Companies such Ferrovial and Broadspectrum are profiting millions of dollars from the deliberate abuse of 2,000 men, women and kids on Nauru and Manus Island.
Ferrovial has publicly claimed it will end its operations on the two islands when its current contract with the Australian Government ends on 31 October 2017.
We held this eye-catching public stunt outside Ferrovial’s Sydney office to make sure Ferrovial sticks to its promise to leave by this date and also to discourage other companies from taking on a new contract profiting from the abuse of refugees and people seeking asylum.
This action was organised for Friday 28 July to coincide with Ferrovial’s release of its past 6 month’s financial report.
Huge thanks to Amnesty activists and staff who made this action so powerful!
Which companies are profiting from people’s suffering?
The Australian Government has trapped refugees in the Pacific countries of Nauru and Papua New Guinea, then hired companies to do its dirty work.
These people are simply looking to rebuild their lives in safety. But instead, these men, women and children are humiliated, neglected and abused on a daily basis.
Australian company Broadspectrum operates these two refugee detention centres. Broadspectrum is owned by Spanish multinational Ferrovial.
Ferrovial reported revenues of €1.326 billion ($1.943 billion AUD) between 1 January and 30 June 2017 from Broadspectrum.
No company should profit from torture or abuse of refugees and people seeking asylum.
You have probably heard of VPNs (Virtual Private Networks), right? They’re those things you use to stream movies online in other countries that are annoyingly blocked in yours. If VPNs were banned, how would you watch the latest robot apocalypse blockbuster online without having to wait a whole year?
Now imagine that the online content banned in your country isn’t movies, but rather major social media platforms, or the main sources of information about your religion, or your sexual orientation. Imagine you use a VPN to access this information, and now that tool is being taken away.
This is what’s about to happen in Russia. It’s already happening in China.
On Sunday, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a law banning anonymizers and VPNs, while over the weekend, Apple pulled most major VPNs from its app store in China, in order to comply with national legislation requiring VPNs to be licensed by the government
Anonymisers, such as VPNs or TOR, are a key enabler of human rights online. As the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Mr. David Kaye, has noted: “Encryption and anonymity provide individuals and groups with a zone of privacy online to hold opinions and exercise freedom of expression without arbitrary and unlawful interference or attacks… A VPN connection, or use of Tor or a proxy server, combined with encryption, may be the only way in which an individual is able to access or share information in [environments with prevalent censorship].”
Russia is one such environment. Overly broad anti-extremism laws in Russia allow for the prosecution of people for all types of expression protected by human rights law. For example a young blogger was recently convicted and given a three-and-a-half year suspended prison sentence for “inciting hatred” and “offending believers’ feelings” after he posted a video of himself playing Pokémon Go in a cathedral in Yekaterinburg.
Meanwhile Russia’s infamous “gay propaganda law” is used to censor and punish content relevant to LGBTI people and LGBTI rights. The discriminatory law was recently – and rightly – condemned by the European Court of Human Rights, but it nonetheless remains in force. The absurd situation is now that the authorities consider “extremist” a caricature depicting President Putin as a “gay clown,” while at the same time failing to open a formal investigation into the horrific campaign of abduction, torture and in some cases killings of gay men in Chechnya.
In this environment of censorship and state-sponsored homophobia, online anonymity can be a lifeline. Anonymising tools like VPNs could allow crucial access to impartial and accurate information, especially to LGBTI kids and teenagers, who may not be able to access it elsewhere. The internet is also a key means for seeking out community and support. Taking away VPNs will leave more and more people stuck in a smaller online world, where even the statement “homosexuality is natural” is considered illegal.
“In this environment of censorship and state-sponsored homophobia, online anonymity can be a lifeline”
Anonymising tools can also help protect political rights. It is becoming an unfortunately common tactic for governments to shut down or block parts of the web around elections, protests or other sensitive events. For example, Amnesty International and OONI (Open Observatory of Network Interference) documented how the Ethiopian government used illegal blocking to censor information about protests in which as many as 800 people were killed by security forces, and to block messaging apps.
Notably, the anonymising tool TOR showed a spike in traffic during these times, clearly indicating the usefulness of anonymisation tools to circumvent unlawful censorship and exercise the right to access information.
