Neverland

YANGON (AFP) — A doctor visited Myanmar's detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi on Thursday, witnesses said, two months after her refusal of food supplies sparked concerns that she was malnourished.

Her regular doctor Tin Myo Win and his assistant went into the lakeside compound where Aung San Suu Kyi is detained in the early afternoon and stayed for about two hours, witnesses near her Yangon home told AFP.

There was no information about the nature of the visit, but a spokesman for her National League for Democracy party has previously said that Aung San Suu Kyi was given a clean bill of health after the doctor's last visit in October.

Tin Myo Win gave Aung San Suu Kyi an intravenous drip on September 14, about a month after she began refusing food rations delivered to her home, prompting her lawyer Kyi Win to describe her as "malnourished."

The NLD and Kyi Win always denied the 63-year-old was on hunger strike, but said she was only eating small amounts of food to call for greater human rights in Myanmar and to protest her detention.

Aung San Suu Kyi, who has no other source of food aside from the daily supplies provided by the military regime, started accepting the food rations again a few days after being given the drip.

The Nobel peace prize winner had been detained for most of the past two decades. She is kept mostly isolated from the outside world, only receiving occasional visits from her doctor and lawyer.

Her NLD won a landslide victory in a 1990 election but the military never allowed it to take office and instead cemented its decades-long grip on power.

Scritto da Gabriele Durpetti

Per boicottare i prodotti cinesi leggete i codici a barre : se i primi 3 numeri vanno da 690 a 695 sono prodotti cinesi. I prodotti italiani si contraddistinguono dai numeri che vanno dall'800 al 839 (sempre le prime tre cifre del codice a barre).

Ormai è ampiamente dimostrato come una delle forme di partecipazione civica e politica tra le più efficaci sia il cosiddetto “voto con il portafoglio”. E’ il nuovo modo di fare i boicottaggi verso i prodotti o i servizi di alcune aziende.

Infatti, ancor più del voto vero e proprio, che si esercita in occasione delle competizioni elettorali (politiche o amministrative), quindi raramente ed in un contesto politico pressoché bloccato, il “voto con il portafoglio” coinvolge progressivamente sempre più persone, con una periodicità ed una incidenza crescente.

Il prof. Leonardo Becchetti, in un suo recente libro, ha dimostrato che queste azioni hanno costretto a modificare il loro comportamento importanti multinazionali europee ed americane. Questo meccanismo potrebbe essere tranquillamente esercitato anche nei confronti di alcuni territori che non rispettano i più elementari diritti umani.
Pertanto anche per la grave tragedia del Tibet, penso che la forma migliore di protesta nei confronti del governo cinese sia quello di boicottare i prodotti che provengono dalla Cina. Ciò potrebbe concretamente avere tre effetti:

1 - protestare in maniera evidente, con il coinvolgimento di molte più persone rispetto a quelle che parteciperebbero ad una eventuale manifestazione, contro una Nazione antidemocratica che non rispetta i diritti della popolazione tibetana;

2 - far capire ai nostri governanti che noi facciamo sul serio, e non è la “compassione di un momento”, affinché attivino canali diplomatici più decisi ed efficaci;

3 - contribuire a diminuire la censura su questa immane tragedia che la nostra attuale società sta attuando nel campo dell’informazione, finalizzata a non “disturbare” i rapporti commerciali che abbiamo con la Cina.

Purtroppo il nostro sistema imprenditoriale sembra preoccuparsi solo degli affari, e mantiene pertanto atteggiamenti ipocriti e superficiali, quindi il nostro “voto con il portafoglio” dovrebbe mettere sull’avviso anche questo, in quanto un giorno questo comportamento potrebbe essere rivolto anche nei suoi confronti.

Sono personalmente convinto che il Governo cinese, così come hanno fatto le multinazionali sopra citate, potrebbe essere maggiormente influenzabile da comportamenti di boicottaggio economici, purché fatti da migliaia di persone, per avviare percorsi di reale rispetto dei diritti civili, sia nei confronti del Tibet, sia all’interno della stessa Cina.

Ciò, peraltro, è stato affermato anche recentemente da Vandana Shiva che ha detto: «È il confronto tragico fra una civiltà violenta e una non violenta, quella indo-tibetana. La Cina

aggiunge al comunismo, che si serve della violenza come mezzo di dominazione, l’avidità che è propria del capitalismo. Oggi il regime comunista cinese è il maggior regime capitalista del mondo. Ha una tale fame di profitto che non gli basta l’acqua, la terra, non gli basta più neppure il Tibet su cui scarica anche i propri rifiuti; ora rivendica anche l’Arunchal, una regione indiana del nord est. I cinesi stanno perfino deviando verso nord il corso dei fiumi, come il Brahmaputra, che nascono in Tibet; dopo aver inquinato i propri fiumi, ora Pechino ha bisogno di acqua pulita e la prende in Tibet.

