# data[].attributes.body
Maria Claudia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
BOULDER, Colo. - Ten people were killed Monday, including a police officer, when a gunman opened fire at a supermarket in Boulder, Colorado, the second mass shooting in the U.S. in a week.

"These were people going about their day, doing their shopping," Boulder District Attorney Michael Dougherty said at a late-night press briefing. He described the day's events as "a tragedy and a nightmare."

The police officer who died was identified as Eric Talley, 51, an 11-year veteran on the Boulder force. Talley was responding to the King Soopers grocery market when he was gunned down. His police chief, Maris Herold, appeared to be choking back tears as she spoke to the media Monday night and confirmed the death toll.

"I have to tell you [of] the heroic action of this officer when he responded at the scene," Herold said, explaining the Boulder Police Department got a call about shots fired early in the afternoon. "Officer Talley responded to the scene - he was the first on the scene - and he was fatally shot.

"My heart goes out to the victims of this incident and I am grateful to the police officers that responded," she said. "And I am so sorry about the loss of Officer Talley."
►Boulder King Soopers shooting:►Mass shootings in America:'Why does this keep happening?' Mass shootings in Boulder and Atlanta expose loopholes, weaknesses in gun laws Suspect in Colorado shooting found not competent to stand trial, will have second evaluation
Boulder Police Commander Kerry Yamaguchi said a suspect has been arrested.

"There is no ongoing public threat,'' Yamaguchi said. "We do have a person of interest in custody. That person was injured during the incident and is being treated for the injuries.''

No motive for the attack was disclosed. Matthew T. Kirsch, the First Assistant United States Attorney for the District of Colorado, said the FBI and other federal agents will be assisting in the case. He promised that the "full weight of federal law enforcement" will be brought in the investigation.

The shooting comes six days after eight people - six of them women of Asian descent - were killed by a gunman at three spas in Atlanta and a nearby county.

Roberto and Ilce Rivero's son, who attends Fairview High School near the King Soopers feels shootings are the norm, and he hopes that feeling will change.

"I hope this tragedy... will help change laws, gun laws in particular, and we can all work together to make a better, more peaceful world for our children," Roberto said, then adding, "This is a sad day for Boulder."

The White House said President Joe Biden has been briefed on Monday's attack and will be kept up to date on developments. The FBI office in Denver tweeted that it's assisting in the investigation at the request of the Boulder police.

Officers armed with tactical gear and rifles responded Monday afternoon to reports of an active shooter at a King Soopers in the southern part of Boulder, about 25 miles northwest of Denver.

At 2.49 p.m. local time, the Boulder Police Department tweeted an alert for people to stay away from the area around the supermarket.

At one point, authorities were heard over a loudspeaker telling someone the building was surrounded and "you need to surrender" and come out with hands up and unarmed.

A shirtless man with blood running down his leg was escorted out of the store in handcuffs by two police officers, a live TV feed showed. An ambulance pulled away from the store, apparently carrying the man. It was not clear whether that man was the suspect, but Yamaguchi said nobody else besides him and those who died was injured.

One person was taken from the shooting scene to Foothills Hospital in Boulder, said Rich Sheehan, spokesman for Boulder Community Health, which operates the hospital. Sheehan said he could not provide additional details but did say that "we have been notified we will not be receiving any additional patients."

At 4:18 p.m., police reiterated the warning to avoid the area - "this is still a very active scene'' - and asked local residents to stay inside and not to "broadcast on social media any tactical information you might see.'' The shelter-in-place request was lifted around 6:40 p.m. Mountain Time.

King Soopers is a Denver-based subsidiary of supermarket giant Kroger. It operates more than 150 stores in Colorado and Wyoming. Kroger is based in Cincinnati.

Kim Cordova, President of Local 7, which is both the largest union in Colorado and represents at least 17,000 grocery store workers in the state and Wyoming, referenced news reports that showed "the best of human nature" in the King Soopers workers.

"After gunshots rang out, grocery workers helped customers in the store find safety, directing shoppers to an exit at the back of the store, and assisted one another to escape the danger inside," she said in a statement.

In the wake of mass shootings elsewhere, Kroger asked shoppers in 2019 to leave their firearms at home. The change in policy came a day after grocery rival Walmart made a similar change. The previous policy had been to defer to state or local gun regulations.

"No one should have to fear for their lives while they grocery shop or go to work every day," Cordova, whose union represents 32 workers at the store, added.

"For the last year our members and other associates have fought an invisible enemy, COVID-19, but today several innocent souls were killed by an evil human."

Dean Schiller, who had just left the Boulder store, told The Associated Press that he heard gunshots and saw three people lying face down, two in the parking lot and one near the doorway. He said he "couldn't tell if they were breathing."

James Bentz, 57, told the Denver Post he was in the supermarket's meat section when gunfire rang out. After hearing what he thought was a misfire, he heard several pops, and "I was then at the front of a stampede."

Colorado Gov. Jared Polis called the killings "senseless."

"This year we have all been surrounded by loss of life, illness and isolation, and the deep grief that has accompanied the loss of life as we knew it," Polis said in a statement. "As spring sprung this weekend, and vaccines continue to get into arms, lightness creeped back in only for the darkness to descend on us again today."

Boulder Mayor Sam Weaver expressed remorse, saying "our community will soon grieve our losses."

University of Colorado head basketball coach Tad Boyle said late Monday that the tragedy had weighed on his mind throughout his team's 71-53 season-ending loss.

"It puts basketball in its proper place," Boyle said. "Win or lose tonight, I just felt an emptiness in my stomach. Another senseless act of violence that we've experienced as a country many, many times."

Colorado senior guard McKinley Wright, who played his final college game, said the shooting was on his mind throughout the night.

"I feel bad, so terrible for the families who were affected by what happened in Boulder," he said. "Today people get so caught up and even us as players on playing this game, and it's a privilege to play this game. But we have to realize life outside of basketball is real, and a lot of people lost family members today."

Shooting tragedies of national magnitude are an unfortunate reality in Colorado.

The greater Denver metro area alone has been besieged with some of the nation's most infamous mass shootings, including the assault at Columbine High School in 1999 that left 12 students and a teacher dead before the two killers committed suicide. The Columbine massacre, which happened about 41 miles south of Boulder, at the time was the deadliest school shooting in U.S. history.

In July 2012, a lone gunman opened fire at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, during a showing of "The Dark Knight Rises." The assailant, who was convicted and sentenced to life in prison, used tear gas and multiple guns as he sealed off doors and terrorized 400 people. Twelve died and 58 others suffered gunshot wounds.
Contributing: Mike James, Dan Wolken and Elinor Aspegren, USA TODAY; Eric Larson, The Coloradoan, Alexander Coolidge, Cincinnati Enquirer; The Associated Press
Another shooting, in Colorado Springs at a Planned Parenthood clinic, left three dead and nine injured in November 2015. The killer, described as delusional, was eventually found incompetent to stand trial and a judge ordered him indefinitely confined to a mental hospital.

And in May 2019, one student was killed and eight others injured in an ambush attack at STEM School Highlands Ranch, a charter school located in Douglas County, about 68 miles south of Boulder. One suspect has pleaded guilty in the case and another is awaiting trial in May 2021.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Sad day for Boulder': Gunman kills 10 at Colorado supermarket, including police officer, in second US mass shooting in a week

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
BOULDER, Colo. - Ten people were killed Monday, including a police officer, when a gunman opened fire at a supermarket in Boulder, Colorado, the second mass shooting in the U.S. in a week. "These were people going about their day, doing their shopping," Boulder District Attorney Michael Dougherty said at a late-night press briefing.

# data[].attributes.headline
March 16th, 5 p.m., 50km north of Atlanta:         Shootings at 3 Georgia spas leave 8 dead

# data[].attributes.subject
March 16th, 5 p.m., 50km north of Atlanta:         Shootings at 3 Georgia spas leave 8 dead

# data[].attributes.body
ATLANTA, Georgia -- A white gunman accused of killing eight people, most of them of women of Asian descent, at three Atlanta-area spas was charged with murder Wednesday 17th in an attack that sent terror through the Asian American community that's increasingly been targeted during the coronavirus pandemic.
Maria Claudia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Eight people, many of them women of Asian descent, have been killed in shootings at spas in the US state of Georgia.

Police say the shootings took place at a massage parlour in Acworth, a suburb north of Atlanta, and two spas in the city itself.

South Korea later confirmed that four of the victims were of Korean descent.

Officials say a 21-year-old man was arrested and is suspected of involvement in all of the attacks.

No motive has yet been established, but there are fears the crimes may have deliberately targeted people of Asian descent.

Hate crimes against Asian-Americans spiked in recent months, fuelled by rhetoric that blames them for the spread of Covid-19.

In an address last week, President Joe Biden condemned "vicious hate crimes against Asian-Americans who have been attacked, harassed, blamed and scapegoated."

The first happened at about 17:00 (21:00 GMT) on Tuesday at Young's Asian Massage in Acworth, Cherokee County.

Two people died at the scene and three were taken to hospital, where two more died, sheriff's office spokesman Capt Jay Baker said. He later confirmed the victims were two Asian women, a white woman and a white man, and said a Hispanic man had been wounded.

Less than an hour later, police were called to a "robbery in progress" at Gold Spa in north-east Atlanta.

"Upon arrival, officers located three females deceased inside the location from apparent gunshot wounds," police said.

While there, officers were called to a spa across the street, called Aromatherapy Spa, where they found another woman shot dead.

Police quoted by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution said all four Atlanta victims were Asian women.

Investigators who had studied CCTV footage then released images of a suspect near one of the spas. Police said that, after a manhunt, Robert Aaron Long, of Woodstock, Georgia, was arrested in Crisp County, about 150 miles (240km) south of Atlanta.

Capt Baker said investigators were "very confident" that the same suspect was the gunman in all three shootings.

The identities of the victims have not yet been made public. Authorities in South Korea said they were working to confirm the nationalities of the four women of Korean descent.

What has the reaction been?

Authorities say it is too early in the investigation to know if the victims were targeted because of their race or ethnicity.

The advocacy group Stop AAPI Hate, which tracks attacks on Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders, said it was not clear "whether or not the shootings were related or motivated by hate. But right now there is a great deal of fear and pain in the Asian-American community that must be addressed".

It called the shootings "an unspeakable tragedy" for both the victims' families and the Asian-American community, which has "been reeling from high levels of racist attacks".

"A motive is still not clear, but a crime against any community is a crime against us all," Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms said in a statement on Wednesday, adding that she had been in communication with the White House.

Ben Crump, a leading civil rights lawyer, also took to Twitter, saying: "Today's tragic killings in #Atlanta reaffirm the need for us to step up and protect ALL of America's marginalised minorities from racism."

Atlanta police said they were increasing patrols around businesses similar to those attacked.

The New York Police Department's counter-terrorism branch said that while there was no known connection to New York city, it would "be deploying assets to our great Asian communities across the city out of an abundance of caution".

The police department in Seattle also said it would increase patrols and outreach to support its Asian-American community.

Georgia Governor Brian Kemp praised law enforcement officials for their response to the shootings, and said: "Our entire family is praying for the victims of these horrific acts of violence."

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken addressed the shootings ahead of a meeting with his South Korean counterpart on Wednesday. "We are horrified by this violence which has no place in America or anywhere," he said.

"We will stand up for the right of our fellow Americans, Korean Americans, to be safe, to be treated with dignity."

The White House said Mr Biden had been briefed on the "horrific" shootings.

Asian-Americans in the US

In 2018, Asians made up 28% of the US foreign-born population

The figure represents a large increase from the 4% recorded in 1960

Starting in 2010, more Asian than Hispanics immigrants have arrived in the US each year

They represent the fastest growing racial or ethnic segment of the US electorate, with more than 11m people eligible to vote in the last presidential election

As of 2015, nearly 5m Chinese, 4m Indians and 1.9m Vietnamese, 1.8m Korean and 1.4m Japanese - as well as millions more who descend from more than 20 Asian countries - were living in the US

Data compiled by the Pew Research Center

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Atlanta shootings: Asian women among eight killed at three spas

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Eight people, many of them women of Asian descent, have been killed in shootings at spas in the US state of Georgia. Police say the shootings took place at a massage parlour in Acworth, a suburb north of Atlanta, and two spas in the city itself.

# data[].attributes.body
Violation of basic human rights!
A way to educate and to take action
Maria Claudia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Below you'll find resources that have been gathered to help individuals educate others, take action, donate, and more.

Anti-Asian racism and violent attacks on Asian elderly have only increased in recent months. Since COVID-19 became news in the United States, hate speech and violence against the AAPI community has run rampant. In February 2021, attacks, particularly on elderly Asian Americans, have spiked. Unfortunately, many of these incidents are not being reported and are invisible to major media outlets. We hope to change this by offering the following resources with our community. Please join us in taking action whether it's by educating yourself and others around you or donating to non-profit organizations.

Statistics

40% of U.S. adults believe "it has become more common for people to express racist views toward Asians since the pandemic began" (Source: Pew Research) More than 1,800 racist incidents against Asian Americans were reported between March and May of 2020, according to a United Nations Report (Source: CBS News) Stop AAPI Hate National Report (March 19, 2020 - February 28, 2021) has received a staggering 3,795 reports of anti-Asian hate incidents. (Source: Stop AAPI Hate)

newest updates

"...He was pretty much fed up, and kind of at [the] end of his rope, and yesterday was a really bad day for him and this is what he did," Capt Jay Baker of the Cherokee County sheriff's office. (Source: The Hill)

This "bad day" ended the lives of 8 individuals and permanently changed the lives of their families.
Say their names. Share their stories.

soon chung park, 74
suncha kim, 69
yong ae yue, 63
hyun jung grant, 51
xiaojie tan, 49
delaina yaun, 33
daoyou feng, 44
paul andre michels, 54

(Source: The washington post)

News articles

Resources to educate

allyship

Donate

Report an Incident

mental health

Petitions

social media

More action

Corporate Statements

Made by haapi erg | flexport
( Made with Carrd )

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Anti-Asian racism and violent attacks on Asian elderly have only increased in recent months. Since COVID-19 became news in the United States, hate speech and violence against the AAPI community has run rampant. In February 2021, attacks, particularly on elderly Asian Americans, have spiked. Unfortunately, many of these

# data[].attributes.headline
“Coronavirus and Gender Equality in Europe”

# data[].attributes.subject
“Coronavirus and Gender Equality in Europe”

# data[].attributes.body
Maria Claudia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
0:00 / 1:02:14•Watch full video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Women in focus: Coronavirus and Gender Equality in Europe - Panel 2

# data[].attributes.body
“During the pandemic, including access to abortion was considered by the government “a non-essential procedure”. In April 2020, out of 112 public hospitals monitored by “ Centrul filia”(a non-profit organisation who makes women’s voices heard), only 12 were having pregnancy interruptions on demand, none from Bucharest. Although their numbers have rising until October 2020, over half of them continue to have no abortions on demand. Sexual and domestic violence increased, especially during their restrictions that kept women indoors even more, along with abusive partners, with their nerves stretched to the maximum. Amid closing schools and kindergartens, domestic work and care work has pressed even more on women’s shoulders, with a follow-up on their physical and mental health. In this context, even more women have experienced episodes of anxiety, high stress or depression. A recent study by the Filia Center showed that 67% of respondents admit that the pandemic has affected their mental health. Women have been more at risk of illness with COVID-19 because of their jobs: front line medical professionals, salesgirl, caregivers, social or sexual workers, educators, teachers, cleaning workers, domestic or seasonal workers. Crafts considered “essential”, yet paid worse. Women were even the most hit by job loss, and represent 2/3 of those who went into employment in 2020. If the weight of unemployed men in Romania increased by 16%, the number of unemployed women increased by 48% in relative terms compared to a year ago(2,5 to 3,7 percent), according to Social Monitor data. Most of them received no help, technical employment, or other forms of state financial support based solely on family and friends.”

Maria Claudia

# data[].attributes.body
“ In 2020 women in Romania had an abortion with( hanger hook)”

# data[].attributes.body
“2/3 of the unemployed in the pandemic are women”
“ stop violence”

# data[].attributes.headline
"Hundreds gather in London to mark killing of Sarah Everard and protest violence against women"

# data[].attributes.subject
"Hundreds gather in London to mark killing of Sarah Everard and protest violence against women"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Police in London clashed with mourners and protesters on Saturday after more than a thousand people gathered to mark the killing of a 33-year-old woman, hours after the police officer charged with her murder appeared in court.

Sarah Everard's disappearance as she walked home on the evening of March 3 had led to a wave of accounts from women about the dangers of walking streets alone at night, and dismay at the failure of police and wider society to tackle this.

Early on Saturday an impromptu memorial with flowers and candles sprang up around the bandstand on Clapham Common in southwest London, near where Everard was last seen alive.

Kate, Britain's Duchess of Cambridge, was among those who paid their respects. A palace official said Kate "remembers what it was like to walk around London at night before she was married".

