21 Mar 18 | Campaigns -- Featured, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
On Wednesday 21 March 2018, a Bahraini Criminal Court convicted and sentenced Duaa Alwadaei to two months in prison for allegedly insulting a public institution. Duaa was sentenced in absentia after exposing her ill-treatment committed by Bahraini security forces at the Bahrain International Airport in October 2016, which Human Rights Watch described as “terrorizing”.
Duaa’s conviction falls on Mother’s Day in Bahrain and represents the latest escalation in the reprisals against the human rights advocacy of her husband, Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, who is the Director of the UK-based Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy (BIRD).
Duaa did not receive any formal notification of the charges against her until her conviction. It was assumed that her charges relate to Duaa’s detention and interrogation at the airport in October 2016, following Sayed Ahmed’s participation in a protest in London.
The following day, Duaa told Human Rights Watch that during her interrogation, she was physically mistreated, repeatedly insulted and warned that her family would be imprisoned if she exposed her ill-treatment and her husband’s activities continued. She had been warned “not to speak out” about the incident, having been threatened with further police interrogations and fabricated criminal charges that could lead to a three-year imprisonment upon conviction. Eventually, Duaa’s tormentors carried out their threats.
Duaa’s then 18-month old son was present throughout the ordeal. He was forcibly separated from his mother and only reunited with her when Duaa’s interrogation began. Duaa told Human Rights Watch that her son was visibly “terrified” during the interrogation.
Commenting, Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, Director of Advocacy at BIRD said: “By coming after my loved ones to silence me, the Bahraini government has sunk to an all time low. Bahraini allies in Washington D.C. and London must condemn this cowardly attempt to muzzle my activism.”
Duaa’s trial was entirely held in absentia because she resides in London. Since lawyers can only be hired through particular channels in Bahrain, the Bahraini Embassy in London is best placed to give power of attorney to a designated lawyer. However, this option has not been pursued due to the recent involvement of the Embassy in the conviction of her family. However, a representative from the British Embassy in Manama attended the hearing today.
Duaa’s mother, Hajer Mansoor Hassan, is currently serving a three-year sentence at Isa Town Prison following a conviction based on a coerced confession. Hajer began a hunger strike yesterday in protest against the ill-treatment of political prisoners by prison officials.
Background
Duaa’s Case
The incident to which Duaa’s charges relate occurred on 26 October 2016. Following Sayed Ahmed’s participation in a protest against the King of Bahrain’s meeting with Prime Minister Theresa May in London, Duaa was detained at Bahrain International Airport for several hours. Here, she was physically mistreated, threatened with criminal charges, and repeatedly insulted. The official also presented Duaa with a travel ban, thereby preventing her return to London.
Duaa Alwadaei told Human Rights Watch in October that a senior official had referred to her husband as “an animal” and asked, menacingly during an interrogation at Bahrain airport, “Where shall I go first, shall I go to his family or your family?” She said that the officer, who appeared to be a senior official, told her: “Deliver this message to your husband – I will get him,” as she left the interrogation.
Since Duaa’s son is a US citizen, the US Embassy in Manama intervened following significant international pressure, thereby facilitating their return to London on 1 November 2016.
Harassment of Duaa’s Family
Duaa is the latest victim of the reprisal campaign launched by the Bahraini authorities in response to Sayed Ahmed’s work as a human rights defender. His mother-in-law, Hajer Mansoor Hassan, brother-in-law, Sayed Nizar Alwadaei, and cousin Mahmood Marzooq Mansoor have been subjected to grossly unfair trials and are currently serving sentences ranging from three to six years in prison on the basis of coerced confessions and fabricated charges.
Yesterday, Hajer declared a hunger strike to protest her mistreatment and the harsh discrimination suffered by political prisoners in Bahrain. Prison officers often harass political inmates and detainees by eavesdropping on personal conversations and deny them free hygiene products. Other inmates do not suffer from this treatment.
When Hajer complained to the officer by requesting that she be treated with respect, she was told that senior prison officials had instructed officers to make Hajer’s life “difficult”, and threatened that the more she exposes the conditions of imprisonment for political prisoners, the more she will be punished. Furthermore, the prison authorities have revoked the 10 minute phone call that Hajer had been rewarded for participating in daily workshops at the prison.
International Response
In its most recent comment on Duaa’s trial, the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) simply reiterated that it will “continue to monitor proceedings”. The British government failed to call on the Bahraini authorities to drop the charges against Duaa.
Both the United Nations and the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini, have recognised the significance of the reprisals against Sayed Ahmed’s family.
Following her ordeal at the airport, the US Department of State commented on their involvement in the incident.
A British Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Julie Ward wrote to the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini, to express her concerns over the “judicial harassment of family members of prominent Bahraini activist, Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, who are being subjected to a collective punishment ”.
[/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:1521649653173-dc894e70-c40f-3″ taxonomies=”716″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
30 May 17 | Campaigns -- Featured, Digital Freedom, Digital Freedom Statements, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
On 16 May the Venezuelan government issued Executive Order 2489 to extend the “state of emergency” in Venezuela, in place since May 2016. This new extension authorises internet policing and content filtering. This measure deepens the restrictions to the free flow of information online even more. They include the blocking of streaming news outlets, such as VivoPlay, VPITV, and CapitolioTV. Other serious practices that prevail in Venezuela are the aggressions of military and police personnel to journalists and civilian reporters, and the detention of citizens in the wake of content published on social networks.
