner to comply with the needs of nature when necessary and in a clean and decent manner.” Food “of nutritional value adequate for health and strength, of wholesome quality and well prepared and served” must be provided. Prisoners must be allowed “at least one hour of suitable exercise in the open air daily if the weather permits.” Contact with the outside world is an essential right of prisoners. International standards dictate that prisoners be allowed to “communicate with their family and friends at regular intervals, both by correspondence and by receiving visits” and that “communication of the detained or imprisoned person with the outside world, and in particular his family or counsel, shall not be denied for more than a matter of days.” Due Process Rights The American Convention on Human Rights, which Nicaragua has ratified, provides in article 8, on the right to a fair trial, that “every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent independent, and impartial tribunal… prior notification in detail to the accused of the charges against him; adequate time and means for the preparation of his defense; the right of the accused to defend himself personally or to be assisted by legal counsel of his own choosing, and to communicate freely and privately with his counsel.” The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Nicaragua is also a party, recognizes and protects, in article 14, the right of every citizen to minimum guarantees of due process, including “to be informed promptly and in detail in a language which he understands of the nature and cause of the charge against him; to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defense and to communicate with counsel of his own choosing; to be tried in his presence, and to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing.” On June 24, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights adopted provisional measures in favor of the Nicaraguan detainees Juan Sebastián Chamorro, José Adán Aguerri, Félix Maradiaga, Violeta Granera, and their families, whose rights the court considered at risk of “irreparable harm.” The court ordered their “immediate release,” concluding that they are being subjected to “arbitrary detention” to “stifle dissent.” On July 19, the court’s president extended provisional measures to Tamara Dávila and her family. The government did not comply with the court’s rulings. On August 27, the court held a hearing with family members and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to supervise the implementation of these provisional measures. Critics’ relatives accused the Nicaraguan government of “enforced disappearance” given that at the time they had no official confirmation about the whereabouts of their loved ones. On September 9, the court further extended these provisional measures to include Lesther Lenin Alemán Alfaro and Freddy Alberto Navas López, and demanded the immediate release of all beneficiaries of this protective order. The court ordered Nicaragua to “notify unequivocally the detainees’ whereabouts to their families and lawyers, facilitate a meeting with relatives and lawyers, and guarantee access to health services and medicines.” It also ordered authorities to “guarantee access to detainees’ chosen lawyers to court documents, including the files on the judiciary’s website.” © 2021 Human Rights Watch

All are invited to a conversation on the situation of the #Hazaras in #Afghanistan, Sept 27, 13h EDT. The panel features Gregory Stanton of @genocide_watch , @HalimaBahman, Stuart Russell @StuartR92034479, Derakhshan Qurban-Ali & @FredericMegret. Zoom: https://t.co/b24HBKG7Ygpic.twitter.com/OaMb7nK1ie

Afghanistan’s new government is likely to severely restrict education for girls and women despite the Taliban’s claims that schooling will eventually resume. 20 September 2021 | By Victor J. Blue and David Zucchino Girls attending class at a school for girls in Kabul last week.Credit...Victor J. Blue for the New York Times KABUL, Afghanistan — The director of a girls’ school in Kabul desperately wants to learn details of the Taliban’s plan for girls’ education. But she can’t attend the weekly Taliban committee meetings on education. They are for men only. “They say, ‘You should send a male representative,’” the director, Aqila, said inside the Sayed Ul-Shuhada High School, which was shattered in May by a terrorist bombing that killed scores of girls. But Aqila and other Afghan educators don’t need to attend meetings to comprehend the harsh new reality of education under Taliban rule. The emerging government has made clear that it intends to severely restrict the educational freedoms enjoyed by many women and girls the past 20 years. The only question is just how draconian the new system will be, and what type of Islamic-based education will be imposed on both boys and girls. Just as they did when they ruled most of Afghanistan in the late 1990s, the Taliban seem intent on ruling not strictly by decree, but by inference and intimidation. When schools reopened Saturday for grades seven through 12, only male students were told to report for their studies. The Taliban said nothing about girls in those grades, so they stayed home, their families anxious and uncertain about their future. Both boys and girls in grades one through six have been attending schools, with students segregated by gender in the higher three grades. A girls’ school in Kabul last week.Credit...Victor J. Blue for The New York Times When the Taliban were in charge from 1996 to 2001, they barred women and girls from school. After the U.S.-led invasion toppled Taliban rule in late 2001, female students began attending schools and universities as opportunities blossomed. Women were able to study for careers in business and government, and in professions such as medicine and law. By 2018, the female literacy rate in Afghanistan reached 30 percent, according to a new UNESCO report. But the Taliban swept back into Kabul and seized power on Aug. 15, and since then they have said they will impose their severe interpretation of Shariah law. The new government has said that some form of education for girls and women will be permitted, but those parameters have not been clearly defined by Taliban officials. The Taliban also have indicated that men will no longer be permitted to teach girls or women, exacerbating an already severe teacher shortage. This, combined with constraints in paying teachers’ salaries and the cutoff of international aid, could have “immediate and serious” outcomes for education in Afghanistan, the UNESCO report warned. Female students will be required to wear an “Islamic hijab,” but with the definition left open to interpretation. At a pro-Taliban women’s gathering last week, many women wore niqabs, a garment that covers a woman’s hair, nose and mouth, leaving only the eyes exposed. A student drawing during an art lesson at a girls school in Kabul last week.Credit...Victor J. Blue for The New York Times “We are working on a mechanism to provide transportation and other facilities that are required for a safer and better educational environment,” Zabihullah Mujahid, Taliban spokesman and the acting deputy minister of information and culture, said Monday, adding that classes for girls in grades seven and above would resume soon. “There are countries in the region that have committed to help us in our education sector,” he said. “This will help us in providing better education to everyone.” While many girls and women in Kabul have embraced Western standards of women’s rights and opportunities, Afghanistan remains a deeply conservative society. In the countryside, even if all women do not necessarily welcome Taliban rule, many are accustomed to customs that kept them at home to cook, clean and raise children even before the Taliban took power in the 1990s. The acting minister of higher education last week said that women could continue to study in universities and graduate programs, as long they were in gender-segregated classrooms, but on Friday, the new government sent an ominous signal of its intentions. The Ministry of Women’s Affairs compound was converted into offices for the religious morality police, who brutally enforced the militants’ interpretation of Shariah law two decades ago. The building now houses the Ministry of Invitation, Guidance and Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice. Female teachers, administrators and students have been bracing for austere new restrictions. Many say they have begun wearing niqabs and preparing classrooms to accommodate classes strictly segregated by gender. (Many schools also taught boys-only and girls-only classes under the U.S.