13 Jun 17 | Azerbaijan, Azerbaijan Letters, Campaigns, Campaigns -- Featured, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Arif and Leyla Yunus (Photo: HRHN)
Dear Secretary General,
We, the undersigned organisations call on Interpol, and all other relevant bodies and authorities to act with due diligence in accordance with Interpol’s constitution to prevent the misuse of Interpol alerts against Leyla Yunus and Arif Yunus, two prominent human rights defenders from Azerbaijan. The couple currently resides in exile in the Netherlands, where they were granted refugee status in 2016. Detailed information about their human rights activism can be found below. Interpol’s constitution prohibits the misuse of its systems for political purposes and in ways that violate human rights.
Leyla and Arif Yunus were arrested on 30 July and on 5 August 2014 respectively. Azerbaijani authorities prosecuted both on politically motivated charges of large-scale fraud, while also charging Leyla with bogus forgery, tax evasion, and illegal entrepreneurship offences. In August 2015, a court sentenced Leyla Yunus to eight and half years imprisonment, and Arif Yunus to seven, having convicted them of tax evasion and other economic crimes. Authorities also filed treason charges against them both, but later suspended the investigation.
On 9 December 2015, Leyla Yunus was released from detention and her eight-and-a-half-year prison sentence was converted into five-year suspended sentence, following a decision by the Baku City Court of Appeal on the basis of a request from her lawyers with reference to her deteriorating health condition. Similarly, Arif Yunus’s prison term was changed to a five-year suspended sentence. He was placed under house arrest on 12 November 2015. In April 2016 the Azerbaijani government allowed the couple to travel abroad to receive needed medical treatment for conditions they had developed during their prison ordeal.
Due to the politically motivated nature of their prosecution, in spring 2016 the couple received political asylum in the Netherlands.
When Leyla and Arif left Azerbaijan, their cassation appeal was still pending before the Supreme Court. On 27 December 2016, the Supreme Court sent the case back for re-examination to the Baku Appeal Court. On 17 May 2017, at the hearing at the Baku Appeal Court, the Yunus’s lawyer asked the court to ensure the couple’s participation in the proceedings via internet. The court rejected the petition. The same day, the court ordered the couple to return to the country to participate in the subsequent court hearings in their case. The court hearing was rescheduled from 31 May to 3 July 2017.
The arrest of Leyla and Arif Yunus happened against the backdrop of a rapidly deteriorating human rights situation in Azerbaijan. Since 2014, several dozens of human rights defenders, lawyers and journalists and opposition politicians have been arrested and prosecuted on politically-motivated grounds. The arrests and other steps by the government of Azerbaijan have served to severely close the space for independent activism, critical journalism, and opposition political activity in the country.
Azerbaijan has been ranking as Not Free in the Freedom in the World rankings of the Freedom House for several years, scoring the lowest on the political rights and civil liberties. In the latest Freedom of the Press rankings, Azerbaijan scored the 162nd place out of 180 countries.
The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention recently concluded an official visit to Azerbaijan. In a statement issued at the end of its visit, the Working Group concluded that human rights defenders, journalists, and political and religious leaders continue to be detained on criminal or administrative charges in the country as a way to impair their exercise of basic human rights and fundamental freedoms and to silence them. The Working Group stressed that these practices constitute abuse of authority and violate the principle of the rule of law that Azerbaijan has undertaken to comply with. One of the cases highlighted by the Working Group is that of Leyla and Arif Yunus. In his recent report to the Human Rights Council, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders, Michel Forst also drew attention to the legal persecution of human rights defenders in Azerbaijan.
An official request has been made to Interpol on 12 June 2017 by the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC), which represents the couple, to inquire about the existence of any alerts made against Leyla and Arif Yunus by the Azerbaijani Government and to request Interpol to take all appropriate steps to prevent the dissemination of such an alert. Taking into consideration the very poor human rights record in Azerbaijan and the routine practice of politically-motivated prosecutions by the authorities, any attempt by the Azerbaijani authorities to use Interpol alerts against Leyla Yunusova and Arif Yunusov would violate the prohibition in Interpol’s constitution against the misuse of its systems for political purposes and in ways that violate human rights. Interpol should, therefore, refuse any request from the Azerbaijani authorities to use the Interpol Information System against Leyla Yunusova and Arif Yunusov, and we call on all relevant national bodies and authorities not to act on Interpol alerts against them, in case they are issued.
