Uncategorized

Argentine Plaintiffs Seek Judicial Inquiry into Franco Era Crimes

By Sovereign Hager
Impunity Watch Reporter, South America

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina-Human rights activists are supporting a lawsuit filed April 13, 2010 by two Argentine residents seeking a judicial inquiry into the deaths of their Spanish relatives during Spain’s civil war between Francisco Franco and  the republican government from 1936-39. The plaintiffs are hoping to implement the principle of universal justice in genocide and crimes against humanity in the case. Commentators are calling the move a “turning of the tables,” as victims of Argentina’s Dirty War first sought justice through European Courts, which have convicted human rights abusers in absentia.

Argentines are especially incensed by the recent proceedings against Baltasar Garzón for trying to launch a judicial inquiry into Franco’s crimes in Spain.  Garzón is known for his investigations into human rights abuses in Latin America, where he unsuccessfully sought the extradition of former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet.  A prominent human rights lawyer told Earth Times that Garzón “did the most to pursue crimes committed by dictatorships. One Argentine plaintiff called the lack of Spanish response to the Franco crimes as “a kind of silence of accomplices.”

The Argentine plaintiffs are receiving support from numerous human rights associations their quest for investigations into whether any of those responsible for the deaths of their family members are still alive. Binusz Smukler, an Argentine human rights lawyer told the Spanish daily El Pais that “the idea is to widen the probe into a general investigation into Franco’s crimes.”

Garzón had success in Argentina citing principles of international law such as the inapplicability of the statute of limitations to crimes against humanity; that such crimes cannot be amnestied; and that universal jurisdiction is appropriate where crimes are not tried in the country where they were committed. Garzón’s probe into forced disappearances in Spain was not as successful, as most potential defendants were dead. However he transferred the investigation of mass graves and missing people to regional courts.

The regional courts have not moved forward with the case and Spain’s Supreme Court ruled that the case against Garzón for “overstepping his jurisdiction” could go ahead. Carlos Seploy, the lawyer representing the Argentine plaintiffs told Reuters that the suit intends to force Spain to produce a list of ministers and military leaders from the Franco era who are still alive, in the hopes that they can be put on trial.

Seploy called the suit “very auspicious for an Argentine tribunal in the same way that we applauded the fact that a Spanish tribunal looked into the crimes committed in the Americas.”

For more information, please see:

EarthTimes-Argentinians Want to Investigate Franco’s Crimes-15 April 2010

Reuters-Victims of Spain’s Franco Dictatorship Seek Justice in Argentina-15 April 2010

IPS-Franco Era Crimes Reach Courts in Argentina-14 April 2010

Imprisoned Chinese Dissident Seriously Ill

By M.E. Dodge
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

BEIJING, China – One of China’s most well-known human-rights activists is ill with a serious liver condition speculated to be cancer.

Hu Jia, internationally acclaimed human rights activist, is in need of serious medical attention. Hu is recognized for speaking out on issues in China, including environmental concerns, patient rights for persons suffering from AIDS, and the expansion of democratic rights, was the winner of Europe’s Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought in 2008, and was a leading runner-up for the 2008 Nobel Peace Prize. 

Hu’s wife, Zeng Jinyan, announced his illness as the 36-year old dissident remains in jail on charges of subverting state power. Hu is serving a 3 1/2-year jail term for sedition that is set to end in June 2011. The charge stems from police accusations that he had planned to work with foreigners to disturb the Olympic Games. Zeng said in an interview that doctors discovered a mass on his liver during tests after he was admitted to a Beijing prison medical center on March 30.

Hu was found to have chronic cirrhosis in 2006 stemming from a hepatitis B infection, and in January 2009 he had to stop taking a drug used to treat it after developing a resistance to it. Cirrhosis can lead to liver cancer. in Zeng’s parole request, she indicated that Hu’s worsening condition and the ineffectiveness of medical treatment together meet the legal conditions for medical parole outlined in Chinese regulations.

Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) director Renee Xia said that prison authorities have refused to treat Hu’s illness. “Overwhelming evidence from the past two years demonstrates that Hu has not been receiving adequate care in prison medical facilities,” she said, this despite the law, which requires prisons to provide inmates with adequate medical care.  She said that she had asked the authorities to grant him parole but that she and Hu’s lawyer had received strong indications from prison officials that the request was unlikely to be granted. However, Zeng, herself a prominent blogger and rights activist, said that Hu’s relatives had been able to visit him the day after he was officially admitted to the Beijing prison medical center.

For more information, please see:

Asia News – Jailed dissident Hu Jia might have liver cancer 9 April 2010

The New York Times – Chinese Dissident Is Gravely Ill, Wife Says – 8 April 2010

The Guardian – Chinese dissident Hu Jia’s wife appeals for his release on health grounds – 9 April 2010

12 Journalists Killed in Mexico in 2009

 By Brenda Lopez Romero

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

MEXICO CITY, Mexico – The National Commission for Human Rights reported that as of today twelve journalists have been killed throughout the Republic of Mexico. It stated that eight persons considered disappeared should be added to the list of violence against reporters. Seven of the reporters had been victims of attempted killings.

