The Iranian authorities must immediately investigate reports that at least five people have died in custody following a crackdown on anti-establishment protests, and take all necessary steps to protect detainees from torture and prevent any further deaths, Amnesty International said.
“The shroud of secrecy and lack of transparency over what happened to these detainees is alarming. Instead of rushing to the judgment that they committed suicide, the authorities must immediately launch an independent, impartial, and transparent investigation, including independent autopsies,” said Magdalena Mughrabi, Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa.
“We have long documented the nightmarish conditions in detention facilities in Iran, including the use of torture. Those suspected of having any responsibility for these deaths should be suspended from their positions and prosecuted in proceedings that respect international fair trial standards and without recourse to the death penalty.”
Fears over the welfare of hundreds of detainees have been heightened by the death of Sina Ghanbari, 23, who was held in the ‘quarantine’ section of Tehran’s Evin prison, where detainees are held for processing immediately after being arrested. There have been conflicting reports about the circumstances surrounding Ghanbari’s death, with activists disputing the authorities’ claims that he had committed suicide.
Since then, at least four further deaths in custody have been reported, including another two deaths in Evin’s ‘quarantine’ section, according to prominent human rights lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh. The identities of these two individuals are currently unknown. At least two others who were arrested during the crackdown – Vahid Heydari and Mohsen Adeli – died in custody in Arak, Markazi province and Dezfoul, Khuzestan province this month, according to reports. In all four cases, activists and several family members have disputed official claims that these detainees committed suicide.
Many relatives of the hundreds of people detained have reported that they have been unable to access information about their loved ones, and that they have faced intimidation and threats by the authorities even for making enquiries.
“The authorities must not only inform family members of detainees’ whereabouts, but also allow families to visit detainees and ensure they have legal representation. Nobody should face reprisals for inquiring about the whereabouts of a loved one or seeking truth about their fate,” said Magdalena Mughrabi.
Dozens of activists, human rights defenders, writers and lawyers are behind bars in Saudi Arabia. Here’s how you can help them.
Raif Badawi
Saudi Arabian blogger Raif Badawi was detained in June 2012 and sentenced in 2014 for setting up a website focused on social and political debate. He was sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes. When Saudi Arabian authorities first flogged him on 9 January 2015, our supporters around the world rose up, driving global condemnation of the authorities and demanding his release and that of all other prisoners of conscience. He has not been flogged since then.
Over the past three years, our supporters have tirelessly campaigned outside Saudi Arabian embassies worldwide, held candlelit vigils, fired off tweets targeting the Saudi Arabian authorities. You have also written hundreds of thousands of letters and solidarity messages demanding Raif and all other prisoners of conscience detained in Saudi Arabia are freed.
Now, more than ever, we must keep up the pressure, as the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia grows worse.
We refuse to let Saudi Arabia’s appalling human rights record go unnoticed. The crackdown on civil society and freedom of expression continues unabated as the authorities continue to put human rights defenders on trial on charges related to their peaceful activism.
Dozens of outspoken activists, human rights defenders, writers and lawyers remain behind bars, including Raif’s lawyer Waleed Abu al-Khair, simply for exercising their rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly. But, there’s power in numbers, and we won’t stop until all prisoners of conscience are free.
Here are three ways you can demand Saudi Arabia respects human rights.
1) Demand the release of all prisoners of conscience
Saudi Arabia is sensitive about its public image and international standing. We encourage you to target officials publicly, shaming them about their repression of freedom of expression and pressuring them to release all prisoners of conscience.
2) Urge Saudi Arabia to stop using counter-terrorism law against human rights defenders
In connection with their peaceful activities, human rights defenders continue to be prosecuted on vague, broad charges under the counter-terror law. They can be sentenced to up to 15 years in prison after grossly unfair trials in front of the Specialized Criminal Court (SCC), a notorious tribunal set up to deal with security and terrorism-related offences. Last week, UN experts deplored Saudi Arabia’s use of the counter-terror law and urged it to end the repression of peaceful activists.
3) Urge your government to pressure Saudi Arabia to stop its crackdown on human rights
The Australian Government should do all it can to ensure Saudi Arabia does the right thing. Tweet now and call for the release of Raif, Waleed and all prisoners of conscience.
Iranian authorities must ensure the right to peaceful protest, investigate reports that security forces have unlawfully used firearms against unarmed protesters and protect hundreds of detainees from torture and other ill-treatment, Amnesty International said amid concerns that the crackdown against demonstrations that have spread across Iran in the past week is intensifying.
Official statements have confirmed that at least 22 people, including two security officers, have been killed since 28 December, when thousands of Iranians began flocking to the streets to speak out against poverty, corruption, political repression and authoritarianism.