That is why Apple’s decision is deeply disappointing. Internet censorship in China is expansive, and increasing: the country aims to ban all non-state-operated VPN services by January 2018. If other companies follow Apple’s lead, it could soon be much harder for people in China to access information freely online.
Apple says it is simply complying with Chinese law, but this is not a sufficient response. Businesses have a responsibility to respect international human rights law, independent of a state’s own compliance with their human rights obligations. By withdrawing access to VPNs from its Chinese customers, Apple is betraying these responsibilities. We would have expected a more robust stance from Apple, a company that prides itself on being a privacy champion.
The internet once seemed to offer the promise of nearly unfettered access to communication, across borders, and free of the heavy-handed censorship which too often plagued broadcast or print media. This free flow of information promised to bring us together and make the world smaller.
But if governments are able to restrict our access to information they don’t approve of, through censorship and blocking access to tools to circumvent it, then that promise will die. In its place we will find increasingly closed islands of information – and the web will be a less inclusive place.
By Joshua Franco, Tech and Human Rights researcher.
The phone rang at four in the afternoon, exactly as scheduled. The ringing heightened the tension in the small living room of the 1950s house in Mexico City.
“Will you accept a call from the West Federal Prison?” said the voice at the end of the line.
“Yes, of course. Yes, I will,” Blanca responded, visibly nervous, as if she hadn’t done this before.
But Blanca Aviña Guerrero has done this many times before. She has been doing it every Friday since her youngest son, Enrique, was arbitrarily detained by federal police in May 2013 and eventually thrown into a maximum security prison in the state of Jalisco, around 540 km west of Mexico City.
Authorities claim Enrique, 28, was involved in kidnapping the nephews of a well-known local businessman.
But a closer look at his case reveals a more sinister story.
False suspicions
A recent investigation by Amnesty International found police forces across Mexico are routinely detaining people without reason.
It appears to be an attempt by authorities to show they are tackling the country’s brutal drug cartels and high crime rates. But the reality is different.
In some cases, they ask victims for money not to be arrested. In others, they torture individuals to force a “confession”. Most victims are poor, lacking resources to challenge the legality of their detention.
Many arrests end up being cases of “wrong place, wrong time”.
Blanca Aviña Guerrero has been fighting for justice for her son, Enrique.
But Blanca never thought this could happen to her family.
Enrique was a bright student at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, one of the most prestigious universities in Latin America. Renowned Mexican poet Octavio Paz, novelist Carlos Fuentes, and the business magnate and philanthropist Carlos Slim Helú, Mexico’s richest person, studied there.
Enrique was a chess champion, popular among his friends and a born leader, who took pride in his social work outside class.
“We used to take part in big meetings to discuss education reform and opposition to war,” said human rights activist and Enrique’s partner, Lénica Morales. “We used to organize study groups at university and across the city.”
Enrique and Lénica met while at university, in 2006. Since then, they shared common interest and bonded over working for justice in Mexico.
They joined the social movement I am 132 (Yo Soy 132), one of the largest student movements in Mexico’s history.
The movement began in 2012 as a show of solidarity towards 131 students who demonstrated against a political speech by President Peña Nieto at the Ibero-American University that year.
The students wanted to highlight Peña Nieto’s actions in 2006, when he had been the governor of Mexico State, overseeing the brutal repression of protesters in San Salvador Atenco.
Lénica Morales is a human rights activist and Enrique´s partner.
In reporting the event, some media organizations claimed the students were paid opposition hoping to topple Peña Nieto’s candidacy.
But the students recorded a video in response, filming their university identity cards to prove their identities, and it went viral.
The movement grew. Months later, when Peña Nieto was elected, protests against him were occurring nationwide.
The repression of the leaders of I am 132 (Yo Soy 132) did not take long.
A dream cut short
Enrique’s activism was cut short on 17 May 2013.
What began as a regular Friday night deteriorated when he was driving near the Azteca stadium – the largest football stadium in the country, the scene of Diego Maradona’s 1986 ‘Hand of God’ goal – at the southern edge of Mexico City. Enrique called his mother in desperation, saying someone was following him.
Men in a white van began shooting at his car and forced him to stop. Panicked and fearing the men were criminals, Enrique got out of the car and started running. He bumped into a police car and asked them for help.
