16 Mar 2015 | Azerbaijan, Azerbaijan News, Europe and Central Asia, mobile, News and features
“Stop the plunder! Thieves in power, go! Resign!”
These were just some of the chants from the scores of Azerbaijanis who gathered in Baku’s Mashul stadium on Sunday. The estimated 10,000 strong crowd was protesting the recent devaluation of the country’s currency and its detrimental effects on living standards. Demonstrators also spoke out against human rights abuses in the country, just 87 days before its capital is set to host the inaugural European Games.
In late February, Azerbaijan’s central bank made the choice to devalue the manat around 30% against the dollar and the euro, in response to the recent drop in oil prices. Around 70% of government revenues come from oil exports. But the policy has led to significant price hikes, igniting the public anger which culminated in Sunday’s protest.
“Ranging from consumer goods, real estate, construction materials, equipment, automotive spare parts, everything is so much more expensive,” stated the official Facebook event, which attracted over 2,400 attendees. The organisers — the oppositional National Council of Democratic Forces (NCDF) — however, put attendance on the day at some 10,000.
The peaceful rally was authorised by the the regime of Ilham Aliyev, who has been in power since succeeding his father Heydar in 2003. In 2013 he won the presidency for a third time, following his 2009 decision to remove term limits, and amid accusations that the vote was not free and fair.
It took place against the backdrop of the countdown to this summer’s International Olympic Committee (IOC)-backed Baku European Games. This fact was not overlooked by protesters. Ali Kerimli, from opposition party Azerbaijan Popular Front, criticised the amount of money spent on the event, saying it could instead be “directed to address the serious social and economic problems, raising the minimum wage and pension, which is only 150 manat,” according to contact.az.
The games have been budgeted at over £5.4 billion, with Simon Clegg, the organising committee CEO (formerly of the British Olympic Association), promising it will be “the most fantastic show ever staged in Azerbaijan”.
Kerimli also brought up the recent revelation that Azerbaijan will cover the costs of all 50 participating delegations. Such grants, most often connected to travel, have played an increasing part in Olympic bidding processes since they were first used at Sydney 2000. Today, “you cannot win without it”, according to the organising committee chair of this summer’s Pan American Games in Toronto. But as it is understood Azerbaijan was the only country willing to take on the risk of hosting the first ever European Games, it was not competing with anyone. Index contacted the European Olympic Committee (EOC) for documents related to the games, such a bid book detailing a city’s hosting plans, including the budget. We were told that as there is no formalised bidding procedure for the European Games, the only such documents that exists is the host city contract. This, we were told, is private and not available to the public.
Azerbaijani authorities have been fighting a PR battle on multiple fronts for some time, paying for everything from beautifying Baku, to glossy magazines and international mega-events like the Eurovision Song Contest — with sports playing an increasingly important role.
The most famous example to date is the shirt sponsorship deal with reigning Spanish champions Atletico Madrid. Fernando Torres and his teammates recently started doubling up as miniature Baku 2015 advertising billboards. If nothing else, this will help football fans familiarise themselves with the name by 2020, when the capital will host three group games and one quarter-final of the European Championship. Last September, Azerbaijan also became Manchester United’s “only Official Football Federation and Football Development Partner”. And with two failed Olympic bids behind them, it seems authorities are pinning their hopes on a successful European Games to further boost their credentials among global sports’ biggest players.
Despite the attempts to rebrand, Azerbaijan has failed to do away with accusations of human rights abuses and high-level corruption. Ranking 126/175 in the latest Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index, a leaked US diplomatic cable once compared the country to “the feudalism found in Europe during the Middle Ages”.
In fact, some of the corruption claims have gone hand in hand with ambitious projects. Ahead of the 2012 Eurovision Song Contest, journalist Khadija Ismayilova uncovered how the Aliyev family profited from the building of the Baku concert hall where the final was to be hosted.
Today, Ismayilova, the country’s most famous and celebrated investigative reporter, is in jail on what is widely believed to be trumped up charges. “I have spent three and a half months in detention waiting for one prosecution, which didn’t work out. Now another one starts. Let us see if prosecutors will produce something smarter than they did so far,” she wrote in an open letter last week.
Just a few months before Ismayilova’s arrest, a number of other prominent government critics — including human rights activists Rasul Jafarov and Leyla and Arif Yunus, lawyer Intigam Aliyev, and journalist Seymour Hezi — were all detained. Though not there in person, they and the other 100 or so political prisoners in Azerbaijan, played a key part in Sunday’s protest; their faces and names adorning posters across the stadium.
Human rights groups have warned that the European Games, like Eurovision before them, could be used to whitewash these rights abuses, and present a sanitised version of Azerbaijan to the world. With the another protest planned for 5 April, it seems government critics and regular people inside the country are determined to not let that happen.
All photos via Azadliq, reposted with permission.
This article was posted on 16 March 2015 at indexoncensorship.org
12 Mar 2015 | mobile, News and features, Volume 44.01 Spring 2015
Tim Cross and Martha Lane Fox, credit: Mark Boardman
Martha Lane Fox and retired Major General Tim Cross debate how far governments go when balancing individual rights and safeguarding the nation. This is an extract from a longer feature in the latest issue of Index on Censorship magazine.
Martha Lane Fox
When it comes to balancing national security and personal privacy, I believe that your personal data should be your personal data, and that action should be taken based on a case that can be proven, as opposed to looking at everyone in society’s movements and then targeting those who stand out. I am not a fan of the world we seem to be ending up in, and I don’t necessarily believe that it is because of anything malicious. I think it would be better to have a system where your data is your personal property, and there then have to be the same restrictions applied as would be the case if someone wanted to enter your home and go through your belongings or intercept your post.