Per sostenere le istanze tibetane è imperativo fermare la Cina. Occorre boicottare tutti i prodotti (abiti, tv, strumenti, scarpe, …) che vengono da un Paese che non ha alcun rispetto né per i diritti umani né per la democrazia né per la sostenibilità dello sviluppo» (da un’intervista al “Resto del Carlino” di Vandana Shiva, economista indiana più volte candidata al Nobel per la pace)

di Andrea Lessona, direttore "il reporter" (www.ilreporter.com)
link diretto: www.ilreporter.com/editoriale.aspx?LANG=ITA&IDCAT=0&IDART=510&PAGE=1


Un Natale per legge è un Natale triste.

Il Congresso Usa ha approvato una risoluzione bipartisan contro chi lo vuole negare per non insultare le diverse comunità religiose.

372 deputati hanno detto sì, nove no per ribadire che anche «i non cristiani possono celebrare l’Avvento come un'occasione per mettersi al servizio degli altri».

Il documento invita gli uffici pubblici e le scuole a festeggiare questo giorno, estendendo al «pregiudizio anticristiano» le condanne previste per altre forme di discriminazione.

In Gran Bretagna, la Commissione per l'Eguaglianza e i Diritti Umani ha invitato a «celebrare il Natale come festa cristiana, senza preoccuparsi di offendere i non cristiani».

Le maggiori organizzazioni musulmane hanno applaudito all’iniziativa, ricordando che l’Avvento per l'Islam non ha nulla di oltraggioso.

In Italia, invece, ci si è ingegnati a trovare sinonimi strampalati per dargli un nome differente: Festa della Pace, Festa della Luce, Solstizio d'Inverno.

In alcune scuole sono stati vietati i presepi, in altri solo alcune statuine.

L’obiettivo, non richiesto – se non dai soliti fanatici integralisti – è quello di non urtare la sensibilità dei tanti stranieri di fede diversa che vivono nel Belpaese.

Come se negli Stati Uniti e nell’Isola Britannica ce ne fossero di meno.

Forse non si può esportare la democrazia. Di certo non dobbiamo importare l’intolleranza.

Le diverse culture dovrebbero incontrarsi, accettarsi, convivere. Non annullarsi.

Il Natale è un simbolo dell’Occidente. Rinunciarvi significherebbe perdere le nostre radici.

E allora, Umanità, celebra questo giorno per quello che è: una festa religiosa di molti, una festa della famiglia per tutti quelli che lo vogliono.

Non fermarti ai confini della becera faziosità e dell’opportunismo politico di un ministro qualsiasi.

Vai oltre.

http://www.osservatoriocaucaso.org/article/articleview/8001/1/204/

l Primo ministro dell'autoproclamata repubblica abkhaza è sopravvissuto al quarto tentativo di attentato nei suoi confronti. La cronaca e i retroscena nel commento di Kommersant
Di: Ol’ga Allenova, per Kommersant’, 10 luglio 2007 (tit. or.: Una granata per il premier)

Traduzione per Osservatorio sui Balcani: Davide Cremaschi

Aleksandr Ankvab, Primo ministro della Repubblica non riconosciuta dell'Abkhazija, è stato colpito da un lanciagranate. E’ il quarto attentato nei confronti di Ankvab, uomo ritenuto non solo il principale avversario della criminalità organizzata, ma anche una figura molto scomoda. Sia per la Russia che per la Georgia.

Alle otto del mattino la Jeep del premier abkhazo si è avviata da Gudauta in direzione di Sukhumi. Appena l’auto ha cominciato a salire lungo il ponte Lykhninskij, dal monte che si innalza nei pressi si è udito uno sparo di lanciagranate. La Jeep corazzata ha resistito all’urto della granata ed è riuscita ad attraversare il ponte, anche se il premier ha riportato una ferita da scheggia alla schiena. Nel giro di venti minuti sulla scena dell’agguato sono arrivate la polizia e un’autoambulanza. Il premier ed il suo autista sono stati ricoverati in ospedale, mentre le forze dell’ordine hanno incominciato a setacciare il massiccio boschivo nei dintorni di Lykhny.

“Il Primo ministro era seduto nella parte anteriore della vettura, accanto all’autista. Alcuni frammenti di proiettile sono rimasti incastrati nel sedile” – ha raccontato la collaboratrice di Ankvab, Marina Bganba. Dopo aver ricevuto i soccorsi medici il Primo ministro ha lasciato l’ospedale. In questo momento si trova a casa. Il suo autista è ancora ricoverato – ha subito una leggera commozione cerebrale. Sono stati salvati dal fatto che l’auto sulla quale viaggiavano era blindata”.

La Procura dell’Abkhazija ha aperto un fascicolo per “attentato terroristico”. “Questo è già il quarto attentato – hanno fatto sapere dalla Procura della Repubblica non riconosciuta. E non molto tempo prima di quest’ultimo, gli artificieri avevano disinnescato una mina sulla strada Gudauta-Sukhumi. Aleksandr Ankvab vive a Gudauta e tutte le mattine percorre questa strada per andare al lavoro. Anche i precedenti attentati nei suoi confronti sono avvenuti in questo tratto di strada. Ciò significa che i criminali sono gente del posto, o comunque buoni conoscitori dei paraggi”.