He texted his mother Blanca from that car to say he was fine but unsure what was going on.
“He told me he was in Churubusco [around 20 minutes’ drive north of where the chase started] and then I just didn’t hear any more from him,” said Blanca.
Enrique went missing for the next 30 hours. His family desperately looked for him in various places: the Prosecutor’s Office, in hospitals, in police stations. No one had any information. The detention had not been recorded.
Enrique was eventually found in the Attorney General’s Office.
Lawyers advised Blanca to let her older son – who had travelled back to Mexico from London where he was living – to see him first.
“It might be traumatizing,” they were told.
Enrique had been tortured in a bid to make him “confess” to the kidnapping he was accused of – which he refused to do. He was then paraded with a group of 12 other people in front of the media. They were branded as the gang responsible for the crime.
A day later, Enrique was moved to a maximum security prison in Jalisco.
“It was there that the worst began,” Blanca said. “At the time, we didn’t think everything was going to take so long”.
From student to criminal
Photos of Enrique Guerrero’s childhood. Enrique is one of the cases of the report on arbitrary detentions in Mexico.
In a space of four days, Enrique had gone from being a star student to being branded a highly dangerous criminal.
He had been charged with kidnapping, which carries a sentence of up to 45 years in jail.
Four years after his arrest, he has still not been sentenced.
His lawyers and Amnesty International say the case against him is marred with flaws.
As he awaits the conclusion of his trial, Enrique spends more than 20 hours a day in a small cell of less than four square metres, barely furnished with a small sink and a shower. Getting hold of books or even a pen is a challenge.
“This whole process has been very difficult. Many people ended up here after an arbitrary detention, after being tortured, accused of crimes they did not commit.”
Enrique Guerrero
“This whole process has been very difficult,” Enrique said from jail. “Many people ended up here after an arbitrary detention, after being tortured, accused of crimes they did not commit”.
Enrique sounded upbeat, perhaps because he knew he needs to sound strong for his family. When he called, Blanca stood next to the phone, eager to hear every word coming from her son’s mouth.
“We never thought this could happen to us, but now we know that this can happen to anybody,” she said.
So why are the Mexican authorities doing this?
“I don’t know what to say,” she responded. “The government doesn’t listen. They say that this is the way things are and no one can convince them otherwise. It is very hard to know that there are so many injustices here and no one does anything. That you can be disappeared and no one cares.”
“The government doesn’t listen. They say that this is the way things are and no one can convince them otherwise.”
Blanca avina guerrero, enrique’s mother
Over the telephone, Enrique was asked what he would tell the government if he had a chance to confront them about his case.
“I would ask them for justice,” he said. “But that is something they do not want to listen to, they will never understand.”
And with that, his 10-minute weekly call was out of time.
Government seeks to divert attention from political crisis
Executions would violate Maldives commitments under international law
Authorities in the Maldives must halt the first executions in more than 60 years as the government seeks to divert attention from a worsening political crisis, Amnesty International said today.
The Minister of Home Affairs has announced that executions will resume “in the next few days”, leaving three men on death row who have exhausted their legal processes at imminent risk. No date for the executions has been specified.
“For more than sixty years, the Maldives led the way in the region by shunning this cruel and irreversible punishment. Now, when most of the world has rid itself of the death penalty, the country risks being on the wrong side of history and earning global notoriety for reviving its use,” said Biraj Patnaik, Amnesty International’s South Asia Director.
Although the Minister of Home Affairs claims the move is motivated by two recent murders through stabbings, the announcement of the executions comes as the Maldives is roiled by political tensions. Last week, the military stormed parliament to stop proceedings as the political opposition was poised to bring forward a vote of no-confidence.
“The executions are a transparent ploy by the government to distract attention from its own woes. It is alarming that they would think of depriving people of their right to life just to ensure their own political survival,” said Biraj Patnaik.
Amnesty International has serious concerns about the fairness of the proceedings that lead to the imposition of the death penalty in the country, including the use of an apparently coerced “confession” that was later retracted by one of the death row prisoners, Hussain Humaam Ahmed.
Last year, the UN Human Rights Committee requested the government of Maldives to stay the execution of Humaam, pending the consideration of an appeal filed on the prisoner’s behalf. The same requests were issued by the UN body last month in the cases of the two other men, Ahmed Murrath and Mohammed Nabeel.
