Where the Human Rights Abuses Are, Daily Brief August 4, 2023
Daily Brief, August 4, 2023.
When asked why he robbed banks, the so-called “gentleman bank robber,” Willie Sutton, replied: “Because that’s where the money is.”
I sometimes get asked why I’m so often writing here about vulnerable people, and why human rights defenders generally are constantly focused on minorities.
Although I’m not keen to compare myself to a bank robber, not even a “gentleman” one, I have to answer in a similar “well, duh” sort of way: because that’s where the human rights abuses are.
It’s kind of obvious, isn’t it? Powerful people – those with access to money and lawyers and political contacts – are not as likely to be subject to human right abuses. It’s not impossible, but it’s rare, and when it happens, the powerful can defend themselves. By definition.
And I’m not just talking about billionaires here. Even those with more limited means can get satisfaction through legal routes – at least if they live in a country where there are enforceable laws, if the government respects those laws, and the courts basically work. Some big “ifs,” I know, but at least they have a chance.
However, it’s the truly powerless folks who are so often the target of abuses – often by the powerful – precisely because they can’t defend themselves.
Look at one of the most persistently abused groups around the world today: refugees and migrants. These are people who may have lost everything in a war back home: their job, their home, their family. Or maybe they’re escaping extreme poverty.
They set off with little or nothing, searching for sanctuary or a better life, and where they’re living now – or trying to live – they have little power. They can’t vote, and very often, they can’t work legally either. This political and economic powerlessness makes them vulnerable.
Unscrupulous politicians are all too quick to jump on that vulnerability. They tell voters their problems are the fault of those newcomers. And with no refugee votes or campaign donations to worry about, politicians can in some sense target the newcomers “cost free.”
It’s the laziest form of politics, of course: blaming someone else rather taking responsibility and addressing difficult social and economic issues. Bashing the vulnerable is simple; solving problems is hard. But this lazy politics too often works for the politician in terms of media attention and votes.
The same dynamic can happen when it comes to minorities, too, whether ethnic, racial, or sexual minorities. Politicians from majority communities use them as scapegoats to boost their careers in the same way.
And the smaller – and less powerful – the minority, the better for politicians’ purposes. Just take what’s been happening to trans folks, for example.
If a person has a clear head, unbefuddled by the whipped-up fears of shouty TV talking heads, there is no possible way they could objectively say this tiny group of people represents any threat to anyone. And yet, politicians from the US to Hungary to Russia are spending huge amounts of time and effort to bash them in speeches and abuse them with new laws.
Even when it comes to larger minority communities, very often – for reasons of long-term discrimination and unequal opportunities historically – they can find it difficult to fight back. They can be shut out of costly legal pathways to defend their rights, or at least face greater obstacles doing so.
In any case, the message from politicians to the wider public is similar: those people over there, they are the problem. Politicians with power then punish those with less or no power, as if to say: “See, I am doing something about this huge problem I’ve told you you have.” (And please, dear voters, don’t look at anything else, like my corruption or my failure to solve your real problems.)
Sadly, media often play along – in more repressive places because that’s what authorities direct them to do, and in less repressive places because fear and hate are good for business models based on clicks and views. So, too many members of the public accept the sacrifice of the vulnerable – a kind of political sadism – as normal.
It becomes so commonplace, people can even get to the point where they fail to recognize the glaring immorality of things like the EU’s “let them die” policy in the Mediterranean Sea or Texas officials in the US pushing kids into razor wire and deadly river currents.
It’s our role as human rights defenders to remind everyone that this isn’t normal. That it’s completely unacceptable to anyone with any sense at all of human dignity. That politicians are lying to you. And that these vulnerable people they are abusing to boost their political careers are just that: people – with fundamental rights like everyone else.
So, yeah, we work with the vulnerable and minorities a lot, because that’s where the human rights abuses are.
Daily Brief, August 3, 2023.
Who do you believe?
On the one hand, you have the survivors of the greatest tragedy off the Greek coast in recent years.
On the other hand, there’s the Greek coast guard.
The two sides offer very different accounts of what happened on June 14, when the fishing vessel Adriana sank near Pylos, drowning most of the 750 people on board.
One critical issue involves a rope – or “line,” as sailors would say – between the overcrowded boat and the coast guard vessel dispatched to the scene.
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch interviewed survivors, who consistently described how the coast guard ship attached a line to the Adriana and started towing it. This, survivors say, caused the Adriana to sway unusually and then capsize.
