Chile Disputes Creation of Peruvian District

By Kaitlyn Degnan
Impunity Watch Reporter, South America

SANTIAGO, Chile — Chileans are protesting in reaction to the Peruvian government’s creation of the new La Yarada-Los Palos district. The Peruvian Congress passed the decision last month and was signed into law on Saturday morning. The Chilean government has issued a statement rejecting the move.

The creation of the district would allow residents of the area to elect representation to the Peruvian Congress and to take part in national politics. President Ollanta Humala hopes the move will also push development in the area.

Peruvian President Ollanta Humala. (Photo courtesy of La Prensa SA).

A communique from the Heraldo Munoz, head of the Chilean Foreign Ministry, said that the new district “includes territory that is unquestionably Chilean.” Munoz also said that although Chile would keep open channels of diplomatic communication to resolve the matter, the new district has “significantly deteriorate[d]” the relationship between the two countries.

The area in question has been in dispute since the end of the 1879-1883 War of the Pacific. Following the war, Peru and Bolivia lost territory in the region to Chile, including Bolivia’s only outlet to the sea.

A land treaty laying out the border was signed in 1929, but both Peru and Chile have different interpretations of the treaty. As a result, both countries claim the so-called “land triangle,” which covers 37,610 square meters.

The International Court of Justice issued a ruling on the border in 2014 which awarded additional ocean territory to Peru.

The incorporation of the district comes only days after Chile complained of Peruvian military presence at the border. Chilean President Michelle Bachelet alleges that the Peruvian military travelled to an area known as Milestone 1 in vehicles and took photos. Chile interprets Milestone as the site of the border between the two countries.

Chile claims that the presence was in violation of a 1994 bilateral accord dictating procedures for the surveillance and patrol of the Peru-Chile border. Peru denies that the incident occurred. Chile has also cancelled a scheduled bilateral meeting, set for December 7.

 

For more information, please see:

BBC – Peru-Chile border defined by UN court at The Hague – 28 January 2014

Peru this Week – Chile upset over Peruvian military presence at border – 5 November 2015

Andina – Peru Ambassador: Land boundaries with Chile are perfectly established – 6 November 2015

Fox News Latino – Peru denies posting troops on border with Chile – 6 November 2015

Peru this Week – Chile border: Peru denies military presence – 6 November 2015

La Prensa – Humala enacts law to create border district despite Chile objections – 7 November 2015

Yahoo News – Peru steps up border dispute with Chile – 7 November 2015

BBC – Chile and Peru in border spat over La Yarada-Los Palos area – 8 November 2015

Costa Rica Star – Border Conflict Between Chile and Peru Intensifies – 8 November 2015

Protection of Human Rights Defenders — November 2015 New Tactics in Human Rights Newsletter

November Conversation:

Evaluating the Human Rights Defender ‘Protection Regime’

Since the United Nations General Assembly’s adoption of the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders in 1998, there has been considerable effort to recognize and protect the rights of people to defend their own and others’ human rights. Over time an international protection regime for human rights defenders has emerged, aimed at protecting and supporting defenders in the face of threats and risks. Based upon the international human rights framework, this protection regime focuses on human security, and consists of a variety of actors and mechanisms operating at national, regional, and international levels.

In a Special Issue in the International Journal of Human Rights on ‘Critical Perspectives on the Security and Protection of Human Rights Defenders’, scholars and practitioners critically appraise the construction and functioning of this protection regime, examining: (i) the definition and use of the term ‘human rights defender’; (ii) the effectiveness of protection mechanisms; and, (iii) the complex relationship between repression, activism and risk.

In this conversation, we explore these areas, asking: How do we define who is and who is not a ‘human rights defender’? What are the effects of these decisions? How effective are current protection mechanisms for defenders? How do defenders manage their security as they face risks? How should ‘protection’ work in practice?

Join New Tactics and the authors of the papers in this Special Issue from November 16-20, 2015.
Copies of these papers are available for free here: http://explore.tandfonline.com/page/pgas/ijhr-volume19-issue7 until December 31, 2015.

