Delisha Valacheril – UAB Institute for Human Rights Blog

Rohingya Refugee Crisis Leads to Shifting Tide in Indonesia

by Delisha Valacheril

Figure 1 Displaced Rohingya at a refugee camp. Source: Yahoo Images

The Rohingya are survivors of atrocities committed by the government of Myanmar. Described as the most persecuted minority in the world by the United Nations, the Rohingya are the world’s largest stateless population. Under Myanmar’s Citizenship Law, the government has consistently denied citizenship to this group of people for decades. 135 distinct ethnic groups are recognized under the law, with Rohingya being one of the few exceptions. Without citizenship, they are deprived of basic rights such as access to health services, education, and employment. Forced to leave their homes and families, more than 730,000 fled to neighboring countries like Bangladesh or Indonesia. Approximately 600,000 still reside in Myanmar’s western Rakhine State. They are restricted to refugee camps and settlements where there is a severe lack of food, adequate healthcare, education, and livelihood opportunities. The long-lasting systemic abuses against the Rohingya at the hands of the Myanmar government are equivalent to crimes against humanity, deprivation of liberty, and even apartheid.

Who are the Rohingya?

The Rohingya are a Muslim ethnic group who have lived in the predominantly Buddhist region of the Rakhine State of Myanmar for generations. Since the government of Myanmar does not recognize them as an official ethnic group, during the conflict, authorities took over much of the former Rohingya land. Forced to flee their homeland, nearly a million Rohingya live in makeshift camps on the outskirts of civilizations. Despite being disenfranchised, refugees try to have a way of life, but the seasonal flooding and tropical storms endemic to safe haven regions like Bangladesh prevent them from doing so. Due to decades of state-sanctioned discrimination, repression, and violence, the Rohingya refugees cannot return to their homes either.

The remaining 600,000 Rohingya who have been arbitrarily detained in Myanmar endure even worse conditions with no agency or freedom. Of the 72,000 children who are confined to these detention sites, 40,000 were born into imprisonment, and it is all they have ever known. Access to indispensable necessities like clean water, enough food, and adequate housing is limited in this squalid, stateless purgatory. Military officials impose strict curfews, unnecessary checkpoints, and barbed wire fencing, significantly affecting the Rohingya population’s right to movement. This directly violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, respective of Article 13. By depriving this community of their civil liberties and development rights, such as freedom to movement, food, water, and housing, the government is hardening the barrier of segregation to marginalize them from society permanently.

Figure 2 Young girl holding a child in detention sites in Myanmar. Source: Yahoo Images

How did the crisis begin?

Presently, in Sittwe, a town that was once home to approximately 75,000 Rohingya residents before 2012—constituting nearly half of the town’s population—only 4,000 individuals remain. Anti-Muslim sentiments across Myanmar marked the onset of a period of heightened oppression of the Rohingya in both policy and actions. Article 3 of the 1982 Law, on the other hand, positions taing-yin-tha, national race, and identity as an ongoing basis for recognition of citizenship. This meant that national race trumps citizenship, so even though Rohingya were born and raised in Myanmar, they can be kicked out because they are not a part of the national race. This environment set the stage for more severe and organized military atrocities in 2016 and 2017. The largest exodus of refugees is marked by military attacks that occurred in August of 2017 that resulted in the massacre of thousands, villages burned to the ground, and the whole community displaced. The war crimes that occurred offer a clear warning of Myanmar’s military to carry out ethnic cleansing and the government to support the internment of the Rohingya people. The brutality that played out in the Rakhine State is on par with apartheid, persecution, and imprisonment.

Figure 3 Rohingya landing on the shores of Indonesia. Source: Yahoo Images

What is happening to Rohingya refugees in Indonesia right now?

Indonesia is turning away 150 Rohingya refugees from its shores because of local resentment about the arrival of boats carrying exhausted refugees. Due to the unending oppression in Myanmar and the growing risks of calamity in Bangladesh, refugees are now risking tumultuous sea voyages to seek refuge in neighboring countries like Indonesia. However, the growing influx of immigrants is a cause for concern for Indonesian residents. The Indonesian navy has intercepted a boat with Rohingya refugees as it neared the coast of Aceh. Aceh is the only state in the archipelago where 90 percent of the population follows Islamic law. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) reported that since November 11 Rohingya boats have landed, and the refugees have relocated to informal sites, mainly in Aceh and one in North Sumatra. The attack on refugees is not an isolated incident but rather the consequence of an organized online campaign of misinformation, deception, and hate speech directed towards Rohingya.

