Tribunal Finds Canadian Government Discriminated Against First Nation Children

By Samuel Miller
Desk Reporter, North America and Oceania

OTTAWA, Canada — The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruled on Tuesday the federal government has discriminated against First Nation children on reserves by failing to provide the same level of child welfare services that exist elsewhere. In its ruling, the tribunal found First Nations are adversely impacted by the services provided by the government and, in some cases, denied services as a result of the government’s involvement.

The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, Located in Ottawa. (Photo Courtesy of National Post)

The government is committing to “significantly increase” funding for First Nations child welfare programs.

In its ruling, the tribunal found that funding formula used by the federal First Nations Child and Family Services Program and related agreements with the provinces and territories have resulted in the denial of child welfare services on reserves. The tribunal also found cases in which there was a financial incentive for the government to remove children living on reserves from their parents’ care and place them in foster care, even though that’s not the standard of care off reserves.

The decision was hailed as a “win not only for First Nations but for all of Canada” by Carrier Sekani Family Services director Mary Teegee.

“If you don’t give a child a good start at life, they don’t have that good of a chance to become strong adults…and if we are not providing what they need to live up to their human potential, that’s a loss not only for Canada but for the world,” Teegee said.

The decision goes on to state the government must cease the discriminatory practice and take measures to redress and prevent it. Furthermore, it calls for the redesign of the child welfare system and its funding model, urging the use of experts to ensure First Nations are given culturally appropriate services.

The quasi-judicial body was ruling on a 2007 complaint from the Assembly of First Nations and The First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada (FNCFCSC), who had argued the federal government failed to provide First Nations children the same level of services that exist elsewhere.

Funding for on-reserve child welfare services has been pegged at 22 to 34 per cent lower than for provincially-funded off-reserve counterparts, the FNCFCSC said in a press release.

Assembly of First Nations National Chief Perry Bellegarde said the tribunal’s ruling presents an immediate opportunity to fix the system. He said he expects to see the funding gap addressed in the upcoming federal budget.

“In this great country there is no room for discrimination and racism. To all the young children that have gone through the failed system, we want to ensure them they’re not forgotten.” Bellegarde said during a news conference.

For more information, please see:

BBC News — Canada short-changed First Nation children – court ruling – 26 January 2016

CBC News — Canada discriminates against children on reserves, tribunal rules – 26 January 2016

CTV News — Ottawa to increase funding for First Nations children after human rights ruling – 26 January 2016

National Post — Federal government discriminated against First Nations children through welfare funding: human rights tribunal – 26 January 2016

Prince George Citizen — Tribunal rules in favour of First Nations on child welfare complaint – 26 January 2016

Reuters — Canada government discriminated against aboriginal children: tribunal – 26 January 2016

Toronto Sun — Federal government discriminated against First Nations children: Tribunal – 26 January 2016

Police Kill Three Protestors in Nepal

By Christine Khamis

Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

 

KATHMANDU, Nepal –

Police shot and killed three ethnic Madhesi protesters in Rangeli, Nepal last week. The killings occurred amidst continuing political discord over Nepal’s new constitution.

Madhesi protesters during a November 2015 protest over Nepal’s new constitution. (Photo courtesy of Voice of America)

Protesters disrupted a pro-constitution rally run by the Youth wing of Nepal’s governing Communist Party last Thursday, according to Toyam Raya, the chief district officer of the region. The event was organized to honor Nepal’s current prime minister, K. P. Oli.

The United Madhesi Front, a group that has organized most of the Madhesi protests, reportedly warned the Youth wing of the Communist Party not to have its rally. The United Madhesi Front also said that it would disrupt any attempt to honor Prime Minister Oli.

Protesters began to throw stones at police, at which point the police fired tear gas at them and attempted to use batons and blank shots to control the crowd. When those tactics did not work, the police then opened fire on the protesters.

The number of injuries is unclear at this time. Mr. Raya states that eight protesters and 13 police officers were wounded during the conflict, while the Madhesis say that 35 people were injured.