Ieri il ministero degli Interni dell’Abkhazija ha promesso una ricompensa di 500.000 rubli per informazioni sull’attentato (e la televisione russa ha diffuso ampiamente la notizia). In questo modo gli organi di sicurezza sperano di salvaguardare il premier da nuovi agguati. Ma i politici abkhazi si dicono sicuri che nemmeno l’eventuale cattura dei responsabili sia sufficiente a risolvere i problemi.

Circolano intanto diverse interpretazioni sull’attentato. La prima si concentra sul fatto che il premier Ankvab, noto come acerrimo nemico della criminalità organizzata, possa aver intralciato gli interessi di grossi gruppi criminali, sostenuti dalla precedente classe politica al potere in Abkhazija ed attivi nel commercio illegale di metalli non ferrosi, nonché nella pesca e nella vendita clandestina di pesce. Lo stesso Ankvab indicava questa come la pista più probabile già nel 2005, ai tempi del precedente attentato. Aveva rilasciato in quell’occasione una dichiarazione al nostro giornale spiegando che, con l’avvento del nuovo governo in Abkhazia, “tutti sono stati messi alle strette. Ferraglia, legname, pesce e anche i bilanci: ora è tutto sotto controllo. E molto altro: il commercio di tabacco e tutti gli altri tipi di contrabbando – ha detto il Primo ministro. E’ comprensibile che i tentativi iniziali di riportare l’ordine abbiano ricevuto una tale reazione”.

Secondo un’altra versione, accreditata dal capo della commissione parlamentare della Georgia per le relazioni internazionali Konstantin Gabašvili, “sono stati i servizi segreti russi ad attentare alla vita del premier abkhazo”. A suo tempo il Cremlino, tentando di portare al potere in Abkhazija l’allora premier Raul Khadžimba, ha cercato con ogni mezzo di non ammettere Ankvab alla corsa per le elezioni presidenziali. Per questo Gabašvili è convinto che Ankvab, “politico onesto e dotato di credibilità nella società abkhaza”, finora abbia irritato i servizi segreti russi, che hanno i propri interessi economici in Abkhazija. Un ulteriore elemento rafforza questa tesi, rendendola del tutto verosimile. Proprio Ankvab aveva avviato una riforma che prevede il censimento degli immobili in Abkhazija ed il controllo del commercio illegale in questo mercato. Affari illeciti che in molti casi – come è noto – sono stati realizzati con la partecipazione russa.

Nella stessa Abkhazija circola invece un’altra versione, secondo la quale l’attentato al premier, accaduto poche ore prima la firma degli accordi di cooperazione tra il Presidente dell’Abkhazija Sergej Bagapsh ed il sindaco di Mosca Jurij Lužkov, sia stato realizzato per impedire la firma di questo accordo. Che è comunque stato siglato ieri nel pomeriggio.

“Si tratta di un protocollo di cooperazione tra Abkhazija e Mosca in campo economico ed edilizio – ha spiegato Alkhaz Čolokhua, uno dei portavoce del Presidente dell’Abkhazija. Il patto è stato siglato per la prima volta. Prevede lo sviluppo di progetti di investimento in Abkhazija da parte dell’amministrazione moscovita”.

E’ significativo il fatto che l’accordo tra i vertici dell’amministrazione di Mosca e l’Abkhazija venga stipulato immediatamente dopo l’annuncio della scelta di Soči [città russa sul Mar Nero non distante dall’Abkhazija, ndt] come città ospite delle Olimpiadi del 2014. In relazione al fatto che Soči sta diventando un nuovo centro di investimento e di edificazione, le autorità moscovite hanno deciso di impiegare capitali anche nello sviluppo dei centri balneari abkhazi. Questo progetto ha però degli oppositori: quante più risorse vengono investite dalle autorità russe in Abkhazija, tante meno possibilità rimangono per un ritorno della Repubblica sotto il controllo della Georgia.

Si può però supporre che la questione abbia anche altri risvolti. Se da Mosca si intendono investire ingenti somme in Abkhazija, il garante del fatto che tale denaro venga speso secondo il volere degli investitori può essere solo il premier Ankvab. In questo caso, risulta difficile pensare che i nemici del premier si trovino in Georgia.

http://www.alternativenews.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=634&Itemid=0

An Israeli military court approved the extension of Ahmad Abu Hannya’s administration detention until 14 May 2007, by which time Ahmad, an Alternative Information Center (AIC) staff member, will have been imprisoned for two years.

Ahmad, coordinator of the AIC youth group in Bethlehem, was detained at a checkpoint on his way to work on 18 May 2005 and placed in administrative detention, which is imprisonment without trial or charges. As with all of the approximately 600 Palestinian administrative detainees currently being held by Israel, Ahmad and his attorney are not even permitted to know the evidence against him.

