Category: Government

Arbitrary Detentions in Venezuela

Imagine being arrested in the middle of the night—no warrant, no explanation. This is the reality in Venezuela, where arbitrary detentions are used as a tool of political repression.  As noted in “Behind the Ballot: Corruption, Repression, and Hope in the 2024 Venezuelan Elections,” politically motivated arbitrary detentions have run rampant in the country, years before and after Maduro’s victory was announced on July 28th by the National Electoral Council (CNE).

What Is Arbitrary Detention?

The United Nations defines arbitrary detentions as the deprivation of personal liberty (inability to leave at will) paired with unfairness, injustice, unpredictability, and a lack of proper legal procedures. Following the definition, Amnesty International also identified the patterns of arbitrary arrest in Venezuela to be: arrest without warrants; enforced disappearance followed by arrest; the use of torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment; use of military tribunals; the use of special courts such as courts for terrorism cases; undue delays in investigating times and, subjection to criminal proceedings that make no progress and restrict the persons’ liberty, and retaliation as an aim of detention.

National Bolivarian Police (PNB) arrest student during demonstration
Image 1: National Bolivarian Police (PNB) arrest a student during a demonstration. Source: Yahoo Images

While protests have sparked and died down in the country, organizations such as Amnesty International, Foro Penal, and Observatorio Venezolano de Conflictividad Social have kept track of protests and detainees, documenting their experiences and the violations committed against them. Their websites contain contact forms and question banks to reach out for questions, information, and services.

The ultimate purpose of arbitrary detentions, as determined by these organizations, is to neutralize any perceived threat against the Maduro administration, where criticism is ultimately rejected, censored, and attacked. The key targets are activists, human rights defenders, protesters, and anyone suspected of opposing the government and its policies.

Inside Venezuela’s Institutions

Based on research on the correlation between stigmatization and politically motivated arbitrary detentions carried out by Amnesty International and the stories mentioned previously, both state and non-state actors are behind the detentions: SEBIN, Directorate General of Military Counterintelligence (DGMC), Local police, and armed colectivos. Since 2019, the Bolivarian National Guard (GNB) and the Directorate General of Military National Intelligence (DGCIM) continue to be the first and second main perpetrators of arbitrary detentions, third and fourth places occupied by the Special Action Forces (FAES) of the Bolivarian National Police (PNB) and by the PNB themselves.

As mentioned before, legal institutions continue to be manipulated by the misuse of anti-terrorism and public security laws to justify arrests. As a result, 33.3% of these cases were brought before ordinary courts with criminal justification, 9% before courts with special jurisdiction over terrorism, and 6.6% before courts with military jurisdiction. Lack of judicial independence is not uncommon since there is interference from the executive branch.

At least 60 people arbitrarily detained were prosecuted in special courts with jurisdiction over terrorism in 2019. What’s more, invoking the Code of Military Justice—which gives the military courts jurisdiction over military offenses not only committed by military personnel but also by civilians—has led to the persecution of hundreds of civilians before military courts. They are commonly charged with treason or rebellion. In fact, the military courts do not meet the requirements for impartiality and independence, reflecting a poor separation of powers and influence from the executive branch, according to the International Commission of Jurists.

From Protests to Prison: A Timeline of Arbitrary Detentions

2013-2019

Reports of inhumane treatment and torture of political detainees surfaced in 2013 after Maduro won the April elections, and opposition leader Henrique Capriles accused him of fraud. Protests broke out in the streets, resulting in many detentions. As a response, a civil rights group filed a complaint to the International Criminal Court in Hague to investigate violations of human rights committed against detainees.

In 2017, protests sparked again to express displeasure towards a ruling issued by the Supreme Court that made the National Assembly—the unicameral legislature of the country—powerless. As a result, 5,000 people were detained. A rights group shares how the detainees were beaten, sexually assaulted, or given electrical shocks, according to AP News.

Emirlendris Benitez is one of many arbitrary detainees. She was detained in 2018 for alleged links to a drone attack against President Nicolás Maduro. She reported torture and inhumane treatment while in custody. According to the report and a compilation of similar cases, she forcefully disappeared for a few weeks after her detention, and her pregnancy was terminated without her knowledge or consent. After being subjected to torture, she was transferred to a medical facility in July 2023 and now requires a wheelchair. Amnesty International shared her story and advocated for her immediate release in an urgent action announcement.

TOPSHOT-VENEZUELA-CRISIS-OPPOSITION-PROTEST
Image 2: A Venezuelan opposition demonstrator waves a flag at the riot police in a clash during a protest against President Nicolas Maduro, in Caracas on May 8, 2017. Source: Yahoo Images (Federico Parra /AFP/Getty Images)

 

Fear as a weapon: how arbitrary detentions terrorize Venezuelan communities

One common tactic utilized by authorities during these years is the so-called “Nights of Terror,” when officials raid and attack residential areas. Forty-seven of these were reported between April and July 2017. According to the recollection of witnesses, the incidents follow a pattern:

First, the officials (from the GNS, the CONAS, or even the SEBIN) burst into homes, breaking down front gates and security doors. They would fire indiscriminately into the houses using riot control equipment and weapons (tear gas and pellet guns). Even after the residents asked to see the search warrants, the officials continued the search without showing them. In private homes, officials shot off locks, broke down gates, destroyed property, and threatened the residents. They demanded to know the whereabouts of people who participated in protests. The raids are frequent and repeated, characterized by searches without a warrant.

Many children have been affected, as those who witnessed home raids are now scared of the National Guard officers. Not only do victims feel vulnerable as institutions collapse into corruption and impunity, but they also feel more terrified and angry than protected.

During the Covid-19 pandemic: 2020-2023

Arbitrary detentions continue amid the COVID-19 pandemic, during which NGOs documented how the state of emergency—decreed by the president—was used to crack down on dissent. The decree not only requires face masks and limits movement and certain activities, as stated by Human Rights Watch, but it also authorizes inspections at the discretion of security forces if there is reasonable suspicion that someone is violating the decree. Among the affected are human rights lawyers, journalists, and public service officials.

Journalists such as Marco Antoima or human rights lawyers like Ivan Varguez have been charged with inciting hatred and criminal activities, rebellion, or unlawful association.

International Response and What’s Next? 

Actors in the international system have taken steps to put pressure on the Maduro administration.  The United States has imposed a number of sanctions dating back to 2015. These sanctions account mostly for blocking property and assets. The European Union, on its part, approved an embargo on arms and materials in 2017 to countries that may use it for repression. In addition, between 2018 and 2021, about 30 officials were sanctioned, freezing their assets and prohibiting them from entering nations of the E.U.

The journey to justice may be frail, and the fight is far from over. You can help by supporting organizations like the ones mentioned here, sharing detainee stories, and demanding more international actions. Some ways available to support this organization include legal consultation, logistics, physical therapies, psychological therapies, transportation, medical treatments, or other services. Registration on their website is required. On the other hand, Observatorio Venezolano de Conflictividad Social has a submission box on its website for requests to contact the support staff. You can help by supporting organizations like the ones mentioned here, sharing detainee stories, and demanding more international actions.

More detailed stories are available in Foro Penal’s report on “Crackdown on Dissent, Brutality, Torture and Political Persecution in Venezuela.”

 

Election Integrity in Romania

The Romanian November presidential elections have prompted many questions about democracy and election integrity within the nation. After the elections were conducted, it was reported that independent and wildcard candidate Calin Georgescu garnered 22.94% of votes and won by plurality; however, this outcome has since been annulled and the second round of voting has been canceled. Romanian courts and intelligence have cited alleged Russian interference, questionable campaign finance practices, and inappropriate use of the social-media app TikTok as reasons for rejection. While the elections have been rescheduled, many Romanian citizens remain concerned about their country’s ability to conduct free and fair elections going forward, thus leading to apprehension regarding Romanian democracy. Similarly, the suspected Russian involvement in the election warrants further examination.  

 

Romanian voters cast their ballot during the 2024 elections. They are in a classroom set up to turn in ballots.
Image 1: Romanian citizens cast their ballots. Source: Yahoo Images

Presidential Elections

The Romanian presidential elections were held on November 24, 2024. While many well-established candidates ran for this position, the winner, having achieved 22.94% of the votes, was Calin Georgescu, an independent candidate. Prior to the election, polls estimated a 5th-place finish for Georgescu, resulting in greater shock at his victory. Similarly, his policies are at odds with many of the other candidates, as he vowed to distance the country from global organizations such as the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Georgescu gained much of his notoriety from TikTok, where he gained popularity by attracting young voters, targeting voters’ frustrations, and spreading misinformation. He also encouraged his supporters to share his content and allegedly paid users to promote his campaign without disclosing the partnership. Since Georgescu gained a plurality, he was moved into the second round of voting, competing against second-place and popular candidate Elena Lasconi. 