The Madhesis have repeatedly called for changes to the new constitution, primarily because it redraws the boundaries of Nepal’s provinces. The redrawn districts, according to the Madhesis, deny them adequate political power and representation. They have called for the districts to be redrawn so that electoral constituencies are based on population and proportional representation. Members of the Madhesis have held talks with Nepali authorities on the issue, but those talks have failed to end in agreement.

Nepal’s parliament proposed a constitutional amendment in an attempt to quell the protests, but the Madhesis rejected the amendment this week. Laxman Lal Karna, a member of the United Democratic Front, says that the amendment was incomplete and failed to address the Madhesis’ concerns.

Since the introduction of the new constitution in September 2015, over 50 people have been killed in confrontations between police and protesters. Protesters have also blocked supplies coming in from India, leading to a severe fuel shortage in Nepal.

 

For more information, please see:

The New York Times – Nepal Police Fire on Madhesi Protesters, Killing at Least 3 – 21 January 2016

Voice of America – Police Fire on Protesters in Southern Nepal; 3 Killed – 21 January 2016

Business Standard – 3 Killed in Police Firing as Madhesis Clash with CPN-UML – 21 January 2016

ABC News – Ethnic Protesters in Nepal Reject Constitutional Amendment – 24 January 2016

Press Release- Measuring the Hate: The State of Antisemitism on Social Media

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: On International Holocaust Remembrance Day (January 27th) the Online Hate Prevention Institute has released a groundbreaking report “Measuring the Hate: The State of Antisemitism on Social Media”. The report tracks over 2000 items of antisemitism reported to Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. The items were tracked over 10 months and at the end of the period, only 20 per cent has been removed.

The response by social media platforms is unacceptable given the a sharp rise in violent hate crimes against Jewish people around the world. Last year, we saw four French Jews killed in an attack on a Jewish supermarket, a community security volunteer killed outside a Synagogue in Denmark, multiple knife attacks on Jews in Israel and a range of other serious antisemitic incidents. Rampant online antisemitism is also playing a significant role in self-radicalisation and the spread of violent extremism in parts of the Arab world and within some Muslim communities.

The new report examines the spread of antisemitism across Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. It also explores the spread across four categories of antisemitism. In both cases the removal rates over time are presented. This report is a world first in empirically examining these issues the responses of the world’s three largest social media platforms.

The four categories of antisemitism explored are:  the promotion of violence against Jews; traditional antisemitism such as conspiracy theories, racial slurs, and accusations such as the blood libel; Holocaust denial; and New Antisemitism which relates to the State of Israel. Traditional antisemitism accounted for almost half the items reported.

The report also outlines where each type of antisemitism occurs, with content promoting violence against Jews far more likely to be found on Twitter, while content promoting Holocaust denial was most likely to be found on YouTube. There was also evidence of significant variations in way the social media companies responded to online antisemitism.

Within each company there was a significant variation depending on the category of antisemitism. The best response rates came from Facebook where content promoting violence against Jews showed a 75% chance of eventually being removed. The worst case was YouTube videos containing New Antisemitism, that is, antisemitism related to the State of Israel, where only 4% has been removed after more than 10 months.

Online hate speech is fuelling hate crimes around the world. Governments are starting to respond to the inadequate response by social media companies to this problem. Last year, German prosecutors launched a criminal investigation against senior Facebook executives in response to growing incitement on the platform against immigrants, and Facebook, Google and Twitter have since agreed to remove hate speech reported in Germany within 24 hours and to use the definition of German law rather than their own standards. Facebook has since announced a one million dollar project to tackle online hate in Europe.

Dr Andre Oboler, CEO of the Online Hate Prevention Institute warned that, “time is running out for social media platforms to improve their response to the crisis of dangerous content their technology is helping to spread through society. Governments around the world are demanding better regulation of hate, incitement and radicalisation material. This report shows that some platforms are doing more to meet this challenge than others, but all have a long way to go. The current situation is simply not good enough.”