Short biographies:
Leyla Yunus is a long time human rights defender and activist since the late Soviet era. She is the director of the Institute for Peace and Democracy, a human rights organisation in Azerbaijan that focused on political prisoners, women’s rights and other issues. For almost 30 years Leyla Yunus and Arif Yunus have been involved in compiling comprehensive lists of political prisoners in Azerbaijan. Leyla Yunus is a Knight of the French Legion of Honor, winner of the International Theodor Hacker award, Laureate of the Polish Sergio Vieira de Mello Award and a finalist of the 2014 Sakharov Prize of the European Parliament.
Arif Yunus is a prominent Azerbaijani historian and human rights activist. He is the chairperson of the Conflict and Migration departments at the Institute for Peace and Democracy. Throughout his career, Arif has published over 30 books and several articles on the history of Azerbaijan and on Azerbaijani-Armenian relations. In his work, he has promoted dialogue between intellectuals from Azerbaijan and Armenia, and for many years has advocated for a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh. He has supported numerous victims of torture and spoken out repeatedly against politically motivated detentions.
The list of signatory organisations:
1. Amnesty International
2. Association UMDPL (Ukraine)
3. Bir Duino
4. Centre for the Development of Democracy and Human Rights
5. Committee Against Torture
6. Crude Accountability
7. Fair Trials
8. FIDH and OMCT under “Observatory for the protection of human rights defenders”
9. Freedom Files
10. Front Line Defenders
11. Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights
12. Human Rights House Foundation
13. Human Rights Watch
14. Index on Censorship
15. International Partnership for Human Rights
16. Institute for Reporters’ Freedom and Safety (IRFS)
17. Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and the Rule of Law
18. KRF Public Alternative
19. Legal Policy Research Centre
20. Public Verdict
21. Regional Center for Strategic Studies
22. The Barys Zvozskau Belarusian Human Rights House
23. The Georgian Centre for Psychosocial and Medical Rehabilitation of Torture Victims
24. The Netherlands Helsinki Committee
25. Women of the Don[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”12″ style=”load-more” items_per_page=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1497944614160-ae286e6b-fd24-9″ taxonomies=”7145″][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row full_width=”stretch_row_content_no_spaces” content_placement=”middle”][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”91122″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2017/05/stand-up-for-satire/”][/vc_column][/vc_row]
07 Jun 17 | Azerbaijan, Azerbaijan Letters, Campaigns, Campaigns -- Featured, Georgia, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Afgan Mukhtarli. Credit: Meydan TV
Index on Censorship and 22 other NGOs have written to Georgian Prime Minister Giorgi Kvirikashvili calling on his government to respect its international obligations and, in particular, to conduct a full investigation into Azerbaijani journalist Afgan Mukhtarli’s abduction in Tbilisi on 29 May.
Att.: Prime Minister of Georgia, Mr. Giorgi Krvirikashvili
Parliament of Georgia
26, Abashidze Street
Kutaisi, Georgia, 4600
6 June 2017
Dear Mr. Krvirikashvili,
We write to express our deepest concern about the abduction of Afgan Mukhtarli, an exiled Azerbaijani journalist, on 29 May in Tbilisi. He went missing after leaving his colleagues in the evening, before resurfacing the following day in Baku in the custody of Azerbaijan’s state border agency.
Mukhtarli reports that he was forced into a car near his home, tied up and beaten. His abductors put a bag over his head and 10,000 euros were stuffed into his pockets while crossing the Azerbaijani border. His lawyer Elchin Sadygov, who managed to visit him in detention, confirmed that he bore the marks of blows to his face and that he may have had one of his ribs broken. On 31 May, a court in Baku sentenced him to a three months’ pre-trial detention while he is now being charged with smuggling, illegal border crossing and violence against police authority.
This disturbing development does not only expose Afgan Mukhtarli to the possibility of torture and a long prison sentence, but also sets a worrying precedent, threatening the security of dozens of other Azerbaijanis living in exile in Georgia. Numerous independent journalists, human rights defenders and other civil society activists fled Azerbaijan in recent years to escape repression, but they are increasingly becoming targets of harassment and persecutions abroad. They were hoping to find a safe haven in Georgia, but must now live with the constant fear of being illegally brought back to their country of origin.
