China Lifts Ban on HIV-Infected Foreigners

By Hyo-Jin Paik
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

BEIJING, China – The twenty year old ban prohibiting foreign travelers with HIV/AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases, and leprosy from entering China has been lifted.

The Chinese government lifted the ban on Tuesday.  The revision comes just days before the opening of the Shanghai World Expo.

China’s State Council said that several provisions in the Border Quarantine Law and the Law on Control of the Entry and Exit of Aliens, which were implemented in the 1980s, are being revised because the ban was imposed two decades ago with “limited knowledge about HIV/AIDS and other diseases.”  However, the Chinese authorities have now come to a conclusion that such ban had either limited or very small influence in controlling the spread of HIV/AIDS or other sexually transmitted diseases in China.

UN Secretary General Bank Ki-moon praised China and President Hu Jintao for lifting the ban saying, “Punitive policies and practices only hamper the global AIDS response.”

The United States also welcomed China’s move.  U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, “I commend China’s decision to lift its ban . . . China’s step . . . is supposed by current medical knowledge of HIV transmission and risk.”

Clinton added that the long-standing policy of prohibiting people with HIV from entering the country will also help reduce the stigma and discrimination around this global epidemic.

Those inside China also believe that Chinese government’s lifting of the ban is a step towards progress.  Medical professor at Qingdao University and an advocate for rights of people living with HIV (PLWHIV), Zhang Beichuan, said, “Previously, China viewed HIV/AIDS as an imported disease related to corrupted lifestyle.  But now the government handles it with public health perspective.”

He Tiantian, a Chinese woman in her 30s living with HIV also said, “This revision shows us a silver lining, because we have advocating for the rights of PLWHIV . . . now we know we didn’t do it in vain.”

Nevertheless, He added that it will “take time to end discrimination, but the change in the government’s stance will help change the public’s attitude . . . .”

According to the Health Ministry, the estimated number of those living with HIV in China was approximately 740,000 as of October 2009 and almost 50,000 Chinese have lost their lives to HIV/AIDS since the disease was first reported in 1985.
For more information, please see:

China Daily – China lifts entry ban on HIV/AIDS foreigners – 29 April 2010

RTT News – China Lifts Ban Imposed on HIV-Infected Foreign Travelers – 27 April 2010

Zee News – China lifts ban on entry of HIV individuals; US welcomes – 30 April 2010

Thai Protest Continues in Hospital Raid

By M.E. Dodge
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

BANGKOK, Thailand – A major hospital evacuated patients and suspended operations, except emergency surgical procedures, after Red-Shirt, anti-government, protesters surged the hospital in search of security personnel they suspected were using the hospital as a lookout of their base.

  A “red shirt” anti-government protester is detained by Thai soldiers on a street near the residence of Thailand’s Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva. Photograph courtesy of Time.

Hospital directors and administrators pleaded with the group not to enter, and after storming the building, and not finding police or military within, the group of protestors withdrew back to their nearby barricaded enclave.

Following the incident, Thailand’s Prime Minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva, whom the protesters seek to overthrow, went on nationwide television to criticize Red Shirt actions, which he states are paralyzing areas of central Bangkok. In a press release, Vejjajiva stated, ”It’s not necessary for me to condemn (the hospital break-in) since Thai society and the world community have already done that,” and went on to say that the government would ”not allow any movements that pose threats to the public.”

In mid-April Thailand experienced a resurgence of turmoil as minority and majority interests clash. The ideological divergence created a standoff between street protesters, under the United Front for Democracy, against Dictatorship and the government of Abhisit Vejjajiva. The situation has left the country in a perpetual state of unrest. So far, there have been26 reported deaths and hundreds of people injured.

Security forces, in almost every recent instance of protestor violence and activity, have  been unable or unwilling to stop the Red Shirt forays, including that of the hospital breach. In commenting on the group’s actions, Weng Tojirakarn, a Red Shirt leader and medical doctor, issued a ”deep apology” for the raid staged by up to 100 protesters. He told reporters that is was, ”inappropriate, too much, and unreasonable.”

The nation also fears a backlash from another factious group, the Yellow Shirts, who, back in 2008, were responsible for closing Bangkok’s airports for one week. People in Thailand are worried they may also engage in the hostile unrest by further inflicting street violence.

Many believe that to bring these turbulent times to an end, ultimately, Thailand will have to find a way to have majority rule with the protection of minority rights. Some posit this may mean that the Prime Minister will need to make the country’s hierarchy less prohibitive of minority concerns.