-backed government.) Parisa, a teacher at a girls’ school in Kabul, last week.Credit...Victor J. Blue for The New York Times “I started wearing the niqab from the first day of the coming of the Taliban,” said Parisa, who works at a school in Kabul. She said she did not want to give the Taliban an excuse to shut down the school entirely. “We will wear it, but we don’t want to stop educating,” Parisa said. The Times is referring to Parisa by only her first name, and the other teachers and students by nicknames or their given names, to protect their identities. Parisa’s attempts to learn details of the new Taliban curriculum have gone nowhere, she said. She and other teachers said they had been told only to continue teaching the current curriculum until the Taliban completes its own version. “Women are half of our society — their role is important in all parts of life,” Parisa said. “But the Taliban are not speaking to women.” For female students, the sudden end to their academic freedoms has been both traumatizing and paralyzing. Many say the joy and anticipation they once felt when entering classrooms has been lost, replaced by fear and a surpassing sense of futility. Zayba, 17, survived a devastating bombing at her school in May, for which no group took responsibility, though similar attacks have been attributed to the Islamic State-affiliated group operating in Afghanistan. Zayba stopped attending school after the Taliban takeover, which she said had robbed her of all motivation. “I like to study at home,” she said. “I am trying to, but I cannot, because I don’t see any future for myself with this regime.” Zayba, a 17-year-old student who survived the bombing at a girls’ school in May, at her home in Kabul last week.Credit...Victor J. Blue for The New York Times Sanam, Zayba’s 16-year-old schoolmate, underwent two operations to repair injuries from shrapnel that tore into her the day of the bombing. On Aug. 15, she was taking an exam; she wants to be a dentist. When she returned home, she learned that the Taliban had seized political power. “I thought of the explosion, and I thought they would come and kill every student,” Sanam said. She is still in a state of shock. “I can’t concentrate in my studies,” she said. “When we think about our future, we can’t see anything.” When Sanam heard that boys were returning to school Saturday, she said, she was pleased that her brother was back in class. She clung to the hope that the Taliban would somehow recognize the prowess girls and women have exhibited the past two decades. “If they learn that women can be part of this country and they can do whatever the men can, then they may allow us to go to school,” she said. Girls studying in a classroom in Kabul last week.Credit...Victor J. Blue for The New York Times But for now, even male teachers say they are anxious and seized by dread. A teacher at the Sayed Ul-Shuhada School said 11 of his students were killed in the May 8 bombing. “After the explosion happened, we lost our self-confidence,” he said. “The students didn’t have the motivation to go to school.” Since the Taliban took power, morale has sunk even lower, said the teacher, whose name is being withheld to protect his identity. “The new government says the ladies and girls cannot work in government, so that’s why they have lost their motivation,” he said. “If you were them, you would also say this situation is impossible.” A mural of Albert Einstein decorates a wall at a school for girls in Kabul.Credit...Victor J. Blue for The New York Times Mohammad Tariq, an administrator at a private school in Kabul, said Taliban education officials had told him at meetings he attended that the new curriculum would include “special subjects” that teachers will be required to teach. Girls will be taught by women, and boys by men, he said. “Change will come in the books, in the Islamic books,” Mohammad Tariq said. “Certain subjects will be eliminated for girls: engineering, government studies, cooking, vocational education. The main subjects will remain.” Mr. Mujahid, the Taliban spokesman, denied that any specific subjects would be removed from schools’ curriculum. For many girls, the end of their educational freedom also means shutting down their dreams. Zayba, the 12th grader, said she had planned since childhood to study for a career as a surgeon. But last month, she said, her future seemed to evaporate. “The day the Taliban took control, I was thinking: This is the end of life for women,” she said. Students arriving at a girls' school in Kabul last week.Credit...Victor J. Blue for The New York Times © 2021 The New York Times Company

BY JOHN QUINLEY III AND MATTHEW SMITH © Getty Images It’s been four long years since the Myanmar military’s most egregious attack on the Rohingya people, and it’s time for the U.S. government to finally recognize those crimes for what they are: Genocide. On Aug. 25, the U.S. State Department issued a brief statement of solidarity for the Rohingya people — which was welcomed — but rather than refer to crimes against Rohingya in Myanmar as genocide, it instead called the situation “ethnic cleansing.” That was a mistake. For starters, “ethnic cleansing” is a metaphor, not a crime per se. It has become a euphemism that governments, politicians, and even human rights and aid groups use when they would rather avoid the term genocide. Coming into popular use in the early 1990s — via perpetrators who sought to purge Bosnia of everyone but the Serbs — the term “ethnic cleansing” lacks legal definition, making it technically un-actionable. Nevertheless, “ethnic cleansing” does describe criminal behavior and may constitute mass atrocity crimes. The Responsibility to Protect, or R2P, endorsed by U.N. member states in 2005, provides that governments have a “responsibility to protect” people from “ethnic cleansing” and other atrocity crimes, such as war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. A U.N. commission of experts said that ethnic cleansing can “constitute crimes against humanity and can be assimilated to specific war crimes” and that “such acts could also fall within the meaning of the Genocide Convention.” Regardless, “ethnic cleansing” is an unacceptable substitute for a genocide determination, failing as it does, in this case, to describe past and ongoing criminal attacks against the Rohingya accurately. There is no shortage of evidence. We documented Myanmar Army-led offensives in 2016 and 2017 (and since). Soldiers killed, raped, and otherwise destroyed Rohingya people in well-planned, coordinated attacks in three townships of northern Rakhine State. Those attacks forced hundreds of thousands to southern Bangladesh. Many organizations and experts apart from Fortify Rights, including the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, Refugees International, and an independent U.N. fact-finding mission, found that the situation amounts to genocide. The U.S. State Department itself already has up to 15,000 pages of evidence of atrocities against Rohingya. There have been recent legal actions, too. The Gambia brought a case against Myanmar at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), alleging genocide of the Rohingya. The Burmese Rohingya Organisation U.K., U.N. Special Rapporteur Tomas Ojea Quintana, and others filed a petition in Argentina under the principle of universal jurisdiction, urging the prosecutor to take up a genocide case against Myanmar’s generals. And most recently, the National Unity Government (NUG) of Myanmar — the civilian-led government comprising elected officials deposed by the junta — announced at an online Fortify Rights press conference on Aug. 19 that it had delegated