Look around this morning.

America and Israel, nuclear-armed states have attacked Iran.

Israel, which has never declared its nuclear stockpiles nor its borders, has spent 2.5 years committing genocide against Gaza, a trapped community with no significant defensive weapons.

Israel has bombed six countries which are not at war with it. America funded it and elected Donald Trump to lead the violence from the front.

America and Israel pontificate about other states’ fitness to hold nuclear weapons.

Nuclear-armed Russia has invaded and battered Ukraine for four long years. Nuclear-armed Pakistan has begun to bomb the cities of Afghanistan, a state which lacks even an air force with which to defend its people (not that the Taliban care for the lives of their people).

We awake in the world that wise, caring people worked to avert for over a century; a world of impunity and gleeful slaughter by the already-overarmed.

People tried to minimise the risk and the harm of war with a few basic agreements. They dared to intervene for the protection and survival of civilians, doctors, journalists. They wrote laws to criminalise aggression and genocide.

All this is going up in smoke, and not one of the aggressors/provocateurs/genocidaires has a viable claim of self-defence.

How many people wake up in terror this morning (if they slept at all last night) in this new world?

Marilyn Garson writes about Palestinian and Jewish dissent.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The murders of unarmed civilians on the streets of Minneapolis, including the killing of the intensive-care nurse Alex Jeffrey Pretti, would not come as a shock to Iraqis in Fallujah or Afghans in Helmand province.

They were terrorised by heavily armed American execution squads for decades.

It would not come as a shock to any of the students I teach in prison. Militarised police in poor urban neighborhoods kick down doors without warrants and kill with the same impunity and lack of accountability.

What the rest of us are facing now, is what Aimé Césaire called “imperial boomerang”.

Empires, when they decay, employ the savage forms of control on those they subjugate abroad, or those demonized by the wider society in the name of law and order, on the homeland.

The tyranny Athens imposed on others, Thucydides noted, it finally, with the collapse of Athenian democracy, imposed on itself.

But before we became the victims of state terror, we were accomplices. Before we expressed moral outrage at the indiscriminate taking of innocent lives, we tolerated, and often celebrated, the same Gestapo tactics, as long as they were directed at those who lived in the nations we occupied or poor people of colour.

We sowed the wind, now we will reap the whirlwind. The machinery of terror, perfected on those we abandoned and betrayed, including the Palestinians in Gaza, is ready for us.

Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for 15 years for The New York Times, where he served as the Middle East bureau chief and Balkan bureau chief for the paper. He is the host of show “The Chris Hedges Report”. This commentary was first published on the Chris Hedges Substack page and is republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Dozens of Filipinos and supporters in Aotearoa New Zealand came together in a Black Friday vigil and Rally for Justice in the heart of two cities tonight — Auckland and Christchurch.

They celebrated the arrest of former President Rodrigo Duterte by the International Criminal Court (ICC) earlier this month to face trial for alleged crimes against humanity over a wave of extrajudicial killings during his six-year presidency in a so-called “war on drugs”.

Estimates of the killings have ranged between 6250 (official police figure) and up to 30,000 (human rights groups) — including 32 in a single day — during his 2016-2022 term and critics have described the bloodbath as a war against the poor.

But speakers warned tonight this was only the first step to end the culture of impunity in the Philippines.

Current President Ferdinand Marcos Jr, son of the late dictator, and his adminstration were also condemned by the protesters.

Introducing the rally with the theme “Convict Duterte! End Impunity!” in Freyberg Square in the heart of downtown Auckland, Bagong Alyansang Makabayan’s Eugene Velasco said: “We demand justice for the thousands killed in the bloody and fraudulent war on drugs under the US-Duterte regime.”

She said they sought to:

• expose the human rights violations against the Filipino people;
• call for Duterte’s accountability; and
• to hold Marcos responsible for continuing this reign of terror against the masses.

Flown to The Hague
The ICC issued an arrest warrant for Duterte on March 11. He was immediately arrested on an aircraft at Manila International Airport and flown by charter aircraft to The Hague where he is now detained awaiting trial.

“We welcome this development because his arrest is the result of tireless resistance — not only from human rights defenders but, most importantly, from the families of those who fell victim to Duterte’s extrajudicial killings,” Velasco said.

“These families fought for justice despite the complete lack of support from the Marcos administration.”

Velasco said their their courage and resilience had pushed this case forward — “even in the face of relentless threats and violence from the police and military”.

“‘Shoot them dead!’—this was Duterte’s direct order to the Philippine National Police (PNP) and the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP). His death squads carried out these brutal killings with impunity,” Velasco said.

But Duterte was not the only one who must be held accountable, she added.

“We demand the immediate arrest and prosecution of all those who orchestrated and enabled the state-sponsored executions, led by figures like Senator Bato Dela Rosa and Lieutenant-Colonel Jovie Espenido, that led to over 30,000 deaths, the militarisation of 47,587 schools, churches, and public institutions — especially in rural areas — the abductions and killings of human rights defenders, and the continued existence of National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict or NTF-ELCAC.”

Fake news, red-tagging
Velasco accused this agency of having “used the Filipino people’s taxes to fuel human rights abuses” through the spread of fake news and red-tagging against activists, peasants, trade unionists, and people’s lawyers.

“The fight does not end here,” she said.

“The Filipino people, together with all justice and peace-loving people of Aotearoa New Zealand, will not stop until justice is fully served — not just for the victims, but for all who continue to suffer under the Duterte-Marcos regime, which remains under the grip of US imperialist interests.

“As Filipinos overseas, we must unite in demanding justice, stand in solidarity with the victims of extrajudicial killings, and continue the struggle for accountability.”

Several speakers gave harrowing testimony about the fate of named victims as their photographs and histories were remembered.

Speakers from local political groups, including Green Party MP Francisco Hernandez, and retired prominent trade unionist and activist Robert Reid, also participated.

Reid referenced the ICC arrest issued last November against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, wanted for war crimes and crimes against humanity related to the Gaza genocide, saying he hoped that he too would end up in The Hague.

Mock corpses surrounded by candles displayed signs — which had been a hallmark of the drug war killings — declaring “Jail Duterte”, “Justice for all victims of human rights” and “Convict Sara Duterte now!” Duterte’s daughter, Sara Duterte is currently Vice-President and is facing impeachment proceedings.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

ANALYSIS: By Katrina Mitchell-Kouttab

Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa national chair John Minto’s campaign to identify Israeli Defence Force (IDF) soldiers in New Zealand and then call a PSNA number hotline has come under intense criticism from the likes of Winston Peters, Stephen Rainbow, the Jewish Council and NZ media outlets. Accusations of antisemitism have been made.

Despite making it clear that holding IDF soldiers accountable for potential war crimes is his goal, not banning all Israelis or targeting Jewish people, there are many just concerns regarding Minto’s campaign. He is clear that his focus remains on justice, not on creating divisions or fostering discrimination, but he has failed to provide strict criteria to distinguish between individuals directly involved in human rights violations and those who are innocent, or to ground the campaign in legal frameworks and due process.

Any allegations of participation in war crimes should be submitted through proper legal channels, not through the PSNA. Broader advocacy could have been used to address concerns of accountability and to minimise any risk that the campaign could lead to profiling based on religion, ethnicity, or language.

While there are many concerns that need to be addressed with PSNA’s campaign, why has the conversation stopped there? Why has the core issue of this campaign been ignored? Namely, that IDF soldiers who have committed war crimes in Gaza have been allowed into New Zealand?

Why has any discussion about Israel, its violations of international law, and the international legal expectations for third party states to hold IDF soldiers accountable not been addressed? Why is criticism of Israel being conflated with racism, even though many Jewish people oppose Israel’s war crimes, and what about Palestinians, what does this mean for a people experiencing genocide?

Concerns should be discussed but they must not be used to protect possible war criminals and shield Israel’s crimes.

It is true that PSNA’s campaign may possibly target individuals, including targeting individuals solely based on their nationality, religion, or language. This is not acceptable. But it has also uncovered the exceptionally biased, racist, and unjust views towards Palestinians.

Racism against Palestinians ignored
Palestinians have been dehumanised by Israel for decades, but real racism against Palestinians is being ignored. As a Christian Palestinian I know all too well what it is like to be targeted.

