Index relies entirely on the support of donors and readers to do its work.
Help us keep amplifying censored voices today.
Callum Macrae, in collaboration with Channel 4 News, has made three films uncovering the truth about Sri Lanka’s human rights abuses in the final months of its decades-long civil war in 2009.
Macrae’s most recent film No Fire Zone, containing carefully authenticated video evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity, gained particular attention as it was aired just before the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Sri Lanka last November. “Both sides in that war committed crimes, although the most of those who died did so as a result of shelling by forces under the ultimate command of President Mahinda Rajapaksa,” Macrae wrote recently. The film tells this story, and that of the government’s attempt to cover it up.
Macrae has been continuously smeared in Sri Lankan media, with claims that he is a Tamil Tiger supporter and that he and Channel 4 receive funding from the disbanded rebel group. He has received death threats, and the team has been followed by the secret service as well as impromptu pro-government protesters, while in the country. “I am probably the most hated man in Sri Lanka at the moment” Macrae recently wrote, but added that based on his experiences in the country, “it is very clear there are a lot of people in Sri Lanka who are very happy to see their increasingly despotic ruling family coming under pressure.
Nominees: Advocacy | Arts | Digital Activism | Journalism
Join us 20 March 2014 at the Barbican Centre for the Freedom of Expression Awards
This article was posted on March 6, 2014 at indexoncensorship.org
Art is one of the most prominent forms of freedom of expression, allowing people to express their thoughts through song, dance, prose and theatre. It is not uncommon across the world for performers to be attacked as a form of censorship, ultimately silencing what they are trying to say.
Ala Yaacoub- Tunisian rapper, two years imprisonment
Tunisian rapper Weld El 15, real name Ala Yaacoub, was sentenced to two years in prison after posting a song online in which he insulted and threatened police.
Yaacoub, 25, told AFP that in the rap, entitled The Police are Dogs, he used the same terms that the police use to speak about the youth: “The police have to respect citizens if they want to be respected. I am afraid because in a country like Tunisia the law is not applied; you can expect anything.”
Some of those involved in the production of the music video for the rap, including director Mohamed Hedi Belgueyed and actress Sabrine Klibi, were handed suspended sentences of six months. Yaacoub was freed a month after his trial and given a suspended six-month term.
Tunisia was the first country to be hit by the ‘Arab Spring’ after which a moderate Islamist-led government was elected after the overthrow of Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali. Since then there has been an increase in ultra-conservative Islamists, Salafists, who have been campaigning for greater public piety in Tunisia.
Aron Atabek – Kazakh poet, 18 years imprisonment
In 2007 Aron Atabek was sentenced to 18 years imprisonment following his involvement in a 2006 protest against an attempt by Kazakh authorities to flatten a shanty town; the protest ended in violent clashes and the death of a police officer.
Whilst in jail Atabek wrote poetry and prose relating to the clash which was later smuggled out of his prison and posted online. The authorities, not happy with this, sentenced Atabek to two years in solitary confinement, serving one year until November 2013. This type of punishment, in which he was watched under 24 hour video surveillance, was nothing new to the poet having spent two years in solitary confinement previously for refusing to wear a prison uniform.
Since leaving solitary confinement and returning to his previous prison Atabek’s family are still yet to have any contact with him.
Malian musicians- 12,000 singers and musicians banned from working
Islamic militants first announced a ban on music in the north of Mail in 2012; since then the ban has spread to nearly two-thirds of the country, a country from which artists such as Ali Farka Touré, Rokia Traoré and Salif Keita have witnessed global success.
After armed militants sent out death threats nearly 12,000 musicians found themselves out of work, with some facing exile, as instruments were destroyed and live venues shut down. The 2013 Festival in the Desert, a world famous Malian music event, was moved to neighbouring Burkina Faso and then later postponed due to security risks.
Fadimata “Disco” Walet Oumar was forced to flee as the conflict in Mali developed: “Life without music is not possible … I would rather die than never be able to perform, create or listen to music again in my life.”
The state of emergency has been lifted in the country and the Islamists driven out of the north of the country by the help of the French. But refugees returning to the country don’t yet believe that Mali’s problems are over.
Tunisian actors
Nineteen actors in the Tunisian city of El Kef were attacked by Salafist Muslims only to be arrested themselves by police under claims of ‘indecency’.
Whilst performing at a small theatre, to help raise funds for another venue that had been burnt down in an arson attack, the group of actors were attacked by the militant group. The performance, entitled “Guetlouh” (They Killed Him), was a tribute to opposition politician Chokri Belaid, who was assassinated in February by suspected Salafists.