“Law enforcement officials have the right to defend themselves, and a duty to protect the safety of the public. However, reports of the use of firearms against unarmed protesters by security forces are deeply troubling and would contravene Iran’s human rights obligations under international law,” said Philip Luther, Amnesty International’s Research and Advocacy Director for the Middle East and North Africa.
“The Iranian government must promptly launch an effective and independent investigation into the killings and other reports of excessive or unnecessary force, and bring all those responsible for human rights violations to justice.”
Videos and eyewitness testimonies have emerged on social media and media outlets showing or describing riot police and other security forces using excessive and unnecessary force, including firing ammunition at unarmed protesters, beating protesters with truncheons and using tear gas and water cannons to disperse demonstrations. Amnesty International has not been able to verify the videos or witness accounts.
Hundreds at risk of torture
More than a thousand people have been arrested and detained over the past seven days in jails notorious for torture and other ill-treatment, with many being denied access to their families and lawyers.
The Human Rights Activist News Agency has reported that in Tehran’s Evin prison alone, the authorities registered at least 423 detainees between 31 December 2017 and 1 January 2018.
Many of the hundreds of detainees are believed to be held in overcrowded conditions in the “quarantine section” of Evin prison, which only has capacity for around 180 people.
The “quarantine section” is where detainees are often held shortly after arrest and subjected to checks to see if they are carrying drugs or infections before transfer to a general ward. Some have been transferred to sections of the prison that are run by the Revolutionary Guards or Ministry of Intelligence.
“The Iranian authorities have an appalling track record of carrying out mass arbitrary arrests of peaceful demonstrators. Given the alarming scale of the current wave of arrests, it is highly likely that many of those held are peaceful protesters who have been detained arbitrarily and now find themselves in prisons where conditions are dire and torture is a common tool to extract confessions and punish dissidents” – Philip Luther
“The Iranian authorities have an appalling track record of carrying out mass arbitrary arrests of peaceful demonstrators. Given the alarming scale of the current wave of arrests, it is highly likely that many of those held are peaceful protesters who have been detained arbitrarily and now find themselves in prisons where conditions are dire and torture is a common tool to extract confessions and punish dissidents,” said Philip Luther.
“The Iranian authorities must ensure that anyone held solely for peacefully taking part in demonstrations, expressing support for them or criticising the authorities is released immediately and unconditionally. All detainees should be protected from torture and other ill-treatment.”
Most of the demonstrations appear to have been peaceful, but in some cases violence by protesters has erupted, including stone-throwing, acts of arson and other damage to buildings, vehicles and other property.
“Those suspected of criminal conduct should be promptly charged with a recognisable criminal offence and tried in proceedings which meet international standards for fair trial or released. Their legal status and exact whereabouts should also be immediately disclosed to their families,” said Philip Luther.
Aggressive rhetoric
Despite President Hassan Rouhani’s assurance on Sunday 30 December 2017 that protesters have the right to criticise the government, the authorities’ subsequent rhetoric has suggested they intend to respond to the unrest in an increasingly ruthless manner.
On 1 January, Judiciary Chief Sadegh Larijani demanded a “strong approach” from “all prosecutors”.
On 2 January, the Head of the Revolutionary Court in Tehran, Mousa Ghanzafar Abadi, warned that the Ministry of Interior had declared the protests illegal and that those who continued to engage in protests would face severe penalties. He threatened that the protest leaders and organisers could be charged with “enmity against God” (moharebeh), which is punishable by the death penalty, “as they are connected with foreign intelligence services and are implementing their agendas.”
The same day, Iran’s Supreme Leader, Sayed Ali Khamenei, accused the country’s “enemies” of stirring the protests.
On 3 January, Iran’s Minister of Information and Communication Technology, Mohammad Javad Azari Jahromi, stated that the popular social messaging application Telegram would remain blocked unless it agreed to remove “terrorist content”.
The CEO of Telegram has said that it has refused the authorities’ request to shut down channels that peacefully promote and support the protests. The social media application Instagram also remains blocked. On 31 December Minister Jahromi had said that the blocking of access to Telegram and Instagram, which began that day, would be temporary.
The authorities’ aggressive rhetoric has been accompanied by state-sanctioned media outlets publishing a wanted list of protesters with their faces showing, and calling on members of the public to identify and report them to the authorities.
The authorities’ aggressive rhetoric has been accompanied by state-sanctioned media outlets publishing a wanted list of protesters with their faces showing, and calling on members of the public to identify and report them to the authorities.
