Perhaps I’ll write more about the Ukrain Tragedy, but I don’t promise anything
Although it was to be expected, yet I was shocked by that pure act ofagression, the Russian attack on the sovereign State of Ukraine.I am certainly no supporter of president Putin [1], committer of serioushuman rights violations in Russia and still worse, in Chechnya [2]like his predecessors, but that being said:The ones that condemn Putin most for his unlawful attack, namely the USA and the EU, are birds of the same feather:What about the US led attack on Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya? [3]Was the attack on Iraq in contrary to International Law or not! [4]Were not those countries sovereign States, like Ukraine?Are warcrimes not committed on large scale in those US led wars? [5] Certainly I am NOT a supporter of Putin at all and I am a fervent opponentof the division of the world into international Power Blocs, as if the world werea sort of mighty Cake [Ukraine for the Ukrainian people!].
But seen from a geopolitical point of view [not mine], I do understand, thatPutin is furious about the disturbed Game of Power since the late eightiesof the 20th century, called ”Perestroika” [6] and the fall of the Sovjet Empire,from which Western Europe took advantage by practically incorporate the Eastern European countries by the EU, countries, that back in the days belonged to the Warsaw Pact, the great enemy of the US led Western European NATO [7]
Granted, membership of the EU [8] was the own will of the new European governments and their people and the former Russian occupation and oppression of Eastern Europe was not right at all, but here I am talking, not about Eastern European rights, but the INTENTION of Western Europe.And that was:To weaken what was left of the Russian Empire…..
And we’ve witnessed the desastrous consequences of a world, ruled byone Super Power, the USA.Look at the bloody wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya etc! [9]
EU, TWO FACED LIAR! And the EU is a two faced liar anyway!Now, when they can use it against Russia and for their own propaganda,they welcome Ukrainian refugees ‘[10] and don’t get me wrong:I am pleased with the saving of those war-refugees!But when desperate Syrian and Iraqi refugees [in both wars US and the EU took partand committed warcrimes] fled to Poland, via Belarus, EU member Polandbuilt a Wall and pushed the refugees back, letting them freeze and starvein the wintercold…….[11]
With the ”blessing” of the EU…….[12]
HELP ME, PLEASE I will never forget the sight of an old Ukrainian Lady,who seemed to have nobody to support here, bursting out in tearsand begging to the camera, begging to us:”HELP ME, PLEASE” That touched me deeply: I have no sympathy for and nothing to do with leaders of State, whether Russianor US/Western European and their deadly and sick game powers.NO, my sympathy lies with common Ukrainian people, who are thereal victims of the military adventures of powerseeking countriesand rulers:
”When Elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers”
TOBUDIMEXTHE GREAT CONSTRUCTION GROUP, OPERATINGIN POLAND
BOARD OF DIRECTORSMANAGEMENT Subject:About your construction of a Wall between Poland and Belarus Demand:Stop earning blood moneyStop your cooperation with forced deportations, pushbacks andmistreatment of refugeesStop your cooperation with the violation of one of the most elementaryhuman rights!
Dear Board of DirectorsDear Management Sometimes reality seems worse than the most creepy horror movie.Not because horror movies can’t be frightening, but because they are just for amusement and not real, although made very realistic. But when you read and see actings in the real world, especiallyfrom politicians and their partners in crime, you realize that here arereal people involved, who really suffer and with them their families andother loved ones.That is the moment, that it is really freezing around me and others, who seekfor elementary justice. And you, board of directors and management, have violated the most elementary human rights by constructing a Wall between Poland and Belarus.The proof is in your own declaration, under P/S, before my notes. SHAME TO YOU! Because you know completely well the aim of this Wall:To prevent warstricken and hunted refugees to seek for a safe homeby building a Wall on the outskirts, the outer borders of the EU borders!Because that’s the aim of the Polish government [1] and you know thatfull well! ELEMENTARY RIGHTS Every human being has the right to ask for asylum, as written inthe Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 18 ofthe EU Charter of Fundamental Rights [2], but all the Polish government did was putting an armyon her border, not only preventing refugees, trapped between Belarusand Poland to enter the EU and ask for asylum, but also treatingthem very badly [3] and using evil and forbidden practices likepushbacks [4], such as was described in an Human Rights Watch Report ””DIE HERE OR GO TO POLAND”BELARUS’ AND POLAND’S SHARED RESPONSIBILITY FOR BORDER ABUSES [5] YOUR COOPERATION WITH HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES So I refer to illegal pushbacks of the Polish government, that doesn’t and didn”t care about the fact, that refugees nearly were freezing to death [6],that refugees actually DID die in that no mans land between Polandand Belarus [7], a government that also mistreated refugees [8] and whatis your role? Not only you are supporting the government in theie evil ways by constructingthis Wall of Death and Despair, and earning Blood Money, you even have the nerve only to care about the environmental value of the Bialowieza Forest!I quote you [SEE UNDER P/S]”We understand the emotions that surround the issue of the construction of the wall on the border between Poland and Belarus, in particular, in the Białowieża Forest section; therefore, our representatives consulted the local governments on 26 January 2022. The meeting was attended by military representatives, heads of five gminas located within the development project area, forest district representatives and the Staroste of the Hajnowski Poviat.”
And don’t get me wrong:I also care for and value the great value of the Bialowieza Forest as avery important primeval forest [9], but I value human lives more andwhen people are dying in that forest I think everyone should valuetheir lives in the first place. But you don’t care, because in your declaration [see under P/S]NOT A WORD ABOUT THE REFUGEES, WHO SUFFERED IN THEBIALOWIEZA FOREST, BECAUSE OF THE POLISH GOVERNMENT,WHICH DENIED THEM THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS! DEMAND I have referred to the great Injustice and the atrocities, done by the Polishgovernment to desperate refugees, mentioned in the Human Rights report andin a Statement of Amnesty International [10] Also I mentioned your supportive role and the Blood Money, you earn with yourconstruction of this Wall. I don’t know how many letters you have received to protest against yourpractices.I presume, not many and perhaps I am unimportant in your eyes, representingno government or great organisation. But that doesn’t matter, because each Voice counts. And trillion drops of water form an Ocean. Get back on your Path of Evil, because more protests will come. This is only the Beginning. You have chosen your Side. Change your construction of this Wall of Death, or else youwill be condemned by men or women of justice and in each case,by History.
Kind greetings Astrid EssedAmsterdamThe NetherlandsEurope P/S
On 25 January 2022, the Border Guards handed over to the contractors the construction site for the construction of the 186-kilometre wall on the border between Poland and Belarus. The contractor of the wall in the Białowieża Forest section is Budimex. The company makes every effort to ensure that works are carried out professionally and with respect for residents and the environment. Budimex will carry out works on the 100-kilometre section, and the border zone along the Białowieża Forest accounts for less than 40% of its length.
We understand the emotions that surround the issue of the construction of the wall on the border between Poland and Belarus, in particular, in the Białowieża Forest section; therefore, our representatives consulted the local governments on 26 January 2022. The meeting was attended by military representatives, heads of five gminas located within the development project area, forest district representatives and the Staroste of the Hajnowski Poviat.
During the meeting with the representatives of local governments, we confirmed that we have extensive experience in implementing projects in diverse environments. We carry out construction work, for example, in protected areas, including Natura 2000 areas in many places in Poland. The warehouses used to store our construction materials are and will be neutral for the environment. Our compliance with strict environmental standards is confirmed by numerous certificates – our construction sites have been issued with more than 100 BREEAM or LEED sustainable building certificates.
Although the contract does not require us to do so as a contractor, there will be external environmental supervision of the entire project. We understand that the Białowieża Forest is extremely valuable, and we want to work with respect for its ecosystem. The team assigned to the project has the highest level of competence to perform this task.
The works on the wall, transport and storage of raw materials will be carried out in accordance with the best construction and environmental standards. Our plan includes:
securing the soil with double and triple isolation to prevent leakage,
the use of spill kits,
covering and securing construction equipment repair points,
securing fuel tanks,
sorting and securing waste points,
preparation of separate points for hazardous waste,
fencing and monitoring of the area.
Our works will be carried out during the day, and the planned truck traffic at the construction location is several vehicles per hour. Upon completion, all roads will be restored to their original condition or will be improved.
Works on the entire project will take just six months. We are also on the list of strategic companies from a defence perspective. Therefore, we have a duty to act for the benefit of the country in the event of special situations from a security point of view. We responded in the same way to the calls for the construction of temporary hospitals or the completion of road and rail works after other general contractors had abandoned their contracts.
Our aim is to perform the contract through transparent subcontractor selection rules while respecting the interests of local communities and the environment. We make every effort to minimise the inconveniences for the residents and take into account the needs of the natural forest environment.”
Poland has started building a wall along its frontier with Belarus aimed at preventing asylum seekers from entering the country, which cuts through a protected forest and Unesco world heritage site.
The Polish border guard said the barrier would measure 186km (115 miles), almost half the length of the border shared by the two countries, reach up to 5.5 metres (18ft) and cost €353m (£293m). It will be equipped with motion detectors and thermal cameras.
Poland has accused Belarus’s president, Alexander Lukashenko, of deliberately provoking a new refugee crisis in Europe by organising the movement of people from the Middle East to Minsk and promising them a safe passage to the EU in revenge for the sanctions Brussels has imposed on his authoritarian regime.
Thousands of asylum seekers, mainly from Syria, Iraqi Kurdistan and Afghanistan, were caught attempting to cross the frontier and were violently pushed back to Belarus by Poland’s border guards, and hundreds of families were trapped in the forest between the two countries in the midst of a frigid winter.
At least 19 people have died since the beginning of the border standoff between Poland and Belarus. Most of them died of exposure to freezing temperatures.
The humanitarian emergency reached its peak in November when Belarusian authorities escorted thousands of asylum seekers to the Polish border. Dozens of refugees told the Guardian how Belarusian troops gathered groups of up to 50 people and cut the barbed wire with shears to allow them to cross.
“The construction of the barrier on the Polish-Belarusian border has started,” said a statement from the Polish border guard on Twitter. “It is the largest construction investment in the history of the border guard.”
The cost is approximately 10 times the whole budget of Poland’s migration department this year.
The news has raised human rights concerns among aid workers and charities worried that refugees fleeing conflicts and starvation will not be able to apply for asylum, and there are also environmental concerns. “This money could be used to build and launch [an] effective and humane migration, reception and asylum policy,” said a spokesperson for Ocalenie Foundation, which supports refugeesliving in Poland. “No wall in the history of the world stopped migration. Also, it would be a disaster for the nature in Białowieża area.”
The Białowieża forest world heritage site, on the border between Poland and Belarus, is an immense range of primary forest including conifers and broadleaved trees. It is home to the largest population of European bison.
Anna Alboth, of Minority Rights Group and a member of Grupa Granica, a Polish network of NGOs monitoring the situation on the border, said: “Walls are dividing, not protecting. The decision about building such a wall on the Polish-Belarusian border is not only lawless but also brings a risk of irreversible harm to the environment, in one of the most rich natural places of Poland and the whole of Europe.
“Instead of spending money on walls and private companies, it should be spending on developing a migration policy that prioritises human rights and safety of the people on the move, local people, animals and nature.”
A border guard spokesperson, Anna Michalska, told Poland’s PAP news agency that the “intention is for the damage to be as small as possible”. She said: “Tree felling will be limited to the minimum required. The wall itself will be built along the border road.” Contractors would only make use of existing roads, she said.
Last year Warsaw’s rightwing government quadrupled the presence of border guards and military personnel in the area, creating a two-mile deep militarised zone, and built a razor-wire fence, in a show of force unknown in the country since the end of the cold war. Dozens of checkpoints were placed along the perimeter of the so-called red zone, which is inaccessible to aid workers and journalists.
Last week Poland’s supreme court condemned the government for preventing reporters from accessing the area. Judges in Warsaw said the ban was incompatible with Polish law and that “there is no justification for admitting that this particular professional group represents a threat to steps taken”.
END OF THE ARTICLE
[2]
Article 14
1. Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
The right to asylum shall be guaranteed with due respect for the rules of the Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 and the Protocol of 31 January 1967 relating to the status of refugees and in accordance with the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Treaties’).
On the outskirts of the Białowieża forest – which bestrides the border between south-east Poland and Belarus – a group of seven Iraqi Kurds make their weary way towards the Polish hamlet of Grodzisk.
The latest miles of their journey have been from Belarus – crossing back and forth twice, deported after their first and second attempts. Now a third time: through sub-zero temperatures, across the primeval forest’s marshy terrain. Among them are two children: an eight-month-old girl and a two-year-old boy. When we came upon them, they were afraid to get up off the ground and begged us not to call the police, whispering: “They’ll kill us.”
The infant was still, though not asleep. They looked like waxen figures, their faces blank, though one woman’s face was covered in bruises.
This is one group among the thousands of migrants trapped in a perilous purgatorial terrain between Belarus and Poland, as gateway to the European Union, where they seek refuge and asylum. That gate has slammed shut, claiming eight known migrant lives so far. Poland’s rightwing government has secured parliamentary authority to build a Donald Trump-style wall the length of its frontier with Belarus, and meanwhile patrols the territory with a force of some 17,000 border police reinforced by military personnel.
The Polish government argues that it is a deliberate policy by Belarus to undermine the EU’s south eastern border by encouraging refugees to pour in. The government has also established a two-mile militarised zone adjacent to the frontier, from which medical services, volunteer aid workers and reporters are banned. Crystal van Leeuwen, a medical emergency manager with Médecins Sans Frontières, told the Guardian last week that NGOs must urgently gain access to the secure zone for migrants’ claims and international protection to be respected.
The migrants are part not only of the exodus in flight from war and other tribulation where they began their journeys – across the Middle East and Africa – but also pawns in a game between Belarus and Poland. Many are lured by Belarusian travel bureaux, controlled by the authoritarian government of Alexander Lukashenko, which, as middlemen, organise trips from the Middle East to Minsk, promising passage to the EU.
The Iraqi Kurdish group is from Duhok, near the Turkish border. It is the scene of intense recent intra-Kurdish fighting, and Turkish strikes against the Kurdish PKK organisation. The mother of the children, 28-year-old Amila Abedelkader, said that the group was lured to Belarus by a travel agency that would arrange travel by plane from Istanbul to Minsk, and access to the Polish border.
Migrants are charged €15,000-€20,000 when they reach Belarus. Airport photos show their arrival wearing shorts and T-shirts, clearly unaware of the temperatures awaiting them. They are then installed in state hotels managed by the regime, from which officially assigned buses and even taxis transfer them to the Polish or Lithuanian border.
Belarusian border guards then shove them past the fence. “Some migrants we saw had their faces sliced with barbed wire,” says volunteer aid worker Katarzyna Wappa. “We have amateur films showing how the Belarusians drive the migrants forward. The border guards stand there with snarling attack dogs in full battle gear.”
Abdelkader says her group had made their first crossing into Poland in early October, but were forced back by guards. Trapped between borders, they were given nothing to drink or eat. “The Polish guards caught us and pushed us back. They said: ‘Go back to Belarus.’ And the Belarusian soldier said: ‘No, no go back to Poland.’ When the water was all finished, my brother asked Polish soldiers for some water to drink. Every day we asked about water. They say: ‘No, no.’” The guards refused to supply milk for the baby. The migrants drank rainwater or from puddles.
This was their third attempt. Whether they have since been successful is unclear.
But every morning we receive news on WhatsApp from people held in the border guards’ cells. Bulletins such as: “Yesterday a family and their sick son staying with us were taken by the police back to the border.” And: “We are so frightened of going to the border because my baby is too small. Please help us.”
Back home in the nearest town of Hajnówka, Wappa says: “We are creating a network, trying to do what we can, but it’s too much to bear. People are dying in the forest and the Polish state offers no help apart from bringing in more troops, rounding them up, and deporting them back to no man’s land. And if we reach those people, what can we give them? A flask of tea, some warm clothes, then leave them in the darkness and cold?”
In the forest last week, volunteers found Mustafa, a 46-year-old man from Morocco, taken in by a volunteer named Mila. Speaking Spanish, Mustafa told us: “As I made my way through the forest, I saw a man lying on the ground. I don’t know if he was alive or dead. I walked two nights until I could go no further. I was walking at night, trying to sleep during the day. I was in a vacuum.