It happens in the day. It happens at night. It happens regardless of what you're wearing.

Both of these men followed me in their cars. Parked them, then followed me on foot. This happens all the time, and so much of it goes undocumented. This is our reality.#Reclaimthestreets pic.twitter.com/ggmazjV0PD
- Frank.Riot (@RiotFrank) March 11, 2021

By late Saturday around a thousand people - mostly women - gathered at the site to pay their respects and protest at the lack of security they felt when out alone. Some chanted "shame on you" at police who were present.

Campaign groups had wanted to organise a formal vigil, but London's Metropolitan Police said people should not gather due to coronavirus restrictions.

The head of the force, Cressida Dick, said any vigil "would be unlawful and would be unsafe".

As tensions mounted, Reuters witnesses saw police drag several women away from the gathering on Clapham Common.

Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Helen Ball said four people were arrested for public order offences and breaches of the Health Protection Regulations.

"We absolutely did not want to be in a position where enforcement action was necessary," Ball said in a statement. "But we were placed in this position because of the overriding need to protect people's safety."

London Mayor Sadiq Khan - who is responsible for policing in the city - said the officers' response "was at times neither appropriate or proportionate" and added that he was seeking an urgent explanation from Dick.

Labour Party leader Keir Starmer called the scenes "deeply disturbing" and Conservative interior minister Priti Patel said she too wanted answers from police about "upsetting" images.

A week after my rape, the people of West Belfast held a candlelight vigil to reclaim Colin Glen. I never forgot the solidarity shown to me, a complete stranger. I wish #SarahEverard could see this outpouring of support, the tide of our collective anger #ReclaimTheStreets #endVAWG
- Winnie M Li (@winniemli) March 13, 2021

Earlier on Saturday, Prime Minister Boris Johnson said he and his partner Carrie Symonds would light a candle in memory of Everard.

"I will do everything I can to make sure the streets are safe and ensure women and girls do not face harassment or abuse," he said.

Appearing at London's Westminster Magistrates' Court on Saturday morning, 48-year-old police officer Wayne Couzens, wearing a grey tracksuit, spoke only to confirm his identity.

Couzens's lawyer did not enter a plea to the charges of kidnap and murder ahead of a fuller court hearing scheduled for Tuesday. Couzens remains in custody.

Police discovered Everard's body on Wednesday in woodland about 50 miles (80 km) southeast of London. The court heard that her body was found in a builder's refuse bag, and was identified using dental records.

Couzens joined the Metropolitan Police in 2018 and guarded foreign embassies before his arrest.

England's police watchdog has launched an investigation into the Metropolitan Police's handling of the case.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hundreds gather in London to mark killing of Sarah Everard and protest violence against women

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Police in London clashed with mourners and protesters on Saturday after more than a thousand people gathered to mark the killing of a 33-year-old woman, hours after the police officer charged with her murder appeared in court.

# data[].attributes.headline
"The murder of Sarah Everard and the shadow pandemic"

# data[].attributes.subject
"The murder of Sarah Everard and the shadow pandemic"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Professor of American Studies at the University of Nottingham

A sign is seen on March 13, 2021 as people gather at a memorial site in Clapham Common Bandstand, following the kidnap and murder of Sarah Everard, in London [Reuters/Hannah McKay]

On March 3, a 33-year-old British woman, Sarah Everard, disappeared in London. A little over a week later, her remains were discovered in woodland in Kent and a police officer was charged with kidnapping and murdering her.

It was amid this tragic news in the United Kingdom that we marked International Women's Day as well as the first anniversary of the World Health Organization's designation of the COVID-19 outbreak as a pandemic.

Everard's murder comes on the heels of a massive increase in violence against women across the globe in the past year. This and the countless other violent attacks on women should be a wake-up call for societies.

A shadow pandemic

Everard's picture and story made front-page news, and as more information about the case came out, there was an outpouring of rage and sorrow across the country. On social media, many women shared their stories about experiences of sexual harassment and fears about walking alone at night. Female politicians from across the political spectrum have also gone public with their personal stories of sexual abuse and fear, demanding that the government do more to make "the UK safer for women".

While Everard's murder captured the attention of the media in the UK and abroad - most likely because she was a white, attractive middle-class woman - the public does not hear anything at all about the vast majority of cases of sexual harassment and deadly violence against women.

A recent survey from UN Women UK reports that among women aged 18-24, 97 percent said they had been sexually harassed while 80 percent of women of all ages said they had experienced sexual harassment in public spaces. The statistics about violent deaths are also shocking: a woman is murdered every other day in the UK, with the majority killed by an intimate partner or someone known to the victim.

Domestic violence has worsened with the pandemic. In the first month after a lockdown was imposed in the UK, murders related to domestic abuse tripled compared to 2019 figures, while calls to domestic abuse services jumped by 50 percent.

Data from across the world shows similar dramatic increases in gender-based violence. A chilling report issued by UN Women reveals that violent crimes against women have intensified across the globe since March 2020. Many women experiencing violence at home are simply failing to receive any kind of support. The UN report concludes that the global rise in gender-based violence - at home and in the streets - needs to be understood as another kind of pandemic, a shadow pandemic.

The reality, as these statistics and reports lay bare and Everard's murder highlights, is that misogyny, systemic male entitlement, and violence against women are thriving. More than 100 years have passed since the first International Women's Day, but we are still a very long way from putting an end to gender-based discrimination and violence.

Shrinking safe spaces

Everard's murder and the public's response to it need to be put in the larger context of shrinking safe spaces for women. The increased anxieties around sexual assault underscore the fact that public spaces too often can be extremely hostile towards women.

Furthermore, even though seemingly random attacks are much less prevalent than those carried out by men known to the victims, hearing about cases like Everard's still takes a psychological toll. If it can happen to someone like Everard, if it can be perpetrated by a police officer, and if the attack is seemingly random, then it can happen to any woman, anywhere, at any time. Everard's killing helps produce and reinforce a sense that the threat of gender-based violence is everywhere.

Sharing difficult and often tragic stories as well as exposing the ubiquity of both the violence and the fear are crucial. And, yes, we do need to insist that men change their behaviour and that governments legislate against sexual harassment and assault. But the solution to systemic and structural sexism does not lie with more police on the street or individual men changing their behaviour. Rather, it lies in the complete transformation of our societies: from our gender norms through our common sense, to our economies that reproduce patriarchal hierarchies.

All of this leads us back to International Women's Day. This protest, alongside the many contemporary struggles against sexual violence around the world - the #MeToo movement in many countries, the Women's March in the United States, Ni Una Menos in Argentina, the protests against femicide in Nigeria, Uganda and South Africa, and the demonstrations in India in response to gang rapes of lower-caste women - have been mobilising women and men against sexual assault, femicide and all gender-based discrimination.

These movements have helped open the floodgates of repressed rage at the pervasiveness of violence against women. They have helped to make it loud and clear that women - cis-women and trans-women as well as gender non-conforming people and their allies - will not be cowed into silence and that they will not stop until they do take back the night - both in the streets and in the bedroom.

It is only through global feminist solidarity and mass mobilisation that we will succeed in making the radical changes necessary for making gender justice our new reality.
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The murder of Sarah Everard and the shadow pandemic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Professor of American Studies at the University of Nottingham On March 3, a 33-year-old British woman, Sarah Everard, disappeared in London. A little over a week later, her remains were discovered in woodland in Kent and a police officer was charged with kidnapping and murdering her.

# data[].attributes.headline
“The Shadow Pandemic: addressing gender-based violence during COVID-19”

# data[].attributes.subject
“The Shadow Pandemic: addressing gender-based violence during COVID-19”

# data[].attributes.body
Maria Claudia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
IDLO - International Development Law Organization

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Shadow Pandemic: Addressing gender-based violence during COVID-19

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Violence against women has long been recognized as a global epidemic, and the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly escalated threats to women’s safety, security and access to justice.

# data[].attributes.headline
“5 reasons why so many people believe feminism hates men and why they’re not true”

# data[].attributes.subject
“5 reasons why so many people believe feminism hates men and why they’re not true”

# data[].attributes.body
Meriem

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians."

Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today. It's an understatement to say that feminism has a bad rap.

Feminism doesn't hate men.

So why do so many people think feminism = man-hating? Let's look at a few explanations for this fallacy.

#1 Because Some Individual Feminists Hate Men

Surprised to hear me say that? It's true. There's no point in avoiding it, so we might as well start with it. Just look around the internet.

In 30 seconds on Google, I found this article (first page of my first search about "radical feminism") and this delightful collection of quotes (my favorite: "To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he's a machine, a walking dildo." Thanks for the gem, Valerie Solanas.).

You don't have to look very hard to find examples of "feminists" who hate men.

I publish new Social Justice, Gender, & Sexuality Resources.
Get the Email.
But there's a difference between "feminists" and "misandrists."

Ever heard the term misandrist? It's like misogynist but for hating men instead of women.

Yes, misandrist is a word. But feminist doesn't mean "person who hates men." Feminist means "person who believes people should have equitable places in society regardless of their gender."

Some feminists may be misandrists. I linked to a couple above. But it's by no means a criterion to join the club.

A portion does not equal the whole, even if that portion is really loud.

Though they're not even that loud, but can seem so because anti-feminists like to cherry pick quotes and ignore the much greater number of feminist writings, people, and organizations that say otherwise.

Some individual feminists hate men. A lot of feminists might hate men. You might even argue based on what you find on the internet that most feminists hate men. It's irrelevant.

What matters is that feminism, distilled down to its absolute core, is about gender equity. The goal of feminism is to create a society in which individuals' genders don't restrict them from an equitable shot at success and happiness.

Most feminists actively disagree with the belief that women are better than men and think that feminists who are anti-men are going against the fundamental principles of feminism, which says we're all deserving and worthy human beings - women, men, trans* - and should be treated as such.

So man-hating isn't a part of that goal. It's an unfortunate reactionary sentiment bought into by some people (misandrists) who also identify with the feminist movement.

A lot of people get drunk in college, but we know that college is more than a big drinking club, right? Isn't it? Maybe I attended the wrong college.

#2 Because People Have Been Told Feminists Hate Men for 200+ Years

The whole "feminists hate men" thing has been tossed around for quite a long time now. It's not new. The first "feminist" women who began advocating for equal status of women in the US did so in the late 1700's, but it didn't really pick up steam until the late 1800's.

What crazy radical things were these man-haters asking for? Primarily, the rights to own property, to attend college, and to vote.

In response to these requests, they were were labeled as anti-family, anti-God, anti-men radical hedonists. That labeling has continued to today, because - surprise! - a group with a lot of power (men) tends to do whatever it can to maintain that power (dismiss equal rights as radical).

It's happened with every oppressed ethnic group (from the Irish to the Africans) that's immigrated the country. It happened with oppressed religious groups (from the Catholics to the Muslims). And it continues today with the oppressed gender group.

Why do people believe it if it's not true?

Because people are irrational. One of the ways I know this is true because there's an entire book written about it. An example of how we act irrationally is called diagnosis bias.

A particularly fascinating study showed that the smallest change in the way you describe someone can completely alter the way you perceive their behavior. How about an example?

A university class (unknowing lab rats) had a substitute professor. To introduce the professor, the class members were given short bios. What they didn't know was that half the bios had been very slightly altered (e.g., exchanging warm, positive adjectives for cold, callous ones).
The smallest change in the way someone is described can make a dramatic change in the way you interpret their behavior and demeanor.
After the lecture, the students were asked to review the professor. The entire class saw the same man say the same things, yet the reviews were split 50/50 positive and negative. Half the class said he was personable, considerate, and engaged, while the other half said he was ruthless, would do anything for success, and didn't care about students or people.

Now, hypothetically speaking, imagine how twisted the perceptions would have been if the students were told the professor was a student-hating, self-serving, radical hedonist.

Oh wait.

#3 Because Most Men Aren't Bad But Think Feminism Says They Are

Let me bust a few myths.

1. Being a feminist doesn't mean you believe "all men are rapists." This quote comes from a book by Marilyn French and it seems to be recited more by anti-feminists (as a means of debunking feminism) than feminists themselves. It's simply a ridiculous statement that's been given a ridiculous amount of airtime.

2. Being a feminist doesn't mean you think all men are evil. Following up on the last point, a lot of anti-feminist folks make the argument that feminists believe all men are evil. This is not true.

3. Being a feminist doesn't mean you blame every individual man you know for hundreds of years of oppressive behavior. Just like you wouldn't point at a random White person today and blame them for slavery, you can't blame an individual man today for a history of sexism.

A lot of people think about the things above, think about the men they know (or, if they are men, they think about themselves), and think "That's ridiculous, ____ isn't an evil rapist who is responsible for hundreds of years of sexism."

A lot of people are right.

The thing feminism thinks is bad is the hundreds of years of sexism part, as well as the existence of sexism today. Sexism is the problem - sexism that a lot of men engage in and a lot of women internalize.

Men engage in sexism because they've been taught to behave/think that way. Women internalize it for the same reason.

Feminism asks both men and women to critically think about those normalized behavior and its impact, and holds people accountable to sexist thinking and behavior even if they didn't initially realize it was sexist.

So yes, it's natural to get defensive when someone brings up feminist issues because it's likely you never thought you were doing anything wrong. Does that make sexist behavior acceptable? No.

That's why we need to do a better job as a society to teach people how to treat each other with equity. That's what feminism is trying to do here.

#4 Because Some Feminists Aren't Willing To Address Men's Issues (Though Some Are)

I publish new Social Justice, Gender, & Sexuality Resources.
Get the Email. Working towards gender equity means equity for all genders, right? Then what about men? And what about trans* folks? This is a question that often gets raised by men (about men, not as much for trans* folk).
Feminism in general has mixed feelings about addressing men's (and trans*) issues.

I'll be the first person to admit that there are a lot of gender-based men's issues to address. Like why young men today are less likely to graduate from college, attain a high GPA, be active in extracurricular organizations or seek leadership roles; or why men in general have always been more likely to be caught up in the criminal justice system or be homeless. These are real issues, surely, and things our society should work to correct.

But do many feminists ignore these issues because they hate men? No.

The mixed feelings about addressing men's issues tend to stem from the fact that "men's issues" tends to be the default in our society. We're a male dominant society.

Many feminists are concerned that addressing men's issues (or gender issues as a broad goal) will move the conversation completely away from women's issues, resulting in no progress for the women's part of the gender progress.

So instead they focus on women's issues and allow others to focus on other's issues. Many feminists would like to see pro-feminist men tackle men's issues in a way that doesn't blame women and feminism for all their problems (like MRA's).

However, it's worth noting that we here at Everyday Feminism are both men- and trans*-inclusive. We take an intersectional approach to feminism and look at how different groups of genders, sexual orientations, races, classes, and more are dominated in our society. Our inclusive approach is a big part of our popularity - i.e. a lot of feminists are also inclusive.

#5 Because Sensationalism Is a Good Way To Distract From Real Issues

It's pretty messed up that being born a certain way means you're going to be less likely to earn as much money, achieve the same tier of success, be treated with respect and fairness, be elected into political office... but those restrictions are objectively measurable.

Those issues mentioned above affect just about every identity group in the US other than people who are White and male ( and straight, non-disabled, etc.) - like me!

Instead of dealing with inequality and giving up a bit of unearned power, it's far more fruitful to change the conversation and put the oppressed group on the defensive.

Blacks are more likely to be imprisoned because being a criminal is part of being black. Have fun arguing about that while we enjoy our unfairly granted innocent verdicts.

Gays can't be given rights to form families because being a child molester is part of being gay. Go ahead and re-read all of those nonsensical studies and commission some more while we enjoy our access to 1,138 benefits granted solely to married couples.

Women don't earn as much as men because earning a lower wage for the same work is part of being a woman. Oh, and babies. Don't forget, you make the babies. What a miracle! That should be payment enough.

Social change is slow because the people in power are the ones writing the narrative, and they often choose a distracting narrative.

Did you know that up until the early 20th century there was an actual medical condition called "female hysteria" (yes, "hyster," as in hysterectomy, or pertaining to the uterus)?

Some of the symptoms of female hysteria: loss of appetite, nervousness, irritability, fluid retention, emotional excitability, outbursts of negativity, excessive sexual desire and "a tendency to cause trouble."

In other words, if a woman wasn't eating, was eating too much, was angry, happy, wanted to have sex, or wanted equal rights for women (you trouble causers, you!), she was mentally ill and her behavior could be dismissed as such.

Guess who came up with that idea? You guessed it! White dudes.

Am I Trying To Bring the White Man Down?

No. I am a White man. That wouldn't serve me well at all.

What I'm trying to do, and what feminism is trying to do, is bring the woman up.

While an understandable response to this idea for men is a defensive one, considering so many of the bad things in history have been caused by men (by so many, I mean, like, all of them). That's also a positive response, because it means you're accessing empathy.