The charge for indecent behaviour carries a sentence of up to six months imprisonment in Tunisia.
Lena Hendry
‘No Fire Zone: The Killing Fields of Sri Lanka’ was shown on Channel 4 in 2012, drawing in more than double the viewers of a 11pm broadcast despite the graphic content it showed. The ITN team behind the documentary went on to be nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize.
Lena Hendry, on the other hand faces jail for organising a private screening of the documentary during a human rights event in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Hendry was charged on 19 September for her involvement in the screening of the documentary on 9 July 2013 under the Film Censorship Act 2002, in connection with the screening of a video which was not vetted and approved by the Film Censorship Board of Malaysia. If convicted she faces a fine of between $1,576 and $9,455, up to three years in jail or both.
The Magistrates’ Court scheduled a final procedural hearing for 17 March 2014, and set the trial dates for 31 March to 4 April 2014. Lena Hendry is bringing a High Court appeal challenging the charges.
A Channel 4 News team was yesterday barred from travelling to the north of Sri Lanka by a group of angry protesters blocking their train. The pro-government crowd claimed that the reporters were getting money from the Tamil Tigers (LTTE). The crew were eventually escorted out by the police.
Channel 4 News editor Ben De Pear was live tweeting the ordeal. “It seems it is mob rule in Sri Lanka, albeit orchestrated by the authorities to prevent free press access to the north of Sri Lanka,” he posted at the time.
Channel 4 has angered the government of President Mahinda Rajapaksa with a series of documentaries and reports on the alleged of death of some 40,000 Tamils – the figured comes from the UN – in the last weeks of the country’s 30 year long civil war, which ended in May 2009. They have also covered subsequent allegations of human rights abuses like torture and disappearances, levelled at security forces. But De Pear tweeted Rajapaksa had said Sri Lanka is a free country, where you can “go anywhere”.
This comes on the day before the start of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in the capital Colombo. The biannual summit has been marred by coverage of the continuing poor state of fundamental human rights in the country, with Commonwealth members like India and Canada boycotting in protest. Britain, however, will be attending, with Prime Minister David Cameron stating it is better to confront the country than isolate it. Unlike MPs from Australia and New Zealand on a human rights fact finding mission, who were on Sunday detained and deported, he will presumably be able to enter the country. And with human rights not even on agenda to be formally discussed during the meeting, there are a number of recent issues the Prime Minister can raise in his “serious questions” to President Rajapaksa.
While what has happened to Channel 4 is unacceptable, it is nothing compared to the conditions local journalists work under. Since the murder of Lasantha Wickrematunge in 2009 and the disappearance of cartoonist and columnist Prageeth Eknelygoda in 2010 – neither properly investigated – the country’s media face ongoing repression under the Rajapaksa regime. While freedom of expression is protected in the constitution, little is done to protect it in practise. Intimidation is rife, with journalists attacked and beaten and printing presses destroyed. A recent example was the two-hour long raid on the home of editor and columnist Mandana Ismail Abeywickrema in August. She recently started a journalists’ trade union. Critical reporters have previously been labelled “traitors” by authorities, and at least 26 are currently in exile.
The regime also seems to have a problem with the right to free assembly and civil society gatherings. The vaguely worded 1979 Prevention of Terrorism Act is often used in government crackdowns. Only yesterday, families of disappeared people were barred by the military traveling to a candlelight vigil at an alternative Commonwealth meeting organised by human rights groups in Colombo. One of the conveners of the Alternative People’s Forum, Dr Nimalka Fernando, which is boycotting all official Commonwealth events, was subject to on-air threats from the Chairman of the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation – a state owned radio station.
There is also the case of continuous allegations of torture and forced disappearances levelled at at government and security forces. A recent BBC report by Fergal Keane suggested that while repression has been taking place under successive governments, activists say the situation has worsened under the current regime. A priest who helps victims of torture in the country told the BBC “those who criticise or question the government are being silenced in a very brutal way”.
The government has denied all allegations of human rights abuses, with President Rajapaksa saying today that they ended the killing by defeating the Tamil Tigers. But with the Commonwealth “committed to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights” leaders have a responsibility to hold the Sri Lankan government to account. Hopefully David Cameron’s questions will indeed be serious.
I have not seen Madras Café, a political thriller from Bollywood, which tells the story of an Indian intelligence agent on a secret mission during the Sri Lankan civil war. That was an exceptionally cruel war; one only has to see Channel 4’s searing reports or read Frances Harrison’s Still Counting the Dead or Gordon Weiss’s The Cage: The Fight for Sri Lanka and the Last Days of the Tamil Tigers to realise the gravity of that conflict.