“Belarusian soldiers beat people,” he continued. “They beat me in Belarus. There are gangs that stand behind the army and attack us. They beat you, take your money, and split it 50-50, part for the gangs, part for soldiers. This border is like a river of death. What are you to do? Where to go, I do not know.” Mustafa’s fate remains in the balance.
Once on the Polish side, migrants are tracked down by border guards, police, army, and territorial defence forces; in the Hajnówka region, practically every second car on the road belongs to law enforcement officers. Others have darkened windows – either protecting or smuggling the migrants.
“We’re in a parcelled-off, isolated world,” adds Kamil Syller, initiator of the Green Light project, which aims to put green lights in windows to signify homes where refugees can find help, discreetly, and not be handed over to the police.
At the Mantiuk Hospital in Hajnówka, a boy from Somalia tells how he watched his two brothers freeze to death. “It’s impossible to say where it happened,” he says.
“Apparently he’s losing contact with reality,” say the doctors. “He often asks: ‘But where am I?’” The refugees who reach the hospital receive professional medical care, yet the hospital is patrolled by border guards, and as soon as someone’s health is restored, guards take them back to the border and leave them in the forest.
Medics on the Border, a group of doctors with an ambulance, operates in the “open” areas, but are not allowed in the off-limits zone. Asked how they can be of help, they say: “We need passes to the zone,” says Jakub Sieczko, a paramedic. “But this is impossible.”Advertisement
“We have no access to the off-limits zone,” says a Polish Red Cross workerfrom the border area. “We can’t hand over aid packages ourselves.”
Syller says that the refugees are freezing, succumbing to hypothermia and shaking from fear and cold. “The children are having reactions similar to epileptic attacks. The suffering and terror here can only remind you of wartime,” he explains.
Wappa feels that she is “witnessing scenes like out of a war, but at least in a war things are clear. “This is worse, because here half the society denies what’s going on. They think it’s all a big sham, that there are politics behind it. People say of the refugees: ‘Why did they even leave home and why take their children?’”
This land is steeped in dark history of flight and deportation. And there are few reminders so cogent as in the village of Narewka, where a row of houses from before the second world war is adorned with enlarged photographs of the Jewish residents who lived here until the Holocaust.
The pictures show people posing in their finest clothes: an elderly couple, an Orthodox family, a girl in a polka-dot dress with bows in her hair, a sophisticated lady wearing a cap.
Now, past those houses in memoriam for Jews deported from here, military and police vehicles pass, carrying migrants for deportation.
END OF THE ARTICLE
[4]
PUSHBACKS ARE FORBIDDEN ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 19.EU CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS Article 18
Article 19 Protection in the event of removal, expulsion or extradition 1. Collective expulsions are prohibited. 2. No one may be removed, expelled or extradited to a State where there is a serious risk that he or she would be subjected to the death penalty, torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
”Polish pushback practices are also in violation of article 19 of the Charter and Protocol 4 of the ECHR, which both state unequivocally that collective or mass expulsions of aliens are prohibited” HUMAN RIGHTS WATCHPOLISH LEGISLATION AND VIOLATIONOF EU LAW A CHAPTER FROM THE HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT”DIE HERE OR GO TO POLAND”BELARUS’ AND POLAND’S SHARED RESPONSIBILITY FOR BORDER ABUSES https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/11/24/die-here-or-go-poland/belarus-and-polands-shared-responsibility-border-abuses
”On the outskirts of the Białowieża forest – which bestrides the border between south-east Poland and Belarus – a group of seven Iraqi Kurds make their weary way towards the Polish hamlet of Grodzisk.
The latest miles of their journey have been from Belarus – crossing back and forth twice, deported after their first and second attempts. Now a third time: through sub-zero temperatures, across the primeval forest’s marshy terrain. Among them are two children: an eight-month-old girl and a two-year-old boy.”THE GUARDIANON THE FROZEN FRONTIERS OF EUROPE WITHTHE MIGRANTS CAUGHT IN A LETHAL GAME
”This is one group among the thousands of migrants trapped in a perilous purgatorial terrain between Belarus and Poland, as gateway to the European Union, where they seek refuge and asylum. That gate has slammed shut, claiming eight known migrant lives so far.”
THE GUARDIANON THE FROZEN FRONTIERS OF EUROPE WITHTHE MIGRANTS CAUGHT IN A LETHAL GAME
”“At least 10 people, including a one-year-old child, have died at the EU’s Eastern borders in recent weeks. Today the European Commission is bringing in measures which undermine rights and normalize the dehumanization and suffering of people at the EU’s borders.” AMNESTY INTERNATIONALEU ”EXCEPTIONAL MEASURES” NORMALIZE DEHUMANISATION OF ASYLUM SEEKERS’1 DECEMBER 2021
In response to today’s proposals from the European Commission which would allow Latvia, Lithuania and Poland to derogate from EU rules, including by holding asylum-seekers and migrants at the border for 16 weeks with minimal safeguards, Eve Geddie, Director of Amnesty International’s European Office said:
“The arrival of people at the EU’s borders with Belarus is entirely manageable with the rules as they stand. Today’s proposals will further punish people for political gain, weaken asylum protections, and undermine the EU’s standing at home and abroad. If the EU can allow a minority of member states to throw out the rule book due to the presence of a few thousand people at its border, it throws out any authority it has on human rights and the rule of law.
“The current situation at the EU’s borders with Belarus is being used by some countries as an excuse to weaken protections of asylum-seekers and push their anti-migrant agenda. Holding asylum seekers in detention for four months, without the protection standards required by international law, is normalising de facto unlawful detention at the EU’s external borders.
“Asylum rules should be upheld, not allowed to be side-stepped by countries via so-called exceptional measures. Amnesty International is alarmed that the proposal will violate people’s rights, and exacerbate the humanitarian crisis at borders while continuing to expose the EU to further internal and external manipulation and blackmailing.
“While Lukashenka’s mistreatment and instrumentalization of migrants and asylum seekers is deplorable, he is exploiting the EU’s own tendency to treat people at their borders as a threat.
“At least 10 people, including a one-year-old child, have died at the EU’s Eastern borders in recent weeks. Today the European Commission is bringing in measures which undermine rights and normalize the dehumanization and suffering of people at the EU’s borders.”
END OF STATEMENT
POLAND-BELARUS REFUGEE CRISIS/LETTER TO THE EU/EU’S HUMAN OBLIGATIONS AGAINST THE REFUGEES
” Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.”
THE VOICE OF HOLLAND SCANDAL/INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY/ASTRID ESSED’S REMARKSREGARDING THE ”THE VOICE OF HOLLAND FOUR”[Ali B, Marco Borsato, Jeroen Rietbergen and the unknown Director] ” Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.”
{See under the Astrid Essed’s comments, which were sent as a Letter to the Editor to a number of Dutch newspapers, under the notes, some added articles] Dear Readers More then 7 million people, myself included, have recently watched onYoutube the documentary from the online program ”BOOS” THIS IS THE VOICE” [made by journalistand television presenter Tim Hofman [1]This BOOS edition delt with the Topic ”Sexual misconduct”Women and girls spoke out their accusations of sexual harassment [2] in allforms, ranging from sexual apps and remarks [and also the sending of Dicpics] [3] to sexual assault and rape, against topfigures of the RTL the Voice of Holland programma, namely rapper and comedianAli B [who was a coach of Voice of Holland], singer and former Warchildambassador Marco Borsato [also coach in the Voice], bandleader Jeroen Rietbergen and an unknown director of the Voice, [4]Apart from the stories in online program Boos, charges have been pressedagainst the The Voice of Holland Four: Ali B, Marco Borsato, Jeroen Rietbergen and the anonymous Director.Against Marco Borsato already other charges of sexual misconduct had been pressed in december 2021 [5] In a response on the program ”BOOS: This is the Voice”, Jeroen Rietbergen has admitted that he went too far sexually [6], MarcoBorsato has denied, Ali B has denied, as the anonymous Director. Currently the Prosecutor’s Office is investigating the sexual assault allegations. BOOS DOCUMENTARY: ”THIS IS THE VOICE” The Boos Documentary ”This is the Voice”, is very touching, confronting.And it was with right that people were angry and showed indignation.
YET! I WANT TO ISSUE AN URGENT WARNING IN THIS ”THE VOICE OFHOLLAND” SCANDAL: Because the danger is [and I saw it in the reaction of many known and famousDutch TV personalities], that the public opinion is going too far and acts, writesand talks, as if the allegations of sexual misconduct are no allegations anymore,but proven facts!Without waiting for the outcoming of the investigation of the Prpsecutor’s Office, let alone a possible trial against the The Voice of Holland Four [or possibly more people] ALLEGATIONS/ALLEGATIONS! Because what we know until now?There are a number of allegations, uttered by REAL ORALLEGED VICTIMS [The silly newsmedia already speak of ”real victims”],there are no hard evidence yet [which has to be decided by the judge!] INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY! That’s why I tell to the public not to forget that we are living in a Society with judges, with Courts and above all the principle:”Innocent until proven guilty” [7], which is established in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [8], International Treaties [9], EuropeanTreaties, the Dutch and International Law! And let’s face this Uneasy Truth:False statements exist, especially when it concernsthe High and Mighty. Therefore its is of the greatest importance, that the allegation-casesare in the hands of the Prosecutor’s Office now, where a just, judicialdecision can be made.Prosecute or not. The real or alleged victims have a right to it, as the accusedand maybe suspects.In case of a witch hunt, there are no winners.
”On 13 December 2021, a 22-year-old Dutch woman filed charges against Borsato with the police, accusing Borsato of grooming and sexually assaulting her for years beginning when she was 15 by touching her genitals, buttocks and breasts against her will.[30] The victim considered Borsato, who was a family friend, to be a father figure after her own father died. In the following days, two more women accused Borsato of sexual abuse”
”Soon after RTL’s announcement, band leader of The Voice of Holland, Jeroen Rietbergen (brother in law of media tycoon and creator John de Mol), issued a statement admitting to years of sexual misbehaviour. ” WIKIPEDIA/THE VOICE OF HOLLAND/SEXUAL MISCONDUCT CLAIMS
” Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.” ARTICLE 11, UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
RTL temporarily canceled the television show the Voice of Holland due to allegations of sexually transgressive behavior and abuse of power by personnel connected to the show. Shortly after the announcement Saturday morning, it was revealed that composer and keyboardist Jeroen Rietbergen would leave the program with immediate effect. The Public Prosecution Service also confirmed that a criminal complaint connected to a person on the show was filed this week.
The editorial team of the BNNVARA program BOOS informed RTL on Wednesday of the incidents RTL said that The Voice of Holland will not air while the allegations are being investigated. “The allegations are very serious and shocking and were not known to RTL,” the broadcaster stated in a press release.-ADVERTENTIE-
“This Saturday, the editors received a confession and apology from the band leader of The Voice, Jeroen Rietbergen. He announced that he will stop his work at The Voice immediately,” BNNVARA wrote in its own press release. “The Voice of Holland has stated that it was not aware of these abuses and has decided to conduct an independent investigation.”
Dutch singer Marco Borsato was also the subject of allegations about sexually transgressive behavior late last year. Borsato was also a coach on The Voice of Holland from 2011-2015. Rietbergen worked with Borsato for several years over the past two decades. Rietbergen was also previously in a relationship with Linda de Mol, the sister of The Voice creator John de Mol
The television show which uncovered the claims, BOOS, said that the episode detailing their investigation will air next week. “We put a huge amount of time and effort into the program. Our show about The Voice of Holland will be broadcast coming Thursday,” said BOOS program director Tim Hofman on Twitter.
Hofman began his investigation into power and sexual abuse claims in talent scouting shows in August. During his research, Hofman received information from people who said they experienced sexually transgressive behavior while on The Voice of Holland.
Television producer ITV reacted to the allegations stating, “Our highest priority is to provide a safe and supportive environment for everyone who participates and works on our shows. ITV Studios has a zero-tolerance policy towards the kind of behavior that is said to have taken place. We have immediately ordered an outside investigation.”
The Dutch version of “The Voice” has been suspended pending an investigation into sexual misconduct allegations surrounding the popular talent series.Dutch broadcasting company RTL said it will stop airing the show while it carries out an investigation with producers ITV into allegations of “sexually inappropriate behavior” and “abuse of power,” according to a statement released by RTL over the weekend.Among those facing accusations is “The Voice” bandleader Jeroen Rietbergen, who has resigned from his post and issued an apology.
RTL, an affiliate of CNN, said it was notified of the allegations at “The Voice of Holland” on January 12 by the Dutch TV news program BOOS. RTL said it was previously unaware of misconduct allegations.
“We take this extremely seriously. Participants, colleagues, everyone must be able to work in complete safety. There is no room for interpretation in that. The priority is now to get the facts on the table,” Saturday’s statement added.BOOS said in a statement that it received stories in spring 2021 about sexually inappropriate behavior at “The Voice of Holland.”BOOS show host Tim Hofman subsequently issued an open call, where he asked if there were other people who had experienced “something inappropriate at talent shows.””Numerous reactions followed from people who said they were victim or witness to abuse of power or sexually inappropriate behavior at ‘The Voice,'” the BOOS statement said.Those accused of misconduct were approached by BOOS, the show said. One of these was Rietbergen.In a statement reported by RTL, Rietbergen said: “During my years-long involvement with ‘The Voice of Holland’ I had contact of a sexual nature with some women involved in the program and exchanged sexually colored WhatsApp messages.”My involvement with ‘The Voice of Holland’ was as a pianist and bandleader. In my opinion there was no position of power at the time, in my position I am not in a position to favor anyone on the program, I am solely concerned with the music. I saw the contacts as reciprocal and equal.”Rietbergen added: “In the intervening time I have become very aware that my own perception is not relevant at all, but much more the perception of the women concerned. And that these women may have experienced this very differently. This insight has made me realize that my behavior was completely wrong. The things that I have done I should never have done.”Rietbergen, who said he has had professional help, said he has “drastically and permanently” changed his behavior. He said that he will immediately stop working for the series.”I am more sorry for everything than I can express in this statement,” Rietbergen added.BOOS added that the allegations concern Rietbergen, as well as “multiple people within the program.”ITV Studios said in a statement to CNN Tuesday: “Our utmost priority is to provide a safe and supportive environment for everyone who takes part in or works on our shows and there is zero tolerance at ITV Studios for the type of behaviour alleged to have taken place.”On Monday, Dutch Justice Minister Dilan Yeşilgöz-Zegerius urged anyone who has been a victim of sexual intimidation or violence to file a report so the police and Public Prosecution Service can start an investigation. The Public Prosecution Service is responsible for investigating and prosecuting criminal offenses.The Dutch reality singing contest sparked the original format of the show in 2010, where judges sit with their chairs facing away from the stage, so that they initially cannot see prospective candidates.If the judges like the sound of a candidate’s voice, they must press their button, which spins their chair towards the stage to reveal the contestant behind the blind audition.
The series has since been iterated in countries including the UK, the US and Australia, where previous coaches include global artists such as will.i.am, Kylie Minogue, Ariana Grande and John Legend.A program about sexual misconduct at “The Voice of Holland” is scheduled to air on Thursday, BOOS added.
END OF THE ARTICLE
THE GUARDIAN
DUTCH CREATOR OF THE VOICE ACCUSED OF VICTIM-BLAMING
The creator of reality TV shows including The Voice and Big Brother has been accused of victim-blaming by his company’s female employees after accusations of widespread sexual abuse of contestants on the original Dutch version of The Voice.
In a full-page advert in the Dutch newspaper Algemeen Dagblad, a group of employees at the production company Talpa Media castigated its founder, John De Mol, for suggesting that women as well as men had lessons to learn from a scandal that has gripped the country this week and prompted the broadcaster RTL to take Friday’s episode of The Voice of Holland off air.
Following a deluge of allegations of abuse made against men on the show, De Mol, 66, said in an interview: “Do not wait. Do not be afraid. You have to open your mouth. Only then can we help you … Women apparently have a kind of shame, I don’t know what it is, but I would like to delve into it.”
In response, an advert was published in Friday’s newspaper that said: “Dear John, it’s not the women. Greetings, the women of your company.”