In fact, it was only recently at a New Zealand First State of the Nation gathering last year that Winston Peter’s followers called me a terrorist for being Palestinian and told me that all Muslims were Hamas lovers and were criminals.

The question that has been ignored in this very public debate is simple: are Israeli soldiers who have participated in war crimes in Aotearoa, if so, why, and what does this mean for the New Zealand Palestinian population and the upholding of international law?

By refusing to address concerns of IDF soldiers the focus is deliberately shifted away from the actual genocide happening in Gaza. If IDF soldiers have engaged in rape, extrajudicial executions, torture, destruction of homes, or killing of civilians, they should be investigated and held accountable.

Countries have a legal and moral duty to prevent war criminals from using their nations as safe havens.

Since 1948, Palestinians have been subjected to systematic oppression, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, violence and now, genocide. From its creation and currently with Israel’s illegal occupation, Palestinian massacres have been frequent and unrelenting.

This includes the execution of my great grandmother on the steps of our Katamon home in Jerusalem. Land has been stolen from Palestinians over the decades, including well over 42 percent of the West Bank. Palestinians have been denied the right to return to their country, the right to justice, accountability, and self-determination.

Living under illegal military law
We are still forced to live under illegal military law, face mass arrests and torture, and our history, identity, culture and heritage are targeted.

The genocide in Gaza is one of the most horrific atrocities in modern history and follows a decades long campaign of mass murder at the hands of Israel which includes 2008-9 (Operation Cast Led), 2014 (Operation Protective Edge), 2021 (Operation Guardian of the Walls).

Almost 10 children lose one or both of their legs every day in Gaza according to the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (UNWRA). 2.2 million people are starving because Israel refuses them access to food. 95 percent of Gaza’s population have been forced onto the streets, with only 25 percent of Gaza’s shelters needs being met, according to the Norwegian Refugee Council.

One out of 20 people in Gaza have been injured and 18,000 children have been murdered. 6500 Palestinians from the Gaza Strip were taken hostage by Israel who also stole 2300 bodies from numerous cemeteries. 87,000 tons of explosives have been dropped on all regions in the Gaza Strip.

Dr Ghassan Abu-Sittah, a British Palestinian reconstructive surgeon who worked in Al Shifa and Al Ahly Baptist hospital and who is part of Medicine Sans Frontiers, estimates as many as 300,000 Palestinian civilians, most of them children, have been murdered by Israel.

This is because official numbers do not include those bodies that cannot be recognised or are blown to a pulp, those buried under the rubble and those expected to die and have died of disease, starvation and lack of medicine — denied by Israel to those with chronic illnesses.

‘A Genocidal Project’: real death toll closer to 300,000.    Video: Democracy Now!

As a signatory to the Geneva Convention, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), and UN resolutions, New Zealand is expected to investigate, prosecute and deport any individual accused of these serious crimes. This government has an obligation to deny entry to any individual suspected of war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide.

IDF has turned war crimes into entertainment
Israel has violated all of these, its IDF soldiers filming themselves committing such atrocities and de-humanising Palestinians over the last 15 months on social media.

IDF soldiers have posted TikTok videos mocking their Palestinian victims, celebrating destruction, and making jokes about killing civilians, displaying a disturbing level of dehumanisation and cruelty. They have filmed themselves looting Palestinian homes, vandalising property, humiliating detainees, and posing with dead bodies.

They have turned war crimes into entertainment while Palestinian families suffer and mourn. Israel has deliberately targeted civilians, bombing schools, hospitals, refugee camps, and even designated safe zones, then lied about their operations, showing complete disregard for human life.

Israel and the IDF’s global reputation among ordinary people are not positive. Out on the streets over 15 months, millions have been demonstrating against Israel. They do not like what its army has done, and rightly so. Many want to see justice and Israel and its army held accountable, something this government has ignored.

Israel’s state forced conscription or imprisonment, enforced military service that contributes to the occupation, ethnic cleansing, systematic oppression of a people, war crimes and genocide is fascism on display. Israel is a totalitarian, apartheid, military state, but this government sees no problems with that.

The UN and human rights organisations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have repeatedly condemned Israeli military operations, including the indiscriminate killing of civilians, the use of white phosphorus, and sexual violence by Israeli forces.

While not all IDF soldiers may have committed direct atrocities, those serving in occupied Palestinian territories are complicit in enforcing illegal occupation, which itself is a violation of international law.

Following orders not an excuse
The precedent set by international tribunals, such as Nuremberg, establishes that following orders is not an excuse for war crimes — meaning IDF soldiers who have participated in military actions in occupied areas should be subject to scrutiny.

This government has a duty to protect Palestinian communities from further harm, this includes preventing known perpetrators of ethnic cleansing from entering New Zealand. The presence of IDF soldiers in New Zealand is a direct threat to the safety, dignity, and well-being of our communities.

Many Palestinian New Zealanders have lost family members, homes, and entire communities due to the IDF’s actions. Seeing known war criminals walking freely in New Zealand re-traumatises those who have suffered from Israel’s illegal military brutality.

Survivors of ethnic cleansing should not have to live in fear of encountering the very people responsible for their suffering. This was not acceptable after the Second World War, throughout modern history, and is not acceptable now.

IDF soldiers are also trained in brutal tactics, including arbitrary arrests, sexual violence, and the assassination of Palestinian civilians. The presence of war criminals in any society creates a climate of fear and intimidation.

Given their history, there is a concern within New Zealand that these soldiers will engage in racist abuse, Islamophobia, or Zionist hate crimes not only against Palestinians and Arabs, but other communities of colour.

New Zealand society should be scrutinising not just this government’s response to the genocide against Palestinians, but also our political parties.

Moral bankruptcy and xenophobia
This moral bankruptcy and neutral stance in the face of genocide and racism has been clearly demonstrated this week in Parliament with both Shane Jones and Peter’s xenophobic remarks, and responses to the PSNA’s campaign.

Winston Peter’s tepid response to Israel’s behaviour and its violations is a staggering display of double standards and hypocrisy. Racism it seems, is clearly selective.

His comments about Mexicans in Parliament this week were xenophobic and violate the principles of responsible governance by promoting discrimination. Peters’ comments that immigrants should be grateful creates a hierarchy of worthiness.

Similarly, Shane Jones calling for Mexicans to go home does not uphold diplomatic and professional standards, reinforces harmful racial stereotypes and discriminates based on one’s nationality. Mexicans, Māori, and Palestinians are not on equal standing as others when it comes to human rights.

Why is there a defence of foreign soldiers who may have participated in genocide or war crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories, but then migrants and refugees are attacked?

“John Minto’s call to identify people from Israel . . . is an outrageous show of fascism, racism, and encouragement of violence and vigilantism. New Zealand should never accept this kind of extreme totalitarian behaviour in our country”. Why has Winston Peter’s never condemned the actual racism Palestinians are facing — including ethnic cleansing, forced displacement, and apartheid?

Why has he never used such strong language and outrage to condemn Israel’s actions despite evidence of violations of international law? Instead, he directs outrage at a human rights activist who is pointing out the shortcomings of the government’s response to Israels violations.

IDF soldiers’ documented atrocities ignored
Peters has completely ignored IDF soldiers’ documented atrocities and distorted the campaign’s purpose for legal accountability to that of violence.

There has been no mention of Palestinian suffering associated with the IDF and Israel, nor has the government been transparent in admitting that there are no security measures in place when it comes to Israel.

For Peters, killing Palestinians in their thousands is not racist but an activist wanting to prevent war criminals from entering New Zealand is?

Recently, Simon Court of the ACT party in response to Minto wrote: “Undisguised antisemitic behaviour is not acceptable . . . military service is compulsory for Israeli citizens . . . any Israeli holidaying, visiting family or doing business in New Zealand could be targeted . . . it is intimidation towards Jewish visitors . . . and should be condemned by parties across Parliament.”

This comment is misleading, and hypocritical.

PSNA’s campaign is not targeting Jewish people, something the Jewish Council has also misrepresented. It is about identifying Israeli soldiers who have actively participated in human rights violations and war crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories.