In the escalation of hatred against the Rohingya, hundreds of students stormed a temporary Rohingya shelter in Indonesia’s western Aceh province, demanding their deportation. The students shouted and physically abused the migrants before forcing them onto trucks and transporting them to the government office responsible for immigration. Demands for relocation stem from local anger over the already limited resources that are overstretched to accommodate new arrivals. Residents do not want the refugees in their communities and have gathered to protest boat landings. The greater international pressure to provide fair asylum to Rohingya refugees is causing tensions to rise in Southeast Asian governments. It is unfair to expect these countries to deprive resources of their citizens instead of addressing the real issue.

What Can We Do?

The responsibility to end the worst forms of violence and persecution falls on the government of Myanmar. For instance, by cutting off the Myanmar military’s government funding, the revenue from the abusive operations can be allocated to the Rohingya people so they can finally experience justice.

The governments of Indonesia, Malaysia, and Bangladesh should pressure the government of Myanmar to be responsible for the genocide and displacement of the Rohingya people. By exerting the existing international obligations that require governments to take a number of actions to prevent and punish genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, Myanmar will have to respond. It is a long road to repatriation, but placing pressure on governments and non-profit organizations ensures the onus falls on Myanmar to correct its wrongs.

The long-term root causes of the crisis must be addressed to quell the tide of hopelessness. However, until safe and dignified returns are guaranteed for Rohingya refugees, they will require emergency assistance in order to survive. Myanmar is strengthened as a state by its multi-ethnic, multi-religious makeup. With help from foreign governments and humanitarian aid, the Rohingya can work towards restoring their rights.

Brazil Decides in Landmark Court Case to Grant Land Rights to Indigenous

by Delisha Valacheril

Image 1. Indigenous Representatives Speaking with Local Leaders in Brazil. Source Flickr.

A jubilant celebration of color erupted as several indigenous leaders and activists gathered outside the courthouse adorned in tribal wear and brilliant headdresses to rejoice in the top court’s decision to rule in favor of their land rights. Dubbed the “trial of the century,” Brazil’s Supreme Court decided against a so-called cutoff date restricting Indigenous people’s claims to their traditional lands. Demarcation of ancestral lands is essential in preserving Indigenous human rights. By protecting these lands, indigenous communities can aid in conservation and preserve their cultural integrity. It is reported that 29% of the territory around indigenous lands in Brazil has been deforested, according to the Amazon Environmental Research Institute (Ipam). Now that the native people can access their roots, they can help preserve what is left. This decision also provides legal ramifications against land poaching or exploitation, which applies to several indigenous areas throughout the Amazon. Addressing historical injustices is a crucial step to ensuring that these communities can enjoy a more equitable and sustainable future.

Image 2. Tribal Chief at Land Protest. Source Flicker.

Context

On September 21^st, the Federal Supreme Court had to decide whether or not the native people’s right to their territories predated the Constitution of Brazil formulated in 1988. The Justices followed the precedent set up by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which states that the right continues as long as their “material, cultural, or spiritual connection” with the land persists. This case has been brewing in the nation for quite some time. The dispute stems from Santa Catarina’s legal battle against the Ibirama-La Klãnõ Indigenous Land. The Xokleng tribe sought to regain their ancestral land from the state of Santa Catarina. The state used the “Marco Temporal” legal argument, which prohibited Indigenous Peoples who were not living on the land when Brazil’s current constitution was enacted in 1988 to apply for land demarcation. This is gravely prejudicial, given a significant part of the indigenous population was expelled and displaced during Brazil’s two decades of military dictatorship. Numerous tribal communities were killed and displaced due to that repressive system, which included the invasion of land, forced labor, displacement, and other human rights violations.

With this in mind, hundreds of activists have flocked to the capital, demanding respect for the rights that were stolen from them. These activists advocate for land traditionally occupied by indigenous people to be reserved for their perpetual possession. They are the natural owners of the land, so it should belong to them. They also argue that the natives can conserve the land much better than the local government. Traditional habits and customs of the indigenous are the most significant deterrent to deforestation. However, there are some critical opponents to this viewpoint. Individuals involved in the agribusiness sector and those on the far right are stronger than ever in National Congress, upholding the time limit principle. This decision opposes their farming interests because they want that land to grow their business. Currently, Indigenous reservations cover 11.6% of Brazil’s territory, notably in the Amazon. This area is rich in biodiversity, making it ideal for agricultural commodities. However, ruling against business interests could exacerbate violence against Indigenous peoples and escalate conflicts in the rainforest.

Image 3. Indigenous People Protesting Brazil Government. Source Flickr.

Historical Significance

The Xokleng, the tribe responsible for taking this case to the highest court in the country, was nearly wiped out by Italian settlers who were granted “uninhabited” land in the State of Santa Catarina by the Brazilian government during the 20th century. They were pursued by “bugreiros,” or hired hunters, who were sent into the forest to hunt down and exterminate the Amazon’s native inhabitants. After that mass extermination, how can the government uphold such a discriminatory precedent? The Xokleng are the rightful owners of the land because the Brazilian government forcibly removed them. Marco Temporal is a complete infringement on human rights. The tribe was almost decimated in the 1900s, and the law stated indigenous people living on the land past 1988 had a right to the land. Examining this from a historical viewpoint further illuminates the egregiousness of the situation. The Supreme Court of Brazil found this law inherently unfair because the same government that invaded indigenous lands could not decide on the legality of their land rights.

