An anti-Muslim video demonstrated how politics of fear dominate the online environment. It’s time we took action, argue Rebecca MacKinnon and Ethan Zuckerman (more…)
Kim Kardashian flew into Bahrain’s capital today to launch the country’s first Millions of Milkshakes shop — but “sources” close to the reality TV star told TMZ that her trip to Kuwait and Bahrain is about more than promoting frozen drinks.
According to the celebrity-stalking website, Kardashian wants to “use her celebrity to raise awareness about important issues in the area”, and while in Kuwait a few days ago she met with the US Ambassador to the country, Matthew Tueller.
Before heading out to the region, Kardashian tweeted that the purpose of her trip was to “set the record straight”:
According to TMZ, Kardashian will also be meeting with “local leaders”, but I have a feeling that won’t include human rights defenders from Bahrain Centre for Human Rights (BCHR) despite an invitation made by its acting president Maryam Alkhawaja asking the starlet to meet with the organisation. The BCHR won an Index Freedom of Expression Award last year for its work documenting human rights violations, political repression and torture in the tiny gulf kingdom after peaceful protests calling for political reform began on 14 February 2011. As similar protests blew across the Arab world, thousands of people took to the streets calling for democratic change and pro-democracy protests continue today. Since then Bahrain’s government has engaged in a brutal crackdown, according to BCHR, at least 84 people have been killed since the start of unrest and despite promises of reform, little has changed.
Only yesterday,ahead of a court decision next week, Amnesty International demanded that “13 opposition activists and prisoners of conscience must be released immediately by the Bahrain authorities.” And Human Rights Watch say Bahrain’s human rights situation “remains critical in the wake of the brutal crackdown”.
But is this just another case of a celebrity cluelessly brushing shoulders with corrupt government officials? Kardashian’s trip has been organised by Paresh Shah and Sheeraz Hasan, the duo behind the US-based Millions of Milkshakes franchise. Shah and Hasan have partnered up for various celebrity-oriented endeavors, including celebrity news and gossip site Hollywood.tv. Shah is an attorney, and Hasan a London-born entrepreneur who moved to the United States and launched a career as a producer, presenter, and eventual businessman. After the duo’s first milkshake store opened in West Hollywood in 2008, Kardashian launched the second shop in Dubai last year and they continue to expand in the region, with shops opening this week in Kuwait and Bahrain. The shop focuses on celebrity to draw in customers, boasting a long list of camera-heavy celebrity visits — from Baywatch actress Pamela Anderson to British X-factor alum Cher Lloyd.
Shah and Hasan appear to have an interesting relationship with Bahrain’s royal family. According to their official website, the two were given a “mandate to source unique investment opportunities outside of Bahrain and developing infrastructure within Bahrain” after meeting with the royal family earlier this year.
Hasan and Shah traveled to Bahrain only weeks before the controversial Bahrain Grand Prix in April, with Hasan tweeting a photograph of himself with Shah and a pair of Rolexes the Bahraini royal family delivered to their plane. Hasan first made mention of their unique mandate in May, shortly after returning from the trip.
Bahrain is no stranger to using flashy events to attempt to whitewash its tarnished international reputation. Formula 1 went ahead with the Bahrain Grand Prix earlier this year despite violent clashes between protesters and security forces in the build-up to the race. The country has also enlisted a number of western PR companies to whitewash its image after international condemnation of its human rights record. Its not a stretch to see why Bahrain might find the Millions of Milkshakes’ celebrity-focused approach appealing.
News of Kardashian’s trip coincided with another bizarre Bahraini celebrity story. American rocker and self-proclaimed “Party King” Andrew WK claimed to be headed to the Kingdom on a “partying and world peace” trip organised by the US Embassy in Manama. His visit was cancelled by the StateDepartment but a State Department spokeswomen told reporters that a “Bahraini entity” approached the Embassy about arranging the trip. The incident raises many questions — who was the “Bahraini entity” that suggested the trip, and why is the US Embassy in Bahrain planning on bringing in celebrities for “inspirational talks”, when it really should be placing pressure on its long-term ally to commit to reform?
