By Andrew Woodcock & Kate Devlin Published by The Independent on March 15, 2021. (BBC / PA Media) Priti Patel has been accused of launching an assault on Britain’s democratic traditions with a crackdown on protests that would make it a crime to cause “serious annoyance or inconvenience” by taking part in a demonstration. Amid an atmosphere charged by the police use of force at a vigil for murder victim Sarah Everard on Saturday, the home secretary came under fire in the House of Commons over proposed legislation which Labour say would allow someone convicted of vandalising a statue to be sentenced to a longer jail term than a rapist. Among MPs raising concerns was ex-prime minister and former home secretary Theresa May, who said that freedom of speech was “an important right in our democracy” and warned of “potential unintended consequences” from provisions in Ms Patel’s Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill. As MPs began a two-day debate on the controversial legislation, hundreds of protesters thronged Parliament Square outside demanding freedom of speech and better protection for women. The shadow home secretary, Nick Thomas-Symonds, told MPs that the scenes from Clapham Common should be a “red warning signal” of the dangers of draconian measures in the bill. A member of Sisters Uncut, a feminist direct action group involved in the Clapham vigil, said: “The police are institutionally violent against women. Handing them more powers will increase violence against women. This bill must be stopped.” And race equality and criminal justice organisations wrote to Boris Johnson warning the prime minister that the legislation will further entrench discrimination against black and minority ethnic (Bame) communities. In a letter to Ms Patel co-ordinated by Liberty and Friends of the Earth, 245 charities, community groups and campaign organisations, ranging from Amnesty International to the Ramblers and the RSPB warned that the “draconian” legislation “represents an attack on some of the most fundamental rights of citizens, in particular those from marginalised communities”. But a string of Conservative MPs said Labour would show themselves to be soft on crime if they vote on Tuesday against the 300-page document, which was published only six days ago and contains a vast array of unrelated measures, including provisions to double maximum punishments for assaults on emergency workers and to end the release of serious sexual offenders after serving half of their sentence. Ms Patel told the Commons that the right to protest peacefully was “a cornerstone of democracy and one this government will always defend”. But she said recent years had seen a “significant change in protest tactics” which required police to be given powers to take “a more proactive approach”. Citing Extinction Rebellion protesters blocking ambulances on emergency calls and gluing themselves to rush-hour trains, she told MPs: “There is a balance to be struck between the rights of the protester and the rights of individuals to go about their daily lives.” Mr Thomas-Symonds told the Commons that “deep and profound” lessons need to be learnt from the “distressing” scenes at Clapham, where women taking part in the vigil in the face of appeals to stay home due to the coronavirus pandemic were forced to the ground by police officers and handcuffed. “The scenes from Saturday should be a red warning signal to this House that rushing through ill-judged, ill-thought out restrictions on the right to protest would be a profound mistake that would have long-lasting consequences and do great damage to our democracy,” he warned. “The right to protest is one of our proudest democratic traditions. That this government seeks to attack it is to its great shame. “Our existing laws on protest strike a careful balance between legitimate rights and the need to keep order. What our laws on protest do not do, and should never do, is seek to shield those in power from public criticism and public protest.” He highlighted provisions which would allow police to impose conditions on protests if they generate noise that might result in “serious disruption” to people or organisations in the vicinity. And he blasted provisions allowing a maximum 10-year sentence for damaging a statue – twice the jail term received by some rapists. “No government should ever send out a signal that the safety of a statue carries greater importance in our laws than the safety of women,” he said. Human rights groups have raised concerns that the law’s wording could allow the home secretary to greatly extend police powers to shut down protests, but allowing her to use secondary legislation to define the kind of “serious disruption to the life of the community” or “serious disruption to the activities of an organisation” which would constitute a breach. The current version of the bill would also allow police to restrict static assemblies and vigils, rather than just moving demonstrations, as well as protests “carried out by one person in a public place”. And protestors could be arrested and prosecuted if they breach restrictions which they “knew or ought to have known” were in place, a significant hardening of the current threshold which states a crime is committed if they “knowingly” fail to comply. This would allow prosecution of individuals who had not heard that conditions were imposed by police, even though officers frequently announce such measures by shouting them over megaphones at noisy demonstrations. Ms May said the law had to be “proportionate” she said and warned that some of the definitions in tne Bill, including of “noise and nuisance”, looked quite wide. She also warned Ms Patel against giving more powers to the home secretary saying “future home secretaries may not be so reasonable”. “I would urge the government to consider carefully the need to walk a fine line between the popular and populist, our freedoms depend on it,” said the former PM. Yvette Cooper, the Labour MP and chair of the Home Affairs Committee, denounced many of the reforms targeted at protests, urging the government to think again and saying “these powers are too broad”. Liberty’s interim director Gracie Bradley said the bill would hand police the power to decide when and how people can protest, criminalise the way of life of gypsy and traveller communities and create new stop and search powers that will exacerbate discrimination against people of colour. “Protest isn’t a gift from the state – it’s our fundamental right and under human rights law, states have an obligation to facilitate protest not suppress it,” she said. “Yet this is what this bill seeks to achieve. Not content with all but banning protest during the pandemic, the government is now using this public health crisis as cover to make emergency measures permanent. Its new policing bill is an all-out assault on basic civil liberties.” The cross-party parliamentary joint committee on human rights announced an inquiry into the legislation, voicing concern that a number of its provisions may interfere with rights to liberty, free expression and free assembly guaranteed by the Human Rights Act. © The Independent 2021