Conclusion

While this is a historic milestone for indigenous communities, the work is not over. Though land demarcation is critical in the pursuit to secure the rights of Indigenous Peoples, it does not, by itself, sufficiently protect ancestral land. We must hold the government accountable to implement an active, systemic policy that enshrines Indigenous rights from violence, especially violence committed by anyone who illegally trespasses into their territory. Additionally, they must have unhindered access to their territories. From a human rights standpoint, defending indigenous rights is critical because it resolves past wrongs, assures access to necessities, fights discrimination, and upholds justice, equality, and respect for the dignity of all people and communities.

Deadly Earthquake in Afghanistan Magnifies Gender Apartheid Under Taliban Control

by Delisha Valacheril

Image 1. Afghan Man standing in the rumble caused by an earthquake. Source: Flickr

The ongoing humanitarian crises as a result of the Taliban, an Islamic fundamentalist group, regaining control of Afghanistan have been exacerbated since the devasting earthquake hit the country, with women and children bearing the brunt of the struggle. The Herat province has been shaken by two 6.3-magnitude earthquakes in just five days, with at least 1,482 people killed, another 2,100 have been injured, and an estimated 114,000 people need humanitarian assistance. The detrimental aftermath has been felt by everyone in the country, especially women and children, since they encompass 90% of those killed. With homes demolished and livelihoods lost, obtaining humanitarian aid is of the utmost importance. However, women across the country are struggling to gain assistance due to the numerous human rights violations against them in Afghanistan. Women and children are the most affected when natural disasters strike, but they are often the least considered in the response and recovery process. With the death toll mainly comprised of this vulnerable population coupled with the existing humanitarian crises, the situation in Afghanistan is grave for the young women and children survivors.

Image 2 Afghani Women fully covered in accordance with Taliban rule. Source Flickr.

Humanitarian Crisis

It is not just women who are suffering under Taliban rule; everyone is. The UNDP reports that the Taliban’s rule has also erased the Afghans’ standards of life. Since the takeover, the economy has collapsed by up to 30%, and there have been an estimated 700,000 job losses. Over 90% of people have experienced food insecurity in one way or another. The situation in Afghanistan remains precarious and uncertain, and the earthquake has only exacerbated this.

To provide context for the Taliban’s gender apartheid in Afghanistan, a proper foundation must be laid. In 2021, after the US withdrew troops from Afghanistan, the extremist group rose to power and established itself as the sole authority. Since resuming their regime, they have implemented restrictive, discriminatory practices against women. Women have been banned from attending and tutoring at universities, women cannot work, and most girls cannot attend secondary school. These Taliban-imposed constraints have left women and girls increasingly confined to their homes, which is why they suffered the most from the natural disaster. Even when women are allowed to go outside, they must comply with the strictly enforced dress code that requires them to be fully covered, and on top of that, they must be accompanied by a male chaperone.

Image 3 Children in a refuge shelter in Afghanistan. Source Flickr.

What’s Currently Going On

Considering the plight women have to endure under this restrictive government, it has been extremely difficult for aid to reach these vulnerable communities. An obstacle women must overcome to get relief is they must have a male relative’s tazkera, a national identity card. Since there is an absence of women working at the distribution center, many women cannot obtain humanitarian aid if they don’t have male relatives who can access it on their behalf. They also need to adorn the Islamic hijab so they can dress appropriately to access services and relief. This natural disaster has decimated homes, destroyed families, and left many to grieve their loss alone. How can the government discriminate and impose restrictions on who can receive aid in a time of crisis? After losing their husbands, fathers, and sons to this calamity, what are women supposed to do? Is there life meaningless without a male associated with it? Are they not worthy of aid from Afghanistan’s government?

Sonita Bahram, who is part of a team providing medical assistance to survivors, recounts the hardships women have had to withstand during these trying times. “I saw dozens of women and girls each day, and I can tell you that 99.9% of them were suffering from some sort of psychological trauma,” she said. Bahram narrates how women who have lost their homes, some of them their entire families, now have to work together to exist. Survivors seek refuge in the sea of tents that now stand in the rubble of Afghanistan’s towns and cities. Women are tying tattered blankets and even their headscarves to construct some semblance of privacy. On top of the mental stress and trauma that these women have had to endure from their daily home lives, these devasting earthquakes add significantly to their worries.

