View previous stories
	Is India Still a Democracy? by OHCHR, The Nation, Le Monde diplomatique, agencies   Mar. 2024   We call on India to implement its human rights obligations and set a positive example by reversing the erosion of human rights. (OHCHR)   UN human rights experts have sounded the alarm over reports of attacks on minorities, media and civil society in India and called for urgent corrective action as the country prepares to hold elections in early 2024.   “We are alarmed by continuing reports of attacks on religious, racial and ethnic minorities, on women and girls on intersecting grounds, and on civil society, including human rights defenders and the media,” the UN experts said, expressing concern that the situation is likely to worsen in the coming months ahead of national elections.   They noted reports of violence and hate crimes against minorities; dehumanising rhetoric and incitement to discrimination and violence; targeted and arbitrary killings; acts of violence carried out by vigilante groups; targeted demolitions of homes of minorities; enforced disappearances; the intimidation, harassment and arbitrary and prolonged detention of human rights defenders and journalists; arbitrary displacement due to development mega-projects; and intercommunal violence, as well as the misuse of official agencies against perceived political opponents.   “We call on India to implement its human rights obligations fully and set a positive example by reversing the erosion of human rights and addressing recurring concerns raised by UN human rights mechanisms,” the experts said.   “In light of continuing reports of violence and attacks against religious, racial and ethnic minorities, and other grave human rights issues, and the apparent lack of response by authorities to concerns raised, we are compelled to express our grave concern, especially given the need for a conducive atmosphere for free and fair elections in accordance with the early warning aspect of our mandates,” they said.   http://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/03/india-un-experts-urge-corrective-action-protect-human-rights-and-end-attacks http://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/03/india-crackdown-on-opposition-reaches-a-crisis-point-ahead-of-national-elections/   Is India Still a Democracy, by Christophe Jaffrelot - Research Lead, Global Institutes, King’s College London.   Narendra Modi’s electoral success in Gujarat between 2001 and 2014 and on the Indian scene since then stems from his novel blend of populism and Hindu nationalism (Hindutva). Hindutva grew out of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (National Volunteer Organization, RSS), a paramilitary-style nationalist group founded in 1925 to bulk up young Hindus both physically and morally so they could stand up to Muslims, who were depicted as a danger to the majority.   Modi joined the RSS as a child and devoted his life to it, pursuing no other careers and even living apart from his wife. He rose through the ranks, eventually becoming the chief minister of Gujarat (his home state) in 2001. The following year, he oversaw an anti-Muslim pogrom that left some 2,000 dead— a strategy of religious polarization that won him the December 2002 regional elections. Similar successes in 2007 and 2012 made Modi the obvious prime ministerial candidate for his Bharatiya Janata Party (Indian People’s Party, BJP) in 2014.   But he left behind the RSS tradition of collective decision-making, putting himself front and center and striving to connect directly with “his” people. Rather than relying on the activist network, Modi held rally after rally where he showcased his flair for speechmaking. He also founded his own television channel, worked social media, and employed a revolutionary strategy: using holograms to simultaneously lead one rally in hundreds of places. Modi even distributed masks printed with his likeness to deepen supporters’ identification with him. In short, he saturated the public arena so as to embody the masses—a task made easier by his low-caste origins, on which he has built a complete narrative. (He worked as a teaboy in his father’s shop.)   However, the “masses” meant only the Hindu majority, which he was busy stirring up against one target in particular: Muslims. As in the 2014 elections, in 2019 “Moditva”—Modi’s idiosyncratic hybridization of right-wing nationalist ideology, Hindutva and a personality cult—triumphed on the strength of BJP landslides in the north and west. This success allowed him to bend to his will both the RSS and the BJP—whose MPs had ridden to victory on his coattails—fashioning a government of faithfuls and a parliament of yes-men.   The other institutions soon succumbed too—even the Supreme Court, once a beacon of independence. In the summer of 2014, Modi advanced a constitutional reform that would have changed the appointment process for judges, until then picked by a collegium of peers. His co-optation, opposed by the entire political class, would have replaced the collegium with a five-member commission. The Supreme Court eventually declared the amendment unconstitutional, but Modi still got his way: Of the nominees submitted by the collegium, his government finalized appointments only for those he liked. The court thus resigned itself to proposing candidates who were apt to please him.   