In an accompanying statement the group of employees wrote of their “amazement and shame” at De Mol’s comments. It “says a lot about a culture change that is needed within the company, but also in the media world and society,” the statement continued. “And certainly at more large companies where these kinds of thinking errors are still made by men in power.
“Women’s behaviour is not the problem. And not the solution either. This statement is of course also for all other victims of sexually transgressive behaviour in the workplace (not just at Talpa), to encourage them.”
On Friday night, De Mol said he had been “moved” by the advert and had spoken to the women behind it to “understand this anger and disappointment”. He added: “I now understand that, contrary to my good intentions, I have failed to take into account the fact that I, completely unintentionally, gave the impression that I was putting the blame on women. It has become clear to me now that women will not come forward if the culture in a company is not perceived as being sufficiently safe. I blame myself for the fact that this is apparently the case in my company, and I am 100% committed to changing this.”
The Voice of Holland was suspended before Thursday’s broadcast of a documentary on the YouTube channel Boos, which translates as “angry”, and is run by the public broadcasting company BNNVARA. In the documentary, dozens of anonymous women alleged that high-profile men on The Voice had sexually harassed, abused and assaulted them.
A spokesperson for ITV Studios said the company was “shocked and dismayed” by the allegations but declined to comment on De Mol’s interview. She said: “Our utmost priority is to provide a safe and supportive environment for everyone who takes part in or works on our shows and there is zero tolerance at ITV Studios for the type of behaviour highlighted in the show.
“After ITV Studios received notice from Boos of this behaviour last week we moved quickly to launch an external investigation to fully understand what happened.”
Netherlands authorities, including the justice minister, subsequently urged anyone who had been a victim of sexual abuses on the programme to file a complaint with the police so that they and the Public Prosecution Service could investigate
The rapper Ali Bouali, 40, a coach on the show who goes by the name Ali B, was accused by one former contestant of raping her when she appeared on the programme as an 18-year-old hopeful.
In a statement, he responded: “There are now two anonymous reports that are presented with a lot of fury as news. That is unjustified. I cannot publicly defend myself against this. Nevertheless, it is clear to me that the Public Prosecution Service will in both cases have to decide to dismiss [the allegations]. I am not guilty of what I am accused of in the claims.”
Before the broadcast of the allegations, Jeroen Rietbergen, 50, the show’s bandleader, stood down after admitting to having had “sexual contact” with women on the show and sending sexually oriented messages on an app. Rietbergen, until recently the partner of De Mol’s sister, the TV presenter Linda de Mol, said he was not aware of wrongdoing at the time of the alleged incidents.
Six other women have made complaints about the singer Marco Borsato, three of them contestants on The Voice and three on The Voice Kids. Borasto denies any wrongdoing.
De Mol, who initially made his fortune through development of the reality television series Big Brother, spoke of his disappointment that the HR procedures in his company had not protected the contestants.
ITV bought Talpa Media seven years ago for £355m, with further payments dependent on future performance, up to a total potential cost of £920,000.
The company has created 75 shows in more than 180 countries. The Voice format, in which singers are selected via public auditions and then coached by professionals before a competition for a recording contract, has been aired in 50 countries.
Anouk Teeuwe, a female singer who represented the Netherlands at the Eurovision song contest in 2013, said she had quit as a coach on the programme.
“The news is so saddening and a major disappointment,” she said. “I know enough. I’ve decided I don’t want to return to The Voice. It’s a corrupt mess. I don’t want to work at a place where men have, for years, abused their positions and where others have chosen to keep the misconduct silent and look the other way.
“You just can’t do that. You’ve got structural issues when you do that. I do not wish to be part of such behaviour, that’s just not me. So therefore, I will not return to The Voice of Holland.”
END OF THE ARTICLE
BBC
THE VOICE: DUTCH TV SUSPENDS SHOW OVER SEXUAL MISCONDUCT CLAIMS
Jeroen Rietbergen, the series’ band leader, resigned on Saturday, admitting to “relationships of a sexual nature” with women involved in the programme.
The UK version was previously broadcast on the BBC for five series, before it moved to ITV.
The show sees the singing coaches do initial “blind auditions” with singing hopefuls, who have to perform while the judges’ backs are turned, so they are assessed only on their vocal merits.
ITV Studios told the BBC they are “shocked” by the allegations about the Dutch show, which started its 12th series in early January.
“Our utmost priority is to provide a safe and supportive environment for everyone who takes part in or works on our shows and there is zero tolerance at ITV Studios for the type of behaviour alleged to have taken place,” they said.
“We have immediately commissioned an external investigation into the allegations.”
RTL told the BBC the “very serious and shocking” allegations “were not known to RTL”.
They said they were told about the “allegations of sexually transgressive behaviour and abuse of power in relation to The Voice of Holland” on 12 January by by news programme Boos, broadcast on Dutch public broadcaster BNN/VARA, which had been conducting an investigation.
Alleged misconduct
RTL added that a “mutual agreement” was reached with ITV about it conducting a “diligent, independent investigation” into the allegations.
“We take this very seriously. Everyone, including both participants and employees, must be able to work in complete safety. There is no room for interpretation here. The priority now is to get the facts straight,” they said.
The BBC has asked RTL for comment from Rietbergen.
The Hollywood Reporter said it was “not clear whether the alleged misconduct at The Voice of Holland took place before or after the ITV takeover”.
RTL suggested there is “talk of abuse of power and sexually transgressive behaviour of three employees”, including “a complaint against jury member Ali B” but that his management said: “Ali has never abused his position and has never acted” in a sexually transgressive way.”
Dutch rapper Ali B posted on Instagram he is “100% convinced” of his own innocence and his management said they currently had nothing to add to his words on social media.
Pre-recorded shows held back
Rietbergen said in a statement he had some years ago had “contact of a sexual nature” with women involved in the programme, and that he had exchanged sexually explicit messages” with them.
He added he did not feel he was abusing his position of powerbut has “now become very aware that my own perception is not relevant at all, but much more the perception of the women concerned. And that these women may have experienced this very differently”.
The identity of the third employee has not been made public.
The Hollywood Reporter said Rietbergen has been in a romantic relationship for more than a decade with Dutch TV star Linda de Mol, who is the sister of one of the show’s creators. but that she declined to comment.
Reitbergen said he has been very aware for “a number of years” that he made a mistake, and that he has received professional help for his behaviour, according to RTL.
ITV Studios told Hollywood Reporter they were contacted “this week” by Boos with the allegations of “inappropriate behaviour” associated with the show.
RTL said the show runs for 15 episodes and that 12 have been recorded, with two broadcast. The last three would have been broadcast live.
A YouTube documentary about sexual intimidation and abuse surrounding The Voice of Holland talent show has detailed a long list of claims about sexual abuse, inappropriate comments and behaviour and even one instance of rape. The long-awaited programme, broadcast on Thursday afternoon, involved statements from dozens of anonymous women who were contestants on the show. One former contestant accused rapper and show coach Ali B of raping her eight years ago, when she appeared on the show as an 18-year-old. The woman told her story in a disguised voice, saying she ‘froze’ during the attack and that it had taken her years to realise she was not to blame. Two women have so far made police complaints about B, who denies all the allegations. The programme included other anonymous women who spoke about B promising them fame and then trying to kiss and touch them at his home or in the dressing room – a pattern repeated by other men involved in the show. Off air RTL took the talent hunt off air last weekend when band leader Jeroen Rietbergen went public with a confession, before the allegations were broadcast. Rietbergen is alleged to have made continuous sexualised comments during rehearsals, sent women photos of his sexual organ and in one case, had physical contact. The complaints about Rietbergen cover a period of over ten years, from 2010 and involve at least 19 women. De Mol The show also made it clear that John de Mol, who devised the programme and owned broadcasting company Talpa until it was taken over by ITV in 2019, was aware of at least one case of unacceptable sexual behaviour by Rietbergen in April 2019. De Mol told the programme he had summoned Rietbergen and given him a serious talking too, but also gave him a second chance. De Mol said he was not aware that Rietbergen had also sexually intimidated other women. Rietbergen was at the time in a relationship with De Mol’s sister, television presenter Linda. The couple separated after the scandal broke and Linda de Mol said before the broadcast that her heart ‘wept for all the women who have suffered’. Six women made complaints about singer Marco Borsato, three from contestants on The Voice and three on The Voice Kids. A spokesman for Borsato, who was faced with allegations about his behaviour at the end of the last year, said he would not be commenting on the claims. Director A further 15 women made complaints about one of the show’s directors who was not named by the programme makers. He was accused of making inappropriate comments and touching the contestants and told the programme via his lawyer that he denied all the accusations. Since the storm broke, judge and coach Anouk has also quit the line-up, and the main sponsors have dumped the programme. RTL has also pulled The Voice Kids and The Voice Senior. The Voice format has been bought by broadcasters in over 50 countries world wide, since its inception in 2010.
A week and a half after the first revelations of sexually transgressive behavior at the talent show The Voice of Holland, the Center for Sexual Violence (CSG) is still receiving more calls and chats than usual. Most people report experiencing sexual violence a long time ago.
Wher the CSG usually conducts about 12 to 13 chat conversations a day, on the day that BNN/VARA program BOOS put the episode about The Voice online on Thursday, there were 341 chat conversations. On Friday, the center had 286 chat conversations. “The chats just keep coming,” said CSG head Iva Bicanic. “Where we normally have two emergency workers on the cats at night, we were still short of hands during the peak with 12 emergency workers.”-ADVERTENTIE-
The number of chats decreased over the weekend but remained above average. On Monday, CSG workers held a total of 131 conversations.
There are also more calls coming in than usual. On the day of the BOOS broadcast, the center received 92 calls – over four times as many as the same day a year ago. On Friday, there were 232 calls. Over the weekend, the number of calls dropped to about 70 a day. On Monday, the phone rang 101 times.
The reporting on the alleged abuse on The Voice of Holland has had an enormously triggering effect,” said Bicanic. “It triggered something for many victims of sexual violence. There was no escaping it; the whole of the Netherlands was talking about sexual violence, wherever you looked or listened. For many victims, this caused hidden memories to surface, and thus the suffering pressure increased.”
The reports came, for example, from people who were struggling with re-experiences, sleeping-, and concentration problems. Others called because they felt empowered to seek help after hearing stories in the media. People also called who realized that they themselves had been a victim after all the attention to the subject.
Last week, the CSG called in a “Letter to the Netherlands” to prevent victim-blaming. According to the center, 75 percent of victims of sexual violence face accusatory comments and inappropriate questions.
The organization Victim Support also reported that chat conversations tripled last week.
BOOS maker Tim Hofman also notices the first results of his episode on The Voice of Holland. “Something seems to be moving,” the presenter wrote on Instagram. “We see companies, universities, associations, and other institutes adjusting their policies to create a safer environment. A Cabinet (including Prime Minister) speaks out. Men talk to each other, women share with each other,” said Hofman. This is a “valuable” development, but “we are not there yet,” he added. “It feels like the first big breath of a new wind.”
The presenter also thanked all the people who told their stories about the abuses behind the scenes at The Voice in the broadcast. Dozens of women spoke out about sexually transgressive behavior on the RTL program. This included accusations against band leader Jeroen Rietbergen and coaches Marco Borsato and Ali B.
Dutch talent show “The Voice of Holland” has been taken off air in the Netherlands amid a sexual misconduct scandal
AMSTERDAM — The Dutch talent show “The Voice of Holland” has been taken off the air in the Netherlands amid a sexual misconduct scandal that has cast a shadow over the future of the TV ratings juggernaut in the country where it was first conceived by a media mogul.
The furor is one of the most serious #MeToo reckonings yet to hit the Dutch entertainment world and focuses on a show created in the Netherlands but broadcast in local versions around the globe.
It also draws in a family considered television royalty in the Netherlands — the original creator John de Mol and his sister Linda, a television star in her own right in the Netherlands and Germany who last weekend split from “The Voice of Holland’s” pianist and band leader after he admitted having sexual contacts with some contestants.
The Dutch scandal erupted after a local broadcaster’s YouTube show called “BOOS” — the Dutch word for angry — contacted “The Voice of Holland” to say it has spoken to victims of “sexually transgressive behavior” on the show and is planning to broadcast a program about their allegations on Thursday.
Prosecutors have received two complaints in recent days against one of the show’s panelists, Dutch rapper Ali Bouali. His lawyer, Bart Swier, said Wednesday that the artist known as Ali B denies any wrongdoing. Swier declined to comment further.
The complaints, which Swier said were filed Jan. 11 and on Tuesday, will trigger investigations to establish whether Ali B should face any criminal charges.
Even Prime Minister Mark Rutte has weighed in on the scandal swirling around one of the Netherlands’ most popular TV shows.
“I think everybody is very shocked and it’s good that it is investigated,” he told the Dutch daily De Telegraaf.
Dutch broadcaster RTL, which airs “The Voice of Holland,” reacted swiftly to the reports, saying over the weekend that it was suspending the show. It called the allegations “very serious and shocking” and said they weren’t known to RTL.
Dutch media reported Wednesday that RTL had suspended its ties with Ali B as a result of the complaints. The network did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The show’s pianist and band leader, Jeroen Rietbergen, quit over the weekend and issued a statement acknowledging his actions.
“During my years of involvement with “The Voice of Holland,” I had contact of a sexual nature with some women involved in the program and exchanged sexually tinted WhatsApp messages,” he said in a statement to the RTL Boulevard entertainment news show.
Rietbergen went on to say that after initially considering the sexual encounters “as reciprocal and equal,” he later came to understand that the women “may have experienced this very differently. This insight has made me realize that my behavior has been completely wrong.”
His statement also suggested the show’s producers had known about his actions and cautioned him in the past. Rietbergen’s lawyer didn’t immediately respond to a call and email seeking comment.
Rietbergen’s partner, Linda de Mol, said in a statement on her website that she split from Rietbergen after the scandal broke and was taking a break from her own television career.
RTL said it contacted the show’s producer ITV Studios, which agreed to “immediately initiate a diligent, independent investigation.” The Dutch broadcaster said that “Participants, employees, everyone must be able to work in complete safety. There is no room for interpretation in this. The priority now is to get the facts on the table.”
ITV Studios said: “Our highest priority is to provide a safe and supportive environment for everyone who participates in — or works on — our shows and ITV Studios has a zero-tolerance policy towards the type of behavior it is said to have taken place.”
The company said its investigation aims to “build a complete picture of what happened” and encouraged victims or witnesses to speak to the investigation.
Dutch singer Anouk said she was quitting as one of the show’s panelists, who first get to know contestants by listening to them “blind” from a swiveling chair facing away from the stage before going on to mentor them.
“I don’t want to work in a place where for years a number of men have abused their position and deliberately chose to keep it quiet and look the other way,” she said in an Instagram video.
The Dutch public broadcast organization NPO also took action as a result of the scandal, sending a letter to public networks urging them to make sure they have sufficient checks for misconduct.
“We treat everyone equally and respectfully,” the organization said Tuesday in a letter to the broadcasters. “Attention is paid to unequal power relationships and dependency relationships, where there may be an increased risk of undesirable transgressive behavior.”
END OF THE ARTICLE
Reacties uitgeschakeld voor The Voice of Holland Scandal/Innocent until proven guilty/Astrid Essed’s remarks
REFUGEES IN BORDERLAND/DECEMBER 2021 NIGHT OF HORROR, NIGHT OF HOPE
In this Night they leave, in search for a Safe Place,not knowing where the journey ends.For they are threathened by death by a merciless dictator,while they only wanted to spread Love and Peace.Which dictators don’t like.
The journey is heavy, through cold and heat, with only a donkey toaccompany them and to ride onWith a precious Newborn Child and another on the way. They are lucky to find a Safe Place.And when the Danger is over, they return to their country, in safety……It was heavy, but they are Safe. And in the Horror, they discovered, how strong they were They were lucky, it all went well
But not everybody is so lucky…… We saw it, this year.Caught between the sick Games of politicians, a group ofpeople ended up in the borderland between Belarus [White Russia]and Poland, and neither Belarus, nor Poland-EU did care a damnedthing about those people, using them for Power Games. Some of them got sick, many died.Yet the Belarus dictator Loeasjenko showed more humanitythen Poland/EU. offering them some warm shelter for whoeverwanted to make use of it. The only thing Poland and EU offered was more military, pushbacks,fences and laws that made it easy for Poland to refuse asylum…. BUT THERE WAS A LIGHT!NOT from politicians, but common people People like you and me….. They kept it out of the news, but there were common Polish people,who wanted to help! So there was an old Polish woman, who made soup for the refugees!And unknown Polish people, who put a candle for their window to showthe refugees a Light in the Darkness. Those people are not mentioned by the media, but they exist!They are not mentioned by history, but I know them.THE REFUGEES know them! I don’t know how the refugees fare now, in this Christmas Night, but thisNight I think of them!