Greek authorities have strongly denied this. Senior officials of the Hellenic Coast Guard told us their vessel came close to the Adriana and used a line only to approach the boat. They claim they did this to assess whether migrant passengers wanted help, but that passengers threw the line back and the boat continued its journey.
The survivors say people on the Adriana were pleading to be rescued from the rickety fishing vessel – they’d even called for help by satellite phone hours earlier – but the Greek coast guard wouldn’t listen.
When accounts differ as dramatically as this, there clearly needs to be an independent, impartial investigation into what happened. Greek authorities have opened two criminal investigations, one targeted at the alleged smugglers and another into the actions of the coast guard.
Equally clearly, there will be questions about the credibility of Greece’s investigations.
This is especially true given the “Farmakonisi” shipwreck in 2014, in which survivors also argued their boat capsized when the Greek coast guard tried to tow them. The European Court of Human Rights in that case condemned the rescue operations and the subsequent investigation, including how victims’ testimonies were handled.
There are things authorities can do to help make today’s investigations more credible.
One would be to put investigations under the supervision of the Supreme Court Prosecutor’s Office. Another would be to ensure the Greek Ombudsman’s Office is able to fulfill its oversight role properly, with access to all necessary evidence.
And, of course, investigations should involve taking testimonies from all survivors, under conditions where they feel safe to talk openly.
Investigations seem to be proliferating now, too. In a separate, welcome development, the EU Ombudsman has announced it will open an inquiry into the actions of EU border agency Frontex in the Mediterranean, including in the Adriana shipwreck.
If there’s room for another investigation, I’d like to see one look into the EU’s illegal and morally bankrupt asylum and migration policies generally.
But for now, one final question about Pylos: where are the mobile phones? Survivors say the Greek coast guard took their phones from them (and perhaps from dead bodies, too) after they were pulled out of the water. Survivors told us they contain vital video evidence about the shipwreck and what led to it.
Accounts of what happened that terrible day vary widely, but if the Greek coast guard is so sure of its account, why won’t they give those phones back – or turn them in as evidence?
News this week suggests this is precisely where investigators are now focusing their interest.
Senegal’s government hit the country with two shocks on Monday.
First, they shut down mobile internet services in much of the country. Then, they announced the dissolution of a key opposition party, Patriotes africains du Sénégal pour le travail, l'éthique et la fraternité (Patriots of Senegal for Work, Ethics, and Fraternity, or PASTEF).
These events are especially alarming in the context of increasing instability in West Africa, with multiple military coups in the region recently. Senegal has also been, in many eyes, “long considered a bastion of democracy and a regional leader in diplomacy.”
The government’s moves against the opposition party did not come out of the blue. It’s been building for some time.
On June 1, a court sentenced PASTEF leader Ousman Sonko to two years in jail for “corrupting youth.” This undermined his chances to run in next year’s presidential election, where he could have been expected to do well, given his third-place showing in 2019 and his mobilization of younger voters.
Obviously, PASTEF supporters saw the legal actions as politically motivated. Protests broke out in the capital Dakar, and violence led to at least 16 deaths, including two members of the security forces. Scores of others were wounded. Some 500 people across Senegal were arrested.
Then, last week, Sonko, who hadn’t begun serving his first sentence yet, was arrested on numerous new charges. These included fomenting insurrection, undermining state security, creating serious political unrest, and criminal association.
On Sunday, Sonko announced on social media that he had begun a hunger strike in custody and called on Senegalese citizens “to resist.”
Hundreds of people heeded that call in Dakar and in the southern city of Ziguinchor, on Monday, to protest Sonko’s arrest and detention. Senegal’s interior minister announced that two people died during protests in Ziguinchor but did not provide any details.
And that’s when the government dissolved PASTEF and restricted internet access.
PASTEF has condemned its dissolution as “anti-democratic,” and that’s a fair conclusion to draw here. Senegalese authorities should immediately reinstate the party.
They should also restore internet services, recognizing people’s right to freedom of information and to express their views.
In the words of the prominent Senegalese human rights activist, Alioune Tine, the government of Senegal must respect its human rights obligations and “prioritize dialogue with the opposition over the use of indiscriminate repression that leads to violence and instability.”
Sea levels are rising, and the people of Gardi Sugdub know disaster looms.
The tiny, low-lying island off the north coast of Panama doesn’t stand a chance against the steamroller of climate change. The nearly 1,300 people crowded onto to it will have to move.
And the community wants to move. In fact, they began planning to relocate to the mainland in 2010. But no one has yet been able to leave the sinking island, because government pledges of support for the move keep falling through. The relocation date gets pushed forward, over and over.