Society, meanwhile, was undergoing a similar process of enforced conformity, especially in higher education, despite India’s reputation for creativity and intellectual vitality. Public universities were under the thumb of vice-chancellors invariably chosen from among members or supporters of the Hindu nationalist current. Funders (mostly from the business world) of private institutions were pressured, and they in turn pressured the faculty: Industrialists cannot afford to antagonize those in power.   Dozens of subtle maneuvers brought the opposition to its knees. Most often, members of the Indian National Congress or regional parties would be intimidated via tax adjustments or police investigations based on shaky pretexts. The objective? To draw rivals away from their political affiliations and toward the BJP. A valuable catch would sometimes be rewarded with a ministerial position or an easy job. Those who resisted the carrot felt the sting of the stick, typically in the form of charges that could mean prison (the chief minister of Delhi, Arvind Kejriwal, was imprisoned last month) or a freeze on their party’s funds (the case for several Congress party bank accounts since February).   Despite the prime minister’s autocratic tendencies, his government has continued to hold elections. Other similarly disposed countries—think Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Turkey or Viktor Orbán’s Hungary—have done likewise. Elections have two major upsides. First, a country can claim to be a democracy (India is the “world’s largest,” according to Western leaders). Second, elections offer a cover of legitimacy to Modi: The people’s mandate justifies weakening all other power centers, especially those that uphold the rule of law. How could the judiciary system defy a leader who embodies the people? Legitimacy wins out over legality.   For Modi, running for reelection is a calculated risk. Regulatory institutions are shadows of their former selves: The electoral commission, which caused many a headache for prime ministers past, has become compliant, as its civil servant leaders face the same pressures as political opponents. For example, although it is illegal to campaign on religious arguments, it would now be unthinkable to punish a BJP leader for doing so.   What’s more, Modi knows he can outspend any rival. BJP expenditures reportedly reached around $3 billion in 2019, equivalent to those of all other parties combined. This financial heft was made possible by a law his government passed in 2017 that keeps donors anonymous through “electoral bonds,” a system declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court this year, in its most significant challenge to the government since 2015. Even if this system were eliminated, the BJP would still benefit from other private funding channels—not to mention the vast sums the government collects from the public sector to finance its campaigns.   Private-sector money comes primarily from a handful of oligarchs. In exchange for significant advantages, these tycoons help fund the government and back it in the press, which they are slowly taking over. New Delhi Television, the last mainstream TV channel still brave enough to criticize Modi, was acquired in 2022 by Gautam Adani, and some highly popular journalists resigned as it morphed into his mouthpiece. Overall, TV channels and media companies have self-censored to avoid the tax officials and police.   At grassroots level, the Hindu nationalist movement relies on a network of disciplined activists trained by the RSS. As “vigilantes,” they primarily act as a sort of local cultural police, and Muslims are their favorite targets. Muslim men are barred from fraternizing with young Hindu women in public or on campus, in the name of combating “love jihad” (a supposed strategy to seduce them, persuade them to convert to Islam and then marry them). Muslims are sometimes pressured to (re)convert to Hinduism, banned from mixed neighborhoods—causing increased ghettoization—or pursued on highways in the north when they are suspected of transporting a cow (sacred in Hinduism) to the slaughterhouse. This form of vigilantism sometimes leads to lynchings that are filmed and posted on social media.   Guided by the Hindu nationalist movement, these activists work hand in hand with the party-state that the BJP is becoming, to create a deeper state that penetrates society. Vigilantism indeed offers the state unprecedented societal reach: Cultural order is enforced not just by the administration but also by activists who serve as proxies for those in uniform. The only difference is their attire.   Given this transformation of the public sphere, how different would things really be for minorities if the political pendulum were to swing? If elected, the opposition could reverse BJP laws, but what power would it have to keep self-proclaimed defenders of Hinduism from policing the streets? Legitimacy may continue to sideline legality for as long as the Hindu majority remains swayed by the dogmas that the BJP has effectively made mandatory.   * Christophe Jaffrelot is Professor of Indian Politics and Sociology at the King's India Institute and also the Research Lead for the Global Institutes, King’s College London. He teaches South Asian politics and history at Sciences Po, Paris and is an Overseas Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.   (Jointly published by Le Monde diplomatique and The Nation)   19 March 2024   Rushed adoption of national security bill a regressive step for human rights in Hong Kong – UN Human Rights Chief.   UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk on Tuesday deplored the accelerated consideration and adoption of a national security bill in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China, despite detailed, serious human rights concerns raised with the authorities by his Office and UN human rights mechanisms.   “It is alarming that such consequential legislation was rushed through the legislature through an accelerated process, in spite of serious concerns raised about the incompatibility of many of its provisions with international human rights law,” the High Commissioner said.   The Safeguarding National Security Bill just adopted expands on the 2020 Law on Safeguarding National Security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, passed by the People’s Republic of China. This latest expansion further widens the breadth of national security law applicable in Hong Kong, introducing five additional categories of crimes, described as treason, insurrection, offences in connection with state secrets and espionage, sabotage and endangering national security, and external interference.   Turk stressed that broadly defined and vague provisions in the Bill under Article 23 of Hong Kong’s Basic Law could lead to the criminalization of a wide range of conduct protected under international human rights law, including freedom of expression, freedom of peaceful assembly, and the right to receive and impart information.   “This ambiguity is deeply troubling, given its potential misuse and arbitrary application, including to target dissenting voices, journalists, researchers, civil society actors and human rights defenders,” he said.   “As we have already seen, such provisions readily lead to self-censorship and chilling of legitimate speech and conduct, in respect of matters of public interest on which open debate is vital.”   Under the Bill’s “external interference” provisions, the broad definition of what constitutes “external force” could have a further chilling effect on engagement with human rights organisations and UN human rights bodies.   “For such important legislation, with a significant impact on human rights to be passed without a thorough process of deliberation and meaningful consultation is a regressive step for the protection of human rights in Hong Kong.”   http://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/03/rushed-adoption-national-security-bill-regressive-step-human-rights-hong
	Anti-corruption campaigner and prisoner of conscience Alexei Navalny dies in prison by OHCHR, UNHCR, HRW, Amnesty, agencies   16 Feb. 2024   Anti-corruption campaigner and prisoner of conscience Alexei Navalny dies in prison. (UN News)   The UN human rights office (OHCHR) on Friday said it was “appalled” over the death announced by Russian authorities of opposition leader Alexei Navalny in prison, calling for an impartial and transparent independent investigation. Mr. Navalny, 47, had lost consciousness and could not be revived, according to media reports.   “If someone dies in the custody of the State, the presumption is that the State is responsible – a responsibility that can only be rebutted through an impartial, thorough and transparent investigation carried out by an independent body,” said OHCHR spokesperson Liz Throssell, calling on Russia “to ensure such a credible investigation is carried out”.   Any State has a heightened duty to protect the lives of individuals deprived of their liberty, the UN rights office said.   Ms. Throssell also called on Russia to end its persecution of opposition politicians, human rights defenders and journalists, among others.   “All those who are held or have been sentenced to various prison terms in relation to the legitimate exercise of their rights, including the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and expression, should be immediately released and all charges against them dropped,” Ms. Throssell said.   The Russian authorities – like all States – have a duty under international law to protect the lives of individuals deprived of their liberty. A comprehensive and independent investigation, including a full autopsy must be carried out as a matter of urgency.   Mr. Navalny was serving several sentences, including fresh charges of extremism announced in August, following his arrest in 2021.   OHCHR had “repeatedly raised serious concerns relating to the charges against Navalny and his repeated detention which appeared to be arbitrary”, Ms. Throssell said.   