 For more information, please see:

The Guardian – Compromise is the only answer to the Thai crisis – 30 April 2010

The New York Times – Thai Protesters Storm Hospital – 30 April 2010

Associated Press – Thai hospital evacuated after protesters storm it – 30 April 2010

PNG Faces Controversial Ombudsman Bill That May Induce Corruption

By Cindy Trinh
Impunity Watch Reporter, Oceania

PORT MORESBY, Papua New Guinea – People of Papua New Guinea (PNG) have signed a petition calling on Parliament to reject the proposed Ombudsman Commission Amendment Bill. They fear that the Bill will allow senior politicians in PNG to be free of investigation. The Governor of PNG’s National Capital District has offered to organize a meeting to discuss the controversial bill.

The PNG government’s draft of the Bill is designed by politicians to allow the Ombudsman Commission funds to be cut. People in PNG fear that this bill will prevent the Ombudsman’s Office from investigating senior politicians.

Under the proposed legislation, the Ombudsman Commission would not longer be able to refer politicians to the Leadership Tribunal, or prevent MPs from using Electoral Development Funds for anything by earmarked projects in their electorates.

PNG’s Media Council president, Joe Kanekane, reported that he was given the petition opposing the Bill. Kanekane, who is also the co-chair of the Community Coalition Against Corruption, also reported that the petition was signed by more than 500 people in Aiyura Valley, including representatives from Southern Highlands, Hela, Western Highlands, Jiwaka, Chimbu, and Eastern Highlands.

The petition was an unexpected outcome of a 3-day media literacy workshop that was conducted by the Media Council from April 14-16 for the Highlands region, which was attended by 40 participants.

The workshop included a forum on the awareness of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and PNG’s performance, which then attracted more than 500 people.

Media Council’s executive director, Nimo Walter Kama, who launched the workshop, stated: “None of the forum participants had any idea of what the MDGs were. They did not even know the targets that were supposed to be achieved and were concerned that 10 years had already gone without any real achievements.”

Kama further stated: “But most forum respondents recognized that the MDG targets of ending hunger and poverty, achieving universal primary education, promoting gender equality and empowering women, reducing child deaths, improving maternal health, curbing HIV/AIDS, malaria and other preventable diseases, and ensuring environmental sustainability, would transform rural communities.”

Kama reported that during a question and answer session in the forum, a petition to Parliament was proposed to focus on key developmental issues. The petition focused on the concern that PNG, as a signatory to the MDGs, had downgraded their efforts to tackle on the developmental issues that PNG people face. There was a lot of enthusiasm to sign the petition.

In light of the strong advocacy for the petition, the Governor of PNG’s National Capital District, Powes Parkop, has offered to organize a meeting between NGOs and MP Moses Maladina to discuss the parliamentary bill.

Parkop reported that he wants to play the middle-man because he does not want to see a planned protest march against the bill to occur in Port Moresby. He fears of the potential destruction if protestors lose control.

However, Parkop’s fear of a march has already been in progress. A march is being planned by the Community Coalition Against Corruption. The NGO group is concerned over what they see as a move to weaken the Ombudsman’s powers.

Parkop responded by stating that while some of the proposed amendments should be changed, some provisions do have merit, and thus the bill should be scrutinized properly.

Students from the University of Papua New Guinea sign the petition calling on Parliament to reject the proposed amendment
Students from the University of Papua New Guinea sign the petition calling on Parliament to reject the proposed amendment

For more information, please see:
Radio New Zealand International – Governor of PNG capital offers to organize dialogue over controversial Ombudsman bill – 29 April 2010

Pacific Islands Media Association (Pima Nius) – Media Council receives petition opposing Ombudsman fund-cutting bill – 27 April 2010

Pacific.Scoop – Media Council receives petition opposing Ombudsman fund-cutting bill – 27 April 2010

Omar Khadr Boycotts Second Day of Hearings

By William Miller
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba – Canadian Citizen Omar Khadr was not present for the second day of hearings to decide if any of the evidence against him should be suppressed. Khadr who was just fifteen when he was arrested in Afghanistan is to be tried for war crimes in a military tribunal. He decided to boycott the proceedings because military officials required him to wear sensory deprivation equipment while he was being transported from the jail to the court house.

Omar Khadr at age 15 when he was captured and at age 22 (PHOTO: Miami Herald)
Omar Khadr at age 15 when he was captured and at age 22 (PHOTO: Miami Herald)

Khadr was born in Canada to Al Qaeda supporters. He was taken to Afghanistan when he was just ten. During his time in Afghanistan he stayed in Al Qaeda camps and assisted in building road side bombs.

Khadr was just fifteen years old when he was arrested by U.S. Forces in Afghanistan for allegedly throwing a grenade that killed a United States medic. Prosecution witness FBI agent Robert Fuller testified to an account of the incident he says Khadr gave him when he was sixteen.