Madras Cafe is a Bollywood film, a fictional feature based on real events – in this case, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (Tamil Tigers) role in the assassination of former Indian prime minister Rajiv Gandhi, on his comeback trail. (The LTTE assassinated former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in 1991, on his comeback trail, later saying it was “a blunder”.)
I haven’t seen the film because UK cinema chains Cineworld, Odeon and Vue, won’t let me. Apparently in response to protests from the local Tamil community, Cineworld issued an anodyne statement, saying: “Our policy is to show a wide range of films for different audiences. However, following customer feedback and working with the film distributors, we have decided to not show Madras Café. We apologise for any inconvenience.”
Customer feedback? Press reports suggested that some Tamils had complained that the film was anti-Tamil. The Facebook page of the Tamil Youth Organisation UK has been full of agitation against the film, but I was curious about the basis of the chain’s decision, so I asked them what kind of feedback they had received. Was it in writing or a phone call? Had the customers giving such feedback seen the film? (How, considering that the film was being released simultaneously worldwide on 23 August?) I also asked if it was normal practice for Cineworld to see customer feedback before showing each film. I’m not sure if Cineworld had shown any of the following films, so I wanted to know if they had sought prior customer feedback from any of the communities that may have been offended by films like “Borat” (Kazakhs), “LOC Kargil,” “Gadar: A Love Story”, or “Zero Dark Thirty” (Pakistanis), “Bruno” (gay people), “Waltz With Bashir” (Israelis), or the many American films critical of US foreign policy and Vietnam war? If not, why not? A Cineworld official sent me, again, the press release about customer feedback.
True, protests in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu has also led to the film being withdrawn from most cities there. Ransacking and attacking theatres is not unusual in India. But this is Britain. I wanted to know if there had been a violent threat, and if so, did the theatre seek police protection. But we didn’t reach that far.
Have we learned nothing? A quarter century ago, Muslims in Bradford burned copies of Salman Rushdie’s novel, The Satanic Verses because the Iranian leader Ayatollah Khomeini declared a fatwa on the novelist. At that time, some in Britain didn’t want anything to do with the problem. Outraged by the intellectual acquiescence of some, Hanif Kureishi wrote the fine novel, The Black Album ridiculing the fundamentalists and the fair-weather free speech defenders.
At that time of The Satanic Verses protests, while some bookshops caved in to pressure, as Rushdie has noted later, many brave booksellers insisted on displaying the novel and selling it, reinforcing freedom of expression, and keeping the idea of unfettered imagination alive.
That was then. It is different now.
In 2004, when Gurpreet Kaur Bhatti wrote a play, Behzti (Dishonour) which dealt with rape and abuse in a gurdwara (the Sikh place of worship), the Birmingham Repertory stopped performances because some members of the local Sikh community threatened violence. Later, “Behzti” could have readings in London, and Bhatti even wrote another play in 2010 – “Behud” (Beyond Belief) – which examined the state of censorship and artistic freedom in Britain.
And now? Madras Cafe can’t be shown, and much of the British media has ignored the story, except industry publications. That reflects the underlying paternalism of the media towards the politics within Britain’s minorities. Like female genital mutation, which was initially considered a quaint ritual among immigrants, and forced marriage, which was confused with arranged marriages among Britain’s Asians, intolerance by young hotheads is seen as a cultural characteristic of specific immigrant groups, and being good multicultural people, we should all accept that. Rights – of equality, of expression – are seen as the privileged majority’s heirloom. Since loud individuals within a minority don’t want it, why impose “our” values on them?
But those values are universal, not western. Madras Cafe may be a terrible film – who knows? – but that should be for the viewers and audiences to decide. The aggrieved Tamils have no obligation to see it; indeed, they have the right to picket peacefully outside theatres. They also have the right to tell their story and broaden our understanding of the Sri Lankan conflict, so that the British leaders who go to the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meet in Sri Lanka in November know the kind of hosts whose hands they will shake.
The Sri Lankan story is complex, with neither the government nor the LTTE coming out looking good. The many victims of that conflict – Sinhala and Tamil alike – deserve better. Madras Cafe won’t tell that story – that was never its aim. But that doesn’t mean it can’t be shown.
Cinema chains need to rise to the challenge, and screen the film, with police protection, if necessary. Far more is at stake than a Bollywood blockbuster’s box office returns.