Afgan Mukhtarli’s abduction and illegal deportation to his country while in process of applying for asylum in Georgia is a clear violation of international law. The prohibition of torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment enshrined in Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, to which Georgia is a state party, clearly implies an obligation for each country not to expel, extradite or deport an individual to a state, where he or she faces a real risk of being subjected to this type of treatment. It is therefore Georgia’s responsibility to guarantee the safety of Azerbaijanis living in its territory and to prevent any forced return to their country.
Afgan Mukhtarli’s abduction is a black stain on Georgia’s reputation as a leader in upholding human rights standards in the Caucasus region. The Azerbaijani authorities are engaged in a relentless war against their remaining critics. The Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights, Nils Muiznieks, stated in May 2017: “The situation in Azerbaijan continues to worry me. Since 2015, I have intervened before the European Court of Human Rights in seven cases, which are in my view emblematic of the human rights problems of the country: limitations to freedom of expression, shrinking space for NGOs, and official harassment of human rights defenders and their lawyers. While the applicants of the cases I intervened in are no longer in prison, we should not forget all the others who are still detained on charges which defy credibility, often after having expressed critical views against the authorities.” As the neighbour of such a repressive state, Georgia has a moral duty to maintain its historical role of welcoming Azerbaijani dissidents.
We welcome the opening of an investigation into Afgan Mukhtarli’s “illegal abduction”. We hope that it will fully shed light on the abductors’ identities and clarify the potential role of the Georgian authorities in what happened. A clear message needs to be sent regarding that illegal actions of a neighbouring state on Georgian territory will not be accepted, and that any public servant implicated in such grave violations of international law will be held accountable.
Georgia has co-sponsored all recent United Nations resolutions on human rights defenders. Most recently, Georgia was amongst the States expressing grave concern at the United Nations Human Rights Council – of which Georgia is a member – “that the practice of enforced disappearance is often used to repress and intimidate human rights defenders” (resolution 34/5 adopted on 23 March 2017 by the Human Rights Council, with Georgia voting in favour). The credibility of Georgia’s commitment to the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms is hence at stake.
We thank you in advance for the attention you give to our request.
Sincerely,
- Canadian Journalists for Free Expression
- CEE Bankwatch Network
- Civil Rights Defenders
- Committee to Protect Journalists
- Crude Accountability
- English PEN
- FIDH, within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders
- Freedom Now
- Human Rights First
- Human Rights House Foundation
- Human Rights Watch
- Index on Censorship
- IFEX
- International Media Support
- International Partnership for Human Rights
- Institute for War and Peace Reporting
- Netherlands Helsinki Committee
- Norwegian Helsinki Committee
- PEN America
- PEN International
- People in Need
- Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
- World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”12″ style=”load-more” items_per_page=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1496838211274-6137de09-9eaa-5″ taxonomies=”7145″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
22 May 17 | Azerbaijan, Azerbaijan Statements, Campaigns -- Featured, Digital Freedom, Europe and Central Asia, Statements
Ilgar Mammadov
Today three years have passed since the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) delivered its judgment on the case of political prisoner Ilgar Mammadov, concluding that the Azerbaijani authorities had detained him to punish him for his criticism of the government. In spite of this ruling, and repeated calls for his release by Council of Europe bodies in follow-up to the ruling, the Azerbaijani authorities have persistently refused to execute the decision of the Court and free Ilgar Mammadov. In view of this, we, members of the Civic Solidarity Platform and the Sports for Rights Coalition, call on the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to refer the case back to the ECtHR on the grounds of non-execution of the judgment. This is crucial to ensure justice for this wrongly imprisoned government critic, who has already spent more than four years behind bars, as well as to safeguard the legitimacy of the Council of Europe as the guardian of human rights and the rule of law in the region.
Ilgar Mammadov, chair of the political opposition REAL party, was a well-known opponent of the regime when he was arbitrarily detained in February 2013. He attempted to stand in the 2013 presidential elections, gathering the required 40 000 signatures in support of his candidacy, which the Central Election Commission ruled as invalid.[i] He was also outspoken in his criticism of the policies of the authorities on his blog and in the media. Ilgar Mammadov was detained after monitoring and reporting on street protests in the town of Ismayilli in January 2013, which resulted in clashes with the police. He did not participate in these protests, but travelled to the region after they took place to observe developments and revealed the role of individuals with ties to the authorities in initiating the clashes. In spite of the lack of evidence llgar Mammadov was accused of instigating the Ismayilli clashes and on 17 March 2014, he was sentenced to seven years in prison on trumped-up charges of “organizing mass riots” and using “violence against police officers”. His sentence was upheld on appeal.