The Maldives has undertaken a binding commitment to cooperate with the Human Rights Committee—should the government go ahead with the executions, it would violate Maldives’ obligations under international law, including to protect the three men’s right to life.
Ahmed Murrath and Hussain Humaam Ahmed were convicted of and sentenced to death for murder in 2012, and Mohammed Nabeel was convicted of and sentenced to death for murder in 2009. The Supreme Court upheld the men’s convictions and death sentences in June and July 2016.
Amnesty International is absolutely opposed to the death penalty in all circumstances, regardless of the crime or the method of execution.
The three men have exhausted all domestic legal avenues. Following changes to the country’s legislation, they have not been allowed to apply for pardon or the commutation of their death sentences from the executive – a right guaranteed under international human rights law.
“When lives are at stake, it is all the more critical that safeguards of due process are strictly observed. People’s lives are too precious to be ended with cruel haste. The Maldives still has time to turn back, consolidate its positive record on the death penalty, and impose a full moratorium on its implementation as a first step,” said Biraj Patnaik.
Background
In 2014, the Maldives government under President Abdulla Yameen announced that executions would resume after more than 60 years without the death penalty being implemented.
The authorities have since amended legislation, clearing the way for executions to take place, including removing the power from the executive to grant pardons or commutations in intentional murder cases, a breach of their rights under international human rights law.
There are 20 people currently on death row, including at least five who were convicted and sentenced to death for crimes committed when they were less than 18 years old. Under international human rights law, it is unlawful to execute juveniles for any crime whatsoever.
As of today, 141 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice; in the Asia-Pacific region, 20 countries have abolished the death penalty for all crimes and a further seven are abolitionist in practice.
Iran’s judicial and security bodies have waged a vicious crackdown against human rights defenders since Hassan Rouhani became president in 2013, demonising and imprisoning activists who dare to stand up for people’s rights, Amnesty International said in a new report.
Caught in a web of repression: Iran’s human rights defenders under attack details how scores of human rights activists – often labelled “foreign agents” and “traitors” by state media – have been prosecuted and jailed on spurious “national security” charges, dealing a crushing blow to hopes of human rights reform raised during President Hassan Rouhani’s first election campaign. Some activists have been sentenced to more than 10 years behind bars for simple acts such as being in contact with the United Nations, European Union or human rights organisations including Amnesty International.
“It is a bitter irony that as the Iranian authorities boast about their increased engagement with the UN and the EU, particularly in the aftermath of the nuclear deal, human rights defenders who have made contact with these same institutions are being treated as criminals,” said Philip Luther, Amnesty International’s Research and Advocacy Director for the Middle East and North Africa.
“Rather than propagating the dangerous myth that human rights defenders pose a threat to national security, the Iranian authorities should focus on addressing the legitimate concerns they raise. These are people who have risked everything to build a more humane and just society – it is appalling that they are so viciously punished for their bravery.”
“Rather than propagating the dangerous myth that human rights defenders pose a threat to national security, the Iranian authorities should focus on addressing the legitimate concerns they raise. These are people who have risked everything to build a more humane and just society – it is appalling that they are so viciously punished for their bravery” – Philip Luther
The organisation is calling on the EU, which announced plans to relaunch a bilateral human rights dialogue with Iran in 2016, to speak out in the strongest terms against the persecution of human rights defenders in the country.
“The international community, and in particular the EU, must not stay silent over the outrageous treatment of human rights defenders in Iran,” said Philip Luther.
“Instead of appeasing Iranian officials, the EU should forcefully call for the immediate and unconditional release of all those jailed for their peaceful human rights activism and for an end to the misuse of the justice system to silence activists.”
The report provides a comprehensive overview of the crackdown targeting a wide range of human rights defenders from key battlegrounds for human rights in Iran. It highlights 45 cases including anti-death penalty campaigners, women’s rights activists, trade unionists, minority rights activists, human rights lawyers, and activists seeking truth, justice and reparation for mass extrajudicial executions and enforced disappearances in the 1980s.
Closing in on the defenders
Over the past four years, Iran’s judicial authorities have dropped the threshold for invoking vague and overly broad national security-related charges and, at the same time, sharply increased the length of prison sentences given to convicted human rights defenders. The head of the judiciary is appointed by Iran’s Supreme Leader.
