In Azerbaijan, it is not only journalists who face intimidation, arrests and violence: artists, musicians and writers also come under attack for exercising their right to artistic freedom. To coincide with the UN’s International Human Rights Day, Art for Democracy, a new initiative to support artistic freedom, was launched in Baku.
“Art for Democracy seeks to use all forms of artistic freedom of expression to promote democracy and respect for human rights in Azerbaijan, including to improve the climate for artistic freedom of expression itself”, said Art for Democracy‘s coordinator Rasul Jafarov. “It will also give artists a platform to come together and use their talents to promote democratic change”.
In May, Azerbaijani musician Jamal Ali fled the country in fear of his life after he reported that police tortured him in detention. The rapper had criticised President Ilham Aliyev during a concert. Musician and activist Azer Cirttan is also in exile.
It’s clear that, in addition to more traditional campaigns, including political engagement at the Council of Europe and organised demonstrations in Azerbaijan and around the world, a creative approach to promoting free expression in Azerbaijan is also needed. The campaign will also offer direct support to marginalised artists, who are often persecuted for their work.
Art for Democracy builds on the work of Sing for Democracy, which drew attention to the poor health of free expression in Azerbaijan in the run up to the Eurovision Song Contest, hosted in Baku in May. To celebrate the launch, free speech advocates, including Eurovision 2012 winner, Swedish pop star Loreen, recorded video messages of support.
Azerbaijan hosted the Internet Governance Forum, in November. In an open letter to President Aliyev prominent activist and journalist Emin Milli lamented the fact that citizens are “do not dare to speak out” against the dictator’s policies, “online or offline”. “You have successfully managed to silence them,” he added.
In this climate, Art for Democracy is an important, fresh voice that will draw together the country’s most important free expression experts, ensuring that a wider audience is informed about the very serious free expression crisis in Azerbaijan today.
In South Africa, the singing of “struggle songs” remains a bone of contention. Some South Africans contend, along with the courts, that songs should be banned when their lyrics incite violence. Other South Africans regard the songs as a way to remember the anti-apartheid struggle.
On 31 October, South Africa’s ruling African National Congress (ANC), along with former ANC Youth League leader Julius Malema, reached an agreement with the white “minority rights” lobby group AfriForum and the Transvaal Agricultural Union (TAU) to avert the banning of the anti-apartheid struggle song Dubula iBhunu. “Dubula iBhunu” is a vernacular Zulu phrase that translates as “Shoot the Boer”.
AfriForum, along with TAU, and Malema and the ANC in its capacity as political party agreed that:
In the interest of promoting reconciliation and to avoid community friction, and recognising that the lyrics of certain songs are often inspired by circumstances of a particular historical period of struggle which in certain instances may no longer be applicable, the ANC and Malema commit to counselling and encouraging their respective leadership and supporters to act with restraint to avoid the experience of such hurt.
Their agreement has been made an order of the court. The ANC abandoned its appeal against the banning of the song while AfriForum agreed not to pursue the banning of the song. The parties committed themselves to further dialogue to deepen mutual understanding. In practice, ANC leaders will discourage their followers from singing songs deemed “hurtful” to “minority groups”.
Malema “rediscovered” the anti-apartheid song in 2010
ANC Youth League leader Julius Malema “rediscovered” the anti-apartheid song in March 2010 in the process of bolstering his appeal to young black people who feel excluded from the material benefits of the country’s transition to democracy.
The South African Bill of Rights enshrines freedom of expression but explicitly excludes incitement of violence or advocacy of hatred to incite harm on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender or religion.
AfriForum obtained an order from the High Court last year banning Dubula iBhunu. The judgment found that the song referred to white Afrikaans people as rapists and robbers and dehumanised them by calling them “dogs”. “The process of dehumanisation is recognised … as one of the steps leading to genocide.” Malema was found guilty of hate speech.
The judgment included a reminder that South Africa’s jurisprudence regards
the right to dignity as “at least as worthy of protection as the right to freedom of expression… freedom of expression does not enjoy superior status in our law.”
The ANC appealed against the finding. It also lodged an appeal against another case involving the song: a member of the public, Willem Harmse, had taken another, Mohammed Vawda, to court in 2010 as the latter wanted to use “Dubula iBhunu” during a march against crime. Vawda argued that the song’s lyrics indicated “shooting apartheid” while Harmse, a white farmer, argued that the words could cause him personal harm. The high court had found the song to be an incitement to violence.
The appeal in the Harmse case was postponed in September this year in anticipation of the appeal in the case involving AfriForum, which would have come before the Supreme Court of Appeal this week.
The Mail and Guardian, a leading opinion-making newspaper, questioned the ANC’s decision to withdraw its appeal:
The settlement forestalls the testing of a questionable judgment with far-reaching implications. South Africans should be able to understand that what is legally permissible and what is wise or constructive are not the same. The law must leave wider parameters than political morality.
