Uncategorized

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

 

European Court Rules That Migrants Intercepted at Sea Cannot Be Expelled

By Alexandra Halsey-Storch
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

STRASBOURG, France–On Thursday, February 23, 2012, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that, “it is a violation for states to collectively expel migrants intercepted on high seas.”

Migrants rescued at sea (Photo Curtesy of The United Nations)

In 2009, the subjects of the case, 11 Somali and 13 Eritrean nationals, boarded a boat and left for Italy in search of a better life. They were part of a larger group of about 200 migrants, including pregnant women and children. Just outside of Italian territorial waters, south of the Sicilian island of Lampedusa, Italian military vessels picked the migrants up and took them to Tripoli, Libya’s capital. There, they were handed over to Libyan authorities who incarcerated them for at least several months.

This procedure was arranged by then-Italian President, Silvio Berlusconi and Libya’s then-dictator, Moammar Ghadafi, in an effort to “stem the huge tide of immigration to Italy.”  Under this course of action, about 1,000 migrants were “forcibly returned to Libya by the Italian Cost Guard,” according to the United Nations.

The attorney for the African migrants alleged that this bi-lateral agreement between the two countries violated Article 3, Article 4 of the Protocol Number 4, and Article 13 of the Geneva Convention thereby violating their human right to seek political asylum. The European Court of Human Rights agreed.

The Court Opinion recognized that, through the bi-lateral agreement, Italy attempted to alleviate some of the problems associated with a great influx of migrants; however, the Court went on to articulate that a State is not absolved of its “obligation not to remove any person who would run the risk of being subjected to treatment prohibited under Article 3 in the receiving country.”

Article 3, which governs civil armed conflict, prohibits members of the armed forces from engaging in “violence to life and person, in particular murder…mutilation, cruel treatment and torture” against civilians and innocent bystanders.

Looking back to the “situation prevailing in Libya” at the time migrants were forced there in 2009, the Court determined that they could have been subjected to the aforementioned Article 3 prohibitions. Moreover, bringing the African migrants to Libya exposed the migrants to the “risk of arbitrary return to their countries of origin,” also in violation of Article 3. The Court determined that in 2009 Somalia remained a place of “widespread insecurity” and individuals in Eritrea “faced being tortured and detained in inhuman conditions merely for having left the country.”

The court also ruled that a country is not permitted, under Article 4 of Protocol Number 4, to collectively expel migrants captured at sea, iterating that, “we have long expressed alarm at the interception and collective expulsion of migrants, often risking their lives on the high seas, without opportunity for an individual examination of their cases.”

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, “cheered” the Court’s decision and called on “all states to recognize and respect the fundamental rights of all migrants, which are guaranteed by international law.” She also encouraged states to consider “human rights and protections enshrined by international law” when writing migration policies and laws.

For more information, please visit:

The United Nations – Rights of Migrants Upheld by European Court – 24 Feb. 2012

European Court of Human Rights – Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy – 23 Feb. 2012

 

Efrain Rios Montt to Face Genocide Charges After 30 Years

By Brittney Hodnik
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

GUATEMALA CITY, Guatemala – For the first time, a Latin American court has decided to charge former president, Efrain Rios Montt with genocide.  For the past14 years, Montt has enjoyed immunity as a member of Congress, according to The Indypendent.  His term expired in January and the government has finally brought genocide charges and accusations of other human rights abuses.

Montt faces genocide charges and other crimes against humanity. (Image courtesy of The New York Times)

Montt served as president-dictator of Guatemala from 1982-1983 after a military coup in that country.  A civil war ensued for over three decades.  According to the Associated Press, he is accused in 266 incidents (usually massacres) that resulted in 1,771 deaths, 1,400 human rights violations, and the displacement of 29,000 indigenous Guatemalans.

According to The Indypendent, Judge Patricia Flores stated in her ruling, “We can establish these are acts so degrading, so humiliating that there is no justification . . . You were the general commander of the military and had knowledge of the execution of these plans.”

Montt’s lawyer told local newspapers, “We are sure that there is no responsibility, since he was never on the battlefield,” as reported by The New York Times.  Montt has previously denied ordering any massacres, but military documents have shows the contrary.  Further, according to the Associated Press, Montt explained to the judge “I understand what the prosecution is saying and I won’t respond . . . The point is to do justice, not vengeance.”