In case after case, people have been sentenced to lengthy prison terms, sometimes exceeding a decade, for acts that should not even be considered crimes. These include contact with the UN and the EU, as well as with media outlets, international trade union associations and human rights groups based outside Iran including Amnesty International.
One of the most emblematic cases is that of critically ill human rights activist Arash Sadeghi, who is serving a total of 19 years in prison for “offences” that included communicating with Amnesty International as well as sending information to the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iran and members of the European Parliament.
Despite his critical condition, the authorities have repeatedly blocked his transfer to a hospital outside prison, in reprisal for a hunger strike he staged between October 2016 and January 2017, in protest at the imprisonment of his wife, Golrokh Ebrahimi Iraee, for writing a fictional story about stoning.
Prominent human rights defender Narges Mohammadi, who led the Centre for Human Rights Defenders in Iran, is serving a 16-year prison sentence also in connection with her human rights work. The criminal case against her was opened in reprisal for a meeting she had with EU’s former foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, on International Women’s Day in 2014.
Raheleh Rahemipour, meanwhile, was sentenced to one year in prison after the UN requested information from the Iranian authorities about the enforced disappearance of her brother and niece during the 1980s.
“This is a sinister and deliberate attempt by Iran’s authorities to cut off human rights defenders from the outside world and prevent them from challenging the official narrative on the human rights situation in the country,” said Philip Luther.
Trade unionists including Esmail Abdi and Davoud Razavi have also experienced harassment and imprisonment for being in contact with international organisations, including the International Labour Organisation.
Minority rights activists have fared no better in the crackdown. Alireza Farshi, a member of Iran’s Azerbaijani Turk minority, was given a 15-year prison sentence for “offences” that included writing a letter to UNESCO to hold an event commemorating International Mother Language Day.
Human rights defenders whose cases are featured in the report were invariably convicted after grossly unfair trials before Revolutionary Courts.
The proceedings are often extremely brief. For example, anti-death penalty campaigners Atena Daemi and Omid Alishenas were sentenced to 14 and 10 years’ imprisonment, respectively, after a trial in March 2015 which only lasted about 45 minutes. Their sentences were later reduced to seven years on appeal.
Trials of human rights defenders generally take place in a climate of fear in which their lawyers face a range of abusive measures. These include attempts by the authorities to arbitrarily restrict them from visiting defendants or communicating with them in private, or delaying their access to court files.
Human rights lawyers who speak out against torture and unfair trials have also faced relentless harassment, disbarment and imprisonment. Prominent human rights lawyer Abdolfattah Soltani has been serving a 13-year sentence since 2011 for his courageous human rights work including with the Centre for Human Rights Defenders.
Amnesty International’s global campaign ‘Brave’ calls for an end to attacks against those defending human rights worldwide. For more information click here
By Gabe Kavanagh, President, Amnesty International Australia
Later this month I’ll have the privilege of travelling to Amnesty’s International Council Meeting (ICM) in Rome, Italy.
At the ICM, held every two years, representatives from most of the 150 Amnesty offices around the world come together in one place. We’ll be meeting to look to the future and make sure that, all around the globe, we’re doing our very best to address human rights abuses.
The Australian delegation will be made up of myself, the National Director Claire Mallinson, Board member Katerina Barbour, SA/NT Vice President Sarah Burrage, Board member James Milsom, and youth delegate Sarah Swan.
We come together at the ICM to take decisions that enable us to be the most effective human rights movement we can be. The 2017 ICM will have a major focus on global governance reform. Together we are working towards a model of governance that enables us to be responsive, flexible, and truly member-led.
This year resolutions address matters as diverse as the human rights impact of climate change; intersex people’s rights; opposing military occupation; drug control policies and human rights; and the rights of people with disabilities.
There is also a resolution to review Amnesty’s existing policy around abortion, enabling Amnesty to campaign for full realisation of sexual and reproductive rights.
This year resolutions address matters as diverse as the human rights impact of climate change; intersex people’s rights; opposing military occupation; drug control policies and human rights; and the rights of people with disabilities.