You don't want to be seen as the "bad guy" (what a misandristic term!). You don't hate women. You've never oppressed women. Of course you haven't. Oppression doesn't happen on the individual level.

But it happens. And as a man, particularly one who is White (like me!), you are granted a lot of privileges that stem from hundreds of years of oppression. You get that privilege whether you choose to have them or not.

The only choice you get is what you do with your privilege.

Do you use it to make for a more equitable society for mothers, sisters, and daughters you love all human beings, of all genders?

Or do you keep whining about how feminists hate men and distracting yourself and others from serious issues of inequality?

Your call.

I originally wrote the following article for Everyday Feminism. You can view that here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Reasons Why So Many People Believe Feminism Hates Men and Why They're Not True - ❤ It's Pronounced Metrosexual

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians." Pat Robertson famously said this in the 90s, and the sentiment still rings as true in the ears of many today.

# data[].attributes.body
Héloise

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Foto: Pixabay

Convivenza forzata a causa delle misure restrittive per contenere il diffondersi del coronavirus e violenza domestica: che il binomio potesse rivelarsi drammatico era già stato detto, ma ora ci sono dei nuovi numeri a confermare questa emergenza nell'emergenza ai danni delle . Analisi e cifre frutto di uno studo della direzione centrale della Polizia criminale del Dipartimento di pubblica sicurezza del ministero dell'interno. Che Osservatorio Diritti oggi pubblica in anteprima. L'analisi mette in relazione i dati relativi ai reati in generale con quelli della violenza di genere:

"Le limitazioni alla libertà di circolazione costituiscono fattore di diminuzione del reato di atti persecutori, mentre, alla distanza, sembrano comportare un aumento del numero di maltrattamenti contro familiari e conviventi", si legge nel documento non ancora diffuso.

Violenza sulle donne: i dati della Criminalpol

La premessa contenuta del documento ministeriale, che anticipa dati e tabelle, è chiara: "I divieti imposti in materia di circolazione delle persone fisiche potrebbero accentuare situazioni conflittuali preesistenti, determinando un sommerso di violenze e maltrattamenti ".

In particolare, sono stati analizzati i reati relativi alla violenza di genere e i delitti potenzialmente riconducibili a liti familiari nel periodo 1°-31 marzo 2020, confrontandoli con quelli dell'analogo periodo del 2019.

Tre i reati presi in considerazione: atti persecutori, maltrattamenti in famiglia e violenze sessuali. "Nel periodo 2020 - si legge nel documento - i valori assoluti, pur inferiori a quelli del 2019, mostrano una progressiva diminuzione nelle prime tre settimane, ed un lieve incremento nella quarta settimana (289) rispetto alla terza (278)".

Anche entrando nel dettaglio dei tre distinti reati, l'andamento è coerente: gli atti persecutori - che passano da 52 della prima settimana a 13 dell'ultima settimana - e le violenze sessuali (184 nella prima settimana, 59 nell'ultima settimana di marzo), infatti, registrano una costante flessione nel periodo preso in esame. Mentre quello di maltrattamenti contro familiari e conviventi subisce, dopo un'iniziale diminuzione, un incremento a fine marzo, toccando infatti quota 217 nell'ultima settimana.

Ma per comprendere meglio la portata del fenomeno è necessario capire l'incidenza che sui reati commessi ha il genere, ovvero quanto i reati commessi siano stati perpetrati contro la donna. Nel capitolo " vittime dei reati spia" del documento ministeriale, si nota come, "per il reato di atti persecutori, l'incidenza delle vittime donne faccia rilevare un picco nel periodo 1-7 marzo (78,75 per cento), mantenendosi sempre su valori elevati, leggermente in flessione nell'ultima settimana (67,74%)".

E ancora: "La percentuale delle violenze sessuali si attesta sempre oltre il 90 per cento. Il reato di maltrattamenti contro familiari e conviventi mostra un andamento costante sia per il numero rilevante di reati commessi (217 reati), sia per l'incidenza delle vittime donne, con una media sempre superiore al 75 per cento".

Violenza sulle donne in Italia: il tema delle liti in famiglia e i femminicidi

Nel documento del dipartimento di pubblica sicurezza, un focus è stato dedicato ai reati - minaccia, lesione personale, percosse - che potessero evidenziare quei comportamenti, penalmente rilevanti, che potrebbero essere connessi a un permanere forzato in famiglia, "una panoramica sui quei reati che, commessi in ambito domestico, possono rivelarsi un termometro delle cosiddette liti in famiglia".

Emerge come i reati nel loro complesso abbiano un'importante flessione nel 2020, mentre l'incidenza di quelli commessi in ambito familiare fa registrare un tendenziale aumento. "In sintesi i reati commessi in ambito domestico nel periodo di marzo 2020 si attestano tra il 12 per cento ed il 20 per cento rispetto al totale, con un picco del 19,93 per cento nell'ultima settimana ( nel 2019, l'incidenza era intorno al 12 per cento, ndr)".

E poi c'è il capitolo femminicidio. Anche qui l'analisi evidenzia un gap tra reato di omicidio in generale e femminicidio. Il dato generale degli omicidi a marzo 2020 si conferma in calo (11 a fronte di 38) rispetto all'analogo periodo del 2019; mentre le vittime donne mantengono comunque valori significativi: sia in generale (7 rispetto a 12), sia in ambito familiare/affettivo (6 a fronte di 8). Diminuiscono, invece, gli omicidi commessi da partner o ex partner (3 rispetto a 7).

Coronavirus e violenza sulle donne: in calo il numero delle nuove richieste d'aiuto

A dare il senso di quanto la convivenza forzata a causa delle misure di contrasto al coronavirus rappresenti un problema per tante donne italiane, è anche la rilevazione effettuata dalla rete D.i.Re: è del 74,5% l'incremento percentuale delle donne che - dal 2 marzo al 5 aprile - si sono rivolte ai centri anti-violenza che fanno capo alla rete.

Nel dettaglio, ben oltre 1.200 donne in più si sono rivolte ai centri anti-violenza D.i.Re in poco più di un mese, "un dato - dicono dalla rete - che conferma quanto la convivenza forzata abbia ulteriormente esacerbato situazioni di violenza che le donne stavano vivendo".

A preoccupare, tuttavia, sono le cosiddette nuove richieste di aiuto, "che rappresentano solo il 28 per cento del totale, nel 2018 rappresentavano il 78 per cento del totale delle donne accolte. E di queste solo il 3,5 per cento sono transitate attraverso il numero pubblico anti-violenza 1522", nota Paola Sdao, che con Sigrid Pisanu cura la rilevazione statistica annuale della rete D.i.Re.

Alla luce di questi dati è necessario fare delle precisazioni. Inizialmente, nei primi giorni di marzo, le richieste di aiuto da parte delle donne hanno registrato un calo (come abbiamo già raccontato, tra l'8 e il 15 marzo le chiamate al telefono rosa 1522 si sono dimezzate). La nuova rilevazione della rete D.i.Re, di fatto, si presenta coerente: sono pochi i contatti al 1522, a cui più spesso ricorrono le donne che per la prima volta decidono di farsi aiutare per uscire da una condizione di violenza domestica, ma c'è un incremento consistente da parte dei cosiddetti vecchi contatti, ovvero delle donne che hanno già stabilito un contatto con i centri anti-violenza.

"Oggi, ancora in piena emergenza, siamo nella stessa situazione di quando si è registrato il primo decesso per Covid-19", afferma Antonella Veltri, presidente di D.i.Re.

"I fondi del 2019 sbloccati dal Dipartimento Pari Opportunità il 2 aprile devono ora transitare per le Regioni: ad aggi nessuna Regione risulta essersi attivata. Non siamo ancora fuori dall'emergenza, nessun intervento è stato previsto per affrontare la situazione, mentre le richieste di supporto potrebbero aumentare ancora, come è già successo in Cina", denuncia la presidente Veltri.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Violenza sulle donne e coronavirus: in anteprima i nuovi dati della Criminalpol

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Foto: Pixabay Convivenza forzata a causa delle misure restrittive per contenere il diffondersi del coronavirus e violenza domestica: che il binomio potesse rivelarsi drammatico era già stato detto, ma ora ci sono dei nuovi numeri a confermare questa emergenza nell'emergenza ai danni delle .

# data[].attributes.body
Meriem

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Women's rights activists in the UK are reeling from the Metropolitan Police's heavy-handed approach at a Saturday night vigil for Sarah Everard, a 33-year old who was murdered while walking home in South London earlier this month.

The man who is accused of murdering her is a serving member of that same police force.

Throughout the day, mourners had flocked to the bandstand of Clapham Common, an area where Everard was last seen, in a tribute to her life. But they also came in an act of solidarity, as an acknowledgement of the shared, omnipresent experience of intimidation, violence and harassment that women constantly face in public spaces.

A series of evening vigils from organizers "Reclaim These Streets" had been planned Saturday across the UK. The main event, at Clapham Common, was cancelled after the Met said they couldn't go ahead, citing coronavirus restrictions. The organizers asked people to shine a light on their doorstep instead for Everard and for all women affected by and lost to violence.

But by nightfall, peaceful mourners gathered for the socially distanced event in Clapham. Attendees chanted: "This is a vigil, we do not need your services."

Less than an hour after the gathering began, officers moved in to inform people that they were breaching Covid-19 regulations and had to leave. Then, a predominantly male cluster of officers moved in, using containment and corralling techniques - where officers surround demonstrators to keep them in a particular place, making social-distancing impossible - ordering people to leave, or face arrest and fines.

As police officers forcibly removed women from the bandstand and dropped others face down to the floor in arrest, attendees chanted "Shame on you," "Arrest your own," and "Who do you protect?"

In a statement on Sunday morning, the Met Police said they "absolutely did not want to be in a position where enforcement action was necessary," but that "we were placed in this position because of the overriding need to protect people's safety."

Home Office minister Victoria Atkins addressed a now-viral photograph of one of the women who had been pinned down by police officers during an intervi

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fury as London police officers break up vigil to murdered Sarah Everard | CNN

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Women's rights activists in the UK are reeling from the Metropolitan Police's heavy-handed approach at a Saturday night vigil for Sarah Everard, a 33-year old who was murdered while walking home in South London earlier this month. The man who is accused of murdering her is a serving member of that same police force.

# data[].attributes.headline
THE CONDITION OF WOMEN: A SHADOW PANDEMIC

# data[].attributes.subject
THE CONDITION OF WOMEN: A SHADOW PANDEMIC

# data[].attributes.headline
“Our freedom of speech doesn’t depend on what you’re speaking about”

# data[].attributes.subject
“Our freedom of speech doesn’t depend on what you’re speaking about”

# data[].attributes.body
Meriem

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The right to protest government is one of the oldest and most revered American traditions. From the Boston Tea Party to the Civil Rights movement to the modern-day Tea Party and Black Lives Matter movements, Americans of all political beliefs and backgrounds have always turned out to protest for justice and liberty. As the Supreme Court explained in 1965, the right to protest is "basic and fundamental to the preservation of the freedoms treasured in a democratic society."

That right is never more important than in times of crisis, but unfortunately, political ideologies warp how many people react to any public dialogue.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, people in multiple states chose to protest against some shutdown policies they saw as discriminatory, unjust, or unfair. Yet even for protestors following social distancing procedures to prevent the spread of COVID-19, many labeled them as entitled and even accused them of not caring about the lives of their fellow citizens.

This past week massive protests have taken place across the country in response to the killing of George Floyd. Now, some of the same people that praised the anti-shutdown protesters have vilified those protesting against Floyd's killing, while many of the people who vilified protests against state shutdown policies are celebrating the protests against Floyd's killing.

The disparate reactions to these two types of protest show that, unfortunately, many people support free speech for themselves and the issues they care about, but not so much when it comes to those they disagree with.

Yet supporting our freedom of speech shouldn't depend on your political positions or worldview. While someone may sympathize more with those taking to the streets over George Floyd than those who have gone bankrupt due to the shutdown, or vice versa, it is everyone's equal right as an American citizen to protest freely and safely.

The First Amendment stands for the principle that the government does not get to determine which issues people are allowed to be outraged about. It allows individuals, not governments, the right to decide what issues are most important, weighty, or significant for them. And even in times of public emergency, the First Amendment protects the fundamental right to protest and requires rigorous scrutiny of even well-intentioned government restrictions on free speech. Organizations like PLF, the Institute for Justice, or the ACLU fight every day to protect these constitutional rights.

But the events of the past few weeks and months show that legal protections alone are not enough. What we need is a robust commitment from each one of us that we will defend the right of others to speak out even when we disagree. We should not only tolerate but celebrate and protect the right of everyone to protest, whether we agree with them or not. We should be grateful to live in a free society that allows people who disagree sharply to coexist.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Our freedom of speech doesn't depend on what you're speaking about | Pacific Legal Foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The right to protest government is one of the oldest and most revered American traditions. From the Boston Tea Party to the Civil Rights movement to the modern-day Tea Party and Black Lives Matter movements, Americans of all political beliefs and backgrounds have always turned out to protest for justice and liberty.

# data[].attributes.headline
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea - North Corea

# data[].attributes.subject
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea - North Corea

# data[].attributes.body
Elisa Maria

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Drawing made by a former prisoner who was detained in the Chongori prison. North Korean prisoner pretends to be asleep and uses food to catch a mouse which he will eat raw. United Nations Human Rights

"Christmas in a N. Korean gulag will be just another day of grotesque suffering"

Today is International Human Rights Day, but the right to freedom of belief is violated each and every single day, especially in North Korea, despite being protected by Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

A globally recognised campaigner and specialist on North Korea, British Lord David Alton wrote in a Dec. 8 email that "Christmas spent in a North Korean gulag will be just another day of grotesque suffering," according to California Catholic Daily.

On Dec. 10, the British All Party Parliamentary Group for International Freedom of Religion or Belief (the latter shortened to FORB) published a report about the findings of its inquiry into persecution in North Korea. The findings of the group encourage countries around the globe to maintain momentum and public pressure on North Korea so that it can no longer systematically oppress religious freedom with impunity.

The report, entitled "Religion and Belief in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea," key findings include how the North Korean government systematically oppresses freedom of religion or belief and continues to target Christians in a way that amounts to crimes against humanity.

"For many years North Korea has been viewed as an impossible case, but now the international community is finally beginning to afford the country the attention its people so desperately need," said Baroness Elizabeth Berridge, chairman of the APPG.

In an effort to uphold the values of Article 18, the report encourages the international community to invest in long-term strategic engagement with North Korea. Some of the practical suggestions include: educational exchanges, investing in the 30,000 North Korean people who have managed to escape, breaking the information blockade, critical engagement on human rights and the re-instigation of the 'Six Party Talks.'.

It also recommends that governments use "soft power" to push the North Korean regime for further openness, and urges the BBC World Service to establish a radio broadcast to the Korean Peninsula, in both English and Korean languages, giving citizens a window out of their closed world.
Chronic wide-spread human rights abuses
In March 2014, the first-ever Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea presented its report to the UN Human Rights Council. The 372 page report accentuated the chronic, wide-spread human rights abuses in the DPRK. It reported how countless followers of religion "have been severely punished, even unto death", stating that "the gravity, scale and nature of these violations reveal a State that does not have any parallel in the contemporary world."
Crimes against humanity
The UN Commission of Inquiry also labelled North Korea's treatment of Christians a crime against humanity, recommending that the DPRK be referred to the International Criminal Court. The first step of this process was implemented on Nov. 18, when 111 nations voted at the UN General Assembly for its referral.

In response, members of the UK Parliament All Party Parliamentary Group on International FORB decided to launch an inquiry into religion in the DPRK, with a view to the role that the international community can play in furthering justice, accountability and increasing openness in this country.

The APPG report found that although there were visible changes in DPRK policy toward religion in the 1970s-1990s, these did not point to an overall relaxation of pressure on religious groups. On the contrary, the DPRK continued to actively target religious groups functioning outside the extremely limited state-controlled religious structures.
Imprisoned for owning Bibles & executed for praying
Those who practice a religion in the DPRK do so knowing full well that they could be sent to prison for saying grace at meals and executed for possessing a Bible.

In 2009, two women, Seo Keum Ok and Ryi Hyuk, were executed for distributing Bibles. They were accused of having connections with the US and South Korea and were charged with spying and being Catholic. Three generations of the women's families were also arrested and sent to prison camps, highlighting North Korea's three-generation guilt policy.

If a married person is accused of practicing religion his or her spouse will often seek divorce in a bid to save the wider family from punishment.
Christians targeted
Religious groups were also targeted for particularly harsh treatment in prison camps. The All-Party group heard how Christians were "forced to stick out their tongue and iron was pushed into it". Another woman, arrested for her faith, was "assigned to pull the cart used to remove excrement from the prison latrines. Several times the guards made her lick off excrement that had spilled over in order to humiliate and discipline her".