In a judgment issued on 22 May 2014, the ECtHR found that Ilgar Mammadov’s arrest and detention violated numerous provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights, including Articles 5.1, 5.4 and 6.2 on the right to liberty and security, the right to judicial review of one’s detention and the principle of presumption of innocence, as well as article 18 that limits the applicability of restrictions on rights. The Court concluded that Ilgar Mammadov had been detained without any evidence to reasonably suspect him of having committed a crime and that the actual purpose of his detention was to silence and punish him for criticizing the government and publishing information it was trying to hide.[ii]
In its follow-up to the ECtHR’s ruling, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe — the body responsible for supervising the execution of ECtHR judgements — has repeatedly called on the Azerbaijani authorities to release Ilgar Mammadov. The Committee has examined this case as a matter of priority in its review of the execution of ECtHR judgments by Council of Europe member states and adopted a number of decisions and interim resolutions on it.[iii]
Other Council of Europe bodies, including the organization’s Secretary General, its Human Rights Commissioner and the President of its Parliamentary Assembly have also repeatedly called for Ilgar Mammadov to be released. However, the Azerbaijani authorities have flagrantly ignored these calls and refused to implement the ECtHR’s judgment and release Mammadov.
In view of the continued failure of the Azerbaijani authorities to implement the ECtHR’s decision on Ilgar Mammadov’s case, the Council of Europe’s Secretary General Thorbjørn Jagland launched an official inquiry into Azerbaijan’s implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights in December 2015.[iv]Under Article 52 of the Convention, the Secretary General may initiate an inquiry into how the domestic law of member states ensures the effective implementation of the Convention. This was the first time that Secretary General Jagland had taken such a measure and his initiative was welcome and important.
However, in November 2016, Azerbaijan’s Supreme Court nevertheless rejected an appeal submitted by Ilgar Mammadov on the basis of the ECtHR ruling and upheld his seven-year prison sentence. Thus, Ilgar Mammadov remains behind bars for no other reason than speaking out critically about those in power. This continued defiance by the Azerbaijani authorities leads us to conclude that further action is urgently required.
Therefore, we call on the Committee of Ministers to refer the case back to the ECtHR under Article 46.1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which obliges the parties to the Convention to abide by the final judgment of the Court in any case to which they are parties. The Convention authorizes the Committee to take action to this end. Article 46.4 states: “If the Committee of Ministers considers that a High Contracting Party refuses to abide by a final judgment in a case to which it is a party, it may, after serving formal notice on that Party and by decision adopted by a majority vote of two-thirds of the representatives entitled to sit on the committee, refer to the Court the question whether that Party has failed to fulfil its obligation under paragraph 1.”
Ilgar Mammadov v. Azerbaijan has become a test case of the legitimacy of the Council of Europe. When commenting on the Supreme Court’s failure to uphold Azerbaijan’s obligation to execute the ECtHR judgment last year, Secretary General Jagland stated: “Azerbaijan’s flagrant disrespect of the European Convention on Human Rights undermines the entire scope of our cooperation” [and] “affects the 46 Member States of the Council of Europe who have a collective responsibility for the implementation of the Convention”.[v]
By resorting to the ultimate mechanism for addressing non-compliance of judgments set out by the European Convention on Human Rights, the Committee of Ministers can take resolute action to safeguard the Council of Europe’s integrity and ensure that the Azerbaijani authorities finally abide by their obligations under the Convention, implement the ECtHR ruling and free Ilgar Mammadov.