Significance

Conflict, food insecurity, drought, displacement, and poverty were already prevalent among the women and children of Afghanistan, but since the deadly earthquake, the government has continued to marginalize this group. The obstacles Afghani women have to overcome to receive aid are egregious; the treatment of women survivors has been abysmal, and they make up the majority of the fatalities. The humanitarian crisis involving women’s rights has been festering for a long time in the country, but this catastrophe has only inflated the concerns and hardships of the minority group. The severity of this issue has reached a global extent, with international relief centers and governments limiting humanitarian help to Afghanistan since the Taliban took power because of the government’s flagrant breaches of human rights, especially those committed against women and girls. This is harmful to the women and children of Afghanistan because they are the ones in dire need. It is important to support and donate to NGOs that are providing aid. UNICEF has launched a $20 million appeal to support 96,000 children affected by the earthquake. Life USA is pledging funds to provide emergency relief to the survivors. 2023 Afghanistan Earthquake Relief is also a great organization committed to doing beneficial work. By supporting these organizations, we can help the women and children of Afghanistan even if their government chooses not to.

Lifesaving Aid Delayed In the Wake of Morocco’s Catastrophic Earthquake

Image 1 – Source: Yahoo Images; An image of collapsed building as a result of earthquake

A devasting, 6.8 on the Richter scale, earthquake hit the North African nation late Friday, killing at least 2,886 people and injuring 2,562. The earthquake struck the High Atlas Mountain range ripping through the small villages and the center of Marrakech. Rescue operations are still taking place, as there are many people crushed under the remains of Al Haouz, where the quake was most devastating. Every minute counts in the search for survivors, yet the Moroccan government is selective with which countries they accept. France was left out of Morocco’s decision to accept aid from the UK, Spain, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. When the death toll continues to rise and the city turns to rubble, why is Morocco declining French assistance in disaster relief? Analyzing recent tensions between Morocco and France, it is apparent that the strained relationship between the two countries is the contributing factor to the refusal of aid during this dire time of need. Major humanitarian crises like this are supposed to be a chance to bridge the divide between nations, but they can also be an opportunity that is overlooked.

Image 2 – Source: Yahoo Images; An image of survivors going through the rubble.

Context

The controversy between Morocco and France has its roots in historical, political, and diplomatic factors. Originally, Morocco was a French protectorate from 1912 to 1956, and then in 1956 the country gained its independence. Therefore, there is a significant Moroccan diaspora in France which is why the government pledged 5 million euros to help with aid. Additionally, four French residents died in the earthquake. However, one topic of contention between the two is the sovereign claim over the Western Sahara. Morocco recognizes the West Sahara as part of their country, but France refuses to acknowledge that. Back in 2021, France went on the offensive against migrants from Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia, threatening to cut off their visas unless they agreed to accept back migrants. The aforementioned nations took that as a sign of shame. These controversies, compounded with the government’s decision to reject French assistance, are indicative of the icy diplomatic relations between President Emmanuel Macron and King Mohammed VI. Despite the King being in France when the quake hit, no attempts were made to resolve the tension.

Image 3 – Source: Yahoo Images; An image of rescue operations after earthquake.

Significance

Morocco’s reluctance to accept aid is baffling global aid groups. Time is the most precious resource when it comes to disaster relief. By refusing the French, the Moroccan government is taking precious time away from the survivors of this devasting earthquake. Especially since France is known for being an expert in disaster relief, they have the resources to mobilize coordinated rescue operations on the ground. In the wake of this horrible humanitarian crisis, the focus should be on helping the suffering, not balancing adverse international relations. This decision made by the Moroccan government is actually hurting its people. That aid could be used to reach parts of the village that are not accessible due to the vast destruction. The increased delays have resulted in families digging themselves out of the debris. In addition, the government has been dubiously quiet about the severity of the crisis. Instead of making a broad appeal for help, Morocco is limiting foreign aid. For this to be the strongest earthquake to hit the country in over a century, the government is keen to downplay the seriousness of the situation and provide inadequate resources. Therefore, the catastrophe response promotes the notion that the administration is indifferent to the plight of the people in the impoverished mountain towns shaken by the quake, rather preferring wealthy metropolitan inhabitants and foreign tourists. With lives lost and homes destroyed, now is not the time for petty politics, but rather a chance to come together in a time of need.

Libya Flood Relief

The case of Libya’s flood is another case where relief efforts are hindered by political complications in North Africa. More than 5,300 people were killed and 10,000 are missing in Libya when a storm caused rivers and dams to breach. Storm Daniel wreaked havoc on Libya’s eastern port city of Derna, virtually flattening it. The Morocco quake and the Libya have resulted in 8,000 dead and significantly more injured or missing. Both devastated communities have waited for days for aid, frequently digging out and burying their dead with little to no help from their governments. Some of the delays can be attributed to damaged infrastructure; however, the main impediment, though, is politics. It seems that the immediate aftermath of a natural disaster qualifies as a moment for political differences to be put aside. The delays in receiving aid in Morocco and Libya, one nation perceived as the bedrock of stability in the region and the other torn apart by conflict and governed by rival governments, show how difficult it is to separate political concerns from humanitarian help. Despite the stark differences between the two, both are in the same predicament. Both governments need to accept responsibility and make a coordinated effort to provide aid to the citizens of their respective countries.

Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill Sentences People to Death for Being Gay

Uganda has a controversial history regarding its stance on homosexuality. In 2014, the country passed the Anti-Homosexuality Act, which imposed harsh penalties on individuals engaging in same-sex activity, including life imprisonment for “aggravated homosexuality.” The law also criminalized the promotion of homosexuality and made it a crime to not report homosexual activity to authorities. Recently, policymakers in Uganda have proposed new legislation that would prohibit even identifying as LGBTQ. Parliament passed the new bill in order to crack down on homosexual activities. Gay people living in Uganda face life in prison and even the death penalty. The proposed bill has been widely criticized by human rights organizations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, as well as many countries around the world. The international community has called on Uganda to respect the human rights of LGBTQ individuals and to repeal the proposed legislation.

Criminalization of Homosexuality

Violations include “aggravated” homosexuality which involves gay sex with people under 18 years old or when a person is HIV positive, according to the law. The penalties are significantly steep resulting in death penalty. Failure to report homosexuality is a crime. As well as making merely identifying as gay illegal for the first time, friends, family and members of the community would have a duty to report individuals in same-sex relationships to the authorities. It bans media from publishing queer advocacy or promoting homosexuality. People found guilty of “grooming” children for purposes of engaging them in homosexual activities face life in prison. This can include discussing sexuality in classrooms or teaching about same sex relations in sexual education courses.

Impact on Society

The deeply regressive bill endangers gay people who live in Uganda and will have negative repercussions in society. The UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights urged Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni not to sign the bill calling the Anti Homosexuality Bill 2023 “draconian”. The passing of this extremely discriminatory policy will result in families betraying their own, friends turning in friends, and communities turning their back on the LGBTQ. There will be severe psychological and mental effects for queer people in Uganda. They are condemned for simply existing. Legislation like this will only grow the anti-gay sentiment in Uganda making it much more difficult for change. The anti-gay bill will damage Uganda’s international reputation, leading to criticism from the international community and the potential for economic sanctions and aid cuts. The bill has been condemned by many western countries and organizations, including the United States and the United Nations. Overall, the anti-gay bill has had a devastating impact on Uganda’s LGBTQ community, civil society, and international reputation, and has further entrenched discrimination and violence against marginalized groups in the country.

What Can We Do

There are several strategies that can be employed to prevent anti-gay attitudes and actions in Uganda. To start, we must continue to support and organize with LGBTQ organizations in Uganda as well as globally. Education and awareness is key. Activists and advocacy groups can target awareness campaigns in schools, universities, and community centers. However, this is not possible without our continues support. NGOs to look into are Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG), the United Nations, and Human Rights Watch. The international community can exert pressure on the Ugandan government to promote LGBTQ+ rights and to repeal discriminatory laws. This can include diplomatic pressure, economic sanctions, and other measures. They can also foster support networks and safe spaces for LGBTQ+ individuals to provide them with a sense of community as well as a means of protection against discrimination and violence.

US Sanctions Against Foreign Jurisdictions Violate Human Rights

For years the United States (US) has been employing extraterritorial jurisdiction to impose oppressive sanctions on foreigners. Often, these sanctions violate due process rights because they are imposed without providing individuals with adequate notice, a fair hearing, or an opportunity to challenge the designation. The US has the authority to freeze assets, ban travel, and place other restrictions on financial transactions. This significantly impacts an individual’s human rights as the freedom to travel, freedom to work, and freedom to have privacy. Targeting individuals abroad for alleged activities that occurred outside of the US makes it evident that these restrictions are over-complying out of fear, a fear which is rooted in ethnophobia. Many Americans fear immigrants are taking their jobs, and sanctions like this only bolster this. Arbitrarily depriving someone of their property based on where they are from is an inherent violation of human rights. Unilateral coercive measures like the Global Magnitsky Act, Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Person List, and Office of Foreign Assets Control sanctions have a disproportionately negative effect on international people.