This happens in a context of a general deterioration of telecommunications, as a consequence of the divestment in the sector in the last 10 years. This has turned Venezuela into the country with the worst internet connection quality in the Latin American region. Given the censorship practices applied to traditional media, the internet has become an essential tool for the freedom of expression and access to information of the Venezuelan people.
The measures taken by the Venezuelan Government to restrict online content constitute restrictions to the fundamental rights of Venezuelan citizens and, as such, do not comply with the minimum requirements of proportionality, legality, and suitability. The Venezuelan Government has systematically ignored civil society requests regarding the total number of blocked websites. To this date, there is evidence of the blocking of 41 websites, but it is suspected that many more websites are being blocked. The legal and technical processes applied by the government to determine and execute the blocking of websites remain unknown.
These kinds of practices affect the exercise of human rights. In a joint release, the rapporteurs for freedom of expression of the UN and the IACHR condemned the “censorship and blocking of information both in traditional media and on the internet”. During the last few months, three streaming tv providers have been blocked without a previous court order. Moreover, the Government has used unregulated surveillance technologies that affect the fundamental rights of citizens, such as surveillance drones to track and watch demonstrators, while at the same time expanding its internet surveillance prerogatives, through the creation of bodies such as CESPPA.
In addition to this, the government has implemented mechanisms for the collection of biometric data without citizens being able to determine their purpose nor who has access to such information. The official discourse towards the internet, and specifically to social networks, is disturbing: the director of the National Telecommunications Commission has recently declared that social networks are “dangerous” and a tool for “non-conventional war”.
The sum of this factors, aggravated by the passage of time and the deepening of the social and political crisis, outlines the creation of a state of censorship, control, and surveillance that gravely affects the exercise of human rights. Quality access to a free and neutral internet is recognised internationally as a necessary condition for the exercise of freedom expression, communication and the access to information, and as a precondition of the existence of a democratic society. In that regard, the undersigned civil society and academic organisations wish to set our position in the following terms:
We express our condemnation to the extension of the state of exception in Venezuela, as well as to the restrictions to the free flow of online content that derive from it.
We manifest our concern for the growing deterioration of internet access infrastructure and telecommunications in Venezuela. The maintenance of such systems is of vital importance for education, innovation, and the communication of Venezuelans.
We emphasise that the use and implementation of technological tools such as drones and biometric identification systems must fit human rights standards and not affect the fundamental freedoms of citizens, in particular their privacy and autonomy.
We insist that all measures that restrict the free exercise of fundamental rights, such as the blocking of web pages, must comply with the minimum requisites of proportionality, legality and suitability, and in consequence, must be only adopted by judicial authorities following a due process.
We request the ending of the harassing actions and insulting speech conducted by public servants online against NGOs and human rights activists that document and denounce acts through digital platforms.
We demand the cessation of military and police aggressions against journalists and citizen reporters.
We request transparency on the actions taken to restrict internet traffic and content and demand an answer to the requests for public information made by civil society regarding the practices of content blocking and filtering executed by the public administration.
Signed,
Derechos Digitales
Instituto Prensa y Sociedad de Venezuela
Acceso Libre (Venezuela)
(DTES-ULA) Dirección de Telecomunicaciones y Servicios de la Universidad de los Andes
Venezuela Inteligente
Public Knowledge
Access Now
Espacio Público (Venezuela)
Hiperderecho (Perú)
Son Tus Datos (México)
Alfa-Redi (Perú)
Centro de Derechos Humanos de la Universidad Católica Andrés Bello
EXCUBITUS Derechos Humanos en Educación
IPANDETEC (Panamá)
Sursiendo, comunicación y cultura digital
Red en defensa de los derechos digitales, R3D
Global Voices Advox
Asuntos del Sur
Internet Sans Frontières (Internet Without Borders)
Center for Media Research – Nepal
Index on Censorship[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1496155906014-ceb40fec-308b-10″ taxonomies=”13, 6914″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
31 Mar 17 | Events
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Have journalists ever been under pressure from so many directions and how can they combat those pressures? This session looks at the power of propaganda machines to influence, or try to influence, the media, issues of personal security and image, and how journalists must cut through the cloud and examine sources and data.
Panelists:
Tamas Bodoky, founder and editor Atlatszo.hu
Dan Gillmor, School of Journalism Arizona State University
Rachael Jolley, editor Index on Censorship magazine
Maria Stepanova, founder and editor Colta.ru
This panel is part of the International Journalism Festival in Perugia, Italy[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
31 Mar 17 | Events
New winds of censorship are blowing in not only from the Middle East and Africa, areas traditionally plagued by a troubled relationship between media and power, but also from the Americas and Europe. Index on Censorship, which monitors the state of censorship in the world, has recorded a worrying global upward trend, especially against artists, activists, intellectuals and journalists. In this session Index correspondents from Mexico, the Gulf, the Horn of Africa and Europe will provide an update on censorship worldwide and reaffirm the need for increased vigilance in the fight to maintain, or indeed reinstate, freedom of expression.
Panelists:
Laura Silvia Battaglia, freelance journalist
Ismail Einashe, freelance journalist
Rachael Jolley, editor Index on Censorship magazine
Marta Ottaviani, La Stampa
Duncan Tucker, freelance journalist
This event is part of the International Journalism Festival in Perugia, Italy.