It intentionally blurs the lines between Israeli soldiers and Jewish civilians, as the lines between Palestinian civilians and Hamas have been blurred.

Erases distinction between civilians and a militant group
Even MFAT cannot use the word “Palestinian” but identifies us all as “Hamas” on its website. This erases the distinction between civilians and a militant group, and conflates Israeli military personnel with Jewish civilians, which is both deceptive and dangerous.

The MFAT website states the genocide in Gaza is an “Israel-Hamas” conflict, denying the intentional targeting of Palestinian civilians and erasing our humanity.

Israel’s assault has purposely killed thousands of children, women and men, all innocent civilians. Israel has not provided any evidence of any of its claims that it is targeting “Hamas” and has even been caught out lying about the “mass rapes and burned babies”, the tunnels under the hospitals and militants hiding behind Palestinian toddlers and whole generations of families.

Despite this, MFAT had not condemned Israeli war crimes. This is not a just war. It is a genocide against Palestinians which is also being perpetrated in the West Bank. There is no Hamas in the West Bank.

The ACT Party has been silent or outright supportive of Israel’s atrocities in Gaza and the West Bank, despite overwhelming evidence of war crimes. If they were truly concerned about targeting individuals as they are with Minto’s campaign, then they would have called for an end to Israel’s assaults against Palestinians, sanctioned Israel for its war crimes, and called for investigations into Israeli soldiers for mass killings, sexual violence and starving the Palestinian people.

What is clear from Court and Seymour (who has also openly supported Israel alongside members of the Zionist Federation), is that Palestinian lives are irrelevant, we should silently accept our genocide, and that we do not deserve justice. That Israeli IDF soldiers should be given impunity and should be able to spend time in New Zealand with no consequences for their crimes.

This is simply xenophobic, dangerous and “not acceptable in a liberal democracy like New Zealand”.

Erased the voice of Jewish critics
ACT, alongside Peters, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, Labour leader Chris Hipkins, and the Jewish council have erased the voice of Jewish people who oppose Israel and its crimes and who do not associate being Jewish with being Israeli.

There is a clear distinction, something Alternative Jewish Voices, Jewish Voices for Peace, Holocaust survivors and Dayenu have clearly reiterated. Equating Zionism with Judaism, and identifying Israeli military actions with Jewish identity, is dangerously antisemitic.

By failing to distinguish Judaism from Zionism, politicians and the Jewish Council are in danger of fuelling the false narrative that all Jewish people support Israel’s actions, which ultimately harms Jewish communities by increasing resentment and misunderstanding.

Antisemitism should never be weaponised or used to silence criticism of Israel or justify Israel’s impunity. This is harmful to both Palestinians and Jews.

Seymour’s upcoming tenure as deputy prime minister should also be questioned due to his unwavering support and active defence of a regime committing mass atrocities. This directly contradicts New Zealand’s values of justice and accountability demonstrating a complete disregard for human rights and international law.

His silence on Israel’s war crimes and violations of international law fails to comply with legal norms and expectations. He has positioned himself away from representing all New Zealanders.

While we focus on Minto, let’s be fair and ensure Palestinians are also being protected from discrimination and targeting in New Zealand. Are the Zionist Federation, the New Zealand Jewish Council, and the Holocaust Centre supporting Israel economically or culturally, aiding and abetting its illegal occupation, and do they support the genocide?

Canada investigated funds linked to illegal settlements
Canada recently investigated the Jewish National Fund (JNF) of Canada for potentially violating charitable tax laws by funding projects linked to Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories, which are illegal under international law.

In August 2024, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) revoked the Jewish National Fund of Canada’s (JNF Canada) charitable status after a comprehensive audit revealed significant non-compliance with Canadian tax laws.

On the 31 January 2025, Haaretz reported that Israel had recruited the Jewish National Fund to illegally secretly buy Palestinian land in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
What does that mean for the New Zealand branch of the Jewish National Fund?

None of these organisations should be funnelling resources to illegal settlements or supporting Israel’s war machine. A full investigation into their financial and political activities is necessary to ensure any money coming from New Zealand is not supporting genocide, land theft or apartheid.

The government has already investigated Palestinians sending money to relatives in Gaza, the same needs to be done to organisations supporting Israel. Are any of these groups  supporting war crimes under the guise of charity?

While Jewish communities and Palestinians have rallied together and supported each other these last 15 months, we have received no support from the Jewish Council or the Holocaust Centre, who have remained silent or have supported Israel’s actions. Dayenu, and Alternative Jewish voices have vocally opposed Israel’s genocide in Gaza and reached out to us. As Jews dedicated to human rights, justice, and the prevention of genocide because of their own history, they unequivocally condemn Israel’s actions.

Given the Holocaust, you would expect the Holocaust Centre and the Jewish Council to oppose any acts of violence, especially that on such an industrial scale. You would expect them to oppose apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and the dehumanisation of Palestinians as the other Jewish organisations are doing.

Genocide, war crimes must not be normalised
War crimes and genocide must never be normalised. Israel must not be shielded and the suffering and dehumanisation of Palestinians supported.

We must ensure that all New Zealanders, whether Jewish, Israeli or Palestinian are not targeted, and are protected from discrimination, racism, violence and dehumanisation.
All organisations are subject to scrutiny, but only some have been.

Instead of just focusing on John Minto, the ACT Party, NZ First, National, and Labour should be answering why Israeli soldiers who may have committed atrocities, are allowed into New Zealand in the first place.

Israel and its war criminals should not be treated any differently to any other country.

We must shift the focus back to Israel’s genocide, apartheid, and impunity, while exposing the hypocrisy of those who defend Israel but attack Palestinian solidarity.

Katrina Mitchell-Kouttab is a New Zealand Palestinian advocate and writer.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A month before the anniversary of the death of photojournalist Issam Abdallah — killed by an Israeli strike while reporting in southern Lebanon — Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and 10 organisations have sent a letter to the UN Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem and Israel.

The letter supports a request made by Abdallah’s family in July for an investigation into the crime, reports RSF.

According to the findings of Reuters and Agence France-Presse (AFP) news agencies, and the NGOs Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, the shooting that killed Abdallah and injured journalists from AFP, Reuters, and Al Jazeera on 13 October 2023 originated from an Israeli tank.

A sixth  investigation, conducted by the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), found that “an Israeli tank killed Reuters reporter Issam Abdallah in Lebanon last year by firing two 120 mm rounds at a group of ‘clearly identifiable journalists’ in violation of international law,” according to Reuters.

Based on these findings, RSF and 10 human rights organisations sent a letter to the United Nations this week urging it to conduct an official investigation into the attack.

The letter, dated September 13, was specifically sent to the UN’s Commission of Inquiry charged with investigating possible international crimes and violations of international human rights law committed in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories since 7 October 2023.

With this letter, RSF and the co-signatories express their support for a similar request for an investigation into the circumstances of Abdallah’s murder, made by the reporter’s family last June which remains unanswered at the time of this writing.

Rare Israeli responses
Rarely does Israel respond on investigations over journalists killed in Palestine, including Gaza, and Lebanon.

Two years after the murder of Shireen Abu Akleh in the West Bank on 11 May 2022, and a year after Israel’s official apology acknowledging its responsibility, justice has yet to be delivered for the charismatic Al Jazeera journalist.

At least 134 journalists and media workers have been killed since Israeli’s war on Gaza began.

Jonathan Dagher, team leader of RSF’s Middle East bureau, wrote about tbe Abdallah case:

“Issam Abdallah a été tué par l’armée israélienne, caméra à la main, vêtu de son gilet siglé ‘PRESS’ et de son casque.

“Dans le contexte de la violence croissante contre les journalistes dans la région, ce crime bien documenté dans de nombreuses enquêtes ne doit pas rester impuni.

“La justice pour Issam ouvre une voie solide vers la justice pour tous les reporters.

>“Nous exhortons la Commission à se saisir de cette affaire et à nous aider à mener les auteurs de cette attaque odieuse contre des journalistes courageux et professionnels à rendre des comptes.”

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A West Papuan pro-independence leader has condemned the “sadistic brutality” of Indonesian soldiers in a torture video and called for an urgent United Nations human rights visit to the colonised Melanesian territory.

