By Sarah Lafen

Impunity Watch Desk Reporter, Europe

 

ROME, Italy — On Wednesday, Italy pledged 200 million euros ($215 million) to several African countries to aid in their efforts of better controlling their borders. The goal of the fund is to reduce the number of migrants who leave these countries and risk their lives traveling to Europe by preventing them from leaving their home countries. The fund also hopes to deter human traffickers and smugglers who control the migration routes from Africa to Europe.

The fund, known as the Africa Fund, will aid in the “fight against human trafficking and illegal migration” according to Italian Foreign Minister Angelino Alfano. The money will help train each nations’ security forces that control the borders, as well as pay for equipment to better monitor their borders. The funding will also be allocated partially towards Libya’s coastguard, as well as United Nations refugee and migrant agencies that can use the money to improve the living conditions of migrants in those countries.
At a press conference, Alfano further explained the fund’s goal of focusing efforts on the African countries migrants leave from, saying that Italy does not “build walls in the Mediterranean – we can’t and don’t want to do that.” Instead, Alfano emphasized the need to “strengthen the bond between solidarity and security.”
Some European leaders have suggested the possibility of financing camps in different locations on the southern shores of the Mediterranean to house potential refugees, however Alfano’s goal with the Africa Fund is to prevent exactly this. According to him, there have not been talks of setting up camps in Tunisia or Libya yet due to the lack of security in those nations. Italy is “trying to work so that there will be no need for camps.”

The majority of the funding will be given to Niger, Libya, and Tunisia, which are three major departure points for African migrants hoping to cross the Mediterranean and reach Italy. Other African countries can also request money to improve their border control.

Last week, the EU’s executive European Commission proposed making another 200 million euros available for other African countries to prevent migrants from leaving their home countries to journey across the Mediterranean Sea in hopes of reaching Europe.

 

For more information, please see:

Daily Nation — Italy Pledges 200 Million Euros to African Countries to Address Immigration — 1 February 2017

Euractiv — Italy Sets up Fund to Help African Countries Stop Migrants — 1 February 2017

European Online Magazine — Italy Unveils 200-Million-Euro Africa Fund to Curb Migration — 1 February 2017

 Reuters — Italy Sets up Fund to Help African Countries Stop Migrants — 1 February 2017

By Sarah Lafen

Impunity Watch Desk Reporter, Europe

 

The human rights activist group Amnesty International issued a warning that Europe’s counter-terrorism measures are eroding basic human rights, and have been for the past two years.  The report released by Amnesty, titled ‘Dangerously Disproportionate: The Ever-Expanding National Security State in Europe,’ gives a detailed look into the anti-terrorism measures employed by 14 European countries, and explains how those measures impact basic human rights.  The report also warns that a security state is becoming the “new normal” in the 14 countries which were examined.

Amnesty attributes the restrictive measures to the recent string of terrorist attacks in Europe.  John Dalhuisen, Amnesty’s Europe director, explained that “Europe’s human rights framework, which was so carefully constructed after the Second World War, is being rapidly dismantled.”  Dominique Curis, Amnesty’s director in France, urged the need to “dismantle the paradigm that says there is the state of emergency or nothing in the fight against terrorism, that security equals restriction of rights equals state of emergency.”

Kate Allen, director of Amnesty’s UK branch, compared the restrictive measures to those of Big Brother from author George Orwell’s book 1984, calling the surveillance state from the book “alive and dangerously well in Europe today.”  Allen explained the understandable need for protection from such attacks, however such measures should not be implemented at the cost of fundamental human rights.

Activist groups such as Amnesty criticize the state of emergency that was enacted after the attacks in Paris, and has since been renewed five times, as “extreme.”  Government officials, however, view this as a necessary security measure in protecting against future attacks.  Manuel Valls, French Prime Minister and presidential hopeful, told reporters that “[t]his terrorist threat will last a generation.  Today we have to live with a kind of permanent state of emergency.”

