Uncategorized

Racial Tension Rising in Trayvon Martin Shooting; Questions About “Stand Your Ground” Law

By Brittney Hodnik
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON, United States – By now, most of the country has heard of the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed, teenage black male.  The shooter, George Zimmerman is the community watch captain in the neighborhood.  Students have staged walkouts, the President has expressed his opinions, and thousands across the country are outraged about the lack of an arrest.

Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman. (Image courtesy of ABC News)

Zimmerman claims he was acting under Florida’s “stand your ground” law, in an act of self-defense.  As mentioned above, Martin was unarmed however, causing many to question whether deadly force was even necessary.  Furthermore, Zimmerman trailed Martin, following him on his walk home from a convenient store.

Under the law, a person may use deadly force anywhere they have a right to be if they have reasonable fear an assailant could seriously harm them or someone else, according to CNN.  Also, it eliminates the “duty to retreat” and allows people to “meet force with force.”

Former Florida governor, Jeb Bush signed the bill into law in 2005, according to The LA Times.  Although he was (and presumably still is) in favor of the law, he thinks it is being abused.  As reported by The LA Times, Bush said, “Stand your ground means stand your ground.  It doesn’t mean chase after somebody who’s turned their back.”

The problem with the law as written does not require a person to prevent a possible altercation, nor does it address whether one can pursue someone who has been perceived as a threat, according to The LA Times.  For example, a Florida judge ruled that a man who chased a burglar more than a block and a half and stabbed him to death, was acting within his rights under the “stand your ground” law.

The police have not arrested Zimmerman; there is no evidence to refute the claim that he acted in self-defense.  Now, however, the FBI and the Justice Department are investigating Zimmerman for possible civil rights violations, according to ABC News.

Zimmerman is white-Hispanic and Martin was black.  Zimmerman’s lawyer, Craig Sonner believes that Zimmerman’s life is in danger and has encouraged him to keep a low profile, reports CNN.  He said, “This case is spinning out of control…I hope there’s a way to rein things in so it doesn’t become an issue of a racial battle.”

Many believe that it already is a race battle and are insistent upon an arrest.

The New Black Panther Party (different from the more widely known Black Panther Party formed in the 1960s) has resorted to a reward.  The group put a $10,000 bounty for his capture.  According to CNN, the group is a “virulently racist and anti-Semitic organization.”  The City of Sanford responded to the bounty by demanding no vigilante justice.

Walkouts across the country including New York, Virginia, Georgia, California, and Trayvon’s old high school have become prevalent.  There is also a movement associated with the hoodie that Trayvon Martin was wearing when he was killed.  Miami Heat basketball players made a statement wearing the hoodies, and there are plans for a “Million Hoodie March” in Rochester, New York, reports CNN.

The Sunshine Slate reports that even though two major figures have stepped down in connection with the shooting, it does nothing to ease the rising racial tensions.  There is widespread and continued distrust of the Florida police by the black community.  The Sunshine Slate reports that historically, Sanford has already dealt with documented racial tensions.

The “stand your ground” law will be carefully looked at and possibly amended after this tragedy.  Sonner is questioning whether to argue that the law even applies to his client, or whether it was merely self-defense, which has always been an acceptable avenue to take.

For more information, please visit:

ABC News — Trayvon Martin Shooter ‘Could Not Stop Crying’ After Shooting — 25 Mar. 2012

CNN – Lawyer: Federal Hate Crime Charge Against Trayvon Shooter a “Challenge” — 25 Mar. 2012

The Los Angeles Times — “Stand Your Ground” Law Criticized After Trayvon Martin Shooting — 25 Mar. 2012

The Sunshine Slate — Trayvon Martin: State Attorney Steps Aside, Chief Steps Down — 24 Mar. 2012

2 Nurses in Uruguay Charged with Killing at least 16 Patients – Attorneys Maintain These Were Mercy Killings

by Emilee Gaebler
Impunity Watch Reporter, South America

MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay – On March 19, two male nurses in Uruguay were charged with the murders of 16 patients and held without bail after confessing their guilt in front of Judge Rolando Vomero.  The names of the two men have not been released to the press at this time.  Instead they have been simply identified as J.A.A. age 46, and M.P.G. age 39.

Uruguayan Minister of Public Health, Jorge Vengas, reacts during a press conference to news that both nurses have admitted to more killings. (Photo courtesy of San Jose Mercury News)

The two nurses do not appear to have been working together.  J.A.A. worked at the Asociación Española, a private caregiving facility, where he admits to killing 11 patients.  M.P.G. was employed at the Hospital Maciel, where he admitted to causing the deaths of another 5 patients.  A single female nurse was also arraigned with them on charges of covering up their deeds.