As Ahmad stated before the military court, “They tell me that I am a danger to the security of the region. Yet for years I have worked with Israelis. I have Israeli friends. I always emphasise the fact that on this land it is possible to live in peace. How am I dangerous exactly?”

Ahmad has been adopted as an appeal case by Amnesty International, and is supported by the American National Lawyers Guild.

The continuing detention of Ahmad and so many other Palestinians blatantly violates international law, which permits administrative detention only as an exceptional and highly regulated measure. Administrative detention violates the fundamental right to liberty and due process, and is used by Israel as a tool to oppress political activists in Palestine who struggle non-violently against the Israeli occupation and for a just peace between Palestinians and Israelis.

We do not know the secret evidence that Israel claims to have against Ahmad. We do know, however, that Ahmad has worked with progressive Israelis and Palestinians since 1998 on behalf of human rights and fundamental freedoms of all peoples in the area. Ahmad has a demonstrated commitment to a just peace and joint life for Palestinians and Israelis in the region.

We urge you to continue advocating with the Israeli authorities and join us in demanding Ahmad’s unconditional release from administrative detention! The Israeli authorities must release Ahmad or charge him with a recognisable criminal offence and in accordance with internationally accepted standards for a fair trial. Despite these difficult circumstances, Ahmad has not given up hope for a just peace in the region and neither has the AIC. Please join us in working for this better future.

ADDRESSES

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert

POB 187

Kiryat Ben Gurion

Jerusalem 91919 Israel

Fax: +972 2 670 5475 or +972 2 566 4838

Email: pm_eng@pmo.gov.il

Menahem Mazuz

Attorney General

Ministry of Justice

29 Salah Adin Street

Jerusalem 91010

Fax: +972 2 628 5438 or +972 2 627 4481



Brigadier General Avihai Mandelblit

Judge Advocate General

6 David Elazar Street

Tel Aviv

Fax: 972 3 569 4370

Email: arbel@mail.idf.il



As Ahmad begins his nineteenth month in prison, we further urge you to write him letters of solidarity:



Ahmad Abu Hannya

ID 917755720

Prisoner number 3186/05

Ktziot Detention Camp 01771

Military Post

Israel



Letters may also be sent by email to: connie@alt-info.org. Please write “For Ahmad Abu Hannya” in the subject line.

Additional information about Ahmad may be found on the website of the Alternative Information Center: www.alternativenews.org.

by Human Rights Watch

Cambodian Artist Vann Nath Honored with Prestigious Hellman/Hammett Prize

(New York, February 6, 2007) – Cambodian writer and artist Vann Nath is among a diverse group of writers from 22 countries to receive the prestigious Hellman/Hammett award, which recognizes courage in the face of political persecution, Human Rights Watch said today. He is the eighth Cambodian to win the award since 1995.

Vann Nath, 62, is one of seven survivors of the Khmer Rouge secret prison known as Tuol Sleng or S-21, where 14,000 men, women and children were interrogated, tortured and executed during the 1975-79 Pol Pot regime. He is a torture survivor and experienced appalling conditions, including near starvation, during his time at the prison.

“Vann Nath is an important painter and writer whose memoirs and paintings of his experiences in the Tuol Sleng prison are a powerful and poignant testimony to the crimes of the Khmer Rouge,” said Marcia Allina, who coordinates the Hellman/Hammett program.

Today, Vann Nath is an outspoken advocate for justice for victims of the crimes of the Khmer Rouge. His 1998 memoir about his experiences at S-21 is the only written account by a survivor of the prison. He will likely serve as an important witness in the tribunal being organized by the United Nations and Cambodia to bring former Khmer Rouge leaders to justice.

Vann Nath is one of Cambodia’s most prominent artists. It was this skill that kept him alive at S-21. His life was spared by his jailers so that he could be put to work painting and sculpting portraits of Pol Pot. He has played an important role in helping to revive the arts in Cambodia after decades of war and genocide.

Vann Nath’s first effort to document in writing his experiences under the Khmer Rouge resulted in “A Cambodian Prison Portrait: One Year in the Khmer Rouge’s S-21 Prison.” The book was published in English in 1998 and is currently being translated into French and Swedish.

During 2001-2002, Vann Nath worked intensively with Cambodian filmmaker Rithy Panh in the preparation of a documentary film entitled “S-21: The Khmer Rouge Killing Machine.” Vann Nath is extensively featured in the film, in which Panh brought together former prisoners and guards and filmed them, on site at the former prison or at the killing field known as Choeung Ek. With great dignity, survivor Vann Nath confronts and questions his former torturers.

Despite battling long-standing health problems, including chronic kidney disease, Vann Nath continues to paint and write about his experiences under the Pol Pot regime.

“Recognizing courageous writers and torture survivors such as Vann Nath, who continue to speak out about injustice, torture and impunity, highlights the need for justice for past atrocities,” said Allina. “Like the other Hellman/Hammett grant-winners, Vann Nath is also living proof of the need for greater human rights protection today.”