jurisdiction to the International Criminal Court to investigate mass atrocities in the country since 2002, including atrocities against Rohingya. Recently, more than 90 organizations worldwide wrote to U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, urging him to make a formal genocide determination without delay. To his credit, even before his confirmation, Blinken committed to deciding whether Rohingya faced genocide. On July 12, he said the determination was being “very actively considered.” Forthcoming legislation led by Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) in the House and Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) in the Senate has strong bipartisan support and is meant to nudge Blinken to show some hustle on the question. So, what is the holdup? It’s not as though Democratic administrations in D.C. are allergic to genocide determinations — far from it. In 2016, the Obama administration said crimes committed by the Islamic State against Iraq’s religious minorities, including the Yazidis, amounted to genocide. In 2021, the Biden administration said that China’s treatment of Uyghur Muslims and other minorities in the Xinjiang region constitutes genocide. In April, it declared century-old atrocities against Armenians as genocide. Since the Myanmar military's bloody Feb. 1 coup d’état, U.S. government agencies devoted considerable time and resources to respond with targeted sanctions and other measures. While this may have redirected internal resources away from a genocide determination, we’re told that Blinken has complete authority to issue a declaration and need not seek presidential approval. He should use that authority without delay. Before the coup, U.S. State Department officials were quietly hesitant to brand the crimes against Rohingya as genocide, fearing such a move might further alienate the U.S. from Myanmar officialdom — where America has never kept pace with China. State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi had long denied the Rohingya genocide and defended the military, most visibly at the ICJ in The Hague. As a result, in part, of her prior leadership, the general population was prone to denying the existence of the Rohingya while dismissing any evidence of atrocities against them. In that context, some argued a U.S. genocide determination would have further alienated the U.S. from Naypyidaw. Overlooking genocide in exchange for a weak connection with the government was not savvy realpolitik, but rather callous and craven. Regardless, those days are over. Many opinion leaders in Myanmar, including senior members of the civilian-led NUG, civil society members, and others, have acknowledged the crimes against Rohingya as genocide, issued heartfelt apologies, and even committed to seeking justice and accountability. If the U.S. issued a Rohingya-genocide determination now, it would fertilize those roots of contrition and foster the inter-ethnic and inter-religious unity already forming in Myanmar. It would serve the domestic political awakening that now sees the Myanmar military for what it is: A corrosive, authoritarian, genocidal regime that must be held accountable for its crimes in all possible ways — including through genocide determinations. Lastly, a genocide determination would be truthful, and that matters. © The Hill

By Michael Posner Member state flags fly outside the United Nations headquarters during the 75th session of the United Nations General Assembly, Wednesday, Sept. 23, 2020. Tomorrow, September 21st, is the first day of the 76th session (AP Photo/Mary Altaffer) Tomorrow, President Joe Biden will address the United Nations General Assembly for the first time in one of the most visible foreign policy speeches since he took office. At stake is his stated priority of reclaiming America’s global standing, which was so badly diminished by the Trump Administration. Biden has promised to defend democracy in the face of rising authoritarianism around the globe. One place has where this struggle is playing out dramatically is Myanmar (formerly Burma), a country that has suffered decades of brutal military rule and systematic violations of human rights. A decade ago, President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took an active interest in promoting change in Myanmar, pushing successfully for the release of more than 1,000 political prisoners, limited constitutional reforms and new elections in which the opposition National League for Democracy won an overwhelming majority in the parliament. While these reforms engendered cautious optimism that Myanmar might finally be on a path to democracy, that hope was tempered by the refusal of Myanmar’s military to surrender much of its long-standing authority. The generals retained control of key ministries and were guaranteed a quarter of the seats in the parliament. This precluded the most-needed constitutional reforms. Beginning in 2014, the military and allied ultranationalist militias weaponized social media — Facebook, in particular — as part of a brutal campaign against Rohingya Muslims in Rakhine state which led to the burning of homes, and raping of women. Ultimately, more than 800,000 Rohingyas fled the country. In 2018, a UN report categorized these mass crimes as a genocide, identifying sexual violence as a deliberate strategy to terrorize civilian populations, with a degree of planning that implicated the highest level of the military. Adding to Myanmar’s misery, in February of this year, the military launched a coup d’etat, disbanding the democratically elected government and imprisoning the nation’s leaders, including Aung San Suu Kyi. When tens of thousands of people took to the streets in response, their peaceful protests were brutally suppressed. In the last seven months, more than one thousand people have been killed, more than 6,000 arbitrarily detained, and a quarter of a million Burmese driven from their homes. The junta has even sought to make COVID-19 a tool of their oppression, hoarding oxygen, arresting and persecuting doctors, opening fire on crowds seeking medical care, and collectively denying Myanmar’s citizens their right to basic health services. As President Biden takes the podium to address world leaders at the UN, the military leaders of Myanmar represent everything that he has pledged to confront. In addition to condemning the ongoing human rights crisis in Myanmar, which he clearly needs to do, Biden and his administration also need to ensure that the country’s illegitimate military leaders are denied diplomatic recognition at the UN itself. There are two competing submissions for Myanmar’s ambassadorship to the UN — one from the democratically elected National Unity Government (NUG), the other from the military. Because of China’s longstanding support for Myanmar’s military, Beijing is blocking the NUG representative. As the credential fight plays out, the U.S. needs to continue supporting the NUG representative, Kyaw Moe Tum, who now holds the seat, and ensure that he can participate freely in the General Assembly’s debates. The U.S. also should support the UN expert’s conclusion that the violence against the Rohingya was a genocide. In the Security Council, the Biden Administration should also assert its leadership by pushing for global restrictions on arms sales to Myanmar, and sanctions directed against the country’s lucrative oil-and-gas sector, which serves as a key source of funding for the military. If the U.S. takes a strong stand against authoritarianism in Myanmar, starting with the President’s words tomorrow, it would send a clear message to the Burmese military that it is more isolated than ever and can no longer violate human rights with impunity. Biden should call for an end to all attacks against peaceful demonstrators, release of all political detainees, and restoration of the duly elected government. Myanmar is a crucial test for the Biden democracy agenda and the principles he has espoused for the broader international community. © Forbes

