Dutch “Abortion Ship” Sparks Protests in Morocco

By Alexandra Sandacz
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands – “Women on Waves” (WoW), a Dutch organization that provides abortions and contraception information outside territorial waters, was met with harsh protests in Morocco on Thursday.

Moroccan citizens watch as “abortion boat” arrives. (Photo Courtesy of The Raw Story).

“Women on Waves” is a nonprofit organization, founded in 1999 by Dutch physician Rebecca Gomperts, that provides abortions to women in countries where abortions are illegal.

WoW’s travel to Morocco is the first trip into a Muslim country. The pro-choice organization also planned trips to Ireland, Poland, Portugal and Spain.

Although a local youth group, the Alternative Movement for Individual Liberties, invited the Dutch organization to raise support for the legalization of abortion in the country, Moroccan protesters targeted the Dutch abortion-rights activist at a port where the WoW ship was expected to dock.

Protesters carried pictures of bloody embryos and screamed words such as, “terrorist” and “assassin.” Police  were eventually forced to block persistent protesters as they tried to get closer to the activists. The Moroccan government maintains that the Dutch boat was not permitted to visit, abortion is illegal in the majority of cases in Morocco, and it also is forbidden to give out information about the medical procedures.

Abdelmaik Zaza, a Moroccan lawyer, stated, “Moroccan law forbids abortion. Moroccan religious identity says it is forbidden and so does Islam. So the government cannot allow this ship to come to Morocco.”

In addition, Chafik Chraibi, head of a Moroccan NGO that believes abortions should be performed legally, also resisted the Dutch abortion boat’s visit. He says, “It’s true that the initiative is symbolic, to defend the rights of women to have abortions, but to practice abortion at sea, in international waters, is for me a way of circumventing the law and is something clandestine.”

WoW argues that the purpose of the visit is to offer women “safe legal medical abortions” in a country where the practice is illegal and taboo. WoW also intends to set up hotlines to inform women about safe medical abortions.

Doctor Rebecca Gomperts, the founder of “Women on Waves”, supports her cause by determining around 600 to 800 Moroccan women have an abortion every day. She says, “The problem is that only about 200 cases are done properly, by women who have money. This leads to the deaths of 78 Moroccan women each year on average.”

However, Hannan Idrissa, a member of a Moroccan pro-life group was quoted saying, “The figures on abortion are not right.”

For further information, please see:

The Huffington Post — Dutch Abortion Ship: ‘Women on Waves’ Boat Heads For Morocco – 4 October 2012

International Business Times — Dutch ‘Abortion Boat’ Is Blocked From Entering Morocco – 4 October 2012

The Raw Story — Moroccans voice opposition to Dutch ‘abortion boat’ – 3 October 2012

BBC News — Dutch abortion boat heads to Morocco – 1 October 2012

 

Students Killed in Dorm Shooting in Nigeria

By Heba Girgis
Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa

ABUJA, Nigeria—On Tuesday, October 2, 2012, more than 25 students and citizens were killed in the town of Mubi in Nigeria in the state of Adamawa. Four of those killed were students of the College of Health Technology in Mubi, seven others were members of the Federal Polytechnic Institution and fourteen other citizens of the town lost their lives in the shootings. The attack was carried out at night while most of those killed were sleeping. The gunmen went door-to-door to called out their victims by name before they shot them. It remains unclear who is responsible for the attack.

Many Students Have Left Town Since the Shootings Occurred Early Tuesday Morning. (Photo Courtesy of BBC News)

The reports suggest that several men in military uniform entered the residence halls and gathered the students outside of their dorm rooms. Once they were lined up, they were shot and their bodies were left in rows outside of the dorm buildings. The President of the National Association of Nigerian Students, Ken Henshaw, said that the killings were “simply shocking.” But he also noted that, “it seems to make a lot of sense that it could have been an outcome of the elections that were held the previous day.”

There does exist some rivalry between different groups of students that may be influenced by national politics, religion or ethnicity, and this would not be the first time that it would reach this level of violence. The deputy registrar of the Polytechnic school, Shuaib Aroke, denies that these killings were linked to any student politics. He said, “It is a fallacy. We are united here at polytechnic.”

Before these shootings, the town of Mubi was already held to an extensive curfew between 3pm and 6am after a series of arrests were made of people with links to prior attacks with Boko Haram last week. Boko Haram is a violent group that is fighting to establish Islamic law in Nigeria and has killed over 1,000 people in a number of attacks across the northern and central areas of the nation this year. The schools are now closed and many of the students have left town.

Senator Bindowo Jibrilla, from the Adamawa North Senatorial District, in discussing these types of crimes noted regrettably, “when they happen in this country, after a week, we tend to forget it and wait for the next one to happen.” The Senate President David Mark also said, “Terrorists will succeed once they can stop you from doing what you want to do and once they can stop government from doing what they want to do, they want all Nigerians to be very scared of sending their children to polytechnics and universities. I think these are very serious challenges and we must address them.”