On December 2nd, the Romanian courts requested that the votes be recounted; however, the reason for this was not made public. Even though a recount was underway, the courts insisted that second-round voting would continue and that no evidence suggested that Georgescu’s victory was invalid. Many citizens question the conduct used to carry out the recount, as no guidelines were publicly declared regarding how this analysis would occur. 

Calin Georgescu is surrounded by reporters and microphones, being interviewed following his first place win in the recent elections
Image 2: Calin Georgescu is interviewed following his first-place victory. Source: Yahoo Images

Annulled Results 

On December 6th, two days before the runoff election, the initial results were annulled and the second round of voting was canceled after Romanian intelligence declared that the election was undermined. Interference was found through cyber activities, most notably through TikTok, where authorities allege that the social media app gave Georgescu “preferential treatment.” Furthermore, officials suggest that fake, Russian-made accounts bolstered Georgescu’s page into popularity as it led to increased engagement and content circulation. With Romanian courts arguing that citizens have an inherent right to access accurate information about candidates, this rampant sharing of misinformation, allegedly encouraged by foreign influences, meant that this right was undermined, and thus warranted the results be annulled. Other sources of online Russian collusion were cited as reasons to cancel the election and reject its results. However, evidence and further explanation have not been revealed to the public. While Russia has ultimately rejected these claims, it has since led the European Union to enact stricter social media campaign regulations. 

Campaign finance issues were also uncovered, with authorities finding that candidates reported receiving and spending zero dollars throughout the course of the campaign trail. Officials imply the use of third-party financing, where money is sent through various accounts so that its origin remains unknown. This goes against standards set out by domestic Romanian law and the European Union, where campaign funding sources are expected to be disclosed. With these standards in place, Romanian courts argue that annulling the election results further signals its desire to uphold democratic principles along with domestic and regional legislation. 

New elections will be held on May 4th and 18th. Regardless, many citizens continue to protest for free and fair elections, as the annulment has led many citizens to question the nation’s electoral capabilities. In the meantime, President Klaus Iohannis will remain in power. As of now, it is unclear if Georgescu will be allowed to partake. 

Countless protestors rally outside government building, carrying Romanian flags
Image 3: Romanian citizens protest for free and fair elections. Source: Yahoo Images

Geopolitical Incentives

While there isn’t enough evidence to prove that Russian sources interfered in the Romanian elections, there are reasons to explain why Russia might have an interest in influencing the outcome. For starters, under a parliamentary system, the president plays a significant role in foreign policy, as they ratify international treaties, initiate or disband diplomatic missions, and communicate with foreign leaders. If Russia were to want to create warmer relations with Romania, influencing who becomes president would play an important role in achieving this goal. Another objective could be to distance the country from Western institutions, such as the European Union and the North Atlantic Trade Organization. By promoting Georgescu, a candidate who openly blames such organizations for the country’s problems, Russia can undermine trust in these institutions, ones that shame Moscow for its imperialist and authoritarian actions. Furthermore, Romania is home to critical NATO infrastructure, such as the largest NATO military base in Europe. This base strengthens NATO’s position on the Black Sea, an area where Russia poses military dominance. 

These reasons also tie into the Russia-Ukraine War. Throughout the course of this conflict, Romania has made great military contributions to support Ukraine. To achieve a victory in its imperialist conquest of Ukraine, Russia might find it beneficial to undermine Romania’s support for its neighboring country. 

Impacts on Democracy

The recent election annulment could have a great impact on the state of democracy in Romania. Though much consolidation has occurred since its commitment to democracy in 1991, the nation is still working on strengthening its democratic institutions. Because of this, the choices made by the Romanian government going forward could have long-lasting ramifications, such as weakening trust in such institutions. The Romanian courts argue that its decision was meant to align the nation further with the EU and to restore trust in its electoral process, but this has clearly not been the case. However, democracy could be further consolidated if this issue begins to be handled with transparency. By showcasing to Romanian citizens that Russian or other foreign involvement was found and terminated, it can indicate that the government had the ability to identify and remove election collusion. Furthermore, releasing intelligent reports and investigations provides necessary transparency during a political crisis that can reinforce trust in democracy and the government. Lastly, directing more resources to civil society groups can lead to the creation of safeguards against further interference. While it seems that Romania is on the cusp of democratic backsliding, by moving forward with transparency, the government can demonstrate its self-declared commitment to democracy. 

Conclusion

The recent annulment of the Romanian election results has triggered many questions regarding electoral integrity within the country. Campaign finance inconsistencies, the sharing of misinformation, and alleged Russian involvement, through both TikTok and other undisclosed sources are at the root of this political crisis. While this prompts many questions regarding the validity of other elections and overall national security, by moving forward with transparency, the government can further strengthen its democratic institutions and regain its citizens’ trust. If not, the nation could risk democratic backsliding, which is being seen in various European countries. Similarly, given its proximity to Ukraine, Romania is at risk of being caught in the crossfire if this alleged Russian collusion is found to be accurate and nothing is done to prevent it. Overall, to ensure Romania remains committed to democracy, international attention is warranted.

The Abuse of Facial Recognition Technology in the Hong Kong Protests 

Overview

Facial recognition technology has become a powerful tool in the last ten years, with uses ranging from improved security to personalized customer experiences. However, concerns about its potential for abuse have been voiced worldwide. This has not been more apparent than during Hong Kong’s pro-democracy demonstrations in 2019. The state used sophisticated monitoring techniques to suppress dissent, leaving protesters to contend with a nightmarish reality. This article will explore the use of facial recognition technology during these events, the protesters’ responses, and the broader civil liberties implications. 

Hong Kong protestor wearing a gas mask.
Image 2: Hong Kong protestor wearing a gas mask. Pexels.com

Facial Recognition Technology as a Tool for Suppression 

By analyzing a person’s facial traits with extensive databases, face recognition technology helps police identify individuals. Although the technology is supposedly employed for public safety, its darker side was brought to light during the protests in Hong Kong. During the demonstrations, the semi-autonomous province was also able to utilize facial recognition technology, which the Chinese government has been known to use to track its citizens. 

The protesters were aware that participating could result in arrests or other consequences, like being barred from future work or school opportunities. There was reason to be concerned; according to reports, officials monitored and identified participants using facial recognition cameras placed across the city. Due to fear for their safety, many were discouraged from joining the movement. 

Authorities allegedly deployed law enforcement to protest hotspots using real-time video data alongside overt monitoring. This made it possible to crack down quickly, which deterred involvement even more. The protesters’ awareness of these strategies intensified the tense environment and emphasized the dangers of criticizing their government. 

Protesters’ Countermeasures Against Surveillance 

Understanding the risks posed by facial recognition technology, protesters adopted innovative and sometimes unconventional tactics to shield their identities. Three key countermeasures stood out: 

  1. Face Coverings and Laser Pointers

Protesters used masks, goggles, and other facial coverings to obscure their identities. This method effectively counteract facial recognition technology, which relies on unobstructed views of key facial landmarks. To further disrupt surveillance, they employed handheld laser pointers aimed at cameras, which blurred the recorded footage. This tactic was particularly effective in public areas heavily monitored by government-operated cameras. 

These measures gained even more importance when the Hong Kong government enacted a ban on face coverings during protests in October 2019. The move was seen as an attempt to weaken the protesters’ ability to avoid identification, forcing them to weigh the risk of legal penalties against their need for anonymity. 

Skyscrapers in Hong Kong with student protestors camping in the road.
Image 2: Skyscrapers in Hong Kong with student protestors camping in the road. Flickr.com.
  1. Dismantling “Smart” Lampposts

Another tactic involved physically dismantling infrastructure suspected of housing surveillance tools. Protesters targeted “smart” lampposts, which were equipped with cameras and sensors capable of collecting data. In August 2019, demonstrators tore down these lampposts in Kowloon, suspecting they were being used for facial recognition and other surveillance purposes. This act of resistance underscored the deep mistrust between protesters and authorities. These lampposts became symbolic targets in the fight against surveillance. 

By removing these lampposts, protesters sent a powerful message against the encroachment of state surveillance into public spaces. The act also demonstrated the lengths ordinary citizens were willing to go to protect their freedoms in the face of technological oppression. 

  1. Umbrellas and Creative Shields

Umbrellas, a defining symbol of Hong Kong’s earlier Umbrella Movement in 2014, made a resurgence as tools for privacy. Protesters used them to block cameras from capturing their faces, forming makeshift shields during confrontations. Umbrellas were especially useful in densely monitored urban areas. This method combined practicality with a symbolic nod to the city’s history of resistance. 