The Latest From New Tactics

Blog: Evaluating the Development of the Human Rights Defender Protection Regime. Read More >

nfographic: 2010-2015 | Strategic Effectiveness Method Trainings | Middle East North Africa Region.
View the Infographic>

Russia Alleged to Have Commit Warcrimes in Syria

By Brittani Howell

Impunity Watch Reporter, The Middle East

 

DAMASCUS, Syria –  According to Human Rights Watch, Russian airstrikes appear to be war crimes, as dozens of civilians have been killed. Since the beginning of Russia’s air campaign in September, more than 130 civilians, including 34 women and 36 children.

Men playing chess in front of a destroyed building in the Idlib province. (Photo courtesy of the Wall Street Journal)

The deadliest attack occurred on October 15, 2015 in the village of Ghantou when a home was struck by what was believed to be Russian airstrikes. The attack killed 46 members of the same family, including 32 children and 12 women.

Russia allegedly was targeting Abu al-Abbas, the commander of al-Sumud Brigade of the Homs Liberation Movement. The Homs Liberation Movement is tied to the Free Syrian Army. Abu al-Abbas was not killed in the attack as he had been on the front line at the time.

Local residents believed that the airstrikes were caused by the Russians because of the distinct sound of the plane and because the plane was flying much higher than was is accustomed of Syrian planes.

Human Rights Watch is calling for Russia to investigate the alleged war crime. The report issued by Human Rights Watch states, “indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks are serious violations of the laws of war the Russia has an obligation to investigate.” In response, the Russian Foreign Ministry stated that the report was “another piece of disinformation” and nothing in the report confirmed that the Russian forces had been in the area at the time.

Russian airstrikes have also struck as many as nine hospitals in the month of October. Syrian Medical Society reported that early in October two hospitals in the southern Aleppo were forced to shut down as a result of Russian Airstrikes. This resulted in the depravation of medical access to thousands of people.

Russian airstrikes, in one incident, struck a hospital in the northwest province of Idlib which killed at least 12 people and injured 28 more. Rebels and activists in the area determine which country is responsible for the airstrikes based upon the sound the planes make and the height at which they fly. Syrian Medical Society has not released an official death toll over the month nor has it provided evidence in order to establish that the airstrikes were caused by the Russians.

For more information, please see:

CNN – Rights Group: Russian Airstrikes in Syria May Have Killed Dozens of Civilians – 25 October 2015

Human Rights Watch – Russia/Syria: Possibly Unlawful Russian Air Strikes – 25 October 2015

Al-Jazeera America – Scores Killed in Russian, Pro-Assad airstrikes in Northern Syrian Cities – 24 October 2015

The Wall Street Journal – Syrian Hospitals Hit by Russian Airstrikes, Says Medical Group – 23 October 2015

Shell’s Failed Clean Up Efforts In Niger Delta

By Tyler Campbell

Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa

 

ABUJA, Nigeria – Amnesty International and the Centre for Environment, Human Rights and Development (CEHRD) released a report today calling Shell’s claims about its clean up effort in the Niger Delta “blatantly false.” Some of these un-cleaned spill cites date all the way back to 1970’s. Even though Shell Nigeria claims to have cleaned them twice, most recently in 2011, they are still polluting the surrounding area.

(Area of the polluted Niger Delta. Photo Courtesy of the Guardian)

The long-term effects that these spills continue to have are a combination of poor handling by Shell Nigeria and minimal regulation by the Nigerian Government. The Niger Delta is the largest oil producing section of Africa and Shell Nigeria is the largest producer in that area. The Nigerian government also happens to be the largest share holder of Shell Nigeria, meaning that polluted, or not, the Niger Delta is one of Nigeria’s largest revenue streams.

This conflict of interest may be one of the reasons that government regulation of oil spills has been relaxed at best. Three out of the four contaminated sites in the Amnesty report were actually cleared by government regulators as clean. Shell Nigeria claimed that it had cleaned all four of these cites, but all still showed visible signs of damage and pollution. The report found that this visible pollution was a product of ineffective clean up and not from new spills in the area.