Global Magnitsky Act

The Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act authorizes the president to block or revoke the visas of certain “foreign persons” (both individuals and entities) or to impose property sanctions on them. People can be sanctioned (a) if they are responsible for or acted as an agent for someone responsible for “extrajudicial killings, torture, or other gross violations of internationally recognized human rights,” or (b) if they are government officials or senior associates of government officials complicit in “acts of significant corruption.” It was enacted as a deterrent for foreign political corruption but instead was a catalyst for arbitrary detention and arrests without due process. There is a lack of transparency and little to no evidence provided to justify designating individuals under the Act. UN Special Rapporteur Alena Douhan concerned about human rights violations states, “This is a clear violation of due process rights, including the presumption of innocence and fair trial.” The Act allows the US government to impose sanctions on individuals accused of human rights violations and corruption but does not provide them with a fair opportunity to challenge these allegations. Though it serves the purpose of preventing acts of terrorism and maintaining foreign accountability, the language is not concise enough to prevent arbitrary detentions or sanctions.

Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Person List

The SDN list is updated regularly with the names of individuals, entities, and organizations deemed to be involved in a range of criminal activities such as terrorism, narcotics, or arms. Therefore, US nationals are prohibited from engaging in any form of transaction with SDNs. Based on similar provisions under the Patriot Act, the government can block all of an individual’s or entity’s assets in the US. Similar to Magnitsky, there are concerns over transparency and due process violations. There have been inconsistencies in the way that individuals and entities are designated on the list, including cases where some individuals or entities are designated while others engaged in similar activities are not. Since the process behind the designation is not made public, it begs the question what is the real intention behind this decision and are there any underlying motives? Also, the list is public which subjects the individuals on the list to political abuse by targeting people that are seen as political opponents or rivals, rather than based on evidence of wrongdoing. “This is a clear violation of due process rights, including the presumption of innocence and fair trial, “ The Special Rapporteur observed.

Office of Foreign Assets Control Sanctions

OFAC is an office of the U.S. Treasury that administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions based on U.S. foreign policy and national security goals against targeted individuals and entities from foreign countries. OFAC sanctions can have unintended consequences and harm innocent parties, such as businesses or individuals that have no connection to the sanctioned entities or countries. The exterritorial reach the US has over foreign businesses is overt and unnecessary. Similar to the other legislation, there is a significant gap in knowledge between the government and the individuals affected. They do not know what they have done that has caused them to be targeted. The affected parties have no way to challenge these accusations if they are not aware of what they have done wrong, thus hindering the due process. The UN expert mentioned how human rights are infringed upon when US trade sanctions against specific countries penalize foreign companies for doing business.

Revaluate

While these laws are in the interest of national security, we need to reevaluate if their ability to reach their intended goals or if have they just enforced discriminatory, biased legislation. There are concerns about their impact on innocent parties, lack of transparency and due process, extraterritorial reach, and potential for abuse. These are important factors to consider when evaluating the country’s presence in foreign entities. It is important to incorporate human rights protections in the sanctions the government passes because they affect international relations, global human rights, and the preservation of American ideals of democracy and equality.

Human Rights Abuses Against Elderly During Armed Conflict

Armed conflict often results in a wide range of human rights violations, including right to life, liberty, and security. Conflict can have a devastating impact on human rights, leaving individuals and communities vulnerable to a range of abuses and violations. Often times, during military conflicts, the elderly are overlooked when it comes to human rights abuses. Despite being among the most vulnerable members of society, the impacts of armed conflict on older people are often underreported, highlighting the need for greater attention and support for this marginalized group. Human Rights Watch released a report addressing the significant human rights violations older people endure during wartime. The report calls for the United Nations (UN) to end the abuses, provide protection, and facilitate humanitarian assistance for the elderly. The report documents a pattern of violations against the elderly in African and Middle Eastern countries experiencing war.

Pattern of Abuses

Older people are more likely to experience a range of physical, emotional, and economic challenges during times of conflict. Government and non-state armed forces have unlawfully attacked and killed older civilians, subjecting them to summary executions, arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and other ill-treatment, rape, abduction and kidnapping, and the destruction of their homes and other property. Older people are more likely to be injured or killed during armed conflict due to their reduced mobility, impaired senses, and other health issues. In the Central African Republic, for example, the armed forces executed Dieudonne, a blind 60-year-old man in July 2017. Many older people rely on family members and caregivers for support, but armed conflict can disrupt these networks, leaving them isolated and vulnerable. In Ethiopia, after Tigrayan forces recaptured most of the Tigray region in 2021, authorities arbitrarily arrested and detained older Tigrayans in Addis Abeba. Amhara forces in control of the Western Tigray zone detained elderly people in overcrowded detention facilities, subjecting them to beatings and other forms of ill-treatment. The stress and trauma of living in a conflict-affected environment can have significant impacts on older people’s mental health and well-being, and may exacerbate pre-existing mental health conditions. In South Sudan during government operations against rebel forces in February 2019, a soldier made a 50 year-old woman carry looted property, beat her with a gun, and raped her repeatedly. Sexual assault can have profound and long-lasting effects on an individual’s mental health and well-being.