Human Rights Watch administers the Hellman/Hammett awards, given each year to writers around the world who have been victims of human rights violations or targets of political persecution.

More than half of this year’s 45 awardees hail from three countries – nine are from China, eight are Vietnamese, and seven come from Iran. All three countries have harassed and persecuted journalists, poets, playwrights, essayists, bloggers and novelists who dare to express ideas that criticize official public policy or people in power.

Among this year’s recipients is Chinese poet Huang Xiang, 65, who spent more than 12 years in Chinese work camps and prisons as a result of ideas expressed in his poetry. Also recognized this year is Vietnamese democracy activist Nguyen Vu Binh, 38, who is currently serving a seven-year prison sentence for articles he wrote criticizing the government and calling for democracy.

http://www.hrw.org/

International Community Should Not Reward Sham Election

(New York, February 8, 2007) – A new dictatorship will be consolidated in Turkmenistan by the pro forma presidential election on February 11 unless strong international voices insist on real human rights reform, Human Rights Watch said today. The election is for the successor to Saparmurad Niazov, who died in December after two decades of increasingly tyrannical rule.

The February 11 presidential election will be neither free nor fair, and the result is a foregone conclusion,” said Holly Cartner, Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The international community has strangely failed to criticize the upcoming Turkmen election. It may be polite for outsiders to restrain their criticism to avoid accusations of prejudging the poll, but it’s clear the Turkmen authorities themselves have already prejudged the outcome.”

Sunday’s poll will be the first multi-candidate presidential election in gas-rich Turkmenistan. But all six candidates are from the only permitted political party, and were pre-selected by the country’s supreme legislature. Candidates must have held state office and been resident in Turkmenistan for at least the past 15 years. These conditions made it impossible for opposition candidates to participate, since most opposition leaders are in exile and barred even from entering the country. The only potential independent candidate inside Turkmenistan, Nurberdy Nurmamedov, was reportedly abducted and beaten shortly after Niazov’s death was announced; he is now believed to be under house arrest.

Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov, the health minister at the time of Niazov’s death, seems virtually assured of victory. The constitutionally designated acting successor to Niazov, parliamentary chairman Ovezgeldy Ataev, was arrested within hours of Niazov’s death being announced. Berdymukhammedov was named acting president, and a constitutional provision barring the acting president from contesting the election was hastily stuck down by the rubber-stamp parliament. The Central Election Commission chairman has declared his commitment to “do everything necessary” to secure Berdymukhammedov’s victory.

“There are several candidates in the Turkmen election, but no real choice,” said Cartner.

Candidates in the election have talked of the need for reforms in health, education and the pension system, and the government has promised to make internet access more available. But there have been no promises to end a range of human rights violations that characterized the Niazov era.

“Foreign governments and corporations will be eager to establish close relations with Ashgabat and its vast gas resources,” said Cartner. “But since Turkmenistan will also want to do business, they should use this opportunity to press for human rights improvements.”

Human Rights Watch has issued a set of benchmarks that it said governments should adopt as a condition for deepening engagement with Turkmenistan. In October 2006, a European Parliament committee voted to stop further consideration of a trade agreement with Turkmenistan until its government significantly improved its human rights record. The committee cited in particular the need to release all political prisoners, allow the registration and free functioning of nongovernmental organizations, permit the International Committee of the Red Cross to work freely in the country, and to grant United Nations human rights monitors “timely” access to Turkmenistan to monitor the situation.

“Institutions seeking to engage with Turkmenistan’s new leadership shouldn’t give it the benefit of the doubt just because Niazov is gone, but should push for these reforms,” said Cartner. “Foreign governments need to make clear that Turkmenistan’s new leadership will be judged on solid evidence of human rights progress.”

Background: The Niazov Era, Engagement and Evidence of Reform

Turkmenistan under Niazov: One of the most repressive countries in the world
Niazov, who was president for life, terrorized Turkmen government and society. Frequent purges of his government resulted in lengthy prison sentences for officials. He personally controlled the country’s foreign-held hard currency accounts. His official title was Turkmenbashi, or father of the Turkmen people, and he also called himself a prophet. Niazov’s Rukhnama, or “Book of the Soul,” a collection of his sayings, has been paramount in school curricula and required reading for civil servants, who had to pass exams on it. Niazov’s pervasive personality cult gained much attention and ironic media comment abroad, but for the population subject to Niazov’s monstrous policies and his legacy, life in Turkmenistan was, and is, no joke.

The Turkmen government tolerates no dissent, allows no media or political freedoms, and has driven into exile or imprisoned members of the political opposition, human rights defenders, and independent journalists. Dissidents are treated as criminals and have been subjected to internal exile, forced eviction from their homes, and confiscation of their personal property. Several have been forcibly detained in psychiatric hospitals. Torture is rampant in places of detention. In September, Olgusapar Muradova, a human rights defender and Radio Liberty correspondent, died in prison in highly suspicious circumstances after being convicted on politically motivated charges of illegal weapons possession. Dozens of people arrested in the wake of an armed attack on Niazov in 2002 are believed to be held incommunicado following closed trials. Great numbers of people are thought to be blacklisted and banned from leaving the country, and the government denies entry to foreign journalists and human rights defenders.