 

For further information, please see:

All Africa – Nigeria: Scores Arrested Over Mubi Killings – 4 October 2012

All Africa – Nigeria: Outrage Trails Mubi Massacre – 4 October 2012

BBC News – Nigeria Police Deny Mubi Student Killings Arrests – 4 October 2012

Channels – Police Arrest Mubi Murder Suspects – 4 October 2012

Magnitsky’s Mother Slams the Government’s Cover-Up in Prosecution of Prison Doctor Kratov

Press Release
Hermitage Capital

2 October 2012 – Natalia Magnitskaya, the mother of the late Russian lawyer Sergei Magnitsky, today called on the Russian court to accept new evidence showing the complicity of a large group of Russian law enforcement officials in the torture and killing of her son, and to send the case back to prosecutors.

In her testimony at the Tverskoi District Court in Moscow this morning, Mrs. Magnitskaya gave evidence that the indictment issued by Russian investigators against Dmitry Kratov, a former deputy head of Butyrka prison, does not contain certain critical factual and documentary evidence linking other officials to the crime against her son. Under the Russian criminal procedural code, the court is bound by the scope of the indictment in issuing its sentence and this ommision by the prosecutors would lead to a drastically more lenient sentence.

In her court testimony against Kratov, Natalia Magnitskaya made the following statements:

“In accordance with the law, the victim is entitled to represent and support the prosecution, but in this situation, I am deprived of this right because I cannot support this accusation – the information contained in the case files available to the investigators make it clear that Dmitry Kratov was not the only culprit as the indictment suggests. In these circumstances I ask the court to make the only possible just and lawful decision – to return this criminal case back to the prosecutor and re-open the investigation in light of the new factual circumstances identified by my representative and which the indictment does not include.”

Judge Neverova refused the petition on the grounds that a similar petition had previously been refused from Mrs. Magnitskaya’s lawyer.

“Last time I saw my son alive in the Tverskoi District Court, there were no signs of his fatal condition. That was four days before his death… Who will tell me the truth, what happened to my son during these 4 days? It is in these days and the last hours of his life, which was confirmed by experts, that Sergei suffered injuries from violence,” said Mrs. Magnitskaya.

“My son died not on a deserted street, and not in a dark hallway, he died in a state facility in the presence of many witnesses, and such witnesses were not prisoners, but they were the state officials, doctors and security guards. However, the investigation has been conducted for almost three years by now, and is still very far from completion,” said Mrs. Magnitskaya.

Mrs. Magnitskaya drew attention to the role of the head of Butyrka detention, Mr Komnov, and his deputy in charge of operational and intelligence activities in custody, Mr Gorchakov, neither of whom have been charged, and instead these officials will be called as witnesses for the prosecution.

“The head of Butyrka detention center Mr Komnov and his deputy Mr. Gorchakov were both responsible for establishing torturous conditions for my son by arranging for numerous illegal transfers between different cells in Butyrka detention center, however, no charges have been brought in relation to them and they now have been invited to the court as witnesses,” said Mrs. Magnitskaya.

Mrs. Magnitskaya also noted the role of officials at Matrosskaya Tishina detention center and doctor on duty, Alexandra Gaus, who left Magnitsky without any supervision for over an hour when detention center guards used handcuffs and rubber batons on Magnitsky.

“Without any doubt, direct responsibility for the torture of my son and for his brutal murder stays with Dr. Gaus and she should be held criminally liable for this. Despite all of this, investigator Mrs Lomonosova of the Investigative Committee and Deputy Prosecutor General Grin called her to the court as a witness for the prosecution. There have been no changes brought for the committed crime in relation to Dr. Gaus or her accomplices,” said Mrs. Magnitskaya.

Mrs. Magnitskaya recounted her meeting with Dmitry Kratov two months before her son’s death when she requested him to provide medical treatment for her son which he had been systematically denied in custody.

“Based on my personal meeting with Mr Kratov in September 2009, i.e. two months before the death of my son, I have every reason to state that Mr Kratov knew and was aware that by his criminal actions and omission, torturous conditions were created for my son. He was part of this conspiracy and therefore fulfilled his role in the torture of Sergei,” said Mrs. Magnitskaya.

“A young, healthy man who had no medical history in local clinics after being in custody for about a year became sick and had an incredible large number of fatal illnesses…Less than a year after the arrest, state representatives asked me to pick up my son’s mangled body from the morgue, doing it in a way that I was unable to have an independent medical examination of the causes of his death,” added Mrs. Magnitskaya.

Mrs Magnitskaya also highlighted the role of the senior leadership of the Interior Ministry and high ranking officials from the Russian penal system in organizing Magnitsky’s six transfers between detention centers in less than a year.

“Maybe Investigator Silchenko, acting now as “witness for the prosecution”, will be able to explain what his motives were when he signed an illegal decree requesting to execute the forceful delivery of my son to him? On November 24, 2008 the state officials who were the members of investigation group of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Interior Ministry, Mr Ryabinin, Mr Droganov and Mr Krechtov came to my son’s apartment and took him away – young and healthy – forever from his family under a pretext of a criminal case brought by investigator Karpov and the FSB officials,” said Mrs. Magnitskaya.