Amnesty’s report is also at odds with independent reviewer of terrorism legislation David Anderson QC’s report.  Anderson believes that the anti-terrorism legislation is an appropriate and proportionate reaction to the current threat Europe faces.  European Union representatives have voiced their disagreement with the conclusions in Amnesty’s report as well, urging that human rights remain paramount in their eyes.

 

For more information, please see:

EurActiv — Amnesty: Fight Against Terror is Dismantling Human Rights in Europe — 18 January 2017

DW — European Counter-Terrorism Legislation ‘Dangerously Disproportionate,’ Amnesty Reports — 17 January 2017

The Guardian — UK Counter-Terror Laws Most Orwellian in Europe, Says Amnesty — 17 January 2017

Independent — European Anti-Terror Powers ‘Eroding Human Rights’ — 17 January 2017

By Sarah Lafen

Impunity Watch Desk Reporter, Europe

BERLIN, Germany — This past Tuesday, Germany’s highest court unanimously rejected a proposal to ban the far-right neo-Nazi political party.  In 2013, 16 German states submitted a petition to ban the party, citing an alleged racist and anti-Semitic agenda as reasons to support the ban.  The petition also claimed that the group’s views violate Germany’s constitution.

As reason for rejecting the proposal, the court ruled that the party does not pose a serious-enough threat to Germany’s democratic system.  In its verdict, the Federal Constitutional Court explained that they rejected the motion to ban the group as groundless because of a “lack of concrete evidence to make it seem likely that [the party’s] actions will lead to success…”  Per Germany’s constitution, a political party can only be banned if they pose an actual threat to democracy.  Andreas Vosskuhle, president of the presiding court, further explained that in the court’s eyes, a party which “has aims that run contrary to the Constitution is not sufficient grounds for banning a party.”

In September, voters ejected the National Democratic Party (NPD) from the legislature in the last German state in which it held seats.  The party is currently only represented on a local level, which Vosskuhle cites as a reason as to why the party does not have the means to carry out its actions.  “In more than five decades that it has existed, the [NDP] has not been able to achieve lasting representation in a state legislature,” Vosskuhle explained.  He does not see any “indications that this will change in the future.”

The court’s verdict has sparked great outcry.  Ronald Lauder, president of the World Jewish Congress, labeled the ruling as “disappointing” and believes that the ruling “allows the NPD to pursue its destructive, anti-democratic activities and to spread more anti-Semitic and racist hatred.”  The Central Council of Jews in Germany called the verdict “a lost opportunity to take action against an inhumane party.”  Christoph Heubner, Vice President of the International Auschwitz Committee, called the move a “reality-blind and untimely decision” which is going to send a disastrous signal to the rest of Europe.

The court’s verdict marks the second failed attempt of the German government to ban the NPD, as a similar bid was rejected in 2003.

 

For more information, please see:

Fox News — German Court Decides Against Ban of Neo-Nazi Party — 17 January 2017

New York Times — German Court Rejects Effort to Ban Neo-Nazi Party — 17 January 2017

The Times of Israel — German Court Criticized for not Banning Neo-Nazi-Linked Party — 17 January 2017

USA Today — Germany’s Top Court Rejects Bid to Ban Neo-Nazi Party — 17 January 2017

 

By Sarah Lafen

Impunity Watch Desk Reporter, Europe

MOSCOW, Russia — The Duma recently passed a bill which would decriminalize some forms of domestic violence.  The bill, also known as the “slapping law,” would eliminate criminal punishments for first offenses, or attacks that occur only once a year in which a woman or child is not “seriously” injured, and does not require hospital treatment or sick leave from work.

Under the bill, the punishment for domestic violence offenders would be limited to a fine or community service, while subsequent offenses can still be considered criminal.  The bill passed its first reading at the Duma with a nearly-unanimous 368 out of 370 votes in its favor.

Supporters of the bill claim that current domestic violence penalties are “anti-family” and are a “baseless intervention into family affairs.”  The bill was proposed by conservative MP Yelena Mizulina, who is the head of the Duma Committee on Family, Women, and Children’s Affairs.  Mizulina believes that offenders should not be jailed and deemed a criminal “for a slap” or a “scratch.”  According to Mizulina, “battery carried out towards family members should be an administrative offense.”