The charges against the two men are for the deaths of at least 16 patients at this time.  Reports have surfaced that there are more than that so investigators are currently looking in depth at patient’s records for the two hospitals.  Public news outlets in Uruguay believe that dozens more patients were killed by the men.  At a recent news conference one of the men said he had killed at least 50 patients and the other said he had lost count long ago of how many he had killed.

The hospital’s spokespeople and the health minister of the government are stressing that there is substantial rebuilding now required to instill faith and credibility back in to the health system.  The first step is to establish just how extensive this operation was.

Ines Massiotti, a lawyer for one of the nurses, stressed that both her client and the other nurse acted out of pity due to their extensive years working in the intensive care units and being exposed to death and suffering.

“My client is fully aware of his actions.  He fully confessed in front of the judge [and] prosecutor, and his defense is he did it out of mercy,” said Massiotti.

Attorney Santiago Clavijo echoed a similar statement noting that these were not “vicious” killings but rather done to stop the pain they witnessed the patient’s experiencing.  Prosecutors contest this noting that many of the patients targeted were not terminally ill.  In fact, one of the victims had release papers signed the day before she was killed.

Investigators believe that the two were killing patients in a number of ways, including; overdosing patients with the drug morphine and injecting air bubbles into their blood streams.  Health officials expressed profound concern for the situation and stressed that they would be fully cooperative during the investigation.

 

For more information, please see;

Latin American Herald Tribune – Nurses Accused of Killing 16 in Uruguay Hospitals – 21 March 2012

CNN – 2 Nurses in Uruguay Charged in Slayings of Patients – 20 March 2012

BBC – Nurses Confess to Killing 16 Patients at Uruguay Hospital – 19 March 2012

CBS – Uruguay Nurses Charged with Murdering 16 with Morphine – 19 March 2012

Daily Mail Reporter – Two Nurses Arrested in Uruguay After Poisoning 200 Hospital Patients in Mercy Killings – 19 March 2012

Spanish Judge Off The Hook For Franco Probe

By Terance Walsh
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

MADRID, Spain — Baltasar Garzon, a well-known judge in Spain, was acquitted Monday of abuse of power charges.  His charge stemmed from his alleged improper investigation of human rights violations under the dictatorship of Francisco Franco.

Baltazar Garzon, Spanish judge accused of abuse of power (Photo courtesy of Amnesty International).

Spain’s Supreme Court acquitted Garzon on a 6-1 vote.

The prosecution was brought by right wing private groups, as allowed by Spanish law, led by the group Manos Limpias (Clean Hands).  They accused Garzon of ignoring Spanish amnesty laws when he investigated human rights abuses that occurred between 1936 and 1975.

Franco led a military uprising in 1936 that set off three years of civil war in Spain that ended with Franco’s forces defeating republican and left-wing fighters.  He remained in power until he died in 1975.

Garzon has said that crimes against humanity deserve no amnesty because they are “permanent crimes.”

In 2008 Garzon began an investigation of the disappearance of tens of thousands of people in the build up to Franco’s rise to power.  The investigation included the excavation of mass graves.  Ultimately an appellate court ended the investigation and the next year Manos Limpias brought the prosecution.

Relatives of the victims of Franco’s human rights offenses have been some of the strongest supporters of Garzon.  They have seen the judge as their hope for justice

The groups bringing the prosecution supported their allegations by saying Garzon’s investigation “reopened wounds which we Spaniards – whatever our political beliefs – had totally recovered from.”

Human rights groups applauded Garzon’s acquittal.  “The Supreme Court has spared itself further embarrassment by rejecting these ill-advised charges,” Reed Brody of Human Rights Watch said. “Investigating torture and ‘disappearances’ cannot be considered a crime.”

In addition to the Franco investigation charges, Garzon is under fire for ordering wire taps of conversations between remand prisoners and their lawyers regarding a corruption case.  The lawyers filed suit alleging a constitutional violation of their constitutional right to confidential communications with their clients.

Garzon contends that the wiretaps were supported by state prosecutors, who did not file charges against him.  The wiretaps were ordered on suspicions that the subjects of the taps were involved in a money laundering scheme.  He was suspended from the bench for 11 years.

Supporters of Garzon argue that these convictions are meant to be retaliation for Garzon’s activism.  “It was clear they were out to get him, and now they have,” said Emilio Silva, head of the Historical Memory Association that campaigns to shed light on Francoist killings. “It is very sad. Plenty of other judges have committed the same irregularities and have not been treated this way.”

Garzon argued in a statement through his lawyers “that the Supreme Court sentence seriously violated several of the fundamental rights which he, as all citizens have under the constitution, as well as his judicial independence.”