The Commission stated that “Mexico has become one of the highest risks for working as a journalist.” The Commission also opened up an investigation to expedite the homicides of many of the victims, and has demanded that the government take a more proactive and efficient approach in their investigations in order to obtain justice.

The Commission reported that since 2000, a total of fifty-seven journalists have been victims of aggression with countless more in complaints of abuses against journalists. It reiterated that there are also countless more that go unreported. The Commission stated “every time there are more communicators that in the exercise of their profession, they are victims of threats, intimidations, persecutions, attempts, and forced disappearances.”

For more information, please see:

Milenio.com – Doce periodistas asesinados en Mexico durante 2009 – 25 December 2009

El Algora – Doce peiodistas han sido asesinados – 11 December 2009

Reporteros Sin Fronteras – Asesinados doce periodistas en Mindanao: “Un dia negro para la libertad de infromar – 23 November 2009

U.S. Senate Passes Health Insurance Reform

By Stephen Kopko

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON, D.C., United States – In its first Christmas Eve vote since 1895, the United States Senate passed a reform bill that will change the health care system in the United States. The bill will provide health care coverage to millions of Americans that are uninsured now. 

The Senate passed the health care bill along party lines. The final tally of the vote was sixty to thirty-nine. All fifty eight Democrats and two Independents voted to send the bill to the Conference Committee with the House of Representatives. The Senate version of the health care bill is similar in some aspects to the version passed earlier by the House. However, there are some notable differences between the two pieces of legislation. 

The Senate version of the health care reform bill will cost approximately $871 billion dollars. The House version of the bill costs approximately one trillion dollars. Both costs would be paid over a period of ten years. Under the Senate version of the health care reform bill about fifteen million more people would be added to the health insurance rolls.

Under both the Senate version of the bill and the House version of the bill, approximately thirty million more people would have health insurance. Both versions would prevent suppliers of health insurance from denying people coverage because of pre-existing condition. Insurers would be barred from increasing interest rates because of a person’s gender or past medical history. Both versions of the health insurance bill would make it easier for small businesses and the unemployed to purchase coverage.

Nevertheless, there are major differences between the two pieces of legislation. The most revealing difference between the two versions is that the House has a public option while the Senate does not. The public option is something that the Democrats have fought hard for since taking the majority in both the House and the Senate. Another striking difference between the two versions is how health insurance reform is going to be paid. Under the House version, those people making five hundred thousand dollars or more per year and those families making more than a million dollars a year will pay a five point four income tax surcharge. Under the Senate bill, health insurance companies would be subject a forty percent tax when they only offer the most premium plans that only the wealthy could afford. 

For more information, please see:

CNN – Senate Approves Health Care Reform Bill – 24 December 2009

MSNBC – Senate Passes Historic Health Care Legislation – 24 December 2009

NYTIMES – Senate Passes Health Care Overhaul on Party-Line Vote – 24 December 2009

General Takes Back Comment on Pregnant Women in Iraq

By Stephen Kopko

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

BAGHDAD, Iraq – Last month, United States Major General Anthony Cucolo issued a statement saying that troops under his command in Iraq would be subject to court martial if they were found to be pregnant or that they have impregnated a women. This week, Cucolo issued a statement that he would never actually subject a violator of the the regulation to a trial but wanted to echo the seriousness of the situation.

General Cucolo commands more than 22,000 troops in Iraq. The troops under his command are stationed throughout the northern provinces in Iraq. This includes cities such as Tikrit, Kirkuk, and Mosul. Of the 22,0000 troops under Cucolo’s command, 1,682 are female. 

The military has a policy of sending women home within fourteen days after finding out they are pregnant. The levels of troops within the ranks are lessened by sending these women home in the time of war. This diminishing of the troops within units places strain and stress on the unit to compensate for those who are are sent home to the United States because of the pregnancy. 

According to army regulations, each commander of a unit has the option to create supplemental rules that govern the unit troops. Each general is not allowed to lessen the rules of the General Order but can add rules to the General Order. Cucolo stated that his order of court martialing pregnant women and the men who are also involved was implemented after great consultation. He stated that he consulted with his commanders, lawyers, and two female soldiers before implementing the regulation. The two female officers supported the measure fully. 

Since coming out with the order, General Cucolo has faced a great deal of criticism. National Organization of Women’s president, Terry O’Neil stated that she is going to lobby Defense Secretary Robert Gates and President Obama to change the order. She likened the order to the discrimination perpetuated against women in the 1800’s. Also, four U.S. Senators have written letters to General Cucolo asking him to rescind the order. The letters state “We can think of no greater deterrent to women contemplating a military career than the image of a pregnant women being severely punished simply for conceiving a child.” The letter was signed by Senator Barbara Boxer, Senator Barbara Mikulski, Senator Jeanne Shaheen and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. 

For more information, please see:

ABC – Four Senators Demand General Rescind Order on Pregnant Soldiers – 22 December 2009

CNN – Pregnant Soldiers Won’t be Court-Martialed, Commander Says – 22 December 2009

MSNBC – General: No Trials of Pregnant Soldiers in Iraq – 22 December 2009