While centuries ago, Jozef and Maria, were helped byhospitable Egyptians, when a cruel king dictator wanted to kill the Child, those refugees get a Sign of Hope and Light fromcommon Polish people, people like you and me, who have no Powerin this World, but do something which is worth more than allthe screaming and criminal politicians, who treat the refugees like Dirt
They give Hope to people in need!
HOW FARE THOSE TRAPPED REFUGEES NOW, IN THE BITTER COLD?I don’t know. I can’t do anything for them, but I can think of them and write about them.It will not reach them, but I believe that everything that is written, and every thought comes somewhere.Meets someone. If there is only ONE PERSON, who, by reading this, thinks of those people,then I have reached my goal. Let’s realize that Christmas is not the Feast of Eating and presents[however jolly that is, I enjoy it too], but to give Light in the Darkness By thinking of those refugees and all the refugees in this world,you give them Hope. Thank you I wish you a Very Happy and Blessed Christmas and Health and Happiness in 2022!
ASTRID ESSED
ASTRID ESSED
Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Refugees in Borderland/December 2021
JULIAN ASSANGE ARRESTED/ATTACK ON THE FREEDOM OF PRESS WIKILEAKS HOPE FOR THE VICTIMS OF THE POWER POLICY OF SUPERPOWER USA AND THEIR ALLIES
FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND PRESS/ FIRST AMENDMENT UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. – Wikipedia
In the race between secrecy and truth, it seems inevitable that truth will always win”
Rupert Murdoch
“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” ~George Orwell
This world is full of injustice. Julian Assange is in jail, while top American and allies war-criminals are free to go
Wise woman
What was feared by many adherents of whistleblower site Wikileaks has come to reality.
Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, has been arrested by the British police, after he voluntarily surrendered [1]
O fficially this arrest was on behalf of the Swedish Justice, which had issued an European Arrest Warrant agianst him with charges of alleged rape and molestation of two Swedish women[2]
On request of the Swedish police Interpol also issued an International Arrest Warrant against him [3]
However it is clear, that this arrest is motivated by the political interests of the USA and their allies, considering the spectacular revealings of Wikileaks and the American political hysteria, from extreme right wing death treaths and hunting Assange down ”like a terrorist”, [4] till governmental plans to prosecute him [5]
Also State Secretary of Defense mr Gates called the arrest of Assange ”good news” [6]
Releasement on bail :
Initially it seemed, that Swedish Justice appealed against the decision of the UK Court [dd 14th december] to grant bail to Assange. [7]
Mr Stephens, solicitor of Assange, spoke of the ”continuing vendetta by the Swedes” [8]
Later however rumour spread, that the British prosecution had appealed However, Assange is released on bail now [9]
IN DEFENSE OF THE POWERLESS :
Wikileaks, which has been founded by Assange, is an international new media with a whistlerblower function, revealing otherwise unavailable documents and thus exposing injustice, committed by States, especially Superpower the USA and their allies [10]
As a new medium, Wikileaks has won several prices, as in 2009, Amnesty International’s UK Media Award [in the category ”New Media”] for the 2008 publication of “Kenya: The Cry of Blood – Extra Judicial Killings and Disappearances” [11]
RELEASED DOCUMENTS
What has infuriated the US and allies are the released documents about US and alles warcrimes and scandals about secret diplomacy This happened in close cooperation with The New York Times, The Guardian and Der Spiegel, which publicized them
And although Assange has been arrested, the releasements go on
An overview:
Video in US killings in Iraq:
”Exposing warcrimes is not a crime!” Bradley Manning Support Network
In April 2010, Wikileaks posted video from an American airstrike on Badghdad [2007] [12] in which Iraqi civilians and journalists were killed by US forces, including a Reuters journalist and his driver, on a website called Collateral Murder [13]
A courageous American soldier with a conscience, Sgt Bradley Manning, is supposed to have leaked it
He now possibly faces a trial and a yearlong prison sentence [14]
Afghan war-logs
In July the same year, Wikileaks released Afghan War Diary , a compilation of more than 76,900 documents about the War in Afghanistan [15], not previously available for public review.
Iraq war-logs
In October, Wikileaks released a package of almost 400,000 documents called the Iraq War [16] in coordination with major commercial media organisations [17]
As well as the Afghan as Iraq war-logs documents showed shocking details about American and allied warcrimes as torture practices
The moat horrifying however is the total American indifference for Afghan and Iraqi civilian lives
US Embassy Cables
In November, Wikileaks began releasing US State Department diplomatic cables [18]
Those are the most important revelations, internationally known
However, already in 2007 Wikileaks disclosed the ”Standard Operation Procedure for Camp Delta”, a guideline for the American military, how to handle prisoners in Guantanamo Bay [19]
Shocking details were the detention [by arrival] of prisoners in an isolation cell [in the Manual called ” the’Brhaviour Managment Plan”] ’to make them more ”cooperative” for interrigations
Placing in isolation was litterary meant to ”ENHANCE AND EXPLOIT THE DISORIENTATION AND DISORGANISATION BY A NEWLY ARRIVED DETAINEE” [20] In other words: Cruel and inhumane treatment
Lack of access to the Red Cross:
The manual also revealed, that some of the prisoners were denied access to the Red Cross
Also on arrival, the prisoners were denied basics and access to a Qu’ran [21]
CREDIBILITY: REACTIONS OF STATES AND HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH
Although it is impossible for the common civilian to control the hundred and thousands of document on their credibility, a clear confirmation is been showed in the website ”Collateral Murder, where the video proof of the US attack in Iraq, where 13 civiilians were killed, is clear [22] Besides, this Iraq document and thousands of others have been controlled by a team of journalists, who work with Wikileaks
Also the close cooperation with quality papers like the New York Times, Der Spiegel and The Guardian, which have their own investigative journalists, confirms the credibility
The Guardian has since then published all Wikileaks documents in her paper [23]
Credibility is also shown by the aggressive and hostile reactiions of several States, especially the USA, which seek to prosecute Assange on the ground of an old ”Espionage Act” , which is ridiculous, since a native Australian and not in American government service, he can’t be a ”spy”
This American use of the Espionage Act to silence critics is not new: Many critical intellectuals, journalists, film producers and pacifist religious figures were prosecuted. [24]
Human Rights Watch has emphasized her concern about the planned US prosecution in a letter to president Obama, that prosecitung Assange is a violation of the freedom of press and expression [25] But despite the furious reactions of governing States, no charge on the ground of defamatiion or slander [the socalled libel suit] has followed
THE ”RAPE” CASE
”There’s something rotten in the State of Denmark” Hamlet, Shakespeare
Let’s make this clear: Nobody is above the Law
When there is really substantial and hard evidence, that Assange should have raped this women, he should be prosecuted and, by enough proof, condemned after a fair trial
However, there are clear indications, that this whole case is politically motivated
That would not be the first or the last time:
Using rape and sexual contact as a political or personal means is as old as Mankind
In the Old Testimony the wife of Potiphar accused Joseph, son of Patriarch Jacob, than slave in Egypt, of rape, when he refused to be intimate with her [26]
Whistleblower Vanunu, who exposed Israel’s nuclear power, was trapped by a gallgirl and so was abducted by Israel, which led to a yearlong imprisonment [27]
From the very start, this real or alleged ”rape case” had some strange and clumsy aspects, which make the whole case look fishy
After two Swedish women, in press called ”Miss A” and ”Miss W” went to the police with accusations about rape and molestation, at 21 august Swedish police opened an investigation against Assange [28] Within hours, Stockholm’s chief prosecutor Eva Finne, reviewed the case and dropped the rape investigation, saying there was insufficient evidence to suggest rape [the charge on molestation, a far lesser crime, had been maintained] [29]
However, despite the dropping of the case, at 1 september, Swedish Justice reopened the rape case again [30] At least that sounds very strange
But there were more fishy elements on this case
Accompanied with the European Arrest Warrant, Interpol issued an International Arrest Warrant against Assange [30 november], which is highly out of proportion, seen the charges against him Then, on request of the British Serious and Organised Crime Agency, Sweden issued a new Arrest Warrant because of incorrectness of the earlier one [31]
Allegations of the women:
Without going into details, at least some of the allegations of the women were dubious
For example:”Miss A”
Despite her accusations ”Miss A” organised a party for the same man whe accused of rape and molestation
And moreover: Even after her alleged ”rape” or ”molestation” she let him stay in her appartment [32]
Timing
Not long after the revelations of Wikileaks Afghan war logs, the rape accusations of Miss A and W followed
What is a better moment for slander against Wikileaks and his founder, seen American hysterical reactions?
Assange himself commented on Twitter ”The charges are without basis and their issue at this moment is deeply disturbing.” [33]
Of course there is no proof for a political set-up, but overviewing the strang behaviour of Swedish Justice, the out of propiortion Interpol Arrest Warrant, the initially ”wrong” Swedish Arrest Warrant, the contradictional story of the women involved and the ”timing” of the charges, raise a serious doubt and show political intrigue.
OPERATION PAYBACK CYBERATTACKS ON LARGE CORPORATIONS, CUTTING OFF WIKILEAKS OF FINANCIAL MEANS
PAMPHLET OF ANONYMOUS
WE ARE ANONYMOUS. WE ARE LEGION
Several corporations now have been involved in the censoring of Wikileaks
The censoring of free speech and free information
The censoring of a free world
Amongst these corporatiions are MasterCard, VISA, PayPal, Amazon- some of the largest corporations in the world
We, the people, will make a stand, no matter how large these corporations are
We, the people, won’t budge for government pressure We, the people, won’t fall for bribery and corruption We, the people, won’t submit to this attempt by our so-called leaders to protect their own interests and power
We, the people, will fight back. We will not forgive. We will not forget Expect us
Apparently due to American political pressure, large corporations like Mastercard, Visa, Paypal, Amazon and the Swiss Bank cutt of the financial means of Wikileaks [34]
Later the Bank of America joined [35]
Due to this cutting off of financial means, Assange was obliged to sell the rights of his autobiography for his legal fight in Sweden and to keep the website afloat [36]
As a reaction, a group of hackers [socalled ”hacktivists”] of the Group ”Anonymous” systematically attacked and attacks large corporations like Mastercard, Visa, Paypal and Swiss Bank,to protect the right to free information [37]
Also the office of Mr Borgstrom, the laywer of the two women who accused Assange of socalled ”rape” has been under attack [38]
Dutch authorities arrested and later released a Dutch 16 year old, in connection with the Cyberattacks Also a Dutch man [19 year old] had been arrested [and later released] in connection with an attack on the Dutch public prosecution office, in connection with the arrest of the 16 year old [39]
Cyberattacks:
Attacks on the laywer of the two Swedish women are unacceptable, since any person has a right to a laywer, however controversial his or her case
However, although somewhat extreme, the Cyberattacks on the financial corporations which cut off Wikileaks, are legitimate resistance, since Mastercard and co are supporting American government policy against Wikileaks, violating freedom of press
In this respect and given the American hatred policy against Wikileaks, also attacks on American governmental organisations is legitimate.
Anonymous is an important weapon in the struggle for Wikileaks freedom of press
Also the Also UN Commissioner of Human Rights, mrs Pilay, has criticized websites, that have refused to host Wikileaks, as an attack on the freedom of expression of Wikileaks [40]
EPILOGUE
The arrest of Assange is directly connected with the American political interest to stop the revelations of Wikileaks at all costs
Therefore it is an attack on the freedom of press and the freedom of expression
Journalism feels that, by working together with Wikileaks and saving material, as The Guardian and other papers do
But there’s more at stake:
Whole Internetjournalism may be treathed
When Assange is to be extradited to Sweden and in the horrorscenario, that Sweden extradites him to the USA [41], after British consent [42], there is more to it than a probably unfair US trial
From that moment all critical Internetjournalists, who write unpleasant truths about the US and human rights violating allies, can be prosecuted, persecuted and intimidated
The freedom of press and speech, consolidated in the first Amendment of the American Constitution, will be a dead letter.
However, most bizarre point: Real or alleged American warcriminals are free to go, while the messengers are shooted at [42]
BUT US AND ALLIES, MAKE NO MISTAKE
Their dirty secrets will always be unmasked and Wikileaks, or a successor, will go on
To defend the victims of US power policy
Astrid Essed Amsterdam The Netherlands
NOTES
[1]
ARTICLE JULIAN ASSANGE THE AUSTRALIAN DON’T SHOOT THE MESSENGER FOR REVEALING UNCONFORTABLE TRUTHS 8 DECEMBER 2010
”At 9.15am last Tuesday a thin, white-haired figure left the Frontline Club, the west London establishment dedicated to preserving freedom of speech, and voluntarily surrendered to police.”
Source:
THE GUARDIAN WIKILEAKS BACKLASH: THE FIRST GLOBAL CYBER WAR HAS BEGUN 11 DECEMBER 2010
”Assange, a 39-year-old Australian, had earlier handed himself in to British police after Sweden had issued a European Arrest Warrant for him. Assange, who denies the allegations, will remain behind bars until a fresh hearing on December 14.”
Source:
REUTERS WIKILEAKS FOUNDER ASSANGE REFUSED BAIL BY UK COURT 7 DECEMBER 2010
” US At torney General Er ic Holder said officials were pursuing a “very serious criminal investigation” into the matter. Yet while Mr Assange has widely acknowledged his role in disseminating classified documents, legal experts say US criminal statutes and case law do not cleanly apply to his case. US espionage law has been used to prosecute US officials who provided secrets to foreign governments or foreign spies who pursued US secrets. But Mr Assange, an Australian citizen, former computer hacker and self-described journalist, did not work for the US government, has no known links to foreign governments, and operates on the internet, by all accounts far from US soil”
SOURCE:
BBC NEWS BARRIERS TO POSSIBLE US ASSANGE PROSECUTION 8 DECEMBER 2010
” US Attorn ey General Eric Holder said officials were pursuing a “very serious criminal investigation” into the matter. Yet while Mr Assange has widely acknowledged his role in disseminating classified documents, legal experts say US criminal statutes and case law do not cleanly apply to his case. US espionage law has been used to prosecute US officials who provided secrets to foreign governments or foreign spies who pursued US secrets. But Mr Assange, an Australian citizen, former computer hacker and self-described journalist, did not work for the US government, has no known links to foreign governments, and operates on the internet, by all accounts far from US soil”
SOURCE:
BBC NEWS BARRIERS TO POSSIBLE US ASSANGE PROSECUTION 8 DECEMBER 2010
” There is a Sweden-US extradition treaty, signed in 1961, which provides a legal foundation for extraditions between the countries. But there is still discretion for Sweden to refuse extraditions for “political offences” or where the suspect has reason to fear persecution on account of their membership of a social group or political beliefs. The treaty also specifies the offences which qualify for extradition, and espionage is not one of them. If the treaty doesn’t apply, there would still be scope for the country to agree to his extradition to the US – Swedish law permits extradition more generally to countries outside Europe, but this could only take place after the current rape proceedings were concluded.”
SOURCE:
THE GUARDIAN JULIAN ASSANGE’S EXTRADITION WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? 8 DECEMBER 2010
” 4.1 8pm: Speaking outside the court, Ken Loach said it was “good news” that Assange had been granted bail.
Clearly, if the Swedish government opposes bail it will show there is some vindictiveness beyond this case. It will show there is some political element that goes beyond the case.”
Source:
THE GUARDIAN JULIAN ASSANGE GRANTED BAIL/LIVE UPDATES 14TH DECEMBER 2010
”WikiLeaks has won a number of awards, including the 2008 Economist magazine New Media Award.[10] In June 2009, WikiLeaks and Julian Assange won Amnesty International’s UK Media Award (in the category “New Media”) for the 2008 publication of “Kenya: The Cry of Blood – Extra Judicial Killings and Disappearances”,[11] a report by the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights about police killings in Kenya.[12] ”
”David Schlesinger, Reuters editor in chief, said Tuesday that the video was disturbing to watch “but also important to watch.” He said he hoped to meet with the Pentagon “to press the need to learn lessons from this tragedy.”