“There is an urgent need for states to take more serious action on human rights in West Papua,” said president Benny Wenda of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP).

Describing the “horror” of the torture video in a statement on the ULMWP website, he called for the immediate suspension of the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) membership of Indonesia.

Citing the 1998 Rome Statute, Wenda said torture was a crime against humanity.

“Indonesia has not signed this treaty — against torture, genocide, and war crimes — because it is guilty of all three in West Papua and East Timor,” Wenda said. His statement said:

‘Horror of my childhood’
“I am truly horrified by the video that has emerged from of Indonesian soldiers torturing a West Papuan man. More than anything, the sadistic brutality on display shows how urgently West Papua needs a UN Human Rights visit.

“In the video, a group of soldiers kick, punch, and slash the young Papuan man, who has been tied and forced to stand upright in a drum full of freezing water.

“As the soldiers repeatedly pummel the man, they can be heard saying, ‘my turn! My turn!’ and comparing his meat to animal flesh.

“Watching the video, I was reminded of the horror of my childhood, when I was forced to watch my uncle being tortured by Suharto’s thugs.

“The Indonesian government [has] committed these crimes for 60 years now. Indonesia must have their MSG Membership suspended immediately — they cannot be allowed to treat Melanesians in this way.

“This incident comes during an intensified period of militarisation in the Highlands.

“After an alleged TPNPB fighter was killed last month in Yahukimo, two Papuan children were tortured by Indonesian soldiers, who then took humiliating ‘trophy’ photos with their limp bodies.

“Such brutality, already common in West Papua, will only becoming more widespread under the genocidal war criminal [newly elected President Prabowo Subianto].

‘Torture and war crimes’
“According to the Rome Statute, torture is a crime against humanity. Indonesia has not signed this treaty, against torture, genocide, and war crimes, because it is guilty of all three in West Papua and East Timor.

“Though it is extreme and shocking, this video merely exposes how Indonesia behaves every day in my country. Torture is such a widespread military practice that it has been described as a ‘mode of governance’ in West Papua.

“I ask everyone who watches the video to remember that West Papua is a closed society, cut off from the world by a 60-year media ban imposed by Indonesia’s military occupation.

“How many victims go unnoticed by the world? How many incidents are not captured on film?

“Every week we hear word of another murder, massacre, or tortured civilian. Over 500,000 West Papuans have been killed under Indonesian colonial rule.

“There is an urgent need for states to take more serious action on human rights in West Papua. We are grateful that more than 100 countries have called for a visit by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

“But Indonesia clearly has no intention of honouring their promise, so more must be done.

“International agreements such as the [European Union] EU-Indonesia trade deal should be made conditional on a UN visit. States should call out Indonesia at the highest levels of the UN. Parliamentarians should sign the Brussels Declaration.

“Until there [are] serious sanctions against Indonesia their occupying forces will continue to behave with impunity in West Papua.”

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A chilling new report by a German-based human rights watchdog has exposed indiscriminate attacks by Indonesian security forces on indigenous West Papuan villages, highlighting an urgent need for international action.

The 49-page report, “Destroy Them First . . . Discuss Human Rights Later”, is an investigation of the Indonesian forces in the remote Kiwirok area in Pegungan Bintang Regency in the Papuan highlands.

Satellite imagery and on the ground analysis by researchers shows the destruction of eight villages in 2021 and 2022 — Mangoldogi, Pelebib, Kiwi, Oknanggul, Delmatahu, Spamikma, Delpem and Lolim.

A total of 206 buildings, including residential homes, churches and public building buildings  have been destroyed in the raids, forcing more than 2000 Ngalum villagers to seek refuge as internally displaced people (IDPs) in the surrounding forest in destitute circumstances.

In a statement, the Human Rights Monitor said the report — released today — provided a “meticulous and scientific analysis” of the Indonesian forces’ attacks on the villages.

“This report sheds light on the gravity and extent of violations in the Kiwirok region and measures them against international law,” the statement added.

Eliot Higgins, director at Bellingcat, a Netherlands-based investigative journalism group specialising in fact-checking and open-source intelligence, said: “This in-depth report provides evidence of security force raids carried out in the Kiwirok District, impacting on both indigenous villages and public properties.

‘Harrowing picture’
“It paints a harrowing picture of more than 2000 villagers displaced and forced to live in subhuman conditions, without access to food, healthcare services, or education.

“The main findings of this report include instances of violence deliberately perpetrated
against indigenous Papuan civilians by security forces, leading to loss of life and forced
displacement which meet the Rome Statute definition of crimes against humanity.”

The report says that the armed conflict in West Papua has become “significantly aggravated since December 2018, as TPNPB [West Papua National Liberation Army] members killed at least 19 road workers in the Nduga Regency.

“That incident marks the re-escalation of the armed conflict in West Papua. The conflict statistics show a continuous increase in violence over the past three years, reaching a new peak in 2022. The number of civilian fatalities related to the conflict rose from 28 in 2021 to 43 in 2022,” added the report.

Usman Hamid, Amnesty International’s Indonesia director said: “Impunity for violence by the security forces is a major concern from both a human rights and a conflict perspective.

“This report provides the necessary information for the National Human Rights Commission, Komnas HAM, to take up the case.

“Without accountability for the perpetrators, the chances of a lasting solution to the conflict in Papua are slim,” he added.

‘Hidden crisis’
Peter Prove, director for international affairs at the World Council of Churches, said:
“The World Council of Churches has been monitoring the conflict in West Papua — and its
humanitarian, human rights and environmental impacts — for many years.

“But it remains a hidden crisis, largely forgotten by the international community — a situation that suits the Indonesian government very well. This report helps shine a small but telling beam of light on one specific part of the conflict, but from which a larger picture can be extrapolated.

“Indonesia — which is currently campaigning for election to the UN Human Rights Council — must provide more access and transparency on the situation in the region, and the
international community must respond appropriately to the increasing gravity of the crisis.”

Disturbing revelations in this new Human Rights Monitor report on the bombing of indigenous villages in Kiwirok, West Papua. The world must stand united against such atrocities. Read the full report here: https://t.co/5ySOZt7T2R🕊️ #HumanRights #CrimesAgainstHumanity pic.twitter.com/QxIWmPK4C8

— Human Rights Monitor (@hurimonitor) August 16, 2023

In light of the findings, Human Rights Monitor has called on the international community,
governments, and relevant stakeholders to:

• Immediately ensure humanitarian access for national and international humanitarian
  organisations and government agencies to the Kiwirok District. Humanitarian aid
  should be provided without involving security force members to ensure that IDPs can
  access aid without fearing reprisals;
• Instruct the National Human Rights Commission (Komnas Ham) to investigate
  allegations of serious human rights violations in the Kiwirok District between 13
  September and late October 2021;
• Immediately withdraw non-organic security force members from the Kiwirok District,
  allowing the IDPs to return and re-build their villages without having to fear reprisals
  and further raids;
• Ratify the Rome Statute;
• Be open to a meaningful engagement in a constructive peace dialogue with the
  United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP); and
• Allow international observers and foreign journalists to access and work in West
  Papua

Human Rights Monitor is an independent, international non-profit project promoting
human rights through documentation and advocacy. HRM is based in the European Union
and active since 2022.

Focused on West Papua, HRM states: “We document violations; research institutional, social and political contexts that affect rights protection and peace; and share the conclusions of evidence-based monitoring work.”

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Indonesia’s Setara Institute for Peace and Democracy says that the presidential decree (Keppres) on the formation of a team for the non-judicial resolution of past gross human rights violations — signed recently by President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo — will reinforce impunity and absolve perpetrators of past human rights violations.

According to Setara Institute chairperson Hendardi, the Keppres shows that Widodo is unable to or unwilling to resolve past human rights cases, reports CNN Indonesia.

“The Setara Institute views the formation of the ‘PAHAM Team’ as just a project to reinforce impunity and to whitewash past human rights violations which have not yet been fully resolved by the state”, said Hendardi.

Based on the draft Keppres which is circulating, Hendardi said that the membership of a team formed by Widodo is made up of people who are considered problematic in terms of past human rights violations.

