33 Chilean Women Stage Hunger Strike To Demand Jobs

By Patrick Vanderpool
Impunity Watch Reporter, South America 

Chilean Women Stage Hunger Strike in Mind (photo courtesy of www.calgaryherald.com)
Chilean Women Stage Hunger Strike in Mine (photo courtesy of www.calgaryherald.com)

SANTIAGO, Chile – A group of 33 women have banded together in a Chilean mine 3,000 feet underground to protest the end of a program which, at one time, provided thousands of people with jobs. 

In February, an earthquake devastated Chile.  As a result, the Chilean government created a Military Job Corps program which put people to work clearing debris and constructing emergency housing, amongst other things.

In September, the government failed to extend the program, forcing –by some accounts– 12,000 people out of work, adding additional stress on those who had already lost their homes and livelihoods to the earthquake. 

In an interview with the Santiago Times, protest spokesperson Ivania Anabalón stated that Chileans have “tried several actions at all levels [since September] and cannot make the government understand that all we need is a source of work.”  Anabalón also stated that “[t]he governor wouldn’t even look at us.”

Reports from several news agencies indicate the women have hundreds of supporters and sympathizers protesting and rallying outside the mine, which was operating as a tourist attraction when the women occupied the coal mine.  Javier Matamala, who is currently in charge of the mine, has urged all parties involved to end the protest quickly and peacefully “to avoid damages to this historic location.”

The women sent an open letter to the Piñera Administration, referring to the recent effort to rescue 33 trapped miners in the north of the country. They ask the government to use that same kind of effort to provide assistance for the thousands of Chileans who have lost their jobs and homes due to the earthquake and the failure to reauthorize the jobs bill.

Interior Minister Rodrigo Hinzpeter urged the 33 women on hunger strike to reconsider their protest and said they were “lucky” to have had jobs for a few months.  The governor of the Concepción region, where the mine is located, told Radio Cooperativa that the women’s protest was being orchestrated by Lota municipal chief of staff Vasili Carrillo, a one-time guerrilla who battled the 1973-1990 dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet.

For more information, please see:

Epoch Times – Women Stage Hunger Strike in Chilean Mine – 18 November 2010

Latin American Herald Tribune – Chilean Women Mount Hunger Strike to Demand Jobs – 18 November 2010

Hispanically Speaking News – 33 Chilean Women Lock Themselves in 9,000 Feet Deep Mine – 16 November 2010

A Terrorist Gets What He Deserves

By MORRIS DAVIS
New York Times

WASHINGTON D.C., United States – CRITICS of President Obama’s decision to prosecute Guantánamo Bay detainees in federal courts have seized on the verdict in the Ahmed Ghailani case as proof that federal trials are a disastrous failure. After the jury on Wednesday found Mr. Ghailani guilty of only one charge in the 1998 African embassy bombings, Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate, called on the administration to “admit it was wrong and assure us just as confidently that terrorists will be tried from now on in the military commission system.”

The verdict — in which Mr. Ghailani was found guilty of conspiring to blow up United States government buildings and not guilty on 284 other counts — came as a surprise to many, but the outcome does not justify allowing political rhetoric like Senator McConnell’s to trump reality.

True, prosecutors suffered a major setback when Judge Lewis Kaplan of the Federal District Court in Manhattan refused to permit the testimony of the only witness who could connect Mr. Ghailani to the explosives used in the bombings. The judge did so because Mr. Ghailani claimed that he revealed the identity of this witness after being tortured by the C.I.A. The prosecution did not contest his claim, arguing instead that the identificationof this “giant witness for the government” was only remotely linked to Mr. Ghailani’s interrogation.

Judge Kaplan disagreed, saying that Americans cannot afford to let fear “overcome principles upon which our nation rests.” He said that, given the same circumstances, a military commission judge might have reached the same conclusion and barred the testimony.

Many have scoffed at this claim. Representative Peter King, a New York Republican, insists that Judge Kaplan “doomed” the case. Yet a look at the record shows that Judge Kaplan’s assessment of what a military commission judge might have decided was well founded.

Consider Mohammed Jawad, an Afghan teenager who was charged with attempted murder for throwing a grenade at an American vehicle in Kabul in 2002. In 2008 a military judge, Col. Stephen Henley, suppressed incriminating statements Mr. Jawad had made after he was beaten and his family threatened while he was in Afghan custody. The military commission charges were later dropped and last year the United States sent Mr. Jawad home to Afghanistan.

We don’t know for certain whether a military judge would have reached the same conclusion as Judge Kaplan, but given the Jawad precedent it seems very possible. Those who claim to know that the government would have gotten a more favorable ruling in a military commission are ignoring the record.

In any case, Mr. Ghailani now faces a sentence of 20 years to life. Even if he gets the minimum, his sentence will be greater than those of four of the five detainees so far convicted in military commissions. Only one defendant, Ali Hamza al-Bahlul, has been sentenced to life, and this was after he boycotted his tribunal and presented no defense.