By Oliver Griffin Mayerli Lopez, former FARC guerrilla, nurserywoman and signer of the peace agreement with the government of Juan Manuel Santos, stands during a visit to one of the nurseries run by former FARC guerrillas in Putumayo, Colombia August 26, 2021. Picture taken August 26, 2021. REUTERS/Luisa Gonzalez PUTUMAYO PROVINCE, Colombia, Sept 13 (Reuters) - An environmental activist in southern Colombia's steamy jungle province of Putumayo was preparing to run some errands earlier this year when she received a warning from a contact, she said. "He wrote me a message saying it's better I don't go outside...They've sent someone to kill you three times already," she recalled, referring to crime gangs operating in her village. Reuters could not verify the content of the message. The woman, who has protection from government bodyguards, is one of scores of activists under threat in Colombia, the world's most dangerous country for environmentalists. She fled her village last October after her activism and opposition to drug crops that damage the Amazon rainforest made her a target for crime gangs. For her protection, Reuters has not named the activist nor the criminal group, though her story was corroborated by a U.N. Development Program team. A record 65 environmental defenders were killed in Colombia in 2020, according to a report published on Monday by advocacy group Global Witness, nearly one-third of the worldwide total. Colombia's government is working across departments, including efforts from the environment ministry and attorney general's office, to mitigate conflict and tackle violence, the environment ministry said in a statement. "The environment ministry will work to provide the country with solid management mechanisms for prevention, protection and guarantees for non-repetition (of violence)," the statement said. Colombia's government has blamed crime gangs and leftist rebels involved in drug trafficking for the rise in activist killings. Reuters was unable to contact the armed groups. Globally, the number of murdered environmentalists and land defenders hit 227 last year, surpassing the previous 2019 record of 212. Global Witness says its annual tally is likely an underestimate because many killings in rural places, as well as some entire countries, go unreported. It marks the second year in a row Colombia registered the most killings, despite government promises to increase security in rural areas and offer activists protection. President Ivan Duque could leave office next year with environmental activist killings having more than doubled during his term, according to Global Witness' annual tally. The deaths of Colombian human rights and community activists of all stripes have sparked exhortations from the Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights for Duque's government to step up protective measures. Killings of environmental activists dipped briefly in the two years after a 2016 peace deal between the government and the leftist guerrilla group, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), according to Global Witness figures. The peace deal led to a general decline in violence, but the FARC's demobilization opened a power vacuum in some areas. Former FARC fighters who reject the deal, members of remaining rebel group the ELN, and crime gangs are now battling for control in many areas. Laura Furones, Global Witness' senior adviser for its land and environmental defenders campaign, said the increase in activist killings was due to "the lack of state action in terms of implementing the peace accord," which had led to the growth in competing armed groups. Activist murders soared to 64 in 2019, well above pre-accord figures of 37. "There's been many areas of the country (which) have been overtaken by guerrillas, paramilitaries and other criminal groups," said Furones, calling on Duque's administration to do more to protect activists. "We see really worrying trends upwards and that tells us that whatever the government's doing is by no means enough." EX-COMBATANTS IN DANGER The activist in Putumayo fled after threats from the armed group that wants locals to tear down forest to plant coca, the chief ingredient in cocaine. She was given state-funded bodyguards and an armored car after she fled, but longs to be able to return safely to her village. The national protection unit, which provides bodyguards to officials and threatened public figures, said it does not confirm the identities of those it protects. "Since October last year I haven't been able to go near the area," she said, adding that she misses her neighbors and drinking her morning coffee gazing from her window. "For all the protection you get from the state...I wouldn't for a moment trade that for the tranquility of my home," she said. Seventeen of the Colombian environmentalists murdered in 2020 were involved in coca crop substitution programs, Global Witness found. Reuters could not independently verify the figures. Some environmental activists are also ex-FARC guerrillas, making them potential targets for their former brothers-in-arms who reject the peace deal and reap hefty profits from coca and illegal mining, activists, the government and advocacy groups say. More than 280 ex-FARC members have been killed since the peace deal was signed, according to advocacy group Indepaz. The government tallies close to 260 killings, according to the government department charged with implementing the peace deal. At least one environmental activist - Hernando Jose Molina - included in Global Witness' list of those killed last year was an ex-fighter who had signed the 2016 peace deal, according to a report by local advocacy group Somos Defensores. Reuters could not independently confirm this. Former guerrilla Jorge Santofimio leads a network of tree nurseries in Putumayo and two other provinces, growing saplings meant to restore damaged parts of the Amazon, with help from the U.N. Development Program. He and other ex-guerrillas hope the work will reconcile them with communities who suffered during the conflict, but Santofimio said that their activism was making them a target for armed groups. "They won't kill you for having signed the peace deal. They'll kill you for trying to build peace," he said. Reporting by Oliver Griffin Editing by Julia Symmes Cobb and Alistair Bell © Copyright 2021 Reuters

Syrian Civil Defence says a medical centre in rebel-held Idlib province was targeted by government shelling. The home Nour el-Din Afair was destroyed during the bombardment [Ali Haj Suleiman/Al Jazeera] By Harun al-Aswad 8 Sep 2021 Several civilians have been killed in a series attacks conducted by the government and its allies in rebel-held northwestern Syria, the Syrian Civil Defence has said. At least five people were killed and several others wounded in the shelling across Idlib province on Tuesday and Wednesday, according to the civil defence, a volunteer search-and-rescue group operating in rebel-held areas of Syria. Fatima al-Khatib was killed in artillery shelling that destroyed a building containing a medical centre in Marayan, in the Jabal al-Zawiya area in southern Idlib on Wednesday. Al-Khatib lived in a residential part of the building with her husband Nizar al-Khatib, who serves as the director of the medical centre. It was the only medical centre for thousands of civilians in the area. “We will continue our humanitarian work that serves civilians despite all circumstances, challenges and violations,” Nizar al-Khatib told Al Jazeera on Wednesday. At least four civilians were killed on Tuesday in separate attacks on residential neighbourhoods in Idlib city, the Syrian Civil Defence said. Among the dead were a 21-year-old woman, a senior university official and his 12-year-old son, activists said. At least 11 others were wounded in the attacks. An activist told Al Jazeera that Nour el-Din Afair, head of the accounting department at the Faculty of Economics at Idlib University, was killed in a rocket attack while trying to rescue his son, who had been wounded in a previous rocket attack. The Syrian Civil Defence says a medical centre was targeted by government forces [Ali Haj Suleiman/Al Jazeera] “He was known for his noble morals and humanitarian goals, as he rejected many job offers outside Syria and worked on the graduation of about 3,000 students who would have