According to Hendardi, instead of dealing with cases of human rights violations in accordance with the mandate of Law Number 26/2000 on Human Rights Courts, Widodo has instead closed the door firmly on public demands and the hopes of victims for truth and justice.

He also said that the formation of the team would impact upon the search for truth and fulfilling the rights of the victims and the public because a judicial resolution becomes optional.

“Because the non-judicial option has been decided on, Jokowi is actually negating the mandate of Law Number 26/2000 which states that the resolution of human rights violations which occurred before 2000 can be tried through an ad hoc human rights court”, said Hendardi.

Hendardi believes that this non-judicial mechanism is a form of mass amnesty and the state washing its hands of the issue.

The “PAHAM Team” is just a committee formed by Widodo to give the appearance of sympathy with the victims while the aim is to silence their demands and aspirations, according to Hendardi.

“Yet under international human rights law and the concept of transitional justice it is not just the right reparation that must be fulfilled, but also the right to truth, the right to justice and guarantees of non-repetition,” he said.

As has been reported, when giving his State of the Nation address on August 16 at the People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR) in Jakarta, President Widodo said he had signed a Keppres on the formation of a team for the non-judicial resolution of past gross human rights violations.

Widodo also said that a Draft Law on Truth and Reconsolidation (RUU KKR) was in the process of being deliberated.

Non-judicial mechanisms have long been criticised by civil society groups because they can be used as an alibi by the government not to pursue cases of gross human rights violations through judicial means.

Currently there are 12 cases of human rights violations being handled by the National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM).

They include:

• The 1965 mass killings;
• The May 1998 riots in Jakarta;
• The 1997-98 Trisakti, Semanggi I and Semanggi II student shootings;
• The assassination of renowned human rights defender Munir Said Thalib, co-founder of the Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS);
• and the 2014 Paniai shootings in Papua.

Translated by James Balowski for Indoleft News and republished with permission. The original title of the article was Jokowi Dinilai Putihkan Pelanggar HAM Berat Lewat Keppres Terbaru.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Pacific Islanders believe corruption is a big problem in both their governments and the business sector, says a new report.

About one third of 6000 interviewees across the region believe that most or all members of parliament and staff in heads of government’s offices are involved in corruption, says Transparency International’s Global Corruption Barometer – Pacific 2021.

The survey subjects across 10 countries and territories were asked what they thought about corruption, if they have directly experienced it, and whether things could change.

Transparency International says the result is the most extensive public opinion data on corruption ever gathered in the region.

Corruption was perceived to be worst in Solomon Islands (97 percent) and Papua New Guinea (96 percent), followed closely by the Federated States of Micronesia (80 percent). It is also bad in Vanuatu (73 percent), Fiji (68 percent) and Tonga (62 percent).

Despite more than half of respondents reporting a “fair amount” or a “great deal” of trust in their government to do a good job and treat people fairly, 61 percent believe corruption is a significant problem in their government and 56 percent think it is getting worse.

Impunity also appears to be a problem, with less than a fifth of respondents (18 percent) believing that corrupt officials frequently face appropriate consequences for their actions.

Added to this, only 14 percent believe their government regularly considers them when making decisions.

Bribery common
About one in three paid a bribe

“One of the most significant results was how often ordinary people in the Pacific directly encounter corruption in their daily lives,” says the report.

“Thirty-two percent of interviewees recently paid a bribe to receive public services – a higher rate than any other region surveyed by Transparency International.”

However, rates differ widely by country.

The most common reason given across the region for bribery is to receive a quicker or better public service.

Bribery appears to be a problem across a range of government services, from applying for official government documents to dealing with the police.

Only 13 per cent of those who paid a bribe for a public service reported it. This rises to around 30 percent in Fiji and Kiribati.

‘Sextortion’ also a problem
“Even more worrying is that 38 percent of respondents say they or someone they know have personally experienced ‘sextortion’, where an official requests sexual acts in exchange for an essential government service,” says the report.

About a quarter of respondents have been offered a bribe for their votes. This has serious consequences for the integrity of national and local elections.

In addition, 15 percent of people have received threats of retaliation if they do not vote in a specific way.

It is not only their governments which Pacific Islanders are concerned about. A majority of people interviewed feel that corruption is a big problem in business, too.

“A corruption ‘hotspot’ appears to be government contracts, which more than two thirds of respondents believe businesses secure through bribes and connections,” the report says.

“Almost half of the people we surveyed think there is little control over companies [which] extract natural resources, which is of particular concern given that this is one of the largest industries in the region.”

The good news, says Transparency International, is that “more than 70 percent of respondents say that ordinary people can help to fight corruption”.

“More than 60 percent also think their government is doing a good job at combating corruption”

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The whistleblowing vice-chancellor at the University of the South Pacific (USP), Professor Pal Ahluwalia, has described the illegal deportation of he and his wife, Sandra Price, last week as a “surreal” experience.

Many would agree that the inhumane, immoral and illegal deportation has plunged the tertiary institution into the biggest crisis of its 50-plus-year history.

The ensuing standoff between USP host country Fiji and the university governing body, the USP Council, has put the institution’s funding at risk, and its future in jeopardy.

In another surreal episode, Fiji’s Prime Minister and Immigration Minister, Voreqe Bainimarama, chose to airily downplay the situation, apparently hoping that the controversy would blow away.

After initially going to ground in the face of the international and national uproar created by the expulsion, Bainimarama responded with a tweet – concentrating on things that matter – insinuating that the crisis engulfing the region’s once premier tertiary institute was of little, if any, consequence.

Bainimarama’s right-hand man, Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, followed suit by telling The Fiji Times that there is “no saga” and “no crisis” at USP. Since last year Khaiyum, as the economy minister, withheld Fiji’s $27 million allocation to USP over alleged unresolved governance issues.

It came after a failed attempt by the Fiji government’s USP representative to suspend Professor Ahluwalia.

Total disregard for the consequences
The statements by these two men, who virtually run the country, reflect a total disregard for the consequences of their actions. Besides the international furore, they seem unconcerned about the political fallout domestically, despite winning the 2018 election by the thinnest of margins with another election just around the corner in 2022.

Their growing arrogance is clearly a consequence of military support and the censorship of the media, which means the government maintains a firm grip on the country. Hiding behind the facade of a democracy is very much a military government.

This is reflected in the despotic actions of both the Prime Minister and his Attorney-General, who clearly feel that they can act with impunity, without suffering any consequences.

Then more surreality: when the USP issue was raised in Fiji’s parliament this week, it was ruled out by the Speaker on the grounds that it was not a matter of national importance. Even though Fiji has the most students at USP, and never fails to point out that it contributes more funds to the institution than any other government.

This week the education minister claimed that Fiji does not interfere in the decisions of the USP Council, even though it just did: by withdrawing the VC’s work visa the government voided his contract.

Various independent commentators have pointed out that the scale of the damage to USP is enormous and unprecedented, and raises serious questions about the broader, longer-term impacts on regional unity, academic freedom, respect for human rights and the rule of law.

The deportation has also seen the resurfacing of questions about Fiji’s suitability as the host nation for USP due to political instability and the lack of civil rights. Samoa has already put itself forward as an alternative host for the university.

Legally questionable, but morally wrong
The manner in which the Ahluwalias were deported has been well-covered by the media. It was not only legally questionable, but morally wrong. Up to 15 police and immigration officers descended on the couple’s accommodation in the dead of the night, demanding to be let in on the threat of breaking the door down.

The VC and his wife were then whisked away to the Nadi International Airport at high speed, without so much of a toilet break, let alone due process.

Few believe the official reason offered for the deportation — that Professor Ahluwalia’s conduct was “prejudicial to peace, defence, public safety, public order, public morality, public health, security, or good government of the Fiji islands”. Many feel that Ahluwalia has had a target on his back since his exposure of financial mismanagement under the previous vice-chancellor, Professor Rajesh Chandra, who was seen to be close to the government.

The losses ran into the millions of dollars, as articulated in the BDO special audit report, which was leaked to the media, much to the embarrassment and the consternation of the government, the chairman of the USP Council and those implicated in the scandal.

