Malawi president Bingu wa Mutharika will purportedly participate in a traditional engagement ceremony on Valentine’s Day with the lovely woman he has been seen escorting of late. I wish him all the happiness in the world. But at the same time Mutharika looks forward to sharing his life with the person of his choice, two men remain jailed in Malawi because they tried to do the same.

At the end of December 2009, Steven Monjeza and Tiwonge Chimbalanga were arrested following their participation in a traditional engagement ceremony. They are currently on trial for “unnatural practices between males” and “gross public indecency.” They remain imprisoned after being denied bail, purportedly for their own safety, and face public ridicule when appearing in court. They have applied for relief to the Constitutional Court challenging the constitutionality of their arrest under Malawian law but have yet to receive a ruling.

Following the arrest of Monjeza and Chimbalanga, three things have happened. First, Malawi’s gay rights movement has become much more active. Second, Malawi has harshly cracked down on gay rights activists. Third, the international community has mobilized, demanding the release of these two men and the repeal of homosexuality as a crime in Malawi. I view two of these outcomes as very positive, and unfortunately, one of them not so much. The arrest of someone for putting up posters that read “Gay Rights are Human Rights” is not only harassment, but it is violative of freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which Malawi is a signatory.

Malawi is also pushing back against the international community, stating other nations and individuals have no right to dictate the laws in their country, raising fears Malawi will only entrench further on its anti-homosexuality stance in the face of this criticism. As a general rule, I appreciate the concept of sovereignty and that other States should stay out of the business of running a nation. However, when persons are discriminated against, their rights violated, their civil liberties trampled, their basic freedoms curtailed and their safety endangered purely because of who they are as individuals, it is the duty of all human beings to stand up and say that this is wrong.

President Mutharika looks to have a very busy year between settling into a new marriage and assuming the African Union chairmanship.  The increased visibility and prestige of chairing the African Union makes it incumbent upon Mutharika to set positive standards for all of the continent.  Monjeza and Chimbalanga return to court tomorrow as their case resumes. Stand up and do your duty as a global citizen and urge Malawi to treat all its citizens, gay and straight, president and average Joe, with love.

Last week Attorney-General Eric Holder wrote to Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell about the circumstances surrounding the arrest of underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab on Christmas Day 2009.

A plainly exasperated Holder sought to counter the hysterical reaction that greeted the decision to handle Abdulmutallab’s case within the criminal justice system with a few pertinent facts and a solid dose of common sense.

His letter is well worth reading for the insights it offers into the choices facing Americans as they seek to respond to future terrorist attacks.

The debate is not about whether or not the Obama administration has somehow applied a less robust approach to the underwear bomber than the Bush administration did to similar incidents.

It has not, despite Rudy Giuliani’s selective memory loss. Shoe bomber Richard Reid was treated precisely the same way in 2001. Both administrations allowed the law to take its course.

The more important debate is whether or not the law enforcement paradigm is the best method for handling such events. It is.

Much has been made in some quarters about the need to extract actionable intelligence without delay. This – much like that old chestnut, the ticking bomb scenario – is a meaningless rhetorical device routed in TV drama, not reality.

The idea that an apprehended suicide bomber like Abdulmutallab is likely to possess much actionable intelligence – that is, intelligence requiring an immediate operational response – is patently absurd.

Terrorist groups know that there is a fair chance any operation will fail and that their operative could be detained alive. Indeed, Al Qaeda has seen as many plots fail as it has succeed. See the rest of this entry »

The first charter on human rights was authored by Cyrus the Great over 2500 years ago. As Iranians we are heirs to a proud tradition of human rights and tolerance. Sadly, the Iranian authorities have not lived up to this legacy, as can be seen by the mock trials, false imprisonments, torture, child executions, and lack of equality for women in Iran today.

For the past 30 years the Iranian government has barred Amnesty International from entering the country, affording us no transparency in regards to its human rights record. However, advances in technology and the internet are allowing brave Iranian activists to share direct eyewitness accounts of what is happening on ground zero in the post-election crackdown: brutal attacks on and murder of peaceful protestors, wrongful imprisonment without access to an attorney or fair trial, forced confessions obtained under torture and duress, rape used as a weapon of torture in prisons, and the lack of freedom of assembly as seen in the case of the ‘Mourning Mothers’ whose only “crime” was gathering for an hour each Saturday in a peaceful vigil near the place and time of the killing of protester Neda Agha-Soltan.