Tim Cross
Like fighting terrorism, governments have to “fight” with one hand tied behind their backs, but they cannot fight with both hands tied as some would clearly prefer. Individuals will understandably not want governments interfering with, or prying into, their personal privacy, but no one will thank any government if the banking system or consumer supply chains were to collapse. Monitoring cyberspace now forms a key part of any government responsibilities, and is (or should be) included in any national security strategy.
This said, if people fear the state is holding too much data on them unnecessarily and (rightly) demand some semblance of control over what happens with that data, then government is the least of their worries. Leaving aside the fact that government resources are scarce, the idea that some government employee is sitting in a room somewhere carefully sifting through everyone’s email is fanciful. Intelligence and law enforcement have to meet certain criteria including necessity, proportionality and justification. This is absolutely the way it should be. But private firms have no such restrictions in place. Government intelligence and law enforcement agencies are rightly burdened by layers of legality, including authorisations, justifications and audit trails, but big corporations, particularly those whose primary public interface is through cyber means, use and exploit personal details for a wide variety of reasons. While these may sometimes include improving their services, more unpalatably they sell details on to third parties. This is absolutely endemic. Many companies will not allow customers to use their service unless they agree to terms and conditions that essentially mean losing control of their personal details and allowing them to be sold on to the highest bidders. The primary concern of business is making money. Not so with governments, whose intelligence and law enforcement agencies are about deterring/catching enemies and protecting the public.
To read the rest of the debate, click here to subscribe to Index on Censorship magazine. Or buy an individual issue. Or subscribe to the app (free 30-day trial).
Major General (Rtd) Tim Cross (CBE) was commissioned into the British Army in 1971.
He served in Northern Ireland, Macedonia, Albania and Kosovo. He was also the British deputy to the US-led Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Affairs, later re-titled the Coalition Provisional Authority. He is chair of the think-tank Theos
Martha Lane Fox is chair of Go On UK, a digital skills charity which helps people to get online. She co-founded travel website lastminute.com, and in 2013 became a crossbench peer in the House of Lords
10 Mar 2015 | Awards, Fellowship 2015
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
The 2015 Freedom of Expression Campaigning Award-winner is activist Amran Abdundi, who, through various channels, has worked to make life safer in northeastern Kenya – supporting women who are vulnerable to rape, female circumcision and murder.
The women’s rights activist runs the Frontier Indigenous Network, an organisation which mobilises female peace builders and activists along the dangerous border with Somalia.
“The award ceremony was aired by all community radios in northern Kenya and reached many people. I am happy because it will give women courage to stand up for their rights.”
[/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:1501490968444-2e9c8f60-55e6-3″ taxonomies=”6943″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
3 Mar 2015 | Awards, Fellowship 2015, Kenya, mobile
Campaigning nominee Amran Abdundi
Amran Abdundi is a women’s rights activist based in northeastern Kenya. She runs the Frontier Indigenous Network, an organisation which mobilises female peace builders and rights activists to set up shelters along the dangerous border with Somalia. It offers first aid to the injured as well as to women and girls who have been raped, moving victims to a safer part of Kenya.
As well as protecting citizens endangered by the guerrilla activities of the Al Qaeda-linked group Al Shabaab, Abdundi and her organisation also help those fleeing drought and failed harvests in Somalia. Abdundi is also behind radio-listening groups for women, which share information about access to tuberculosis treatment, among other things.
In a society that teaches women to leave decision-making to men and to look down when men pass, Abdundi’s Frontier Indigenous Network empowers, educates and mobilises rural women to challenge such outdated social codes.
The Al Qaeda-allied Islamist group Al Shabaab has sown terror in the Kenya-Somalia border region, one of the world’s most inhospitable areas. Women in the region are often the victims of violence, rape and murder. The northern region of Kenya is one of deeply conservative social customs, in which a man owns property on a woman’s behalf – even when the woman has bought the land. In the environment Abdundi operates in, a quarter of Kenyan girls and women have endured genital mutilation, despite legislation outlawing the practice.
Abdundi told Index: “I want to see them go to school. I don’t want to see them moving here and there without education – early marriage and female circumcision are also major issues.”
She said that some of the initial challenges the organisation faced have been overcome. In the beginning it was hard to talk to parents about their girls and “how the women have suffered”, she explained. “But now they understand us. They know how good we are and we want to change their lives.”
One of Frontier Indigenous Network’s biggest achievements in 2014 has been in mapping out conflict areas in northern Kenya. It focuses on the factors which fuel armed violence occurring after peace agreements are signed between warring parties. Aware that small arms and light weapons were one of the biggest obstacles to peace in the region, Abdundi and her group mapped many of the weapons used by the combatants. She then instigated a regional agreement to pursue arms traffickers, closing boltholes used by smugglers along the Somali border and developing a register of all recovered weapons. The agreement also targeted a network of groups running an illegal arms trade.
Abdundi has established radio-listening groups specifically for women, in which she encourages them to challenge the repressive cultural values preventing women from being permitted to own property or livestock. She uses the radio groups to reach women with tuberculosis, educating them about access to treatment and breaking cultural beliefs that tuberculosis is caused by curses and bad omens.
Abdundi has also mobilised women along the Kenya-Somalia border to rise against Al-Shabaab, a militant terrorist group, by educating them on the dangers of following the doctrine propagated by the terror organisation; she has received a number of death threats as a result of this work. She has also campaigned against the practice of female circumcision in northern Kenya.
She said: “My dream is to help women, girls and children. I just want to see them doing good. That’s my dream.”
This article was published on March 2, 2015 at indexoncensorship.org