Accordingly Garzon filed his papers with the Supreme Court to appeal the decision.  This request, however, is expected to fail and Garzon plans to appeal to the Supreme Constitutional Court.

Although human rights groups applauded Garzon’s acquittal on the Franco investigation charges, they continue to push Spain for accountability for its past misdeeds.

“It is a scandal that Spain has not yet tackled its dark past,” said Marek Marczynski, Amnesty International’s Head of International Justice.  “News about Judge Garzón is a step forward. However, what we want to see next is a full investigation into the catalogue of abuses that took place during the Civil War and Franco’s regime. There must be no impunity in Spain for these most horrible crimes.”

Amnesty International calls on Spain to continue its remediation of its past human rights abuses and set aside its law granting amnesty for crimes committed under Franco.

For more information please see:

Amnesty International — Spain: Ruling On Baltazar Garzon Is Good News, But Crimes Remain Untackled — 27 February 2012

BBC — Spanish Judge Baltazar Garzon Cleared On Franco Probe — 27 February 2012

CNN — Former Spanish Judge Acquitted Of Abusing Power — 27 February 2012

Expatica — Spanish Judge Asks Supreme Court To Annul Verdict — 22 February 2012

The Guardian — Baltazar Garzon, Judge Who Pursued Dictators, Brought Down For Wiretapping — 9 February 2012

NY Times — Truth On Trial In Spain — 4 February 2012

Falkland Island Tensions Increase with Denial of Cruise Ship Entry and Enactment of Bill Banning British Ships

by Emilee Gaebler
Impunity Watch Reporter, South America

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina – Tensions between the Argentinian and British governments regarding the Falkland Islands, called the Malvinas Islands by Argentina, are peaking.  This past weekend a couple of cruise ships were denied entry to the Port of Ushuaia in southern Argentina.

The sign in the Port of Ushuaia banning British flagged ships. (Photo Courtesy of MercoPress)

On Friday, February 24, the Adonia ship of P&O Cruises was denied entry and then on Saturday the Star Princess of Princess Cruise Lines was also turned away.  Both ships had stopped in the Falklands the day before.

The port of Ushuaia is right near the Tierra del Fuego national park.  The 3,000 passengers on the two ships were unable to go on shore excursions and tours as planned.  Instead they were forced to remain on the ship at sea.

This comes shortly after Argentina enacted provincial act No. 852, called the “Gaucho Rivero” act.  This bans the entry to any Argentinian port of a ship flying any form of a British flag.  The ban also covers any commercial vessels that are partly owned by British companies.

As reported by MercoPress, the act is named in honor of an Argentinian soldier, a “gaucho” who flew the flag of Argentina on the islands until the British landed and took control of the islands in 1833.  This individual has become a legend and a Malvinas history hero by the administration of President Cristina Fernandez.

Earlier this year the Star Princess  cruise ship was denied entry to the Falklands due to a majority of the passengers contracting a stomach virus.  At the time Argentina claimed the real reason was politically motivated because Argentinian citizens were on board.

Many have expressed concerns over the choice to ban these ships as the bill specifically targets commercial boats involved in the exploitation of natural resources in the area.  Marcelo Lietti, the President of the Ushuaia Tourism Chamber, expressed his the city’s position.

He noted that the tourism industry is not related to the Malvinas dispute and most business in the Ushuaia region centers on the cruise industry so this decision has a negative impact that is deeply felt by the community.

The levels of hostility between the Argentinian and the British governments are at an all time high as the 30th anniversary of the Falklands War approaches.  Britain has refused any negotiations with Argentina regarding giving the islands sovereignty to choose their national identity.

Reports of a British parliamentary committee that oversees defense matters visiting the Falklands within the next month have also contributed to the tensions.  Last week Argentina lodged a complaint with the United Nations regarding the militarization taking place in the Falklands with the dispatch of the HMS Dauntless destroyer ship.

The deployment of Prince William, as a helicopter pilot, to the area is also viewed as a threatening move by the Fernandez administration.  Britain has defended both the deployment of the ship and the placement of Prince William as planned rotations.

 

For more information, please see;

BBC News – Falklands Tension: Argentina “Turns Away” Cruise Ships – 28 February 2012

MercoPress – Port of Ushuaia Refuses Entry of Cruise Vessels that Visited the Falkland Islands – 27 February 2012

Penguin News – Argentine Port Bans Entry to Cruise Ships en route from Falklands – 27 February 2012

The Guardian – Falklands Tension Set to Rise with Visit of Defence Committee MP’s – 14 February 2012

Amid Chaos and Violence, Syria Holds Vote For New Constitution For Its Citizens

By Adom M. Cooper
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

DAMASCUS, Syria–As the crackdown against civilians continued across the nation, the Syrian government called its citizens to the polls on Sunday 26 February 2012 to vote on a new constitution. Although the new text of the constitution ends the legal basis for the five-decade stranglehold o power for the ruling Baath party, it still leaves the executive powers in the hands of President Bashar al-Assad. This is a tremendous problem for the situation and had already been criticized by the opposition.