The government banned opera, ballet, the circus, the philharmonic orchestra and non-Turkmen cultural associations. Religious believers, particularly followers of faiths other than Sunni Islam and Russian Orthodoxy, have faced criminal prosecution, police beatings, deportation and, in some cases, demolition of their houses of worship.

Under Niazov, the government sent the country backwards in social and economic development. The country is rich in natural gas, but most of the population lives in grinding poverty. In 2004, Niazov was reported to have ordered the dismissal of an estimated 15,000 healthcare workers and replaced them with military conscripts. Beginning in 1994, the government limited compulsory education to nine years, stopped recognizing degrees earned abroad, and cut back drastically on state-funded healthcare.

Promises of Reform
Berdymukhammedov has emphasized repeatedly that he would continue the policies of Niazov, a worrying sign that some of the worst aspects of the Niazov regime may remain in place. The only sign of political reform that nods in the direction of human rights was a promise to make the internet more accessible in Turkmenistan.

Following Niazov’s death and during the election campaign period, the government and presidential candidates have promised social and economic reform. The government pledged to restore the tenth grade to the compulsory education system, allow more students to study abroad, and attract more foreign specialists into Turkmenistan’s higher education system. No specific promises have been made, however, to restore the full program of compulsory education.

Berdymukhammedov also promised to improve the pension system, ensure that pensions and salaries are paid on time, and provide gas, water, electricity and salt free of charge to consumers.

Minimum Benchmarks for Engagement
A complete set of benchmarks for across-the-board reform must include the following:

Release prisoners of conscience, and provide independent review of the cases of all political prisoners, including the persons imprisoned in connection with the alleged assassination attempt against Niazov in November 2002, and persons imprisoned in the context of the frequent purges of state officials. Guarantee full access to places of detention in Turkmenistan by the ICRC;

Guarantee the unfettered functioning of UN special rapporteurs and other thematic mechanisms in accordance with Article 4 (h) of the April 15, 2003 UN Commission on Human Rights statement on the situation in Turkmenistan;

Guarantee access to the country for Professor Emmanuel Decaux, rapporteur on Turkmenistan for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), so that he may complete the work begun in 2002 under the Moscow Mechanism;

Allow independent investigation of deaths in custody, notably the death of journalist Ogulsapar Muradova in September 2006;

Guarantee freedom of movement. This should include rescinding the blacklisting of persons from travel overseas, and cancellation of the punishment of internal exile or forced relocation imposed on certain individuals and groups;

Allow freedom of expression and information. This should include lifting of all restrictions on independent journalistic activity, including access for, and free functioning of, foreign journalists in the country;

Allow freedom of religion;

Fully restore the education system;

Restore a functioning healthcare system, cancelling the policies that saw healthcare workers replaced by military conscripts in most of the country’s healthcare facilities;

Establish a genuinely pluralistic political environment, including registration of alternative political parties, and conditions for future elections to be conducted in accordance with democratic standards as determined by OSCE Copenhagen commitments. Exiled opposition figures should be allowed to return to Turkmenistan and participate in the political life of the country.

by Human Rights Watch

Failure to Prosecute Undermines Commitment to International Justice

(Berlin, February 2, 2007) – Uzbek survivors of torture and the 2005 massacre of unarmed protesters in Andijan have appealed a decision by Germany's federal prosecutor not to open an investigation against former Uzbek Interior Minister Zokir Almatov, Human Rights Watch said today.

Germany's federal prosecutor had rejected a December 2005 complaint by the victims, joined by Human Rights Watch, asking the prosecutor to open an investigation against Almatov and 11 other Uzbek government officials
for crimes against humanity. The crimes related to the massacre of hundreds of unarmed protesters on May 13, 2005 in the eastern city of Andijan, and the widespread and systematic use of torture in Uzbekistan.

The German government allowed Almatov to travel to Germany shortly before the complaint against him was filed, although the authorities knew he was on a visa ban list about to be announced by the European Union.
The federal prosecutor then failed to open an investigation against Almatov as required by Germany's universal jurisdiction law, the Code of Crimes against International Law.

"Germany's universal jurisdiction law was adopted to help survivors of serious atrocities who have no hope of getting justice at home," said Holly Cartner, Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "By refusing to use the law, Germany's federal prosecutor has exacerbated the environment of impunity that exists for foreign officials accused of crimes against humanity."

The appeal was submitted last week to the Higher Regional Court in Stuttgart. Wolfgang Kaleck, the lawyer representing the victims and Human Rights Watch, challenged the federal prosecutor's reasoning for not opening an investigation. The appeal stresses that Germany's Code of Crimes against International Law obliges the prosecution to investigate alleged international crimes such as crimes against humanity, and that its failure to do so when Almatov was present in Germany cannot now be used as a justification not to do so after he fled back to Uzbekistan.