It gladdens the heart of the International Society for Civil Liberties & Rule of Law to inform the world that the 75 innocent and defenseless Obigbo residents, comprising 55 women and 20 men, all Igbo natives, and Christians, have finally returned to Igbo Land and rejoined their families, left for over four months or since Oct/Nov 2020 when they were abducted by soldiers of the Nigerian Army. The 75 abductees were freed on 4th and 5th March 2021, having earlier been granted bail by the Grade 11 Magistrate Court, Wuse 11, FCT Judicial Division, Abuja. While some were abducted between 7 pm and 8 pm in Obigbo and environs on their way home from work and other lawful social activities and held secretly for days at Headquarters of 6 Division of the Nigerian Army in Port Harcourt before bundled to the Mogadishu Barracks in Abuja, others were abducted during similar, if not same hours and bundled to Obinze Army Barracks in Owerri, Imo State from where they were disappeared and surfaced next day at Mogadishu Barracks in Abuja. All the freed 75 abductees were abducted at night and moved from 6 Division/Obinze Army Barracks to Mogadishu Barracks in Abuja late into the night or at hours of the blue law. Among the 75 abductees are 55 women mostly between 18 and 25 years of age. The oldest among the 55 women are between 27 and 39 years of age including mothers of children and the newly married and among those in the 18 and 25 years age bracket are university admission seekers, salesgirls, hairdressing/plaiting and tailoring apprentices, fresh university undergraduates, etc. There are also hospital staff and a Day-Care proprietress, etc among those in the 27 and 39 years age bracket. The 20 men among the 75 abductees are also of productive age bracket (18 years and 35 years and two are in their late 50s and mid-60s) including traders, trade apprentices, panel beaters, Secondary School leavers, university admission seekers, etc. All personal belongings of the 75 abductees including women’s handbags and their contents, cash sums, mobile phones, identity cards, etc were taken away by soldiers till date, and each of 55 women among them was forced to wear in Army captivity same underwear worn at the point of her abduction over four months ago. It must be reminded that the 75 Obigbo abductees including 55 women and 20 men were abducted by soldiers of the Nigerian Army, held for days at the headquarters of 6 Division and Obinze Barracks, and bundled to Mogadishu Army Barracks in Abuja, located very close to Aso Rock-the seat of Nigeria’s Presidential Power where they were secretly held outside public or their families’ knowledge or information for over four months. Their abduction and captivity were also done amidst grave inhuman conditions and without a court trial. According to testimonies of most of the freed abductees, “they were transferred to DSS and Police facilities after being held in Army captivity for months”. In other words, they were transferred to DSS and Nigeria Police facilities a few weeks before they regained freedom through Court bails following our advocacy campaigns and public outcries. While 53 women were released from the hands of DSS, 22 including 20 men and two women were freed from the hands of the Nigeria Police Force. To date, the Nigerian Army and its immediate past Chief of Staff-Retired Lt Gen Tukur Buratai (principal perpetrators) and authorities of DSS and Nigeria Police Force (conspirators) have refused to speak on their roles in the abductions. Intersociety wishes to state again that by the existing laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria including Decided Cases (Case-Laws), the Armed Forces Act of 2004, and the 1999 Constitution, the Nigerian Army or any other branch of the Armed Forces is disempowered from arresting, detaining, investigating and prosecuting civilian citizens not subject to the Armed Forces Act of 2004 and the Nigerian Security Agencies Act of 2004, governing the conducts of DSS, the Service is disempowered from usurping the core duties of the Nigeria Police Force such as investigation, arrest, detention, and prosecution of civilian citizens or their discharge and acquittal. DSS is also disempowered by the referenced laws including Sections 35 and 36 of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution from accepting civilian citizens abducted or illegally arrested and held for months by any branch of the Armed Forces particularly the Nigerian Army for purpose of incarcerating them further and unlawfully without trial. The Nigeria Police Force as lawful or authorized investigating, arresting, detaining, and prosecuting authority, is barred by Law from holding civilian citizens without public knowledge and trial outside the constitutionally prescribed periods. Freed Abductees’ Ten Days Tortuous Journey Back To Igbo Land Apart from spending heavily to secure bail sureties for the 75 freed Obigbo abductees and feeding, cleaning, clothing (including new panties and brassieres, soaps and sponges, and sanitary pads for each of the 55 women), foot-wearing, treatment (first aids), lodging (hotels within and outside Abuja), transporting (within and outside Abuja and rejoining him or her with his or her family) each of them; all running into millions of naira, it was also ten days tortuous journey of the abductees back to Igbo Land. During the ten days (5th to 14th March 2021) tortuous journey from Abuja to Igbo Land, the traumatized and the fainted were revived, and conveying vehicles broke down severally. Funds also became a major hindrance. Malicious surveillances and roadblocks were also mounted by detailed security agents so as to do the untoward. Some media practitioners were infiltrated or hired by malicious security agents and spying on others including those working for the immediate past Chief of Army Staff (key perpetrator of the conduct atrocity crimes). They had bombarded us with calls pretending to be “professional” and “sympathetic” journalists “seeking to speak with the women especially the raped or their families”; whereas their sole mission was hostile journalism. In the end, the ten days tortuous journey of the 75 abductees back to Igbo Land, despite encountered challenges and difficulties, was hugely successful, thanks to the doggedness of Barr Richie Okoroafor, the leadership of IPOB and others contacted including lawmakers, etc. The highlight of it all was the historic visit to the freed female abductees by three parents: a father and two mothers and they can be spotted in front of the two photos attached. Names Of Freed 55 Igbo Christian Women Ijeoma Francisca, Pauline Anyanwu, Grace Samson, Rebecca Ibeanusi, Ebere Uchechi, Emmanuella Oluchukwu, Okafor Uloma, Peace Amaka, Eberechi ibe, Ekene Silver, Grace Anwulika, Mba Asiegbu, Modesta Umezie, Blessing Paulina, Joy Anozie, Amarachukwu Believe, Amadi Chinasa, Onwuka Uzoma, Chidinma Ukachukwu, Chioma Isaac and Peace Isaac (sisters), Ebube Aneto, Tina Emeka, Stephanie Sunday, Mercy Chidinma, Diri Ibe, Mirabel Angel, Nwosu Abigail, Uwaoma Queen, Sarah Alo, Sandra Evoh and Cynthia Evoh (sisters), Bridget Dede, Erica Ndubuisi and Ujunwa Ndubuisi (sisters), Oluchi Mercy, Uchendu Priscilla, Goodness Kaima, Mama Nnamdi (39 years old), Ekpere Odinanka, Nwoji Mary, Rosemary Ogudike, Happiness Odinaka, Georgina Umunze, Ngozi White, Atumofe Charity and Atumofe Precious (sisters), Amaka Ebere, Clementina Obiageli, Success Florence, Dike Amara, Kelechi Orji and Ukaamaka Oluchi (all released from the hands of DSS after being held for months and transferred by Nigerian Army) and Joyce Igwe and Ujunwa Felix (freed from the hands of the Nigeria Police Force after being held for months and transferred by Nigerian Army). Names Of Freed 20 Igbo Christian Men Precious Ibe, Okonkwo Peter, Basil Anyanwu, Apostle Collins, Emeajokwu Bright, Nonso Isaac, Kennedy Samuel, Ugwu Odinnaka, Hossana Gregory, Ambrose Kenechukwu, Timothy Onyeama, Raphael Adam, Lucky Okolie, Richard Okpara, Emmaus God-Day, Chibuike Andrew, Kenneth Onuigbo, Patrick Uzoma, Anthony Okparaego and Uche Paul (all freed from the hands of the Nigeria Police Force after being held for months and transferred by Army). Signed: International Society for Civil Liberties & Rule of Law Principal Officers: Emeka Umeagbalasi, Chinwe Umeche, Esq., Obianuju Igboeli, Esq., Chidimma Udegbunam, Esq., and Comrade Samuel Kamanyaoku www.intersociety-ng.org