Of the four detainees who participated in their military commissions, Omar Khadr, a Canadian citizen who was 15 when arrested, is serving the longest sentence after pleading guilty to murder. Yet he will serve no more than eight years behind bars, less than half of Mr. Ghailani’s minimum incarceration. Salim Hamdan, Osama bin Laden’s former driver, was sentenced to five and half years in 2008 but given credit for time served; five months later he was free. There is no reason to assume that a military commission sentence will be more severe than one from a federal court.

In addition, Mr. Ghailani may well serve his sentence at the “supermax” federal prison in Florence, Colo., where others convicted in the embassy bombings are confined. If so, he will spend more time in solitary and enjoy fewer privileges than those under the most restrictive measures at Guantánamo.

President Obama is in a no-win situation when it comes to trying detainees — any forum he chooses will set off critics on one side of the debate or the other. I hope he pauses to reflect on what he said at the National Archives in May 2009: “Some have derided our federal courts as incapable of handling the trials of terrorists. They are wrong. Our courts and our juries, our citizens, are tough enough to convict terrorists.”

The Ghailani trial delivered justice. It did so safely and securely, while upholding the values that have defined America. Now Mr. Obama should stand up to the fear-mongers who want to take us back to the wrong side of history.

Morris Davis, a former Air Force colonel, was the chief prosecutor for the military commissions at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, from 2005 to 2007. He is the director of the Crimes of War Project.

Published November 18, 2010 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/19/opinion/19davis.htm

Migrants and Refugees Face Inhuman Living Conditions and Abuse in Greek Prisons

By Ricardo Zamora

Impunity Watch Reporter Europe

STRASBOURG, France – A recent investigation in the Greek prison system revealed severe police abuses against detainees.  The Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT), the experts that lead the investigation, report that police conduct, at times, bordered on torture.

In its report, the CPT notes instances of detainees being punched, kicked, beaten with clubs and even threatened with rape.

While the below-par living conditions in Greece’s prisons are not novel, the increasing detention has many human rights and political groups worried that living conditions and abuses will worsen.

In response to such concerns, the Council of Europe is calling on Europe to help Greece process inmates.

The “Dublin II Regulation” is major reason Greece is receiving so many migrants.  The regulation is an EU law that determines which state is responsible for looking into an asylum-seeker’s application.

While it aims to consider the legitimate concerns of asylum seekers and irregular migrants, the living conditions individuals face by being sent to Greek prisons under its guise indicates indifference.

The UN High Commissioner for Refugees and human rights groups are calling for the stop of returns under the regulation because of the inadequate protection against inhuman conditions in Greece.

The European Court of Human Rights seems to share those concerns.  In a recent opinion it appealed to Austria, the Netherlands and Britain not to send any individuals back to Greece.

“Greece should not carry the burden of receiving the vast majority of all irregular migrants entering the European Union,” said Manfred Nowak, the UN Special Rapporteur on torture.  “In a number of Criminal Investigation Departments, I found more than 40 foreigners held in administrative detention in office space temporarily used as make-shift cells,” he added.

Nowak stressed that such conditions clearly violated Articles 7 and 10 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.  Articles 7 and 10 were adopted to curtail inhuman and degrading treatment.

Monsters and Critics reported that while the Greek government is planning on changing its system of expulsion centers, it has rejected the allegations of serious abuse of detainees.

For more information, please see:

Monsters and Critics – Council of Europe Group Blasts Greece Over Prison Abuses – 11.17.2010

Radio Free Europe – EU Sends Border Team To Greece Over Immigrants – 10.25.10

Global Nation – EU Urged to Help Greece Deal With Irregular Migrants – 10.24.10

Charles Taylor Defense Rests Case

by Laura Hirahara

Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa

FREETOWN, Sierra Leone-Last week, former Liberian president Charles Taylor’s defense counsel rested their case in his trial before the Special Court of Sierra Leone at The Hague.  Taylor was indicted by the Court in 2003 under allegations that he promoted an eleven year civil war in Sierra Leone that led to wide spread violence in which thousands of people were victim to rape, enslavement, torture and murder.

Photo by AFP. Former Liberian President Charles Taylor featured above.
Former Liberian President Charles Taylor featured above. Photo by AFP.


The prosecution claims Taylor funded and controlled Sierra Leone’s Revolutionary United Front (RUF) which was the primary rebel military force in the country.  It is alleged that he provided the RUF with armaments in exchange for ‘blood diamonds’; the RUF in turn used child soldiers to carry out acts of violence, most notoriously the cutting off of victims hands, arms and heads.


Taylor has been charged with eleven separate criminal counts including five counts of crimes against humanity, five counts of war crimes and one count of acting in violation of international humanitarian law.  During the trial, which started in early 2008, the defense brought twenty-one witnesses before the Court, including Taylor himself who states the charges against him are lies.

One such witness was Sam Flomo Kolleh, now 38, who testified that he was captured and forced to fight for the RUF during the conflict.  Kolleh told judges that the prosecution had offered him money in exchange for him refusing to testify and once on the stand, he told the Court that while he was a diamond courier, he never gave any diamonds to Taylor.