“The escalation in the intimidation of protesters and the grossly disproportionate restrictions imposed on the right to freedom of expression online over recent days heightens fears that the Iranian authorities may resort to increasingly heavy-handed tactics to crush dissenting voices,” said Philip Luther.
“Peaceful protest is a right, and many people in Iran want to exercise that right. Instead of opting for repression and absurdly accusing protesters of collusion in foreign-orchestrated plots, the Iranian authorities should address their own record of failure to respect a range of civil, political, economic and social rights.”
Background
Since 28 December 2017, protests that started in Mashhad, Iran’s second-largest city, have spread to as many as 40 cities across Iran.
Slogans chanted at the demonstrations have expressed a mix of economic and political grievances – ranging from complaints over poverty, high unemployment, corruption and inequality – to demands for the release of political prisoners and outright rejection of the ruling political system, which protesters have denounced as a “clerical dictatorship”, and of its so-called Reformist and Principalist factions.
Iran has not seen protests on this scale since those which followed the disputed presidential election of 2009. On that occasion, more than a hundred protesters were killed and thousands suffered arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and other ill-treatment as the authorities cracked down on the unrest in a heavy-handed fashion.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Iran is a state party, upholds the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of expression.
The trial of a Tibetan language education activist, who could face up to 15 years in jail for “inciting separatism”, has exposed how ludicrously unjust the case against him is.
Tashi Wangchuk’s trial took place on Thursday at a court in the Yushu Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture in Qinghai province, northwest China. According to his lawyer, the main evidence presented against Tashi Wangchuk was a short film produced by the New York Times in 2015, which documented his campaign for Tibetan language education in schools.
Tashi Wangchuk, who has been in pre-trial detention for almost two years with no access to his family, is now awaiting the court’s verdict.
“It is appalling that Tashi Wangchuk could face up to 15 years’ imprisonment simply for expressing his views in media interviews. These are blatantly trumped up charges and he should be immediately and unconditionally released.”
Roseann Rife, Amnesty International’s East Asia Research Director.
“It is appalling that Tashi Wangchuk could face up to 15 years’ imprisonment simply for expressing his views in media interviews. These are blatantly trumped up charges and he should be immediately and unconditionally released,” said Roseann Rife, Amnesty International’s East Asia Research Director.
“Exposing and criticizing the way Tibetan language and culture are being suppressed by government policies is a legitimate exercise of free speech. Labelling it as a form of “inciting separatism” demonstrates how the Chinese authorities blatantly misuse this criminal charge to silence dissent.”
Tashi Wangchuk is an advocate for increased Tibetan language education in schools in Tibetan-populated areas where Chinese has become the sole language of instruction. Tashi Wangchuk has voiced his concerns that many Tibetan children are unable to use their native language fluently, which contributes to the gradual extinction of Tibetan culture.
“A Tibetan’s Journey for Justice”, produced by The New York Times in 2015 told the story of Tashi Wangchuk’s trip to Beijing to seek legal assistance in filing a lawsuit against local officials regarding the lack of Tibetan language education in schools. It revealed that no law firm was willing to take on the lawsuit and that the state-sponsored TV station, CCTV, refused Tashi Wangchuk’s request to report on the situation. The police used the footage as evidence that he had deliberately incited “separatism” by attempting to discredit the Chinese government’s international image and its policies on ethnic minorities.
“The video made by The New York Times shows that Tashi Wangchuk was trying to express his opinions about education policy through entirely legitimate means using official media and the Chinese legal system, but no one was willing to touch such a sensitive subject. This case demonstrates the extreme discrimination Tibetans face in China today, especially in terms of the restrictions on the rights to freedom of expression and to use their own language,” said Roseann Rife.
The trial took place shortly after Tibetan filmmaker Dhondup Wangchen was reunited with his family in the United States on 26 December, almost ten years after he was first detained in China for making an independent documentary about the views of ordinary Tibetans ahead of the 2008 Beijing Olympics.
While the historic Women’s Marches highlight a growing sense of urgency to fight for gender equality, it’s not surprising that feminism has remained in the spotlight. And yet, even in 2018, there are basic questions about feminism that continue to confound people. Questions that are surprisingly quaint, awkward or — in some cases — knowingly facetious, so people end up Googling them.
But why ask the internet when you can ask real-life feminists? Here, we’ve rounded up some of the most-Googled myths about feminism and put them to some of our favourite feminist writers and thinkers. After all, who better to answer those burning questions than women who deal with them in their everyday lives?
Why are feminists so angry?