Myanmar junta systematically murdering and arresting protesters. (BANGKOK, March 15, 2021)—U.N. member states should move to hold an Emergency Special Session at the U.N. General Assembly to demand collective action in response to the Myanmar military’s widespread and systematic attack on protesters, said Fortify Rights today. The Myanmar Police Force and Army reportedly killed more than 120 women, men, and children and arbitrarily arrested more than 2,000 since February 1. Yesterday, security forces murdered more than 50 protesters, most in Yangon, according to local news outlets and open-source media. It was the deadliest day since the February 1 military coup d’etat. “The Myanmar military poses a threat to the peace, and its ongoing attack is grave, dire, and massive in scope,” said Matthew Smith, Chief Executive Officer at Fortify Rights. “The people of Myanmar are desperate for action, and the U.N. Security Council has persistently failed them. Now is the time for an Emergency Special Session at the General Assembly, where China and Russia have no veto power.” During an Emergency Special Session on the situation in Myanmar, U.N. member states should press for a global arms embargo against the Myanmar military and targeted sanctions against Myanmar military individuals, entities, and assets said Fortify Rights. On sanctions, specifically, governments should coordinate to block the junta’s access to billion-dollar natural gas revenues. Member states should also press for the U.N. Security Council to refer the situation in Myanmar to the International Criminal Court to investigate atrocity crimes by Myanmar security forces in recent years, including genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The U.N. Security Council has issued two statements in response to the situation in Myanmar since the coup, on February 4 and March 10, but failed to take any collective action or acknowledge the junta’s overthrow of the elected government as a coup d’état. The people of Myanmar and civil society organizations have consistently called for greater action from the international community in response to the coup and the junta’s attacks on civilians. On March 10, the Security Council called on “the [Myanmar] military to exercise utmost restraint.” Since that statement, the junta murdered scores of people. The primary responsibility of the U.N. Security Council in the maintenance of international peace and security. In 1950, the U.N. General Assembly passed the Uniting for Peace Resolution to circumvent persistent vetoes at the U.N. Security Council by the Soviet Union during the Cold War era. Under the Uniting for Peace Resolution, if the U.N. Security Council lacks “unanimity” and “fails to exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security in any case where there appears to be a threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression,” then the U.N. General Assembly can convene “to maintain or restore international peace and security.” For the U.N. Security Council to request an Emergency Special Session, at least nine members of the Council must vote to refer the issue to the U.N. General Assembly. Alternatively, any U.N. member state may send a letter to the U.N. Secretary-General describing the matter of concern to request an Emergency Special Session. If a majority of member states agree with the request, then an Emergency Special Session must be held within 24 hours of receiving the majority of votes. Since 1950, the U.N. General Assembly has only ever held 10 Emergency Special Sessions on situations in several countries. During those sessions, the General Assembly recommended arms embargos on four occasions, comprehensive sanctions on two occasions, and peacekeepers on one occasion. In five of the past ten Emergency Special Sessions, the General Assembly urged military forces to withdraw. On February 1, the Myanmar military carried out a coup d’etat, overthrowing the democratically elected government. The military initially arrested State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi, President Win Myint, and hundreds of others, declaring that it would control the country for one year. On February 2, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing created the State Administrative Council, with himself as chairperson. On February 3, medical professionals in Myanmar government-run hospitals went on strike in an act of civil disobedience. Their initial, coordinated act grew into the ongoing nationwide nonviolent “Civil Disobedience Movement” involving daily mass protests throughout the country and nationwide general strikes. On February 5, 15 elected members of parliament created the Committee Representing the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw (CRPH), adding two additional MPs on February 10. The CRPH aims to form a government and perform the duties of the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw. On February 23, the CRPH appointed Dr. Sasa, an ethnic Chin medical doctor and longtime humanitarian, as its representative to the United Nations. On March 9, CRPH announced it had appointed Mahn Win Khaing Than as acting Vice President of the country. Since February 1, millions of people in Myanmar have protested the coup, including through acts as simple as banging pots and pans. Hundreds of thousands of people have taken to the streets throughout the country, protesting the military and holding evening vigils for murdered protesters in defiance of the junta’s prohibition on gatherings of five or more people. The Myanmar Police Force and military have used excessive and lethal force against protesters and, according to the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners, arbitrarily arrested at least 2,000 people. The junta amended a raft of laws to strip away rights and imposed evening internet blackouts nationwide. The military coup stands to exacerbate existing crises in the country, said Fortify Rights, citing reports of recent Myanmar military troop movements in at least northern Rakhine State and Karen and Kachin states, armed clashes with non-state ethnic armies, and attacks on civilians in ethnic areas since February 1. The Myanmar military is responsible for mass atrocities and protracted human rights violations committed with impunity against the Rohingya and the Arakanese (Rakhine), Kachin, Shan, Karen, and other ethnic minorities for decades. In its 2017 genocidal offensive against the Rohingya, the military massacred untold civilians and forced nearly 800,000 to flee to Bangladesh. Myanmar authorities continue to confine more than 125,000 Rohingya and other Muslims to more than 20 internment camps in five townships in Rakhine State. On February 12, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, Thomas Andrews, said, “all options should be on the table” in response to the coup in Myanmar. “Barring concrete steps from the Security Council,” Thomas Andrews said, “the General Assembly can convene an Emergency Special Session.” On March 11, Thomas Andrews addressed the U.N. Human Rights Council, describing “shocking video of the aftermath of attacks, including fatal gunshot wounds to the heads of protesters, and video of soldiers dragging or carrying away the dead bodies of their victims.” “There is no question that the Myanmar military poses a threat to international peace and security, even beyond this coup,” said Matthew Smith. “This is the same military that has been carrying out the Rohingya genocide for several years and committing war crimes in ethnic states.” The U.N. Security Council already recognizes humanitarian emergencies, military coups, and cross-border refugee crises as legitimate threats to international peace. Despite the Myanmar military’s long-standing threats to peace and security, the Security Council has never used its authority under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter concerning Myanmar. Chapter VII allows the U.N. Security Council to “determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression” and to take military and nonmilitary action to “restore international peace and security.” In 2007, China vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution on Myanmar. Months later, the people of Myanmar held nationwide pro-democracy protests, similar in scale to the protests occurring now. In response, Myanmar state security forces killed unarmed pro-democracy protesters and Japanese journalist Kenji Nagai with impunity. “The Myanmar military is not the Government of Myanmar,” said Matthew Smith. “U.N. member states must recognize Myanmar’s duly elected leaders and their chosen representatives, including the CRPH. The junta is an illegal entity formed by the Myanmar military, a criminal enterprise.” Fortify Rights © 2021 Access the full article here.