Protesters also adapted other everyday items for use against surveillance. Aluminum foil, reflective materials, and even thermal blankets were used to obscure heat signatures and reflect camera images. These creative solutions highlighted the ingenuity of the demonstrators as they adapted to an ever-evolving surveillance landscape. 

The Broader Implications of Surveillance Technology 

The events in Hong Kong serve as a cautionary tale about the unchecked use of facial recognition technology. While the technology can offer benefits to law enforcement and public safety, its misuse can severely curtail civil liberties. Below are some of the broader implications: 

  1. Erosion of Privacy

The pervasive use of facial recognition technology threatens the fundamental right to privacy. In Hong Kong, protesters’ every move was potentially monitored, creating an environment of constant surveillance. Such practices set a dangerous precedent for governments worldwide, particularly in authoritarian regimes where dissent is often criminalized. 

  1. Suppression of Free Speech

The fear of identification and subsequent retaliation stifles free expression. In Hong Kong, many potential protesters chose to stay home rather than risk being identified by facial recognition systems. This undermines the principles of democracy and freedom of speech, cornerstones of any free society. 

The suppression of free speech extends beyond the immediate protest environment. Surveillance tools can be used to identify individuals who post dissenting opinions online or participate in virtual activism. The integration of online and offline surveillance poses a new level of threat to freedom of expression in the digital age. 

  1. Exportation of Surveillance Tools

China’s use of facial recognition technology in Hong Kong is part of a broader trend of exporting such tools to other countries. Nations with authoritarian tendencies may adopt similar methods, enabling the global spread of surveillance states. The Hong Kong protests highlight the urgent need for international regulation and oversight. 

Furthermore, the proliferation of surveillance technology raises questions about its commercialization. Private companies developing these tools often operate with minimal oversight, making it easier for governments to acquire and misuse them. Addressing this issue requires not only legal reforms but also greater ethical accountability within the tech industry. 

Calls for Regulation and Ethical Use 

The Hong Kong protests have amplified calls for stricter regulations governing the use of facial recognition technology. Advocates argue for a global framework that balances the benefits of the technology with protections for individual rights. Key recommendations include: 

–Transparency: Governments and organizations should disclose how facial recognition data is collected, stored, and used. 

–Accountability: Mechanisms should be in place to prevent misuse and hold violators accountable. 

–Consent: Individuals should have the right to opt out of facial recognition systems where feasible. 

–Independent Oversight: Third-party audits can ensure compliance with ethical standards. 

These measures require international cooperation and enforcement to be effective. A united global stance against the misuse of facial recognition technology can help ensure that it is used responsibly and ethically. 

Moving Forward 

The 2019 Hong Kong protests revealed the double-edged nature of facial recognition technology. While it holds promise for improving security and convenience, its misuse can have devastating consequences for individual freedoms and democratic movements. The countermeasures adopted by protesters, from face coverings to dismantling surveillance infrastructure, reflect a broader struggle for privacy and autonomy in an increasingly monitored world. 

As facial recognition technology continues to evolve, the lessons from Hong Kong serve as a reminder of the need for vigilance. By advocating for ethical practices and robust regulations, society can harness the benefits of this powerful tool while safeguarding the rights and freedoms that define us. The time to act is now, before surveillance becomes an irreversible norm. 

The Hong Kong protests are not just a localized struggle; they are a symbol of resistance against the encroachment of state power through technology. The courage of these protesters underscores the universal importance of privacy, freedom, and democracy in the face of technological oppression. 

Democratic Backsliding in Georgia

In recent months, the country of Georiga has seen an increase in anti-democratic policies and government behavior, distancing the nation from Western states and institutions and further aligning itself with Russia and its allies. While political tension has been building within the country over the past decade, the passage of new policies, such as the Foreign Agent Bill and the LGBT Propaganda Bill, has taken this to new heights, receiving domestic and global condemnation as these programs fall in line with authoritarian initiatives taken in other countries. This prefaces the October 2024 parliamentary elections, where the incumbent Georgian Dream Party received a majority of the votes. However, due to the alleged use of voter intimidation and fraud, this result has been widely contested. These events have triggered mass demonstrations throughout the nation as citizens question the state of democracy within Georgia. Due to their longstanding history with Russia and the undemocratic nature of new policies, the events in Georiga warrant monitoring to ensure democracy remains. 

Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze speaks in front of Georgian and European Union flags
Image 1: Georgian Dream Party chairman and Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze speaks at an event. Source: Yahoo Images

History of the Georgian Dream Party

The policy platform and support of the Georgian Dream Party have seen a notable shift throughout its time in office. The party was founded in 2012 and quickly rose to prominence, receiving enough votes to oust the former administration later that year. During its conception, the party’s primary objectives were to improve relations with Western states and to join international organizations such as the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, while also opening up friendly communications with Russia. Popularity for these policies led to the party gaining an absolute majority in parliament in 2016, however; support dwindled following corruption scandals. Later in this administration, a Russian lawmaker was invited to join a Georgian parliamentary meeting, a decision that was met with great upset. Largescale demonstrations erupted as citizens protested the encroachment of Russian influence in their national institutions, rejecting the potential for future Russian involvement. Regardless, the Georgian Dream party won again in 2020 as it promised to take the necessary steps to join the EU. However, this commitment was halted in 2022, when the relationship between Russia-Georgian relations has seemingly strengthened since the Russian invasion of Ukraine. While numerous countries enacted economic sanctions on Russia, Georiga did not follow suit. Similarly, trade and travel have grown between the countries since 2022. 

Not only has the Georgian Dream Party strayed away from its original policy promises, but officials have also begun to spread harmful rhetoric and enact undemocratic policies. In the leadup to the October 2024 elections, the administration promoted that a “Global War Party” was the reason behind the invasion of Ukraine. This theory suggests that Western states are purposefully trying to prolong the war to weaken the Georgian state. The party has also recently passed the Foreign Agent Bill and the LGBT Propaganda Bill, both of which undermine core democratic principles. Though the Georgian Dream Party has not been free of problems, it is clear that, within the past few years, drastic changes have brought the country further away from democracy. 

Democratic Backsliding

Foreign Agent Bill

On August 1st, 2024, the Foreign Agent Bill was passed. This piece of legislation requires that non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that receive 20% or more of their total funding from international sources must label themselves as companies “pursuing the interest of a foreign power.” Georgia is home to thousands of NGOs, with many monitoring compliance to democratic standards and ensuring there is no return to its communist past. It is estimated that 90% of NGOs would fall under this category, thus undermining the validity of countless institutions and organizations. Furthermore, this bill primarily targets civil society and media organizations. Businesses are exempt from receiving this label, regardless of the percentage of foreign funding. While the Georgian government claims that this policy promotes transparency, the rhetoric that officials use when talking about NGOs suggests otherwise. In a speech given in April 2024, a prominent political figure explained how NGOs “do not love their country or their people because they do not really consider them to be their own”. Between the language used when discussing NGOs and the timing of the bill, many speculate that the purpose of this legislation is to undermine the credibility of opposition and pro-democracy groups, being enacted only 3 months before the 2024 elections. 

LGBTQ+ advocates protest for their rights, with one woman wearing a pride flag, and a man holding a poster saying how he wants his country back
Image 2: LGBTQ+ advocates protest against Georgian policies. Source: Yahoo Images

LGBT Propaganda Law

Passed into law only one month after the foreign agent bill, the LGBT Propaganda Law seeks extreme measures to ensure the protection of heterosexuality. Not only does it codify marriage between men and women, but it also bans LGBTQ+ members from adopting children, limits their representation in media, and monitors community events. Furthermore, it overrides anti-discrimination hiring policies and prohibits gender reassignment surgery. The implementation of this bill faced local and international condemnation. Within Georgia, opposition parties criticized the inherent discrimination at the core of the legislation. Similarly, the European Union warns that this legislation threatens the nation’s chances of becoming a member state. The combination of both these bills has raised questions regarding Georgia’s alliances, with many pointing out how these laws signal alignment with Russia over Western powers. 

October 2024 Parliamentary Elections 

On October 26, 2024, Georgia held its parliamentary elections, where Georgian Dream, the long-standing incumbent party, won a majority. However, these results have been widely contested, with the nation’s own president, Salome Zurabishvili, refusing to recognize the validity of the results. One reason backing these claims is the alleged use of voter intimidation tactics by the Georgian Dream party. Voters discuss cameras monitoring polling booths and the display of a Georgian Dream politician presenting a speech being aired directly outside polling stations. The passing of the Foreign Agent Bill has also warranted concerns as this legislation impacted the credibility of election monitoring organizations and groups ensuring democratic compliance. Furthermore, many changes were made to the electoral system in the months before the election, with this being the first election where parties must receive 5% of the vote to have representation in the parliament, and the first election using an electric ballot counting system. Regardless of these questions surrounding the validity of the election, domestic courts have refused to annul the results or to initiate a recount. Despite its alleged election rigging, the Georgian Dream Party still declares itself victorious. It has also declared a halt to its efforts to join the European Union, causing even more discontent amongst the population. 

