Uncategorized

Editorial: India’s Abstention From Condemning Russia in the United Nations Security Council Is Disappointing

By: Rohan Bhattacharjee

Impunity Watch News Staff Writer

India’s abstention on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) draft-resolution vote on the condemnation of Russia’s blatant and unilateral aggression on Ukrainian territory, is deeply disappointing.   

India’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Amb. TS Tirumurti. Photo courtesy of the New York Times.

Close alignment with Russia has been an integral part of India’s post-independent foreign policy. Russian contribution to Indian scientific, economic, and defense development, including military support on key foreign policy events such as the Bangladesh liberation war in 1971, are unparalleled. The shift of the global order since the 90s however, and the rapidly evolving global geo-political developments signifying increasing polarization between free societies led by the U.S on one side and authoritarian states such as Russia and China on the other, amidst intensifying cultural and people-to-people ties between India and the western world, require an urgent rethinking of India’s ‘strategic neutrality’ policy.  

In 2020, as China entered Indian territory in Ladakh, killing over 20 Indian soldiers, Indian diplomats travelled to capitals around the world, frantically asking leaders to condemn China’s unilateral actions violating India’s territorial integrity and sovereignty.

The same diplomats, two years later, were instructed to abstain from condemning Russia’s aggression against Ukraine in the UN Security Council in demonstration of its ‘non-alignment’ policy. India’s isolation on the international stage was manifest as not a single member of the UN Security Council voted against the resolution except for Russia.

This balancing act, a legacy of the Non-Alignment Movement (NAM), cannot be more absurd in today’s global scenario. Besides exposing India’s hypocrisy, it showcases that India’s concerns over the principles of respecting the territorial sovereignty of states are only seasonal and arise only at a convenient moment when its own interests are at stake. It is inapplicable to tyrants and dictators like Putin. Such a transactional approach in foreign policy does not bode well for India’s future and its image as a responsible global power.  

Two distinct worlds are fast emerging in areas of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and finance – dominated by the U.S-led free world on one side and authoritarian states such as Russia and China on the other. Because of the geo-political rivalry, the two systems continue to become ever more parallel and distant. For India to continue with its transactional approach towards world affairs, continuing its purchase of Russian weapons systems on one hand, making use of American-designed defense software on the other – while the U.S-led alliance continues to place more crippling sanctions on Russia, it will become more difficult for India to enjoy the best of both worlds for which it is time that it finally make a choice.

India has enormous scope of gaining immensely from the west than it can gain from authoritarian states such as Russia or China. The sheer size of the American economy and the western world’s unparalleled appetite for progress in basic research, science, and technology, fueled by free-market capitalism and a free and open society promoting honest intellectual discourse, will benefit India much more in the long run than short-term transactional relationships. The U.S-led western alliance, with its convergence with India on democratic values and key national security priorities, are natural partners for India in the long-run.   

India also can tap into the influence of its extremely large, well-integrated, and successfully placed diaspora in the western societies to influence government policy. The Indian diaspora in the U.S alone, for instance, numbers over 4.2 million, compared to a paltry 14,000 in Russia. Members of the diaspora are situated in the highest echelons of government and industry, providing an opportunity for the Indian government to directly influence decision making processes favoring its agendas.

For these reasons, India must take a bold stance against authoritarian regimes in the world to establish itself as a responsible global power and a leader of the free world, bin its policy of strategic neutrality, and realign more concertedly with the western-led alliance of democracies. It should begin by condemning Vladimir Putin’s blatantly illegal actions in Ukraine.             

Navalny Faces Additional Charges in Russia

By: Hannah Gavin

Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Associate Articles Editor

MOSCOW, Russia — Putin’s strongest opponent, Aleksei A. Navalny faced new charges in court this Tuesday. Additional charges included embezzlement and contempt of court. These charges have the potential to extend his imprisonment by 15 years. Navalny faced these charges from a Penal Colony outside of Moscow where he is currently serving what should be the last year of his sentence.

Nalvany at his hearing on Tuesday. Photo courtesy of The Guardian.

In February of 2021, a Moscow appeals court rejected Navalny’s appeal of an original 2014 sentence for embezzlement. Navalny was originally sentenced to two years and eight months. On appeal, the judge reduced Navalny’s sentence by just 45 days. Navalny was poisoned in August of 2020 by Putin and nearly died while at a hospital in Germany. When recovered, Navalny chose to return to Russia, knowing he would be imprisoned.