“Maybe Investigator Silchenko will be able to tell us why my son was transferred six times between different detention facilities within less than one year. Decisions on each such transfers were taken at the federal level, personally by acting Director of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia Lt-general Petrukhin, his deputy  General Semeniuk, with direct participation of the Deputy Chief of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Interior Ministry General Logunov and investigator of this committee Mr Silchenko… In total, during his illegal detention, my son was transferred between different cells at least twenty-one times, some transfers were conducted during nights,” said Mrs. Magnitskaya.

“Sergei died due to violence and torturous conditions that were specifically created for him. This is confirmed by documentary evidence which those who were involved in his death will not be able to hide,” said Mrs. Magnitskaya.

Sergei Magnitsky, an outside lawyer for the Hermitage Fund, was killed in Russian police custody at the age of 37 after he exposed the $230 million theft implicating government officials. He was honored posthumously with 2010 Integrity Award by Transparency International, for his fight against official corruption.

 

For further information please contact:

Hermitage Capital
Phone:             +44 207 440 17 77
E-mail:             info@lawandorderinrussia.org
Website:          http://lawandorderinrussia.org
Facebook:        http://on.fb.me/hvIuVI
Twitter:           @KatieFisher__
Livejournal:     http://hermitagecap.livejournal.com/

ICTJ In Focus October 2012 Issue 25

ICTJ In Focus October 2012 Issue #25

Battle Free Speech: Brazil v Google

By Margaret Janelle R. Hutchinson
Impunity Watch Reporter, South America

BRASÍLIA, Brazil – As a young, vibrant, democratic nation, it seems counterintuitive that Brazil would be a leader in digital censorship.  Brazil submitted 418 requests, more than any other country, to block or remove content from Google’s various servers last year.

Brazil, which led the world in requests to block Google content, struggles with technology and free-speech rights. (Photo Courtesy Google)

Attempts to censor content were elevated to another level last week when a judge ordered the arrest of Google’s most senior executive in Brazil, Fabio Jose Silva Coelho, after the company failed to take down YouTube videos attacking a local mayoral candidate.

A different Brazilian judge ordered Google to remove versions of the “Innocence of the Muslims” video that has sparked deadly riots across the Middle East from Brazilian YouTube within 10 days or face fines.

The cases are reviving a debate about Brazilian laws that hold services such as YouTube responsible for the videos posted on them, making the country a hotbed of attempts to stifle digital content.

Brazilian law currently treats content on the internet like material in newspapers, television and radio.  Consequently, Google is considered responsible for user posted material.

Brazil carefully monitors racial issues and has strict electoral laws that limit criticism of candidates in the run-up to elections.  There are lawsuits in at least 20 of its 26 states seeking deletion of Google content.  The video that drew controversy last week aired paternity claims against a mayoral candidate in Campo Grande, a state capital in Brazil’s interior.

Google says it resists restrictions it regards as illegitimate but complies with lawful requests from government officials.  The company appealed the ruling in the Campo Grande case but blocked the video after the court rejected the appeal and police arrested Coelho.

“Our goal with YouTube is to offer a community that everyone can enjoy and, at the same time, is a platform for freedom of expression worldwide,” Coelho said in a blog post after his brief detention.  “This is a great challenge, mainly because content acceptable in one country may be offensive — or even illegal — in others.”

Many Brazilians criticized the government’s handling of the Campo Grande case and what they see as elevating the rights of political candidates over the free-speech rights of their constituents.

“It’s a step back in terms of freedom of expression, something like we see happening in countries like China,” said Monica Rosina, professor at Fundaçao Getulio Vargas Law School. “It’s bad for the Brazilian image abroad.”

In the video case, the judge said Google would be fined 10,000 Brazilian reais ($4,926) per day if it doesn’t comply with his order.  Still, the judge acknowledged the complexity of policing videos on YouTube.

There is pending legislation in Brazil that would provide some protection for intermediaries such as Google.  The legislation, known as Marco Civil, would not fully prevent the kind of case that resulted in Coelho’s arrest, which was brought under Brazil’s more specific electoral laws.

Maria Clara Garcaz, a 20-year-old university student in Rio de Janeiro, expressed worries about the court action.

“It’s like we live in a silent, disguised dictatorship.  When we had our real dictatorship, at least you knew for certain what you could and couldn’t say,” Garcaz said.  “Political speech can be censored at any time and it’s moving into the Internet, exactly where people speak out.”

For further information, please see:

The Independent – Governments in young democracies fret over social media – 4 October 2012

PKKH – Google’s Brazil Chief Detained; Court Bans Anti-Islam Video – 27 September 2012

Yahoo Finance – Arrest of Google Brazil head stirs debate over Web – 27 September 2012

The Guardian – Google executive in Brazil faces arrest over video – 25 September 2012