A European Union, a Georgian, and a Ukrainian flag are held up in front of a Georgian government building among a large group of protesters
Image 3: Georgians protest and fight for their inclusion into the European Union. Source: Yahoo Images

Protests and Government Responses

These unaddressed concerns triggered a nationwide uproar, with protests fighting for democracy throughout the country. Beginning in early November, these protests demanded that new elections be held in compliance with democratic standards. President Zurabishvili has supported these efforts, protesting alongside Georgian citizens. These protests have continued since the election. Georgian police have reacted with force, unleashing tear gas, water cannons, and rubber bullets on peaceful protestors. Arrested over 20 individuals. The government has also enacted legislation that imposes restrictions on protestors, such as fining those caught hanging posters and stickers in public areas. These acts have also granted Georgian police the ability to proactively detain individuals they suspect will violate these limitations. While Georgian citizens continue to fight for and protect their democracy, it is clear that the current administration is taking steps to silence these voices.  

Conclusion

Georgia is experiencing a period of democratic backsliding as the current administration passes authoritarian-leaning legislation and distances itself from Western powers. Though it has never been void of issues, Georgian democracy has drastically weakened in the past few months, resulting in a contested election that reinstated power in the hands of the Georgian Dream Party. Legislation enacted throughout 2024 has also reduced the likelihood that Georgia will be able to join the EU. This backsliding follows a similar trend toward authoritarianism throughout Europe, seen in countries such as Hungary, Romania, Austria, and Poland, and raises concerns over a regional and global weakening of democracy. Similarly, Georgia’s previous relations with Russia make this issue more pressing and in demand of attention. 

 

Behind the Ballot: Corruption, Repression, and Hope in the 2024 Venezuelan Elections

This year, a handful of elections were scheduled. At least 27 countries, including Algeria, Senegal, Pakistan, and Venezuela, held their presidential elections. Because of the varying political climates, let’s visit the most recent Venezuelan elections, which illustrate human rights violations in the form of voter intimidation and political persecution. The development of the events raises questions about the validity of the results and the corruption of the powers of the state. Amid widespread despair, NGOs like Foro Penal, a Venezuelan group offering legal aid to victims of state repression, and international bodies such as Human Rights Watch and the Carter Center are investigating irregularities and violations.

Challenges to Maduro’s Presidency and Popularity

Facing crippling inflation, electricity blackouts, and water and food scarcity, the Venezuelan people had been waiting for a leadership change. Although still appealing to the love people had for former president Hugo Chavez, President Maduro Moros had been increasingly losing popular support.

At the beginning of his term, Chavez gained public trust through social programs addressing inequality, such as adult literacy, health care, and infrastructure. The programs were meant to address the gap between the rich and the poor, a hot issue among voters. His “revolution“ of the old system set up by the administration of Carlos Perez Jimenez was mildly disrupted by a Human Rights Watch report exposing corruption. Nevertheless, his charisma and the benefits he provided kept his supporters loyal.

In 2013, Chavez appointed Maduro as his successor. Disguised as a blessing, Maduro had inherited institutions that were corrupted and allowed him to enrich himself and stay in power. However, years of inflation and poverty eroded Maduro’s connection to the Chavez revolution. As a result, many pro-Chavez supporters have lost confidence in Maduro and continue to mourn the late president, as AP reported.

While his popularity decreased, a new leader had been working to gain the people’s support. Maria Corina Machado, a former member of the national assembly, won a primary election in 2023. Appealing to free the country and grabbing onto the growing dislike for Maduro, Machado became the face of the Democratic Unitary Platform (DUP), an alliance of trade unions, political parties, and former officials.

However, in January 2024, the highest court in Venezuela banned opposition leader Machado from running for the presidency. The ban keeps Machado from participating in any elections for 15 years. The Supreme Court made the decision based on financial irregularities claimed to have happened while Machado served in the legislature. This obstacle is among many presented to political figures who pose a threat to Maduro’s regime. After failing to appoint a replacement for a while, a new candidate was put in the front of the opposition campaign. Edmundo Gonzalez, a former diplomat, became the new candidate of the DUP.

Months Leading to Election Day

Venezuelans outside the country went out to register, uncertain of what turn the elections would take; however, they encountered significant obstacles.

The New York Times reports that Venezuelans living abroad were affected by long waiting times, rejection, and confusing instructions across several countries, including Argentina, Chile, Colombia, and Spain. People arrived at consulates as early as 4 a.m., only to face rejection due to suspended registrations.

In addition to the unexplained delays, voters were met with unexpected registration requirements. Before, only a Venezuelan identification, expired or not, was valid for registration. However, as part of the new requirements being enforced, a Venezuelan passport and proof of residency or legal permanence in the host country were needed. This created obstacles, as many Venezuelans in countries like Colombia or the U.S. lack permanent residency despite having other legal documents, such as Temporary Protected Status (TPS).

National filling out an applications with his passport
Image 1: National filling out a form with his passport at hand. Source: Yahoo Images

What’s more, the government only allowed a 29-day registration period, which differs greatly from the year-round period allowed in the past. However, in countries where diplomatic relations are broken, and embassies and consulates are closed (like the U.S.) Venezuelans can’t register to vote.

As a result of these events, millions of Venezuelans couldn’t vote. Between 3.5 million and 5.5 million Venezuelans who live abroad were eligible to vote, but only about 69,000 were registered.

Election Day – July 28th, 2024

Venezuelans inside the country went to cast their votes at their designated stations. Throughout the morning, locals and the Carter Center mission—sent on June 29th—observed several violations.

Violence and Voter Intimidation

According to electoral rules, a witness is allowed to observe the tally count. People loyal to the ruling party intimidated witnesses and forced them to stay at home or leave their posts halfway through the election.

New York Times (NYT) reported that, in the capital, Caracas, a journalist observed men blocking access to one of the voting centers. Adding to the tension, voters were not allowed entry until over an hour after the poll was supposed to open. Similarly, in the city of Cumaná, about 50 armed police and National Guard officers stood outside with their helmets and armor in what seemed to be a show of power. Over in the city of Maturín, a woman was shot when men on motorcycles drove by a line of voters.

Changing Voting Locations

The NYT also disclosed that constituents’ voting locations were changed without a previous announcement. A worker of the Venezuelan Electoral Observatory, Carlos Medina, stated that the voting stations for 17,000 Venezuelans changed at the last minute. This is the case for Sonia Gomez, a voter who went to vote after verifying her polling site on the electoral council website. However, upon arrival, the workers told her she was registered elsewhere.

National casting their paper vote. Source: Yahoo Images
Image 2: National casting their paper vote. Source: Yahoo Images

Aftermath

Refusal to Disclose Paper Tallies

In Venezuela, votes are counted digitally by the Consejo Nacional Electoral (National Electoral Council) or CNE and verified using paper tallies collected at each voting station. Some officials in certain locations refused to disclose their paper tallies.

With the digital count, Maduro’s administration celebrated their victory, claiming 51% of votes. On the other hand, the opposition released data showing that Edmundo Gonzalez had received 67% of the vote. According to Machado, the opposition’s numbers came from voting machine tallies that were scanned and calculated.

In response to the allegations made by the opposition on corrupt and ridged elections, Maduro requested the Supreme Court give its expert opinion on the results. It is important to mention that the Supreme Court, closely tied to Maduro’s administration, had previously upheld Machado’s ban. Although the court backed him up, Maduro promised to release the tallies on the CNE website. However, the website has remained inaccessible since the events of July 28th.

Politically Driven Detentions

After the CNE announced Maduro’s victory, Venezuelan protested in the streets. However, they were met with brutal repression by state authorities. Videos circulating on social media showed police and military brutality directed at protesters. Human Rights Watch analyzed these videos, corroborating reports of detentions and deaths. While about 2,400 people were detained during protests, Foro Penal—a Venezuelan NGO that provides legal support for victims of arbitrary detention—claims that the police arrested electoral witnesses at their homes. These events have fueled arguments for election fraud. Most of the detainees are being charged with terrorism and incitement of hatred. Other irregularities include a lack of legal assistance and transfer to maximum security prisons.

Adding to the political persecution, a court issued an arrest warrant against Edmundo Gonzalez for conspiracy and usurping power. This prompted him to flee to Spain. Similarly, other figures, like diplomats, have been targeted, too, as Maduro ordered diplomats who opposed his victory to leave the country.