Far from being a secret, religious persecution in the DPRK is widely known. According to a study by the the Database Centre for North Korean Human Rights, 99.7% of refugees interviewed said there is no religious freedom. Of those who had experienced, witnessed or perpetrated religious persecution, 45.5% were Protestant, 0.2% Catholic, 1.3% Buddhist, 1.7% no religion, 1.1% 'others' and the beliefs of 50.3% were unknown.
Religions threat to North Korean government
Religious belief is considered treasonous by the DPRK because it is seen to directly compete with its national ideology of Juche points to man's self-sufficiency and a deification of the country's leaders. Decades of state-sponsored religious oppression are summarised in a 1962 speech by former leader Kim Il-sung:

"We have tried and executed all religious leaders higher than a deacon in the Protestant and Catholic churches. Among other religiously active people, those deemed malignant were all put to trial. Among ordinary religious believers, those who recanted were given jobs while those who did not were held in prison camps".

Despite this, religious institutions appeared in the DPRK in the 1970s and state-approved religious buildings emerged in the 1980s and 1990s.

Although the report said these organisations and buildings opened a small window of opportunity for engagement with the DPRK, it concluded these limited examples of religious activity did not constitute freedom of religion or belief.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Human Rights Day but Article 18 violated every day

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Drawing made by a former prisoner who was detained in the Chongori prison. North Korean prisoner pretends to be asleep and uses food to catch a mouse which he will eat raw.United Nations Human Rights "Christmas in a N. Korean gulag will be just another day of grotesque suffering" [...]

# data[].attributes.headline
FREEDOM OF THOUGHT, CONSCIENCE AND RELIGION (ART.18)

# data[].attributes.subject
FREEDOM OF THOUGHT, CONSCIENCE AND RELIGION (ART.18)

# data[].attributes.headline
“NOWHERE SAFE: CYCLE OF ABUSES AGAINST REFUGEES AND MIGRANTS IN LIBYA“

# data[].attributes.subject
“NOWHERE SAFE: CYCLE OF ABUSES AGAINST REFUGEES AND MIGRANTS IN LIBYA“

# data[].attributes.body
Maria Claudia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Skip to main content
Which language would you like to use this site in?

Close

(as of September 2020)

Refugees and migrants hold a placard during United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres (unseen) visit to Ain Zara detention centre for migrants in the Libyan capital Tripoli on April 4, 2019. Mr. Guterres said he was "shocked" by the level of suffering of migrants at the detention centre.

Refugees and migrants, who were intercepted by the Libyan coastguard in the Mediterranean Sea off the Libyan coast, arrive at the naval base in the capital Tripoli on May 6, 2017.

A refugee weeps after being intercepted onboard a boat bound for Italy. Tripoli, Libya. 6 June 2016.

Refugees in Tariq al-Sikka detention center, Tripoli, Libya. 22 September 2017.

Refugees and migrants are seen outside a detention centre used by the Libyan Government of National Accord (GNA) in the Tripoli's suburb of Tajoura on July 3, 2019, following an air strike on a nearby building that left dozens killed and more than 100 wounded the previous night. The UN said the air strike "may amount to a war crime".

After some 240 refugees and migrants of different African nationalities were intercepted in the Mediterranean late on February 18, 2020, they were gathered in the Libyan town of Tajoura, about 14 kilometres east of the capital Tripoli.

Next Previous

What is Amnesty International doing?

We are investigating the abuses and exposing Europe's complicity in the cycle of suffering migrants and refugees;

We are advocating with the UN, EU, and other international bodies as well as relevant states;

We are challenging dangerous cooperation in courts, by bringing legal actions against measures that contribute to trapping refugees and migrants in Libya;

We are campaigning to end detention in Libya; and

We are calling on Malta to drop the charges against three youths known as El Hiblu 3 who face life in prison for opposing their return to Libya.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Cycle of abuses against refugees and migrants in Libya

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Skip to main content Which language would you like to use this site in? Close (as of September 2020) Refugees and migrants hold a placard during United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres (unseen) visit to Ain Zara detention centre for migrants in the Libyan capital Tripoli on April 4, 2019.

# data[].attributes.body
Carlotta

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BEFORE YOU GO TO SCHOOL, WATCH THIS || WHAT IS SCHOOL FOR? (2026)

# data[].attributes.body
Meriem

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Netherlands violates nationality rights: UN rights committee

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Netherlands has violated a child’s rights by registering children under the category “nationality unknown” as opposed to Stateless – leaving them ineligible to access international protections, the UN Human Rights Committee declared on Tuesday.

# data[].attributes.headline
"Finland's schools outperform most others across the developed world" 

# data[].attributes.subject
"Finland's schools outperform most others across the developed world" 

# data[].attributes.body
Maria Claudia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Finland's schools outperform most others across the developed world | 7.30

# data[].attributes.body
Maria Claudia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Teachers should earn just as much as doctors because a doctor can do heart surgery and save the life of a kid

3:13 / 6:00•Watch full video

# data[].attributes.body
Heloise

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Why the school system is so outdated?????

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why the school system is so outdated?????

# data[].attributes.headline
WORLD REPORT 2021 - Our annual review of human rights around the globe

# data[].attributes.subject
WORLD REPORT 2021 - Our annual review of human rights around the globe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Our annual review of human rights around the globe

As More Climate Chaos Looms, Slashing Fossil Fuels Is Key

World Report 2021, Human Rights Watch's 31st annual review of human rights practices and trends around the globe, reviews developments in more than 100 countries.

In his introductory essay, Executive Director Kenneth Roth calls on the incoming US administration to more deeply embed respect for human rights as an element of domestic and foreign policy to counter the "wild oscillations in human rights policy" that in recent decades have come with each new resident of the White House. Roth emphasizes that even as the Trump administration mostly abandoned the protection of human rights, joined by China, Russia and others, other governments-typically working in coalition and some new to the cause-stepped forward to champion rights. As it works to entrench rights protections, the Biden administration should seek to join, not supplant, this new collective effort.
Download the easy-to-read version of the keynote essay >>
The report reflects investigative work that Human Rights Watch staff undertook in 2020, usually in close partnership with human rights activists in the country in questions. It also reflects the work of our advocacy team, which monitors policy developments and strives to persuade governments and international institutions to curb abuses and promote human rights.

As in past years, the World Report does not include a chapter on every country where Human Rights Watch works, nor does it discuss every issue of importance. The absence of a particular country or issues often simply reflects staffing limitations and should not be taken as commentary on the significance of the problem. They are many serious human rights violations that Human Rights Watch simply lacks the capacity to address.

This year's World Report is dedicated to the memory of Dan Baum and Mickey Spiegel, beloved colleagues whom we lost in 2020 but remember every day.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Our annual review of human rights around the globe As More Climate Chaos Looms, Slashing Fossil Fuels Is Key World Report 2021, Human Rights Watch's 31st annual review of human rights practices and trends around the globe, reviews developments in more than 100 countries.

# data[].attributes.headline
"No ‘Negative’ News: How China Censored the Coronavirus£

# data[].attributes.subject
"No ‘Negative’ News: How China Censored the Coronavirus£

# data[].attributes.body
Carlotta

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
No ‘Negative’ News: How China Censored the Coronavirus (Published 2020)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Thousands of internal directives and reports reveal how Chinese officials stage-managed what appeared online in the early days of the outbreak.

# data[].attributes.headline
Budapest Black Lives Matter artwork sparks rightwing backlash

# data[].attributes.subject
Budapest Black Lives Matter artwork sparks rightwing backlash

# data[].attributes.body
Carlotta

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It will be only one metre high, and will be on display for just two weeks. Nevertheless, a planned art installation dedicated to the theme of Black Lives Matter is causing uproar in Budapest, where the rightwing, nationalist government of Viktor Orbán has taken aim at the movement and all it represents.

The installation won a recent tender for public art in Budapest's ninth district, an area on the city's Pest side that combines streets of grand turn-of-the-century buildings with communist-era social housing projects.

"The BLM goals of opposing racism and police brutality are just as relevant in Hungary as anywhere else," said Krisztina Baranyi, the ninth district mayor, citing the Orbán government's relentless campaign against migrants and refugees, as well as the systematic discrimination against Hungary's Roma minority.

In total, seven pieces were chosen to be displayed for two-week periods next spring in different locations, but it is the BLM sculpture that has created headlines.

The issue was seized upon eagerly by government officials and the government's stable of loyal media. "Black Lives Matter is basically a racist movement. The racist is not the person who opposes a BLM statue, but the person who erects one," said Orbán's chief of staff, Gergely Gulyás.

Commentators on pro-government television chatshows threatened to pull the statue down if it was erected, and compared it to putting up a monument to Adolf Hitler. Others laughed that it was an absurdity given there are few black people in Budapest.

The planned art installation by Péter Szalay dedicated to the Black Lives Matter movement.

Hardly anyone looked at the details of the project. Notably, most pro-government coverage neglected to note that the statue will only be a two-week installation, not a permanent addition to the city.

"This whole scandal is typical of the way pro-government media works in Hungary. Everyone is angry about this and nobody actually knows anything about it," said Baranyi. An independent, she took control of the ninth district late last year, in municipal elections that dealt a blow to the monopoly of Orbán's Fidesz party as Budapest and most of its districts were won by the opposition.

Ahead of parliamentary elections in 2022, the government has been pushing its ultra-conservative credentials hard. Even in a pandemic year, the government has been busy passing legislation to further its positioning as Europe's biggest champion of rightwing "traditional values" and fight against what Orbán refers to as "loopy liberals".

In mid-December, the government amended the constitution to clarify that in a family, "the mother is a woman and the father is a man", and made it explicit that only heterosexual couples can adopt children. The families minister, Katalin Novák, released a video telling women they "shouldn't compete with men" or expect to earn the same amount of money. In May, Hungary ended legal recognition of gender changes for trans people.

The government also recently launched a billboard campaign with the slogan "All lives matter" in Hungarian. Ostensibly, it relates to the fight against coronavirus but it seems likely the decision to use it was a nod to the culture war the government believes it is fighting, particularly as Orbán posted a video featuring the English-language version of the slogan on his Instagram account.

Péter Szalay, the sculptor behind the BLM project, said that after news of it broke, he had received a threatening email from a well-known far-right figure, promising he would be "punished" if the installation went ahead.

The sculpture, which will be made in 12 pieces using a 3D printer and put together using magnets, is a "paraphrase of the Statue of Liberty", said Szalay. The figure kneels, lifting her right hand in a fist, and holds a tablet with the inscription "Black Lives Matter". There is also an LGBT-rights theme to the installation, with rainbow colours used to illuminate the monument.

Szalay said that despite the government reaction, the work was not meant as a show of support or solidarity with the BLM movement. "It does not declare itself on the side of or against BLM. According to my artistic purpose, it is undecidedly swaying between the two readings," he said.

The art tender was organised by Baranyi's deputy, Suzi Dada of the satirical Two-Tailed Dog party. She said she wanted to restart a tradition of public art, something for which the current government has little time. "For Fidesz, culture politics is all about historical memory and memorials, relativising Hungary's role in the second world war and painting us as victims," she said.

In the year since she took office, Baranyi said it had been hard to implement new policies, owing both to the coronavirus pandemic and a government funding squeeze that she estimates has shaved off about a third of the district's budget. In mid-December, she was engulfed in a new scandal when a recording was leaked of her using antisemitic language. She has claimed it was taken out of context and has said she plans to sue public television.

When it comes to the BLM installation, Baranyi said she realised that the government campaign was working well when she stepped into a taxi in recent days. The driver, unaware of the identity of his passenger, began a long and abusive rant about Baranyi, saying he had heard she wanted to build a monument to gay black people.

"I tried to explain to him the real story, and the amazing thing was that he wouldn't believe me, even though I explained I knew all about it. He said he knew he was right because he had read it in the newspaper," she said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Budapest Black Lives Matter artwork sparks rightwing backlash

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It will be only one metre high, and will be on display for just two weeks. Nevertheless, a planned art installation dedicated to the theme of Black Lives Matter is causing uproar in Budapest, where the rightwing, nationalist government of Viktor Orbán has taken aim at the movement and all it represents.

# data[].attributes.headline
"Drivers of migration: why do people move?"

# data[].attributes.subject
"Drivers of migration: why do people move?"

# data[].attributes.body
Giada S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

More than 244 million international migrants were estimated to live in a foreign country in 2015, leaving apart the massive number of people that have been relocated in their own country. Furthermore, a substantial proportion of international migrants from southern countries do not reach western nations but resettle in neighbouring low-income countries in the same geographical area. Migration is a complex phenomenon, where 'macro'-, 'meso'- and 'micro'-factors act together to inform the final individual decision to migrate, integrating the simpler previous push-pull theory.

Among the 'macro-factors', the political, demographic, socio-economic and environmental situations are major contributors to migration. These are the main drivers of forced migration, either international or internal, and largely out of individuals' control.

Among the 'meso-factors', communication technology, land grabbing and diasporic links play an important role. In particular, social media attract people out of their origin countries by raising awareness of living conditions in the affluent world, albeit often grossly exaggerated, with the diaspora link also acting as an attractor. However, 'micro-factors' such as education, religion, marital status and personal attitude to migration also have a key role in making the final decision to migrate an individual choice. The stereotype of the illiterate, poor and rural migrant reaching the borders of affluent countries has to be abandoned. The poorest people simply do not have the means to escape war and poverty and remain trapped in their country or in the neighbouring one.

Once in the destination country, migrants have to undergo a difficult and often conflictive integration process in the hosting community. From the health standpoint, newly arrived migrants are mostly healthy (healthy migrant effect), but they may harbour latent infections that need appropriate screening policies. Cultural barriers may sometimes hamper the relation between the migrant patient and the health care provider. The acquisition of western lifestyles is leading to an increase of non-communicable chronic diseases that require attention.

Destination countries have to reconsider the positive medium/long-term potential of migration and need to be prepared to receive migrants for the benefit of the migrants themselves and their native population.

Foreword

According to the International Organization for Migration (IOM), as many as 244 million people were international migrants in 2015 and the UN Department of Economics and Social Affairs estimates that the figure is as high as 257.7 million in 2017. Importantly, out of the 244 million claimed by IOM in 2015, 90.2 million moved from a southern country to another southern country, while only 85.3 million were people migrating from the south to the north, the remaining being individuals from the north migrating to the south (13.6 million) or from the north to the north (55.1 million). At present, most international migrants are of working-age and live in Europe, Asia and North America (Figure 1). Apart from international migrants, an astonishing figure of 740 million people is estimated to have migrated internally within their origin country.

Lee's theory has the merit of being one of the first trying to identify in a modern and scientific way the drivers of such a complex phenomenon after Ravenstein first addressed them in Scotland in 1885. The main elements of the 'push and pull' theory will also be considered in this article for didactic purposes, but the Author recognizes that in the current global world reality is certainly much more complex and faceted, involving both local national realities and macro-level causes as well as meso-level and micro-level causes related to the link of the individual to his/her ethnic or religious group and the personal characteristic of the individuals respectively. (Figure 2) Recently, the 'pull-push plus' theory has also been proposed, which considers predisposing, proximate, precipitating and mediating drivers of migration.

Regardless of the theoretical framework adopted, the topic addressed by this article is difficult because sound scientific data are scarce, existing literature is mainly qualitative and often presented as grey literature. In addition, geographical and cultural elements may influence the weight of the single determinant in different continents and in different periods. Finally, although the various drivers will be presented separately, we recognize that they are part of a unique complex scenario where they strongly interact.

Definition of migrants

According to the International Organization for Migration (IOM), a migrant is ' any person who is moving or has moved across an international border or within a State away from his/her habitual place of residence, regardless of (1) the person's legal status; (2) whether the movement is voluntary or involuntary; (3) what the causes for the movement are; or (4) what the length of the stay is ', a broad definition indeed. Under such definition, and strictly limiting our analysis to south-to-north migrants, two major broad categories may be identified:

whose reasons to migrate may differ, even if difference between the two categories are probably smaller that estimated once and the same migrating individual may fall in one or the other category at the same time.

Asylum seeker
A person who seeks safety from persecution or serious harm in a country other than his or her own and awaits a decision on the application for refugee status under relevant international and national instruments. In case of a negative decision, the person must leave the country and may be expelled, unless permission to stay is provided on humanitarian grounds.
Refugee

A person who, ' owing to a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinions, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country (Geneva Convention, 1951, Art. 1A).'

Drivers of migration

The factors acting together and determining the final decision of an individual to migrate may be subdivided in macro-elements (largely independent from the individual), meso-elements (more closely related to the individual but not completely under the individual's control) and micro-element (personal characteristics and attitudes). Those that have been more extensively studied will be discussed in this article.

Inadequate human and economic development

Human development is enormously unbalanced in the various regions of the planet and the gap is increasingly wide. The economic and political reasons underlying this sad situation are beyond the scope of this article and will not be addressed here. The Human Development Index (HDI) is a composite index combining the performances of the different countries on health (life-expectancy), education (years of schooling) and economics ( per capita income) proposed by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP).