Clementine Ford, Author of Fight Like A Girl, Daily Life columnist:
The trope of the angry feminist has proved a useful bogey monster for those invested in keeping women in a state of inequality. Women’s anger is pathologised as hysterical, irrational, illogical — we’re supposed to be Cool Girls, laughing along at our inherent weakness and maintaining the bonds of male power. But anger is not only a strength in women, it’s also a legitimate response to the oppression we’ve been subjected to for millennia.
If women are angry, it’s because we have good reason to be — we’re subjected to significant levels of violence – sexual, family, maternal, reproductive – and workplace and labour inequalities. The real mystery is how we’ve managed to stop ourselves being consumed by this justifiable rage and instead have found ways to temper it — with love, kindness, and the continued embrace of men who may not be perpetrating this violence against us, but are certainly beneficiaries of the inequality it maintains. I always say that women have every reason to be angry. If you’re not angry, you’re not paying attention.
Do feminists hate men?
Natalie Kon-Yu, Creative writer, editor and academic:
The idea of the man-hating feminist is one of the most dangerous myths about feminism. What feminists actually hate are the systems of oppression which allow inequality to flourish. In fact, men are arguably oppressed by these same systems, too.
The idea that men are strong and women are weak, for example, allows no wriggle room for either gender. It’s a rigid box that traps both and doesn’t allow for factors such as race, class, sexuality, sexual identity and levels of ability. It’s also a profoundly stupid thing to say, as though humans are fixed into one category and women and men must always be oppositional. We’re so much more complex than that.
Why do feminists not shave?
Natalie Reilly, Daily Life Columnist and Beauty Editor:
The simplest answer as to why feminists might not shave under their arms or legs (or bikini lines or face) is because men don’t have to. Nobody recoils if they see a man with hairy legs. And if men don’t have to, why should we? Social conditioning — via advertising — has led us to believe we’ll feel better with hairless skin. (Words like ‘silky’ and ‘soft’ are used ad nauseum) But it’s also an accepted fact that, especially in the cooler months, hair removal is not a woman’s highest priority.
And yet, I still choose to remove hair from my body. My rationale is that the feminism I subscribe to is not a fundamentalist one. In other words, I don’t believe hairless legs make me less of a feminist. I see it as a minor issue in a world where women are still struggling to obtain basic healthcare, education and freedom from violence, rape and even death.
I believe in equality, and as more men come under societal pressure to remove hair from their chests, their backs and even their bikini lines, I feel like hey, it’s almost within our grasp, so why stop now?
Does a feminist have to be female?
Amy Middleton, Publisher of Archer Magazine:
To me, feminism means acknowledging that the power structures associated with patriarchy fall somewhere between unfair and unbearable for most people. This essential feminist belief can be held by anyone, regardless of gender.
Importantly, though, those who identify as female, femme, transgender or non-binary, along with anyone else who doesn’t directly benefit from patriarchy, need more space, more volume, and more decision-making power.
The greatest feminists are those who use their privilege to create platforms for those who are less heard. In other words, the people in power who know when to shut the hell up, and listen to those who are being oppressed.
Do feminists get married?
Maeve Marsden, Writer, Producer and Artistic Director of Lady Sings It Better:
The issue here isn’t whether feminists get married — obviously they do — or if marriage itself is a feminist act. There’s no doubt the institution of marriage has historically been tied to the subjugation of women and much of that history is still embedded in the traditions we uphold today. I’m always flummoxed when I see women take their husband’s name, vow to honour and obey them, get “given away” by their fathers… All of these traditions are in contradiction with what I consider to be feminism.
What does a feminist believe in?
Mehreen Faruqi, Greens NSW MP:
Being a feminist is not a theoretical concept for me, but something that is relevant every single day of my life. In my workplace — the Upper House of NSW Parliament — women currently make up only 9* out of 42 members and that’s a gender imbalance we should all be very uncomfortable with.
I also find myself at the intricate crossroads of being Muslim, migrant and a woman of colour. Facing this ‘triple whammy’ has been liberating and empowering, in a personal and professional capacity. For me, it’s been about embracing a broad, diverse and inclusive feminism based on the realisation that the crossover of gender, race, class and culture particularly affects marginalised groups of women.
The challenging and furiously frustrating truth is that our pace towards equality of opportunity and outcomes for all women has been slow and is getting slower. That is why we must see through the façade that all is well, and continue to be unapologetically feminist.
Will feminism hurt your career?