Protests in Venezuela on May 1st, 2019. Source: Wikimedia Commons archive; originally published by Voice of America.
Image 3: Protests in Venezuela on May 1st, 2019. Source: Wikimedia Commons archive; originally published by Voice of America.

Future Implications

After the return of the Carter Center’s technical election observation mission, the center stated that the elections did not meet the integrity standards. The Organization of American States and several countries, including Argentina and Costa Rica, recognized Edmundo Gonzalez as the president-elect and called for transparency. Nevertheless, as Gonzalez has now fled to Spain, it is unclear what the next steps the international community will take to address the democratic crisis.

Since the elections, Venezuelans have felt both hope and fear. Despite a great number of protests and social media posts, fear of government retaliation has reached a higher level than ever. Some believe it is impossible for Maduro to resign, but only time will tell if democracy can still be restored.

Pro-Democracy Activist Jimmy Lai’s Case and The History of Hong Kong

A man standing in front of Hong Kong protesters pointing out.
Image 1: A man standing in front of Hong Kong protesters pointing up to the sky. Source: Yahoo Image.

In recent years, many freedoms of Hong Kong citizens have been stripped away. Once a British colony now under the rule of Beijing, legislation has restricted the voice of its journalists and activists. 

Critiques of the Hong Kong and Chinese government are met with an iron fist. New laws such as the National Security Law and Article 23 law have limited what can and cannot be said in public and media. Consequently, activist such as Jimmy Lai have fallen victim to these new laws. 

Historical Background of Hong Kong, The National Security Law, and Article 23

Protesters in Hong Kong
Image 2: Protesters in Hong Kong. Source: Yahoo Image.

Britain acquired Hong Kong after the first Opium War with China, under the Treaty of Nanjing 1842. Negotiations of Hong Kong took place in 1984, with the signing of the Joint Declaration. In 1990, the Basic Law was completed which served as a mini-constitution for Hong Kong. The former British Colony was officially turned back over to the People’s Republic of China on July 1, 1997. 

Beijing had promised Hong Kong a “One Country, Two Systems” rule and to continue their political practices for 50 more years.  However, after an economic crisis in Hong Kong, Beijing sought to implement strict regulations in 2003. The National Security Law was proposed to be added to the Basic Law, but half a million Hong Kong citizens marched in protest. The bill was unable to be passed due to the pushback. 

Despite citizens’ displeasure with the proposal in 2003, 17 years later, the National Security Law was put into place. This has heavily restricted many freedoms that people in Hong Kong partook in previously. The crackdown of this law came in the form of dozens of activists being arrested. In recent years, the recognition of the Tiananmen Square Massacre has been censored. With that, people are no longer permitted to hold vigils in memory of those who died during the protest. Beijing has frequently been exercising their authority to interpret the Basic Law in Hong Kong.   

The Basic Laws are similar to a mini-constitution for Hong Kong. The Nationals Security Law (NSL) was passed in 2020. This heavily restricts Hong Konger’s rights to protests and freedom of speech and expression. Because of this new law, the Hong Kong government was able to pass Article 23. This article, officially called Safeguarding National Security Ordinance, creates new offenses, heavier prison sentences, and stronger enforcement for violations of national security. The law adopts mainland China’s definition of “State security threats” and “State secrets” which encompasses almost anything. The law is up for interpretation, but only the interpretation of the Hong Kong government and Beijing.  

Who is Jimmy Lai? What is he charged with?

Jimmy Lai standing with police officer holding his arm.
Image 3: Jimmy Lai standing with police officer holding his arm. Source: Yahoo Image.

Jimmy Lai first came to Hong Kong in 1961 at the age of 12. After having fled from Communist China, Lai had arrived at a colonized Hong Kong. Because of its national status at the time, he is considered a British National. As a child, Lai worked as a child laborer in a clothing factory, persevering  through years of working in harsh conditions. By 1981, Lai opened a chain clothing store called Giordano. Through this Jimmy Lai became extremely successful. 

As a result of the events at the Tiananmen Square Massacre, Lai began to dedicate his life to activism for human rights (see my blog post about China for an in-depth look into the Tiananmen Square Massacre and its influence on activists in Hong Kong and China). In 1995, he opened a newspaper called Apple Daily. Frequently, this pro-democracy media outlet would criticize the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). 

On August 10, 2020, Jimmy Lai was arrested and in December 2020, he was charged with three counts of foreign collusion and one charge for sedition. For four years, Lai has been detained in the conditions that violate many human rights. According to Amnesty International, Lai has been subjected to solitary confinement and is allowed outside for less than an hour a day.  

Jimmy Lai’s international legal team has reported that Lai, a Catholic, has been denied his freedom to practice his religion. In an interview conducted by Nick Schifrin, International Human Rights Lawyer, Caoilfhionn Gallagher said, “He’s also a devout Roman Catholic being denied access to the sacrament of holy communion.” While his legal team continues to fight for his release, Gallagher emphasizes the imperative danger that Lai is in of losing his life.

Lai’s son, Sebastien Lai, also spoke out about his father. In the interview, he worries about the passing of his father while in prison. Sebastien said that his ultimate goal was to see his father out of prison before his death. Despite their best hopes the chances of the case against Jimmy Lai being dropped are slim. Sebastien reflects on the memory of his father, “My memory of my father is always of this man smiling, because he knew that, despite all of this, he was doing the right thing.” This quote summarizes the kind of person Jimmy Lai is. One that fights for his freedoms and the freedoms of the people around him. Lai had not hesitated, in any of the times he was released on bail, to continue to attend Tiananmen vigils and stand up for democracy and freedom of speech.

The Lai Trial and November 20th Resumption Update

Jimmy Lai in handcuffs being escorted.
Image 4: Jimmy Lai in handcuffs being escorted. Source: Yahoo Image.

The long awaited trial of pro-democracy advocate, Jimmy Lai, began on December 18, 2023. Lai had been held in custody awaiting his trial for over 1,000 days due to delays from Beijing over their interpretation of the national security law.  Beijing ultimately decided that Lai would not be allowed his choice of a British lawyer. 

A trial that was only supposed to last 80 days, ran until June 11, 2024. The court was unable to have the mid-trial submission until July 24-25. Since then, the court has been adjourned until November 20, 2024. 

In another case, Hong Kong rejected Jimmy Lai’s request for a jury trial in early October 2024. This was in response to Jimmy Lai bringing a case against Ta Kung Pao, a pro-Bejing newspaper, in November 2020. Ta Kung Pao had published defamatory statements regarding Lai in June 2020. In the article, Ta Kung Pao accused Lai of trying to escape and create chaos within Hong Kong. Unfortunately, Judge Queeny Au Yeung rejected Lai’s request, stating that the legal documents needed further in-depth examination.

The court case for the national security trial resumed on November 20 with the testimony of Lai. In the charges of collusion with foreign forces, Lai pleaded not guilty. Hong Kong’s Prosecutor Anthony Chau insisted that Lai was asking other countries, specifically the United States, to impose sanctions and encourage hostilities against Hong Kong and China. 

In his first court testimony, Lai stated that it was not his intention to manipulate foreign policy in the United States to be hostile towards China and Hong Kong. This was in response to the prosecution bringing forth evidence of Lai’s “collusion with foreign forces” in a meeting he had with Vice President Mike Pence and secretary of state Mike Pompeo during Donald J. Trump’s presidency in July 2019. 

Lai said that all he did was answer honestly of what was happening in Hong Kong when asked. In relation to his newspaper Apple Daily, Lai denies advocating for Hong Kong’s independence. He also reiterated that any conversations held with Officials from other countries were strictly professional. Lai further stated that the National Security Law would bring about the end of free speech in Hong Kong.

Conclusion: What is the international reaction? What can be done to help Lai and others?

The trial will continue throughout November while the rest of the world awaits the fate of Jimmy Lai. Amnesty International continues to call for the release of Jimmy Lai. Both the U.K. and the U.S. have criticized Beijing for the imprisonment of Lai. Beijing in response, has condemned the U.S. on its involvement with a “threat to the security of Hong Kong and China.” They have also stated that the U.K. should stay out of all legal processes. 

 “Support Jimmy Lai” is an online website that has been keeping track of Lai’s case. On the website they provide case updates and a timeline of Lai’s life. They ask people to show support by using the hashtag #FreeJimmyLai. If you would like to donate to the cause or for more information check out “Support Jimmy Lai.”

Civil War in Sudan: What is Happening and How to Help

none
Image 1. Sudan Civil War Refugee Holding up Sudan’s Flag. Source: Yahoo Images.