A United Nations-backed truth commission set up in 1996 found that about 200,000 people were killed or disappeared during the civil war, according to The New York Times.  Montt’s 17-month rule played a significant role in these deaths.  Judge Flores went on to say during the testimony, “Unfortunately there are cases like this where people have been waiting 29 years for justice.”

His parliamentary immunity has shielded him from prosecution until now.  In December of 1999, a group of Guatemalans filed suit in the Spanish National Court against 8 high ranking Guatemalan officials, including Montt, reports The Indypendent.  These charges were filed under “universal jurisdiction” and were upheld.  Also, in 2004, the Guatemalan government admitted before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights that Rios Montt’s regime pursued a strategy of genocide, reports The Huffington Post.

Currently, Montt is on house arrest and has been ordered to pay a $64,000 bond.  Formal charges against the court are expected to come about soon.

For more information, please visit:

The Indypendent — Genocide Trial of Rios Montt — 9 Feb. 2012

The Huffington Post — Paul Seils: Guatemala Genocide Ruling a Triumph for Survivors — 1 Feb. 2012

The Associated Press — Guatemala: Ex-Dictator to Face Genocide Charges — 27 Jan. 2012

The New York Times — Efrain Rios Montt, Guatemala Ex-Dictator, to Appear in Court — 22 Jan. 2012

Police Strike Expected to Bring Severe Economic Damage to Brazil in Wake of Carnival

By Paula Buzzi
Impunity Watch Reporter, South America

RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil  — Over the last week, the murder rate in Salvador has doubled as police officers walked off the job in an organized strike over a week ago. Police all across the country are demanding better pay and benefits as well as a national minimum wage for all uniformed forces. According to the Brazilian Association of Tourism Agencies, at least 10 percent of tourists have already canceled their trips to Rio for Carnival out of fear for their safety.

Police officers go on strike, demanding higher pay. (Photo Courtesy of LA Times).

More than 1000 police officers and firefighters gathered in downtown Rio on Thursday to protest their low wages. The Brazilian government arrested 16 leaders of the strike on Friday and over 100 officers could face summary expulsion for not showing up for patrols.

According to David Fleischer, a political scientists at the University of Brasilia, the government of Rio is coming down with an “iron fist” in order to halt the chaos in Rio before Carnival. “Police in Rio had been doing an excellent job of improving safety in the city, so this is unexpected and extremely embarrassing,” he said.

Although Brazil now has the sixth-largest economy, the recent strike has called into question the country’s ability to put on two of the largest sporting events in the world — the World Cup in 2014 and the Olympic Games in 2016. Safety in most major cities in Brazil has been improving of the last couple years, but crime is still a problem and may be contributed to the low wages and corruption of police officers.

Since the strike began in the metropolitan area of Salvador last week, roughly 150 people have died in Salvador and shopkeepers and tourists officials claim the economic damage is immense. Salvador holds the second largest Carnival festival in Brazil, attracting approximately 500,000 tourists each year. The state tourism secretariat says that tourists contribute about $300 million dollars into local economy each year during Carnival.

According to Jorge Cardeiro, a salesman at the high-end boutique, Projeto Axe Design, Carnival is a crucial time for Brazil’s economy and the police strike may have caused irreversible economic damage. “This place has been so empty it feels like sales are down 100 percent, but really they’ve fallen more than 70 percent. I don’t know how we’re going to make it up,” he said. The U.S. State Department has already issued an advisory warning to Americans against traveling to Salvador.

Although violence in Salvador seems to be cooling down, Intelligence officials are concerned after intercepting a cellphone conversation that revealed a plan by police officials to cause acts violence and vandalism in a strike that would extend to Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. A violent strike in Rio could be more economically damaging than the strike in Salvador, especially during Carnival, where tourists already come concerned about their safety even with the police force working properly.

Military patrols are stepping in to help keep businesses open in Rio as preparations for Carnival street parades continue despite the tension.

 

For further information, please see:

CBS News – Crime Cutting into Brazil’s Carnivals Amid Strike – 11 February 2011

LA Times – Brazil Arrests Strike Leaders to Halt Police Work Stoppage in Rio – 11 February 2012

Reuters  – Brazil Police Strike Spreads to Rio Before Carnival – 10 February 2012

Washington Post – Rio Calm in 2nd Day of Police Strike With Low Adherence Rate – 10 February 2012

The New York Times – Police Strike by Brazilians Makes Holiday Seem a Threat – 09 February 2012