Despite the dangers posed to protesters, Iranians continue to take to the streets in hundreds of thousands to demand their universally recognized rights. The movement has grown beyond simply contesting the results of the presidential election. It has morphed into a Civil Rights movement of the magnitude seen in the United States in the 50’s and 60’s, uniting Iranians across a broad spectrum of political ideologies, bridging our differences for the first time in 30 years, with a single goal in mind: Freedom.

Today, I stand in solidarity with the people of Iran in demanding a fair and democratic society where the 30 articles of the UN Declaration of Human Rights are fully realized. Together we can ensure that their pleas for freedom are not going unheard by the international community, that their struggle is not in vain, and that they will prevail.

– Nazanin Boniadi

At the end of December, the human rights movement had some disappointing news. Federal Judge Ricardo Urbina dismissed the charges against the five Xe (Blackwater) guards accused in the shooting death of at least 14 innocent Iraqi civilians in Nisour Square in September 2007.

While his decision indicates the need to examine more closely the conduct of the Justice Department’s prosecutors as well as the State Department’s practice of immunizing contractors’ statements given in the course of investigations, there is now reason for hope. On Tuesday, Rep. David Price and Sen. Patrick Leahy introduced companion bills under the short title of the Contractor Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act (CEJA) of 2010 in the House (HR 4567) and Senate (S2979). The legislation closes gaps in U.S. law to ensure that contractors can be prosecuted for crimes committed overseas.

One of the single biggest hurdles to holding military and security contractors accountable for criminal acts committed overseas has been the duality of systems in place for Defense Department (DOD) contractors versus those working for other government agencies. DOD contractors implicated in crimes are subject, in theory, to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the military’s judicial system, and the jurisdiction of federal courts by way of the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act (MEJA). But what about Blackwater, which was fulfilling the State Department’s Worldwide Personal Protective Services (WPPS) contract at the time of the Nisour Square shootings? Well, many feared that the Justice Department wouldn’t or wouldn’t be able to pull off a case against the shooters because of unsettled evidentiary and jurisdictional issues.

We – the human rights community, Congress, the President, the media, and others – have known about this inconsistent patchwork of laws for some time now. In fact, in 2007 Rep. Price and then-Senator Barrack Obama joined forces to try to amend MEJA to clarify that there would be no impunity for government contractors who commit crimes. While the House version of the bill passed with an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 389 to 30, it fizzled on the Senate side.

Two years on, we don’t need any more evidence to indicate the importance of acting decisively to make CEJA law. The DOS is about to release the Request for Proposal for WPPS III. In the upcoming weeks, we’ll be asking you to call on your members of Congress in the House and Senate to endorse CEJA and end impunity for rights violators. Let’s make sure that the framework is in place to hold military and security contractors accountable for human rights violations before we send out the next round of armed guards in the name of the U.S. government.

Help share the message of February 11th by adding this solidarity image to your blog, website or social networking profile.

Iranian authorities have committed horrific abuses in the aftermath of the disputed presidential elections last June. Several months later, human rights in Iran remain under attack and the level of repression reaches a breaking point.

Several important events in the Iranian political calendar from the end of January through late March make this threat imminent, most notably the “Victory of the Revolution” day on February 11, 2010, marking the 31st anniversary of the fall of the Iranian monarchy and the return of Ayatollah Khomeini from exile in France in 1979.

Given the importance of February 11th for Iranians, we are calling on our members and the public to unite in the blogosphere to show support and solidarity for those suppressed voices in Iran. During our “Unite for Human Rights in Iran” bloggers day, we are encouraging everyone to publicize the ongoing dire human rights situation in Iran and call for the protection of those arrested or detained from torture or other ill-treatment. Moreover, we urge you to highlight the need to release prisoners of conscience and those convicted after unfair trials.

Opposition leaders are calling for supporters to peacefully demonstrate on February 11th. The Iranian authorities attempt to thwart protests has already led to the expedited executions of Mohammad Reza Ali-Zamani and Arash Rahmanipour, convicted of moharebeh or “enmity against God” and for being members of a banned anti-revolutionary political group last week.   It is also expected that nine other protesters sentenced to death for their participation in the post-presidential election protests will be swiftly executed prior to February 11th day in order to further intimidate and silence the opposition.

The executions are clearly a sign of the government’s frustration to end the protests. There are fears that the government might engage in the kind of cleansing that it did between 1980 and 1988, when it executed more than 3,000 political prisoners.

- Hadi Ghaemi, the executive director of the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran

AI activists protest against the post-election violence in Iran. July 25, 2009 ©Amnesty International

We are calling for strong international condemnation of human rights violations in Iran. As the United Nation’s prepares for its Universal Periodic Review in mid-February, focusing attention on the need for a strong report condemning human rights abuses in Iran by the Human Rights Council is also critical.