Tracey Spicer, Journalist, Broadcaster and Author of The Good Girl Stripped Bare:
Of course feminism will hurt your career! Fighting for women’s rights will do absolutely nothing to end the gender pay gap, combat sexual harassment in the workplace, or pave the way for more women in leadership. In fact, if we become pregnant, we should quit our jobs immediately to make way for a real worker — preferably a man. We’re better off just giving up, popping on an apron, kicking off our shoes, and fixing the hubby a nice gin and tonic after a hard day at the office. That’s what I did when I was ‘boned’ after spitting out a couple of sprogs. I finally realised feminism was a nasty F-word and decided to become an ally of the patriarchy.*
*Actually, this is bulls—t. I took action against the bastards and it was the best thing I ever did. They certainly thought twice before ‘boning’ another mother in the workplace, as I outline in my book. And — incredibly — my career continues to flourish. Thank you, feminism!
*UPDATE: There are now 10 women in the NSW Upper House, as at August 2018. Thanks again, feminism!
Ahead of planned protests in the Occupied Palestinian Territories later today, and in the wake of the deaths of four Palestinian protesters and the injuring of hundreds of others in the last two weeks, Amnesty International is calling on the Israeli authorities to put an end to the excessive force that has been part of its response to demonstrations and clashes resulting from the decision by the US administration to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
“Israeli authorities must stop using excessive force against protesters once and for all. The fact that live ammunition has been used during protests in Gaza and the West Bank is particularly shocking. Under international human rights law lethal force can only be used when lives are at imminent risk, which clearly was not the case in the examples we have documented,” said Philip Luther, Research and Advocacy Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International.
“Respect for the right to peaceful protest is an obligation binding on Israel and, even where violence erupts, the Israeli security forces must use the minimum force necessary to address it, while allowing peaceful marches and demonstrations to continue.”
“Respect for the right to peaceful protest is an obligation binding on Israel and, even where violence erupts, the Israeli security forces must use the minimum force necessary to address it, while allowing peaceful marches and demonstrations to continue.” – Philip Luther
Over the last two weeks, four Palestinians, three in the Gaza Strip and one in the West Bank, have been killed by the Israeli authorities during demonstrations and ensuing clashes. Figures issued by the Palestinian ministry of health indicate that more than 3,000 others have been injured and, according to the Palestinian Prisoners’ Club, more than 400 have been arrested.
Israeli forces have used tear gas and rubber-coated bullets at a number of demonstrations, sometimes in response to protesters throwing stones and, in the case of the West Bank, Molotov cocktails. Particularly alarming has been the Israeli army’s use of live ammunition against Palestinian protesters in Gaza during demonstrations at or near the fence that separates the Strip and Israel. One of those killed was 29-year-old Ibrahim Abu Thuraya, who was shot in the head by a soldier on 15 December. At the time he was shot, he was sitting with a group of young protesters near Nahal Oz, a heavily militarised area, where barbed wire separated them from the Israeli army, positioned approximately 15 metres away. According to eyewitnesses, Ibrahim Abu Thuraya, who was wheelchair-bound after losing both his legs in an Israeli air strike in 2008, was waving a Palestinian flag and chanting slogans. He was in possession of a slingshot, which he did not use. Israeli military investigations have concluded there were “no moral or professional failures” identified in this killing.
The other two Palestinian protesters killed in the Gaza Strip were Mahmoud Abdelmajid al-Masri on 8 December and Yasser Naji Sukkar on 15 December. The fourth Palestinian protester killed – in the West Bank – was Basel Mustafa Ibrahim, also on 15 December.
“There’s no denying that Palestinian demonstrators in Gaza threw stones at Israeli soldiers, but it’s hard to believe how any of them posed an imminent danger to the lives of well-equipped soldiers protected by concrete blocks.”- Philip Luther
“There’s no denying that Palestinian demonstrators in Gaza threw stones at Israeli soldiers, but it’s hard to believe how any of them posed an imminent danger to the lives of well-equipped soldiers protected by concrete blocks,” said Philip Luther.
“The Israeli authorities have consistently refused to investigate killings of Palestinians by Israeli soldiers or police or at least not done so to international standards. As long as Israeli officers are not held to account for abusing their powers, the pattern of unlawful killings will continue, and Palestinians will be denied their right to peaceful protest without fear of injury or death.
“If further bloodshed is to be avoided as these demonstrations continue, the Israeli authorities must properly investigate all incidents in which arbitrary and otherwise abusive force appears to have been used and bring those suspected of being responsible to justice. This is all the more important when serious injury and loss of life are involved. Israel must also reform its investigation systems to ensure their impartiality and independence. A failure to do so will only perpetuate years of impunity.”
Three other Palestinians, two armed group members and one civilian, have been killed as a result of Israeli air strikes in the Gaza Strip in retaliation for rockets fired by Palestinian armed groups. The air strikes targeted a military site used by Hamas in Beit Lahya, in the north of the Gaza Strip. Another Palestinian was killed in al-Bireh in the West Bank on 15 December by Israeli soldiers who said he had attempted to stab one of them.
