By Madeline Schiesser
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

HRODNA, Belarus – Three Belarusian human rights activists were fined for participating in an unauthorized demonstration on December 10: International Human Rights Day.  Oddly, none of them were arrested at the demonstration, but only days later, once a photo of their protest appeared online.  An Index on Censorship Report published this month found that even as the Internet becomes more accessible to a greater portion of the Belarusian population, the government continues to find new ways to silence and track dissidents.

The activists, from the western city of Hrodna, were not questioned by police until December 18 for their involvement in the demonstration.  The photo which caused Uladzimer Khilmanovich, Viktar Sazonau, and Raman Yurhel to run afoul of authorities showed the men with posters and a shirt showing Ales Byalyatski, Viasna’s chairman who was jailed last year for 4.5 years in tax evasion charges, which supporters say are politically motivated.

In a 150 minute trial on January 5, a Leninski District Court judge in Hrodna found the three guilty of staging an unauthorized demonstration and fined each 1.5 million rubels ($170).  No evidence of their guilt was presented beyond the photograph and the accusations were based only on the police’s reports and “speculation,” Viasna says, and is also calling the trial politically motivated and absurd.

“In truth, I understood, I was convicted for what I advocate, for having engaged in activities not prohibited by law,” said Sazonau. “I was convicted for what I had done: cooperation with Ales Byalyatski.”

Belarus, Europe’s last dictatorship, has tightened its laws on protest in recent years.  In October 2011, the Parliament amended the Law on Mass Activities to prohibit protest organizers from announcing a gathering before it had received government sanction and to ban Internet organized protests.

Therefore, while the Internet has allowed activists and defenders of human rights to better spread their message in repressive states (where Internet use is growing rapidly, e.g. there are half a million new Internet users every year in Belarus, and in the past two years access to broadband increased from 10% of uses to 70%), unfortunately the increased exposure has also handed these states more evidence to use in criminal prosecutions to stifle speech.

The U.K.-based Index on Censorship’s Report found that the Belarusian government uses “a repressive legal framework, including draconian laws such as criminal libel, legal prosecution, and the misapplication of the Criminal Code” to crackdown on opposition.

In addition, the government, which also owns most mainstream media, has found “new tools” in its pursuit to stamp out dissent on the Internet.  These tools include web filters on multiple government controlled WiFi networks, surveillance technology allowing authorities to intercept web traffic, the removal of secure access to particular websites (e.g. Facebook), and fake versions of popular dissident websites such as Charter97.  The report also explains that websites critical of the government are often targeted by Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks, which overwhelm a targeted site with requests for information, temporarily paralyzing the site and taking it down.

Andrei Aliaksandrau, the Index on Censorship’s Belarus program manager, said: “[Belarusian president] Alexander Lukashenko has significantly expanded his government’s control over the internet in the last two years. Few people in Belarus realize the level of state surveillance now being carried out by Lukashenko’s security services. This poses a huge threat to internet activists in Belarus.”

The report also discussed new legislation that would widen the government’s power to censor online content.  Particularly, a “catch-all” ban on “distribution of illegal information” would be put in place, as well as “mass surveillance of citizens’ activities online.”  Researchers also found that the government “is spending heavily on the development of software that will allow the tracking of nearly all the activities of every internet user in the country” and that western technology companies had likely sold the government the equipment and software to be used in this tracking.

Mike Harris, the Index on Censorship’s Head of Advocacy said: “State surveillance is yet another way that Lukashenko is compromising freedom of expression in Belarus. Index calls on the government to end online surveillance, release political prisoners and support its citizens’ rights to free expression. The European Union must also act to stop the export of surveillance technology to places like Belarus.”

For further information, please see:

Chapter’97 – 4.5 Million Fine for a Photo in the Internet – 8 January 2013

RFE/RL – Belarus Activists Fined After Posting Protest Photo Online – 8 January 2013

The Independent – Government of Belarus Using ‘New Tools’ to Silence Dissent on Internet, Says Index on Censorship Report – 4 January 2013

Index on Censorship – Belarus: Pulling the Plug – January 2013

Vyasna (Spring) – Супраць гарадзенскіх праваабаронцаў распачатая адміністратыўная справа (адноўлена) (Grodno Against Human Rights Defenders Filed an Administrative Case (updated)) – 18 December 2012

By Alexandra Sandacz
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

BELFAST, Northern Ireland – Belfast faced its fifth night of rioting following protests over the Belfast City Council’s decision to stop a century-old tradition of flying the Union Jack flag year-round. Instead, the City Council decided to limit the number of days the union flag flies over Belfast City Hall.

Almost a thousand protesters picketed Belfast City Hall when the City Council met for the first time since passing the controversial motion in December. The protestors demanded that the council reverse its ruling over the flag.

The most recent protest began peacefully, however, the violent riot started when hundreds of protesters passed the Short Strand on their return to east Belfast. Multiple Nationalists threw numerous missiles as the protestors passed.

As a result, police fired plastic bullets and water cannons in an effort to separate republican and protestant groups. Loyalist protestors set up a barricade in the middle of the road and set it on fire. In addition, the police were also notified of two attempted hijackings in the area.

During the recent riot, two males and two females were arrested and accused of rioting and public order violations. Since the various protests began, 96 people were arrested, and at least 52 officers were hurt. Furthermore, since December, multiple elected representatives received death threats.

The Chief Constable for the Police Service of Northern Island believes the violence is at the fault of the loyalist Ulster Volunteer Force members. The British flag has been the subject of a longstanding disagreement between British loyalists and Irish nationalists.