Last August, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk highlighted that the latest 19-year sentence raised questions about judicial harassment and instrumentalization of the court system for political purposes in Russia and called for Mr. Navalny’s release, the spokesperson said.   Mariana Katzarova, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Russia, issued an alert in December voicing concern over the enforced disappearance of Mr. Navalny, whose whereabouts and wellbeing were unknown after more than 10 days. In late December, Mr. Navalny was transferred to the prison where he has reportedly died.   UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Alice Edwards said that several UN independent experts, including herself, privately and publicly urged the Russian Government to end the punitive conditions in which Mr. Navalny was held.   She said they had called for an investigation into credible allegations of torture against Mr. Navalny and told the authorities of the essential need for him to receive medical treatment, especially following his alleged poisoning in 2020, she said.   “That our appeals to the Kremlin were ignored so blatantly and with such disregard for human life is a tragedy for Mr. Navalny, his family and supporters,” she said. “It is also a bleak day for the rule of law, free expression and human rights.”   Since the early 2000s, he has been a vocal anti-corruption activist and critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin, leading protests and garnering support.   In 2020, Mr. Navalny was hospitalized for injuries sustained from a poisoning that involved Novichok, a nerve agent developed by Russia during the cold war.   The media reported that on Thursday, Mr. Navalny had appeared in court via video. News reports also noted that Mr. Navalny’s spokesperson was asking for confirmation and further details of his death.   The UN Secretary-General is “shocked by the reported death”, UN Spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric said at the Noon Briefing in New York.   “The Secretary-General calls for a full, credible and transparent investigation into the circumstances of Mr. Navalny’s reported death in custody,” Mr. Dujarric said.   http://news.un.org/en/story/2024/02/1146627 http://news.un.org/en/story/2024/02/1146647 http://www.dw.com/en/alexei-navalny-dies-in-russian-prison-aged-47-authorities/a-68275055 http://www.bbc.com/news/topics/cpzyrklr4l8t http://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/02/russia-prisoner-of-conscience-aleksei-navalny-kremlins-most-vocal-opponent-dies-in-custody/ http://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20211209STO19125/sakharov-prize-2021-parliament-honours-alexei-navalny http://multimedia.europarl.europa.eu/en/topic/sakharov-prize-2021_20502   UN report highlights risk of more and gross human rights violations if South Sudan’s conflict drivers remain unaddressed. (OHCHR)   Unchecked mass violence and entrenched repression in South Sudan threaten the prospects of durable peace and human rights protections; this must urgently be addressed to live up to hopes of the people and commitments of the peace agreement, the UN Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan said in its latest report.   Members of the Commission presented their report to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.   “Our investigations again found an absolutely unacceptable situation in South Sudan, whereby families and communities are devastated by human rights violations and abuses by armed forces, militias and State institutions acting with impunity. Further, the media and civil society groups operate under intolerable conditions which stifle democratic space for the population at large,” said Yasmin Sooka, Chair of the Commission.   “The drivers of violence and repression are well known, and while commitments have been made to address them, we continue to see a lack of political will to implement the measures necessary to improve millions of lives,” Sooka said. “South Sudan’s immediate and long-term future hinges on political leaders finally making good on their commitments to bring peace, and reverse cyclical human rights violations.”   The report draws on investigations undertaken in South Sudan and the neighbouring region throughout 2023, involving hundreds of witness interviews and meetings, expert opensource and forensic analysis, and dozens of engagements with State authorities.   The findings detail the persistence of armed conflict whereby State actors have either instigated or failed to prevent or punish violence, which frequently involves killings, sexual and gender-based crimes, and the displacement of civilian populations.   The Commission also identifies the use of children in armed forces, the State’s systemic curtailment of media and civil society actors both in and outside of the country, and the diversion of available State revenues from rule of law, health, and education institutions.   Measures to address conflict drivers and human rights violations are laid out in the 2018 Revitalized Peace Agreement, which is scheduled to conclude following the country’s first elections which are planned for December.   “The transformative promises of the Revitalized Agreement remain unfulfilled, jeopardizing prospects for peace and human rights protections,” said Commissioner Barney Afako.   “The process of merging forces is not yet completed, the drafting of a permanent constitution has not started, and none of the three transitional justice institutions are established,” said Afako. “Time is running out for South Sudan’s leaders to implement key commitments, which are the building blocks for peace, for holding the country together, and advancing human rights beyond the elections.”   The report finds that patterns of violations remain unchanged, ever increasing because the root causes remain unaddressed. Abductions of women and children in Jonglei State and the Greater Pibor Administrative Area appear to be worsening in scale and severity, frequently involving horrific sexual violence and the separation of parents from children.   The Commissioners visited these regions last month, spoke with survivors, and delved deeper into the harrowing issues of abductions, forced displacements, sexual slavery, and ransoms.   In 2023, authorities paid ransoms to captors in exchange for the release of abductees, which risks incentivising the recurrence of crimes. Many women and children are still missing; other abductees are held hostage as authorities fail to effectively intervene. The perpetrators of abductions previously documented by the Commission had not been punished.   “The persistent failure to build a justice system implicates the State in these violations,” said Commissioner Carlos Castresana Fernández. “There is no protective institution between the people and criminals, and it is no coincidence that areas most affected by abductions and other gross violations have few courts and judges, if any. Developing a functioning judiciary is an inter-generational project that must urgently start in earnest.”   The report is accompanied by a detailed paper published by the Commission on 5 October 2023, examining in detail the persistence of attacks against journalists and human rights defenders, and pervasive regimes of media censorship and arbitrary restrictions on civic activities, which systemically curtail the democratic and civic space.   In the latest report, recommendations to the Government of South Sudan focus on addressing structural drivers of violence. This requires urgently implementing core aspects of the Revitalized Agreement, including establishing transitional justice institutions, as well as by identifying required actions to open democratic space, and enable political processes to be meaningful and legitimate.   http://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/03/un-report-highlights-risk-more-and-gross-human-rights-violations-if-south http://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/co-h-south-sudan/index http://www.globalr2p.org/publications/south-sudan-as-elections-loom-extend-vital-human-rights-commission-mandate/   Mar. 2024   Spyware ruling a welcome step towards accountability for those targeted with NSO spyware. (Amnesty International)   A US district court has ordered the spyware firm NSO Group to disclose documents and code related to its notorious Pegasus spyware, to WhatsApp.   Responding to the news, the Head of the Security Lab at Amnesty International, Donncha O Cearbhaill said:   “This decision brings us a step closer towards accountability for up to 1,400 WhatsApp users targeted with Pegasus spyware in this case, as well as the countless other individuals around the world, who have continued to be targeted since this case was filed in 2019. This court order sends a clear signal to the surveillance industry that it cannot continue to enable spyware abuse with impunity.   “While the court’s decision is a positive development, it is disappointing that NSO Group will be allowed to continue keeping the identity of its clients, who are responsible for this unlawful targeting, secret.”   “NSO Group says that it only sells Pegasus to authorized government customers. Our Security Lab has documented the massive scale and breadth of the use of Pegasus against human rights defenders and journalists across the world. It is vital that targets of Pegasus find out who has purchased and deployed the spyware against them so that they can seek meaningful redress.”   # Background: The order is part of an ongoing lawsuit in which WhatsApp alleges that NSO Group’s spyware was used to target 1,400 of its users. Various legal efforts by NSO Group to deflect legal accountability in this case have been rejected. Progress towards more transparency through such legal disclosures are a long overdue avenue for those targeted with NSO Group’s spyware to get redress for the harms they have experienced.   This positive development follows similar news in recent weeks in Poland and Spain where parliamentary and judicial investigations are seeking to uncover the truth behind numerous forensically documented cases of Pegasus spyware misuse against political opponents.   