The appeal also underscores that the federal prosecutor ignored the core principle of universal jurisdiction, which is intended to put an end to impunity for the most horrendous crimes. If this principle is to be respected, states committed to international justice must proactively collect and preserve evidence of such crimes even if they are not immediately able to arrest the accused. Otherwise, universal jurisdiction laws such as Germany's will remain a paper tiger.

"The facts of this case are exceptionally strong, so Germany's refusal to open an investigation against Almatov can certainly not be justified by a lack of evidence," said Cartner.

Background

On December 12, 2005, eight Uzbek victims of abuses, accompanied by Human Rights Watch, submitted a complaint against Almatov to the German federal prosecutor. They asked the prosecutor to open a criminal
investigation against Almatov and 11 other Uzbek government officials for crimes against humanity related to the massacre of hundreds of unarmed citizens on May 13, 2005 in the eastern city of Andijan, and for the widespread and systematic use of torture. Almatov commanded the troops that bore primary responsibility for the mass killings in Andijan and, as interior minister, also oversaw Uzbek prisons and pre-trial detention
facilities, where torture is routine. Four of the plaintiffs are victims of the Andijan massacre and four are victims of torture.

On March 31, 2006, then-Federal Prosecutor Kay Nehm issued his decision not to go forward with an investigation against Almatov; the decision was later upheld by the current Federal Prosecutor Monika Harms.
Nehm argued that the likelihood of a successful investigation and prosecution was "non-existent," given that Uzbekistan was unlikely to cooperate and an investigation in Uzbekistan would be necessary. The prosecutor apparently gave little weight to the fact that hundreds of victims and potential witnesses now live outside Uzbekistan, including in Germany, Romania, Holland, and Sweden.

The prosecutor appears not to have considered that he could interview international witnesses such as former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray, or former United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture
Theo van Boven, who had declared their willingness to serve as witnesses in the case. As special rapporteur, van Boven issued a report in 2003 documenting the systematic nature of torture in Uzbekistan.

In his decision, the prosecutor relied on information submitted by the government of Uzbekistan claiming to be undertaking various initiatives to combat torture, but he failed to check any of these claims with the UN
Special Rapporteur on Torture. He also appears to have ignored the fact that there is no independent access to detention and prison facilities in Uzbekistan and so no mechanism to verify the government's claims.

The complaint against Almatov was based on German law, which recognizes universal jurisdiction for torture and crimes against humanity. This means German courts can try and punish the perpetrators of such crimes, no matter where the crimes were committed, and regardless of the nationality of the perpetrators and victims. German law does not require that the accused or the victims be in Germany, although Almatov's presence there was a facilitating factor in his investigation and potential prosecution.

Germany has been a leader in creating accountability mechanisms for the most serious crimes under international law. The German government was a strong supporter of efforts to establish the International Criminal Court, and incorporated that court's statute of international crimes into its own domestic law. This commitment to international justice reflects Germany's struggle to come to terms with its own history and its recognition of the importance of bringing to justice those responsible for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.

Germany is exemplary in having passed legislation allowing its courts to exercise universal jurisdiction for such serious human rights crimes, which reflects the principle that some crimes so offend humankind that courts
anywhere should have jurisdiction to try them, no matter where they were committed, and no matter the nationality of the accused or the victims.

In August 2006, Harms told Die Zeit newspaper that she wants to contribute to holding accountable those in high offices who perpetrate crimes against humanity. Human Rights Watch urged Federal Prosecutor Harms to use Germany's Code of Crimes against International Law (Völkerstrafgesetzbuch) for the first time since it was adopted almost five years ago.

More of Human Rights Watch's work on Uzbekistan, please visit: http://hrw.org/doc?t=europe&c=uzbeki

by Human Rights Watch
(New York, January 30, 2007) – Two nonviolent political activists in Bahrain face up to seven years in prison for possession of leaflets calling for peaceful political change, Human Rights Watch said today. A court in the capital Manama is scheduled to deliver its verdict in the case tomorrow.

Human Rights Watch called on the Bahraini government to drop charges against Mohamed Sa`id al-Sahlawi and Husain `Abd al-`Aziz al-Hibshi, and grant their immediate and unconditional release. On November 16, state security forces arrested al-Sahlawi, a dentist, and al-Hibshi, an insurance executive, for possessing leaflets calling for the boycott of the last election. The leaflets in question do not condone or encourage violence, but instead called for a boycott of the previous elections and political change through "peaceful legitimate means."

The public prosecutor charged al-Sahlawi and al-Hibshi under articles 160, 161, and 168 of the Bahraini Penal Code, which criminalize the dissemination and possession of materials that could "damage the public interest." Their trial began on January 7 before a judge of the Lower Criminal Court.

"The imprisonment of two Bahrainis for trying to express nonviolent political opinions violates freedoms guaranteed under Bahrain's international obligations and the kingdom's own constitution," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "Bahrain's persecution of free expression makes a mockery of its membership in the UN Human Rights Council."