Source:
THE NEW YORK TIMES AIRSTRIKE VIDEO BRINGS NOTICE TO A WEBSITE 6TH APRIL 2010
”David Schlesinger, Reuters editor in chief, said Tuesday that the video was disturbing to watch “but also important to watch.” He said he hoped to meet with the Pentagon “to press the need to learn lessons from this tragedy.”
Source:
THE NEW YORK TIMES AIRSTRIKE VIDEO BRINGS NOTICE TO A WEBSITE 6TH APRIL 2010
” US Attorn ey General Eric Holder said officials were pursuing a “very serious criminal investigation” into the matter. Yet while Mr Assange has widely acknowledged his role in disseminating classified documents, legal experts say US criminal statutes and case law do not cleanly apply to his case. US espionage law has been used to prosecute US officials who provided secrets to foreign governments or foreign spies who pursued US secrets. But Mr Assange, an Australian citizen, former computer hacker and self-described journalist, did not work for the US government, has no known links to foreign governments, and operates on the internet, by all accounts far from US soil”
SOURCE:
BBC NEWS BARRIERS TO POSSIBLE US ASSANGE PROSECUTION 8 DECEMBER 2010
””The fact that one prosecutor dismissed the charges against Assange and another picked them up afterwards, makes the case look fishy. The prosecuting authorities should have acted more expeditiously and speedily.”
Source:
THE GUARDIAN JULIAN ASSANGE FURORE DEEPENS AS NEW DETAILS EMERGE OF SEX CRIME ALLEGATIONS 18 DECEMBER 2010
”Assange’s supporters point out that, despite her complaints against him, Miss A held a party for him on that evening and continued to allow him to stay in her flat.
Source:
THE GUARDIAN 10 DAYS IN SWEDEN: THE FULL ALLEGATIONS AGAINST JULIAN ASSANGE 17 DECEMBER 2010
MAIL ONLINE SUPPORTERS DISMISSED RAPE ACCUSATION AGAINST WIKILEAKS FOUNDER JULIAN ASSANGE…BUT THE TWO WOMEN INVOLVED TELL A DIFFERENT STORY 29 AUGUST 2010
Een Koerdische familie uit Irak wacht met zestien leden uit drie generaties op de grenswachten. Al acht keer werden ze teruggestuurd naar Wit-Rusland, waarbij ze klappen kregen en door honden gebeten werden. Foto Wojtek Radwanski / AFP
Voertuigen die zich nabij de grens begeven worden streng gecontroleerd. Foto Marko Djurica / Reuters
Achtergebleven spullen van migranten in de bossen. Velen van hen krijgen met geweld en intimidatie te maken. Foto Marko Djurica / Reuters
Ondertussen proberen hulporganisaties de migranten waar mogelijk te helpen. Hier sorteert een Poolse vrijwilligster gedoneerde kleding in een brandweerkazerne. Foto Kacper Pempel / Reuters
Activisten van de Poolse ngo Grupa Granica houden foto’s omhoog van gestrande migranten, met de oproep hen hulp te bieden. Foto Marko Djurica / Reuters
Oekraïense nationalisten houden borden en flares omhoog in protest tegen de komst van migranten voor de Poolse ambassade in Kiev. Foto Sergei Supinsky / AFP
Medici verzorgen een gewonde migrant, terwijl anderen verderop door de Poolse politie worden ingerekend. De Poolse premier Mateusz sprak onlangs van „een brute schending van onze oostelijke grens (…) de ergste in dertig jaar”. Foto Woitek Radwanski / AFP
Migranten drommen samen om noodpakketten te ontvangen van de Wit-Russische krijgsmacht. Foto Stringer / EPA
Een migrant draagt zijn ontvangen noodrantsoen weg van het uitdeelpunt van het Wit-Russische leger. Veel migranten verblijven in het grensgebied onder erbarmelijke omstandigheden. Foto Stringer / EPA
Poolse militairen en politieagenten staan rechts paraat langs de grens met Wit-Rusland, terwijl links migranten te zien zijn in hun geïmproviseerde kampementen.
POLAND-BELARUS BORDER CRISIS/LETTER TO THE EU/”EU’S HUMAN OBLIGATIONS AGAINST THE REFUGEES, WHO ARE TRAPPED BETWEENTHE POLAND-BELARUS BORDER”
TO MRS Y JOHANSSONEU COMMISSIONER FOR HOME AFFAIRSRelating her responsibility for Migration and Asylum Subject:The Poland Belarus crisis on migrants:Eu’s obligations regarding universal human rights
Dear Mrs Johansson,[When you are pressed with time, just read the last piece”EU’s obligations”]
I am greatly concerned about EU’s recent attitude against refugees, who are trapped in the border between Poland and BelarusFirstly the EU waited months after months and allowing Poland to close andmilitarize its borders against those refugees, thus violating their right on asylum,violating their universal human rights by letting them try to survive in the freezingcold and, to add insult to injury, pushing them back from the border, fully knowing that push-backs are against International Law. [1]As a consequence, at least thirteen refugees died. [2]Instead of immediately demanding of Poland, to refrain from violatinghuman rights and giving those refugees entrance to Poland, all the EUdid was express solidarity with Poland and also denying the refugees their right to asylum:I quote from the statement from EU president, mrs von der Leyen, from 8th november 2021:”Finally, the Commission will explore with the UN and its specialised agencies how to prevent a humanitarian crisis from unfolding and to ensure that migrants can be safely returned to their country of origin, with the support of their national authorities.” [3] That’s inhuman. In her report ”Die Here or Go to Poland”, Human Rights Watch wrote among else:”Polish authorities should immediately halt all summary returns and collective expulsions to Belarus and stop all abuse by Polish officials of migrants. The government of Poland should also immediately allow humanitarian and other civil society organizations access to the area currently restricted under the state of emergency order for the purposes of saving lives. Journalists and other monitors should also be permitted access.” [4]Poland is a EU member and should apply toEU rules, among else consolidated in the Charter’for Fundamental Rights of the EU Union [5],in which the right to asylum is granted [article 18] [6] and pushbacks are forbidden [article 18, article 19,EU Charter of Fundamental Rights] [7] As long as Poland is an EU member, Poland has to conduct according toEU rules!And it is the EU task to remember Poland of its obligations. PROPOSAL OF THE EU COMMISSION FROM1 DECEMBER 2021 Not only that has not happened, now the EU Commission did proposals in the favour of Poland.Latva and Lithuania taking ”exceptional measures”I refer to the recent Statement from 1 december 2021, calling for measures of an ”of an extraordinary and exceptional nature” [8] According to my information from Amnesty International,EU Commission proposals ”normalize dehumanisationof asylum seekers” [9] Amnesty International writes among else: ”“The arrival of people at the EU’s borders with Belarus is entirely manageable with the rules as they stand. Today’s proposals will further punish people for political gain, weaken asylum protections, and undermine the EU’s standing at home and abroad. If the EU can allow a minority of member states to throw out the rule book due to the presence of a few thousand people at its border, it throws out any authority it has on human rights and the rule of law.
“The current situation at the EU’s borders with Belarus is being used by some countries as an excuse to weaken protections of asylum-seekers and push their anti-migrant agenda. Holding asylum seekers in detention for four months, without the protection standards required by international law, is normalising de facto unlawful detention at the EU’s external borders.” [10]
That’s clear language and I have nothing to add to this
EU’S OBLIGATION
Summarizing:
During the Poland-Belarus crisis on migrants,
all the EU really did was to express solidarity
with Poland, thus encouraging Poland in it’s
unlawful policy of denying the right to asylum and
practising illegal pushbacks and, to add insult
to injury, letting vulnerable refugee freezing in the cold,
without adequate provisions.
With this the EU has violated her own rules of
humanity, right to asylum and the prohibition
of pushbacks.
So it’s time, the EU acts again in accordance with it’s own Charter and Laws and not proposing ”extraordinary
measures” [11] which violate it’s own rules.
So I call the EU to require from Poland to admit the
refugees and give them a proper asylum procedure,
according to human rights and stop pushing them back.
Of course Belarus bears responsibility too for the
existing situation [12], but that doesn’t excuse
the EU from practising their own rules of
humanitarian protection of refugees, which is formally established in the EU Law.
Return to your own Laws and Charters, EU and stop
dehumanizing refugees.
That’s all I ask.
Kind regards
Astrid Essed
Amsterdam
The Netherlands
NOTES[1]
HUMAN RIGHTSHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH REPORT”DIE HERE OR GO TO POLAND”BELARUS’ AND POLAND’S SHARED RESPONSIBILITY FORBORDER ABUSES
”I have spoken to Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, Lithuanian Prime Minister Ingrida Šimonytė and Latvian Prime Minister Arturs Krišjānis Kariņš to express the EU’s solidarity and discuss with them the measures the EU can take to support them in their efforts to deal with this crisis.”
”’Finally, the Commission will explore with the UN and its specialised agencies how to prevent a humanitarian crisis from unfolding and to ensure that migrants can be safely returned to their country of origin, with the support of their national authorities.”
The instrumentalisation of migrants for political purposes by Belarus is unacceptable.
The Belarusian authorities must understand that pressuring the European Union in this way through a cynical instrumentalisation of migrants will not help them succeed in their purposes.
I have spoken to Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, Lithuanian Prime Minister Ingrida Šimonytė and Latvian Prime Minister Arturs Krišjānis Kariņš to express the EU’s solidarity and discuss with them the measures the EU can take to support them in their efforts to deal with this crisis.
I am calling on Member States to finally approve the extended sanctions regime on the Belarusian authorities responsible for this hybrid attack.
Vice-President Schinas, in coordination with High Representative/Vice-President Borrell, will travel in the coming days to the main countries of origin and of transit to ensure that they act to prevent their own nationals from falling into the trap set by the Belarusian authorities.
The EU will in particular explore how to sanction, including through blacklisting, third country airlines that are active in human trafficking.
Finally, the Commission will explore with the UN and its specialised agencies how to prevent a humanitarian crisis from unfolding and to ensure that migrants can be safely returned to their country of origin, with the support of their national authorities.
[4]HUMAN RIGHTSHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH REPORTSUMMARY”DIE HERE OR GO TO POLAND”BELARUS’ AND POLAND’S SHARED RESPONSIBILITY FORBORDER ABUSES
Article 18 Right to asylum The right to asylum shall be guaranteed with due respect for the rules of the Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 and the Protocol of 31 January 1967 relating to the status of refugees and in accordance with the Treaty establishing the European Community. CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION https://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf
[7] Article 18 Right to asylum The right to asylum shall be guaranteed with due respect for the rules of the Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 and the Protocol of 31 January 1967 relating to the status of refugees and in accordance with the Treaty establishing the European Community. CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION https://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf
Article 19 Protection in the event of removal, expulsion or extradition 1. Collective expulsions are prohibited. 2. No one may be removed, expelled or extradited to a State where there is a serious risk that he or she would be subjected to the death penalty, torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION https://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf
”Notwithstanding any changes to Polish law, Poland’s pushbacks without due process violate EU law including the Charter of Fundamental Rights.[25] The Charter guarantees the right to asylum and standard international refugee law practice, under which any expression of intent to seek asylum should promptly be forwarded to the competent authorities for assessment based on the person’s individual grounds for seeking asylum.[26]”
Polish pushback practices are also in violation of article 19 of the Charter and Protocol 4 of the ECHR, which both state unequivocally that collective or mass expulsions of aliens are prohibited.[28]
The Commission is today putting forward a set of temporary asylum and return measures to assist Latvia, Lithuania and Poland in addressing the emergency situation at the EU’s external border with Belarus. The measures will allow these Member States to set up swift and orderly processes to manage the situation, in full respect of fundamental rights and international obligations, including the principle of non-refoulement. The proposal follows the invitation by the European Council for the Commission to propose any necessary changes to the EU’s legal framework and concrete measures underpinned by adequate financial support to ensure an immediate and appropriate response in line with EU law and international obligations, including the respect of fundamental rights. The measures, based on Article 78(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, will enter into force after their adoption by the Council. The European Parliament will be consulted. The measures will remain in force for a period of 6 months.
Vice-President for Promoting our European Way of Life, Margaritis Schinas, said: “In the past weeks, we have managed to bring the EU’s collective weight to bear in face of the hybrid attack directed at our Union. Collectively, the EU made clear that attempts to undermine our Union will only solidify our solidarity with one another. Today we are giving living manifestation to that solidarity: in the form of a set of temporary and exceptional measures that will equip Latvia, Lithuania and Poland with the means needed to respond to these extraordinary circumstances in a controlled and swift manner and to operate in conditions of legal certainty.”
Commissioner for Home Affairs, Ylva Johansson, said: “Although the EU’s intense efforts have brought rapid results, the situation remains delicate. Today, to protect our borders, and to protect people, we are giving flexibility and support to Member States to manage this emergency situation, without compromising on human rights. This should allow the Member States in question to fully uphold the right to asylum and align legislation with EU acquis. It’s also time limited and targeted. To make our response to hybrid threats future-proof, we activate the EU’s formidable diplomatic and legal capacity, to apply sanctions and persuade third countries to stop flights. We will soon propose a reform of the Schengen rules. Making progress now on the Pact on Migration and Asylum is essential.”
Provisional measures proposed
The measures included in this proposal are of an extraordinary and exceptional nature. They will apply for a period of 6 months, unless extended or repealed, and will apply to non-EU nationals who have irregularly entered the EU from Belarus and are at the vicinity of the border or those who present themselves at border crossing points. The main elements of the proposal are:
Emergency migration and asylum management procedure at the external borders:
The 3 Member States will have the possibility to extend the registration period for asylum applications to 4 weeks, instead of the current 3 to 10 days. The Member States may also apply the asylum procedure at the border to process all asylum claims, including the appeal, within a maximum of 16 weeks – except where adequate support for applicants with particular health issues cannot be provided. In doing so, well-founded claims and those of families and children should be prioritised.
Material reception conditions: Member States focus reception conditions on the covering of basic needs, including temporary shelter adapted to the seasonal weather conditions, food, water, clothing, adequate medical care, and assistance to vulnerable persons, in full respect of human dignity. It is important that Member States ensure close cooperation with UNHCR and relevant partner organisations to support individuals in this emergency situation.
Return procedure: Member States concerned will be able to apply simplified and quicker national procedures including for the return of people whose applications for international protection have been rejected in this context.
All procedures carried out in line with this proposal must respect fundamental rights and specific guarantees provided for by EU law, including the best interests of the child, emergency health care and needs of vulnerable people, the use of coercive measures and detention conditions.
Practical support and cooperation:
Support from EU agencies: EU agencies stand ready to help the Member States on request. The European Asylum Support Office (EASO) can help register and process applications, ensure screening of vulnerable people and support the management, design and putting in place of adequate reception. Further Frontex support is available for border control activities, including screening and return operations. Support from Europol is also available to provide intelligence to counter smuggling.
Continued cooperation: The Commission, the Member States and EU Agencies will continue their cooperation, including an obligation on the Member States to continue reporting relevant data and statistics via the EU Migration Preparedness and Crisis Management Network.
The Commission will regularly reassess the situation and may propose to the Council to prolong or repeal these provisional measures.
Next steps
Article 78(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU states that after consulting the European Parliament, the Council may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the Member States concerned. This happens by qualified majority vote. Once agreed by the Council, in view of the urgency of the situation, this Decision should enter into force the day after its publication in the Official Journal of the EU.
Background
Since the summer, the Lukashenko regime and its supporters have initiated a hybrid attack on the EU, especially Lithuania, Poland and Latvia, which have experienced an insidious new threat in the form of the instrumentalisation of desperate people.
In October 2021, the European Council invited the Commission to propose any necessary changes to the EU’s legal framework to respond to the state-sponsored instrumentalisation of people at the EU’s external border with Belarus. Article 78(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides for the adoption of provisional measures in emergency migratory situations at the EU’s external borders.