Kardashian has close to 17 million Twitter followers (she is the 10th most followed account) and on arrival today she tweeted:
A message that has been retweeted over 2200 times. Kardashian reportedly receives thousands of pounds to promote products via Twitter but even if we take her trip to Bahrain at face value, it’s important to remember that celebrity visits — even if they’re just about milkshakes — are always political.
Sara Yasin is an editorial assistant at Index. She tweets from @missyasin
Last week, in the small town of Palghar, Maharastra, a 21-year-old was arrested for a Facebook post questioning a citywide shutdown to mark the death of a regional leader. Her friend was arrested for ‘liking’ her status. The two women, Shaheen Dhada and Renu Srinivasan, faced charges under the controversial Section 66A of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act 2008.
The case has triggered a massive public outcry here in India over the last ten days, leading to the charges being dropped. Section 66A, now instantly quotable by India’s Twitter generation, allows for “punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service”, which include messages that cause annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred and even ill will. This very loosely defined law has led to a series of arrests around the country in the past year, some of which have only just come to light. Arrests included a professor from Kolkatta forwarding jokes about the West Bengal chief minister via email, an ordinary citizen from Pondicherry for tweeting that he believed the son of a senior cabinet minister is corrupt, a cartoonist in Lucknow whose sketches alleged that corrupt politicians have led to the debasement of democracy in India and two Air India employees in Mumbai who were arrested and held in custody for 12 days after they apparently insulted the prime minister and the national flag in their Facebook posts.
Shaheen Dhadha and Renu Srinivasan appeared on Indian television station NDTV following the arrest and apologised for their online comments
Bowing to public pressure, the Minister for Information and Communication Technology, Kapil Sibal, has spearheaded moves to quickly add guidelines to the section. These new guidelines require an inspector general or district commissioner of police (DCP) to process every complaint under 66A. Twenty-eight states and seven union territories have an inspector general, and each of the countries 657 districts has a DCP.
However, experts have warned this step is not enough to prevent unwarranted arrests and say the section itself needs further revision. In a further development, the Supreme Court of India has just accepted a public interest litigation case calling for the section to be scrapped on the grounds that it violates the right to free speech guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.
These arrests have shown how easy it is for powerful politicians to silence and intimidate their critics using the law as a crutch. Shaheen Dhada and Renu Srinivasan were arrested after a local political leader complained to the police. Even though the case has now been dropped, frightened by the mobs and media spotlight, Shaheen has left her hometown for some “peace”. Soon after, another boy, Sunil Vishwakarma, was questioned by the police for apparently making “vulgar” comments against Raj Thackeray, the nephew of the deceased leader. The police have since released him, as he maintains his Facebook was hacked by someone else to stir up trouble.
The misuse of Section 66A has revealed serious gaps in the legislative process and shown that junior police ranks lack the understanding and training to correctly implement this order. The IT Act was amended in haste in 2008 and passed in parliament without a debate. Under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the charge of defamation carries a maximum jail sentence of two years, in contrast to the three years Section 66A carries for the same offence. But the IPC requires a warrant for an arrest for the offence, while arrests ordered under the IT Act do not. Further, Section 66A had no explanations or guidelines attached to it, which is why the government’s first step in response to the public outcry over these arrests has been to “modify” the section and provide guidelines.
These arrests — assaults on free speech — have revealed the nature of politics in the world’s largest democracy. These high-profile cases all involve the average citizen critiquing powerful politicians. The freedoms at risk – the right to tweet, update a status, forward a cartoon without the fear of becoming a political pawn, have galvanised and angered the netizens of India. There is a serious backlash against those political parties who seek to use the tools of social networking to control them.
India has a legal convention that allows a member of the public to act as a judicial activist and the the public interest litigation currently before the Supreme Court says:
unless there is judicial sanction as a prerequisite to the setting into motion the criminal law with respect to freedom of speech and expression, the law as it stands is highly susceptible to abuse and for muzzling free speech in the country.
This is a welcome step. The people are of India are gaining the confidence to use constitutional tools to fight back the top-down status quo of the country.
To read more about how Indian authorities try to stifle criticism and debate, read Pranesh Prakash’s article in ‘Digital Frontiers’, the new issue of Index on Censorship magazine
The International Day to End Impunity is a campaign to highlight the necessity of protecting press freedom around the world, says Padraig Reidy (more…)