a major impact on the development of Idlib’s future,” Omar Albam, an activist based in Idlib city, and a previous student of el-Din Afair, said. “Most of the attacks were carried out by Syrian regime forces stationed east of Idlib with the intention of killing civilians,” Albam added. There was no immediate comment from Syrian government forces or their allies. Salwa Abd Alrahman, an activist based in Idlib city, told Al Jazeera that a 21-year-old student was killed during the bombardment when a missile struck her home. “The entire city slept sadly on the news of the girl’s death. My heart could not bear to attend her burial this morning. She was my daughter’s friend at university,” Salwa Abd Alrahman, an activist based in Idlib city, said. A building containing a medical centre in Marayan was destroyed in the attacks [Ali Haj Suleiman/Al Jazeera] Fears of escalation “It’s the biggest escalation in a year. The city is overcrowded with displaced people, each of them has begun to hope and try to build a future, hoping for stability and an end to the battles,” Salwa added “Russia is trying to empty the city and intimidate civilians, to send a message to the world that it is the strongest in the region, and that it is in control of the military situation,” she said. Rebel groups Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which was formerly affiliated with al-Qaeda, and the National Liberation Front (NLF), control much of Idlib province, the last rebel-held territory in Syria. A ceasefire between the rebels and government forces has largely held in the region since 2020, under the supervision of Russia and Turkey. The ceasefire ended a large-scale military operation that saw government forces take control of strategic cities south of Idlib and the M5 International highway, displacing nearly one million civilians who fled to the north of the province. For Albam, who was himself displaced in 2020 from the city of Maarat al-Numan, south of Idlib, the latest attacks appeared to be aimed at displacing civilians. He said he feared a possible military escalation in the area, similar to previous escalations that led to the government retaking territory. Syrian government forces have been accused of targeting public facilities including schools, hospitals and camps for displaced people throughout Syria’s decade-long war. FNL spokesman Captain Naji Mustafa told Al Jazeera rebel forces were on high alert for more attacks. “We are ready for all options, or a possible escalation by the regime’s forces and its Russian and Iranian allies. “In response to repeated ceasefire violations, today, we targeted regime forces and allies deployed in eastern and southern Idlib, and we achieved direct casualties in their ranks,” he added. A man walks near the ruins of a medical centre south of Idlib [Ali Haj Suleiman/Al Jazeera] © 2021 Al Jazeera Media Network

Returnees being interrogated when crossing back into Syria © Amnesty International / Dominika Ożyńska September 7, 2021 12:03 am Syrian security forces have subjected Syrians who returned home after seeking refuge abroad to detention, disappearance and torture, including sexual violence, Amnesty International said today. In a new report, “You’re going to your death”,the organization documented a catalogue of horrific violations committed by Syrian intelligence officers against 66 returnees, including 13 children. Among these violations, Amnesty International documented five cases whereby detainees had died in custody after returning to Syria, while the fate of 17 forcibly disappeared people remains unknown. "Military hostilities may have subsided, but the Syrian government’s propensity for egregious human rights violations has not." - Marie Forestier, Researcher on Refugee and Migrants Rights With a number of states – including Denmark, Sweden and Turkey – restricting protection and putting pressure on refugees from Syria to go home, the harrowing testimony in Amnesty International’s report is proof that no part of Syria is safe to return to. Returnees told Amnesty International that intelligence officers explicitly targeted them for their decision to flee Syria, accusing them of disloyalty or “terrorism.” “Military hostilities may have subsided, but the Syrian government’s propensity for egregious human rights violations has not. The torture, enforced disappearances, and arbitrary or unlawful detention which forced many Syrians to seek asylum abroad are as rife as ever in Syria today. What’s more, the very fact of having fled Syria is enough to put returnees at risk of being targeted by authorities,” said Marie Forestier, Researcher on Refugee and Migrants Rights at Amnesty International. “Any government claiming Syria is now safe is wilfully ignoring the horrific reality on the ground, leaving refugees once again fearing for their lives. We are urging European governments to grant refugee status to people from Syria, and immediately halt any practice directly or indirectly forcing people to return to Syria. The governments of Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan must protect Syrian refugees from deportation or any other forcible return, in line with their international obligations.” Amnesty International’s report documents serious human rights violations committed by the Syrian government against refugees who returned to Syria from Lebanon, Rukban (an informal settlement between the Jordanian and Syrian borders), France, Germany, Turkey, Jordan and UAE, between mid-2017 and spring 2021, based on interviews with 41 Syrians, including returnees and their relatives and friends, as well as lawyers, humanitarian workers and Syria experts. Targeted for fleeing the country The authorities have targeted returnees to Syria, accusing those who fled the country of treason or supporting “terrorism”. Amnesty documented 24 cases where men, women and children were targeted as a direct result of these perceptions, and subjected to human rights violations including rape or other forms of sexual violence, arbitrary or unlawful detention, and torture or other ill-treatment. In some cases returnees were targeted simply because they came from parts of Syria that had been under opposition control. "They see us as terrorists because we went to Lebanon." - Ola* For example, security members arrested Karim* four days after he returned from Lebanon to his village in Homs province. Karim recounted one interrogation which took place during his six-and-a-half months of detention: “[An officer] said: ’You came to ruin the country and complete what you started before you left.’ I said that I was coming to my home country, to my village[…]They [security officials] told me that I’m a terrorist because I’m from [a renowned pro-opposition village]. Karim told Amnesty International that he was tortured during detention: "A security officer said, 'You’re a terrorist … Syria is not a hotel that you leave and return to when you want'”. - Noor* “After I was released, I couldn’t see anyone who visited me for five months. I was too scared to speak to anyone. I had nightmares, hallucinations. I was talking during my sleep. I used to wake up crying and scared. I’m disabled because the nerves of my right hand are damaged due to [torture]. Some of the discs of my back are also damaged.” Sexual violence The punishments for those who fall under government suspicion are brutal. Amnesty International documented 14 cases of sexual violence committed by security forces, including seven cases of rape, committed against five women, a teenage boy and a five-year-old girl. Sexual violence took place at border crossings or in detention centres, during questioning. Testimonies are consistent with well-documented patterns of sexual violence and rape committed against civilians and detainees during the conflict by pro-government forces. When Noor* returned from Lebanon she was stopped at the border by a security officer who said: “Why did you leave Syria? Because you don’t like Bashar al-Assad and you don’t like Syria? You’re a terrorist … Syria is not a hotel that you leave and return to when you want.” The officer subsequently raped Noor and her five-year old daughter in a small room used for