In 2007 Amnesty adopted a policy on ‘Select Aspects of Abortion’ that enabled us to call for States to repeal laws criminalising abortion, and to take all necessary measures to ensure that safe and legal abortion is available to girls and women falling pregnant as a result of rape, sexual assault or incest, or if the pregnancy poses a risk of the life or grave risk to the health of the woman (referred to as ‘minimum grounds’).
The resolution at this year’s ICM reflects changes, in the intervening 10 years, to International human rights standards. It also reflects evidence from the UN and AI’s own research that laws permitting abortion only on ‘minimum grounds’ do not ensure actual access to abortion even for women qualifying on those grounds.
In light of these developments, this resolution proposes a review of AI’s current policy in the area, in particular the ‘minimum grounds’ limitation.
Another resolution proposes further research into our current policy on sex workers’ rights, an evidence-based policy that was decided on at the 2015 ICM. This resolution proposes that Amnesty conducts comparative studies between countries that have decriminalised sex work and those that are prohibitionist and abolitionist. While we welcome ongoing discussion of complex human rights issues, the Australian section is clear in its support of decriminalisation of sex work. Two years of research and consultation around the world found decriminalisation is the most effective way to protect sex workers’ rights and safety.
There are many perspectives amongst our movement about the topic of abortion, and the topic of sex work. This wide range of views and evidence were considered in the extensive consultation processes leading up to the adoption of the current policies around sex work, and before that, around abortion.
Abortion is illegal in Ireland unless the mother’s life is at stake. This meant that Nicola, despite her distress, had to wait five more weeks until her unborn child finally died inside her, before she was allowed to end her pregnancy.
While these may be difficult issues for some people, Amnesty has always been brave and bold in taking on important issues. I know there is more that unites us in our movement than divides us.
We are united by the story of Nicola in Ireland, who was 19 weeks pregnant when she was told by doctors her baby had a fatal impairment with no chance of survival. Abortion is illegal in Ireland unless the mother’s life is at stake. This meant that Nicola, despite her distress, had to wait five more weeks until her unborn child finally died inside her, before she was allowed to end her pregnancy. Following her induction and delivery, Nicola developed an infection due to a retained placenta, which required further hospitalisation and care. No woman should have to endure such anguish and indignity.
The positions our delegation will take on all of these issues are informed by the recent consultation process on the ICM resolutions. These positions were brought to the National Board in July and were presented at the National Annual General Meeting. If you would like further information on any of these issues, please contact myself, or James Milsom, AIA Board member and Chair of the International Issues Committee, at james.milsom@amnesty.org.au. A full report of the ICM will be provided at a later date.
I look forward to sharing with you the outcomes from this important ICM. However, whatever comes out of these resolutions, Amnesty Australia’s 2020 vision and priority campaigns will remain the same.
Lastly, this ICM will mark the end of a four-year term as Chair of the International Board for Nicole Bieske, who was formerly the President of the Australian section — and I’d like to take this opportunity to thank Nicole for her work.
The dramatic increase in illegal use of force, scores of arbitrary detentions and the killing of at least 10 people, among other worrying attacks against the people of Venezuela recorded this weekend, confirm a consistent pattern of deteriorating human rights in the country, said Amnesty International.
“President Maduro and his government appear to be living in a parallel universe,” said Erika Guevara-Rosas, Americas Director at Amnesty International.
“The authorities cannot continue to ignore the tension and violence and should respond to the urgent needs of the entire population, including those who do not agree with the government.”
“The use of lethal force in Venezuela must stop immediately. The authorities must carry out impartial investigations in civil courts into all acts of violence, regardless of who is responsible. Immediate action must be taken to put an end to arbitrary detentions, killings and other serious human rights violations.”
“Immediate action must be taken to put an end to arbitrary detentions, killings and other serious human rights violations.”
Illegal use of force has dramatically increased in the country. According to the Venezuelan Public Ministry, on the day of the elections for the National Constituent Assembly in Venezuela at least 10 people died, including teenagers.
Indiscriminate attacks against Venezuelan citizens have also been reported, including shootings and firing of tear gas in residential areas and near hospitals in addition to scores of people hurt by military and police forces and armed civilian groups.
Responding to the UK government’s commitment to ban all new petrol and diesel cars and vans from 2040, Mark Dummett, Business and Human Rights Researcher at Amnesty International, said:
“This is good news for the environment and for air quality, but drivers should be aware that while electric cars may be green, they’re not always clean.