The new charges come amid tense escalations in the potential military action soon to occur by Russia in the Ukraine. Russia has been deploying troops as well as missiles and other tactical equipment to the Ukrainian border. Although this has not yet escalated into violence, the World has been waiting with bated breath to see what the Kremlin chooses to do. Aleski Navalny spoke at the end of January urging western nations to take a harsher stance against Russian military action in Ukraine. In response to the United States’ meetings following Putin’s demands, Navalny stated “instead of ignoring this nonsense, the U.S. accepts Putin’s agenda and runs to organize some kind of meetings. Just like a frightened schoolboy who’s been bullied by an upperclassman.”

Navalny’s imprisonment came as no surprise to him or the international community. As for the additional charges, Navalny claims Putin planned this to coincide with his potential invasion of the Ukraine. Hope does not remain high for Navalny in his pursuit of justice against these additional charges. Navalny has claimed that the hearing was purposely held in a remote area. Additionally, his lawyers were blocked from bringing their laptops to court which contained necessary legal documents.

Although whether or not Navalny will face another decade or more in Russian prisons is unknown, the outlook for his case seems grim given Putin’s continuous attempts to suppress the opposition. Navalny will have his next hearing in this case on Monday.

For further information, please see:

NYT – Navalny Appears in Penal Camp Court to Face More Charges – 15 Feb. 2022

Time – Alexei Navalny Urges Biden to Stand Up to Putin – 19 Jan. 2022

Georgian State Failed to Properly Protect LGBT Demonstrators

By: George Rose

Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Associate Articles Editor

STRASBOURG, France — On May 17, 2013, members of the LGBT community in Georgia planned and obtained permits to hold a vigil on the steps of parliament on International Day Against Homophobia. Many former Soviet countries still have laws outlawing homosexuality, with Georgia legalizing same sex marriage in 2015. While the LGBT community was planning their vigil, members of the Orthodox Church began planning a counter demonstration, citing this as a spread of “homosexual propaganda”.

The demonstration when violence broke out.
Photo curtesy of the New York Times.

While a peaceful counterdemonstration may not have been a problem, peace was not the outcome at the demonstration. Once the members of the Orthodox Church’s counterdemonstration arrived, they quickly overrode the police barriers erected around the parliament building. The Orthodox protesters became violent, videos show priests brandishing various weapons, going as far as using stools from bars and shops, shouting “kill them”. One LGBT demonstrator remarked that she had been assaulted by members of the Orthodox Church, she recalled seeing blood on the ground and was unsure if it was hers or not. After the violence broke out, the police loaded the LGBT demonstrators onto a minibus, however, the members from the Orthodox church smashed through the windows to attack those on board. In the aftermath of the attack, eight members of the LGBT demonstration were hospitalized, as well as three police officers. Following the attack on the LGBT demonstrators, Georgia’s Prime Minister, Bidzina Ivanishvili vowed that those who promoted the violence would be punished. However, the LGBT rights groups are still waiting for proof that the government has held those who promoted violence, accountable.

In a case brought against Georgia in the European Court of Human Rights, the court ruled that Georgia had been complacent by failing to properly protect the LGBT groups. The court reasoned that the use of police officers who were unarmed, thus protecting the demonstrators with a thin line of police officers, was not adequate protection. Further, the court found that in video footage, several officers allowed the violent members of the Orthodox Church within reaching distance of the LGBT demonstrators.

The court ordered Georgia to pay €193,500 to the applicants, with €10,000 reserved to an applicant who had suffered a concussion, and €6,000 for an applicant who had been humiliated by police officers.

For further information, please see:

The European Court of Human Rights – Press Release: Unprecedented Violence against LGBT Demonstrators

The New Yorker – What Was Behind Georgia’s Anti-Gay Rally? – 23 May 2013

The New York Times – Crowd Led by Priests Attacks Gay Rights Marchers in Georgia – 17 May 2013

NPR – Anti-Gay Riot in Tblisi Tests Balance Between Church, State – 30 Jul. 2013

Civilians Killed by Security Forces After Thousands Protest Military Rule in Sudan

By: Amanda Drantch

Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Associate Articles Editor

KHARTOUM, Sudan — In 2019 Sudan’s longtime dictator, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, was ousted in hopes of establishing a democratic government. During his forceful control over Sudan, the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant accusing al-Bashir of crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide that he and other officials committed against those living in the Darfur region. Currently, al-Bashir is still at large and has yet to be properly prosecuted for his atrocities against the Sudanese.

Civilians protesting military rule on the streets of Sudan. Photo courtesy of the New York Times.

Following the overthrow of al-Bashir, then Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok, took control over the transitional democratic government. However, in October of 2021, the Sudanese military forcibly seized control over Sudan, and dissolved the democratic transitional government within hours. Shortly after seizing control, the military ousted and arrested Prime Minister Hamdok. However, after a contentious deal with the military, Prime Minister Hamdok was then reinstated about a month later.