Some people rub their stomachs and talk of their hunger. Others describe burnt villages, abducted relatives, and the agonies of long treks through the bush to reach safety. But it is the beheadings that most haunt Palma, a besieged town in northern Mozambique. It is a place cut off from the outside world by roving gangs of machete-wielding Islamist fighters, and it is now symptomatic of a wider security and humanitarian crisis that has engulfed a remote region the size of Scotland. More than half a million people in the region have been driven from their homes in the past 12 months. "They cut his neck," said Said Ahmad, 47, sombrely drawing his finger across his throat as he explained how dozens of insurgents entered their village one night, earlier this month, before killing seven men including his brother, Bernado Bacar. Another eyewitness described the grotesque aftermath in the isolated village of Quirindi, close to the mangrove forests that line the nearby Indian Ocean, with bloodied bodies tied up with rope and severed heads carefully balanced on top of them. Said Ahmad managed to escape with his brother's extended family and walked through the night to Palma. When he later called his brother's mobile phone, a stranger answered and said: "We killed your brother. We are afraid of nothing. We are al-Shabab and we kill as we please." Like so many people I spoke to while travelling in Cabo Delgado province, he seemed baffled by the violence, by the Islamists' gruesome scorched-earth agenda, and by the transformation of a neglected but relatively peaceful region into a war zone. A population forced out Al-Shabab is how Mozambicans now refer to a shadowy Islamist insurgency that began four years ago in the province - an insurgency that was initially dismissed as a minor distraction in a region that is rich in minerals and focused on reaping the benefits of an international $15bn (£11bn) off-shore gas project. Today things look very different, with a third of the province's population forced to flee. The US state department has designated the insurgents as a terrorist organisation dubbed "Isis-Mozambique" - a reference to the franchise arrangement that the Islamic State group (IS) is believed to have set up with the local faction. I flew into Palma soon after the latest attacks. From the air the damage of past cyclones is visible on stretches of Mozambique's long and stunning coastline. Shortly before landing on a dirt airstrip, I saw the construction work for the giant gas refinery on the Afungi peninsula. The work is still proceeding under heavy protection by the military. We were the first foreign journalists to reach Palma during its siege. The entire province has been more or less closed to foreign - and many local - journalists for the past year. The pandemic is a factor as is the precarious security situation, but Mozambique's government has also been widely criticised for seeking to block access to the conflict, both for the media and, to a lesser extent, international humanitarian organisations. "We face restrictions from [the] government in terms of bringing in supplies and people into Mozambique," said Jonathan Whittall, the head of analysis for the medical aid group Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF). The outskirts of Palma were eerily empty. The first group of civilians we saw told us they wanted to leave town on a truck parked nearby. "We want to leave, because we're hungry. We're afraid of al-Shabab, but what can we do? We'll die here from hunger anyway," said Rabia Momat. She said the police had blocked the group from leaving. On the dusty main street, we saw crowds outside several food shops. There were scuffles as police and soldiers tried to block people from entering. "I'm very, very hungry. I have three days without eating. I'm here [in the queue] but I don't get nothing," said a man called Sufo Salimo, who accused the police of trying to extort money from people. Away from the crowds, I met a group of young men who had recently fled from another nearby village. One spoke of seeing "seven white men" among the insurgents, but others said they'd heard the attackers speaking their local language, and noted that they appeared to know which houses belonged to local officials. One of the men used his mobile phone to call his father, who was still in hiding in a mangrove forest on the coast, along with about 50 others. Neither man wanted to give me their names. "We're trying to reach Palma but it's not possible yet. We're afraid al-Shabab will catch us. We have no food here and people are very hungry. We are not safe," said the father. Although some food supplies - organised by local businessmen and by aid agencies - are starting to arrive by sea in Palma, many people said the amounts were far too small and that prices for bread and rice had risen by four to six times. Girls abducted Several people in Palma told us that they'd seen women and girls being abducted by the militants. Soon after flying back to the regional capital, Pemba, I met many more people with similar stories. "I saw my daughter trying to run to the boat with two other children. The people from al-Shabab chased them. They took my daughter and many others. Then they set fire to our village," said Fatima Abdul, 43, who'd escaped by sea late last year and was now living on the beach in Pemba, scavenging for seafood with nothing but a plastic sheet to protect her from the rain storms. "I'm still trying to find out what happened to my granddaughter. I don't know if they took her to marry her or to kill her. I'm suffering and I don't know how to fix things. We are stuck here with nothing. The help we get is not enough," said Alberto Carlos Said, 67, a fisherman now living in a makeshift camp outside Pemba. His granddaughter is 14-years-old. His daughter was also seized by al-Shabab, but was released when they discovered she was already pregnant. "We came here by foot with nothing. We were afraid. We saw al-Shabab killing others with knives. There are many women I know who were abducted. There are many children in the camp here whose mothers were taken," said Amina Bakar, 68, a weaver from the same village as Alberto Carlos Said. © BBC 2021

'Self-interest' is getting in the way of Canada's obligation to defend human rights in China: Dallaire Brennan MacDonald, Vassy Kapelos | CBC News Lt. General Roméo Dallaire Click here to view video of CBC interview. Retired Lieutenant-General Roméo Dallaire is urging the Canadian government to act in response to the "genocide" being committed by the Chinese government against its Muslim minority Uighur population. "When there is massive abuses of human rights by a state ... we all have the responsibility to go in and protect them. We signed up to it. The world signed up to it," Dallaire said Wednesday in an interview with CBC News Network's Power & Politics. Dallaire, who led the UN peacekeeping mission in Rwanda during the 1994 genocide, said there are many avenues Canada and the international community could pursue to respond to China's actions, adding that the use of force must be a last resort. Dallaire is urging the Canadian government to build a coalition of other like-minded middle powers to call out China over its abuses and build a pressure campaign to influence China's actions. The comments from the former peacekeeping commander came just one day after an independent legal report concluded that the Chinese government is conducting an ongoing genocide in Xinjiang. The Canadian government says it will be reviewing the report, but does not appear ready to declare that China is guilty of genocide. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his government have been reluctant to use the word genocide, arguing that more evidence from independent investigations is needed. Last month, the House of Commons voted to label China's persecution of Uighurs and other Turkic Muslims a genocide. A substantial majority of MPs — including most of the Liberals who participated — voted in favour of a Conservative motion that says China's actions in its western Xinjiang region meet the definition of genocide set out in the 1948 United Nations Genocide Convention. Minister of Foreign Affairs Marc Garneau formally abstained from the vote, while Prime Minister Trudeau and the rest of his cabinet failed to show up for the vote. Dallaire said "self-interest" is getting in the way of the government's obligation to act. "Self-interest and a lack of wanting to take the risk of holding accountable great nations who do horrible things is still prevalent," said Dallaire. "You're either a great nation that believes in its values and in what its flag stands for, and what so many have died to defend it ... you're either that, or you're not. "I think there is a need for a very reinforced diplomatic corps in this country to show the innovation, to show the gumption, to show the ability to go beyond the call of a nation that we are and ... punch way above our weight because we're not doing that enough now, if at all. "I think we did in the past and I would love to see our diplomatic corps regain that stature and help guide the politicians down this road." China has detained an estimated 1 to 2 million Uighurs in China in what the government calls 're-education centres.' The Chinese government has denied accusations of genocide and human rights abuses. The Chinese ambassador to Canada has accused his country's critics of fabricating the "lie of the century." In October 2020, the House of Commons subcommittee on international human rights concluded that China is committing a genocide, saying that the Uighur population is facing mass detention, forced labour, pervasive state surveillance, physical, psychological and sexual abuse, forced sterilizations and forced abortions. Given the ongoing human rights abuses against the Uighurs, Dallaire said Canada should not participate in the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics. "There's no logic to it," he said. "There's not continuity." "If in 1936, we had known the extent of how the Jewish community and other communities were being abused already by that regime, would we have given in to participating at an event that is supposed to provide a high-water mark for a nation in the face of the world? I think probably we wouldn't. So why are participating in this one?" © CBC News