Help us raise the voices of those calling for freedom and justice inside Iran. Stand with the people of Iran on February 11th!

Henry “Hank” Skinner is scheduled for execution in Texas on February 24.  A two-part review of the case was recently published by the Texas Tribune.  He is asking for DNA testing of evidence that was found at the crime scene but never tested.  He claims these tests would establish that someone else committed the crime for which he is slated to be put to death.  The state, of course, is opposing the tests. 

But, why?  The cost of allowing the testing would be a few extra months for a man who has already been on death row for almost 15 years.  The benefit would be guaranteeing that the state does not execute someone who is actually innocent.   Don’t the benefits outweigh the costs in this case?  Is it even close?

Sadly, this is the classic “Finality v. Fairness” battle that death penalty cases so often come down to.  And the importance of “finality” has been inflated out of all proportion.  While “finality” is necessary to ensure that justice is done, the state is also charged with ensuring “fairness” (and accuracy) in its pursuit of that justice.

(It should be noted that long prison sentences usually provide far more real ”finality” than death sentences, which are frequently overturned, sometimes re-instated, and mostly never carried out.)

Yet too often in death penalty cases the state (and the courts) seem to care only about “finality”.  Appeals with valid claims are rejected on technical grounds, and reasonable requests to test new evidence are aggressively resisted.  Even proof of actual innocence is no bar to the “finality” of an execution (though, depending on how the Troy Davis case turns out, that may change).  The result of all this, inevitably, is the execution, or near-execution, of the innocent and the undeserving.  The state of Texas should balance its enthusiasm for finality with a genuine commitment to fairness, and let all the evidence in Hank Skinner’s case be tested.

Originally posted on Politico.com

By Sen. John F. Kerry, Rep. Bill Delahunt, Kerry Kennedy & Larry Cox

Rita Mahato, a mother of three, works as a health adviser for the Women’s Rehabilitation Centre (WOREC) in Nepal, counseling rape victims and registering cases of domestic violence routinely dismissed by the local police. In June 2007, a mob of more than 60 men surrounded her offices, threatening to rape and kill Rita and her colleagues – demanding that they end their work. Three years later, Rita and her team continue to be threatened, harassed and physically abused, yet the police have failed to take action. Despite threats to her life, Rita perseveres defending the human rights of women and seeking justice for victims of domestic and sexual violence.

Sadly, Rita’s experience is not unique: women around the world are subject to abuse and many also face extreme poverty.

It doesn’t have to be that way. That’s why today a bipartisan coalition, led by Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) in the Senate and Congressmen Bill Delahunt (D-Mass.) and Ted Poe (R-Texas) in the House, will introduce the International Violence Against Women Act (IVAWA). Introduction of this bill supports the efforts of President Obama and Secretary Clinton to rightly put women at the very center of a broad global security agenda that factors in the great challenges of our decade and invests in the world’s peacemakers.

Passage of the bill is critical. Every day, women and girls are battered, beaten, raped or otherwise brutalized. In some countries, more than 70 percent of women have been the victims of domestic violence. And, for most of these women, justice is elusive, because where violence against women is endemic, so too are impunity and poor governance. Not only can they expect police, prosecutors and judges to refuse to investigate cases against their perpetrators, too often, they can also expect to be condemned, shamed and even punished themselves.

IVAWA will support innovative programs that challenge public attitudes and cultural practices that perpetuate and condone violence against women and girls. In settings where women are prevented or discouraged from seeking justice, IVAWA will support training for police and judicial officials on countering violence against women and respecting the rights of victims. It will allow long-term prevention efforts such as increasing women’s economic security, expanding access to jobs and education, and engaging men to change behaviors and attitudes. Societies in which women are able to live and function in relative safety, empowered to realize their aspirations and move their communities forward are healthier, better developed, and more stable. Societies that take measures to deter discrimination and violence against women are better equipped to root out terrorism, less prone to conflict, and therefore more secure.

See the rest of this entry »

More disappointing news emerged on Monday for those who believe that US law and professional ethics should actually mean something.

The long awaited Justice Department Office of Professional Responsibility report into the quality and probity of the work produced on coercive interrogation by John Yoo and Jay Bybee while working in the Office of General Counsel has reportedly undergone internal revisions neutering its findings.

David Margolis, a career civil servant who served in the Justice Department throughout the Bush administration, has reportedly downgraded criticism that Yoo and Bybee violated their professional obligations concluding rather that they merely exercised poor judgment.

This is no semantic distinction – it means the difference between potential disciplinary action before state bar associations, and in Bybee’s case potential impeachment as federal judge, and little more than a minor flurry of professional embarrassment.