“He said one of the Afghan locals was running toward their compound yelling, ‘The Americans are coming. At that time he remembers (they gathered) up personal effects — the video camera and some film — placed them into duffel bags and then (tried) to exit the compound, where they engaged U.S. forces.”

Fuller further testified that Khadr told him how he watched as the three men he exited the compound with were gunned down by U.S. Forces. Fuller then said Khadr told him he “then he retrieved a grenade, threw the grenade over the compound wall, and then said he passed out.” Khadr presumably passed out from injuries he incurred during the conflict.

Fuller said he never read Khadr his rights during the interview but defended this position saying it was FBI policy not to and that the conversations were not coercive.

Khadr refused to appear at his hearing on Thursday, April 29 after guards required him to wear earmuffs and goggles during transport which were designed to block out his sight and hearing. Although he had complained of an eye problem earlier in the day this was not why he refused the to wear them. He said that the goggles and earmuffs were humiliating.

Khadr’s lawyer, Barry Coburn said this was the first time he was forced to wear such equipment. Coburn said Khadr had only been required to wear them until he was secured in a windowless transport in the past but guards had forced him to wear them for the entire trip as an unnecessary form of punishment.

Military Judge Col. Patrick Parrish originally held that Khadr had knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appear and started the proceedings without him. After a short recess however he returned and said no one had ever advised Khadr of his right to appear and the consequences of not doing so. He ordered Khadr to be forcibly brought to the courthouse to be advised of his rights unless his defense attorney could persuade him to do so voluntarily.

The hearing Khadr has boycotted is being held to determine if confessions given by Khadr should be suppressed because they were elicited through torture. Khadr has been interrogated more than 100 times during his imprisonment. The defense also seeks to suppress a video tape of Khadr participating in the building of a roadside bomb.

Khadr who is now twenty-three has spent more than a third of his life in prison. If he is convicted he could be sentenced to life. Khadr’s attorneys say that they will appeal any decision to allow Khadr’s confessions to be used as evidence. The case has inflamed many activists who believe Khadr should be considered a child soldier and rehabilitated and sent back home to Canada.

For more information, please see:

Globe and Mail – Khadr Absent from Day Two of Hearings – 29 April 2010

Vancouver Sun – Khadr Boycotts Proceedings at Guantanamo Bay – 29 April 2010

Washington Post – Military Tribunal Opens Hearing on Guantanamo Detainee Omar Khadr – 29 April 2010

Australian Human Rights Framework Focuses on Education Initiatives


By Eileen Gould
Impunity Watch Reporter, Oceania

CANBERRA, Australia – The Australian Government has refused to incorporate human rights into the law, an action which has been criticized by the ACT Human Rights Commissioner.

A recommendation suggested that the administration of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd adopt a law, allowing judges to review Australia’s laws, practices, and policies for human rights compliance.

Instead, Julia Gillard, Minister for Education, and Robert McClelland, Attorney General, announced the Government’s initiative to educate Australians and ensure their access to information about human rights.

According to Mr. McClelland, “[e]nhancing [Australia’s] efforts to improve human rights education is critical as too many Australians are not informed about what human rights are or how they are currently protected.”

Among the education initiatives included in the framework is a provision for “greater support for human rights education across the country, including primary and secondary schools” and “investing $2 million for the development and delivery of community education and engagement programs to promote a greater understanding of human rights by non-governmental organizations (NGOs)”.

The Federal Government plans to invest a total of $12 million for human right education, including the establishment of the framework for human rights, and also includes the formation of a new Parliament committee on this issue. However, the Government refuses to set up a Bill of Rights as part of this framework, contrary to recommendations made by an expert panel.

This decision, according to Human Rights Commissioner Dr. Helen Watchirs, goes against Australia’s wishes.  A national consultation process revealed that approximately 29,000 submissions out of 35,000 favored a Human Rights Act.  The research revealed that Australians supported human rights education rather than a human rights charter, yet there is no doubt Australians would support a human rights act.

Based on the experiences of two provinces, Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory, both of which have implemented Human Rights Acts, advocates claim that a national Act would be beneficial, as it would promote a more accountable government, address poverty, and improve public services.

This new Human Rights Framework will be reviewed in 2014.

For more information please see:

Sydney Morning Herald – A charter of rights is divisive? The vast majority think not – 23 April 2010

ABC – Human Rights Framework: icing without the cake – 22 April 2010

ABC News – Govt ‘ignoring’ Australian’s wishes on human rights – 22 April 2010

Govmonitor – Australia Outlines Education Initiatives to Enhance Human Rights – 22 April 2010