Nevertheless, South Africa has over the past few years witnessed the rise of a public discourse of intolerance that increasingly invokes violence, including Malema’s public declaration that he would “kill for Zuma” in the run-up to the 2009 election. Jacob Zuma subsequently became ANC leader and South Africa’s president. Rather than it being merely about legality or wisdom, the threat of violence has been used for specific political ends: to intimidate detractors and mobilise support.
In resurrecting Dubula iBhunu, Malema was following the example of Zuma, who had revived another “struggle song”, Awuleth’ Umshini Wami (“Bring My Machine Gun”). Zuma used the song as a war cry when his financial advisor faced a corruption trial in 2005, which implicated him, and when he (Zuma) faced rape charges in 2006.
Christi van der Westhuizen is Index on Censorship’s new South African correspondent
Three members of Russian punk group Pussy Riot have had their detention extended by a further six months by a Moscow court, reports say [ru]. Maria Alekhina, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and Ekaterina Semutsevic will remain in jail until at least January 2013, with their detention already being extended from 24 June to late July. The trio were arrested in March and face charges of hooliganism for allegedly staging an anti-Putin performance in Moscow’s Christ the Saviour Cathedral in February. If convicted they face up to seven years in prison.
Pussy Riot spoke to us exclusively in May, read the interview here.
As he watched a horrifying crackdown unfold in his homeland of Syria after the start of popular protests on 15 March last year, US-based Syrian composer and pianist Malek Jandali felt obligated to speak out, believing that it was his “duty to reflect the reality on the ground”.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights now estimates approximately 16,500 deaths since the start of the country’s uprising 18 months ago, in a conflict that the United Nations now considers to be a civil war.
“For me, it is not a political issue. As soon as a bullet hit a child, it became a humanitarian issue for me” Jandali told Index.
Jandali decided to speak out through his music, in order to “support the Syrian people and give a voice to the people who don’t have it”.
Around the start of the uprising, Jandali was visiting Syria and was inspired to write a song entitled I Am My Homeland, releasing it on Syria’s Independence day, 17 April. Without any explicit reference to Syria, Jandali made sure that the song pulled on a universal sense of a loss of homeland. He then sent a copy of the composition to every Syrian embassy across the globe.
The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee invited the artist to perform at their annual convention last year, but only on one condition: he could not perform I Am My Homeland.
Jandali was told by organisers that they “did not want to divide the community — especially the Syrian one”. After a heated debate, Jandali said organisers told him, “if you want to perform it, you are not welcome to come”.
Jandali took this as a revoked invitation, as he would not perform at the conference without performing the controversial song.
The composer slammed the organisation publicly for their decision, and the committee then released a statement claiming that his invitation to the event was never withdrawn. Organisers of the event then played his song without his approval. Jandali responded by filing a lawsuit against the organisation for copyright infringement. The case was eventually settled, on the condition that a donation be made to Syrian refugees in Turkey, as well as an apology to Syrian-American people. Jandali says the organisation told him they would not fulfill either request.
At a protest for Syria at the White House on 23 July 2011, Jandali played I Am My Homeland after playing both the Syrian and American national anthems. Four days later, his parents were brutally attacked in Damascus. Jandali says security forces beat his mother while his father was handcuffed and forced to watch.
While the attack against his parents was meant to silence him, Jandali became even more determined to speak out against Syria’s regime. “When you get attacked in such a brutal way, and you know you are on the right side of humanity, it gives you more determination,” he says.
His mother told him to continue to speak out, telling him what happened to her was “at least worth one more concert”. Jandali performed the next weekend, despite concerns over his safety.
After his parents fled Syria, Jandali published the photographs of their injuries. Following the publicity, Jandali said that in September last year Syrian security forces raided the home of his parents with intent to kill, as he said footage showed armed men forcing entry to the house.
Jandali continues to speak out in support of Syria’s revolution, and has faced attacks both on and off-line. After releasing his Freedom Symphony in February 2012 — the video for which containede powerful images of protest and clashes with security forces — Jandali said his home was bombed, and his official website hacked.
The artist continues to receive threats via Facebook, but will continue to speak out.
“There’s no grey,” says Jandali. “It’s either for or against murder of innocent children. I always talk about innocent children because they have no political affiliation.”
Sara Yasin is an Editorial Assistant at Index. She tweets from @missyasin
“Art for Democracy seeks to use all forms of artistic freedom of expression to promote democracy and respect for human rights in Azerbaijan, including to improve the climate for artistic freedom of expression itself”, said Art for Democracy‘s coordinator Rasul Jafarov. “It will also give artists a platform to come together and use their talents to promote democratic change”.