“Our research shows that there is a significant risk of cobalt mined by children and adults in appalling conditions in the Democratic Republic of Congo ending up in the batteries of electric cars. Workers in the DRC, earning as little as one dollar a day and at risk of fatal accidents and illness, must not pay the price for the UK’s shift to electric cars.
“Drivers will want to know that their new cars are not linked to the suffering of child labourers in the DRC, but there is a worrying lack of transparency across the car manufacturing industry, with many leading names failing to disclose information about their cobalt supply chains.
“With car makers in the spotlight today, we are calling on them to make public the steps they are taking to ensure that their supply chains are not tainted by human rights abuses, so that consumers’ minds can be put at rest.”
Child labour in Australian supply chains
Amnesty International is also campaigning for transparency around child labour in the supply chains of many products containing palm oil sold in Australian supermarkets, including Woolworths, Coles and Aldi.
Amnesty International researchers have shown that children as young as eight are undertaking back-breaking and dangerous work on palm oil plantations, while companies producing the well-known big-brand products containing it turn profits in the billions.
“It is time for Woolworths, Coles and Aldi to stand up for what is right and we are calling on all customers to make it happen by taking action to voice their opposition to child labour in the supply chains of products stocked in these retail giants,” said Diana Sayed, Amnesty International Australia Crisis Campaigns Coordinator.
The Myanmar authorities must immediately and unconditionally release three journalists who were arrested in conflict-ridden northern Shan State last month, Amnesty International said ahead of their trial today.
Aye Nai and Pyae Phone Aung, both reporters for the Democratic Voice of Burma(DVB), and Thein Zaw (aka Lawi Weng), a reporter for the Irrawaddy newspaper, were arrested on 26 June, along with four other people they were travelling with.
They have since been charged under the Unlawful Association Act and could face up to three years in prison if convicted. Three others arrested with them are also facing charges, including under the same Act, while a seventh man arrested on 26 June has since been released.
“The farcical charges against these journalists must be dropped immediately, they have done nothing but carry out their work peacefully” – James Gomez, Amnesty International’s Director for Southeast Asia and the Pacific
“The farcical charges against these journalists must be dropped immediately, they have done nothing but carry out their work peacefully,” said James Gomez, Amnesty International’s Director for Southeast Asia and the Pacific.
“This is a clear attempt by the authorities to intimidate journalists and silence their critical coverage. It is exactly in northern Shan State and the other ethnic areas wracked by conflict, where appalling human rights abuses are rife, that independent journalism is needed the most.”
Soldiers from the Tatmadaw – Myanmar’s armed forces – arrested the journalists as they tried to report on a drug-burning ceremony in an area controlled by the ethnic armed group Ta’ang National Liberation Army (TNLA).
The media workers were held incommunicado in a secret location for two days after their arrest, before they were transferred to Hsipaw prison in northern Shan State where they are currently detained. Their trial is due to start today, 28 July, at the Hsipaw Township Court. Legal proceedings to date have been marred by a lack of transparency, and two earlier court appearances were unexpectedly rescheduled, raising concerns about access to lawyers.
The Myanmar authorities have for years used a slew of draconian laws to intimidate, harass, arrest and imprison critics and media workers. The Unlawful Association Act is one such law – it grants authorities sweeping powers to arrest people considered to be part of or in contact with an “unlawful association”, and is in particular often used in ethnic and religious minority areas.
“Many had hoped that the days when Myanmar relied on its repressive legal framework to silence peaceful criticism were long gone, but sadly the same old patterns of repression continue. The Unlawful Association Act is so vaguely worded that it can easily be misused to jail political opponents as well as journalists on the most flimsy grounds – it must be repealed immediately,” said James Gomez.
Background
The seven men were detained in northern Shan State, in the north part of Myanmar, an area that has seen intense fighting between the Myanmar Army and a range of ethnic armed groups in recent years. In a report released in June this year, Amnesty International documented how civilians from ethnic minority groups in Kachin and northern Shan State are suffering appalling abuses, including possible war crimes, at the hands of the Myanmar Army.