Contractors that Shell hired to clean the areas were questioned by Amnesty investigators about their methods of cleaning spill cites. They gave candid and troubling answers. “This is just a cover up. If you just dig down a few meters you find oil. We just excavated, then shifted the soil away, then covered it all up again.” Amnesty has said that this method of “clean up” does nothing to prevent lasting harm to surrounding areas. It his is hard to know who to blame for the inadequate job done by these local contractors. They are trained and supervised by Shell Nigeria, but until the Nigerian government forces a more stringent clean up little is likely to change.

Shell was quick to place blame on others about the remaining pollution. It first vehemently disagreed with the reports findings, but declined to comment any further. It also released a statement that said that oil theft and illegal refining was the major cause of   this pollution, but again promised to keep cleaning, no matter the cause.

 

For more information, please see:

 

VOA – Shell Accused of Failing to Clean Up Nigeria Oil Spills – 3 Nov. 2015

Al Jazeera America – Amnesty: Shell Has Not Cleaned Nigeria Oil Spills – 3 Nov. 2015

All Africa – Shell – New Report Slams Oil Spill Clean-Up Claims on 20th Anniversary of Ken Saro-Wiwa Execution – 2 Nov. 2015

The Guardian – Amnesty report accuses Shell of failing to clean up Niger delta oil spills – Nov. 2 2015

 

Leaders of South Korea and Japan Hold Summit to Discuss Strengthening Ties

By Christine Khamis

Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

 

SEOUL, South Korea –

South Korean President Park Geun-hye and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe met on Monday for their first formal summit since they both took office. South Korean and Japanese leaders have not held a summit in three years.

President Park and Prime Minister Abe met briefly for a bilateral talk meant to help alleviate tensions between the countries, which have been ongoing since Japan’s 35 year long colonization of Korea from 1910 to 1945.

Prime Minister Abe of Japan and President Park of South Korea. (Photo courtesy of The New York Times)

A major point of contention between President Park and Prime Minister Abe during the summit was the issue of “comfort women”, who were Korean women forced into prostitution at Japanese military brothels throughout Japan’s colonization of Korea and its involvement in World War II. During the summit, President Park and Prime Minister Abe agreed to continue talks to resolve their differences on the issue of the comfort women and strengthen diplomatic ties between their countries.

President Park has referred to the issue of the comfort women as a major stumbling block to friendly relations between the South Korea and Japan and has stated that coming to an agreement on the issue is essential to creating better ties between the countries. She had previously rejected proposals to have summits with Japan because she believed that Japan had failed to make proper restitution for its actions during its colonial rule over South Korea.

Japan says that the issue of comfort women was settled in 1965 during a normalization agreement, under which Japan paid $800 million in grants and loans to Korea to make reparation for its abuses during its colonization, and in 1993 when the country issued a formal apology to Korea. Prime Minister Abe, however, told reporters after the summit that he had agreed with President Park that it was important for South Korea and Japan to resolve the issue of the comfort women as soon as possible and that the two countries “should not leave obstacles for future generations.”

The first meeting between the two leaders since they each took office represents a diplomatic breakthrough between South Korea and Japan. The United States has pushed in recent years for South Korea and Japan to improve their ties in light of China’s growing assertiveness and North Korea’s development of its nuclear arms program. Both South Korea and Japan are military allies of the United States, and the bulk of the United States’ military presence in the Asia-Pacific is concentrated in the two countries.

President Park and Prime Minister Abe’s meeting came a day after leaders from Japan, South Korea, and China met at a summit for the first time since 2012 to discuss progress toward increased economic and regional cooperation among themselves. In a joint statement after the summit, the three countries agreed to work together on improving trade and security ties as North Asia’s three largest economies.

 

For more information, please see:

 Al Jazeera – S Korea and Japan Leaders Meet for First Time in Years – 2 November 2015

South China Morning Post – South Korea and Japan Break Diplomatic Freeze as Park and Abe Meet for Rare Summit in Seoul – 2 November 2015

The New York Times – Leaders of South Korea and Japan Meet in Effort to Mend Ties – 1 November 2015

U.S. News & World Report – Leaders of South Korea, Japan, and China Set for Summit Meant to Repair Terrible Ties – 1 November 2015