Signed by the following members of the Civic Solidarity Platform and the Sport for Rights Coalition:
1. Association of Ukrainian Human Rights Monitors on Law Enforcement (UMDPL, Ukraine)
2. Barys Zvozskau Belarusian Human Rights House
3. Bir Duino-Kyrgyzstan
4. Bulgarian Helsinki Committee
5. Center for Civil Liberties (Ukraine)
6. Center for Participation and Development (Georgia)
7. Center for Regional Strategic Studies (Azerbaijan)
8. Center for the Development of Democracy and Human Rights (Russia)
9. Civil Rights Defenders (Sweden)
10. Committee Against Torture (Russia)
11. Crude Accountability (USA)
12. Fair Trials (UK)
13. International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH, France)
14. Freedom Files (Poland)
15. Freedom House (USA)
16. Freedom Now (USA)
17. Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights (Poland)
18. Human Rights Center of Azerbaijan
19. Human Rights Club (Azerbaijan)
20. Human Rights Monitoring Institute (Lithuania)
21. Humanrights.ch (Switzerland)
22. IDP Women Association “Consent” (Georgia)
23. Index on Censorship (UK)
24. Institute for Reporters Freedom and Safety (Azerbaijan)
25. Institute Respublica (Ukraine)
26. International Partnership for Human Rights (IPHR, Belgium)
27. Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and the Rule of Law
28. Kosova Rehabilitation Centre for Torture Victims
29. Libereco – Partnership for Human Rights (Germany)
30. Moscow Helsinki Group (Russia)
31. Netherlands Helsinki Committee
32. Norwegian Helsinki Committee
33. Notabene (Tajikistan)
34. PEN America (USA)
35. PEN International
36. Promo LEX Association (Moldova)
37. Public Alternative (Ukraine)
38. Public Association “Dignity” (Kazakhstan)
39. Public Verdict Foundation (Russia)
40. Swedish OSCE Network: signed in personal capacity by Olof Kleberg and Anki Wetterhall
41. Truth Hounds (Ukraine)
42. Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union
43. Women of the Don (Russia)
44. World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) (Switzerland)
[i] In several rulings against Azerbaijan, the ECtHR has found that the practices of the Central Election Commission with respect to the validation of signatures violate Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the right to free elections.
[ii] The judgment is available at: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-144124
[iii] The most recent decision on this case adopted by the Committee of Ministers is available at: https://rm.coe.int/16806c4554
[iv] See press release at: http://bit.ly/2q8CRNI
[v] His statement is available at: https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/-/azerbaijan-statement-by-secretary-general-jagland-on-the-decision-of-the-supreme-court-today-rejecting-the-appeal-by-ilgar-mammadov
15 May 17 | Campaigns -- Featured, Denmark, Digital Freedom, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]We the undersigned respectfully urge the Danish Parliament to vote in favour of bill L 170 repealing the blasphemy ban in section 140 of the Danish criminal code, punishing “Any person who, in public, ridicules or insults the dogmas or worship of any lawfully existing religious community”.
Denmark is recognised as a global leader when it comes to the protection of human rights and freedom of expression. However, Denmark’s blasphemy ban is manifestly inconsistent with the Danish tradition for frank and open debate and puts Denmark in the same category as illiberal states where blasphemy laws are being used to silence dissent and persecute minorities. The recent decision to charge a man – who had burned the Quran – for violating section 140 for the first time since 1971, demonstrates that the blasphemy ban is not merely of symbolic value. It represents a significant retrograde step in the protection of freedom of expression in Denmark.
The Danish blasphemy ban is incompatible with both freedom of expression and equality before the law. There is no compelling reason why the feelings of religious believers should receive special protection against offence. In a vibrant and pluralistic democracy, all issues must be open to even harsh and scathing debate, criticism and satire. While the burning of holy books may be grossly offensive to religious believers it is nonetheless a peaceful form of symbolic expression that must be protected by free speech.
Numerous Danes have offended the religious feelings of both Christians and Muslims without being charged under section 140. This includes a film detailing the supposed erotic life of Jesus Christ, the burning of the Bible on national TV and the publication of cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammed. The Cartoon affair landed Denmark in a storm of controversy and years of ongoing terrorist threats against journalists, editors and cartoonists. When terror struck in February 2015 the venue was a public debate on blasphemy and free speech.
In this environment, Denmark must maintain that in a liberal democracy, laws protect those who offend from threats, not those who threaten from being offended.
Retaining the blasphemy ban is also incompatible with Denmark’s human rights obligations. In April 2017 Council of Europe Secretary General Thorbjørn Jagtland emphasised that “blasphemy should not be deemed a criminal offence as the freedom of conscience forms part of freedom of expression”. This position is shared by the UN’s Human Rights Committee and the EU Guidelines on freedom of expression and religion.
Since 2014, The Netherlands, Norway, Iceland and Malta have all abolished blasphemy bans. By going against this trend Denmark will undermine the crucial European and international efforts to repeal blasphemy bans globally.
