News

Landmark Case for Transgender Man Gives LGBT Activists Hope

February 3, 2017

By: Nicole Hoerold
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

BEIJING, China- The LGBT communities of China and Taiwan have been gaining increased attention over the past few years. Rights activists are applauding some small, yet encouraging victories, in an ongoing effort to legalize gay marriage and gain equal rights.

Activists march at a pride event in China. Photo courtesy of: CNN News

In December 2016, a Taiwanese legislative committee approved draft changes on a proposal to legalize same-sex marriage. The proposed amendments to Taiwan’s civil code have been sent to party caucuses for negotiation and further review. Once this process is complete, a final version of the legislation will be voted on. Though the measure has yet to be passed, it is a major step towards gaining equal rights and protections for Taiwan’s LGBT community.

China has received similar attention for a December 2016 landmark ruling in a discriminatory dismissal case. A Chinese court held in favor of Mr. Chen, a transgender man who claims he was illegally dismissed from his position at a Chinese medical clinic after only one week on the job. Though the court ruled in favor of Mr. Chen, finding his dismissal illegal and awarding him a month’s wages, it was not willing to declare that Mr. Chen’s dismissal was due to discrimination against transgender individuals.

Nonetheless, advocates are thrilled that a Chinese court agreed to hear the case. Gay marriage is illegal in China, and homosexuality was long considered a mental illness. It was only in 2014 that Chinese courts ruled against therapy to “correct” homosexuality.

Though LGBT rights are still absent in both Taiwan and China, many are hopeful that change is on the way. Mr. Chen’s case has given activists hope that a legal remedy may be possible in the future.

For more information, please see:

New York Times – On Taking Gay Rights From Taipei to Beijing: Don’t Call It a ‘Movement’ – 18 January, 2017

BBC – China: Limited victory for man in transgender dismissal case – 3 January, 2017

BNA – China: Despite Landmark Ruling, LGBT Rights Lacking in China’s Workplaces – 19 January, 2017

The Guardian – Chinese transgender man wins landmark wrongful dismissal case – 3 January, 2017

Zambian Police Banned from Marrying Foreigners

January 31, 2017

By Samantha Netzband

Impunity Watch, Africa Desk Reporter

LUSAKA, Zambia– Zambian police have been forbidden from marrying foreigners. The Head of Police in Zambia issued a memo on Monday January 23 advising Zambian police to not marry foreigners effective immediately. This ban is put in place in order to protect the Zambian people.

Zambia police in the capital of Lusaka. (Photo Courtesy of BBC Africa)

For police officers who already have foreign spouses have to register their spouses by Monday January 29th. If they do not register their spouses they will face disciplinary action. Many are upset about this law which some are claiming is unconstitutional. However, police spokesperson Esther Katongo defended the order by saying, ““Issues of security are delicate. If not careful, spouses can be spies and can sell the security of the country’’.

She also stated that this law has always been on the books, but given the new security situation in Zambia, it is now being enforced. Action was being taken in order to ensure that police were complying with this previous requirement. Some are criticizing the move saying that instead of worrying about spouses the police should better train their officers to be more professional.

For more information, please see:

Africa Review – Outrage after Zambia police banned from marrying foreigners – 23 January 2017

BBC Africa – Zambia police banned from marrying foreigners – 23 January 2017

News Agency of Nigeria – Zambia police ban foreign wives – 23 January 2017

Vanguard – Zambia bans police officers from marrying foreigners – 23 January 2017

Human Rights Watch Warns of Chinese Government Actions

January 30, 2017

By Nicole Hoerold
Impunity Watch Desk Reporter, Asia

BEIJING, China – Human Rights Watch (HRW) released their annual rights report on January 12, 2017. The report outlines HRW’s concerns for human rights violations in Southeast Asia, voicing particular concern over Thailand, the Philippines, and Cambodia. The report discusses a continuation of limits on free speech, with increasing signs of state suppression and censorship in various countries. The report’s summary on China speaks of similar concerns.