Background
US President Donald Trump’s recent decisions to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and to move the US embassy there from Tel Aviv has caused widespread condemnation and protest in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and around the world.
This decision has implied a “unified” Jerusalem and implicitly recognised the illegal annexation of East Jerusalem in disregard of the mass violations of Palestinian human rights resulting from Israel’s annexation policies.
Israel’s illegal annexation of occupied East Jerusalem was formalised in domestic law in 1980. It has been repeatedly condemned by the international community through various UN Security Council resolutions.
For more than 10 years, Gaza’s two million residents have been subjected to collective punishment as a result of Israel’s illegal blockade. Between October 2015 and September 2016, Amnesty International documented the killings of 21 protesters in Gaza, including a 10-year-old child.
In response to reports that President Trump has threatened to withhold aid to countries if they vote for a resolution condemning the United States decision recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, Raed Jarrar, advocacy and government relations director for the Middle East at Amnesty International USA, made the following statement:
“President Trump is doubling down on his reckless policies by coercing other countries into accepting his decision to recognise the unlawful annexation of East Jerusalem by Israel.
“The Trump administration’s bullying tactics will only serve to further isolate the United States on the global stage. Rather than threatening those who depend on US aid, the Trump Administration should abide by its legal obligations not to recognise an illegal situation and reverse its course on Jerusalem.”
Human rights campaigning is a long-game, and it can take years to see the results of our work – especially so for our refugee campaign. You may feel disheartened that the Australian Government has continued its harsh treatment of asylum seekers, but your work in 2017 has made a real difference for people in detention and laid the foundations for further progress in 2018.
You’ve helped amplify the voices of the people trapped in offshore detention — including Behrouz, Joinal, Aziz, and Imran — by sharing and liking their stories. Behrouz Boochani won the print/online and multimedia category in Amnesty’s media awards forhis journalism from Manus.
When the Manus Island situation escalated, you sent them messages of support to help keep up their spirits while in detention. Never doubt the difference your compassion has made in letting the men know they are not alone.
You have built strategic relationships
Activists have been knocking on the doors of their local councils, asking them to become refugee welcome zones — and with success in the areas of Margaret River, Lithgow, Scarborough, Joondalup and Gippsland. If your local council is yet to sign up as a refugee welcome zone, don’t give up. “We will continue to work for a refugee welcome zone in the city of Stirling because it is important that councils take the lead and foster a spirit of welcome,” says Cat Hogan, Scarborough group convenor in Western Australia.
Amnesty’s refugee networks have also been building relationships with other organisations working on refugees and many are now members of the Australian Refugee Action Network (ARAN).
In the media we have been outspoken at every opportunity about the current government’s policies of cruelty. Dr Graham Thom, our Refugee Coordinator was quoted across Fairfax, calling out Immigration Minister Dutton’s “extraordinarily irresponsible” comments about the first group of refugees to arrive in the US after being warehoused for years in offshore detention.
We worked closely with VICE to make sure Aziz was able to tell his story:
You have helped asylum seekers and refugees get support
Photo by Probal Rashid/LightRocket via Getty Images
Our refugee casework team are a group of dedicated volunteers in the Sydney office who help hundreds of people every year. They tirelessly respond to requests for assistance from asylum seekers, refugees and advocates— linking people in need to legal, mental health and trauma services. They keep in contact with detained asylum seekers and refugees, monitor complex cases, and where appropriate, step in to advocate on someone’s behalf.
This year the team assisted a number of people directly affected by the legacy caseload, writing country information reports and working with organisations such as the Refugee Advice and Casework Service (RACS) and the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre (ASRC) to make sure these people got the support they needed. The work that this team does is critical to the lives of those seeking help.
You pressured Ferrovial to end operations on Nauru
After sustained pressure from activists, in October multi-national corporation Ferrovial decided to end their contract running the offshore detention centre on Nauru.
Brisbane-based engineering company Canstruct have now taken up this ‘poison chalice’ contract. Queensland refugee activists are pressuring Canstruct to end their operations at the detention centre as well.
What’s next?
In 2018 activists can help promote a better plan for refugees that our government can enact instead of its current policies. This five-point plan for refugees includes Australia working cooperatively with neighbouring countries to better support refugees; including refugees in existing visa programs; and assessing refugees applications within a defined time period – finally allowing people to get on with rebuilding their lives.
Keep your eyes peeled in February 2018 for how you can get involved.
By Tammy Solonec, Amnesty International Australia’s Indigenous Rights Manager
Tammy Solonec
Australia Day should be for all Australians, but for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who mark the day as one of invasion, survival and mourning, 26 January is not a day for celebrations. We need to move to a date that is inclusive of all Australians.