During the presentation of their case, the prosecution brought ninety-one witnesses, many of whom were victims of the RUF.  One notable witness was super-model Naomi Campbell who testified that three men gave her uncut diamonds after she met Taylor at a dinner during which he had promised her a large diamond as a gift.

Lead defense counsel for Taylor, Mr. Courtenay Griffiths, told the court when he rested his case, “I would also, in light of the comments I make, like to make clear that it has been accepted by us right from the outset that terrible crimes were committed in Sierra Leone. We share the concerns for the victims of these crimes, and we want to make clear that differences between the parties in the courtroom should not be exploited as evidence that either party naturally assumes a morally superior position.”

In a press release issued afterwards, Registrar of the Court, Binta Mansaray stated that the end of the defense case “is not only a major milestone in the Charles Taylor trial, but in the work of the court as a whole.”  Now that both sides have finished presenting their cases, each side will have the chance to offer closing arguments starting February 8, 2011.


For More Information Please See Links:

CNN- Charles Taylor Team Rests Case in War Crimes Trial– 12 Nov. 2010

AFP- Defense Wraps Up Testimony in Charles Taylor Trial– 9 Nov. 2010

Open Society Justice Initiative- Defense Lawyers Formally Close Their Case in the Charles Taylor Trial– 12 Nov. 2010

FIRST CIVILIAN TRIAL OF GUANTANAMO BAY DETAINEE: SUSPECTED TERRORIST ACQUITTED OF ALL BUT 1 of 285 CHARGES

By Erica Laster
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

NEW YORK, United States –The first trial of a Guantanamo Bay detainee in civilian court resulted in a verdict of not guilty on all but one of 285 charges.   Ahmed Ghailani, a Tanzanian native, was charged with conspiracy, terrorism and murder charges relating to the 1998 attacks on two United States embassies.  Despite being convicted of only one charge, Ghailani faces a prison term of 20 years to life.

Guantanamo Bay detainee is acquitted of all but one charge out of 285 involving conspiracy, murder and terrorism. Photo courtesy of CNN.
Guantanamo Bay detainee is acquitted of all but one charge out of 285 involving conspiracy, murder and terrorism. Photo courtesy of CNN.

Many who have criticized the use of civilian courts in handling the prosecution of Guantanamo Bay detainees and Al Qaeda terrorists are not surprised at the oLast week, former Liberian president Charles Taylor’s defense counsel rested their case in his trial before the Special Court of Sierra Leone at The Hague.  Taylor was indicted by the Court in 2003 under allegations that he promoted an eleven year civil war in Sierra Leone that led to wide spread violence in which thousands of people were victim to rape, enslavement, torture and murder outcome.

A former Islamic cleric, Ghailani was captured in 2004 in Pakistan.  Since then he has been held and transferred to many high security detention centers.  Ghailani argued that he was an unwitting participant in the bombings while being tried by military commission at Guantanamo Bay in 2007 in connection with the bombings.

The Former Commander of the USS Cole, Kirk Lippold, commented that “One of 285 counts is not exactly a track record for a prosecution team to be proud of….This case sends a clear and unmistakable signal about using civilian courts: It didn’t work.”

Peter King, a Republic member of the Homeland Security Committee, expressed that he was “disgusted at the total miscarriage of justice today in Manhattan’s federal civilian court.”

Others have different beliefs.  Human rights activists view the decision as a vindication of their support for the use of civilian courts rather than military courts in trying Guantanamo Bay detainees.

Human Rights Watch Director Tom Malinowski hopes “the conclusion people draw from this is that this is the way to get swift and sure justice.”  He further concluded that “the only difference is that in this courtroom, Ghailani was convicted with legitimacy and finality.”

Mason Clutter, counsel for the Rule of Law Program at the Constitution Project believes that “the system worked here.  I don’t think we judge success based on the number of convictions that were received.  I think we judge success based on fair prosecutions consistent with the Constitution and the rule of law.”

Still, despite many advocates of military trials emphasizing the high security costs, defendant grandstanding and the risk of revealing classified information, others believe civilian courts pose a great tool for the future.

Despite the support, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. revoked his November 2009 decision to prosecute Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other conspirators accused of participating in the September 11, 2001 using a federal court in New York.

Two terrorism suspects have pled guilty in the last year at Guantanamo Bay before military commissions.  Two other terrorism suspects pled guilty in federal court: Najibullah Zazi, who plotted to blow up New York subways, and Faisal Shahzad, for the attempted bombing of Times Square.

For More Information Please Visit –

Washington Post – Ahmed Ghailani, Gitmo detainee, acquited of all but 1 charge in N.Y. – 18 November 2010

New York TImes – Terror Suspect Tests Obama’s Strategy on Detainees – 18 November 2010

CNN – Landmark Terrorism Trial Ends In Acquittal On All But 1 Count – 18 November 2010