The situation is replete with ironies. Bainimarama used the mantra of a “clean up” against corruption to justify his 2006 coup but is now increasingly linked to this cover up at USP. Considering the importance of higher education in the region, and the cost to its own domestic and international reputation, the lengths to which the Fiji government has gone to get rid of Ahluwalia reveal a government that has completely lost the plot.

Unions, civil society organisations and opposition parties have roundly condemned the expulsion, but there is an uncanny silence from the office of the Fiji Human Rights Commissioner, Ashwin Raj, an appointee of the Attorney-General.

Deafening silence from donors
Also deafening is the silence from the USP’s major donors, Australia and New Zealand, the paragons of human rights and democracy in the region. Their statements have merely expressed concern about USP, while failing to condemn the treatment of the VC.

As recently as June 2020, on this very blog, I wrote about regional institutions with governance problems, including specifically USP, and the silence of international aid donors and partner countries.

I attributed these countries’ silence to political expediency and geopolitical priorities, warning that unless we demand high standards, and adopt zero tolerance for graft and abuse, we only embolden the perpetrators.

I called for a change of attitude, but to no avail, as this latest USP scandal indicates. Do Australia and New Zealand still stand for the rule of the law and human rights, or have they surrendered these values for the sake of political expediency?

The only fair outcome in this case, and the only one that would protect the viability of USP, would be the reinstatement of Professor Ahluwalia. This will only happen if the USP Council stands its ground, and if Australia and New Zealand, as USP’s largest donors, put the university first.

This should not be too much to ask, or to hope.

Dr Biman Prasad is a former professor of economics and dean of the Faculty of Business and Economics at the University of the South Pacific. He is an adjunct professor at the James Cook University and Punjabi University, and is currently Member of Parliament and Leader of the National Federation Party in Fiji. This article was originally published on DevPolicyBlog and is republished with Dr Prasad’s permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Philippine authorities should independently investigate the circumstances surrounding the killing of journalist Ronnie Villamor and hold those responsible to account, says the Committee to Protect Journalists.

In the afternoon of November 14, Philippine Army soldiers shot and killed Villamor, a contributor to the local independent Dos Kantos Balita weekly tabloid, outside a military checkpoint in Milagros, a town in Masbate province in the central Philippines.

He was on his way to cover a disputed land survey, according to press reports.

The troops, led by Second Lieutenant Maydim Jomadil, were investigating reports of armed men in the area, according to local broadcaster ABS-CBN.

Major Aldrin Rosales, the local police chief, alleged that the troops ordered Villamor to stop his motorcycle, and opened fire when the journalist drew a firearm, according to that report.

In a statement posted to Facebook, the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines denied that version of events, saying that soldiers stopped Villamor and four surveyors he was accompanying despite the group having coordinated with police to be in the area.

When the five decided to call local police to assist them in passing through the army checkpoint, the soldiers opened fire and killed Villamor, the statement said.

‘Swift, independent investigation’ needed
“Authorities must conduct a swift and independent investigation into the killing of journalist Ronnie Villamor, and ensure that any soldiers who acted unlawfully are brought to justice,” said Shawn Crispin, CPJ’s senior Southeast Asia representative.

“Soldiers cannot simply gun down a journalist without fear that their actions will be thoroughly investigated and any wrongdoing punished. Prosecution of the perpetrators is the only way the cycle of impunity will be broken in the Philippines.”

Local English-language outlet Butalat reported that the army and police claimed Villamor was a member of the New People’s Army (NPA), an anti-government armed insurgent group active in the region.

The Presidential Task Force on Media Security, a government body tasked with resolving journalist killings, did not reply to CPJ’s repeated emailed requests for its assessment of Villamor’s killing and information on the status of any investigations into the case.

Villamor covered land disputes and other political issues for Dos Kantos Balita, according to the NUJP. The tabloid covers many hard-hitting issues, including illegal logging, drug trafficking, and illegal fishing in the region, according to a CPJ review of the publication’s Facebook page.

The Philippine Army did not immediately respond to CPJ’s emailed request for comment on the circumstances surrounding Villamor’s killing.

In October, CPJ published its annual Global Impunity Index, a ranking of nations where journalists are slain and their killers go free – the Philippines ranked seventh, with at least 11 unsolved journalist killings.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Support this progressive voice and be a part of it. Donate to COHA today. Click here

In an extraordinary step backward a Chilean Court of Appeals granted release and sentence reductions to 17 State actors convicted of crimes against humanity perpetrated against thousands of Chilean citizens during the Pinochet dictatorship, provoking condemnation by survivors and the international human rights community. In the context of several months of relentless and brutal government repression of pro-democracy demonstrations and President Sebastián Piñera’s intransigent commitment to a failed economic model, this show of impunity sends the wrong message to the police forces who have already brutalized thousands of Chileans and undermined the rule of law. These measures violate international human rights law signed by Chile.

COHA republishes this open letter initiated by Chilean concerned citizens in Washington DC, supported by more than one hundred people from different countries, against impunity in Chile.

Chilean residents in the United States and persons of all nationalities express their concern for impunity in Chile for violators of human rights

We the undersigned Chilean residents in the US and persons of all nationalities profoundly condemn the judgement of acquittal and reduction of sentences by the Court of Appeals of Santiago, for 17 violators of human rights, adjudicated for crimes against humanity committed during the military dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet.

Minister Juan Cristóbal Mera Muñoz, Minister Mireya López Miranda and member attorney Cristián Lepin Molina, absolved the former agents of the National Directorate of Intelligence (Dirección Nacional de Inteligencia, DINA) Pedro Espinoza, Rolf Wenderoth, Hermon Alfaro, Pedro Betterlich, Claudio Pacheco, Orlando Torrejón, Orlando Altamirano and Eusebio López.  They also reduced the sentences of Ricardo Lawrence, Jorge Andrade, Juan Morales Salgado, Ciro Torré, Sergio Escalona, Juvenal Piña, Jorge Díaz, Gustavo Guerrero y Gladys Calderón to 3 years and 1 day. Pedro Espinoza was an accomplice of the notorious criminal who was the right hand man of Pinochet, Manuel Contreras. Espinoza was the chief of the Villa Grimaldi, a center of torture and forced disappearance. Espinoza was also involved in the operation called “Caravan of death” in which almost 100 persons around the country were assassinated, and he participated in the terrorist attack on Orlando Letelier in Washington DC. All of these criminals had been convicted on July 21, 2017 for 16 kidnappings and one homicide perpetrated in Villa Grimaldi.

The judges’ actions benefit state actors, functionaries of the armed forces and Carabineros police who committed crimes against humanity, including kidnappings, sexual assaults, indescribable tortures and assassinations of Chileans for their political beliefs. According to international law, such crimes constitute acts of state terrorism.

The campaign of impunity has even extended to perpetrators of human rights violations who are completing their sentences in the Punta Peuco prison. Pinochetista legislators are pressuring the Piñera government to grant those among these prisoners who are over 75 years old the benefit of house arrest, measures presently being studied with regard to the coronavirus. The characteristics of Punta Peuco prison, however, considered a place “of luxury” on account of its many benefits, comfortable rooms, and special services, does not justify the application of the same criterion used in the case of overcrowded conditions found in ordinary penitentiary centers.

These very grave deeds of the past few days imply an emotional drama, especially cruel for those family members and loved ones of the thousands of victims of violations of human rights committed by these State agents. Chile has demonstrated an enormous legal ambiguity and  ongoing policy of impunity since the end of the dictatorship. These recent actions, especially the decision of the Court of Appeals, demonstrates that the application of justice in the face of serious violations of human rights continues to be an unfinished task, politicized and debilitated by certain sectors of the society which even confuse the right to defend a political ideology with the necessity to defend, above all, the human life. Also, there ought to be a moral imperative to oppose state terrorism and  bring to justice those who infringe against the dignity of the human personality.

With the decision by the Court, Chile is also out of compliance with international treaties and the jurisprudence of the Interamerican Court of Human Rights (Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, CIDH). The cases of Almonacid, Arellano and others v. Chile, and La Cantuta v. Perú  have established unequivocally the obligation of member states to investigate and prosecute all crimes against humanity, treating them as the most serious violations of human rights. Once responsibility is established, the state, through its judicial branch, ought to apply sanctions commensurate with the gravity of the crimes. These principles of international law  obligate states to avoid any measure that permits amnesty or sets aside the responsibility of the guilty. Chile appears to regress in this regard, abandoning the doctrine that the CIDH has followed for years and forgetting the purpose of these norms of international law related to human rights, laws which are designed to provide a disincentive, under any circumstances, to commit such crimes.