Chief Constable Matt Baggott said, “Everyone involved needs to step back. The lack of control is very worrying. The only answer is a political solution.”

Also, Baggott expressed concern over the number of children that have taken part in the riots. He stated that numerous children were “without parental control” and risked “blighting their own future”.

He states, “At a time when we are working desperately hard with the tourist board, investment agencies, foreign investors, to present the right picture of Northern Ireland as a place that’s worthy of investment, many of those young people who may benefit from that will now have convictions.”

Billy Hutchinson, leader of the Progressive Unionist Party, stated, “If this is the chief constable’s assessment, then what I am saying to people in east Belfast, people belonging to the UVF, please desist from being involved in violence.”

For further information, please see:

IrishTimes – Violence continues in Belfast as flags dispute shoes no sign of abating – 8 January 2013

The Independent – Fifth night of flag rioting hits Belfast – 8 January 2013

BBCNews – Belfast flag trouble: Plastic bullets fired at protestors – 7 January 2013

CNN – Police: Extremist group ‘orchestrating violence’ in Belfast over Union Jack – 7 January 2013

By Madeline Schiesser
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

REYKJAVIK, Iceland – On all official documents, 15-year-old Blær Bjarkadóttir is identified only as stúlka, literally girl, because her name is not approved by Iceland’s Human Name Committee.  However, Blær has become the first person to challenge in court the Human Name Committee’s adverse decision in order to obtain the right to legally use her name.

Iceland, like Germany and Denmark, has an official “Personal Names Register,” which contains 1,853 approved names for women, and 1,712 approved names for men that confirm to grammar and pronunciation rules and are believed to protect children from embarrassment.  Parents may apply to the Human Name Committee for a special exception.

Blær’s name however, which means “light breeze,” was rejected by the Committee because it takes a masculine article, although it is an approved name for a man.

Björk Eiðsdóttir, Blær’s mother, had not realized Blær was not on the approved name list when she had her daughter christened, and it was only later that the priest informed her he had made a mistake by allowing the name.

Blær’s lack of a legal name has given her years of frustration, as she must explain the story of why she is officially called Stúlka when filling out forms or dealing with the country’s bureaucratic system.

“I had no idea that the name wasn’t on the list, the famous list of names that you can choose from,” said Björk.

Björk added that she knew a woman named Blær.  Accordingly, this Blær Guðmundsdóttir, born in 1973 is the only legal Blær in Iceland, named after a character in Nobel Prize in literature winning author Halldór Laxness’s 1957 novel, Brekkukotsannáll (The Fish Can Sing).  The author was friends with Blær Guðmundsdóttir’s parents, and may have influenced the Committee’s decision to approve the name.

Björk’s petition to have her daughter’s name recognized was rejected after she named Blær.  However, now Björk and Blær and have brought suit against the Ministry of the Interior for Blær’s right to legally use her name.  Their case is currently before a District Court, and a verdict is expected within the month, possibly on January 25.  Björk and Blær are prepared to take their case all the way to Iceland’s Supreme Court.

“The law is pretty straightforward so in many cases it’s clearly going to be a yes or a no,” said Agusta Thorbergsdottir, the head of the government committee of three people which hears naming cases.

The Human Name Committee has, however, allowed other masculine words to become girl’s names, among them “auður” (wealth) and “ilmur” (scent).

Blær’s situation is not unique.  In the country of 320 thousand, about 200 people over the age of one year have no name, and are instead listed in the National Registry as merely stúlka (girl) or drengur (boy).  In some cases this is because the parents have not yet submitted information to the Registry or the children are living abroad.  However, as is the case with Blær, the Human Name Committee may not have approved the person’s name.

First names hold particular importance in Iceland, where people are referred to by their given names and surnames are usually patronymics, derived from a father’s first name.  The phone book is indexed by first name, and even the president is called Ólafur Ragnar instead of Mr. Grímsson.

In recent years, the Human Naming Committee, which also has the power to veto adult name changes, has shown greater leniency, but still adhered to certain Icelandic language rules.  The name Elvis has been allowed, while names starting with the letter “c,” such as Cara, Carolina, Cesil, and Christa have been altogether rejected because the letter “c” is not part of Iceland’s 32-letter alphabet.

For example, Icelandic artist Birgir Orn Thoroddsen applied to the Committee to have his name changed to Curver and was rejected.  He said, “I can understand a clause to protect children from being named something like ’Dog poo,’ but it is strange that an adult cannot change his name to what he truly wants.”

Blær and Björk will continue to press forward with their first of its kind case.  In an interview, Björk commented, “So many strange names have been allowed, which makes this even more frustrating because Blær is a perfectly Icelandic name.  It seems like a basic human right to be able to name your child what you want, especially if it doesn’t harm your child in any way…and my daughter loves her name.”

For further information, please see:

Iceland Review – Many Icelanders Nameless in National Registry – 5 January 2013

Reykjavik Grapevine – Nobel-Winning Author Connected To Name Dispute – 4 January 2013

Iceland Review – Girl Named ‘Girl’ Sues State to Have Name Approved – 3 January 2013

Independent – 15-Year-Old Girl with Missing Moniker Set to Sue Icelandic Government in Fight to Legally Use Her Name – 3 January 2013

National Post – State-Approved Names Only, Please: Icelandic Girl Suing Government over Right to Use Her Name – 3 January 2013

RT – What’s in a Name? Quite a Lot, if You Live in Iceland – 3 January 2013