After claiming over 20,000 lives, the civil war in Sudan rages on due to the deadlock position of the opposing sides. The conflict began in April of 2023 and is now coming up on two years of fighting, displacement, and destruction in the region. Nearly 8.2 million civilians have been displaced, and about 46,700 people were forced to leave within the span of a week, October 20-27. As families seek safety in other locations, some face challenges such as hunger, violence, and lack of medical aid. Those who remain face severe threats, including potential sexual assault and fear for their life. The situation grows more precarious as the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a paramilitary group led by General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, commonly known as “Hemedti” remain resistant to negotiations. Waiting for ceasefire operations to take place is not a realistic option. Sudanese people need protection now. International humanitarian law requires governments to take on the responsibility of protecting their citizens. It is time to respond to the humanitarian crisis occurring in Sudan.

Political Context Behind the Civil War

The tendrils of political unrest had been growing in Sudan for many years, but the catalyst event for the war took place in April of 2019 when the military coup deposed the president of 30 years. President Omar al-Bashir was arrested and forced from power in a military coup led by SAF and RSF forces after decades of government power. It began with protests spreading across the country demanding his removal due to his influence in the Darfur ethnic cleansing and the secession of South Sudan. The International Criminal Court has charged al-Bashir with five counts of crimes against humanity and two counts of war crimes. The corruption, mass-killing, and humanitarian issues were significant factors behind the military coup of 2019. Afterward, the SAF, RSF and civilian political leaders were faced with the question of how to integrate the RSF into the SAF, and who would assume leadership of the newly consolidated government. Negotiations to resolve the issue petered off and violence quickly became the deciding factor. These two military factions, SAF and RSF, were battling for control, which led to the current civil war taking place in Sudan.

none
Image 2. Child Soldier in Sudan’s Civil War. Source: Yahoo Images

Consequences of War

Since the coup in 2019, an unprecedented form of fighting has occurred in Sudan. During previous civil wars, the government was fighting rebel groups. In this case, RSF is a legal paramilitary force at war with SAF another military organization. As war spreads across the country, the civilian death toll rises and the lives at risk continue to climb. Civilians are still subjected to torture and summary executions, while women and girls endure widespread sexual violence. The conflict has decimated the country’s healthcare system further exacerbating the situation. More than 70 percent of health facilities are currently non-functional due to looting, occupation, or destruction. Healthcare workers are unable to provide aid to victims of the conflict because they lack resources and pay. Many basic services such as access to food, safe drinking water, and a clean and healthy environment, have been reduced. High rates of malnutrition coupled with low levels of immunization have resulted in catastrophic impacts, particularly for children. Disease outbreaks will continue to spread without proper healthcare infrastructure.

The geographic disposition of Sudan has compounded the effects of the civil war with almost 600,000 people affected by heavy rains and flooding across the country. According to the Sudan Floods Dashboard, this has resulted in an estimated 180,835 people have been displaced, 97 people have been killed, and 124,196 households have been destroyed. Flooding has intensified food insecurity, especially in areas where an estimated 230,700 people are at high risk of famine. These communities have been devastated by the recent severe weather, exacerbating an already critical situation. The civil war in Sudan has left millions suffering, large populations forced to leave, and much of Sudan cut off from humanitarian assistance.

none
Image 3. War Torn Sudan. Source: Yahoo Images.

Need for Resolution

The Sudanese Civil War has plunged the country into devasting turmoil. The two sides fighting, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), have no intention to stop anytime soon. Multiple efforts toward a U.N.-brokered humanitarian cease-fire only yielded partial success. In March of this year, the UN Security Council (UNSC) passed a resolution calling for an immediate cessation of violence in Sudan, but the resolution did not succeed. Initiatives like the Emergency Response Rooms, the Sudanese American Public Affairs Association, mutual-aid networks, and other civil society organizations have been highly active on the ground, courageously working despite immense danger. However, their numbers have dwindled as Sudan’s persistent violence continues to take a toll.

Without cooperative intervention, the crisis will only continue to escalate, leading to more lives lost and the future of hope distant. As a part of the international community, we must play a more active role in mediating the conflict and supporting peace efforts in Sudan. A peaceful resolution to the Sudanese Civil War is not only essential for the stability of Sudan but is also a humanitarian imperative. The brutality of the conflict—marked by widespread torture, summary executions, and pervasive sexual violence— is a clear violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Donating to institutions like the International Rescue Committee can help support an integrated water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) program, child protection services and support for women and girls, including services for survivors of gender-based violence (GBV), health and nutrition services provided through static health facilities, and livelihood assistance through multi-purpose cash aid to internally displaced persons and members of the communities that host them. Together we can call for an end to the civil unrest in Sudan. Raising awareness about the crisis in Sudan is essential to mobilize support and resources for those affected. Using social media to repost advocacy organizations such as the Carter Center, the Sudan Relief Fund, and Mercy Corps International Sudan is a great way to use the platform to advocate for Sudan. As members of a global community, it is our moral obligation to ensure that Sudan can rebuild and move toward a future of peace and prosperity.

New Italy-Albania Migration Deal Raises Human Rights Concerns

Throughout the past decade, the European Union (EU) has seen a rapid influx of refugees entering its countries as people flee violence, war, and persecution. Though this number peaked in 2015, a notable amount of migrants have continued to enter Europe, with roughly 385,000 seeking safety in European countries throughout 2023 alone. While irregular border crossings make up a small percentage of total immigration, concerns surrounding asylum-seekers and migrants have risen throughout the EU and have become highly politicized topics. Today, many countries in the region argue for strict border protections and harsher policies to be implemented into the union.

Being a coastal nation, Italy claims it has received a greater burden than other EU countries have, taking in over one million migrants since 2013. To counter this, Italy has recently entered into a deal with Albania, hoping to minimize immigration numbers. This agreement, pushed forward by Italy’s anti-immigration prime minister Giorgia Meloni, allows Italy to build and manage immigration detention centers within Albania’s borders and promises quicker screening of asylum claims. Albania will only receive those from “safe” countries, or nations the agreement deems free from violence and persecution; those seeking refuge from countries outside this list will continue to have their claims heard in Italy. While many argue that this system is an innovative solution to the question of immigration throughout the European Union, these decisions have been criticized by human rights advocates and Italy’s own judicial branch and raise concerns surrounding the treatment of asylum-seekers on a global scale.

A large groups of asylum-seekers sit near the Italian coast after their journey from their home country.
Image 1: Migrants sit on the Italian coast. Source: Yahoo Images

What is the Italy-Albania Agreement on Migration?

The Italy-Albania migration deal, finalized earlier this year and set into force in October, is an agreement between the two countries and is meant to reduce the number of immigrants entering Italy. Under this program, male asylum-seekers from predetermined “safe” countries found outside the European Union’s territorial waters are transferred to detention centers in Albanian cities. At these centers, detained migrants will experience expedited screenings, receiving their claim results in 28 days or less, with each person’s claim being reviewed by special courts. Based on the verdict, those granted asylum will be transferred to Italy, and those whose claims are rejected will be repatriated or sent back to their home country. Women, children, and vulnerable groups will be immediately sent to Italy, and it is promised that families will not be separated.  

This project is set to last for five years, process 36,000 claims annually, and have a total cost of 670 million euros, or $729 million. Albanian detention facilities will fall entirely under Italian jurisdiction and be fully staffed by Italian citizens, obligating these centers to remain compliant with the European Union’s laws on immigration and protected by the European Convention on Human Rights. As mentioned, these centers will only detain those from “safe” countries. These are countries that the agreement deems free of persecution, torture, and other forms of inhuman treatment. This list originally included 22 nations but was recently reduced to 19. It lists countries such as Egypt, Tunisia, and Bangladesh, and happens to include nations with some of the highest migration numbers. Migrants from these countries can still apply for asylum, though the odds of being granted are slim, as the agreement acknowledges that most of these claims will be rejected. Those whose claims are rejected will remain in Albania until plans are made to return them to their country of origin. 

Albanian and Italian prime ministers shake hands after singing new immigration deal
Image 2: Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni shakes hands with Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama. Source: Yahoo Images

Objectives of the New Italy-Albania Migration Deal

One of the primary objectives of this initiative is to reduce overcrowding along the Italian coast and islands, where an average of 100,000 migrants arrive each year. Typically, asylum claims are applied for at the Border Police Station. By relocating potential immigrants before they reach this destination, the average is expected to shrink. Similarly, by targeting refugees from safe countries, the likelihood that these claims receive an asylum grant is small, meaning fewer people are taken into Italy. This all feeds into one of the biggest reasons behind this deal: deterrence. As asylum claims are rejected in higher numbers and refugees cannot reach the European Union, the Italian government hopes that this will discourage others from attempting this journey. 