“All the Civilian Suffer”: Conflict, Displacement and Abuse in Northern Myanmar details how soldiers from Myanmar’s Armed Forces have carried out torture, enforced disappearances, extrajudicial executions, indiscriminate shelling of civilian villages, and put punitive restrictions on movement and humanitarian access.
Amnesty International also documented human rights abuses carried out by ethnic armed groups operating in the area, including the TNLA, such as abductions, forced recruitment and forced taxation of civilians.
Spanish multinational Ferrovial continued to make millions from the abuse of refugees and people seeking asylum on Nauru and Manus Island in the first half of 2017, despite attempts to distance itself from Australia’s deliberately cruel refugee “processing” system, Amnesty International said today.
Financial reports released today show that between 1 January and 30 June 2017 Ferrovial reported revenues of €1.326 billion ($1.943 billion AUD) from Broadspectrum, its wholly-owned Australian subsidiary which operates Refugee Processing Centres (RPCs) on Nauru and Manus Island. Ferrovial also reported a 40.1% increase in revenues compared to the first half of 2016, largely due to Broadspectrum. Secrecy around the contract for running the RPCs allows Broadspectrum and Ferrovial to hide the exact profit they make from this abusive system.
“These huge figures are nothing to celebrate – every penny made from these centres is tainted with the suffering of women, men and children who the Australian government is making an example of to deter other people from seeking safety on its shores”
Lucy Graham, Amnesty International’s Researcher on Business and Human Rights.
“These huge figures are nothing to celebrate – every penny made from these centres is tainted with the suffering of women, men and children who the Australian government is making an example of to deter other people from seeking safety on its shores,” said Lucy Graham, Amnesty International’s Researcher on Business and Human Rights.
“Ferrovial has responded to criticism of its complicity in this system with indifference and denial, but the money has continued to roll in. Ferrovial needs to take responsibility for its actions – for a year and a half it has been an integral part of a system on Nauru so inherently cruel and abusive that it we believe it amounts to torture.”
Since 2012, Australia has operated intentionally harsh “offshore processing” systems on the Pacific island of Nauru and the island of Manus in Papua New Guinea. Refugees and asylum seekers who arrive in Australia by boat are forcibly taken to remote locations where they are subjected to cruel and degrading conditions, sometimes for years on end. They have faced physical attacks and sexual assault by some members of staff of companies operating at the centres, and self-harm and suicide attempts are rife.
The refugee “processing” centres on Nauru and Manus Island are run by Broadspectrum, which was acquired by Ferrovial in April 2016. Amnesty International’s 2016 briefing Treasure I$land exposed how Ferrovial and Broadspectrum are complicit in and profiting from the suffering of refugees.
Ferrovial has sought to dodge criticism of its ongoing operations by pointing to its April 2016 announcement that it would not renew its contract with the Australian Government when it expires on 31 October 2017. In the meantime, however, it has continued to generate huge revenue from this contract, and not made public how it will ensure a responsible exit when the contract ends.
The Australian Government recently announced that the main “processing” centre on Manus Island would close on 31 October and has told the people living there that they can move into the community or another smaller centre on the island, or go home. The RPCs on Nauru will remain open. Despite months of notice of Ferrovial’s exit, the Government has not yet announced who will run these facilities.
“Ferrovial must keep its promise to leave on 31 October. But, given the extent of its role and having had a year and a half to plan, it must also make sure that its exit is not as abusive as its engagement in this system. It cannot let the Australian Government leave people in an even worse situation than now,” said Lucy Graham.
“With every day that goes by, the situation for people trapped on these islands becomes more desperate. Refugees do not feel safe in the local community, where they have been subjected to violence and threats, and with the closures on Manus and lack of information about what will happen when Ferrovial leaves, anxiety is rising. It is time for the Australian Government and Ferrovial to come clean about their plans for these islands of despair.”
Amnesty International continues to call on the Australian, Papua New Guinean and Nauruan governments to shut down the offshore processing system and immediately bring all refugees and people seeking asylum to Australia, and ensure that all those who were granted refugee status have the right to settle in Australia. It also continues to warn others not to take on Ferrovial’s contract.
“Australia’s offshore processing system is so fundamentally at odds with even basic human dignity that it would be impossible for anybody to provide core services at these centres without involving themselves in serious human rights abuses,” said Lucy Graham.