Poor health services, little educated and qualified work force and poverty are a fertile background promoting migration of individuals in search of better life. New communication technologies, largely available in urban settings even in developing countries, allows people to compare the western lifestyle with the local situations where the luxurious houses and cars of expatriates (and local authorities...) often contrast with the poor living conditions of the local populations. The gradient of prosperity.

Demographic increase, urbanization

The world's living population has increased in an unprecedented way during the last two centuries, from 1 billion estimated to live in the year 1800 to the more than 6 billion living at the beginning of the second millennium, to the roughly 11 billion that will probably inhabit the earth in 2100. The bulk of this massive increase is taking place in Asia and Africa, where high fertility rates, driven by infant mortality, and poor birth control programmes result in high annual population increase rates. On the contrary, the fertility rate in western industrialized countries is shrinking. According to the World Bank, the average fertility rates in high income countries was 1.7 children per woman in 2015, while it was 4.8 per woman in low-income countries. As a global result, the population of western industrialized countries is reducing in size and getting progressively old (aging population), while the young working-age population of the developing countries is rapidly increasing. The African continent offers a striking example. From 493 million in 1990, the African population grew to 1 billion in 2015 and it is expected to rise to 2.2 billion in 2050 and to 4 billion in 2100!

As a matter of fact, the flow of migration in relation to demographic increase could also be regarded in the opposite way, raising the question ' why do so few people migrate? ' In fact, even if the stereotype of migration proposes a model of 'mass' invasion of rich countries by migrants from low-income countries in terms of absolute numbers, the proportion of migrating people is quite stable (3.3% of the world population in 2015, 2.4% of the world population in 1960).

Climate changes

It is now almost universally accepted that the climate is becoming warmer and warmer at an increasing speed, causing health inequalities across the world apart from other unwanted effects. It is also accepted that the driving causes of such climate changes started with the industrial revolution, are mainly anthropogenic in nature and are largely due to the emission of greenhouse gases (in particular CO ₂, methane and nitrous oxide) by industrial activities from carbon-based energy. It has been estimated that 97% of such emissions occur in industrialized rich countries, leaving a mere 3% emission coming out from low-income countries. The impact of climate changes is astonishingly severe in the south of the world, where 150000 are estimated to have died in 2000 from the consequences of the planet warming. Drought, flooding, increases in arthropod borne infections due to vector spreading in regions where the contrast measures are difficult to implement due to scarcity of means also indirectly impact on morbidity and economic agricultural revenues. The case of Lake Chad is extreme but enlightening. From the nearly 25000 square kilometres Lake Chad had in 1963, its water now covers a bare one-twentieth of its original extension, with severe impact on the fertility of the surrounding land. This shortage of water, food and agricultural resources forces people and livestock to move in search of a less hostile environment. Examples of land degradation induced by climate changes are multiple and represent a driving force for people to migrate by producing food insecurity and risk of health-related crisis.

According to the IOM, environmental migrants are those ' persons or groups of persons who, for reason of sudden or progressive changes in the environment that adversely affect their lives or living conditions, are obliged to leave their habitual homes, or choose to do so, either temporarily or permanently, and who move either within their country or abroad '.

The 'climatic migrants', as they are sometime called, might possibly reach the astonishing figure of 200 million by the year 2050, according to the IOM. However, forecasts are difficult to make because sound scientific data on this topic are extremely scarce and do not permit reliable estimates. The assessment of the real impact of worsening environmental conditions, albeit logical, would greatly benefit from sound research studies.

Wars and dictatorship

Even now, at the beginning of the third millennium, many areas of the world-in virtually all continents-host bloody conflicts and social instability where armed parties fight or where rude dictatorships are ruling and denying social rights. Some are well-known to the public (i.e. Syria and Afghanistan), while others are not as is the case of the Horn of Africa (Eritrea, Somalia) and some areas of West Africa (Mali, Gambia) and the Sahelian region or in Central and Southern America. People may be denied basic human rights and the access to education and to a dignified life may be prevented, especially for females. Fundamentalism is such countries may easily grow, as it is the case with the deadly activities of Boko Haram in Northern Nigeria, that it is estimated to have caused the internal displacement of nearly 2 million people. It is to be noted that the majority of displaced people in warring nations are relocated within national borders, thus officially they are not considered international migrants, but rather internal refugees.

Land grabbing

Land grabbing is a phenomenon that has become increasingly important since the beginning of the new millennium. The term 'land grabbing' refers to the intensive exploitation of vast areas of land in rural areas of low-income countries by private international enterprises or even by foreign governments in order to implement large-scale intensive cultivations (mainly biofuels and food crops) or to exploit minerals, forestry or the touristic industry. This happens to the detriment of the poor local population, which is poorly (and often forcedly) compensated and virtually obliged to leave the rural areas to reach the degraded urban peripheries within their own countries, where they often live a difficult life in a different setting from the one they and their families have experienced for centuries. Psychological and physical impairment is frequent in such communities and international migration may then occur. Apart from this direct impact, the economic benefit of small-scale agricultural industry is of advantage of the local communities, while the intensive exploitation of lands as a consequence of land grabbing is mainly to the benefit of the private enterprise stock owners and the international market, leading to the progressive impoverishment of the increasingly resource-poor country. Together with environmental damages due to climate changes, the loss of small-scale land property and its turning into intensive exploitation causes a progressive land degradation, which leads to a progressive abandonment of native lands by a mass of people.

Religion

This issue will only be briefly alluded to, as it is too wide and complex to be adequately addressed in such context. The history of humankind offers many examples of mass population movements caused by religion persecution or following the dream of a land where individual faith could be freely preached. However, these movements have often been the consequence of a political will as it has been the case of the conflictive Muslim, Hindu and Sikh movement across the newly created border between India and East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) in 1947. Similarly, Jews flowed to Palestine after the Second World War, also attracted by the law of return, favouring migration of Jewish people to the new state of Israel. In many other instances, religion has been the pretext for ethnic persecution and expulsion, as is possibly the case for the Rohingya Muslim population from Myanmar or the mass movements caused by armed fundamentalists groups such as Daesh or Boko Haram in the Middle East and sub-Saharan West Africa, respectively.

Sexual identity

A number of countries have a quite restrictive policy on sexual identity and LTGB people (lesbians, gay, transgender and bisexual people) face psychological and even physical violence, forcing them to hide their sexual identity. The impact of such policies on international migration has recently been the subject of some investigation that is in its infancy. No doubt, however, that an impact exists, especially from countries where 'machismo' is considered a value. A comprehensive overview of the issues related to the protection of social rights in those people forced to migrate due to their sexual orientation may be found in the 2013 thematic issue of Forced Migration Review.

Education

A final note has to be dedicated to the education level of migrants. International migrants are often regarded as illiterate and poor people escaping poverty from remote rural areas. This stereotype is far from being true in most instances for both economic and forced migrants. Migrants in search of a better future usually have a more pronounced initiative, attitude and boldness than the average person, with some skills and financial resources needed to plan and fund a long-distance journey as it is the case for international migration. In most instances, they are more educated than their peers left behind in their origin country. Sometimes they are even more educated than their peers in the destination country. In addition, individuals from families or communities that already positively experienced migration in previous years are more inclined to migrate as their travel abroad is regarded as of possible benefit to the origin society. For such individuals, the existence of ethnic or family links in the destination country is a further driver of migration. The relationship between education and migration are twofold. From one side, the migration of educated people from low-middle income countries to OECD countries constitute a net loss of human qualified resources for the origin countries and a gain for the host country. A phenomenon known as 'brain drain'. From the other side, the financial and ideational remittances from destination countries may also have an impact on the education of non-migration children and adolescents in their origin countries.

Personal willingness to migrate

Health challenges in the destination country

Regardless of the mix of drivers leading to migration in any individual person, migrants usually undergo a difficult integration process in the hosting community. Conversely, the receiving country could also be obliged to adapt its social and health systems to face the needs of the hosted population. In many instances, this process is not without conflict for the cultural and economic adaptations that it implies.

From the health point of view, although generalization is inappropriate due to the heterogeneity of provenance and epidemiology of diseases in the origin countries, newly arrived migrants are usually healthy (the 'healthy migrant' effect) but more affected by latent infections than the host populations, requiring screening policies and links to care. Crowded and inadequate living conditions in hosting camps may also lead to infectious diseases outbreaks, as recently reported in France. However, despite the reported higher prevalence of selected infections in migrants, including potentially diffusive respiratory tract infections, the risk of significant spread in the receiving populations has been reported to be negligible, if any.

Once resettled in the host country, foreign-borne individuals may face infectious exposure when travelling back-often accompanied by children born in the host country-to their countries of origin. They are then referred as VFRs (Visiting Friends and Relatives), and represent a significant proportion of imported diseases in western countries, as in is the case for imported malaria. Pre-travel advice in such VFR populations poses significant challenges to optimally address adequate preventive measures. However, even the non-communicable diseases burden (diabetes, hypertension, metabolic disorders, cardio-vascular diseases, etc.) is increasing among migrants, as a result of changing alimentary habits in developing countries and to the progressive acquisition of western lifestyles after a few years in the receiving country.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the migration flow is now a structural phenomenon that is likely to continue in the next decades. While many migrants from low-income countries aim to reach more affluent areas of the world, it is to be appreciated that a similar, or even bigger, mass of people migrates to neighbouring low-income countries in the same geographical area.

Migration is always the result of a complex combination of macro-, meso- and micro- factors, the former acting at the society level and the latter acting at the family or even individual level. The prevalence of a factor over the other is unpredictable.

Among the 'macro-factors', the inadequate human and economic development of the origin country, demographic increase and urbanization, wars and dictatorships, social factors and environmental changes are the major contributors to migration. These are the main drivers of forced migration, both international or internal.

Among the 'meso-factors', linking the individual to his/her ethnic group or religious community, land grabbing, communication technology and diasporic links play an important role. The role of communication technologies and social media to attract people out of their origin countries is indisputable today. Awareness of living conditions in the affluent world-albeit often grossly exaggerated-contributes to nurture the myth of western countries as Eldorado. The ease of communication with the diaspora and family members who migrated previously reinforces the desire of escaping from poverty to a challenging new life abroad.

However, 'micro-factors' such as education, religion, marital status and personal attitude to migration also have a key role to make the final decision to migrate that is an individual's choice.

In any case, the stereotype of the illiterate poor migrant coming from the most remote rural areas and reaching the borders of affluent countries does not stand. The poorest people simply do not have the means to escape war and poverty and remain trapped in his/her country or in the neighbouring one. Some degree of entrepreneurship, educational level, social and financial support is usually requested for international south-north economic migration and personal characteristics and choices also play a role. This phenomenon has a positive aspect, as the possibility of success of migrants increases as do remittances, but also a negative one, as the most active part of the origin country may be drained preventing local development.

Usually, even if generalization is inappropriate, newly arrived migrants are in good health, despite a higher prevalence of latent chronic infections ('healthy migrant' effect). However, marginalization in the host country may lead to a deterioration of such health status, a phenomenon known as the 'exhaust migrant' effect.

Host countries, which may have also an economic benefit from migration in the medium long-term, have to be prepared to receive migrants for the benefit of the migrants themselves and their native population.

Conflict of Interest

None declared.

References

United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (UN-DESA)

. World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision, Key Findings and Advance Tables. Working Paper No. ESA/P/WP/248,
.

International Organization for Migration (IOM)

. World Migration Report, 2008: managing labour mobility in the evolving global economy. Geneva,
.

Migration, Environment and Climate Change: Assessing the Evidence

.

: International Organization for Migration,

.

Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre

. Norwegian Refugee Council. Global Report on Internal Displacement, 2017. Geneva,
.

Migration due to sexual orientation and gender identity

.

. .

. International Migration and Education - A Web of Mutual Causation. Paper commissioned for the Global Education Monitoring Report 2019 Consultation on Migration. UNESCO, Paris 2018.

Author notes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Drivers of migration: why do people move?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
More than 244 million international migrants were estimated to live in a foreign country in 2015, leaving apart the massive number of people that have been relocated in their own country. Furthermore, a substantial proportion of international migrants from southern countries do not reach western nations but resettle in neighbouring low-income countries in the same geographical area.

# data[].attributes.headline
"North Korean man caught by South after crossing border"

# data[].attributes.subject
"North Korean man caught by South after crossing border"

# data[].attributes.body
Giada S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Since taking power in 2011, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un is believed to have have ordered the tightening of border controls between the two sides and with China, including by laying more landmines.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
North Korean man caught by South after crossing border

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Since taking power in 2011, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un is believed to have have ordered the tightening of border controls between the two sides and with China, including by laying more landmines.

# data[].attributes.headline
"Romania Violated Journalist’s Freedom of Expression, Says European Court"

# data[].attributes.subject
"Romania Violated Journalist’s Freedom of Expression, Says European Court"

# data[].attributes.body
Chiara

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The building of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Photo: EPA-EFE/PATRICK SEEGER

The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday condemned Romania for failing to uphold freedom of expression in the case of a local journalist who was fined by a domestic court over a series of critical articles about another journalist in the north-eastern county of Bacau.

"The case concerned the domestic authorities' decision to order the applicant, a journalist, to pay damages for having published five blog posts criticising L.B., another journalist who was the editor-in chief of a newspaper in the Desteptarea media group and producer for a local television channel belonging to the same group," the ECHR said in a statement.

The posts were published by Gheorghe-Florin Popescu in 2011. The same year, L.B. brought civil proceedings before a court in Bacau, which ruled that two of the articles posted by Popescu lacked any factual basis when describing L.B. as morally responsible for a murder-suicide.

The Bacau court also established that Popescu had used vulgar and defamatory expressions that affected L.B.'s honour and reputation, and ordered him to compensate L.B. with the equivalent of 1,100 euros.

Popescu subsequently appealed against the verdict, but Romania's Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal as unfounded in 2013. The journalist then took his case to the ECHR.

More than seven years later, judges at the ECHR unanimously reached the conclusion that Romania breached Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which protects freedom of expression.

According to Tuesday's verdict, Romanian courts failed to make "a distinction between statements of facts and value judgments" when examining Popescu's criticism of L.B.

The verdict also said that Romanian courts ignored "the fact that the applicant was a journalist and that the freedom of the press fulfilled a fundamental function in a democratic society".

They also ignored the fact that L.B. was a publicly known figure before the controversy involving Popescu, the verdict added.

The Romanian courts ruled that some of the content of Popescu's articles was offensive, but the ECHR concluded that "although the satirical nature of the articles had been the main argument in the applicant's defence, the domestic courts had failed to investigate with sufficient care whether or not this was a form of exaggeration or distortion of reality, naturally aimed to provoke".

"In the court's view, the style was part of the form of expression and was protected as such under Article 10, in the same way as the content of the statements," the ECHR said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Romania Violated Journalist's Freedom of Expression, Says European Court

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The building of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Photo: EPA-EFE/PATRICK SEEGER The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday condemned Romania for failing to uphold freedom of expression in the case of a local journalist who was fined by a domestic court over a series of critical articles about another journalist in the north-eastern county of Bacau.

# data[].attributes.headline
"Julian Assange verdict: A test case for press freedom"

# data[].attributes.subject
"Julian Assange verdict: A test case for press freedom"

# data[].attributes.body
Maria Claudia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For the past 10 years, Australian Julian Assange has been pursued by US authorities as an enemy of the state. He exposed their dark secrets. On January 4, London judge Vanessa Baraitser will announce her decision on whether the investigative journalist will be extradited to the US.

Assange is being held at the London maximum security prison Belmarsh - the UN special rapporteur on torture, Nilz Melzer, described it to DW as solitary confinement. Assange spent seven years claiming asylum at the Ecuadorian embassy in London, now he faces the threat of spending the rest of his life behind American prison walls - under conditions Melzer describes as torture.

For German Green party member of parliament Margit Stumpp, the court case is an "acid test for the western community of values." Together with lawmakers from the Social Democrats, the conservative Christian Democrats, the socialist Left party, and the Free Democrats, Stumpp established the cross-party working group "Freedom for Julian Assange." Stumpp told DW that she sees "the rule of law being violated" in the extradition procedures. That started with the fact that she was unable to receive access to the court process as an observer. "I've often been to Turkey, and there I had no problems getting into the courtroom," Stumpp said, an unflattering comparison for the UK.

Good news for dictators?

In early November, BBC correspondent Orla Guerin confronted Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev with critical questions about press freedom in his country. Aliyev answered that in view of its treatment of Assange, the UK had no right to lecture other countries on matters of human rights and press freedom.

Assange supporters have taken to the streets across the world

Nils Melzer is not only the UN special rapporteur on torture. He also teaches international law at the University of Glasgow and knows his way around British law. His verdict on how Julian Assange has been dealt with is damning. "The legal proceeding in itself is not respecting the basic standards of human rights, of due process and the rule of law." The motivation is obvious in the face of revelations of American "corruption and war crimes and other criminal conduct," said Melzer: "The United States is trying to criminalize investigative journalism ... And the British system, unfortunately, is in collusion with the United States." On December 21, Melzer appealed to US President Donald Trump to pardon Assange in his final days at the White House.