We call upon the Supreme Court, the government authorities, and legislators to forcefully exercise their full legal and political authority to urge Chile to fulfill its international obligations with regard to human rights and vigorously oppose these acts of impunity for crimes so serious that they have affected and continue to affect generations of citizens of our country.

Signatures

1. Abril Viscaya, Venezuela
2. Ada Troncoso, US
3. Adam Kaluba, US
4. Adolfo Guidali, France
5. Adriana Bolívar, Argentina
6. Alejandra Barrueto, Chile
7. Alejandra Montecino, Chile
8. Alex Main, US
9. Alicia Bustillo, US
10. Alicia Soto, US
11. Alma Torres-Martinez, US
12. Ana Laura Pereira, US
13. Anahí Arizmendi, Venezuela
14. Andrea Rojas, US
15. Andrés Habella, US
16. Andrew Vavrunek, US
17. Angelica McInerney, US
18. Ayla Bailey, US
19. Blanca Flor Bonilla, El Salvador
20. Bonnie Fox, US
21. Bonnie McCrimmon, Canada
22. Brenda Choi, US
23. Camila Rojas, Chile
24. Camilo Soria, Chile
25. Carlos Alejandro Morales Mateluna, US
26. Carlos Morales Mateluna, Switzerland
27. Carmen Paz Nunez Hoffmann, US
28. Carolina Cucumides, US
29. Carter Carlson, US
30. Cecilia Morales, Chile
31. Cecilia Toledo Gonzalez, US
32. Celestino Barrera, US
33. Cheryl LaBash, US
34. Cindy BelloweBellowe, US
35. Clayton Lee, US
36. Cloe Soria, Chile
37. Cristian Foerster, Chile
38. Cristian Gamboa, US
39. Darlene Hebert, Canada
40. David Paul, US
41. Demetrus Jackson, US
42. Deyanira Garza, US
43. Dianne Budd, US
44. Edalis Mejia, US
45. Elena Hildreth, US
46. Evelyn González, US
47. Estefania Del Real, Chile
48. Fabiana Gallardo, Chile
49. Felipe Fredes , US
50. Francesca Emanuelle
51. Frederick Mills, US
52. Gema Casanova, US
53. Gonzalo Valerio Soto, Honduras
54. Héctor Sepúlveda, US
55. Ignacio Shinya, Chile
56. Isabel Pizarro, Chile
57. Isella Calderon, Chile
58. Jill Clark-Gollub, US
59. John Moriarty, US
60. Jorge Consuegra, US
61. Jorge Pizarro, US
62. Jorge Ramírez, Chile
63. Julia Stover, US
64. Juliana Barnet, US
65. Karen Morales, US
66. Karina Armenta, US
67. Katrina McBrian, US
68. Laura Franco, Venezuela
69. Laura Soria, Chile
70. Leonardo Flores, US
71. Leonardo Vera, US
72. Leslie Salgado, US
73. Lidia Soto, Chile
74. Liliana Cannobbio, Chile
75. Lilly Macier, US
76. Luis Soria González-Vera, Chile
77. Márcia Cury, Brasil
78. Marco E., US
79. Maria Cristina Urquieta Aranciabia, US
80. María Paz González, Chile
81. Marta Pizarro, Chile
82. Martha Allen, US
83. Merrill Cole, US
84. Michelle Ellner, US
85. Miriam Manresa, US
86. Monica Navarro, US
87. Morelia Reali, US
88. Natalie Deriu, US
89. Nora Pizarro, US
90. Pamela Alejandra Weitz, US
91. Pamela Cecilia Molina Toledo, US
92. Pamela Molina, US
93. Pamela Zúñiga Grandi, US
94. Patricia Cifuentes, Chile
95. Patricia Edith Pizarro Toro, Chile
96. Patricio Zamorano, US
97. Phoenix Oaks, US
98. Rebecca Ellner, US
99. Robinet Castillo-Zarate, US
100. Rodrigo López, Chile
101. Ronald Gallardo Duarhtt, Chile
102. Sergio Galikea, Chile
103. Taigan Wright, US
104. Teresa aybar Carbajal, US
105. Teri Matson, US
106. Timothy Brett, Canada
107. Vanessa Asenjo, Mexico
108. Walter Gustavo Weitz Marholz, US
109. Yela Andarcia, Mexico
110. Yu-Ting Chu, US
111. Yvonne Mcdonald, US
112. Zarko Retamal Yacsich, US

Photo credit: Museo de la Memoria, Santiago of Chile

Over the last decade there’s been a stunning slump in levels of public trust for authorities around the globe. When society becomes more suspicious of public institutions, there is increased chance of political upheaval and change – which can be a good or bad thing, depending on your point of view. And the political change that results from distrust can take many forms. It means that, even here in New Zealand, it’s worth keeping a close eye on how the public perceives the major institutions of society. For more than a decade, surveys have indicated there is a fair degree of discontent in New Zealand, especially towards elites. 

Acumen-Edelman’s latest annual survey provides a barometer on trust for New Zealand institutions. It shows that government continues to be widely distrusted, with only half of the 1150 New Zealanders surveyed saying they trusted the institution of government. You can read the full report here: The Battle for Truth. This level of trust in government was actually up on the last survey carried out as part of the global Edelman Trust Barometer. Last year the trust figure was only 46%, and it has since risen to 51%. Perhaps this increase can be explained by the fact that the survey took place in the middle of November last year, soon after the spectacular general election campaign, and a change of government. The public had been engaged in the democratic process, and the campaign was widely viewed as the most interesting in living memory. Nonetheless, it’s worth reflecting upon the fact that half of New Zealanders distrust the political institution that runs society. Certainly, the Minister of Open Government, Clare Curran has taken notice. She’s been reported as saying “I think that the real issue with the survey is that almost half of Kiwis don’t trust the Government, and that’s not good enough, and it’s something we want to be doing more work on” – see Chloe Winter’s How businesses, media, Government work on gaining public trust. Of course, it’s always hard to ascertain exactly how distrust of government breaks down across society. A unique part of the annual Edelman Trust survey is that it breaks down the figures to show how much trust the “informed public” has, compared to the “general public”. The “informed public” seems to be defined as those who have a strong knowledge and consumption of news. On this measure, trust in government fell six points, from 63% to 57%. The survey also shows other societal institutions to be even less trusted. Media, business, NGOs were also deemed untrustworthy by the public – trust for NGOs was down to 48%, for business it was down to 47%, and for the media it was up slightly to 31%. Coverage of all this is found in Chloe Winter’s Kiwis have become a little more trusting. As Winter explains, New Zealand rates well internationally on this index, scoring 44 points, just ahead of the United States which fell nine points over the last year. There’s a particular focus in this year’s report on the New Zealand public not trusting the media. As Winter reports, “About 64 per cent of respondents could not recognise journalism from rumour, and they were also struggling to tell if a piece of news was produced by a respected media organisation.” Furthermore, “many people feel media is more focused on providing entertainment to attract larger audiences. This is leading to a disengaged population with half of those surveyed saying they consume news less than weekly.” The Chief Executive of Acumen Republic, Adelle Keely elaborates, saying “In terms of its top trust-building mandates, New Zealanders expect media to be guarding information quality (63%) and educate people on important issues (59%), however feel the media is performing best at providing society with entertainment (61%).” Trust in Non-Government Organisations (NGOs) was also low, according to the survey, with only 48 per cent having confidence in them (down from 51 per cent), and their performance being judged as poor. Acumen’s Keely provides an interesting commentary on this: “There is no doubt that NGOs are tackling the more complex and difficult issues that are not easily solved so it’s hard to attain high performance scores, but we also think the fact that many NGOs receive funding from government has placed them in a compromising position. They cannot afford to be too outspoken for fear of this having repercussions.” More survey evidence about public distrust can be found in the New Zealand General Social Survey, run by Statistics New Zealand. The latest results on political participation were released in January, and showed that “29 per cent of people in New Zealand rated their trust in Parliament as low” – see the Herald’s Trust in political system lowest among Maori, Stats NZ survey finds. However, conversely, “Thirty per cent of the New Zealand population rated their trust in Parliament as high, and a further 9 per cent rated their trust very high”. This survey, taken under the previous National Government, also showed that a third of people “felt they could not influence Government decisions”, while about 25 per cent thought the public’s influence on decision-making was high, and another four per cent thought it was “very high”. In general, on all of these measures, “Maori had a more pessimistic outlook than the general population.” Arguably, children are even more pessimistic. A Unicef survey released back in November showed that “More than 90 per cent of New Zealand’s children believe the world would be a better place if politicians listened to them” and “six out of 10 Kiwi kids don’t trust adults and world leaders to make good decisions for children” – see Brad Flahive’s Less than half of Kiwi kids trust adults and world leaders, survey says. It’s not all bad news, however, and a few weeks ago survey evidence was released by the Auckland Council to show that citizens are becoming more satisfied with the performance of local government there – although the figures are still rather negative. RNZ reports: “Dissatisfaction was down to 27 percent from 35 percent… Trust in council decision making rose to 22 percent from 15 percent, while distrust fell from 47 percent to 39 percent” – see: Small improvement in public view of Akl Council – survey. There’s also an argument to be made that much of the public’s distrust of authority and politicians is simply due to the media’s negative reporting on our institutions of power. This is an explanation put forward today by Chris Trotter, who says: “The mainstream news media’s dwindling share of the advertising dollar drives it inexorably towards the sensational, scandalous, salacious and bizarre ‘clickbait’ upon which its profitability increasingly depends.” The effect of this, he argues, is a corrosion of the public’s orientation to politicians, who have been unfairly painted by cynical political journalists – see: The Political economy of mainstream political journalism. Finally, Geoffrey Palmer has long talked about the crisis of confidence in New Zealand democracy, and about how important public trust is to the health of democracy. His latest book, Towards Democracy Renewal, co-written with Andrew Butler, is published next month. He recently gave a Ted Talk on these issues, proclaiming: “People have less faith in democracy than they used to. They feel disconnected from it. They don’t feel that the decisions are being made in their interests. And, of course, it is very important in a democracy, if people don’t have confidence in it, then you are going to have all sorts of problems. That’s what’s happening in Western countries – and we’re not immune from that. We’ve got to repair our democracy while we’ve got time.” You can watch the full 14-minute talk here: Constitutional change and democratic renewal.