This has real consequences for human beings, religious and secular, around the globe. In countries like Pakistan, Mauretania, Iran, Indonesia and Russia blasphemy bans are being used against minorities as well as political and religious dissenters. Denmark’s blasphemy ban can be used to legitimise such laws. In 2016 the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief pointed out that “During a conference held in Jeddah (Saudi Arabia) [in 2015], the Danish blasphemy provision was cited by one presenter as an example allegedly indicating an emerging international customary law on “combating defamation of religions”.
Blasphemy laws often serve to legitimise violence and terror. In Pakistan, Nigeria and Bangladesh free-thinkers, political activists, members of religious minorities and atheists have been killed by extremists. In a world where freedom of expression is in retreat and extremism on the rise, democracies like Denmark must forcefully demonstrate that inclusive, pluralistic and tolerant societies are built on the right to think, believe and speak freely. By voting to repeal the blasphemy ban Denmark will send a clear signal that it stands in solidarity with the victims and not the enforcers of blasphemy laws.
Jacob Mchangama, Executive director, Justitia
Steven Pinker, Professor Harvard University
Ahmedur Rashid Chowdhury, Exiled editor of Shuddhashar, 2016 winner International Writer of Courage Award
Pascal Bruckner, Author
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Human Rights Activist Founder of AHA Foundation,
Dr. Elham Manea, academic and human rights advocate (Switzerland)
Sultana Kamal, Chairperson, Centre for Social Activism Bangladesh
Deeyah Khan, CEO @Fuuse & founder @sister_hood_mag.
Fatou Sow, Women Living Under Muslim Laws
Elisabeth Dabinter, Author
William Nygaard, Publisher
Flemming Rose, Author and journalist
Jodie Ginsberg, CEO, Index on Censorship
Kenan Malik, Author of From Fatwa to Jihad
Thomas Hughes, Executive Director Article 19
Suzanne Nossel, executive director of PEN America
Pragna Patel – Director of Southall Black Sisters
Leena Krohn, Finnish writer
Jeanne Favret-Saada, Honorary Professor of Anthropology, Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes,
Maryam Namazie, Spokesperson, Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain
Fariborz Pooya, Host of Bread and Roses TV
Frederik Stjernfelt, Professor, University of Aalborg in Copenhagen
Marieme Helie Lucas, Secularism Is A Women’s Issue
Michael De Dora, Director of Government Affairs, Center for Inquiry
Robyn Blumner, President & CEO, Center for Inquiry
Nina Sankari, Kazimierz Lyszczynski Foundation (Poland).
Sonja Biserko, Founder and president of the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia
James Lindsay, Author
Malhar Mali, Publisher and editor, Areo Magazine
Julie Lenarz – Executive Director, Human Security Centre, London
Terry Sanderson President, National Secular Society
Greg Lukianoff, CEO and President, FIRE
Thomas Cushman, Professor Wellesley College
Nadine Strossen, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law, New York Law School
Simon Cottee, the Freedom Project, Wellesley College
Paul Cliteur, professor of Jurisprudence at Leiden University
Lino Veljak, University of Zagreb, Croatia
Lalia Ducos, Women’s Initiative for Citizenship and Universals Rights , WICUR
Lepa Mladjenovic, LC, Belgrade
Elsa Antonioni, Casa per non subire violenza, Bologna
Bobana Macanovic, Autonomos Women’s Center, Director, Belgrade
Harsh Kapoor, Editor, South Asia Citzens Web
Mehdi Mozaffari, Professor Em., Aarhus University, Denmark
Øystein Rian, Historian, Professor Emeritus University of Oslo
Kjetil Jakobsen, Professor Nord University
Scott Griffen, Director of Press Freedom Programmes International Press Institute (IPI)
Henryk Broder, Journalist
David Rand, President, Libres penseurs athées — Atheist Freethinkers
Tom Herrenberg, Lecturer University of Leiden
Simone Castagno, Coordinamento Liguria Rainbow
Laura Caille, Secretary General Libres
Mariannes Andy Heintz, writer
Bernice Dubois, Conseil Européen des Fédérations WIZO
Ivan Hare, QC[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”12″ style=”load-more” items_per_page=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1495443304735-e4b217b9-25e4-0″ taxonomies=”88, 53″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