Civilians quickly took to the streets and protested not only the coup that originally overthrew Hamdok, but also the contentious deal with the military that culminated in his return to power. Oppositional political groups and civilians violently rejected Hamdok’s agreement with the military for his reinstatement.

On January 2, 2022 Prime Minister Hamdok gave a televised speech announcing his resignation, and cited his failed mediation attempts between the military and the pro-democracy movement in Sudan. Even prior to his resignation violent clashes between civilians, and the Sudanese security forces left more than sixty dead.

The civilian led protests only increased after Hamdok’s resignation, with thousands protesting daily against the possibility of another autocratic government. On Janurary 17, 2022 demonstrators and anti-coup protestors marched in Khartoum shouting slogans like “No, no to military rule”. Sudanese security forces fired tear gas and opened fire on the protestors, leaving three dead. This increased the death toll to sixty-seven since the demonstrations began.

 Many of the pro-democracy protestors are young people who are engaging in these daily demonstrations and demanding that the military hand over their power to the civilians to lead the country to democracy. Military leaders consistently reject the protestor’s demands and insist that power will be handed over only to an elected government.

For now, elections are scheduled to take place in July 2023, but uncertainty and violence still remains in Sudan.

For further information please see:

Al-Jazeera – Tear Gas Fired at Sudan Protests as Thousands Rally Against Army – 04 Jan. 2022

New York Times – Sudan’s Prime Minister, Abdalla Hamdok, Resigns – 02 Jan. 2022

Reuters – Security Forces Fire Tear Gas as Thousands of Protestors March Again in Sudan – 17 Jan. 2022

The Philadelphia Inquirer – Sudanese Forces Open Fire on Anti-Coup Protests, Killing 3 – 17. Jan. 2022

ECHR Demands Protection for Victims of Domestic Violence in Russia

By: Jorge Estacio

Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Associate Articles Editor

RUSSIA — The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has recognized that Russian authorities continue to systemically fail to protect victims of domestic violence.

Protestors hold banners against domestic violence in Russia. Photo courtesy of euronews.com.

On September 14, 2021, the ECHR rendered a verdict in favor of Valeriya Igorevna Volodina, holding that authorities violated the European Convention on Human Rights. Specifically her right to respect for private life. After separating from her partner, “S.”, Ms. Volodina became a target for cyber violence. Her former partner created faked social media accounts using her name, planted a GPS tracking device within her bag, and sent death threats to her actual social media account. Additionally, S. used the fake social media account to display nude pictures of Ms. Volodina without her consent. The court stated that Russian law failed to provide protection for victims of domestic violence. The authorities had the legal tools to investigate the ongoing cyberviolence but failed to take measures of deterrence. They took two years to open a criminal case for the matter. Which resulted in the perpetrator escaping justice due to a time limit contingency within criminal proceedings. For security reasons Ms. Volodina changed her name to an undisclosed identity as of 2018.

The ECHR is threatening to continue handling Russian domestic violence cases in a simplified and accelerated form if the government does not adopt proper measures. The court refers to Ms. Volodina’s case as an example of the systematic problems that continue to prevent prosecution and convictions for domestic violence.

Displaying their willingness to expedite justice for Russian victims of domestic violence, the ECHR joined the judgment of four cases with similar subject matter. It resulted in Russia paying monetary compensation for each victim. The case noted authorities failed to properly assess the victims’ claims, were not properly trained to do so, and failed to take any action towards the known risk. Additionally, the international court condemned the government for having a legal framework that set a high threshold for injuries to be prosecutable and criminal proceedings that rushed through domestic violence inquiries. One of the victims lost her case in Kuzminskiy District Court because she arrived “sixteen minutes late” for the hearing. On December 14, 2021, in its decision the ECHR noted Russia violated several Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights culminating in discrimination against women.

Although insufficient to fully compensate for gross disregard of Human Rights, the ECHR efforts are certainly making it clear that the Russian government cannot continue to disregard the lack of human protection.  

For further information, please see:

The European Court of Human Rights – Press Release: Violations in authorities’ failure to respond to domestic violence cases; urgent legal changes required – Dec. 14, 2021

Jurist| Legal News & Commentary – Europe human rights court rules Russia must do more to combat domestic violence – Dec. 16, 2021

The European Court of Human Rights – Press Release: Russian authorities failed to protect domestic abuse victim from her partner’s cyberviolence – Sept. 14, 2021

Institute of Modern Russia – Sergei Davidis: “The human rights violations in Russia is fraught with instability in the West” – Jan. 12, 2022