Unable to Receive Aid

Another facet of the abuse is that displaced older people cannot access humanitarian aid. People experiencing must flee in order to access basic services such as food, shelter, and medical care. During hostilities, many older people have chosen not to flee their homes because they think they will not be harmed, or they want to protect the land they have had in their families for years. Also, limited mobility and disability lead to fewer elderly choosing to flee. In 2017, Myanmar security forces pushed older people who could not flee back into burning houses. Displaced older people have also faced difficulties in registering for and receiving humanitarian aid. In South Sudan in 2017, displaced older people who sought refuge were more likely to face difficulties in receiving aid than those who fled to Protection of Civilians sites within UN bases. Amnesty International has documented the failure of humanitarian actors to meet humanitarian standards and be inclusive of older people in their responses to conflict-driven displacements.

Significance

We should be concerned with the gross negligence of elderly’s human rights because every person deserves respect and dignity. Elderly individuals have a wealth of life experience and knowledge to share, and they deserve to be valued and respected for their contributions to society. Due to their age, older people are one of the most vulnerable groups, so it is up to us to do all we can to ensure their safety and protection. Protecting the human rights of elderly individuals is a matter of social justice. As members of society, they have the same rights and entitlements as anyone else, and it is our collective responsibility to ensure that these rights are upheld.

Exiled Islanders from Chagos Demand Reparations from US and UK

Over 60 years ago, the United Kingdom (UK) government secretly planned with the United States (US) government to forcibly remove an entire Indigenous people, the Chagossians, from their homes in the Chagos Archipelago. The Chagos Islands are a group of islands in the Indian Ocean. The UK has a long-standing dispute with Mauritius over the islands’ sovereignty. The UK separated the Chagos Islands from Mauritius in the 1960s, establishing a British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) on the islands. The original inhabitants of the islands, the Chagossians, were forcibly removed and relocated to other countries, including Mauritius and Seychelles. The eviction of the Chagossians has been a contentious issue, with many claiming that the UK’s actions were both illegal and unjust. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled in 2019 that the UK’s separation of the Chagos Islands from Mauritius was illegal, and that the UK should cease administration of the islands.

Map showing the location of the Chagos Archipelago. Source: Google Maps.

Forced Removal

Diego Garcia, the largest of the inhabited Chagos islands, would be turned into a US military base, and the island’s inhabitants would be relocated. This is an ongoing colonial crime because according to article 9 of the Human Rights Act, “ No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.” The UK government forcibly removed the indigenous people from their native, ancestral lands. This removal was carried out without their knowledge or consent, and they were given no say in the matter. This action infringed on their right to self-determination, a fundamental principle of international human rights law.

Loss of Livelihood

The reality was the indigenous people had been there for centuries developing their distinct culture, language, and customs. From 1965 to 1973, the UK and US forced the entire Chagossian population from all the inhabited Chagos islands to be displaced from their homeland. Both governments treated the people as if they had no human rights. The islanders were a fishing and coconut plantation community, and their forced removal from the islands cost them their livelihoods. When they were exiled, they were unable to take any of their possessions or belongings with them, and they were not compensated for their loss. This had a significant financial and social impact on their lives.

Separation from Families

“My mother cried and said to us, ‘Now we will live a very different life’” quote from Louis Marcel Humbert, born in Chagos 1955. This was in response to leaving four brothers and a sister back on the island. Unable to bring their families with them, many families were broken and left in a similar situation. The strict restrictions imposed by the UK government on access to the islands made it impossible for families to even visit those they have left behind. The governments’ merciless persecution on the grounds of race and ethnicity have resulted in thousands of families being isolated from each other. This is a continuation of the colonization and exploitation of the inhabitators of Chagos. In 1814, the Chagos Islands were ceded to Great Britain as part of the Treaty of Paris, which ended the Napoleonic Wars. The islanders have been subject to forced removal for years.

Deny Right to Return

Despite the International Court of Justice ruling that the UK’s separation of the Chagos Islands from Mauritius was illegal and that the UK should end its administration of the islands as soon as possible, the UK government has retained control of the islands and denied Chagossians the right to return. Full reparations are in order and that starts by granting passage to return back to Chagos. The US and the UK need to provide restitution by immediately lifting the ban on Chagossians permanently returning to the Chagos Islands. This is a human rights violation from over 650 years ago that has yet to be corrected. By acknowledging the islanders were removed unlawfully, both governments can work towards rectifying the situation.