Human rights activists shocked

Reporters without Borders (RSF) has followed the proceedings closely - under "shocking circumstances," Christian Mihr told DW. The director of the Germany branch of the organization attended many days of the court proceedings in London and alleged that British authorities "attempted to systematically shut out international observers." Even video access, which was initially guaranteed, was withdrawn at short notice. The few observers who were granted access were not allowed in the courtroom itself; they had to monitor a glitchy video transmission from a separate room under extremely uncomfortable conditions, in cold temperatures. In the end, Reporters Without Borders was the only NGO present in court every day of the trial.

Regarding the testimony of the witnesses - most of whom were called up by the defense - RSF head Mihr said it was made clear not only that "this is a question of freedom of the press." It has also become clear that it is "a question of life or death for Julian Assange." Psychologists, psychotherapists, and even a psychiatrist for the prosecution spoke of a very problematic state of health for Assange. "There is an acute risk of suicide under the conditions of solitary confinement," said Mihr.

As for the verdict to be announced on January 4, Mihr holds little hope. "I've always said that this is a political process. That means there is political pressure. And that means - as sad, as tragic as that is - I won't be surprised if the court approves extradition."

Whatever the verdict, both parties have the option to appeal. After two possible higher courts in the UK, the extradition proceedings could end up before the European Court of Human Rights. The question of whether Julian Assange will be extradited to the US could therefore drag on for years.
This article was translated from German.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Julian Assange verdict: A test case for press freedom | DW | 04.01.2021

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For the past 10 years, Australian Julian Assange has been pursued by US authorities as an enemy of the state. He exposed their dark secrets. On January 4, London judge Vanessa Baraitser will announce her decision on whether the investigative journalist will be extradited to the US.

# data[].attributes.body
Giada C. and Giulia S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The right to freedom of speech and expression in India is not absolute. Article 19 of India's constitution guarantees the right "to freedom of speech and expression." However, the constitution also allows the government to limit freedom of expression "in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence."

There are also several sections of the penal code that criminalize certain speech. Section 153A, for example, criminalizes "promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise." Section 292 criminalizes obscenity. Section 295A criminalizes "deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class" of citizens. Section 298 criminalizes "uttering any word or making any sound" with "the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of any person."

The Indian government has used these laws to ban books, such as Salman Rushdie's novel The Satanic Verses, and movies, such as India's Daughter, a 2015 documentary film made by Leslee Udwin for the BBC on the 2012 gang rape of a Delhi college student. In 2014, RSS member and self- appointed cultural vigilante Dina Nath Batra forced Penguin India to withdraw University of Chicago scholar Wendy Doniger's book The Hindus: An Alternative History, and to agree to pulp all copies in its possession, by bringing a series of civil and criminal actions against the book on the basis that it violated Section 295a.

Charges of sedition have recently multiplied in India as a way to curb free speech and to intimidate government critics.

Then there is sedition. In an effort to quash rebellion, the British made sedition a crime in India in 1860. And so it remains. Section 124 of the Indian Penal Code states: "Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law in India shall be punished with imprisonment for life." India's Supreme Court has limited sedition to speech that is "incitement to imminent lawless action." Few have been convicted of sedition, but it suffices to bring the charge against someone to unleash a legal process that can take years before the individual is, as is usually the case, acquitted.

Charges of sedition have recently multiplied in India as a way to curb free speech and to intimidate government critics. India's Crime Records Bureau recorded 47 cases of alleged sedition in nine Indian states in 2014. A folk singer, students cheering at a cricket game, and the author Arundhati Roy are just some who have been charged with sedition. In February 2016, Kanhaiya Kumar, the leader of the student union of Jawaharlal Nehru University, was charged with sedition under politicized circumstances we will discuss in the next section. The case kicked up a media storm and attracted worldwide attention. India's Supreme Court ordered Kumar released on bail.

Censorship also comes in the form of physical intimidation. In January 2015, celebrated Tamil author Perumal Murugan posted on his Facebook page: "Perumal Murugan, the writer, is dead." Murugan declared literary suicide after being hounded by local chapters of right-wing Hindu groups affiliated with the BJP and the RSS that found passages in his novel One Part Woman offensive. After copies of his book were burnt by an angry mob and he'd received threatening phone calls, Murugan met with local authorities and agreed to apologize and withdraw copies of his book from sale.

Powerful Indian corporations, which do not hesitate to sue authors, journalists, or activists for defamation, backed up with claims for damages no author, publishing house, newspaper, or nonprofit group can afford to pay.

In July 2016, the Madras High Court delivered a decision in defense of the author and of free speech in general. Chief Justice Sanjay Kaul wrote in the court's decision: "One of the most cherished rights under our Constitution is to speak one's mind and write what one thinks." He told the book's detractors: "If you do not like the book, throw it away." It was a stinging rebuke to self-appointed censors of the Hindu right.

The charge of defamation is also used to silence free speech. Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code criminalize defamation in terms so broad anyone can claim to be aggrieved by something said or written about them. This includes powerful Indian corporations, which do not hesitate to sue authors, journalists, or activists for defamation, backed up with claims for damages no author, publishing house, newspaper, or nonprofit group can afford to pay. In addition to the threat of colossal punitive damages, filing a defamation suit against someone is a sure way to tie the person up with legal fees and court proceedings, potentially for years.

According to the Index on Censorship, in 2014, seven legal notices of defamation were served in India: five to media companies, including publishing houses; one to a marketing federation; and one to journalists Subir Ghosh,

Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, and Jyotirmoy Chaudhuri for a book on Reliance Industries Ltd., India's biggest corporation, run by Mukesh Ambani. Reliance sought 1 billion Indian rupees, or about $16,400,000, in damages. Environmental journalist Keya Acharya was slapped with a defamation suit by industrialist Sai Rama Krishna Karaturi, of Karaturi Global Ltd., also demanding a billion rupees in damages. The same year the Sahara Media Group dropped a defamation case asking for 2 billion rupees in damages against journalist Tamal Bandophadhyay for his book Sahara: The Untold Story after the author agreed to include a disclaimer by the company in his book.

What about freedom of the press in India?

India's media has become increasingly concentrated in the hands of powerful, family-owned corporations. High-profile journalists whose views do not toe the new line have been pushed out or quit their jobs. Self-censorship by journalists is a growing problem. Those who do speak out regularly face harassment and threats. Reporters Without Borders ranked India in 133rd place out of 180 countries in its 2016 World Press Freedom Index.

India has become a dangerous place to be a journalist. The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) sounded the alarm in February 2016 after two journalists, one working for the BBC, were forced to flee the Indian state of Chhattisgarh after threats to their lives, and lawyers for imprisoned journalists were evicted from their offices. Chhattisgarh is in the grip of a violent confrontation between security forces, mafia gangs, and Maoist insurgents, and journalists trying to report on what is going on find themselves targeted on all fronts. CPJ said it had documented a pattern of police in Chhattisgarh harassing, abusing, and threatening journalists to silence their reporting, while Maoists had attacked journalists they accused of being police informants.

Reporters Without Borders documented nine journalists killed in India in 2015, five while doing their job.

And then there are the journalists who are killed for doing their job. Reporters Without Borders documented nine journalists killed in India in 2015, five while doing their job. "Their deaths confirm India's position as Asia's deadliest country for media personnel, ahead of both Pakistan and Afghanistan." In May 2017, two journalists were shot dead in eastern India in a single 24-hour period. Shock waves rippled through India's press in August 2017 when senior journalist Gauri Lankesh was shot dead in front of her home in Bengaluru by a gunman who sped away on a motorcycle. Defiant in her critical reporting on the Hindu right, her death eerily recalled the murder in 2014, previously mentioned, of rationalist Malleshappa Kalburgi.

_______________________

From India in the 21st Century: What Everyone Needs to Know by Mira Kamdar. Copyright © 2018 by OUP and published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

A former Paris-based editorial board member of The New York Times, Mira Kamdar is a Pacific Council member and an award-winning author. This is her third book on India.
The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Pacific Council.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The right to freedom of speech and expression in India is not absolute. Article 19 of India's constitution guarantees the right "to freedom of speech and expression."

# data[].attributes.headline
"Police in Minneapolis violated reporters' constitutional rights during George Floyd protests"

# data[].attributes.subject
"Police in Minneapolis violated reporters' constitutional rights during George Floyd protests"

# data[].attributes.body
Meriem

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Police in Minnesota have violated journalists' constitutional rights as law enforcement officers pepper sprayed, fired rubber bullets at or otherwise attacked, injured or arrested members of the press covering recent protests, a class-action lawsuit filed Wednesday alleges.

The federal lawsuit, filed by two Minneapolis law firms and the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota on behalf of a freelance journalist, alleges that a pattern of attacks on journalists carried out by the Minneapolis Police Department and the Minnesota State Patrol "tramples on the Constitution."

"It violates the sacrosanct right to freedom of speech and freedom of the press

that form the linchpin of a free society," the lawsuit says. Reporters' rights to due process and against unreasonable force and unlawful seizures were also violated, the suit says.

Jared Goyette, the named plaintiff in the suit, is a freelance journalist who says Minneapolis police shot him in the face with a less-lethal ballistic ammunition as he tried to document injuries sustained by a protester last Wednesday. Goyette's nose and eyes were injured, and he left the scene to seek medical treatment, the lawsuit says. He also experienced "intimidating and obstructive behavior" by police in the days after he returned to covering the protests.

The lawsuit documents multiple cases of other journalists covering the protest in Minneapolis who have faced arrest, physical force, chemical agents and threats.

The suit alleges Minneapolis police and Minnesota State Patrol violated journalists' First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights in their actions.

The Minneapolis Police Department and Minnesota State Patrol did not immediately respond to USA TODAY's request for comment.

"We are facing a full-scale assault on the First Amendment freedom of the press," said Brian Hauss, staff attorney with the ACLU's Speech, Privacy and Technology Project. "We will not let these official abuses go unanswered."

Protests have spread around the U.S. in the past week after the killing of George Floyd, a black man who was pinned to the ground May 25 by a white Minneapolis police officer who held his knee to Floyd's neck as Floyd told the officer he could not breathe.

Two autopsies, one by a county medical examiner and the other commissioned by the Floyd family, have ruled Floyd's death a homicide.

In some cities, peaceful protests have turned violent into the early morning hours with looting and fires, and police have used physical force with riot shields, batons and chemical agents to disperse crowds. In some cases, police used force on peaceful demonstrations.

Journalists covering Minneapolis' unrest were not alone as dozens of reporters across the country have had cameras slapped from their hands, projectiles fired at their bodies and tear gas fill their lungs.

According to the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, the majority of attacks on journalists have been at the hands of law enforcement officials, though some have come from protesters. The group has tracked more than 233 press freedom violations amid recent protests, including more than 41 arrests, 153 assaults and 39 instances of damage to equipment as of Wednesday. The group says 47 of the incidents have occurred in Minneapolis.

Some of the attacks on journalists by law enforcement have appeared targeted as reporters have shown their press badges and announced they are part of the news media.

Hauss said the ACLU plans to file lawsuits across the country. "Law enforcement officers who target journalists will be held accountable," he said.

In Minneapolis, one of the most high-profile instances occurred on live TV when CNN's Omar Jimenez and other crew members were arrested Friday morning as they covered scenes of law enforcement in Minneapolis clearing the streets.

Jimenez identified himself as a journalist, with a full camera crew filming him as he showed his press badge. He asked the state troopers where they would like him to be before they arrested him. Jimenez and his crew were later released, and Gov. Tim Walz apologized.

The night before, Tyler J. Davis, a Des Moines Register reporter covering the protests for the USA TODAY Network, saw police using chemical irritants to subdue protesters. He pulled out his camera to record what was happening, and an officer began spraying him.

"He laid on the trigger for a few seconds as I told him I was a member of the media," Davis wrote in an op-ed describing his experiences in Minneapolis.

"I thought I was OK - maybe just grazed by the irritant. But after roughly three minutes my eyes and face began burning intensely and I walked north along Hennepin away from the scene. I could hardly see," he added.

"The power of the people is rooted in the ability of the free press to investigate and report news, especially at a time like this when police have brutally murdered one of our community members," ACLU-MN Legal Director Teresa Nelson said. "Police are using violence and threats to undermine that power, and we cannot let that happen. Public transparency is absolutely necessary for police accountability."

Katy Glenn Bass, research director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, said the lawsuit is "a very strong complaint" in how it lays out violations of press freedom in Minneapolis.

"When you collect it all, all the behavior from one city in one complaint, you can really see why they think it's a pattern," Glenn Bass said. "This really seems like a deliberate effort to target members of the news media."

Elsewhere, other USA TODAY Network reporters in Asbury Park, N.J., Philadelphia, Cincinnati and Des Moines were arrested or detained.
'This is unacceptable':Our journalists are being attacked while doing their jobs
Journalists in Louisville, Detroit, Madison, Wisconsin, and Fayetteville, North Carolina, were among others in the USA TODAY Network who were pepper sprayed or attacked, some resulting in hospitalization.

In Washington, D.C., reporters were in the crowd near Lafayette Square documenting the group of peaceful protesters whom police cleared Monday night with tear gas and flash-bang grenades before the city's curfew took effect. President Donald Trump later posed for a photo with a bible outside St. John's Church, where the demonstrators had gathered.

Attacks on journalists by police or others have occurred in other cities including New York, Denver, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Pittsburgh and Columbus, Ohio.

In an op-ed, publisher of USA TODAY and president of news for the USA TODAY Network Maribel Wadsworth, editor in chief of USA TODAY Nicole Carroll and vice president of local news for the USA TODAY Network Amalie Nash called these attacks "unacceptable."

"We must be able to do our jobs safely. We call for an immediate end to law enforcement harassment and targeting of journalists who are clearly identified, not interfering in police activity and just doing their jobs: Bringing truth to the American people," the wrote in the op-ed.

Glenn Bass said that while attacks on the press by law enforcement have happened during previous protests in years past, they still show "an egregious, shocking pattern of direct targeting of the press."

Reporters are needed on the scene of these protests, especially ones that occur after a curfew order is in place, to document what both police and demonstrators are doing, Glenn Bass said.
Contributing: Lorenzo Reyes Follow USA TODAY's Ryan Miller on Twitter @RyanW_Miller
"Media coverage helps put these things in larger context," she added.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Police in Minneapolis violated reporters' constitutional rights during George Floyd protests, lawsuit says

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Police in Minnesota have violated journalists' constitutional rights as law enforcement officers pepper sprayed, fired rubber bullets at or otherwise attacked, injured or arrested members of the press covering recent protests, a class-action lawsuit filed Wednesday alleges.

# data[].attributes.headline
"Belarus: Criminal case against opposition is a shocking violation of freedom of expression"

# data[].attributes.subject
"Belarus: Criminal case against opposition is a shocking violation of freedom of expression"

# data[].attributes.body
Lidia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Responding to the announcement that Belarus’s Prosecutor General has launched a criminal case against the Coordination Council, a new body formed by opposition leaders, Bruce Millar, Amnesty International’s Acting Director for Eastern Europe and Central Asia, said:

“Not content with arresting thousands of protesters, torturing detainees and beating up journalists and medics, the Belarusian authorities have now accused peaceful opposition leaders of being a threat to national security. This demonstrates just how far the regime of Alyaksandr Lukashenka is willing to go to cling to power. If anything is threatening peace and security in Belarus it is the authorities’ violence against their own people.

“This development has once again proved that there is no space in Belarus for any opinion that questions or criticizes President Lukashenka’s government. It has extinguished any remaining illusions that the authorities are interested in respecting human rights and the rule of law.

“We continue to call on the Belarusian authorities to end abuses against peaceful protesters, and remind them of their obligation under international law to respect the right to freedom of expression. The Prosecutor’s announcement is likely to appal protesters, and the people of Belarus must be able to express their views without fear of reprisals.”

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Belarus: Criminal case against opposition is a shocking violation of freedom of expression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Responding to the announcement that Belarus's Prosecutor General has launched a criminal case against the Coordination Council, a new body formed by opposition leaders, Bruce Millar, Amnesty International's Acting Director for Eastern Europe and Central Asia, said: "Not content with arresting thousands of protesters, torturing detainees and beating up journalists and medics, the Belarusian authorities have now accused peaceful opposition leaders of being a threat to national security.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ken Saro Wiwa: il poeta nigeriano - impiccato con altri 8 attivisti del MOSOP

# data[].attributes.subject
Ken Saro Wiwa: il poeta nigeriano - impiccato con altri 8 attivisti del MOSOP

# data[].attributes.body
Giada S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Il Teatro degli Orrori - A sangue freddo [OFFICIAL VIDEO]

# data[].attributes.headline
"New UN report cites violations of rights to freedom of opinion and expression in South Sudan"

# data[].attributes.subject
"New UN report cites violations of rights to freedom of opinion and expression in South Sudan"

# data[].attributes.body
Elisa Maria and Heloise

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Co-authored by the UN Mission in the country ( UNMISS) and the Organization's human rights wing, OHCHR, the report also warned that incitement to hatred continues to cause mistrust, fear and violence as well as of a growing climate of self-censorship in the world's youngest country.