interrogation at the border crossing. "The officer said, 'You will not forget this humiliation in all your life'”. - Yasmin* Yasmin* returned from Lebanon with her teenage son and three-year old daughter. Security forces arrested them immediately at the border crossing and accused Yasmin of spying for a foreign country. Yasmin and her children were transferred to an intelligence detention centre, where they were detained for 29 hours. Intelligence officers raped Yasmin, and took her son to another room where they raped him with an object. The officer who raped Yasmin said: “This is to welcome you to your country. If you get out of Syria again and come back again, we will welcome you in a bigger way. We are trying to humiliate you and your son. You will not forget [this] humiliation in all your life.” Some families chose for women to return to Syria ahead of their husbands, assuming they would be less likely to be arrested than men – partly because women are not subject to compulsory military service. However, Amnesty International documented the arbitrary or unlawful detention of 13 women, some of whom were interrogated about their male relatives, and of ten children, aged between three weeks old and 16 years old, who were arrested along with their mothers. Security forces subjected five children to torture and other-ill treatment. Women are as much at risk as men when they return to Syria, and should therefore be granted the same level of protection. Torture and enforced disappearance In total, Amnesty International documented 59 cases of men, women and children who were arbitrarily detained after returning to Syria, most frequently following broad accusations of “terrorism”. In 33 cases, returnees were subjected to torture or other ill-treatment during detention or interrogation. Intelligence officers used torture to coerce detainees into confessing to alleged crimes, to punish them for allegedly committing crimes, or to punish them for alleged opposition to the government. "They electrocuted me between the eyes. I felt my whole brain was shaking, I wished I would die." - Ismael* Yasin* was arrested at a checkpoint just after he crossed the border with Lebanon, and spent four months in prison. He said: “I don’t know how much time I spent being tortured in this room[…] Sometimes, when [an agent] hit me, I counted every hit. Sometimes it reached 50 or 60 and I passed out. Once it reached 100.” Ismael*, who was detained in four different intelligence branches over three and a half months, said: “They electrocuted me between the eyes. I felt my whole brain was shaking[…] I wished I would die. I didn’t know if it was the morning or the night. I wasn’t able to stand on my feet anymore, even to go to interrogation. They had to hold me to take me there and bring me back.” "After I was released, I was too scared to speak to anyone. I had nightmares, hallucinations. I used to wake up crying and scared." - Karim* Amnesty recorded 27 cases of enforced disappearance. In five cases, authorities eventually informed families that their disappeared relatives had died in custody; five were eventually released; the fate of the other 17 people remains unknown. Ola*, who returned from Lebanon with her brother in 2019, said security forces had arrested her brother at the border crossing. In the following weeks, they also visited Ola at her home and interrogated her about her reasons for leaving and returning to Syria. “They see us as terrorists because we left to Lebanon,” Ola said. Five months later, authorities informed Ola’s family that her brother had died in detention. Ibrahim* told Amnesty that his cousin, alongside his wife and their three young children, aged 2, 4 and 8 years old, had been arrested upon returning from France in 2019. At the time of writing, the family has been subjected to enforced disappearance for two years and eight months. Amnesty documented 27 cases where returnees were detained as a means of extortion, with families paying on average between 3 and 5 million Syrian pounds (the equivalent of USD 1,200 to USD 27,000) for the release of their relatives. No part of Syria is safe ​ The level of fighting in Syria has decreased significantly in the past three years, with the Syrian government now controlling more than 70% of the country. Against this backdrop, the Syrian authorities have publicly encouraged refugees to return home, while several host countries have begun to reconsider the protection they offer to people from Syria. In Lebanon and Turkey, where many refugees face dire living conditions and discrimination, governments have put increasing pressure on Syrians to return. In Europe, Denmark and Sweden have reassessed residency permits of asylum-seekers who come from regions they consider safe for return, including Damascus and the surrounding countryside. It is notable however, that a third of the cases documented in this report involve human rights violations that took place in Damascus or the Damascus area. "Countries hosting Syrian refugees must ensure ongoing protection from the Syrian government’s atrocities." - Marie Forestier Based on the findings in its report, Amnesty International concludes that no part of Syria is safe for returnees to go back to. In addition, people who have left Syria since the beginning of the conflict are at real risk of suffering persecution upon return, on account of perceptions about their political opinions or simply as punishment for having fled the country. “The Assad government has attempted to depict Syria as a country in recovery. The reality is that Syrian authorities are still perpetrating the widespread and systematic human rights violations that contributed to millions of people seeking safety abroad,” said Marie Forestier. “We call on Syrian authorities to ensure the protection of returnees and to end human rights violations against them, as well as ensuring the respect, protection and fulfilment of the human rights of all people in Syria. Countries hosting Syrian refugees must continue to provide refuge, and ensure ongoing protection from the Syrian government’s atrocities.” Syria: “You’re going to your death” Violations against Syrian refugees returning to Syria *All names have been changed © 2021 Amnesty International

Yubelka Mendoza, Anatoly Kurmanaev, & Alfonso Flores Bermúdez | The New York Times Sept. 5, 2021 A crackdown on opposition by President Daniel Ortega leaves Nicaraguans to wonder: Who is next? A photo of President Daniel Ortega atop a road sign, between the Nicaraguan national flag and the Sandinista flag. Credit: Inti Ocón for The New York Times MANAGUA, Nicaragua — The nights were the hardest. From the moment Medardo Mairena decided to run for president, in direct challenge to Nicaragua’s authoritarian leader, he was certain the security apparatus would eventually come for him. Over the summer, he watched as other opposition leaders disappeared. One by one, they were dragged from their homes amid a nationwide crackdown on dissent by the president, Daniel Ortega, whose quest to secure a fourth term had plunged the Central American nation into a state of pervasive fear. Since June, the police have jailed or put under house arrest seven candidates for November’s presidential election and dozens of political activists and civil society leaders, leaving Mr. Ortega running on a ballot devoid of any credible challenger and turning Nicaragua into a police state. Mr. Mairena himself was banned from leaving Managua. Police patrols outside his house had scared away nearly all visitors, even his family. During the day, Mr. Mairena kept busy, campaigning over Zoom and scanning official radio announcements for clues to the growing repression. But at night he lay awake, listening for sirens, certain that sooner or later the police would come and he would disappear into a prison cell. “The first thing I ask myself in the morning is, when are they coming for me?” Mr. Mairena, a farmers’ rights activist, said in a telephone interview in late June. “It’s a life in constant dread.” His turn came just days after the call. Heavily armed officers raided his home and took him away late on July 5. He had not been heard from until last