Threats to Human Rights

This agreement has remained controversial since its inception, with many people questioning its adherence to human rights protection, mainly regarding the treatment of vulnerable populations, prolonged detention, and the right to nationality. Under this agreement, those considered “vulnerable,” such as those in need of specific medical attention or with serious medical conditions, are at risk of not receiving proper treatment, as the law lacks written procedures to help such groups. As Amnesty International points out, “there is no clarity on whether such procedures would take place on board the rescue vessels or after disembarkation in Albania,” meaning there is no reassurance that at-risk groups will receive medical attention in a timely manner. This concern has appeared to have some validity, as it has recently been exposed that there are no mechanisms aboard ships that could properly classify someone as vulnerable. Similarly, a majority of asylum-seekers experience some sort of physical, sexual, or psychological abuse prior to or during their journey that would grant them protection from detention. 

This program also puts refugees at risk of prolonged detention. International migration standards assert that migration-related detention should avoid being prolonged or indefinite. While the Italy-Albania agreement writes that asylum claims should be granted within 28 days of detention, all necessary procedures, including organizing repatriation, could take up to 18 months. Similarly, the treaty does not write out an explicit cap for detention, meaning detention could continue to surpass the initial 28-day goal. 

The Italy-Albania migration deal also raises concerns regarding the right to nationality. Following a rejected asylum claim, plans regarding repatriation are then made with the refugee’s country of origin. However, states may ignore these requests or refuse to work with Italy. Being rejected by Italy and without the support of their home country, asylum-seekers may be left without international representation, thus rendering them devoid of nationality. 

Migrants fill an entire boat which is on route to Italy
Image 3: Refugees begin their journey to Italy. Source: Yahoo Images

Pushback

This program has also been relatively controversial within Italy, with the Italian courts pushing back against Prime Minister Meloni’s plan. Following the first ship of migrants arriving in Albania, the national courts ruled that all 16 asylum-seekers be transferred to Italy rather than remain in the outsourced detention centers. Though coming from the list of safe countries, the judges concluded that the repatriation of the refugees would put them at risk of violence, thus accepting their asylum claims. More recently, the courts ordered the transfer of seven more men from Albania to Italy, again going against the vision presented by Meloni’s government. In this case, the courts explained that for a country to be deemed safe, all cities and regions must be free of persecution and violence, not just select areas. Between these two cases, all 24 detainees have been sent to Italy following their forcible detention in Albania.

This program is also largely unpopular among the Italian populace, with only 30% approval. 

This deal follows other agreements Prime Minister Meloni has made with other states regarding immigration. In 2023, the Italian government and the European Union provided monetary and technical support to Libya, encouraging their coast guard to intercept fleeing citizens and forcibly bring them back to the country. Those who attempted to escape were left vulnerable once they returned, often being subjected to various human rights abuses such as torture and sexual exploitation. Prime Minister Meloni has also offered to provide financial assistance to North African countries in an attempt to minimize immigration. 

Conclusion 

Though initially regarded as a promising answer to European migration, the Italy-Albania agreement has been frequently challenged by both human rights institutions and Italy’s own courts. Though all Albanian detainees have been transferred to Italy, this program raises questions regarding the treatment of refugees, making this issue important to monitor. 

Pélicot Trial Questions French Laws Regarding Sexual Assault

Gisèle and Dominique Pélicot got married in the spring of 1973 in France at the age of 21. Considered the ideal couple that managed to find rare and great love in their life stories, it was a tale that brought about three children and seven grandchildren. A loving marriage of about 50 years with regular family vacations. When the couple decided to finally retire and move to Mazan in 2013, Gisèle’s health started to deteriorate unexpectedly and inexplicably. She began to lose hair, lose weight, and lose considerably large gaps of memory, as accounted for by herself and her children. Overcome with the fear of Alzheimer’s, Gisèle remained unaware of the sickening truth that her now former and arrested husband had been concealing. A truth that had been hidden for a decade.  

The Act Revealed  

While in a grocery store, Dominique Pélicot was stopped by a security guard for filming under various women’s skirts in 2020. This led to his arrest and an investigation that revealed the heinous acts committed by Pélicot.   

Over 20,000 photographs and video footage of numerous men sexually abusing an unconscious woman were uncovered. The data had been organized in a folder labeled “abuse,” with dates and names attached to most of them. Messages sent by Pélicot to recruit these men were found, and the unconscious woman was identified to be Gisèle.  

Once taken into custody, Dominique made his confession. From 2011 to 2020, he had been crushing Lorazepam, a psychoactive drug intended for anxiety and sleep, into Gisèle’s food and drinks before bed. It is believed that Dominique Pélicot had been prescribed about 780 Lorazepam tablets over the years. Not only was Pélicot drugging his wife for almost a decade, but it was also the cause behind her deteriorating health. 

 

Lorazepam tablets on a table.
Image 1: Lorazepam tablets on a table. | Source: Yahoo Images

In addition, there are claims indicating that there were nude photos of his daughter and daughters-in-law found in the data that were taken without permission.  

When Gisèle was asked to come to the police station, she initially defended her husband as being a good man who would not do such things. This faith and trust of hers were completely shattered when the uncovered evidence was shown. Within a short time period of leaving the station, she filed for divorce. “I don’t know if I’ll ever rebuild myself,” she stated.  

Court Trial  

The trial of Dominique Pélicot began on September 2nd of this year. The case is being held in the Avignon court with five judges and is anticipated to last until December 2024. Although authorities have 72 suspects in accordance with the footage and photographs, 51 men are on trial, including Dominique, with the risk of up to twenty years of prison time each. The spread of this network began in an online chatroom named “à son insu” or “without her knowledge.” 

Although Dominique has openly admitted to raping Gisèle and speaks of remorse, that is not the case for all the men. Thirty-five due to various arguments. Such reasonings include thinking Gisèle had consented and was faking her sleep, thinking they were partaking in a game, thinking they had been tricked by Dominique, thinking they were forced or terrified, and, most commonly, thinking that Gisèle’s husband’s consent was enough. Contrarily, lawyers have stated that the video footage displaying smiles and moments of joy for these men is enough to reflect their hypocrisy.  

Most of these men ranged from ages 25 to 74 and lived within a 60-kilometer distance of Mazan. Some had previous records of domestic violence, sexual violence, drunk driving, and possession of drugs. This included nurses, journalists, prison wardens, farmers, soldiers, tilers, and more. People that we may encounter in our daily lives.  

A 43-year-old carpenter defendant who has been recorded in the Pélicot home in October 2019 and January 2020 claims to have been a part of a simple sexual game with Gisèle being a consenting partner, according to her husband. “Now that I am being told how the events unfolded, yes, the acts I committed would amount to rape,” he states, yet he continues to insist he is innocent of the charges. 

A 37-year-old agricultural worker who was in the Pélicot home on 2018 New Year’s Eve states that rape was not his intention. Upon receiving permission from Gisèle’s husband, he considered her consent to be received alongside.   

This is a case of barbaric actions accompanied by ongoing denial of harm to its victim, who unknowingly suffered physical violations, emotional and mental collapses, health struggles, and questions about her ability to continue her life. It is undeniable that the actions committed by these men, for almost a decade, breach the rights and basic expectations Gisèle had of privacy and comfort in her own home. Yet, despite the anguish and shattering of her trust, she decided to stand tall and publicize the case, contrary to the court’s suggestion of anonymity. “Shame must change sides,” Gisèle says.

A photograph of Gisèle surrounded by cameras recording her.
Image 2: A photograph of Gisèle surrounded by cameras recording her. | Source: Flickr

Receiving bouquets, applause, strangers standing outside the court, and demonstration marches, the support and love of the public have been with Gisèle, now a symbol of fighting against sexual violence, since the beginning. This is due to the lifting of anonymity from the case, which has now also become a source of hope that the questionable French laws on sexual crimes may change. 

The Controversial French Law  

France established a legal age of sexual consent fairly recently in 2021. This was due to public commotion demanding the reinvestigation of an 11-year-old girl’s rape. In continuation, it is hoped that the publicizing of the Pélicot trial and the public support for Gisèle may bring changes to France’s controversial definition of rape. 

The European Union has been pushing for a common law on sexual assault for a while. Surprisingly, what divides the countries is whether consent matters. In France, prosecutors must prove the use of violence or threat in their cases, with consent being irrelevant, as displayed in the arguments of the Pélicot case defendants. For years, France has defined rape as actions committed “by violence, constraint, threat or surprise.” Advocacy for consent-based legislation on rape has been ongoing since before the Pélicot trial. However, authorities have shown little progress.  

In November 2023 and February 2024, proposals suggesting rewriting French criminal codes for rape to include “without voluntary consent” went to the Senate and the National Assembly of the French Parliament, respectively. However, neither bill made it, and no conclusions have been delivered.  