Institutional Violence by Security Forces Recalls Apartheid Abuses Protesters run for cover as they clash with police at Eldorado Park police station in Johannesburg, South Africa, August 27, 2020. © 2020 AP Photo/Themba Hadebe Police brutality has been a part of the South African experience since colonialism. Infamous incidents, such as the shootings which resulted in the death of school children during the Soweto Uprising of 1976 and the brutal police assaults that led to the death of Steve Biko due to brain injuries, highlight the South African security forces’ role in the long history of violence against Black bodies. As South Africa marks Human Rights Month, commemorating the struggle for democracy, it is a moment to reflect on the lingering scars that still influence policing in the country. Since the apartheid regime was dismantled in 1994, security forces in South Africa have been predominately Black. As a result, any violence attributed to them, like the 2012 massacre in Marikana or the violent death of Collins Khosa in June 2020, reportedly at the hands of soldiers, might not be considered a consequence of institutional racism, but rather a result of inadequate training. But assuming police brutality, white supremacy, and institutional racism would dovetail results in a collective cognitive dissonance. The reality is that police brutality and violence against Black bodies today is a legacy of apartheid. The architects of apartheid were so effective in implementing a system of institutional oppression that despite its end nearly 26 years ago, apartheid still has a solid grip on South African justice institutions. Even the German Shepherd, a dog ubiquitous in police forces throughout the world, to many Black South Africans, remains a relic of the Apartheid regime. Its ancestors were synonymous with the enforcement of racism, and its descendants remain an integral part of the police service. And like the police themselves, formerly white and now predominantly black, these dogs are still trained to attack Black bodies. As we commemorate the 25th anniversary of Human Rights Month in South Africa, we need to recognize that truly dismantling a racist system will mean confronting its legacy throughout the country’s institutions. © 2021 Human Rights Watch

A spokesman for the Syrian National Army said 20 primitive oil refining facilities were lost costing millions of dollars [Courtesy: White Helmets] Attacks on rural Aleppo that caused severe damage to oil facilities have been described as “state terrorism” by the Syrian opposition, in what is a possible message to Turkish-backed forces in the region. The deadly attacks last Friday, reportedly launched by Russia from warships and by forces aligned with the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, hit makeshift oil refineries in al-Hamran near the town of Jarablus and the village of Tarhin near al-Bab in eastern Aleppo. The attack caused huge fires, especially in Tarhin, destroying more than 200 oil trucks and taking 20 hours to bring them under control, according to Syria’s volunteer civil defence, known as the White Helmets. Stark aerial and satellite images showed the scale of the damage left behind with a large area of land charred and the monetary value of the losses thought to be millions of dollars. A statement from the Syrian Opposition Coalition – an alliance of opposition groups – condemned the attack, saying cluster munitions had been used, which are banned under international law. “These crimes cannot be justified whatsoever as they are of purely terrorist, treacherous nature,” the statement said, adding it marked a grave escalation. Hasan Mohamad – director of the al-Bab division of the White Helmets – told Al Jazeera three Tochka ballistic missiles carrying cluster bombs were fired at al-Hamran, where there was a market for fuel, causing 300-metre-tall flames. Less than an hour later, he said, improvised fuel refineries in Tarhin were hit with four missiles, a mix of Tochka and Uragan 9M27K-series surface-to-surface rockets, also carrying cluster munitions. It took more than 100 volunteers and 50 vehicles, such as fire trucks, to try to bring the situation under control. White Helmets volunteer Ahmed al-Waki was killed while trying to put out flames when a fuel tank exploded. The attack also caused some damage to civilian property and will deprive displaced families who rely on the refinery for work of a vital lifeline at a time when the Syrian currency has tumbled and food insecurity is at its highest since the war began. According to the United Nations, about four million people live in Aleppo and the northwestern province of Idlib, which is the country’s last rebel stronghold. About half have been displaced, many more than in previous years. Bakeries, hospitals and other facilities may be cut off from their fuel supply as a result of the targeted strikes. Oil installations in Turkish-controlled parts of Aleppo have come under repeated attack in recent months, although the Syrian regime and its Russian backers have not claimed responsibility. Turkey’s state-owned Anadolu news agency said it was not clear who carried out the attacks on Friday, but the White Helmets, Syrian National Army (SNA) and the SOC blamed Russia. White Helmet volunteer Ahmed al-Waki was killed trying to put out the fire [Courtesy: White Helmets] Major Yusef Hammoud, a spokesman for the SNA, a coalition of armed opposition groups that is backed by Turkey, said 20 primitive oil-refining facilities were lost, estimating a loss of millions of dollars. “The main goal of the attacks is to weaken the economy of the region as the fuel that feeds [opposition-held] areas comes from the two targeted facilities – it is the backbone of the region’s economy,” he said. A dispute over exporting fuel to al-Assad-held areas also played a part, with the mostly Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces that is allied with the United States under instruction not to supply the regime, Hammoud said. “Russia can’t bomb SDF areas due to US presence in the region, so it hit the oil tanks limiting the supply,” he said. Oil tanks are exported from SDF areas through Tarhin to the opposition-held northwest. “The escalation, of course, disturbs Turkey. Turkish bases in the area responded by attempting to bomb the source of the missiles and striking al-Bab city the following day,” he said. A ceasefire agreement between Turkey and Russia was agreed on on March 5, 2020, and it included a “de-escalation zone” stretching from the northeastern mountains of Latakia to the northwestern suburbs of Aleppo city. According to the UK-based war monitor Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, 420 people have been killed in the zone since then. Middle East security analyst Seth Frantzman said the attack was “unusual” and was likely meant to “send a message that Damascus and Moscow are monitoring closely the role of the Turkish-backed SNA in areas near Aleppo”. The attack also caused damage to civilian property [Courtesy: White Helmets] “Using ballistic missiles to sow chaos and fires also shows that Turkey cannot protect the area that it occupies in northern Syria,” he said. Syria’s northern neighbour Turkey has seized control of several regions inside Syria in military campaigns, mostly against Kurdish-held areas, since 2016. Since 2018, Russia and Turkey have sought to reduce tensions in northern Syria. “From time to time Russia and the Syrian regime seek to show that they can continue to strike with impunity in areas that Turkey ostensibly controls. The message is that Turkey’s administration of these areas, running to four years of control in some places, will not last forever,” Frantzman said. © 2021 Al Jazeera Media Network

Originally published March 5, 2021 In one of the most dangerous Latin American countries to be a woman, lockdown measures exposed longstanding challenges in combatting gender violence. A door in Suchitoto, El Salvador with a stencil reading "In this house we want a life free a violence against women." (Miller Gruppe, Pixabay) The same day President Nayib Bukele announced a strict lockdown for El Salvador at the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, a collective of local women’s organizations launched a hotline to support women confined indoors with their abusers. The country was not prepared for the public health emergency nor for protecting women against violence. “Emergency situations,” the groups noted, always exacerbate “acts of violence against women stemming from existing inequalities.” By early June, the feminist organization Colectiva Feminista para el Desarrollo Local had documented 26 femicides during the lockdown. In recent years, El Salvador has reported high rates of domestic violence and epidemic rates of femicide, the intentional killing of a woman or girl based on her gender identity. A 2017 survey found that 67 percent of Salvadoran women had experienced some form of violence in their lives, and in 2019, the country had one of the highest femicide rates in Latin America, second only to Honduras. Although El Salvador passed a gender violence law in 2011, establishing sentences of 20 to 50 years for femicide, acknowledging and prosecuting these cases remains arduous. The pandemic has further exposed these challenges, including by exacerbating structural barriers to reporting gender-based violence. Local human rights lawyers and feminist activists have been fighting to address these limitations by expanding support systems for victims of domestic