By Florence Peschke

Seven months into the administration of President Rodrigo Duterte, press freedom remains under pressure in the Philippines.

The country has been one of the most dangerous for journalists in recent years – the International Press Institute (IPI) has recorded the deaths of 128 journalists in connection with their work since 1997 – and only one week into the year it mourned the first journalist killed in 2017.

On January 6, Mario Contaoi was riding his motorbike home to Magsingal Town on a national highway when unidentified assailants on motorbikes shot him six times. The former university professor, radio announcer and environmental activist succumbed to his injuries in the early hours of January 7.

Just three weeks earlier, Larry Que, a Filipino publisher-columnist, was shot dead after alleging that local officials had ties to the manufacture of illegal drugs.

The circumstances and killers’ motives in both murders remain unclear, highlighting the impunity surrounding journalists’ killings in the country and the lingering threat it poses to their safety.

Since Duterte took office on June 30, he has gained an international reputation for his controversial statements and extreme positions. The war on crime and drugs launched in July that was a focus of his populist campaign is estimated to have taken 6000 lives, many in summary and extrajudicial killings.

Seven months into Duterte’s term, IPI spoke with journalists and civil society representatives in the Philippines to take a closer look at press freedom and journalists’ safety.

Touchy relationship
The president has had a touchy relationship with the media. Just weeks before his inauguration, Duterte said in a May 31 press conference that journalists who were killed were responsible for their own fate “because they extorted, accepted bribes, took sides or attacked their victims needlessly”.

The statement drew vociferous objections from both media and civil society groups. They argued that Duterte’s comments not only reinforced the misconception of journalists as corrupt, but also created a fiction that only corrupt journalists had been killed, justifying their murder.

In an interview with IPI, Kathryn Roja Raymundo, press freedom alerts and communications officer for the Bangkok-based Southeast Asian Press Association (SEAPA) disputed Duterte’s allegations.

“Based on evidence, journalists and media workers in the Philippines were murdered for doing their work investigating and exposing corruption,” she said.

“Killing is killing and should not be justified or condoned, especially by government officials elected to promote and protect the rule of law.”

In fact, according to the Centre for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR), a local NGO based in Makati City, only eight to 10 percent of all journalists killed since 2000 were actually involved in corrupt practices.

Early missteps
Beyond his pre-inauguration statements, Duterte made other early missteps, including limiting access to information and press conferences, and flip-flopping on statements. Observers argue this contributed to misconceptions and set back efforts to improve media literacy in the Philippines.

“Many Filipinos do not understand how the press works, particularly its adversarial function in a democratic society,” Melanie Pinlac, Freedom Fund for Filipino Journalists coordinator for CMFR, commented.

Roja Raymundo said that, in the Philippines, actions that impair press freedom tend to be extra-legal, rather than the result of specific laws or direct government intervention. But Pinlac argued that Duterte’s openly negative attitude towards the press has taken a toll on journalists and other media workers.

“They are more cautious in newsgathering and reporting about the programs of the current government, and vigilant in monitoring the war on drugs,” she said.

Unfortunately, Duterte’s cynicism towards the press appears to be catching on among his supporters. Journalists who criticise the president’s policies or cover sensitive topics like drug trafficking or corruption face defamation suits and an online backlash.

Duterte’s supporters attack them outright or report their online accounts to social media platforms, demanding the takedown of “inappropriate content”.

Roby Alampay, editor-in-chief of Filipino BusinessWorld and InterAkyson, criticised the platforms for their reaction.

“When it comes to Facebook in particular, I am less concerned about fake news and gullibility of people, I am less concerned about the algorithms of Facebook, and more concerned about Facebook’s inability to stand up and defend journalists that they have recognised, journalists with certified accounts,” he told IPI.

The dynamics of social media mean that this stifles not only journalists, but society. Alampay said that in the current climate, no public debate or exchange of ideas is encouraged and Duterte supporters are quick to silence any dissenting opinions. Online harassment causes exhaustion and fatigue, if not fear, in society.

“It is like debating with a wall,” he said. “It is like debating with a drunk.”

Reason for hope?
Nevertheless, some journalists say there is reason for hope. Alampay said he believes that the press in the Philippines is still among the freest of the region and that, despite Duterte’s personal hostile attitude and often bad behaviour, he is still accessible and willing to answer journalists’ questions.

There also have been positive developments. In late July, Duterte issued an executive order promoting access to information. Although the right is guaranteed by the Philippines’ 1987 Constitution, many citizens are not aware of their rights, Pinlac says.

The executive order is a step in the right direction, but observers say that similar legislation applying to all government bodies should be adopted to ensure the public’s access to information.

In October, Duterte also signed an administrative order creating a “Presidential Task Force on the violation of the right to life, liberty and security of members of the media”.

The Task Force is intended to provide security to those under threat and to monitor cases of killed journalists to address the prevailing impunity with which those cases have been met.

Roja Raymundo noted that, since 1986, only 17 people have been convicted in the killings of journalists who died in connection with their work.

Both her organisation and the CMFR have made recommendations to the government on improving the press freedom situation; chief among them is the creation of a multi-stakeholder quick response team, including representatives of media and civil society. The groups also suggested reviewing investigation practices and rules of court that are prone to abuse.

Alampay cited a need to change a misconception of journalism in society, commenting that learning about information and media literacy should start “as soon as kids have email and access to social media”.

However, whether Duterte will manage to effectively address these pressing issues remains to be determined. Although orders on access to information and the safety of journalists spark hope, similar efforts by previous administrations were unable to end impunity and offer real safeguards for journalists.

Florence Peschke is an International Press Institute contributor.