Today’s proposal is the latest in a series of coordinated EU actions that include: targeted measures for transport operators that facilitate or engage in smuggling; diplomatic and external action; stepping up humanitarian assistance and support for border and migration management.
This proposal is in line with the comprehensive approach set out in the New Pact on Migration and Asylum. It complements the Schengen Borders Code and the upcoming Schengen reform, in which the Commission intends to propose a permanent framework for addressing possible situations of instrumentalisation that may still confront the Union in the future.
Financing of this proposal will be accommodated within the budget of the existing EU funding instruments under the period 2014-2020 and 2021-2027 in the field of migration, asylum and border management. Where exceptionally necessary, if the situation aggravates further, the flexibility mechanisms within the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 could be used.
In response to today’s proposals from the European Commission which would allow Latvia, Lithuania and Poland to derogate from EU rules, including by holding asylum-seekers and migrants at the border for 16 weeks with minimal safeguards, Eve Geddie, Director of Amnesty International’s European Office said:
“The arrival of people at the EU’s borders with Belarus is entirely manageable with the rules as they stand. Today’s proposals will further punish people for political gain, weaken asylum protections, and undermine the EU’s standing at home and abroad. If the EU can allow a minority of member states to throw out the rule book due to the presence of a few thousand people at its border, it throws out any authority it has on human rights and the rule of law.
“The current situation at the EU’s borders with Belarus is being used by some countries as an excuse to weaken protections of asylum-seekers and push their anti-migrant agenda. Holding asylum seekers in detention for four months, without the protection standards required by international law, is normalising de facto unlawful detention at the EU’s external borders.
“Asylum rules should be upheld, not allowed to be side-stepped by countries via so-called exceptional measures. Amnesty International is alarmed that the proposal will violate people’s rights, and exacerbate the humanitarian crisis at borders while continuing to expose the EU to further internal and external manipulation and blackmailing.
“While Lukashenka’s mistreatment and instrumentalization of migrants and asylum seekers is deplorable, he is exploiting the EU’s own tendency to treat people at their borders as a threat.
“At least 10 people, including a one-year-old child, have died at the EU’s Eastern borders in recent weeks. Today the European Commission is bringing in measures which undermine rights and normalize the dehumanization and suffering of people at the EU’s borders.”
WEARING OF THE GREEN/LONG LIVE A UNITED IRELAND/DOWN WITH BRITISH COLONIALISM!
Dear Readers Here you can hear and read the beautiful Irish Resistance Song againstthe century long brutal British oppression and colonialism, which not onlyoppressed and humiliated the Irish people, but also tried to destroy theirlanguage and culture!It makes me furious to watch, that till nowadays Northern Ireland, which is the rightful part of Ireland and an invention of British colonialism, is still oneof the last remnants of the British colonial Empire.
FINAL And let’s not forget this.When speaking about British colonialism, always the oppressed colonies in Africa and Asia were centres of the attention and with right, but much less Ireland.Never forget that the British colonialism started just there. SO: DOWN WITH THE PRO COLONIAL GOVERNMENT OF NORTHERN IRELAND!NORTHERN IRELAND MUST BE PART OF IRELAND AGAIN!THE IRA [1] WAS RIGHT ABOUT THAT!And for me:I support any progressive Irish movement, which wants to fight for aUnited Ireland! I hope to see the Day, that Northern Ireland is united with the rest ofIreland againIt’s a question of Justice! ASTRID ESSED [1] WIKIPEDIAIRISH REPUBLICAN ARMY
The following is the celebrated song which created such intense excitement throughout Great Britain, and for the incorporation of which in his piece, Mr. Bourcicault’ play of “Arrah na Pogue,” had to be withdrawn from the London stage.
I.
Oh, Paddy, dear, an’did you hear the news thats goin round?
The shamrock is forbid by law to grow on Irish ground.
No more St. Patrick’s day well keep, his color cant be seen,
For there’s a bloody law agin the wearin of the green.
I met with Napper Tandy, and he tuk me by the hand,
And he said, how’s poor ould Ireland, and how does she stand?
“She’s the most distressful country that ever you have seen,
They’re hangin men and women there for wearin of the green.”
II.
Then since the color we must wear is England’s cruel red,
Sure Ireland’s sons will neer forget the blood that they have shed.
You may take the shamrock from your hat and cast it on the sod,
It will take root and flourish there, though under foot ’tis trod.
When the law can stop the blades of grass from growing as they grow,
And when the leaves in summer time their verdure dare not show,
Then I will change the color I wear in my corbeen,
But till that day, plaze God, I’ll stick to wearin of the green.
III.
But if at last our color should be torn from Ireland’s heart,
Her sons with shame and sorrow from the dear ould soil will part.
I’ve heard whisper of a country that lies far beyant the say,
Where rich and poor stand equal in the light of freedom’s day.
Oh, Erin, must we lave you, driven by the tyrant’s hand,
Must we ask a mother—s welcome from a strange but happier land,
Where the cruel cross of England’s thraldom never shall be seen,
And where, thank God, we’ll live and die, still wearin of the green.
END OF THE SONG
Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Wearing of the Green/Long live a United Ireland!/Down with British colonialism!
INTRODUCTION READERSIsn’t it interesting, when roaming the Internet, to find an old article ofyourself, that you almost forgot!It goes about a Letter to the Editor I wrote in the past [2004] to the webzine”The Pravda” and that they apparently published.Not only is that interesting, but more interesting is the fact, that I wrote about averdict of the Israeli High Court about the building of the Israeli Apartheid Wall [1]You all know, of course, the more known verdict of the International Court ofJustice, declaring the Wall illegal for once and for all [2] but few people[I almost forgot!] will remember, that the Israeli High Court gave also its opinion,in fact supporting the building of the Wall, except for some minor point of criticism [3]And here it is, this voice of the past from Astrid Essed, protesting against theverdict of the Israeli High Court!See directly below And see for the notes, under my almost forgotten Letter to the Editor! ENJOY IT! ASTRID ESSED
ASTRID ESSED: THE VERDICT OF ISRAELI HIGH COURT REGARDING THE WALL6 JULY 2004
The recent verdict of the Israeli High Court, which states that the building of the Israeli Wall at the West Bank must be adjusted with 30 kilometers because of the violations of human rights is not only a partial fullfilling of the humanitarian needs of the Palestinian population, but is also in contarily with International Law.
In the first place the motivation for the verdict is being based on the fact that because of the building of the Wall the inhabitants of the Beit Surik community had no entrance to their agricultural grounds and schools, but in the named verdict the Court doesn’t refer to the other Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank [85.000 people], who are likewise excluded from their agricultural grounds.
In the second place the Israeli building of the Wall is as such a violation of International Law, because it cuts deeply in the occupied Palestinian areas which is a violation of UN Security Council Resolution 242 dd 1967 by which Israel was summoned to withdraw from the in the june-war occupied Palestinian areas.
Further the building of the Wall is being made possible by hugh Palestinian landownings which is yet apart from the flagrant injustice a violation of International Law [the 4th Geneva Convention] which forbids land and house-ownings of ”protected people” [people who are living under an occupation] It is therefore highly recommendable, that the Israeli High Court adjusts its vedict according to the principles of International Law.
”While Israel is heading for de jure annexation, the Wall is an important tool of Israel’s illegal and ongoing de facto annexation. The Wall’s path and its associated regime are planned to de facto annex some 46% of the West Bank, isolating communities into Bantustans, ghettos and “military zones.” STOP THE WALL.ORG https://stopthewall.org/the-wall/
[2]
”In December 2003, Resolution ES-10/14 was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in an emergency special session.[111] 90 states voted for, 8 against, 74 abstained.[111] The resolution included a request to the International Court of Justice to urgently render an advisory opinion on the following question.[111]
“What are the legal consequences arising from the construction of the wall being built by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, as described in the report of the Secretary-General, considering the rules and principles of international law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, and relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions?”[111]
The court concluded that the barrier violated international law”
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURTLEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE INSTRUCTION OF A WALL INTHE OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORYOVERVIEW OF THE CASE https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/131
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
By resolution ES-10/14, adopted on 8 December 2003 at its Tenth Emergency Special Session, the General Assembly decided to request the Court for an advisory opinion on the following question :
“What are the legal consequences arising from the construction of the wall being built by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, as described in the Report of the Secretary-General, considering the rules and principles of international law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, and relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions ?”
The resolution requested the Court to render its opinion “urgently”. The Court decided that all States entitled to appear before it, as well as Palestine, the United Nations and subsequently, at their request, the League of Arab States and the Organization of the Islamic Conference, were likely to be able to furnish information on the question in accordance with Article 66, paragraphs 2 and 3, of the Statute. Written statements were submitted by 45 States and four international organizations, including the European Union. At the oral proceedings, which were held from 23 to 25 February 2004, 12 States, Palestine and two international organizations made oral submissions. The Court rendered its Advisory Opinion on 9 July 2004.
The Court began by finding that the General Assembly, which had requested the advisory opinion, was authorized to do so under Article 96, paragraph 1, of the Charter. It further found that the question asked of it fell within the competence of the General Assembly pursuant to Articles 10, paragraph 2, and 11 of the Charter. Moreover, in requesting an opinion of the Court, the General Assembly had not exceeded its competence, as qualified by Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Charter, which provides that while the Security Council is exercising its functions in respect of any dispute or situation the Assembly must not make any recommendation with regard thereto unless the Security Council so requests. The Court further observed that the General Assembly had adopted resolution ES-10/14 during its Tenth Emergency Special Session, convened pursuant to resolution 377 A (V), whereby, in the event that the Security Council has failed to exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, the General Assembly may consider the matter immediately with a view to making recommendations to Member States. Rejecting a number of procedural objections, the Court found that the conditions laid down by that resolution had been met when the Tenth Emergency Special Session was convened, and in particular when the General Assembly decided to request the opinion, as the Security Council had at that time been unable to adopt a resolution concerning the construction of the wall as a result of the negative vote of a permanent member. Lastly, the Court rejected the argument that an opinion could not be given in the present case on the ground that the question posed was not a legal one, or that it was of an abstract or political nature.
Having established its jurisdiction, the Court then considered the propriety of giving the requested opinion. It recalled that lack of consent by a State to its contentious jurisdiction had no bearing on its advisory jurisdiction, and that the giving of an opinion in the present case would not have the effect of circumventing the principle of consent to judicial settlement, since the subject-matter of the request was located in a much broader frame of reference than that of the bilateral dispute between Israel and Palestine, and was of direct concern to the United Nations. Nor did the Court accept the contention that it should decline to give the advisory opinion requested because its opinion could impede a political, negotiated settlement to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It further found that it had before it sufficient information and evidence to enable it to give its opinion, and empha- sized that it was for the General Assembly to assess the opinion’s usefulness. The Court accordingly concluded that there was no compelling reason precluding it from giving the requested opinion.
Turning to the question of the legality under international law of the construction of the wall by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the Court first determined the rules and principles of international law relevant to the question posed by the General Assembly. After recalling the customary principles laid down in Article 2, paragraph 4, of the United Nations Charter and in General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV), which prohibit the threat or use of force and emphasize the illegality of any territorial acquisition by such means, the Court further cited the principle of self-determination of peoples, as enshrined in the Charter and reaffirmed by resolution 2625 (XXV). In relation to international humanitarian law, the Court then referred to the provisions of the Hague Regulations of 1907, which it found to have become part of customary law, as well as to the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, holding that these were applicable in those Palestinian territories which, before the armed conflict of 1967, lay to the east of the 1949 Armistice demarcation line (or “Green Line”) and were occupied by Israel during that conflict. The Court further established that certain human rights instruments (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child) were applicable in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
The Court then sought to ascertain whether the construction of the wall had violated the above-mentioned rules and principles. Noting that the route of the wall encompassed some 80 per cent of the settlers living in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the Court, citing statements by the Security Council in that regard in relation to the Fourth Geneva Convention, recalled that those settlements had been established in breach of international law. After considering certain fears expressed to it that the route of the wall would prejudge the future frontier between Israel and Palestine, the Court observed that the construction of the wall and its associated régime created a “fait accompli” on the ground that could well become permanent, and hence tantamount to a de facto annexation. Noting further that the route chosen for the wall gave expression in loco to the illegal measures taken by Israel with regard to Jerusalem and the settlements and entailed further alterations to the demographic composition of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the Court concluded that the construction of the wall, along with measures taken previously, severely impeded the exercise by the Palestinian people of its right to self-determination and was thus a breach of Israel’s obligation to respect that right.
The Court then went on to consider the impact of the construction of the wall on the daily life of the inhabitants of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, finding that the construction of the wall and its associated régime were contrary to the relevant provisions of the Hague Regulations of 1907 and of the Fourth Geneva Convention and that they impeded the liberty of movement of the inhabitants of the territory as guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as their exercise of the right to work, to health, to education and to an adequate standard of living as proclaimed in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and in the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Court further found that, coupled with the establishment of settlements, the construction of the wall and its associated régime were tending to alter the demographic composition of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, thereby contravening the Fourth Geneva Convention and the relevant Security Council resolutions. The Court then considered the qualifying clauses or provisions for derogation contained in certain humanitarian law and human rights instruments, which might be invoked inter alia where military exigencies or the needs of national security or public order so required. The Court found that such clauses were not applicable in the present case, stating that it was not convinced that the specific course Israel had chosen for the wall was necessary to attain its security objectives, and that accordingly the construction of the wall constituted a breach by Israel of certain of its obligations under humanitarian and human rights law. Lastly, the Court concluded that Israel could not rely on a right of self-defence or on a state of necessity in order to preclude the wrongfulness of the construction of the wall, and that such construction and its associated régime were accordingly contrary to international law.
The Court went on to consider the consequences of these violations, recalling Israel’s obligation to respect the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and its obligations under humanitarian and human rights law. The Court stated that Israel must put an immediate end to the violation of its international obligations by ceasing the works of construction of the wall and dismantling those parts of that structure situated within Occupied Palestinian Territory and repealing or rendering ineffective all legislative and regulatory acts adopted with a view to construction of the wall and establishment of its associated régime. The Court further made it clear that Israel must make reparation for all damage suffered by all natural or legal persons affected by the wall’s construction. As regards the legal consequences for other States, the Court held that all States were under an obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such construction. It further stated that it was for all States, while respecting the United Nations Charter and international law, to see to it that any impediment, resulting from the construction of the wall, to the exercise by the Palestinian people of its right to self-determination be brought to an end. In addition, the Court pointed out that all States parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention were under an obligation, while respecting the Charter and international law, to ensure compliance by Israel with international humanitarian law as embodied in that Convention. Finally, in regard to the United Nations, and especially the General Assembly and the Security Council, the Court indicated that they should consider what further action was required to bring to an end the illegal situation in question, taking due account of the present Advisory Opinion.
The Court concluded by observing that the construction of the wall must be placed in a more general context, noting the obligation on Israel and Palestine to comply with international humanitarian law, as well as the need for implementation in good faith of all relevant Security Council resolutions, and drawing the attention of the General Assembly to the need for efforts to be encouraged with a view to achieving a negotiated solution to the outstanding problems on the basis of international law and the establishment of a Palestinian State.[3]
”Of course this is not to say that that the Israeli ruling is a good one. For example, like many Israeli rulings there are political points that are treated as legal ones, such as the false characterization of all Palestinian resistance as “terrorism” [8]. Further the HCJ does justify the Wall in principle though the projected segments reviewed were deemed to be illegal because of the humanitarian impact of the suggested route [9]” ELECTRONIC INTIFADATHE ISRAELI HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE AND THE APARTHEID WALL15 JULY 2004 https://electronicintifada.net/content/israeli-high-court-justice-and-apartheid-wall/5156
With the recent International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion regarding the consequences of the Apartheid Wall, the legality of this enterprise has been much discussed in almost all circles related to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. On the Zionist side, aside from the usual canard about the “anti-Semitism” of the United Nations and the like, many commentaries have pointed to the recent Israeli High Court of Justice (HCJ) ruling about the wall and declared, in so many words, that this is the only legal ruling that matters. For example, in the recent diatribe against the ICJ by Alan Dershowitz [1] he writes: “The Israeli government has both a legal and a moral obligation to comply with the Israeli Supreme Court’s decision regarding the security fence.”