violence. Salvadoran law defines femicide as the killing of a woman with “motives of hatred or contempt for her condition as a woman.” Some scholars have proposed the term feminicide, rather than femicide, to underline the role of state negligence in these crimes and the intersection of power dynamics and cultural and socioeconomic factors. In El Salvador and elsewhere, most femicides happen within the context of domestic violence, and structural machismo and the societal normalization of gender-based violence perpetuate both abuses and impunity. Campaigns and events organized by groups like Colectiva Feminista aim to educate women on their human rights, improve their sense of agency and self-worth, and dismantle the normalization of violence. However, underreporting of domestic violence is still an issue. “Domestic violence is the beginning [of feminicide] since women suffer domestic violence in silence,” explains human rights attorney Arnau Baulenas of the Instituto de Derechos Humanos de la Universidad Centroamericana (IDHUCA) in San Salvador. And according to Marshall University Latin America history professor Chris White, in El Salvador, a geographically small country with a high-density population, the normalization of violence is also shaped by a strong historical memory of civil war-era violence. “Impunity Means More Violence” Calling attention to the growing irregularity of resources available for women facing violence in 2020, Colectiva Feminista partnered with the abortion decriminalization organization Agrupación Ciudadana para la Despenalización del Aborto as well as the women’s human rights group Red Salvadoreña de Mujeres Defensoras de Derechos Humanos to create a hotline to provide psychological and legal support. The support line responds to an increased need since the start of the pandemic for remote resources for victims, their families, and others hoping to report instances of gender-based violence or gain information about preventative actions. Many callers are from family members and partners seeking legal assistance to press charges against their abusive counterparts, explains activist and lawyer Laura Moran. According to Moran, the Colectiva Feminista received more gender-based violence cases in the first six months of the pandemic than it did during all of 2019. Reports to the police also increased during lockdown. However, uneven awareness among public officials about the problem, combined with normalization, has created significant barriers to building substantial legal services to protect victims of abuse. Potential for revictimization by police who uphold patriarchal norms, such as the idea that domestic violence is a family matter, is one possible deterrent to reporting abuse. Such barriers to reporting, a lack of political will to dedicate resources to combatting feminicide, and structural problems in the judicial system also translate into a lack of justice for victims. Activists have often pointed out the hypocrisy of El Salvador's justice system criminalizing women for having abortions—or stillbirths or miscarriages in many cases—while failing to pursue prosecutions for femicides. According to Baulenas, prosecutions are often overshadowed by personal and cultural biases against victims that color cases with patriarchal and machista assumptions. These biases contribute to impunity for gender-based crimes, and it can also retraumatize survivors who choose to report their abuse. “Impunity means more violence,” Baulenas explains, underlining a cycle of inaction that fuels further underreporting. “The system needs to be fixed and authority figures need reeducation,” he adds. For Moran, raising awareness is an important first step in the broader ideological and cultural transformation required to meaningfully combat femicide and gender-based violence at the root. In the immediate term, on-the-ground responses like the Colectiva Feminista’s monitoring and the domestic violence hotline aim to create visibility for victims and provide support. They hope that breaking down the normalization of violence will in turn allow women to speak up about their abuse and seek help. When Abuse Goes Unnoticed President Nayib Bukele has smugly said that feminist groups should be “happy” with how rates of killings of women have fallen under his government. Although official data indicate that feminicide rates have declined since 2016, human rights groups highlight that other forms of violence against women, such as disappearances, have increased. This dynamic recalls another period with a similar trend. In 2012, the Salvadoran government struck a deal with gangs to establish a ceasefire between the Mara Salvatrucha and Barrio 18 in hopes of lowering homicides. As a result of the truce, the numbers of killings and feminicides did go down. According to a 2013 report by the international organization Interpeace, “immediately after the truce was agreed upon, homicide rates ostensibly decreased: 14 to 17 homicides a day dropped to an average of 5.5 deaths a day…In parallel, there was also a decrease in femicides.” Despite the controversy surrounding the truce—namely the government’s lack of transparency in secretive negotiations—this reduction in killings was “one of the positive results,” a report by the Red Feminista Frente a la Violencia contra las Mujeres notes. “However,” the report adds, “it is necessary to deepen the analysis of the causes behind this decrease in violent deaths coupled with an increase in the number of acts of other forms of violence against women…because femicides are a culmination in a continuum of violence.” The report also highlights that among the killings of women reported, most were carried out with “extreme cruelty,” and raises alarm that the generalized nature of this phenomenon has not received adequate attention. “The viciousness, hate, [and] torture go unnoticed,” it states. Research has shown that it is not simply gang members inflicting violence against women; intimate partner violence generally is an important factor in and potential precursor to feminicide. Yet the country still centers tackling gang violence within its discourse as a tactic to counter high rates of feminicide. Focusing narrowly on so-called iron fist policies—heavy handed crackdowns resulting in mass arrests and incarceration of alleged gang members—not only fails to remedy root problems but also may pull resources away from developing sustainable policies to protect women from domestic violence. Similarly, hate crimes against trans people and other members of the LGBTQI+ community is also a pressing issue that demands a targeted response beyond strategies that claim to address generalized violence. Citing statistics from the attorney general’s office, Ormusa, a local nonprofit organization promoting women's rights, reports that 130 women were murdered in 2020; this is a decrease from 238 in 2019. However, Baulenas warns people to be wary of government data because it could be motivated by electoral interests, such as the recent midterm elections, in which Bukele’s party won a majority. The decrease in femicide could reflect the fact that the state has not put enough resources into adequately investigating feminicide, especially considering that statistics show that other forms of violence against women have increased. According to Ormusa’s monitoring, cases of domestic violence in 2020 totaled 1,245, an increase from 1,172 cases in 2019. Moreover, feminicide statistics fail to account for the enforced disappearances of women and girls, and missing persons cases also raise questions about the possible underreporting of feminicide. The “Other Underreported Pandemic” Achieving a femicide conviction is difficult for two reasons, Baulenas says. First, there must be proof of an intimate relationship between the victim and perpetrator, which is difficult to prove. Second, many judges base their verdicts on personal biases, not an adherence to international law and treaties such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment, and Eradication of Violence Against Women, also known as the Belém do Pará Convention. There is no guarantee that the appropriate laws will be applied every time. As a result, sometimes cases brought to trial as femicides are not tried as such, leading to impunity for this particular crime, Baulenas explains. According to an investigation by Salvadoran media outlet El Faro, out of 3,000 women killed between 2012 and 2019, only 8.6 percent of cases resulted in a femicide prosecution. “If they weren’t killed for being women, why were they killed?” asked journalists Valeria Guzmán and Gabriela Cáceres. But their investigation found that “it’s almost impossible to give an answer in a country where more than half of cases go unpunished.” Their piece dubbed femicide the “other underreported pandemic.” At a minimum, collaboration between various sectors is required to confront this complex problem. The economic and daily disturbances of Covid-19 have exacerbated issues of gender-based violence, which is a risk factor for femicide. Femicide’s place in these cycles of violence must be acknowledged to create better potential for intervention and prevention. Awareness is important, but only a first step. SJ Fernandez, Yanxi Liu, and Kristina Zanziger graduated from Georgetown University with a Masters in Conflict Resolution. Fernandez concentrated on equitable solutions to identity-based conflict. She currently works within the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion field in the nonprofit sector. Liu focused on human rights and gender-based violence in Latin America and political behavior/political engagement. Prior to Georgetown University, she worked for a development NGO in China with Poverty Alleviation Projects. Zanzinger specializes in human rights and social movements in Latin America with a research focus on LGBTQ+ and reproductive rights. © NACLA 2019

To view interview, click on the photo above.