Once again, we see key players in one of the darker chapters in America’s recent history squirm their way out of trouble scot-free, not a stain in their character. What a contrast to a spectacle unfolding across the Atlantic in the United Kingdom.

On January 29^th the former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, was summoned to appear before the Chilcot commission established to investigate Britain’s decision to participate in the invasion of Iraq.

Blair spent a whole day being cross-examined by a blue ribbon panel of independent experts about his decision to take the country to war.

The committee conducting this inquiry consists of two of Britain’s most prominent academics, Churchill biographer Sir Martin Gilbert and military historian Sir Lawrence Freedman, two former career civil servants, Sir John Chilcot and former Ambassador to Russia Sir Roderic Lyne, and Baroness Prashar, a prominent humanitarian.

See the rest of this entry »

Today begins a monumental week for human rights in Israel and the Palestine National Authority on several fronts.

Over the course of the next few days, in Israel, legislators will begin debate a draft of a law that would put asylum-seekers and migrants at risk for being returned to countries where they would face serious human rights violations. The United Nations will receive the secretary-general’s report on Israeli and Palestinian domestic investigations into violations of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) from December 2008 to January 2009. And in the United States, a congressional letter is circulating asking Representatives to press for immediate relief of the citizens of Gaza.

That’s a lot of activity, and at a time of significant international interest in the region, Amnesty International hopes that it will lead to a renewed focus on human rights issues as the best way to achieve a lasting peace.

To take the various actions of the week one at a time:

* The Israeli Knesset will begin discussion Feb. 3 on the Prevention of Infiltration Law.  The legislation comes out of a current crisis, particularly on the Egyptian border, where refugees from human rights violations – primarily the Sudan and Eritrea – are attempting to reach safety by entering Israel in large numbers. In recent years, large numbers have been forcibly returned to Egypt, where they are at risk of both human rights violations and of being forcibly returned to their country of origin.

Amnesty International is concerned that the draft legislation prescribes lengthy prison sentences for asylum-seekers and irregular migrants and would allow for their immediate deportation, without regard to the risk they might face of torture or other ill-treatment or persecution in the country to which they would be forcibly returned.  We believe the legislation is inconsistent with international human rights treaties and we call about the Knesset to reject the draft law and ensure that any immigration or national security provisions that are introduced into law fully respect Israel’s international human rights obligations.  Click here for more information.

* This past November, the United Nations General Assembly endorsed the findings of the Goldstone Report, which concluded that both Israeli forces and Palestinian armed groups had committed grave violations of international law, including war crimes and possible crimes against humanity, during the three week conflict in Gaza and southern Israel.  Both groups were required to conduct domestic investigations into the allegations and submit reports back to the United Nations in early February.

Amnesty International has called upon both Israel and Hamas to fulfill their obligations in these investigations.  We attempted to ensure both sides conducted their investigations with the required independence, impartiality, transparency and effectiveness. If the reports fail on these accounts, Amnesty expects that the United States and other UN member states will fulfill their responsibility to monitor the investigations.

Feb. 2 update: Amnesty has just issued this release condemning the Israeli response to the Gaza investigations.

See the rest of this entry »

Women of Zimbabwe Arise

Everyone has been blessed in their life with at least one strong, female role model that showed grace under pressure, kindness when facing adversity, strength when challenged. Whether a grandmother, sister, teacher, supervisor or friend, she was someone who inspired and guided you. Personally, I think my mom is pretty fantastic; but I have also been lucky enough to know many other strong, passionate women I consider role models and among those are the leaders of Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA).

 WOZA is a grassroots activist movement in Zimbabwe started by women, led by women and grown by women into a membership of more than 70,000 across Zimbabwe. Magodonga Mahlangu, Jenni Williams and Trust work to improve living conditions for all Zimbabweans as they promote the self-esteem of their members. They practice non-violent civil disobedience as they take to the streets demanding better schools, better hospitals, greater civil liberties, advancement of human rights, a new constitution that protects Zimbabweans and promotes the rule of law, responsible government that works for the people not for themselves and free and fair elections. Their marches are characterized by singing, dancing and complete passivism when faced by violent dispersal by the Zimbabwe police and anti-riot police. 

WOZA began on Valentines Day in 2003, inspired by their slogan “the power of love is greater than the love of power.” Every year they mark their anniversary with large scale marches in major Zimbabwe cities. As a matter of course, these protests are broken up by Zimbabwe police officers, usually with violence. Already in the four short weeks of 2010, thirty-five WOZA members have been arrested for marching for education or meeting to discuss constitutional reform.

See the rest of this entry »