"[South Sudan's] people have been denied the right to life, the right to justice, and, as this report details, the right to freedom of opinion and expression - rights that are not luxuries but are essential to bring about peace and development," said the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein, in a news release announcing the findings.

Across South Sudan, five years of ongoing conflict has uprooted more than four million people but peace efforts are under way both internationally and at grassroots level to end violence.

"It is vital that the voices of all the people of South Sudan are heard so that genuine, inclusive and durable peace can be achieved," said the Special Representative of the Secretary-General and head of UNMISS, David Shearer.

"All parties to the conflict must respect people's right to freedom of expression regardless of their ethnicity, beliefs or political views," he stressed.

Rights are not luxuries but are essential to bring about peace and development - High Commissioner Zeid

The report identifies 60 verified incidents - including killing, arbitrary arrest and detention, closure, suspension or censorship of newspapers, and blocking of websites - in the period from July 2016 to December 2017.

It also found that Government security forces, including the National Security Service, Sudan People's Liberation Army, and the South Sudan National Police Service, were responsible for two-thirds of the verified cases of human rights violations.

However, many victims said they had not lodged formal complaints because of fear of reprisals by influential people and a lack of trust in institutions including law enforcement and the judiciary, notes the report.

To address the situation, the report urges amendment to legislation to decriminalize defamation and ensure that powers given to security forces do not infringe on the legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of expression.

It also calls on all armed forces to guarantee the protection of journalists, civil society, and human rights defenders and respect their right to monitor and report on the armed conflict; as well as urges the Government to ensure that violations of the right to freedom of expression are promptly investigated and prosecuted.

In the news release, OHCHR also noted that the violations contained in the report include only those within the Government-controlled territory and not those in the opposition-held areas due to insecurity and access restrictions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New UN report cites violations of rights to freedom of opinion and expression in South Sudan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Co-authored by the UN Mission in the country ( UNMISS) and the Organization's human rights wing, OHCHR, the report also warned that incitement to hatred continues to cause mistrust, fear and violence as well as of a growing climate of self-censorship in the world's youngest country.

# data[].attributes.body
Eleonora

# data[].attributes.headline
"Russia: Assault on Freedom of Expression"

# data[].attributes.subject
"Russia: Assault on Freedom of Expression"

# data[].attributes.body
Carlotta

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
(Moscow) - Russia has introduced significant restrictions to online speech and invasive surveillance of online activity and prosecutes critics under the guise of fighting extremism, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.

The 83-page report, " Online and On All Fronts: Russia's Assault on Freedom of Expression," documents Russian authorities' stepped-up measures aimed at bringing the internet under greater state control. Since 2012, Russian authorities have unjustifiably prosecuted dozens of people for criminal offenses on the basis of social media posts, online videos, media articles, and interviews, and shut down or blocked access to hundreds of websites and web pages. Russian authorities have also pushed through parliament a raft of repressive laws regulating internet content and infrastructure. These laws provide the Russian government with a broad range of tools to restrict access to information, carry out unchecked surveillance, and censor information the government designates as "extremist," out of line with "traditional values," or otherwise harmful to the public.

"Russia's authorities are leading an assault on free expression," said Yulia Gorbunova, Russia researcher at Human Rights Watch. "These laws aren't just about introducing tough policies, but also about blatant violation of human rights."

Russia should repeal the repressive legislation adopted in recent years, stop prosecuting critics under the guise of fighting extremism, and uphold its international obligations to safeguard free expression, Human Rights Watch said.

Human Rights Watch interviewed more than 50 lawyers, journalists, editors, political and human rights activists, experts, and bloggers and their family members, and analyzed laws and government regulations pertaining to internet content and freedom of expression, as well as indictments, court rulings, and other documents relevant to specific cases.

Some of the restrictive laws appear designed to shrink the space, including online, for public debate, especially on issues the authorities view as divisive or sensitive, such as the armed conflict in Ukraine, Russia's role in the war in Syria, the rights of LGBT people, and public protests or other political and civic activism.

Curbing free speech serves to shut down public debate and denies a voice to anyone dissatisfied with the ongoing economic crisis or simply critical of Russia's foreign policy, Human Rights Watch said.

"We have dozens of cases where people were literally sent to jail," Andrei Soldatov, an investigative journalist and expert on internet freedom in Russia, told Human Rights Watch. "That of course has its effect on the level and freedom for political and public debate in social media."

Other laws aim to undermine the privacy and security of internet users by regulating data storage, unjustifiably restricting users' access to information, and ensuring that a wealth of data, including confidential user information and the content of communications, could be made available to authorities, often without any judicial oversight.

In 2016, parliament passed a set of counterterrorism amendments requiring telecommunications and internet companies to retain the contents of all communications for six months and the metadata for three years. The law makes it easier for the authorities to identify users and access personal information without judicial oversight, unjustifiably interfering with privacy and freedom of expression. A 2015 law that applies to email services, social media networks, and search engines prohibits storage of Russian citizens' personal data on servers located outside Russia. A 2017 draft law aims to prohibit anonymity for users of online messaging applications, such as WhatsApp or Telegram.

"The Russian government effectively controls most traditional media, but independent internet users have been openly challenging the government's actions," said Gorbunova. "The authorities clearly view independent online users as a threat that needs to be disarmed."

Russian authorities have increasingly used vague and overly broad anti-extremism laws against people who express critical views of the government and, in some cases, have conflated criticism of the government with extremism. Laws adopted since 2012 in the name of countering extremism have served to increase the number of prosecutions for extremist offenses, especially online.

Based on the data provided by the SOVA Center, a prominent Russian think tank, the number of social media users convicted of extremism offenses in 2015 was 216, in comparison with 30 in 2010. Between 2014 and 2016, approximately 85 percent of convictions for "extremist expression" dealt with online expression, with punishments ranging from fines or community service to prison time. In the period between September 2015 and February 2017, the number of people who went to jail for extremist speech spiked from 54 to 94.

In the three years of Russia's occupation of Crimea, authorities have silenced dissent on the peninsula. They have aggressively targeted critics through harassment, intimidation, and, in some cases, trumped-up extremism charges, including prosecution for "separatist calls." Human Rights Watch found that most prosecutions of Crimean Tatar activists, their lawyers, and others were for peacefully criticizing the occupation.

Freedom of expression is one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and it extends not only to information and ideas that are received favorably but also to those that offend, shock, or disturb. The Russian government should respect and uphold the right of people in Russia to freely receive and disseminate all types of information protected under international human rights law, Human Rights Watch said.

Russia's international partners should raise concerns at the United Nations Human Rights Council, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, and the Council of Europe about Moscow's curbs on free expression, as well as in bilateral conversations with the Russian government.

Major internet companies operating in Russia, such as Twitter, Facebook, Microsoft, Google, and VK should carefully assess Russia's government demands to censor content or share user data and refrain from complying where the underlying law or specific request are inconsistent with international human rights standards. They should not put people at risk, Human Rights Watch said.

"The Russian government has been casting criticism of it as extremist, instilling fear and encouraging self-censorship," Gorbunova said. "Today people in Russia are increasingly unsure about the boundaries of acceptable speech."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Russia: Assault on Freedom of Expression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Russia has introduced significant restrictions to online speech and invasive surveillance of online activity and prosecutes critics under the guise of fighting extremism, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.

# data[].attributes.headline
FREEDOM OF OPINION AND EXPRESSION (ART.19)

# data[].attributes.subject
FREEDOM OF OPINION AND EXPRESSION (ART.19)

# data[].attributes.headline
"Covid-19 Triggers Wave of Free Speech Abuse -  Bangladesh, China, and Egypt..."

# data[].attributes.subject
"Covid-19 Triggers Wave of Free Speech Abuse -  Bangladesh, China, and Egypt..."

# data[].attributes.body
Valeria

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At least 83 governments worldwide have used the Covid-19 pandemic to justify violating the exercise of free speech and peaceful assembly, Human Rights Watch said today. Authorities have attacked, detained, prosecuted, and in some cases killed critics, broken up peaceful protests, closed media outlets, and enacted vague laws criminalizing speech that they claim threatens public health. The victims include journalists, activists, healthcare workers, political opposition groups, and others who have criticized government responses to the coronavirus.

"Governments should counter Covid-19 by encouraging people to mask up, not shut up," said Gerry Simpson, associate crisis and conflict director at Human Rights Watch. "Beating, detaining, prosecuting, and censoring peaceful critics violates many fundamental rights, including free speech, while doing nothing to stop the pandemic."

Governments and other state authorities should immediately end excessive restrictions on free speech in the name of preventing the spread of Covid-19 and hold to account those responsible for serious human rights violations and abuses, Human Rights Watch said. The United Nations Human Rights Council in its session beginning February 22, 2021, should commission a new report from the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights focusing on states' compliance with their human rights obligations in responding to Covid-19, including the impact of restrictions on free speech and peaceful assembly.

Human Rights Watch reviewed national government responses around the world to the Covid-19 pandemic and found that unlawful interference with free speech has been one of the most common forms of overreach. In some countries, violations were limited. In others, such as China, Cuba, Egypt, India, Russia, Turkey, Venezuela, and Vietnam, government violations affected hundreds or thousands of people.

In some countries, including Bangladesh, China, and Egypt, people remain in detention at the time of writing simply for criticizing government responses to Covid-19 months earlier.

They include Zhang Zhan, a 37-year-old citizen journalist, who in December was sentenced to four years in prison by a Shanghai court for "picking quarrels and provoking trouble" by traveling in February 2020 to Wuhan and reporting from there on the coronavirus outbreak. Officials have been force-feeding Zhang since she started a hunger strike soon after her detention in May and her health is deteriorating, her lawyer said.

"I spend every day in fear," Zhang said before her conviction. "I am afraid when an Army officer threatens me. Or when the police tell me they'd beat me to death. Or when a friend warns me that the National Security Department is onto me. ... I'm just documenting the truth. Why can't I show the truth?"

Human Rights Watch identified the following trends:

Military or police forces in at least 18 countries physically assaulted journalists, bloggers, and protesters, including some who criticized government responses to Covid-19 such as insufficient healthcare funding, lockdowns, and a lack of masks and gloves for medical workers. Abuses include firing live ammunition at peaceful protesters, beating them at checkpoints, and assaulting them in detention, with apparent impunity. In most cases, these forces said they were enforcing Covid-19-related regulations. In Uganda, security forces also killed dozens of protesters.

Authorities in at least 10 countries have arbitrarily banned or broken up protests against government responses to Covid-19, in some cases citing social distancing concerns, or have used Covid-19 as a justification to disperse protests and other gatherings critical of government policies unrelated to the coronavirus. In all cases, the authorities intervened despite permitting other large gatherings.

Since January 2020, governments in at least 24 countries have enacted vague laws and measures that criminalize spreading alleged misinformation or other coverage of Covid-19, or of other public health crises, which the authorities claim threaten the public's well-being. Governments can easily use imprecise laws as tools of repression. At least five countries have also criminalized the publication of alleged misinformation on a range of other topics, including public health.

Authorities in at least 51 countries have used laws and regulations adopted to prevent the spread of Covid-19, as well as counterterrorism and other measures pre-dating the pandemic, to arbitrarily arrest, detain, and prosecute critics of government responses to the coronavirus, or of policies unrelated to the pandemic, resulting in fines and imprisonment. Those targeted include journalists, bloggers and others posting online, opposition figures and activists, protesters, academics, healthcare workers, students, lawyers, cartoonists, and artists.

Using the new laws, laws pre-dating the pandemic, or without citing any laws, at least 33 governments have threatened critics, in some cases with prosecution, if they criticize the authorities' response to the pandemic. Eight of these countries investigated, threatened, and dismissed medical staff for speaking publicly about the authorities' response to the pandemic. At least eight countries have also suspended or restricted the right to request and receive information from the authorities, including on public health matters. At least 12 countries have blocked specific Covid-19-related media reports or shut down media outlets for their reporting on the pandemic.

Governments are obligated to protect the right to freedom of expression, including the right to seek, receive, and impart information of all kinds online and offline, including on public health. The right to freedom of expression is integral to the enjoyment of freedom of assembly, including for public protest. Human rights treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), permit restrictions on freedom of speech and assembly only if they are provided for by law, are strictly necessary and proportionate to achieve a legitimate aim, including the protection of national security, public order or public health, and morals, and are nondiscriminatory. Other legitimate aims include the protection of the rights or reputation of others in the case of free speech, or, in the case of freedom of assembly, the protection of the "rights and freedom" of others.

When governments face a public emergency that " threatens the life of the nation" or "the independence or security" of a country, and they cannot achieve their public health or other public policy objectives by imposing only these restrictions, key international human rights treaties allow them temporarily to further restrict or even suspend some rights, including freedom of speech. They may do this by entering a derogation from their obligations. In such cases, governments should declare a state of emergency, show why more " severe" restrictions are necessary, and provide for such restrictions in law with sunset clauses that will ensure the temporary nature of the exceptional restrictions. As with any limitation on rights, restrictions imposed under a derogation must be nondiscriminatory. They should register these acts of derogation from their human rights obligations with the UN and, for states parties to either European or American regional instruments, with the Council of Europe or the Organization of American States, whose relevant bodies may assess the legitimacy of the derogations and monitor the restrictions

Only 44 of the 83 countries that Human Rights Watch found to have breached freedom of expression or assembly rights have declared a state of emergency. However, none registered derogations relating to freedom of speech and only eight registered derogations relating to freedom of assembly. Failing to register derogations makes it easier for governments to evade international oversight that could curb the abuse of extraordinary powers. Countries that are parties to the ICCPR and that declare states of emergencies without registering derogations nonetheless remain bound by international law governing them.

Governments also have an international obligation to provide the public with access to accurate information on health threats, including methods of preventing and controlling them. Disproportionate curbs on free speech can make it harder to counter misinformation about Covid-19, including conspiracy theories about false and dangerous treatments that have flourished on social media and offline.

"Excessive and sometimes violent crackdowns on critical speech by governments signify a perilous willingness to sideline a fundamental freedom in the name of countering Covid-19," Simpson said. "The obligation of governments to protect the public from this deadly pandemic is not a carte blanche for placing a chokehold on information and suppressing dissent."

Methodology

On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared Covid-19 a "public health emergency of international concern" and on March 11 it declared the coronavirus a pandemic. Since then, Human Rights Watch has identified violations of the rights to freedom of expression and assembly in 83 countries, based on its own research, as well as outside sources including the Covid-19 Civic Freedom Tracker of the International Center for Not-For-Profit Law (ICNL) and European Center for Not-For-Profit Law (ECNL), reports by other nongovernmental organizations and the United Nations, and international and local media.

Human Rights Watch collaborated closely with ICNL, ECNL, and the UN special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism in preparing this report, and shared all cases identified during the research with the ICNL for its tracker. The true extent of the abuses may be greater. Production of this report was supported in part by a grant from the Open Society Foundation.

Violence Against Journalists, Peaceful Protesters, Opposition Activists, Lawyers

Security forces or state officials in at least 18 countries have physically assaulted journalists and bloggers reporting on Covid-19-related policies, as well as protesters, opposition activists, and lawyers, including some who criticized government responses to Covid-19. In most cases, the security

forces justified their excessive use of force by saying they were enforcing Covid-19 regulations.

In at least one country, Uganda, security forces killed protesters. In November, the security forces arrested Robert Kyagulanyi, a presidential candidate, for allegedly breaching Covid-19 regulations by mobilizing large crowds for his campaign rallies. They then used teargas and live bullets against supporters protesting his detention, killing at least 54 and injuring 45. During the same period, the authorities allowed large pro-government rallies. Security Minister Elly Tumwine warned against further protests and told the public that the police have the right "to shoot you and kill you." On November 29, President Yoweri Museveni promised to investigate the killings and to compensate some of the victims.

In India, police officers in March beat 10 journalists with sticks as they tried to report that a checkpoint which police in Andhra Pradesh state had set up to limit the spread of Covid-19 had cut off villagers from their homes. Seven journalists required treatment at a local hospital.

"We tried reasoning with the police to ... move the check post further because it was affecting residents of at least seven villages," one of the journalists, Chalamashetty Srinivas, told local media. "The deputy superintendent of police ... got down from the car and charged at us with a lathi [bamboo police baton]."

Security forces in Cuba between April and November used regulations designed to prevent the spread of Covid-19 to harass and imprison critics, arbitrarily detaining and assaulting several opposition activists for allegedly breaching Covid-19 public health restrictions, including wearing a face mask improperly.