Ben Ferencz The one, the only, the treasured Ben Ferencz turned age 101 today. Following World War II, Ben was a prosecutor of Nazi mass murder. Ben is a lawyer, a teacher, and a force for world progress away from war, toward peace. For more information, I refer you to these sources, including many that are Ben’s wise voice: From the Jackson List archive, two past posts about Ben: https://thejacksonlist.com/?s=%22Ben+Ferencz%22+birth; video excerpts of his 1947 opening statement at Nuremberg in the Einsatzgruppen case: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b67B-MoKG_o; a November 2005 interview of Ben: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-8m5YHt__4; a Ben TED talk from 2017: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zwa4zRWDsvI; the trailer of the 2018 documentary, “Prosecuting Evil: The Extraordinary World of Ben Ferencz”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meDbZemxuK4; on Amazon Prime Video, the 2019 film “Law Not War,” about Ben: https://www.amazon.com/Law-Not-War-Benjamin-Ferencz/dp/B082G8KCDV Ben’s website, a treasure house of his writings and speeches: https://benferencz.org/; and, of course, you should follow Ben on Twitter: https://twitter.com/BenFerencz. So Happy Birthday, Ben. Thank you—those are such inadequate words—for being humanity’s lawyer, teacher, and dear friend.

Newlines Institute for Strategy and Policy and the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights | Newlines Institute for Strategy and Policy Prof. Irwin Cotler of the Raoul Wallenburg Centre for Human Rights interviewed on the Report | CTVNews Watch video by clicking on image above. This report is the first independent expert application of the 1948 Genocide Convention to the ongoing treatment of the Uyghurs in China. It was undertaken by the Newlines Institute for Strategy and Policy, in cooperation with the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights, in response to emerging accounts of serious and systematic atrocities in Xinjiang province, particularly directed against the Uyghurs, an ethnic minority, to ascertain whether the People’s Republic of China is in breach of the Genocide Convention under international law. For this purpose, dozens of experts in international law, genocide studies, Chinese ethnic policies, and the region were invited to examine pro-bono all available evidence that could be collected and verified from public Chinese State communications, leaked Chinese State communications, eye-witness testimony, and open-source research methods such as public satellite-image analysis, analysis of information circulating on the Chinese internet, and any other available source. The resulting report is a presentation of the facts that could be established together with careful analysis of whether China bears State responsibility for breaches of the Genocide Convention. We believe the conclusions are clear and convincing. We do not make any recommendations for action, but we do stand prepared to share our information and analysis with relevant institutions or actors interested in these findings. Executive Summary This report concludes that the People’s Republic of China (China) bears State responsibility for committing genocide against the Uyghurs in breach of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention) based on an extensive review of the available evidence and application of international law to the evidence of the facts on the ground. The examination was conducted by recognized independent experts on international law, genocide, China’s ethnic policies, and the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR). Intent to Destroy. Under Article II of the Genocide Convention, the commission of genocide requires the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, [a protected group], as such.” The “intent to destroy” does not require explicit statements. Intent can be inferred from a collection of objective facts that are attributable to the State, including official statements, a general plan, State policy and law, a pattern of conduct, and repeated destructive acts, which have a logical sequence and result — destruction of the group as such, in whole or in substantial part. High-level statements of intent and general plan. In 2014, China’s Head of State, President Xi Jinping, launched the “People’s War on Terror” in XUAR, making the areas where Uyghurs constitute nearly 90 percent of the population the front line. High-level officials followed up with orders to “round up everyone who should be rounded up,” “wipe them out completely ... destroy them root and branch,” and “break their lineage, break their roots, break their connections, and break their origins.” Officials described Uyghurs with dehumanizing terms and repeatedly likened the mass internment of Uyghurs to “eradicating tumors.” Comprehensive State policy, pattern of conduct and repeated destructive acts. a. Government-Mandated Homestays. Since 2014, the Government of China (Government) has deployed Han cadres to reside in Uyghur homes as monitors, resulting in the rupturing of family bonds. County governments further coerce, incentivize, and actively promote Han-Uyghur marriages. b. Mass Internment. In 2017, the XUAR legislature formally legalized the mass internment of Uyghurs under “De-Extremification” regulations. The top security official and entities dispatched a manual and set of documents across the region with orders to police Uyghurs, “speed up the construction” and expansion of the mass internment camps, “increase the discipline and punishment” within the camps and maintain “strict secrecy” over all information, which is not to “be disseminated,” nor “open to the public.” The manual outlines the complex hierarchy of officials, entities, and the centralized digital surveillance system overseeing the entire campaign. c. Mass Birth-Prevention Strategy. China has simultaneously pursued a dual systematic strategy of forcibly sterilizing Uyghur women of childbearing age and interning Uyghur men of child-bearing years, preventing the regenerative capacity of the group and evincing an intent to biologically destroy the group as such. According to Government statistics and directives, including to “carry out family planning sterilization,” “lower fertility levels,” and ”leave no blind spots,” China is carrying out a well-documented, State-funded birth-prevention campaign targeting women of childbearing age in Uyghur-concentrated areas with mass forced sterilization, abortions, and IUD placements. China explicitly admits the purpose of these campaigns is to ensure that Uyghur women are “no longer baby-making machines.” d. Forcible Transfer of Uyghur Children to State-run Facilities. Pursuant to new Government policy in 2017, China began building a vast network of massive State- run, highly securitized boarding schools and orphanages to confine Uyghur children, including infants, full time. XUAR counties receive specific quotas from higher authorities to institutionalize such “orphans,” who often lose both parents to internment or forced labor. e. Eradication of Uyghur identity, community, and domestic life. Pursuant to Government campaigns, local authorities have eliminated Uyghur education, destroyed Uyghur architecture and household features, and damaged, altered, or completely demolished the vast majority of mosques and sacred sites in the region, while closing off other sites or converting them into commercial spaces. f. Selective Targeting of Intellectuals and Community Leaders. The intent