Wednesday, when relatives were allowed one brief visit. They said they found him emaciated and sick, completely disconnected from the outside world. Government critics say the unpredictability and speed of the wave of arrests have turned Nicaragua into a more repressive state than it was during the early years of the dictatorship of Anastasio Somoza, who was overthrown in 1979 by the Sandinista Revolutionary Movement led by Mr. Ortega and several other commanders. The Sandinistas governed the country until losing democratic elections and ceding power in 1990. In 2007, Mr. Ortega returned as president. After 14 years in power, unpopular and increasingly isolated from Nicaraguan society in his gated compound, Mr. Ortega appears intent on avoiding any real electoral competition. The five presidential candidates still on the ballot with him are little-known politicians with a history of collaboration with the government. Few in Nicaragua consider them genuine challenges to Mr. Ortega. The crackdown, which has extended to critics from any social realm, has spared no political dissidents, no matter their personal circumstances or historical ties to Mr. Ortega. The victims of persecution have included a millionaire banker and a Marxist guerrilla, a decorated general and a little-known provincial activist, student leaders and septuagenarian intellectuals. No government detractors feel safe from the sudden night raids, whose only certainty has been their constancy, more than 30 Nicaraguans affected by the crackdown said in interviews. “Everyone is on the list,” said one Nicaraguan businessman, whose family home was raided by the police and who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. “You’re just trying to figure out how high or low your name is on it, based on the latest arrest.” The wave of repression and fears of political violence have pushed thousands of Nicaraguans to flee the country in recent months, threatening to worsen a mass migration crisis at a time when the Biden administration is already struggling with record numbers of immigrants trying to cross the southern border. The number of Nicaraguans encountered by U.S. border guards has exploded since the crackdown, with a total of almost 21,000 crossing in June and July, compared with fewer than 300 in the same months last year, according to the Department of Homeland Security. About 10,000 more Nicaraguans have crossed south into neighboring Costa Rica in the same months, according to the country’s migration agency. The exodus has included the rich as well as the poor and is driven as much by fears of escalating violence as by concerns over a looming economic crisis in a country heading steadily toward international isolation. Dozens of prominent Nicaraguan businessmen have quietly left for Miami in recent months, halting their investments in the country, according to interviews with several entrepreneurs who did not want to be quoted for fear of reprisals. And most international development banks, whose loans have propped up the Nicaraguan economy in recent years, are expected to stop disbursing new funds following the elections, which the United States has said it is unlikely to recognize in their current form. Some Nicaraguans have left out of fear of a return of the street violence that traumatized the country in 2018, when pro-government paramilitaries and police forces broke up opposition protests, killing more than 300. “I’m scared that another massacre is coming,” said Jeaneth Herrera, who sells traditional cornbread on the streets of Managua. Her sales have fallen sharply in recent months, she said, as political uncertainty has pushed up food prices. “I don’t see a future here.” The detained men and women, some of them top former Sandinistas, have been charged with crimes ranging from conspiracy to money laundering and murder, accusations their families and associates say are trumped up. Most spent weeks, or months, in jail before any communication with relatives or lawyers. Several of those arrested are in their 70s and have health problems. They were put in the same jail as other prisoners, relatives said, and denied access to independent doctors or to medicines delivered by relatives. A retired Sandinista general, Hugo Torres, was arrested despite having staged a raid that helped Mr. Ortega break out of Mr. Somoza’s jail in the 1970s, potentially saving his life. The former Sandinista minister Víctor Hugo Tinoco was detained and his house ransacked for hours by the police in front of his daughter, Cristian Tinoco, who has terminal cancer. The police also smashed into the presidential candidate Miguel Mora’s home at night and dragged him out in the presence of his son Miguel, who has cerebral palsy, said Mr. Mora’s wife, Verónica Chávez. “He kept repeating that night, ‘Where is Papa?’” Ms. Chávez said. “It felt like living in a horror movie.” The cases against the political prisoners are being heard in closed courts without the presence of legal counsel. This has left their relatives and the public in the dark about the evidence presented, adding to the climate of fear. Those who tried documenting the legal process — relatives, lawyers, journalists — say they were threatened or faced with similar accusations, and in some cases forced to flee the country or go into hiding. A lawyer for one of the jailed candidates was himself arrested late last month for being a member of an opposition party. “Absolutely no one has any idea what they are accused of, or what’s in their cases,” said Boanerges Fornos, a Nicaraguan lawyer who represented some of the detained politicians before fleeing the country in June. “There’s a systematic destruction of all nonofficial sources of information. The regime likes to operate in the dark.” After dismantling opposition parties and jailing their candidates, the government shifted its attacks to others with independent views: the clergy, journalists, lawyers, even doctors. In the past few weeks, the government has called Nicaragua’s Catholic bishops “children of demons,” threatened the medics who raised alarm about a new Covid-19 wave and taken over the installations of the country’s biggest newspaper, La Prensa. The uncertainty behind the seemingly arbitrary arrests has made the situation harder to bear for the victims’ families. “They have their chess board already set up, and you’re just a pawn on it,” said Uriel Quintanilla, a Nicaraguan musician whose brother Alex Hernández, an opposition activist, was recently detained. Since then, Mr. Quintanilla said, he has not heard news of his brother or the charges against him. “The check and mate against you have already been planned out,” he said. “We merely don’t know at what moment it will come.” © 2021 The New York Times Company

Tom Phillips in Brasília and Flávia Milhorance in Rio de Janeiro | The Guardian Friday, 10 Sep 2021, 11.42 EDT Jair Bolsonaro is backing a legal move to open up large tracts of indigenous territory to commercial exploitation that tribal members call an ‘extermination effort.’ An indigenous woman from the Pataxo tribe is seen during a demonstration for the demarcation of indigenous land in Brasília on Thursday. Photograph: Carl de Souza/AFP/Getty Images More than 5,000 indigenous women have marched through Brazil’s capital to denounce the historic assault on native lands they say is unfolding under the country’s far-right president, Jair Bolsonaro. Female representatives of more than 170 of Brazil’s 300-plus tribes have gathered in Brasília in recent days to oppose highly controversial attempts to strip back indigenous land rights and open their territories to mining operations and agribusiness. On Friday morning those guerreiras (warriors) trooped south from their encampment wearing bright-coloured headdresses made from the feathers of parrots and macaws and clutching banners condemning growing anti-indigenous violence under Bolsonaro’s “genocidal administration”. Two demonstrators clasped an effigy of the embattled Brazilian leader whose presidential sash bore the words: “Fora Bolsonaro!” (Bolsonaro out!). “What they want is to take away our land,” said Alessandra Korap, an activist from the Amazon’s Munduruku people, deploring a slew of political initiatives she said threatened indigenous lands and lives. Foremost among those threats is the “marco temporal” or “time frame” argument: a legal challenge to indigenous land rights that is being considered by the supreme court. Opponents say that, if successful, the suit – which Bolsonaro has championed as a way of stopping Brazil being “handed over to the Indians” – would nullify all indigenous claims to land they were not physically occupying when Brazil’s constitution was enacted on 5 October 1988. “This is illegal. This is unconstitutional. They want to tear up our roots and we will not allow it,” Korap said on the eve of Friday’s march. Speaking at the protest camp, organized the Articulation of Indigenous Peoples of Brazil, Korap said a ruling in favour of the thesis would effectively legalise the theft of indigenous land. “The time frame thesis indicates that we have only existed since 5 October 1988. But this isn’t true. The whole of Brazil is indigenous territory – all of it. Unfortunately, it has been taken away, bit by bit – and now they want to take away those pieces that were left for us,” she said. As well as Bolsonaro, under whose administration deforestation has soared, the legal challenge is backed by congress’s powerful ruralist caucus, whose members are simultaneously pushing a bill that would have a similar impact. That measure, known as PL490, would restrict indigenous land claims and permit infrastructure building and the commercial exploitation of native forests, without requiring indigenous occupants to be consulted. Sônia Guajajara, another prominent indigenous leader, said: “These are all highly orchestrated measures which are designed to take away the land rights of indigenous people and open these lands up for exploitation … It’s all about profit and money. We champion biodiversity, keeping the forest standing, which is precisely what ensures us life. All they think about is development built on destruction.” Supporters of the time frame thesis argue that setting a date-limit for indigenous land claims will help avoid conflicts and legal uncertainty for landowners. “Should we protect indigenous land rights? Obviously, yes. But we must also protect the rights of property owners, farmers, who are essential for Brazil’s development,” prosecutor Alisson de Souza said during a recent hearing. Guajajara said the indigenous women were mobilizing to repel the latest chapter in a centuries-long attempt to wipe out the descendants of those who inhabited what became Brazil when Portuguese colonizers arrived in 1500. “What we’re living through now isn’t any different from what we’ve always faced when it comes to this extermination effort. We’ve seen centuries of violence, spilled blood, rape and enslavement – and now all of this is being officially professed by the government. “Our march is about defending Mother Earth,” added Guajajara, 47. “More and more we women are taking the frontline in the defense of our sacred Mother Earth.” As well as the time frame thesis judgment and the PL490, activists are also concerned about the imminent expiration of a series of land protection orders barring the development of areas inhabited by uncontacted tribes. Advocates are urging Funai, the indigenous protection agency, to renew those orders restricting access to remote territories inhabited by the Piripkura, Pirititi, Jacareúba/Katawixi and Ituna/Itatá peoples. The Piripkura territory, in Mato Grosso state, is among the most affected by illegal logging, and its protection will expire this month. Korap said indigenous women would continue to fight despite the onslaught: “This government will last just four years – we have been resisting for more than 520.” “Our struggle is for survival, for life, for the forest and for our children. So we will resist. In spite of all the attacks from the government, we are resisting and we will continue to resist,” she vowed. © 2021 Guardian News & Media Limited or its affiliated companies.

ADDIS ABABA, Sept 8 (Reuters) - Rebellious forces from the Tigray region killed 120 civilians over two days in a village in Ethiopia's Amhara region, local officials told Reuters on Wednesday. Pro-TPLF rebels walk in lines towards a field in Mekelle, the capital of Tigray region, Ethiopia, [File: Yasuyoshi Chiba/AFP] The killings in a village 10 km (six miles) from the town of Dabat took place on Sept. 1 and 2, said Sewnet Wubalem, the local administrator in Dabat, and Chalachew Dagnew, spokesperson of the nearby city of Gondar. The Tigrayan forces later issued a statement rejecting what they called a "fabricated allegation" by the Amhara regional government and denying any involvement in the killing of civilians. It is the first such report of Tigrayan forces killing a large number of civilians since they seized territory in Amhara. Tens of thousands of people have fled their homes in the region as the Tigrayan forces have advanced. "So far we have recovered 120 bodies. They were all innocent farmers. But we think the number might be higher. There are people who are missing," Sewnet, the local administrator, told Reuters by phone. Chalachew, the Gondar city spokesperson, said he had visited the burial area in the village and that children, women and elderly were among the dead. He said the killings occurred during the Tigrayan forces' "short presence" in the area, and it was now under the control of the Ethiopian federal army. Reuters was unable to independently verify the accounts. In their statement, Tigrayan forces called for "an independent investigation into all atrocities" in the region. Video interviews provided to Reuters by the Gondar city government indicated that villagers fought the Tigrayan forces. An interview with a man in an old military uniform said the village had mobilised every able person to fight back against the Tigrayan forces when they heard they were approaching. "We fought for five days and they retreated," said the man, who gave his name as Wubet Fekremariam. "When they retreated they killed our people that they found on their way." Last month, Ethiopia's government urged citizens to join the fight against the Tigrayan forces. read more HUMANITARIAN CRISIS War broke out 10 months ago between Ethiopia's federal troops and forces loyal to the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF), which controls the Tigray region. Since then, thousands have been killed and more than 2 million have fled their homes. Fighting spread in July from the Tigray region into the neighbouring regions of Amhara and Afar, also in the country's north. Amid the conflict, relations between the ethnic Amharas and Tigrayans have deteriorated sharply. During the war, regional forces and militiamen from the Amhara region have sought to settle a decades-old land dispute between the Amhara and Tigray regions. read more Amhara forces have seized control of western parts of Tigray and driven tens of thousands of Tigrayans from their homes. Though the Tigrayan forces have seized back most of the Tigray region, they have not taken back the heavily militarized and contested area of western Tigray. The U.S. government's humanitarian agency said last week Tigrayan forces had in recent weeks looted its warehouses in parts of Amhara. read more Responding on Twitter to the agency's statement on looting, Getachew Reda, the Tigrayan forces' spokesperson, wrote: "While we cannot vouch for every unacceptable behaviour of off-grid fighters in such matters, we have evidence that such looting is mainly orchestrated by local individuals & groups." The U.N. has said a de facto aid blockade on the Tigray region, where some 400,000 people are already suffering famine conditions, has worsened an already dire humanitarian crisis. The Ethiopian government has repeatedly denied allegations by the U.N. and Western governments that it is deliberately impeding the delivery of lifesaving assistance. On Sunday, a U.N. convoy of trucks bearing food and other aid was permitted to enter Tigray for the first time since Aug. 20. Reporting by Addis Ababa newsroom, Writing by Maggie Fick; Editing by Jon Boyle, Timothy Heritage and Gareth Jones © 2021 Reuters.