In Malawi on January 22, at least seven police officers assaulted a journalist in the capital Lilongwe with pipes and sticks for several minutes after he asked permission to photograph them enforcing Covid-19 regulations. At the time, the police were beating people for not wearing face masks. Police then refused to record the journalist's complaint. In Ecuador in May, security forces beat and injured peaceful protesters demonstrating against government responses including a lack of guidance for handling the bodies of people suspected of having died from Covid-19, and insufficient allocation of funds to address the pandemic.

In Ukraine on January 19, police beat, detained, and charged 13 activists for breaching the country's Covid-19 regulations. Those charged were among about 30 activists gathered for an annual commemoration of the 2009 killing in Moscow of a human rights lawyer and a journalist.

One of the activists reported that a police officer who was breaking up the event said, "The Constitution is not working now." The police hit, shoved, and verbally abused the 13, dragged them to a police bus, and one punched the protest organizer in the face. In January, the authorities had allowed other protests, involving hundreds of people gathering for many days.

Arbitrary Arrest, Detention, Prosecution

At least 51 governments have used Covid-19-related public health measures or laws pre-dating the pandemic to arbitrarily arrest, detain, or prosecute thousands of people expressing their opposition to the authorities' responses to the pandemic or other government policies unrelated to Covid-19. As of early February, people in at least three countries who criticized the response to Covid-19 were behind bars, either in pretrial detention or in prison after being convicted, including in Bangladesh, China, and Egypt.

At least 41 countries have targeted journalists, bloggers, and others posting online.

In China, the central government announced in January 2021, that over 17,000 people were "investigated" in 2020 for "fabricating and spreading Covid-19-releated false information online."

Turkey's Interior Ministry said that between March and May, 1,105 social media users had "shar[ed] provocative Coronavirus posts," resulting in the detention and questioning of 510 people. In the last three weeks of March, police also detained at least 12 journalists for their reporting on the pandemic. They include İsmet Ciğit, editor of Kocaeli Ses, a local newspaper in the western province of Kocaeli, who was arrested after the paper's website posted an article reporting two Covid-19-related deaths in a local hospital.

Police then arrested the newspaper's editor, Güngör Arslan, who was questioned by the state prosecutor. "[He] said to me 'don't write these articles,'" Arslan said. "He literally said that to me ... I have no idea whether this will turn into a prosecution, but it was certainly intimidating."

According to human rights monitors, the Russian authorities between March and June prosecuted at least 190 people, mostly journalists, activists, and politicians, for allegedly spreading false information relating to Covid-19. Authorities across India said that between late March and early May they arrested at least 640 people including bloggers, students, teachers, government employees, and traders, for allegedly publishing false information relating to Covid-19. Free speech activists accused the government of carrying out the arrests to curb criticism of authorities.

At least 13 countries have targeted opposition figures and activists.

In Azerbaijan in March and April, the authorities sentenced at least six activists and a pro-opposition journalist to between 10 and 30 days in detention on spurious charges, including breaking lockdown

rules or disobeying police orders relating to Covid-19. All had criticized conditions in government-run quarantine centers or the government's failure to provide adequate compensation to people struggling financially due to the pandemic.

In Cuba in November, security forces broke up a meeting of 14 members of an artists' coalition organizing anti-government protests and detained 13 for hours, and one overnight, after alleging that one of them had violated Covid-19 rules by failing to retake a Covid-19 test.

At least 14 countries have targeted protesters using Covid-19 policies as pretext. Following bans and shutdowns on protests in April, the Russian authorities used Covid-19 social distancing measures as pretext to deny permission for a protest in July over a constitutional referendum, despite lifting almost all other restrictions on public gatherings including in cinemas and sports venues. They then arrested at least 132 protesters who demonstrated anyway.

In January, the Russian authorities again cited Covid-19 social distancing rules for refusing to sanction peaceful protests against the detention of the opposition leader Alexey Navalny, warned people to avoid mass gatherings, maintain social distancing, and wear masks and gloves under Covid-19 rules; and then announced that gatherings were illegal and demanded that protesters leave. As of late January, the authorities had placed five protest organizers and protesters under house arrest after opening criminal investigations into possible breaches of sanitary measures.

At least 10 countries have targeted medical workers.

In Egypt between March and June, the authorities detained and charged at least nine medical staff with "spreading fake news," "misusing social media," and - under terrorism laws - "joining an unlawful organization" for speaking publicly about the lack of personal protective equipment and Covid-19 testing for medical staff. Two were members of the country's Doctors' Syndicate's governing council. In August, the Syndicate's secretary general resigned after security agencies threatened to arrest him.

"Any doctor in the current situation is not safe," one doctor, Ibrahim Bediwy, 27, warned in May in an online message referring to the government's targeting of healthcare workers who spoke publicly about the authorities' response to the pandemic. "And neither is his family." Days later, security agents burst into the home of Bediwy's parents. Bediwy was arrested on May 27 and detained on terrorism charges until he was conditionally released in late January following a court order.

"The government wants full buy-in for its Covid-19 measures, so it constantly tries to control the narrative by shutting down information the government views as inaccurate," Ayman Wafik, a right to health researcher, told Human Rights Watch. "Is there a real problem with the Covid response? The government doesn't want anyone other than itself answering that question."

In India in March, police detained and charged Indranil Khan, an oncologist in Kolkata, with "causing communal disharmony" and criminal intimidation after he posted photos online of doctors wearing raincoats due to the lack of medically appropriate gowns in a government hospital's Covid-19 ward. "I was released the next day only after I posted on social media that the state government is working hard for doctors," he said.

Academics, artists, lawyers, and students have been targeted in at least seven countries.

In Venezuela in April, police in Chivacoa, Yaracuy state, arrested and detained Iván Virgüez, a 65-year-old lawyer and president of a local human rights group, after he accused national and local governments on social media of mishandling the pandemic and causing fuel shortages. Police officers handcuffed him to a metal tube about two feet off the ground, under the sun in their precinct jail yard, for two hours, denied him access to the bathroom for 26 hours, and also refused his lawyer access.

The police chief then ordered his transfer to a hospital, where healthcare workers treated him just in time to avoid lasting harm to his bladder, according to his niece. They then returned him to the police station, where he was held overnight with seven others in a cell smaller than 20 square meters. He was charged with public disturbance, contempt, defamation of authorities, and instigation of rebellion, and was placed under house arrest.

Malaysia arrested a migrant worker in July for appearing in a documentary in which he criticized the government's treatment of migrant workers during the Covid-19 pandemic, and deported him in August.

Censorship Through Laws, Threats, and Blocking Reporting

At least 52 governments have prevented Covid-19-related reporting by enacting laws and regulations criminalizing forms of media coverage that they deem undesirable. They have also warned government critics to refrain from contradicting the authorities' response, blocked specific reports, and shut down media outlets.

Human rights experts at the UN and regional bodies have long condemned governments for using vague and ambiguous terms to outlaw the dissemination of certain types of information, including terms such as "false [and] non-objective information." In May, the UN said that laws penalizing speech about public health matters based on vague concepts such as "fake news" are not compatible with the requirements for any free speech restrictions to be lawful and proportionate responses to protect public health.

New Censorship Laws and Regulations

Since the start of the pandemic, at least 24 governments have introduced new laws and regulations banning journalists and others from contradicting the authorities' official position on measures to counter Covid-19, or reporting what the authorities deem to be misinformation or information that causes panic or induces fear or mistrust relating to Covid-19 or public health generally.

Jeanine Áñez, then interim President of Bolivia, issued a decree in March saying that "individuals who incite non-compliance with this decree or misinform or cause uncertainty to the population will be subject to criminal charges for crimes against public health." The decree used overbroad language and did not specify what actions or statements should be classified as "misinformation" or actions that "cause uncertainty to the population." In response to a public outcry, the interim government made cosmetic changes to the decree and in May revoked the provision.

Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed of Ethiopia declared a six-month state of emergency in early April in response to the pandemic, which his government did not register with the UN Office of the Secretary-General. The declaration included provisions restricting media reporting, which - much like the country's hate speech and disinformation law that came into effect two weeks earlier - contained vague and undefined language that made it difficult for journalists, activists, and anyone posting on social media to know what speech or reporting would violate the law.

Before the Covid-19 pandemic, dozens of countries had already criminalized what they broadly referred to as "fake news." Since early 2020, at least five countries have used the pandemic as an opportunity to follow suit, adopting new laws banning the publication or other dissemination of information deemed to be false, either referring to Covid-19 or public health as one reason for the restriction or without referring to public health reporting at all. Penalties for breaching these new laws range from fines to custodial sentences.

In Hungary, under the country's state of emergency powers relating to the pandemic, Parliament amended the Penal Code to enable prosecution for spreading "false information," with a possible prison sentence of up to five years.

Threats, Including for Prosecution, Against Potential Critics

In addition to imposing laws and regulations censoring the media, officials in at least 33 countries have threatened journalists, bloggers, and lawyers, including with prosecution, for criticizing, contradicting, or undermining the authorities' response to Covid-19. Seven of these countries and Thailand have also threatened or fired medical workers for that reason.

In China, the police have warned human rights lawyers and activists not to comment on the pandemic on the internet or to assist people seeking redress for any adverse impact of the authorities' response, including the government's initial coverup and abuses stemming from lockdowns, including lack of access to medical care and other excessive restrictions. Officials at China's justice bureaus have also summoned human rights lawyers and warned them of the "three bans and six forbids," which include forbidding them from giving legal advice to families of those who contracted the coronavirus, speaking to foreign media, and signing petitions.

After the first reports of a new virus emerged in the Chinese city of Wuhan in December 2019, a 34-year-old local doctor, Dr. Li Wenliang, sent texts to fellow medical school alumni about the virus. Soon after, the police accused him of spreading rumors and told him to sign a statement acknowledging his "misdemeanor" and promising not to commit further "unlawful acts." He died of Covid-19 weeks later, triggering nearly 2 million posts with the hashtag "I want freedom of speech" on a popular Chinese blogging site, all of which the Chinese authorities removed overnight. In one of his last interviews before his death, Li said, "A healthy society should not have only one kind of voice."

In Nicaragua, the authorities fired at least 31 healthcare workers between June and August after they spoke out against the government's handling of the pandemic. In Papua New Guinea, a senior police official threatened in March to prosecute anyone who disseminated "false" or "unsanctioned" information during the Covid-19 state of emergency. In Sri Lanka, the inspector general in March ordered the police to arrest anyone who "criticizes" the government, or who spreads "fake" or "malicious" information about the pandemic.

Blocking, Suspending, Shutting Down Media Outlets

At least 12 countries have blocked, suspended, or shut down newspapers, social media accounts, and television stations over their reporting on the pandemic. They include Myanmar, which has used pre-Covid-19 laws to block websites for spreading "fake news" in an "emergency situation." Under the country's March state of emergency, the Honduran president revoked the Constitution's guarantee of freedom of expression for a week.

Authorities in at least seven countries have blocked individual news reports or ordered online media or social media users to remove or edit Covid-19 related content. Vietnamese authorities summoned 650 Facebook users between January and March to question them about publishing false information relating to the pandemic, forced all of them to remove their posts, and fined over 160 of them. Vietnamese law does not only target incorrect information, but information that is deemed to defame or insult others' reputation or honor.

While international standards permit some policing of information that could cause imminent harm, it must be narrowly tailored to safeguard against censoring information that is merely critical, contrary to a government position, or viewed as dissenting, distasteful, or insulting by the authorities.

Iran, Jordan, Oman, and Yemen suspended all print media for a number of weeks even though the WHO said it was unnecessary. Fiji blocked the distribution of a newspaper generally critical of the government to Lautoka, a city in lockdown.

China and Egypt have expelled foreign journalists. Kyrgyzstan, at the start of its state of emergency, withheld accreditation for non-state media. Malaysia investigated and raided offices belonging to an international media outlet after it reported on the country's treatment of migrant workers during the Covid-19 pandemic and has refused to renew visas for two of that outlet's journalists. Zambia revoked a television station's license.

Restricting Access to Public Health Information

The right to freedom of expression includes the right to access information, including public health information. At least eight governments temporarily suspended or restricted the right to request and receive public health information, or limited press accreditation for Covid-19-related press briefings to pro-state media outlets, which put the health of their citizens at risk.

The Turkish authorities refused to publish exhaustive statistics on coronavirus infections between March and late November, resulting in a vast initial under-counting of cases. The authorities have also refused to answer an opposition politician's parliamentary question requesting information on the rising number of Covid-19-related deaths in prisons.

El Salvador's Legislative Assembly suspended all public hearings and procedures in March. This included public information requests, which prevented people from finding out their coronavirus test results and how long they were required to stay in quarantine facilities. The Bangladesh authorities dropped the media in April from the list of emergency services exempted from lockdown restrictions.

Banning Protests and Other Public Assemblies Critical of the Authorities

Authorities in at least 10 countries have banned or broken up protests against their Covid-19 response, or have used Covid-19-related regulations to end protests and gatherings involving opposition groups or other critics of government policies unrelated to Covid-19. In all these cases, the authorities intervened despite allowing other large gatherings to take place.

The UN Human Rights Committee, which interprets the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), has on multiple occasions emphasized the interdependence of the rights of freedom of assembly, association, and expression. The Committee in September 2020 reiterated that "full protection of the right to peaceful assembly is possible only when other, often overlapping, rights are also protected," including freedom of expression. Restrictions on physical gatherings may be necessary during health emergencies, but they must be based on law, and be necessary and proportionate to the aim, such as public health. The UN has said that governments are therefore "encouraged to consider how protests may be held consistent with public health needs, for example by incorporating physical distancing" and to "constantly assess ... restrictions ... to determine whether they continue to be necessary and proportionate."

In Algeria, the government invoked the pandemic to ban all street protests, which put an end to a year

of mass demonstrations. Similarly, in Hong Kong, the authorities cited Covid-19-related restrictions in October to ban pro-democracy gatherings and arrested and fined those ignoring the ban.

In Cameroon, the government in September scheduled the country's first regional elections for early December, prompting opposition protests due to procedural and security concerns. Several regional authorities responded by indefinitely banning public meetings and demonstrations, claiming they would endanger lives by spreading Covid-19. Yet the central and regional authorities allowed bars, restaurants, nightclubs, schools, training centers, churches, and mosques to remain open. Cameroon's communication minister warned political parties that the government would consider protests "insurrection" and punish protesters under the country's counterterrorism law. In September, the main opposition party, Cameroon Renaissance Movement, said that the ban "threatens to force our party underground."

Turkish authorities used the pandemic as a pretext to try to reduce the influence of the country's leading bar associations, which have criticized the government's systemic human rights violations. Under a July law, 2,000 or more lawyers in provinces where the bar association has more than 5,000 members may establish rival associations. Citing Covid-19, the Interior Ministry in July and October extended the initial deadline to form a new association to March 2021, giving pro-government lawyers more time to meet the threshold. Yet throughout October and November, political parties that are not critical of the Turkish government met in large numbers to hold internal elections.

The governor of Istanbul banned public gatherings on January 6, citing Covid-19 risks, but only in the two districts with Boğaziçi University campuses. The ban followed student protests at the university against President Erdoğan's appointment of a controversial new rector, a move they criticized as an encroachment on academic freedom.

Recommendations

Governments should ensure that all Covid-19 responses comport with international and domestic law. Measures that curb fundamental rights including free speech and assembly should be strictly necessary and proportionate as well as temporary, with sunset clauses, and subject to independent review. Governments that impose restrictions on free speech and association rights under de facto or declared states of emergency should register rights derogations with relevant treaty bodies to enable independent oversight.

The UN Human Rights Council should request a new report by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights on countries' compliance with their human rights obligations in responding to Covid-19, including the impact of their restrictions on free speech and assembly. The Council should mandate systematic monitoring of state responses with the aim of halting violations and contributing to accountability and redress for victims, through either enhanced capacity of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, or the creation of a dedicated monitoring mechanism. Relevant UN human rights experts including the special rapporteurs on freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and association, on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, and on the right to physical and mental health, should support this monitoring.

All treaty bodies, special procedures mandate holders, and international and regional human rights mechanisms should monitor disproportionate restrictions on human rights in response to Covid-19 and bring them to the attention of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Human Rights Council, and the UN WHO, including in concert when appropriate.

During public health emergencies of international concern, the UN World Health Organization should expand reporting requirements for member states on how their responses respect human rights, consistent with their obligations under the organization's International Health Regulations. WHO should also review independent experts' and civil society organizations' reporting on policies or practices that may breach human rights, and publish recommendations and examples of good practice to help governments remedy any abuses. WHO's International Health Regulations Review Committee should strengthen language to clarify the limits of permissible rights restrictions during health emergencies and support a call for the Human Rights Council to mandate systematic reporting on countries' compliance with their human rights obligations in responding to Covid-19.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Covid-19 Triggers Wave of Free Speech Abuse

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At least 83 governments worldwide have used the Covid-19 pandemic to justify violating the exercise of free speech and peaceful assembly.