The interesting thing about this is that if one actually reads the HCJ decision [2], it in fact makes a very strong case against the Wall in general though its ruling only regarded only one small 40 km stretch of the Wall. Unlike the ICJ Opinion which was, as per its mandate, primarily focused on existing international treaties and conventions and Israel’s obligations stemming from them; the HCJ decision was based more on general legal principle.
The Israeli case – Beit Sourik Village Council v. The Government of Israel, Commander of the IDF Forces in the West Bank – was a petition against eight separate land confiscation orders for the building of the Wall. The net result was that seven of these eight confiscation orders were deemed illegal and the one that was upheld was only upheld because the petitioners didn’t really argue against it [4].
Key point that resulted in the declaration that these confiscation orders were illegal was the principle of “proportionality” that was very succinctly defined in the ruling itself. [5] The actual factors taken into account were essentially the same that served as the basis of the ICJ Advisory Opinion, specifically the human impact that the Wall had on the resident Palestinian population [6]. The question and standard, treated as the third element of proportionality, deserves to be recalled in full (citations removed):
“The third subtest examines whether the injury caused to the local inhabitants by the construction of the separation fence stands in proper proportion to the security benefit from the the [sic] security fence in its chosen route. This is the proportionate means test (or proportionality “in the narrow sense”). Concerning this topic, Professor Y. Zamir wrote:
“The third element is proportionality itself. According to this element, it is insufficient that the administrative authority chose the proper and most moderate means for achieving the objective; it must also weigh the benefit reaped by the public against the damage that will be caused to the citizen by this means under the circumstances of the case at hand. It must ask itself if, under these circumstances, there is a proper proportion between the benefit to the public and the damage to the citizen. The proportion between the benefit and the damage – and it is also possible to say the proportion between means and objective – must be proportionate.
“This subtest weighs the costs against the benefits. According to this subtest, a decision of an administrative authority must reach a reasonable balance between communal needs and the damage done to the individual. The objective of the examination is to determine whether the severity of the damage to the individual and the reasons brought to justify it stand in proper proportion to each other. This judgment is made against the background of the general normative structure of the legal system, which recognizes human rights and the necessity of ensuring the provision of the needs and welfare of the local inhabitants, and which preserves “family honour and rights” (Regulation 46 of the Hague Regulations). All these are protected in the framework of the humanitarian provisions of the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Convention. The question before us is: does the severity of the injury to local inhabitants, by the construction of the separation fence along the route determine d by the military commander, stand in reasonable (proper) proportion to the security benefit from the construction of the fence along that route?” [7]
It was on this basis that the HCJ ruled seven of the eight confiscation orders under review to be illegal. Were this same principle to be applied to most of the Wall as it exists today, especially in cases like that of the Qalqilya ghetto, it is pretty reasonable to assume that most, if not all, the Wall would be deemed illegal. Better yet, the proportionality argument is generally accepted in all modern legal systems, unlike the more specific treaty/convention law that the ICJ was forced to focus on.
Of course this is not to say that that the Israeli ruling is a good one. For example, like many Israeli rulings there are political points that are treated as legal ones, such as the false characterization of all Palestinian resistance as “terrorism” [8]. Further the HCJ does justify the Wall in principle though the projected segments reviewed were deemed to be illegal because of the humanitarian impact of the suggested route [9].
Further, citing the usual excuse used by the HCJ in regard to IDF decisions, it seeks merely to review military actions for their illegality, not to actually impose its judgment on the IDF [10]. This is, along with the IDF option of utilizing the Emergency Regulations, one of the methods allowed to the IDF to freely disregard the High Court of Justice when so inclined. As was the case in the famous court ruling against torture, that in fact merely amounted to a slight change in the phrasing of the IDF terminology, i.e. “ticking bomb” justification, the court’s ruling can be safely ignored if the government chooses – for whatever reason – not to enforce it. This is one of the luxuries of being a non-constitutional state; the political executive is under no actual obligation to enforce any law or legal ruling. In the ruling itself, the IDF freely concedes that should some portion of the fence that is already constructed be deemed illegal, they will pay compensation, but there is no mention – much less compulsion – to reverse illegal sections or the Wall or to in fact stop committing the construction even if deemed illegal. [11]
Nevertheless, in order to portray itself as being a state that respects the rule of law, High Court of Justice rulings are usually afforded at least some general consideration. Thus the HCJ ruling in Beit Sourik Village Council v. The Government of Israel, Commander of the IDF Forces in the West Bank, is in fact a rather grave embarrassment since the projected Wall cannot be constructed in the Occupied Palestinian Territories at all without inflicting the same disproportionate – and hence illegal – circumstances on other local Palestinians. So how do they intend to reconcile this ruling with the Wall?
The Jerusalem Post provided the answer to this question on July 14: “A petition against the appropriation of land for construction of the security fence near the Kissufim road in the Gaza Strip was turned down Tuesday by the High Court of Justice. The petition was submitted by Palestinian residents of the al-Karara village in the Gaza Strip. According to IBA news, the ruling also cancels a freeze order on construction in the area.” [12] Since the HCJ ruling only related to one small segment of the Wall, and the determination has already been made, the HCJ can now simply refuse to accept further petitions, based on the argument that the IDF should be assumed to be taking the same proportionality concerns into account in other areas. That is, in so many words, it seems unlikely that there will be an option of legal appeal to any other segments of the Wall, based on the assumption that the IDF will act in “good faith” taking the previous ruling into consideration. Thus, yet agai n, we have another High Court of Justice ruling that can be safely ignored.
Make no mistake about it, the Israeli High Court of Justice is no friend to Palestinians living in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Nevertheless, when Zionists and others choose to counter the ICJ Advisory Opinion citing the HCJ ruling, one can – in all honesty – point out that if the HCJ ruling was in fact applied to the entire Wall, most of it would be illegal even under Israeli law. Of course this won’t happen, and even if it did the IDF is under no obligation to comply anyway, nevertheless, for the scoundrels out to justify the legality of the Wall, the High Court of Justice ruling is certainly no help. END OF THE ARTICLE
END OF THE NOTES
Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Voice from the Past!/Letter to the Editor, sent and published by Pravda/”The verdict of the Israeli High Court regarding the Wall”
[At the 15th july 2021 crime reporter Peter R de Vries died, after beenshot in the streets of Amsterdam on 6th july. [2]I honor him, because he was far more than just a crime reporter and an investigator of criminal cold cases, but also a defender of the rights of unheard, like refugees and minorities.Therefore my hommageMay he rest in peace]
Peter R de Vries, the fearless crimefighter and advocate for the rights of the unheard, reminds me of a fictional character of oneof my favourite films ”Legends of the Fall” [3], colonel William Ludlow, whomoves his family to a ranch in Montana out of indignation and dissatisfactionwith the treatment of the American government against the native Americans . [4]In my terms:He fled for aggressive racist white Supremacy”In his terms:,”Losing the madness” [5]By the way:A must see film for you, readers! [6] Fearless and lovers of justice they both shared, fictional ColonelLudlow and crimefighter Peter R de VriesThe one retreated [as was the best thing he could do inpre WO I White supremacist America] and founded his Paradisein Montana, the other fought [as was the best thing to do innowadays the Netherlands]
So like Colonel Ludlow, Peter R de Vries was fearless and obsessed with justice, investigating cold cases [7] and what says more:Achieving great results! [8]
FEARLESS Fearless he was, his motto was:”On bended knee it’s no way to be free” [9] He was also tenacious, never gave up. [10] I don’t have to mention all his successes;Look at his Wikipedia! [11]His last effort was his assistence of the crown witness, Nabil B [12]in the Marengo process, the greatest drug trial in the history of the Netherlands [13]Perhaps that involvement costed him his life, as the Public Prosecuter’s Officethinks is ”more likely” [but nothing is sure, yet, all optionsare still open] [14] ADVOCATE FOR THE UNHEARD Although I admired Peter R de Vries for his great involvement in solvingcold cases and his support for the families of the victims [15], that’s notthe first reason I write this tribute to him. My reason is, that he was not only a dedicated crime fighter, but alsoan advocate of the rights of the unheard and victims of stogmatizationand discrimination.
HIS FIGHT AGAINST PVV LEADER G WILDERS Peter R de Vries was a fervent opponent of fascist PVV leader G Wilders [17]In his diary, he wrote ”Ik vind Geert W. zelf een gevaarlijk man, een demagoog met de potentievan een volksmenner.” [Translated in English: I think Geert W is a dangerous man, a demagogue with the potention of a people’s agitator” [18]
For his contribution to the fight against racism and IslamophobiaI sent Peter R de Vries an appreciation-mail [19]The price he paid for his Wilders criticism was a great number ofhatemails [20]I wonder how many of those people, wholay flowers at the place he was shot [21], were among those haters……
CHAMPION FOR THE RIGHTS OF REFUGEES But Peter R de Vries did more:In a time and on a moment, that there was much resistanceagainst the coming of Syrian refugees to the Netherlands, who hadfled the war in Syria [22], Peter R de Vries stood firm for the refugee rights, he wrote this statement:”Respect and admiration for the refugees! [23]I quote from this statement among else:”Sometimes it seems that in public debate about the refugees it is no longer about people, but only about numbers, percentages, quotas and files. Often the refugee issue is discussed in a detached and intolerant tone of voice; like asylum seekers and refugees are profiteers who are here to seek fortune”AND”It has always amazed me how easily and lightly people condemn refugees about leaving their homeland; like it is a tempting challenge to build a new life in another country, with an incomprehensible language, different culture and a harsh climate. Like people just do that for fun…!”AND”And that is why I would like to emphasize that I have the upmost respect and admiration for those who have abandoned their homes in desperation for doom and disaster and are trying, with great difficulty, to build up a new life in a foreign country. In my opinion they should never have to hide or be ashamed; they can be proud, with their heads held high, because what they have achieved, what they have defied and what they have sacrificed more than most of us would dare or could bear. That is something we should be more aware off…” [24]
True and impressive words and again I sent him a appreciation-mail! [25] STATELESS REFUGEES But apart from writing, Peter R de Vries came in action!He helped a group of ”General Pardonners”, who were allowedto remain in the Netherlands, but yet didn’t become a passport,which made them ”stateless”By his effort [and of course from others] [26], State Secretary Ankie Broekers-Knol of Asylum Affairs made it possible that ten thousand so-called general pardonners can still get a passport. [27]One of the ten thousand stateless General Pardonners,Yosef Tekeste-Yemane, [who turned to de Vries about this humanitarian question] remarked:[comment after the shooting of Peter R de Vries]:”I hope he will still get what he has achieved.” [28] He also remarked:””He saw the injustice and got caught up in it, he was determined to help us and hoped the media would warm to this.” [29] And it worked!
EPILOGUE In his own way, Peter R de Vries made a great contribution inthe fight against injustice..Not only because of the fearless and tenacious way, he fought as a crime reporter [30], but for what he did for refugees.In the fight against racism, prejudices and Islamophobia. Therefore for me, he is a great man.I will not forget him! May he rest in peace. Astrid Essed NOTES Notes 1 t/m 20 https://www.astridessed.nl/notes-1-t-m-20-at-tribute-to-peter-r-de-vries/
Nearly 43,000 foreign men, women, and children linked to ISIS remain detained in inhuman or degrading conditions by regional authorities in northeast Syria, two years after they were rounded up during the fall of the Islamic State “caliphate,” often with the explicit or implicit consent of their countries of nationality, Human Rights Watch said today.
The foreign detainees have never been brought before a court, making their detention arbitrary as well as indefinite. They include 27,500 children, most in locked camps and at least 300 in squalid prisons for men, and scores of others in a locked rehabilitation center. The detainees suffer from rising levels of violence and falling levels of vital aid including medical care. In just one case, France has refused to allow a woman with advanced colon cancer to come home for treatment. One detained woman told Human Rights Watch that a guard ran over a young child in a vehicle, cracking his skull.
“Men, women, and children from around the world are entering a third year of unlawful detention in life-threatening conditions in northeast Syria while their governments look the other way,” said Letta Tayler, associate crisis and conflict director at Human Rights Watch. “Governments should be helping to fairly prosecute detainees suspected of serious crimes and free everyone else, not helping to create another Guantanamo.”
Governments that actively contribute to this abusive confinement may be complicit in the unlawful detention and collective punishment of thousands of people, most of them women and young children, Human Rights Watch said.
In February and March 2021, Human Rights Watch communicated via text, email, or phone with eight foreign women detained in camps for family members of male ISIS suspects in northeast Syria as well as relatives of five camp detainees. Human Rights Watch also spoke or emailed with members of six aid organizations and six civil society groups pressing for the detainees’ repatriations, as well as regional authorities, Western government officials, UN officials, journalists, and academics. In addition, Human Rights Watch reviewed dozens of reports, media articles, and videos about the camps and prisons.
People interviewed described increasingly desperate mothers and children struggling to maintain dignity amid harsh conditions and fears of contracting Covid-19. Three women in one camp, Roj, said that guards confiscated Qurans, threatened women for wearing niqabs, and raided tents at night. Women caught with cellphones or suspected of withholding information about crimes in the camp were sometimes beaten and jailed for days or even weeks, the women and a relative said. The regional authority, called the Autonomous Administration of Northeast Syria, denied any abuse by guards and said that some women had attacked guards with stones and sharp objects. Badran Chia Kurd, Autonomous Administration’s deputy co-chair, told Human Rights Watch that women were in most cases jailed only for “a few days” if they tried to flee.=
One relative of a detainee said that her detained family member was suicidal. A young mother wrote that daily life in the camps made her want to “scream from the top of my lungs”:
It’s mentally exhausting. … never gets better here. Always worse. … majority of the children in the camp are sick. Almost everyday something bad happens. Children trapped in burning tents and dies. … We have water tank that contains worms. The toilets are dirty so people started to build [their] own toilets.
Like all detainees who communicated with Human Rights Watch, the women asked that they not be identified by name or nationality for fear of retaliation by other detainees or camp guards.
Holding the foreigners “is a huge burden” for the cash-strapped Autonomous Administration, Chia Kurd said. “The international community, in particular the countries who have citizens in the camps and prisons, are not assuming their responsibility. This issue, if not solved, will not only affect us, but the entire world.”
Countries with nationals held in northeast Syria should answer repeated appeals by the Autonomous Administration to help them provide detainees with due process, including the right to contest the legality and necessity of their detention before a judge. All detainees held in inhuman or degrading conditions, or who are not promptly charged with a recognizable criminal offense in fair proceedings should be immediately released.
Foreign countries should also comply with the Autonomous Administration’s repeated calls for them to repatriate detainees not charged with a crime, prioritizing the most vulnerable. Repatriated children should be accompanied by their parents in keeping with the child’s right to family unity. Foreigners facing risks at home of death or torture or other ill-treatment should be transferred to a safe third country.
Upon transfer home or abroad, detainees can be provided with rehabilitation and reintegration services and as warranted, investigated and prosecuted, Human Rights Watch said. Children who lived under ISIS and any women trafficked by ISIS should be treated first and foremost as victims, and children should face prosecution and detention only in exceptional circumstances.
In the meantime, foreign governments and donors should immediately increase aid to improve camp and prison conditions in northeast Syria and press the United Nations Security Council to reauthorize vital aid operations across Syria’s northeast and northwest borders to speed the delivery of aid.
Only 25 countries are known to have repatriated any nationals from northeast Syria and most have brought home or helped return only a token few, primarily orphans or young children, in some cases without their mothers.
The UN and donors, including many home countries of the foreign detainees, are providing humanitarian aid to the detainees and others in northeast Syria. But acute shortages of clean water, food, medicine, and adequate shelter and security persist, say UN experts and others.
The United States military, which leads the US coalition against ISIS, has funded measures to bolster security and ease overcrowding for some of the prisons, according to Chia Kurd, media, and US government reports. However, the measures appear to have done little to bring the prisons in compliance with minimum detention standards. Moreover, neither the US nor other members of the international community, including countries with nationals detained in northeast Syria, have funded any measures to provide the prisoners with due process, Chia Kurd said.
The international coalition against ISIS also reportedly plans to fund construction of additional detention centers for women suspects, as well as a 500-bed “rehabilitation center” for older boys. The United Kingdom, another key coalition member, is reportedly funding a project to double the capacity of one of the prisons, in Hasakah, from 5,000 to 10,000 detainees. UK and US defense officials did not respond to requests for comment in the time provided.