Those in favor of the bill cite tradition of parental authority as its source.  Mizulina and her fellow supporters believe that because traditional Russian family values are built on the parents’ authority, laws should reflect those values and traditions.

Women’s rights group claim that the bill will leave domestic abuse victims even more vulnerable than they already are.  Olga Yurkova, executive director of Syostri – a recovery center for sexual assault victims – explained to reporters that the proposed “decriminilisation will worsen the situation” of women tolerating domestic violence but not bringing it to public light.

Women’s rights activist Alena Popova has started a petition which demands the Duma pass a completely new law dealing with domestic violence, which has received over 174,000 signatures.  Journalist Olga Bobrova argued that while domestic violence might not leave a physical mark on the victim’s body, such actions still transform “her life into a living hell.”  Bobrova also explained that “domestic violence is a normal way of life” in Russia.

Activists recently handed out stories of abuse victims outside of the Duma to spread word of the cause.

 

For more information, please see:

The Huffington Post — Russia Moves to Decriminalize Several Cases of Domestic Violence — 14 January 2017

CNN — Russia Prepares to Decriminalize Some Domestic Violence — 13 January 2017

BBC — Russia: Anger at Move to Soften Domestic Violence Law — 12 January 2017

Mic — Russia’s Proposal to Decriminalize Domestic Violence Earns a Sweeping Parliamentary Victory — 12 January 2017

By Sarah Lafen

Impunity Watch Desk Reporter, Europe

 

LONDON, England — The British Red Cross has issued a warning to the British National Health Service (NHS) of overcrowding in United Kingdom hospital emergency rooms, calling the situation a “humanitarian crisis.”  The warning comes after two patients passed away after long waits on trolleys in the hallways of a Worcester hospital.  One of the patients passed away after suffering cardiac arrest in a hallway after waiting 35 hours for a hospital bed.

In response to the issue, the group has dispatched volunteers across the UK to transport patients from the hospital to their homes in order to free up hospital beds.  The crisis is also affecting ambulatory services, and the Red Cross has provided support to staff in Nottingham, Leicester, Lincoln, Kettering and Northampton.  Mike Adamson, chief executive of the British Red Cross, stated that people are “sent home without clothes, some suffer falls and are not found for days, while others are not washed because there is no carer there to help them.”

Dr. Mark Holland, president of the Society for Acute Medicine, told reporters that “people dying after long spells in hospital corridors shows that the NHS is now broken.”  Holland emphasized that the efforts of staff to prop up the system are no longer enough to keep the system afloat.”  The system is being strained due to the demand for a world-class service that is only provided third-world levels of staffing and beds.

Health Secretary Jonathan Ashworth admonished the British government for not acting to prevent this situation, calling the need for Red Cross assistance “staggering.”  Ashworth noted that “[f]or the Red Cross to brand the situation a ‘humanitarian crisis’ should be a badge of shame for Government ministers.”

The Red Cross is urging the government to spend more money on social care for the sick and elderly populations.  According to the Red Cross, cuts to social care funding has resulted in the inability of some patients to be discharged because there is no medical support available for them outside of the hospitals.

In September, the membership organization for the NHS warned that the healthy system was on the verge of collapse unless immediate funding was provided.

Hospitals across the UK have issued public please for people to stay away from Accident and Emergency wards (A&E) unless they have a “genuine emergency.”

 

For more information, please see:

Newsweek — Red Cross: Britain’s Health Faces ‘Humanitarian Crisis’ — 7 January 2017

Press TV — NHS Faces ‘Humanitarian Crisis’ at Hospitals, British Red Cross Warns — 7 January 2017

The Republic — Red Cross Calls UK Hospital Crowding a “Humanitarian Crisis” — 7 January 2017

Times of Malta — Britain’s Health Service in ‘Humanitarian Crisis’ – Red Cross — 7 January 2017