http://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/03/us-spyware-ruling-a-welcome-step-towards-accountability-for-those-targeted-with-nso-spyware/   Feb. 2024   Governments Target Nationals Living Abroad. (Human Rights Watch)   Governments across the globe are reaching beyond their borders and committing human rights abuses against their own nationals or former nationals to silence or deter dissent, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. These abuses leave individuals unable to find safety for themselves or their families.   Governments and international institutions should take tangible steps to combat what is often referred to as “transnational repression” without inadvertently harming human rights in the process.   The 46-page report, “‘We Will Find You’: A Global Look at How Governments Repress Nationals Abroad,” is a rights-centered analysis of how governments are targeting dissidents, activists, political opponents, and others living abroad.   Human Rights Watch examined killings, removals, abductions and enforced disappearances, collective punishment of relatives, abuse of consular services, and digital attacks. The report also highlights governments’ targeting of women fleeing abuse, and government misuse of Interpol.   “Governments, the United Nations, and other international organizations should recognize transnational repression as a specific threat to human rights,” said Bruno Stagno, chief advocacy officer at Human Rights Watch. “They should prioritize bold policy responses that are in line with a human rights framework and uphold the rights of affected individuals and communities.”   The report includes over 75 cases previously documented by Human Rights Watch committed by over two dozen governments, including Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belarus, Cambodia, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Kazakhstan, Russia, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Thailand, Türkiye, Turkmenistan, and the United Arab Emirates. The cases are not exhaustive but instead offer a snapshot of cases across four regions.   Transnational repression can have far-reaching effects, causing a serious chilling effect on the rights to freedom of expression, association, and assembly for those who are targeted, or who fear they could be targeted.   The cases reviewed by Human Rights Watch show how governments have targeted human rights defenders, journalists, civil society activists, political opponents, and others they deem a threat.   http://www.hrw.org/news/2024/02/22/governments-target-nationals-living-abroad http://srdefenders.org/   27 Dec. 2023   Online disinformation, AI generated images and hate speech incite mob attack. (UNHCR)   UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, is deeply disturbed to see a mob attack on a site sheltering vulnerable refugee families, the majority being children and women, in Indonesia Banda Aceh city. Hundreds of youngsters stormed a building basement on Wednesday (27 December 2023) where refugees were sheltered.   The mob broke a police cordon and forcibly put 137 refugees on two trucks, and moved them to another location in Banda Aceh. The incident has left refugees shocked and traumatized.   UNHCR remains deeply worried about the safety of refugees and calls on local law enforcement authorities for urgent action to ensure protection of all desperate individuals and humanitarian staff.   The attack on refugees is not an isolated act but the result of a coordinated online campaign of misinformation, disinformation and hate speech against refugees and an attempt to malign Indonesia’s efforts to save desperate lives in distress at sea.   UNHCR reminds everyone that desperate refugee children, women and men seeking shelter in Indonesia are victims of persecution and conflict, and are survivors of deadly sea journeys. Indonesia – with its longstanding humanitarian tradition – has helped save these desperate people who would have otherwise died at the sea – like hundreds of others.   The UN Refugee Agency is also alerting the general public to be aware of the coordinated and well-choreographed online campaign on social media platforms, attacking authorities, local communities, refugees and humanitarian workers alike, inciting hate and putting lives in danger.   UNHCR appeals to the public in Indonesia to cross-check information posted online, much of it false or twisted, with AI generated images and hate speech being sent from bot accounts.   http://www.unhcr.org/asia/news/press-releases/unhcr-disturbed-over-mob-attack-and-forced-eviction-refugees-aceh-indonesia http://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1145117 http://observers.france24.com/en/asia-pacific/20240220-misinformation-endangering-rohingya-refugees-indonesia http://www.unicef.org/parenting/how-talk-your-children-about-hate-speech   * UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk's global update to the UN Human Rights Council on March 4, 2024:   http://www.ohchr.org/en/statements-and-speeches/2024/03/turks-global-update-human-rights-council Visit the related web page
	View more stories