“Improving horrific prison conditions does not change the fact that indefinite detention without judicial review is unlawful,” Tayler said. “Expanding prisons and locked rehabilitation centers to warehouse hundreds of children who never even chose to live under ISIS is unconscionable.”
The detainees
Backed by a US-led coalition, regional fighters called the Syrian Democratic Forces rounded up tens of thousands of ISIS suspects and family members during the fall of Baghouz, then the last ISIS stand in Syria, during a weeks-long battle that ended March 23, 2019. The Syrian Democratic Forces are still holding nearly 63,400 of the family members, nearly all of them women and children, in two locked, heavily guarded, open-air camps encircled by barbed wire. Roughly 20,000 are from Syria, 31,000 from neighboring Iraq, and nearly 12,000 others – 8,000 children and 4,000 women – are from almost 60 other countries. Conditions for the non-Iraqi foreigners, who are kept in special annexes, are particularly dire.
The Syrian Democratic Forces are also holding about 10,000 men as well as at least 700 boys of all nationalities, most ages 14 to 17 in 14, overcrowded, makeshift prisons for ISIS suspects, Chia Kurd said. Prison conditions “do not meet minimum standards,” he said, blaming scarce international aid for the abusive conditions. Human Rights Watch in 2019 and 2020 documented the inhumane conditions in some of these prisons.
Camp Conditions
In al-Hol and Roj, the locked camps for family members, more than 90 percent of children are under age 12 and more than half under 5, aid groups say. Syrians and Iraqis in the camps have relative freedom, including the ability to leave and return to the camps. During multiple visits to the two camps from 2017 to 2019, Human Rights Watch documentedconditions in the foreigners’ annexes that amounted to cruel, degrading, and inhuman treatment. Combined with the indefinite and arbitrary nature of detention, these conditions may also amount to torture when they deliberately inflict serious physical or mental harm on a detainee. Since then, detainees, family members, civil society representatives, and aid workers told Human Rights Watch, conditions have deteriorated further along with detainees’ despair.
“You can feel that people are giving up on the outside world, they are so desperate you meet a wall of hopelessness,” said Natascha Rée Mikkelsen, founder of Repatriate the Children-Denmark, who has visited the camps several times, including in February. “And the young children, some of them have diarrhea all the time and they are so skinny and so small. They just have this look like they are locked up. They have nothing to do and they know nothing about their future.”
Detainees and others interviewed by Human Rights Watch complained of contaminated water, overflowing latrines, shortages of fresh food and diapers, tents leaking or catching fire, rampant disease, insufficient medical care, and almost no schooling for children or counseling for a severely traumatized population.
While conditions are somewhat better in Roj than in the larger camp, al-Hol, detainees and family members described harsh conditions there as well. Three relatives, a civil society member and two detainees said noxious fumes from adjacent oil fields were causing asthma, deep coughs, and lung inflammations. One mother texted of being terrified by the lack of medicine for her child, by guards threatening to cut detainees’ clothes if they were not “short and colorful,” and of the desert winds that flipped over her tent at night:
Honestly I have ptsd [Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder] from the camps more than IS territory (even though I am traumatized from that lifestyle). … I would hold my daughter tight and stay alert all night watching the tent as it was about to collapse onto us at any moment. And it did actually happen many times.
In mid-March, said a Western European man whose grandchildren are in the camps, a small group of children no older than 6 crossed an internal camp fence to pick dandelions just on the other side. “The camp guards saw them, caught them, and beat them severely,” he said. “The children didn’t decide to be there, they don’t deserve to live like this in such terrible conditions.”
Two relatives described detainees waiting hours to access a shared phone that they could only use for seconds. Communication in one section for foreigners in Roj is limited to messages of less than a minute every 8 to 10 days, compounding detainees’ isolation, one relative said.
Life-Threatening Conditions
According to humanitarian groups and the UN Office of Counterterrorism, more than 700 detainees in al-Hol and Roj – at least half of them children – have died in the past two years. Several were killed by detainees in al-Hol who remain loyal to ISIS, while others died in crossfire between guards and detainees or from lack of medical care, unsanitary conditions, and accidents such as tent fires.
At least 29 people were killed in al-Hol camp alone in January and February 2021 including seven children. “The people who work there feel more and more scared of the situation, as if they have no control,” Mikkelsen said. “You have the feeling that any time you could be killed.”
In text messages relayed to Human Rights Watch, one woman in Roj described a fire breaking out in a tent housing two children whom guards left in the camp while jailing their mother for having a cellphone. The woman said it was one of three fires in Roj so far in 2021:
The 5 year old boy put the tent on fire and his 7 year old sister took him out from the burning tent. Two tent burned that day, it was terrible day cuz it took very long time to put the fire [out] since many fire extinguisher didn’t work and we didn’t know if there was more ppl trapped in the fire.
In February, 10 Frenchwomen in the camps went on a hunger strike to publicize their demand to stand trial at home. That same month, Pascale Descamps, a Frenchwoman whose 32-year-old daughter and four young grandchildren are held in Roj, began her own hunger strike to press the government to let her daughter leave to receive medical treatment for advanced colon cancer. Doctors in northeast Syria told her daughter that she needed “urgent” treatment but that the operation would be high-risk if performed locally, Descamps told Human Rights Watch. In December, the UN Committee Against Torture called on France to repatriate Descamps’ daughter for medical care but she remains in Roj. Descamps said that in intermittent audio messages, her daughter sounded desperate:
Every time my daughter talks to me, she starts crying. She tells me that she is getting worse, bleeding a lot, and getting weaker. She is like an animal in her tent, dying in front of her children. … I am not exonerating my daughter, but she has the right to a fair trial and to receive proper medical care given the seriousness of her health condition … I am also fighting for my grandchildren not to have to go through all this any longer. It is a stake in the heart to know that they see their mother so ill and to imagine that she could die there when France could repatriate her and her children. It’s like they have no rights anymore.”
Covid-19 is another threat. As of February 16, the UN had reported 8,537 cases of the virus in northeast Syria, but humanitarians warn that rates are vastly under-counted because of insufficient staff and supplies for extensive testing. At least 13 cases of Covid-19 had been reported in al-Hol and Roj as of December 2020. A greater outbreak could disproportionately harm camp and prison detainees as most are malnourished with severely limited access to medical services.
Detainees began receiving monthly handouts of masks and gloves in mid-2020 but they have to reuse them several times because of shortages, two women in Roj said.
Inhuman Prison Conditions
Despite some improvements, only one of the 14 makeshift prisons for male ISIS suspects is fit for the purpose, said a June 2020 US military report. The 10,000 men, most Syrian and Iraqi and 2,000 from other countries, are jammed into severely overcrowded cells with open latrines and poor ventilation. The prisons lack essential services including adequate medical care for festering wounds and infectious diseases including tuberculosis. Up to several hundred men have died in the prisons including one from Germany and another from the UK.
The 700 or more boys in the prisons are held separately from the men. About 400 are Syrian, 200 are Iraqi, and the rest come from several other countries, Chia Kurd said. The boys have access to outdoor courtyards, but have little access to education, recreation, and other essential services, he said.
Three well-informed sources speaking on condition of anonymity said that many of the boys in the prisons were taken from the camps where they lived with their mothers and siblings when they reached mid-adolescence and that some were as young as 12. Imprisoned Syrian boys can visit with families, but imprisoned foreign boys are not allowed visits with their mothers and siblings in the camps, Chia Kurd said. Between 100 and 110 more boys are living in a locked rehabilitation center. Services there, too, are “insufficient” due to a lack of aid, Chia Kurd said. The Autonomous Administration would like to transfer the boys in prisons to additional rehabilitation centers if foreign governments will build them, he said.
Chia Kurd said some of the boys were taken from the camps for families and elsewhere “for committing acts of violence” or for ISIS ideology, although Human Rights Watch received reports from local family support groups that at least some of the boys were taken simply because they had reached adolescence. UK-based Rights and Security International in 2020 reported that Syrian Democratic Forces forcibly disappeared dozens of boys from the camps.
The Kurdish-led coalition had prosecuted about 8,000 Syrians suspected of membership in ISIS and other armed groups in People’s Defense Courts as of early 2021, with about 4,000 more awaiting local prosecutions. The trials have been piecemeal with due process gaps and the Autonomous Administration has sought assistance from foreign governments to bring them in line with international standards. For two years, the Autonomous Administration has asked foreign governments to help it create a hybrid or international court to prosecute the detainees, Chia Kurd said. At times the regional authorities have proposed internationally supported local courts. But “the international community has not been cooperative with us,” he said.
Humanitarian Access
Medical and other supplies are scarce in the camps and prisons, in part because of difficulties aid workers face in gaining access to the region. Russia has since January 2020 used and threatened its veto power at the UN Security Council to force the closure of three of the four vital border crossings into Syria that UN agencies had used to transport medicine and other aid into the country. Turkey and Turkish-backed forces have also repeatedly cut offwater supplies to Autonomous Administration-held areas of northeast Syria, including al-Hol camp.
Representatives of four aid organizations said that these factors combined with mounting insecurity have forced many humanitarian organizations to suspend or scale back operations in northeast Syria.
Scant Repatriations
Despite the deplorable conditions, only 25 of nearly 60 home counties have repatriated any of their nationals from northeast Syria, and repatriation operations fell from 29 in 2019 to 17 in 2020 and 3 in the first 10 weeks of 2021, according to Save the Children and Human Rights Watch tallies. Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Russia, andUzbekistan have together brought home more than 1,200 of their citizens, about 85 percent of all returns. Repatriations by Western countries remain piecemeal. The UK, Australia, and Denmark have stripped citizenship of some nationals detained in northeast Syria, in some cases even when the revocation may leave them stateless.
A few countries, including Germany and Finland, have brought home some mothers with children. But others including Canada, the UK, and France have repatriated one or more children without their mothers and others, such as Sweden and Belgium, plan to do so. Systematic returns of children without their parents flout the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which states that countries should uphold the principle of family unity absent a professional assessment that separation “is necessary for the best interests of the child.” While governments obtain mothers’ written consent to take their children without them, Human Right Watch questions whether consent can be informed and voluntary for women indefinitely detained inside locked camps with no access to redress or counsel.
“If I had to choose again, I don’t know if I would have done it,” a Canadian mother in Roj said of her anguished decision to allow Canada to repatriate her 4-year-old daughter without her in March. “It’s the hardest sacrifice for a mother to make.”
Many governments contend that repatriations pose too much of a security risk. While governments have an obligation to keep people safe, security concerns do not obviate their parallel duty to uphold human rights, Human Rights Watch said. Moreover, as even the US-led coalition against ISIS argues, abandoning these detainees to indefinite confinement in dire conditions may pose a greater risk than bringing them home.
Men imprisoned as ISIS suspects in northeast Syria have repeatedly rioted and more than 100 have escaped to whereabouts unknown. With no way to leave legally, women are regularly paying traffickers to smuggle them and their children out of the locked camps, placing them at risk of being trafficked into forced labor and sexual exploitation, among other abuses, or of rejoining ISIS. Shunned by home countries, children may be vulnerable to recruitment by ISIS hardliners in the prisons and camps.
In contrast, repatriations or third-country transfers allow governments to conduct individual assessments of each returnee, monitor them as appropriate, and hold to account those who have committed serious international human rights crimes, a critical step in redress for thousands of ISIS victims.
Repatriations of the foreigners may also improve conditions for the Syrian ISIS suspects and family members whom the local authorities are also detaining in the camps and prisons. The Autonomous Administration has allowed more than 9,100 Syrians to return to their communities since 2019, including more than 2,600 under an amnesty it announced in October 2020, but thousands of others remain. As with the foreign detainees, the local authorities should release any Syrians held in degrading or inhuman conditions or without due process, and improve conditions for those who may not be able to return home because of risks that their communities may reject them or fears of returning to areas held by the government.
In January, UN Secretary-General António Guterres called repatriations by home countries, particularly of children, “an urgent and strategic counter-terrorism imperative.” The European Parliament and UNICEF have also called on member states to repatriate all children, taking into account the best interests of the child. The UN human rights commissioner, the UN counterterrorism chief, and 22 UN specialized human rights experts have called on home countries to repatriate their nationals as well. The 22 UN human rights experts noted that the “violence, exploitation, abuse and deprivation” suffered by foreign detainees in northeast Syria have resulted in deaths and in and of themselves “may well amount to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment under international law,” with no effective remedy.
International Legal Standards
Countries have a responsibility to take steps to protect their citizens when they face serious human rights violations, including loss of life and torture. This obligation can extend to nationals in foreign countries when reasonable action by their home governments’ actions can protect them from such harm. International human rights law also provides that everyone has the right to a nationality. Governments have an international legal obligation to provide access to nationality for all children born abroad to one of their nationals who would otherwise be stateless, as soon as possible. All individuals have the rights to adequate food, water, clothing, shelter, and mental and physical health, and fair trials. All children have the right to education.
Detaining people in conditions that amount to inhuman or degrading treatment is strictly prohibited under human rights law.
The Autonomous Administration’s indefinite detention of these foreigners without due process, including their right to appear before a judge to review the legality and necessity of their confinement, is arbitrary and unlawful. The detention of ISIS suspects’ family members, particularly the children but also women who are not being investigated for any crimes, also amounts to guilt by association and collective punishment, prohibited under international law.
The arbitrary detention and lack of reintegration support for these children violates international principles for children associated with armed groups, who are to be viewed primarily as victims. UN Security Council Resolution 2396 of 2017, which is binding on all member states, emphasizes the importance of assisting women and children associated with groups such as ISIS who may themselves be victims of terrorism, including through rehabilitation and reintegration.
Resolution 2396 also calls on member states to investigate and prosecute suspects for involvement with foreign terrorist groups if appropriate. Given the absence of any fair trial proceedings for foreigners detained in northeast Syria, investigations by home countries remain the only viable option at this time to provide redress to victims for any serious crimes these detainees may have committed.
Countries with Citizens Detained in Northeast Syria
Citizens of at least 58 countries are reported to be detained in camps and prisons in northeast Syria: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bangladesh, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, China, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Indonesia, India, Iran, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Maldives, North Macedonia, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Palestine, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Spain, Sudan, Somalia, Serbia, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, and Yemen.
END OF ARTICLE
Reacties uitgeschakeld voor [Human Rights Watch]/Thousands of Foreigners Unlawfully Held in NE Syria
/s3/static.nrc.nl/inbeeld/files/2021/11/1211inbmigrantenpowr27.jpg)
/s3/static.nrc.nl/inbeeld/files/2021/11/1211inbmigrantenpowr16.jpg)
/s3/static.nrc.nl/inbeeld/files/2021/11/1211inbmigrantenpowr18.jpg)
/s3/static.nrc.nl/inbeeld/files/2021/11/1211inbmigrantenpowr11.jpg)
/s3/static.nrc.nl/inbeeld/files/2021/11/1211inbmigrantenpowr.jpg)
/s3/static.nrc.nl/inbeeld/files/2021/11/1211inbmigrantenpowr26.jpg)
/s3/static.nrc.nl/inbeeld/files/2021/11/1211inbmigrantenpowr9.jpg)
/s3/static.nrc.nl/inbeeld/files/2021/11/1211inbmigrantenpowr28.jpg)
/s3/static.nrc.nl/inbeeld/files/2021/11/1211inbmigrantenpowr3.jpg)
/s3/static.nrc.nl/inbeeld/files/2021/11/1211inbmigrantenpowr29.jpg)
![The Israeli separation barrier divides East Jerusalem and the Palestinian West Bank town of Qalandia. [File: Thomas Coex/AFP]](https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/TafQOExghNFA53NWHdh6penouZCvg70GtnbRrSB5al6iUqhN5NMC9AiFHgZa_PRE2xa2RV-0Paw3fM1ydDP59Mr06NcHTpZBuORzLshWkqgtvJh8D5hMeaUsOtT29XSiwRSpnn96EVKsSb41qtVJ7lnSCpyVg226VF1yyQlH=s0-d-e1-ft#https://www.aljazeera.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/4805b373bf0949d0a31e6b7a375a0128_8.jpeg?fit=1170%2C696)