to destroy the Uyghurs as a group is further demonstrated by the Government’s deliberate targeting of the guardians and transmitters of Uyghur identity for prolonged detention or death, including household heads, intellectuals, and cultural leaders, regardless of Party affiliation or educational status. The deliberate targeting of Uyghur leaders and sacred sites evinces an intent to destroy the essential elements of Uyghur identity and communal bonds, which define the group as such. China’s policies and practices targeting Uyghurs in the region must be viewed in their totality, which amounts to an intent to destroy the Uyghurs as a group, in whole or in substantial part, as such. Acts of Genocide. While commission of any one of the Genocide Convention’s enumerated acts with the requisite intent can sustain a finding of genocide, the evidence presented in this report supports a finding of genocide against the Uyghurs in breach of each and every act prohibited in Article II (a) through (e). “(a) Killing members of the group.” There are reports of mass death and deaths of prominent Uyghur leaders selectively sentenced to death by execution or, for elders in particular, by long-term imprisonment. “(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group.” Uyghurs are suffering serious bodily and mental harm from systematic torture and cruel treatment, including rape, sexual abuse, exploitation, and public humiliation, at the hands of camp officials and Han cadres assigned to Uyghur homes under Government-mandated programs. Internment camps contain designated “interrogation rooms,” where Uyghur detainees are subjected to consistent and brutal torture methods, including beatings with metal prods, electric shocks, and whips. The mass internment and related Government programs are designed to indoctrinate and “wash clean” brains, driving Uyghurs to commit or attempt suicide from the threat of internment or the daily extreme forms of physical and psychological torture within the camps, including mock executions, public “self-criticisms,” and solitary confinement. "(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.” The authorities systematically target Uyghurs of childbearing years, household heads, and community leaders for detention in unliveable conditions, impose birth-prevention measures on Uyghur women, separate Uyghur children from their parents, and transfer Uyghurs on a mass scale into forced hard labor schemes in a manner that parallels the mass internment. In sum, China is deliberately inflicting collective conditions calculated to terminate the survival of the Uyghurs as a group. “(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.” The systematic birth prevention campaign in Uyghur-concentrated areas is reinforced by the mass internment drive. In the camps, Uyghur women are subjected to forced IUD insertions, abortions, and injections or medication halting their menstrual cycles, while Uyghur men of childbearing age are targeted for internment, depriving the Uyghur population of the ability to reproduce. As a result of these interconnected policies, growth rates in Uyghur-concentrated areas are increasingly approaching zero. “(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.” Where detentions and forced labor schemes are leaving Uyghur children bereft of both parents, they are being sent to State-run orphanages and raised in Chinese-language environments with standard Han child-rearing methods. China’s Responsibility for Genocide under the Genocide Convention. China is a highly centralized State in full control of its territory and population, including XUAR, and is a State party to the Genocide Convention. The persons and entities perpetrating the above-indicated acts of genocide are all State agents or organs — acting under the effective control of the State — manifesting an intent to destroy the Uyghurs as a group within the meaning of Article II of the Genocide Convention. This report therefore concludes that China bears State responsibility for an ongoing genocide against the Uyghurs, in breach of the Genocide Convention. Full Report © Newlines Institute for Strategy and Policy and its affiliated partners. All rights reserved.

9 March 2021 The UN human rights office (OHCHR) said on Tuesday that it was “appalled” by what appears to be the simultaneous arbitrary killings of nine activists in the Philippines during police-military operations in provinces surrounding the metropolitan area of the capital, Manila. Photo: Danilo Pinzon/World Bank Housing in Tondo, Manila, Philippines. (file) According to spokesperson Ravina Shamdasani, OHCHR received information stating that at around 3:15am on Sunday, eight men and one woman were killed in Batangas, Cavite, Laguna and Rizal as police and military executed search warrants issued by a Manila court. “We are deeply worried that these latest killings indicate an escalation in violence, intimidation, harassment and ‘red-tagging’ of human rights defenders”, she said, noting a history of human rights advocates being “red-tagged” – or accused of fronting for the armed wing of the Communist party. Rights activists in crosshairs Among those killed were labour rights activist Emanuel Asuncion, along with husband and wife Chai Lemita-Evangelista and Ariel Evangelista, who worked on issues relating to the rights of fishing communities and were reportedly shot inside their home. Melvin Dasigao and Mark Lee Coros Bacasno were also among the victims; advocates for housing rights of people rendered homeless, according to OHCHR. Two indigenous peoples' activists and two housing rights activists were also among those killed and six people were reportedly arrested during the operations. “The Government has informed us that the operation was based on search warrants issued in the context of its counter-insurgency campaign against the New People's Army”, Ms. Shamdasani said, briefing journalists in Geneva. She pointed out that previous search warrants executed at night have also resulted in killings, including on 30 December when nine Tumandok indigenous peoples' rights activists were killed during joint operations, executing search warrants in Panay. Strengthen investigative mechanisms OHCHR welcomed the Government's commitment to investigate these cases, which it called “a critical test” for the domestic investigative mechanisms that it had established. While the UN is working with the Government to strengthen these mechanisms, Ms. Shamdasani stressed that they must be “prompt, transparent and effective” to meet international standards. She detailed that the High Commissioner's June 2020 Human Rights Council report on the Philippines documented “a serious lack of due process in police operations, and near-total impunity for the use of lethal force by the police and the military”. In that report, the High Commissioner warned that “red-tagging” had proven extremely dangerous and urged the protection of human rights defenders, journalists and others at risk. Call to action In recent months, there have been dozens of activists and several journalists arrested, including on Human Rights Day, 10 December. “We urge the police to take urgent measures to prevent the use of excessive force resulting in loss of lives during law enforcement operations”, the OHCHR spokesperson said. “We also call on the Government and members of the security forces to refrain from rhetoric that may lead to violations, and instead make public commitments to uphold human rights and the rule of law”. See article here. © 2021 UN News