Although Australia Day has only been officially nationally celebrated since 1984, protesting on 26 January is not new for Aboriginal people. Protests about the celebration of Australia Day on 26 January date all the way back to the 1800s.
In 2018, Amnesty will be calling on our leaders to acknowledge this plight and start a consultation process to change the date of Australia Day so it can be celebrated by all Australians.
Over recent years, momentum to change the date has grown. Some local councils in Western Australia, Tasmania and Victoria have amended their celebrations, and there has been extensive debate in the media. This year on 26 January there were large public protests across the country.
Over the past couple of years, Amnesty has supported #ChangetheDate by giving people a platform to speak on why they choose not to celebrate on 26 January. Now we are taking a step further, and asking you stand with us in solidarity with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples across this country.
In January we will launch a Change the Date campaign and make Amnesty International Australia’s formal position public. We will be asking our supporters to take action, calling on our elected representatives to:
acknowledge that 26 January has a long and painful history for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, and
start a consultation process to change the date of Australia Day so it can be celebrated by all Australians.
We will encourage our supporters to attend Indigenous events on and around 26 January. Check out the events that Amnesty supporters and activists attended in 2017 here. We will publish a list of 2018 Survival Day events early in the new year, so keep an eye out for it! If you know of any local Survival Day events that you want to share, feel free to email the details to us at rap@amnesty.org.au.
What can you do to help?
There are a number of ways you can be a part of #ChangetheDate:
Attend a local Indigenous cultural/Survival Day event. If you’re in Perth, head along to One Day in Freo on 28 January. These events are a great day out with friends or family.
Volunteer at local Indigenous cultural/Survival Day event. This is a great way to meet with and build relationships with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and communities.
Where appropriate, host a stall at local Indigenous cultural/Survival Day event with our #ChangetheDate and Community is Everything petitions.
Share our online actions on social media and add our #ChangetheDate frame (coming soon!) to your Facebook profile picture.
Write a letter to the editor of your local paper explaining why you support #ChangetheDate.
Our country’s history goes back well beyond 26 January 1788. It began over 65,000 years ago — and we’re still making it now.
Let’s stand together and respect the survival and resilience of the oldest living culture in the world and #ChangeTheDate.
Will you join our call to #ChangeTheDate?
P.S. Want to learn more about why this is important? Check out our Cultural Competency modules presented by Amnesty International Australia’s Indigenous Rights Team. These modules will equip our staff, activists and supporters with the necessary skills and considerations to best achieve success with our Indigenous Rights work.
By Kerry Moscogiuri, Campaigns Director, Amnesty International UK
Imagine carrying a baby for weeks or even months – feeling it grow, kick, hiccup and turn – and then suffering a miscarriage or stillbirth.
For Teodora Vasquez, as well as many thousands of women around the world each year, this is a deeply painful reality. But 37-year-old Teodora is suffering a disturbing double ordeal: both the grief that comes with losing a pregnancy and the torment of being imprisoned for her daughter’s murder.
In 2007 Teodora suffered a stillbirth and, despite scant evidence, was convicted of ‘aggravated homicide’. Last week, a court in El Salvador upheld her sentence of 30 years imprisonment.
Teodora says she was at work when she began to suffer intense pain and started bleeding. She called an ambulance and then collapsed shortly after. When she regained consciousness, she said she found herself surrounded by police who accused her of murdering her daughter by inducing an abortion.
Since her initial trial, which was marred with irregularities, she has spent almost a decade in jail. She will now serve a further 20 years, after the court rejected her appeal, saying it will continue to rely on the government autopsy’s conclusion that the girl was born alive and then asphyxiated. Teodora and her lawyers insist she delivered a stillborn baby, saying the scientific data has not been fully analysed.
Teodora’s case is not unique. The country’s laws continue to punish women and girls for medical complications during their pregnancies.
In 1998, a change in the penal code saw a blanket ban on abortion in El Salvador – even in cases of rape, incest, when a woman’s health or life is at risk, or in cases of severe and fatal foetal impairment. This change in legislation has also led to the wrongful prosecutions of women, who are immediately assumed guilty of murder or abortion when they have suffered a miscarriage or stillbirth.
Penalties are severe, ranging from two to eight years in custody for both women and those who help them, and with longer sentences of six to 12 years for health professionals. In the most extreme cases, women like Teodora have been imprisoned on charges of aggravated homicide, which carries a penalty of up 50 years in prison.
According to the El Salvador-based Citizens’ Coalition for the Decriminalisation of Abortion, 129 women were prosecuted for abortion-related crimes in the country between 2000 and 2011.