The wife of a human rights lawyer stood outside the Tianjin court in protest of her husband's trial (2016). Photo courtesy of: AP Photo — The wife of a human rights lawyer stands outside the Tianjin court in protest of her husband’s trial (2016). Photo courtesy of: AP Photo

Human rights organizations have paid particular attention to China in light of the state’s nationwide sweep of rights lawyers and advocates in the summer of 2015. Xie Yang, a Chinese lawyer who was interrogated by the Chinese government, recently spoke out about his abuse while detained. Mr. Yang is one of about 250 individuals detained by the government on charges of subverting the one-party state. Though most individuals were released, the government’s use of torture against them shows that international and domestic mechanisms for preventing torture have not worked.

In early 2017, the Chinese government also began to regulate the operation of Non-Governmental Organizations within its borders. In order to continue their work within China, foreign NGO’s must find government sponsors, register with the local police, and meet other requirements like submitting annual finance reports. Chinese president Xi Jinping claims such foreign entities are undermining China’s domestic interests.

Critics of the new legislation are concerned that the “Law on Management of Domestic Activities of Overseas Non-governmental Organizations” will hinder the efforts of nonprofits in fields such as human rights. Whether those concerns actually materialize remains to be seen.

For more information, please see:

Human Rights Watch – Deteriorating Outlook for Human Rights in SE Asia – 13 January, 2017

Human Rights Watch – World Report 2017 – 12 January, 2017

New York Times – Punches, Kicks, and the ‘Dangling Chair’: Detainee Tells of Torture in China – 20 January 2017

Quartz – NGOs are under threat in China’s latest crackdown against “foreign forces” – 4 January, 2017

Hong Kong Free Press – Torture accusations as EU ambassador raises case of Chinese lawyer Xie Yang – 25 January, 2017

Trump Expected to Sign Refugee Ban Executive Order

January 27, 2017

By Sarah Lafen

Impunity Watch Desk Reporter, Europe

WASHINGTON D.C., United States — Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order (EO) which would restrict immigration from several countries in the Middle East and Africa, five of which are countries that the U.S. bombed under the Obama administration. The EO would also deny visas from applicants from countries the Trump administration deems high-risk.

A newly-built section of the border wall between the US and Mexico (Photo Courtesy of RT)

According to sources within the administration, the EO is suspected to block Syrian refugees from entering the U.S. indefinitely, suspend all refugee admissions for 120 days while the Trump administration decides which countries are high and low risk, temporarily suspend visa issuances to applicants from countries with security screening that the Trump administration deems inadequate, and cap the total refugee admissions for 2017 at 50,000 (as opposed to the 11,000 recommended by the Obama administration).

Though the list of countries included in the EO is not yet finalized, however some of the countries that are under consideration include Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.

Trump’s proposed EO has been subject to criticism due to its possible implications on U.S. foreign policy. Stephen Legomsky, previous chief counsel of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services under the Obama administration, explained that while the president has the legal authority to limit refugee admissions into the U.S., doing so would be a “terrible idea” from a policy standpoint because of the immediate humanitarian need for refugees.

This EO threatens a deal made with Australia in late 2016, in which the U.S. agreed to resettle over 1,000 refugees who are currently residing in Papua New Guinea and South Pacific nation Nauru on Australia’s behalf. Though Australia will not comment on the nationalities of these refugees, sources working for the refugees told reporters that about one third of the asylum-seekers originate from countries that would be covered by the EO if it is put into place.

This move comes as part of a concerted effort on the part of the Trump administration to reduce the number if illegal immigrants who live in the U.S. As part of this plan, Trump is also expected to direct the construction of a border wall along the U.S. Mexico border in the near future.

For more information, please see:

International Business Times — Donald Trump Muslim Immigration Ban: US Bombs Most Countries on Restricted Refugee List — 25 January 2017

Reuters — Trump Expected to Order Temporary Ban on Refugees — 25 January 2017

RT — Trump to Order Mexican Border Wall, Ban Refugees from 7 Muslim Countries — 25 January 2017

The Huffington Post — Trump Prepares to Halt Syrian Refugee Admissions, Limit Muslim Entry — 24 January 2017

Amnesty International Warns of Oppressive Anti-Terrorism Laws

January 26, 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.

London's Metropolitan anti-terrorism officers (Photo Courtesy of The Guardian) — London’s Metropolitan anti-terrorism officers (Photo Courtesy of The Guardian)

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