The full report is available at: http://ohpi.org.au/measuring-antisemitism/

NOTES

The Online Hate Prevention Institute (OHPI) is an Australian charity dedicated to tackling the problem of online hate including antisemitism, online extremism, cyber-racism, cyber-bullying, online religious vilification, online misogyny, and other forms of online hate attacking individuals and groups in society. OHPI aims to be a world leader in combating online hate and a critical partner who works with key stakeholders to improve the prevention and mitigation of online hate and the harm it causes. Ultimately, OHPI seeks to facilitate a change in online culture so that hate in all its forms becomes as socially unacceptable online as it is in “real life”.

France May Extend State of Emergency Powers

by Shelby Vcelka

Impunity Watch Desk Reporter, Europe

PARIS, France–

France is in the process of extending its state of emergency that has been in place since the Paris attacks in November of last year. The French Prime Minister, Manuel Valls, said that the state of emergency must continue for a “necessary” period of time, despite protests from the UN experts and human rights groups. Prime Minster Valls also said that Europe could not handle the influx of refugees fleeing the “terrible” wars in Iraq and Syria, as it could destabilize the country.

French President Francois Hollande speaks regarding France’s future regarding the nation’s state of emergency. (Photo courtesy of CNN).

Valls’ remarks have ignited international debate about how long an emergency state and extra police powers could exist. The French President, Francois Hollande, has stated that the extension of the police powers is probable, with a final decision likely next week.

The state of emergency was supposed to last for a short period of time, but was extended for three months and set to expire on 26 February, 2016. The government first extended the police powers immediately after the Paris attacks on 13 November 2015. The state of emergency allows police to conduct house raids and searches without a warrant during the day or night, gives police the ability to place people under house arrest without extrajudicial process, and allows for restrictions on large gatherings or protests.

Since the state of emergency has gone into effect, there have been around 3,100 raids and searches, and almost 400 people have been placed under house arrest. Most of the raids and arrests occurred immediately after the attacks, but have substantially slowed down since then. At least 500 weapons have been seized, but over 200 of them have been seized from one person.

The Human Rights League of France has taken a case contesting the state of emergency to the highest court of France. Their reasoning states that it is no longer defensible and “seriously impacts public freedoms.” The court will hear the case next week.

Likewise, the UN has condemned the extension of the police powers, as it “lack[s] clarity and precision of several provisions of the state of emergency and surveillance laws.” Their main problems involve issues with freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and the right to privacy.

For more information, please see–

CNN–French Parliament considers expanded emergency powers— 19 November 2015

Euronews– France’s national assembly votes to extend state of emergency— 19 November 2015

BBC– Migrant crisis: EU at grave risk, warns France PM Valls— 22 January 2016

The Guardian– France considers extending national state of emergency— 22 January 2016

War Crimes Prosecution Watch Volume 10, Issue 23 – January 25, 2016

War Crimes Prosecution Watch is a bi-weekly e-newsletter that compiles official documents and articles from major news sources detailing and analyzing salient issues pertaining to the investigation and prosecution of war crimes throughout the world. To subscribe, please email warcrimeswatch@pilpg.org and type “subscribe” in the subject line.

Opinions expressed in the articles herein represent the views of their authors and are not necessarily those of the War Crimes Prosecution Watch staff, the Case Western Reserve University School of Law or Public International Law & Policy Group.

Contents

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

Central African Republic & Uganda

Darfur, Sudan

Democratic Republic of the Congo

Kenya

Libya

Cote d’Ivoire (Ivory Coast)

AFRICA

International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

Mali

Chad

Nigeria

EUROPE

Court of Bosnia & Herzegovina, War Crimes Chamber

International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Domestic Prosecutions In The Former Yugoslavia

MIDDLE EAST AND ASIA

Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia

Iraq

Syria

Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant

Bangladesh International Crimes Tribunal

War Crimes Investigations in Burma

NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA

South & Central America

TOPICS

Piracy

Gender-Based Violence

REPORTS

UN Reports

NGO Reports

WORTH READING

Worth Reading

Truth and Reconciliation Commission