The government’s unfulfilled promises for the new location include a partly constructed hospital – a project now abandoned – and a new school building that’s taking forever to complete. People from the community ask about the delays, but authorities fail to provide full explanations.
Of course, climate change doesn’t wait for governments, and people cannot live on promises. With the relocation from Gardi Sugdub stalled, the community is in limbo, with the sea rising relentlessly around them. Floods are already making life harder for the island’s residents, impacting health, education, and culture.
And Gardi Sugdub, home to Guna Indigenous people for over a century, is not alone. In Panama, 38 communities may need to be relocated because of overcrowding and the rising sea level. Hundreds of communities around the world find themselves in a similar position – or soon will.
It’s difficult not to see Gardi Sugdub as a metaphor for humanity’s failure in the face of climate change. People look around and see the impacts: more frequent higher temperatures and other extreme events, floods, droughts, forest fires, and more. They ask governments to do something and governments reply with delays and broken promises rather than action.
But being a metaphor or a warning for the rest of the world doesn’t help the people on Gardi Sugdub. They need authorities in Panama to follow through, so they can get off the island with dignity and rebuild their lives on safer ground.
Daily Brief, 31 July, 2023.
Three months into the renewed conflict in Darfur, there one glaring question: where the hell is the United Nations Security Council?
After three months of increasing attacks against civilians and horrific atrocities on the ground – including mass killings, sexual violence, and even the destruction of entire towns – we’ve yet to see anything concrete from the global body charged with peace and security.
The Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a notoriously abusive independent military group, and its allied militias, continue to slaughter and terrorize non-Arab communities in West Darfur. Looting and arson go hand-in-hand with killing and rape. They attack critical civilian infrastructure, like hospitals, and markets.
The assaults and ongoing violence have displaced hundreds of thousands of people throughout the region since April, but the RSF is also attacking the sites where those who had been displaced in previous attacks gathered in hope of finding safety. More than 320,000 people have fled across the border to Chad.
The UN Security Council meanwhile has been tiptoeing around the issue. Sudan and Darfur have technically been on the agenda, but nothing’s come of it apart from this empty formality that helps no one.
Part of the reason has been diplomatic pushback from the three African members of the Security Council – what’s sometimes called the “A3” and is currently comprised of Gabon, Ghana, and Mozambique. They shunned proactive Security Council involvement, preferring to let regional and bilateral efforts to solve the crisis take precedence.
This kind of diplomatic effort is often called, “African solutions for African problems,” and when it works, great. No need to involve global bodies if regional efforts can get results and save lives.
But it’s been three months, and those regional efforts have not stemmed the slaughter. Ethnic attacks continue in Darfur. Atrocities keep mounting.
This is a matter of global, humanity-wide concern, and the body charged with international peace and security – the UN Security Council – needs to act.
Tomorrow, the rotating presidency of the UN Security Council falls to the United States, which will have the entire month of August to try to make things happen. The people of Darfur need to see them shift the Council’s direction.
There are some encouraging signs. Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the US Ambassador to the UN and a member of President Biden’s cabinet, has not been shy in talking about mass atrocity crimes unfolding in Darfur. Just days ago, she said: “In Sudan, we are beginning to see reports use the dreaded word genocide to describe the situation in Darfur.”
And in a media interview last week, she said: “What is happening in Sudan should be on the agenda of the Security Council.”
But, as we’ve seen, it’s not just about keeping the issue on the agenda. It’s about taking actual steps to address the gravity of the issue. Specifically, these are some of the concrete actions we need to see:
First, the UN Security Council should expand the current Darfur-specific arms embargo to cover the whole of Sudan and commit to publicly call out countries not respecting the existing arms embargo on Darfur.
Second, the Council should impose targeted sanctions against those individuals most responsible for atrocities in Darfur.
Third, the Council should involve the UN’s expert on conflict-related sexual violence to report to the Council and pave the way for sanctions against commanders responsible.
Fourth, they should invite atrocity survivors from Darfur to come to New York and address the Council personally.
Fifth, they should consider how to step up civilian protection, starting by asking the UN Secretary General to give the Security Council a report with options on what the UN could do to protect civilians, as soon as possible.
These five steps would be a start to the world treating the deepening crisis in Darfur with the seriousness it demands.
Special note: Starting tomorrow, we will be featuring short dispatches and notes from our researchers who have been in Chad, interviewing victims of atrocities in Darfur.