The Bahraini constitution reaffirms the right of free expression. Article 23 states that "freedom of opinion and scientific research is secured, everyone has the right to express his opinion verbally, in writing or otherwise, in
accordance with the terms and conditions prescribed by the law." The International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Bahrain acceded in September, states in article 19 that "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression" and that "this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds."

The imprisonment of individuals merely for having in their possession and copying a document critical of government policy violates their freedom of expression. Although the ICCPR allows for certain restrictions on
freedom of information on grounds of national security, the terms of any such restriction must be specific and narrowly tailored to prevent against arbitrariness and to ensure that the internationally recognized human rights of all individuals are protected. The detention of al-Sahlawi and al-Hibshi and the threat of further penal sanctions against them under the vague provisions of article 168 of the Bahraini penal code constitute precisely such an arbitrary restriction on the two activists' rights under Article 19 of the ICCPR.

In addition, security forces in Sanabis on January 19 attacked peaceful demonstrators protesting the continued incarceration of al-Sahlawi and al-Hibshi, according to the Committee of Solidarity with Activists and Detainees of Conscience in Bahrain. The committee also said that security forces used rubber bullets and tear gas to disperse the demonstration, causing injuries to demonstrators.

Human Rights Watch called on the Bahraini government to investigate any excessive use of force and ensure that anyone injured by the security forces has access to effective remedies. This is the minimum required by
Bahrain's international legal commitments.

"The Bahraini government should repeal its vague legal provisions on freedom of expression instead of using them to prosecute its critics," said Whitson. "The authorities should also respect peaceful protest instead of resorting to violence."

For more of Human Rights Watch's work on Bahrain, please visit:
http://hrw.org/doc?t=mideast&c=bahrai

by BBC

Jane Fonda: "I'm so sad that we still have to do this"
Tens of thousands of protesters have demonstrated in Washington to demand the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq.
The rally comes days before Congress is to discuss President George W Bush's new strategy for Iraq - including the despatch of 21,500 additional troops.

The protesters, chanting "Bring the troops home", were joined by Vietnam War-era protester, actress Jane Fonda.

Violence continued in Iraq on Saturday, with at least 15 killed in a suicide bomb attack in a Baghdad market.

The BBC's James Coomarasamy in Washington says this anti-war rally at the foot of the US Capitol was a marked shift away from the White House and on to Congress.

The protesters want Congress, now run by the Democrats, to block funding for the president's new strategy, our correspondent says.

Resolution

Jane Fonda, the Hollywood actress who angered many Americans by visiting Hanoi in 1972 during the Vietnam War, told the crowd: "I haven't spoken at an anti-war rally for 34 years. But silence is no longer an option."


Our fellow Americans are dying as we stand here today
Sean Penn, actor

She added: "I'm so sad that we still have to do this, that we did not learn the lessons from the Vietnam War."

Fonda was joined by fellow actors Sean Penn and Tim Robbins.

Robbins said: "What we need is courage, courage and conviction and we need people to represent the voice of the American people, a very clear voice last November, a voice that said: 'We're done with this war'."

The Democrats took control of both Houses in November's mid-term election, sparking Mr Bush's decision to form a new strategy for Iraq.

But our correspondent says Congress has so far balked at using the power of funding and only a handful of staunch anti-war Congressmen were present at the rally.


A man brings a child to hospital after Saturday's Baghdad bombing

Although nearly all Democrats and a growing numbers of Republicans oppose the president's plans, he says, senators have not been able to agree yet on a single non-binding resolution expressing their concerns.

At the rally a coffin covered with a US flag and a pair of military boots was put on display.

Organisers also filled a large bin with tags bearing the names of Iraqis who have died.

More than a dozen veterans, anti-war activists, religious heads and actors addressed the crowd.

A small counter-protest held up a Fonda doll with the sign "Jane Fonda American Traitor".

Mr Bush reportedly reaffirmed his commitment to the troop increase in a phone call with Iraqi PM Nouri Maliki on Saturday.

White House national security adviser spokesman Gordon Johndroe said: "Americans want to see a conclusion to the war in Iraq and the new strategy is designed to do just that."

Violence continued in Iraq on Saturday:


At least 15 people were killed and 55 injured when twin suicide car bomb attacks struck a market in the mainly Shia New Baghdad district

Iraqi police said eight computer firm employees were kidnapped by men in police uniforms in central Baghdad

The US military said it had killed 14 suspected insurgents during an air strike on a building used as a hideout south of Baquba

The US military announced the death of seven more soldiers. Three were killed by a roadside bomb north of Baghdad on Saturday, two by roadside bombs in Diyala province on Friday and two by a bomb in east Baghdad on Thursday.
Also on Saturday, Russia said it planned to question the US on its increasing military presence in the Middle East.

Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said he would seek an explanation during a visit to Washington next week.

He also said it was his "deep conviction that Iran and Syria should not be isolated and must be involved in the settlement process".