The building housing the Nation Assembly of France, the lower house of the French Parliament.
Image 3: The building housing the Nation Assembly of France, the lower house of the French Parliament. | Source: Flickr

Alongside other lawmakers, earlier this spring, on International Women’s Day, President Emmanuel Macron expressed an imperative need for change in favor of adding consent to French laws. However, eight months without any reforms have passed. 

This is a significant matter of concern as consent is not simply an addition to legal repercussions but a question of basic respect, dignity, and autonomy. Therefore, it is crucial that the legislature accounts for consent to reflect the protection of victims and the gravity of such heinous acts. 

Moving Forward 

Sexual abuse is a crime that can leave its victims with deep scars. Scars that remain beyond the physical act and result in tormenting emotional and mental impacts. Many suffer consequences that hinder their ability to truly live their lives and, as seen in the case of Gisèle, their ability to have an identity afterward. Yet, less than 10% of victims seek assistance from law enforcement. 

Hence, it is incredibly important to stress that establishing stern preventive and protective measures in place in such cases is vital not only to supporting victims such as Gisèle but also to the maintenance of global human rights. 

A street sign changed to say “Place Gisèle Peliqueen” to show support and empower Gisèle for her strength and determination.
Image 4: A street sign changed to say “Place Gisèle Peliqueen” to show support and empower Gisèle for her strength and determination. | Source: Flickr

In several cities of France, such as Marseille, Nice, Paris, Rennes, and Nantes, thousands are gathering, chanting, and pledging their support for Gisèle and all victims of sexual assault, as well as pushing the government to revise their laws. If you are not in France or not able to join these voices, there are other methods of support to consider. This includes advocating for progression in the French legislature, supporting feminist organizations such as Fondation des Femmes, and spreading awareness on the Pélicot case and the response of the French Parliament. We must remember that the efforts we put in today to reform these laws will determine whether confidence and protection are given to the criminals or the victims in France. 

On an ending note, if you have been a victim of sexual assault yourself, please call or text 1-800-656-4673. 

 

 

China: Violations of Freedom of Expression, Speech, and Peaceful Assembly

China's flag in front of the Great Wall of China.
Image 1: China’s flag in front of the Great Wall of China. Source: Yahoo Image.

Thousands of miles away, activists for basic human rights sit in prison cells. Most await punishments that far exceed the crime. In China, heavy prison sentences weigh on the shoulders of its brightest human rights activists, scholars, and lawyers. 

According to Amnesty International, freedom of expression and speech is having the right to say what you believe and to call for a better world. To express your freedom of speech is to be able to openly, and without consequences, critique those in power. The United Nations (UN) states that the right to peaceful assembly is the right to hold peaceful gatherings, sit-ins, rallies, and protests without fearing repercussions. 

Who are They? And What Does the Law Say?

Protesters in Qidong, China.
Image 2: Protesters in Qidong, China. Source: Yahoo Image.

Human rights lawyer, Ding Jiaxi, has been imprisoned since December 2019 for subversion of state power. Also arrested for subversion of state power was Xu Zhiyong, a legal scholar.

Ding Jiaxi and Xu Zhiyong are members of the New Citizens’ Movement, a group of activists dedicated to creating a better China. Xu and Ding co-created the movement back in 2012 in order to shed light on government corruption. After a meeting with the activist movement in December 2019 in a Chinese city called Xiamen, multiple members were arrested. As a result of their critique of the Chinese government’s handling of the coronavirus, Xue Zhiyong and Ding Jiaxi were charged with “subversion of state power.” Both have been imprisoned, with sources saying that they have been subjected to various forms of torture. 

By examining China’s laws regarding freedom of press and expression, a clearer understanding of the regulations that restrict the people of China is achieved. The State Council of the People’s Republic of China Article 5 states that the government must protect their citizens’ right to freedom of press so long as they do not criticize the basic principles of the constitution. Citizens must abide by certain regulations put into place of what they can and cannot publish. In support, Article 26 outlines specific regulations such as, no publication shall oppose basic principles and shall not endanger the unification, sovereignty and integrity of the State. 

How then, can a people that are restricted from criticizing their own government be considered free?  In 1989, Tiananmen Square became a testament to just how far the Chinese government was willing to go to suppress its citizens dissent. 

Tiananmen Square History and Influence of Chinese Activist

Man standing in front of military tanks.
Image 3: A  man standing in front of military tanks at Tiananmen Square. Source: Yahoo Image.

During the month of April, in 1989, a peaceful gathering to mourn Hu Yaobang, a liberal Communist Party member, took place in Beijing at Tiananmen Square. The gathering calmly turned into demonstrations that called for the abrupt end of corruption in the Chinese government. An estimated one million people joined in to peacefully protest their grievances. 

In response, Martial Law was enforced and thousands of troops were released upon the protesters. They opened fire on those gathered and plowed through the crowds with military tanks. To this day, the Chinese government refuses to release any new information regarding the massacre. This event is prohibited from being spoken about or commemorated in China and Hong Kong.  

The total number of deaths is unknown in China’s attempt to purge the memory of Tiananmen Square from history. The event is censored; families have been unable to mourn or acknowledge their loved ones. People are forced to forget, and the truth is neglected from the knowledge of a new generation.  

Zhou Fengsuo is the Executive Director of Human Rights in China and was also a student leader at the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre. What was supposed to be a peaceful demonstration turned into a horrific bloodbath. Zhou was there when his peers were shot down in front of him. His eyes are a witness to military tanks and tear gas being used as a means to end the uproar. In his testimony Zhou wrote, “The scene was that of a war zone; a war conducted by the CCP’s army against the Chinese people.” Zhou calls out on foreign governments to take a firmer stance on China’s violation of human rights. 

Activists Imprisonment of Chinese and Hong Kong Human Rights Activist

Large group of protesters at Hong Kong protest.
Image 4: Large group of protesters at Hong Kong protest. Source: Yahoo Image.

Xu Zhiyong writes in his book, A Beautiful China -Thirteen-The Citizens Movement, about his vision for China. In his writings, he talks of a better China; one that is accomplished through peaceful protest and nonviolence. He says, “We are all Chinese, and we will build a beautiful China together in the future.” Throughout his collection of twenty-four essays he repeatedly reiterates the importance of unity.  

To be a true citizen is to have basic rights. Xu writes that when they have the right to vote and to speak freely they will be true citizens. People that are free are ones that can openly and without fear criticize their governments. In A Beautiful China Xu says, “Amid the absurd, we stick to the truth; amidst evil, we hold fast to our conscience; in the darkness, we create light.” Many Chinese and Hong Kong activists are dedicated to changing their governments. 

After being handed over to China in 1997, Hong Kong was promised fifty years with their independent government. Halfway through their allotted time, Beijing implemented a law that gave them further influence in Hong Kong. As of 2020, the new law in Hong Kong, known as the National Security Law (NSL), was passed. This law has since then increased prison sentences and allowed for extreme censorship. 

Chow Hang-tung and Jimmy Lai are both Hong Kong activists. Jimmy Lai was arrested for “colluding with foreign forces” and sedition. His newspaper, Apple Daily, which advocated for human rights such as freedom of expression and speech, was later closed down in June 2021. He has been held in solitary confinement awaiting his trial to resume in November 2024. Lai is 76 years old and only gets around 50 minutes of time outside a day. Chow Hang-tung was arrested after attending a vigil for the Tiananmen Square Massacre. She was imprisoned for 22 months and faces possible imprisonment again for 10 years or more. The new National Security Law states that she was “inciting subversion.” She has also been subjected to solitary confinement. 

Chow Hang-tung, Ding Jiaxi, and Jimmy Lai have been considered by Amnesty International to be prisoners of conscience. A prisoner of conscience is someone imprisoned because of political, social, religious, or other personal beliefs. 

Conclusion: What is China’s Response? What is the Global Reaction?

The United Nation Human Rights Council accepted China’s report on their Human Rights achievement for the 56th Universal Periodic Review (UPR). While multiple activists remain imprisoned in solitary confinement, Chinese Daily flaunts the approval given to them for their advanced improvements in Human Rights by countries like Russia, Algeria, and Venezuela. Chinese Daily said,  “China welcomes and remains open to all constructive suggestions that are proposed in good faith to help it improve its human rights conditions.” This seems to be the case so long as the criticism and call for improvements, recognition, and change do not come from Chinese or Hong Kong citizens. 

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, continue to call for the release of activists Jimmy Lai, Chow Hang-tung, Ding Jiaxi, and Xu Zhiyong. Activists like Zhou Fengsuo, who has been advocating for change in China for many years, will continue the fight for human rights. It is through them that freedom will be achieved.