Voters in Damascus submit their votes on Sunday 26 February. (Photo Courtesy of Reuters)

The opposition stated that the changes offered were entirely cosmetic and that only the removal of al-Assad from power will bring the desired changes. After 11 months of crackdowns, human rights groups have reported that more than 7,600 individuals have lost their lives, with more deaths occurring every day.

According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, on Saturday 25 February 2012, 98 individuals were killed and 72 of them were civilians.

On Sunday 26 February 2012, the polls opened at 7:00AM local time (5:00 GMT). Reports from the around Syria stated that more than 14 million people over the age of 18 eligible to vote appeared at the 13,835 polling stations.

Louay Safi, a leading member of the Syrian National Council, an opposition group, said that the new constitution would be fruitless in bringing about the desired change because it is being promulgated and offered by the current government. The same government that continues to violate its own laws in its ongoing efforts to crush the uprising.

“The major problem is that the government is violating the current constitution. What we fear is if the regime stays intact, the new constitution will be meaningless. So the real step to have a new constitution is to have a new or transitional government.”

In the capital of Damascus, opposition activists claimed that they would try to hold protests near polling stations and even burn copies of the new constitution. One activist named Omar shared these words with Al-Jazeera on Sunday February 26 2012.

“No one is going to vote. This was a constitution made to Bashar’s tastes and meanwhile we are getting shelled and killed. More than 40 people were killed today and you want us to vote in a referendum? No one is going to vote.”

Another activist, Waleed Fares, shared these words from the Khalidiyah district of Homs.

“What should we be voting for, whether to die by bombardment or bullets? This is the only choice we have.”

On the reverse angle, Adel Safar, the country’s prime minister, stated on Sunday 26 February 2012 that the opposition’s call for a boycott displayed a lack of interest in a substantive dialogue for change.

“If there was a genuine desire for reform, there would have been movement from all groups, especially the opposition to start dialogue immediately with the government to achieve the reforms and implement them on the ground.”

While the voting was underway, the violence did not take a break to visit the polls. According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, government forces shelled residential areas in Bab Amr for the 26th day in a row, claiming at least nine lives. The group stated that rebel soldiers had also killed at least four government troops in the city.

Al-Baath, the ruling party’s newspaper, stated in an editorial this week that the new constitution “does not represent a loss for the party and just keeps up with political and social evolution.” The new text does eliminate all references to Syrias as a social state. But Article 60 maintains the mandate that half of the deputies must be “workers and farmers.”

Al-Assad would remain in power under the new constitution, keeping several important responsibilities such as naming the prime minister and the ability to veto legislation. Another provision in the new constitution that has drawn negative attention in Article 3, which states that the president should be a Muslim and that “Islamic jurisprudence shall be a major source of legislation.”

Sunni Muslims makeup 75 percent of Syria’s population of 22 million, while the Alawite community accounts for another 12 percent. President al-Assad comes from the Alawite community and this further exacerbates his refusal to relinquish his power.

Article 88 of the new constitution also states that the president can be in office for two seven-year terms. But subsequent Article 155 states that these conditions would only take effect after the next election for the head of state, which is set for 2014. This would allow al-Assad to theoretically stay in power for another 16 years. This is unacceptable for the Syrian people and quite frankly, would be a nightmare for all of them.

Syrian specialist Thomas Pierret said stated that regardless of the proposed and debated changes, the type of government and political system in Syria does not matter in a country “dominated by the intelligence service.”

“Nothing indicates that this would change under the current regime.”

 

For more information, please see:

Ahram – Syria Puts New Constitution To Vote In Thick of Unrest – 26 February 2012

Al-Jazeera – Syria Holds Vote On New Constitution – 26 February 2012

BBC – Syria Votes On New Constitution Referendum Amid Unrest – 26 February 2012

CNN – Syria Says Referendum Results Coming Monday; Vote Punctuated By New Violence – 26 February 2012

The Guardian – Syria Votes On New Constitution As Shelling Of Homs Continues – 26 February 2012

NYT – Syria Offers A New Charter As Battles In Cities Continue – 26 February 2012

Reuters – Syria Referedum Goes Ahead Amid Military Onslaught – 26 February 2012