Teodora is just one of 17 women who between 1999 and 2011 were sentenced to up to 40 years in jail following reported miscarriage or stillbirth, mostly on charges of aggravated homicide. Official statistics are unavailable, but Amnesty estimates that at least five more women currently await sentencing on similar pregnancy-related charges in the country.
Wealthier Salvadorans can pay for private healthcare or seek medical care abroad, but women with few economic resources are particularly affected by the ban. Most frequently, the law’s victims are patients in the country’s public clinics where doctors, fearing prosecution, call the police when a woman arrives in pain.
And El Salvador is by no means the only country where women are imprisoned for pregnancy complications. In Argentina, a woman known only as Belén was sentenced to eight years for aggravated murder after a miscarriage in 2016. She was acquitted on appeal by a regional high court in 2017.
In the USA, a 2013 study carried out by the National Advocates for Pregnant Women, laid bare a number of cases in which pregnant women were arrested and detained for complications during pregnancy, including miscarriage. Women on low incomes and African-Americans were most commonly targeted. The report found that women were denied a wide range of human rights based solely on their ‘pregnancy status’.
Restrictive and inflexible abortion laws are robbing pregnant women of their lives too. Amnesty’s Criminalising Pregnancy report, that came out earlier this year, found that US laws aiming to protect foetuses from drugs can in fact put mother and baby in danger. The fear of prosecution or loss of custody deters many women who become pregnant while using narcotics from visiting hospital when they need to.
And many women are at risk from how harsh abortion laws affect medical decision-making. In July 2012, 16-year-old Rosaura Almonte was admitted to hospital in the Dominican Republic. There she was diagnosed with leukaemia and told she required urgent life-saving medical treatment. But there was a problem: Rosaura was seven-weeks pregnant and the chemotherapy she needed would almost certainly affect the foetus she was carrying.
Because abortion is illegal in the Dominican Republic, doctors took 20 days to decide what to do before Rosaura received the chemo she desperately needed. Twenty days proved too long and the young woman died from hypovolemic shock – a complication that occurs when blood volume drops – the following month, becoming yet another victim of the cruel laws that impede sound and prompt medical judgment.
The problems surrounding restrictive reproductive rights can be found closer to home too. In Ireland, where abortion is illegal in all circumstances except where the mother’s life is at risk, similar difficulties rumble on.
Doctors, when presented with mothers needing medical treatment that could affect their baby, are forced into the difficult position of either being seen as breaking the law, or not acting in the best interest of their patient. They often wait until a woman is in serious danger before terminating a pregnancy, putting her life needlessly at even greater risk. And if a woman is carrying a foetus that is unlikely to survive, she must still carry that pregnancy to term – a traumatic experience for the woman, who may already be grappling with a devastating loss.
And despite being part of the UK, Northern Ireland has some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the world – carrying the harshest penalties in Europe. Here, abortion is illegal in almost every circumstance, with women potentially facing up to life in prison for having one.
Such tragic cases simply cannot be allowed to continue. Women globally are at the centre of a political and cultural battleground over sexual and reproductive rights – with the law in many cases prioritising ideology over human rights.
Women and girls are being treated as nothing more than child-bearing vessels instead of human beings entitled to rights.
In 1994, 179 governments signed the International Conference on Population and Development Programme of Action, committing themselves to prevent unsafe abortion. And while more than 30 countries have relaxed their abortion laws, a number have in fact tightened them. In fact most countries in Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, and southern Asia still implement oppressive abortion laws.
Amnesty firmly believes that whoever you are, wherever you live, all the decisions made about your own body should be yours. El Salvador’s total ban on abortion, alongside similar laws in other countries, is a serious human rights violation and must urgently be repealed.
Countries around the world have a legal obligation to respect, protect and fulfill the human rights of pregnant women – whatever their circumstances or choices.
How many more women need to suffer – often in silence – or fear for their lives simply because they experience complications during pregnancy? Sadly, it seems as if there could be many, many more before any laws are overturned.
This article was originally published here at iNews UK.
If women are angry, it’s because we have good reason to be — we’re subjected to significant levels of violence – sexual, family, maternal, reproductive – and workplace and labour inequalities. The real mystery is how we’ve managed to stop ourselves being consumed by this justifiable rage and instead have found ways to temper it 
And yet, I still choose to remove hair from my body. My rationale is that the feminism I subscribe to is not a fundamentalist one. In other words, I don’t believe hairless legs make me less of a feminist. I see it as a minor issue in a world where women are still struggling to obtain basic healthcare, education and freedom from violence, rape and even death. 