Nepal Criminalizes Urban Poor

The right to equitable housing, employment, and standard of living are in jeopardy due to Nepal’s government policies towards the displaced community. In the capital district of Kathmandu, the mistreatment of vulnerable, minority populations ensues without providing any alternative measures. Street vendors line the capital with their small business trying to make a living, but new policies are allowing authorities to seize their property and rob them of their way of life. This campaign is accusing street vendors of blocking sidewalks and obstructing pedestrian pathways. People who cannot find regular employment resort to selling their wares on the street. Now, their livelihood is threatened. These are non-permanent, transition spaces for vulnerable individuals dealing with poverty. Nepal government is displacing people who already do not have a place to live, and they are not providing adequate housing. This is only exacerbating the significant homeless population in the country. Preying on this disadvantaged population is harmful and violates human rights.

Government Action

Along the banks of the Bagmati River in Kathmandu, rumbles of protests seem to emerge. The city announced that they will be removing beggars in an effort to make Kathmandu a beggar-free city. The landless squatters held a rally on December 5th from Maitighar to New Baneshwor urging for the government to provide alternative housing. Demanding government aid and relief United National Squatters Front Nepal Chairperson Kumar Karki stated to the press, “Removing us from the current place without arranging an alternative is not tolerable. It is a violation of human rights.” The slum settlements in the Kathmandu valley are not a threat to the government.

Community Response

The government has bulldozed their living structures, so the only way to resolve the issue is through dialogue. Evictions are not the solution. According to the National Land Commission, a statutory body, the city government has failed to provide an alternative place to live. Under international human rights law, everyone has the right to the opportunity to work and to an adequate standard of living, including food, clothing, and shelter. The continued removal of residents is causing undue hardship on the citizens. This policy targets people who have no alternate source of income or no way of supporting themselves. Most of the time, it is young women and children which means now young women and children are being made homeless.

Enact Change

In order to prevent any more draconian governmental initiatives, you can get involved with Help Nepal. Donation, sponsorship, and volunteering are all great ways to support the Nepalese people faced with displacement. Posting on social media to raise awareness is another helpful measure. Speaking out against policies like this will result in less similar policies. Right to housing, work, and living are all basic human rights. Sprawling urban fringe is not only seen in Nepal, but in fact a lot of other parts of the world deal with these same issues. This is why it is important to discuss and bring attention to these topics.

Humanitarian Crisis in Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka is in the midst of its worst economic crisis since gaining independence in 1948. Sri Lanka made a declaration of insolvency in early April 2022, after it could not service its foreign debt. Recently the United Nations renewed an  humanitarian appeal, stating that 28 percent of the population faces food insecurity and that the poverty rate this year has doubled. The dramatic fuel shortages caused by a steep drop in agricultural output are accompanied by mass protests. Additionally, the country is also experiencing a rapid deterioration of the health system. In Sri Lanka, health challenges are interwoven with a deteriorating socioeconomic landscape, lack of essential medicines, and human rights violations. Student activists have been detained under the notorious Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) by President Ranil Wickremasinghe. He has even threatened to declare a state of emergency in the event of major protests. People in Sri Lanka have no recourse to hold politicians accountable for mismanagement or corruption.

Economic Crisis

President of Sri Lanka — Source by Flickr

After years of accruing foreign debt, the current economic downfall has been looming in the shadows for a while. Mainly investing in large-scale infrastructure projects, the government projects provided no real economic benefits for ordinary Sri Lankans. Therefore, it resulted in a failed investment; one which Sri Lanka is still attempting to pay back. The government’s economic policies have only exacerbated the human right crisis. The economic downturn has had an unequal impact on the country with lower–class, marginalized communities feeling the effects in a detrimental way. Instead of addressing this issue, the government has decided to provide fuel and electricity for the middle–class and above. They are doing so in order to promote a false sense of hope by making it seem like all is well, when in fact over a third of the population is without food.

Humanitarian Crisis

These realities have not been addressed by legal reforms. Employee rights to fair wages, decent working conditions, the right to organize, and secure social protection are often violated by employers, with no consequences. Legislation to resolve land disputes, housing issues, access to basic livelihoods, and ensure a sustainable environment is inadequate. Moreover, investments in education, health, and equitable development have been put on hold since the late 1970s. Sri Lanka’s lack of constitutional recognition of socio-economic rights leaves people without a legal framework to protect themselves from the many abuses they face every day. The economic crisis has revealed the benefits the system is designed to provide – those of capital and the political elite. Popular protests are challenging the existing economic order, authoritarian rule, and even constitutional shortcomings.

Take Action

Source by Yahoo Images

Here are some ways to take action and support the people of Sri Lanka. Write a letter or follow this sample letter demanding the release of the student activist that is being arbitrarily imprisoned due to anti-government protests. This Urgent Action expires on January 3, 2023, so please enact the change as soon as possible. You can also donate to UNICEF’s Appeal for Sri Lanka and help them meet their goal of providing food for children who are disproportionately affected by the rapidly unfolding economic crisis. The right to food, the right to protest, and the right to equality are universal human rights that everyone should have access to. By supporting these initiatives, you can take an active step in ensuring this as a reality rather than an illusion.