Thailand: Human rights defenders on trial for leading demonstration

Ten prominent human rights defenders are standing trial in Thailand for leading a peaceful protest. Starting today, the activists will be put on trial for a demonstration against the attempt by the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) to pass undemocratic laws in December 2007. Protesters called for the military appointed NLA to stop passing controversial laws affecting human rights, civil liberties, social justice and privatisation. The ten were charged on 30 December 2010 after being summoned by police.

The mysterious case of Hamza Kashgari

In deporting Saudi journalist Hamza Kashgari for his blasphemous tweets, the Malaysian government acted in its own interests and prioritised diplomacy, even if it might ultimately cost the columnist his life, argues Malik Imtiaz Sarwar

A version of this piece was first published in The Edge on 18 February

On 12 February Malaysia deported a young Saudi journalist named Hamza Kashgari where he is to face charges of blasphemy, an offence that carries the death sentence.

Kashgari fled Saudi Arabia after a controversy erupted after he used to social network Twitter to imagine a conversation with the Prophet Mohammed. Kashgari apologised and deleted the tweets in the hope that this would calm the situation. His efforts were insufficient and a directive was issued for his arrest for blasphemy. Kashgari fled the country, he hoped to secure political asylum in New Zealand but was arrested in Kuala Lumpur while in transit.

It seems that the Malaysian authorities would have rather kept the arrest and deportation off the radar. However, the news began to spread. The authorities began trying to justify themselves and their intended actions. It was suggested that the arrest was part of an Interpol initiative, though Interpol denied any knowledge of the matter.  Attempts were then made to characterise the affair as being part of an extradition exercise but Malaysia does not have an extradition treaty with Saudi Arabia.

Lawyers were appointed and began efforts to meet their client and to secure his release. They appear to have been given the run-around or kept in the dark about the fact that the authorities had already unilaterally decided to return Kashgari to Saudi Arabia. The procuring of an injunction from a High Court judge on Sunday to temporarily restrain the deportation came to nought; Kashgari had been deported earlier that morning despite awareness of the intended legal challenge.

One cannot help but question the manner in which the Malaysian authorities conducted themselves. Malaysia was under no legal obligation to return the journalist to Saudi Arabia and the two countries are not bound by an extradition treaty, meaning what Kashgari has done in Saudi Arabia is not of relevance in Malaysia. Kashgari had not committed any offence in Malaysia and had entered the country on a valid travel document. He was not intending to stay in Malaysia; his final port of call was New Zealand.

There is a more fundamental question: what was Kasghari arrested for? That has not been made clear by the authorities; all they have said is that he is wanted in Saudi Arabia. Under Malaysian law a person is guaranteed life and liberty and can only be arrested for having committed a crime. Kashgari did not commit a crime here, he was entitled to contest the legality of his arrest. This is why his lawyers ultimately filed a habeas corpus application.

The situation is ironic. The Home Minister has attempted to justify the deportation as an extradition. But were this to be the case, the person sought to be extradited would be entitled to challenge the validity of the extradition order. Those who have been following the extradition proceedings concerning Julian Assange would have seen how aggressively he has opposed extradition. In the same way, General Augustus Pinochet had fought his extradition to Spain. In such cases it is open to the person sought to be extradited to show that were he to be extradited, he would face consequences that were harsher than those permitted in the deporting country.

Where Kashgari is concerned, this was clearly the case. He is facing a death sentence for having done something that would either not have been an offence in Malaysia or would not have carried a death sentence.

The very real possiblity of Kashgari being sentenced to death has been studiously avoided by the Malaysian authorities. They take the position that this is an internal Saudi matter. Curiously, the Home Minister has gone on to say that Malaysia is not to be seen as a haven for terrorists; the offence Hamza is said to have committed does not concern an act of terrorism.

And underlying all of this is the fact that the Malaysian authorities did not have to intervene at all. Kashgari could have been left to take his flight to New Zealand and the problem would have been New Zealand’s.

All of this marshals into one inescapable conclusion. The Malaysian government acted only in its own interests and chose to prioritise diplomatic expediency over the lawful rights of Hamza Kashgari, even though this may ultimately cost the columnist his life. In doing so, the government acted in complete defiance of legal obligations it was under.

I am not alone in this view. The National Human Rights Commission (SUHAKAM) has condemned the authorities for having acted as they did.

For all its talk about moderation,  progress and commitment to the fundamentals of the international human rights framework, it is regrettable that the Malaysian government appears to be willing to uphold human rights only where it is politically convenient to do so. Put more plainly, it just does not seem to care.

Were it otherwise, Hamza Kashgari would have had his day in court.

Malik Imtiaz Sarwar is a practising lawyer and the president of the Malaysian National Human Rights Society. He tweets at @malikimitiaz

Burma: Dissident monk prosecuted

A Burmese monk jailed for his involvement in 2007 protests faces further charges for breaking both the law and the Buddhist monks’ code of conduct. Shin Gambira, who was released from prison in a January amnesty, has been accused of rejoining the religious order without requesting authorisation, of being in the government sealed Magin Monastery and breaking the locks of two other monasteries. According to newspapers reports, Shin Gambira had said in a statement that he did not need permission to rejoin the order of monks so he would not ask for it. Gambira was awarded an Index on Censorship Free Expression Award in 2008.

Australia: Google urges rejection of web regulation

Google has urged the Australian federal government to reject an interim independent report recommending the country’s internet be regulated in a similar manner to television, arguing it would be unclear how regulation online could be imposed without a filter. Its proposals, if successful, would usher in a “new independent regulator for content and communications” that is technology-neutral. Google said it was “struggling with the one-size-fits-all model” the proposals made in the report, which is related to part of Australia’s Convergence Review into determining if current media policy and regulation need amending.

China: Reporters attacked while covering protest

Journalists from French broadcaster France 24 and the Netherlands Press Association were attacked yesterday in Panhe, Zhejiang province, while investigating land grab protests in the area. France 24′s Baptiste Fallevoz and his Chinese fixer, Jack Zhang, said they were followed in their car and later surrounded by 20-30 thugs who pulled Zhang from the vehicle and smashed his camera before continuing to try to attack him. Remko Tanis of the Netherlands Press Association was also beaten up by attackers who confiscated his notebook, materials about the land disputes given to him by Panhe locals, and his camera memory card.

China: More Internet regulation planned

The Chinese government plans to continue censoring social networking sites, the the Communist Party and State Council has said regarding China’s 12th Five-Year Plan (2011-2015) on Cultural Reform and Development. The outline said the Chinese government will increase regulation of domestic social networks such as RenRen and microblogging platforms, as well as cracking down on online distribution of pornography. There will also be an increased focus on protecting private information online and improving the country’s system to assess online security, according to the outline.

Afghanistan: Cameraman attacked with acid in Kabul

Parviz Safi, a cameramen for state-owned English-language TV station Press TV, was attacked with acid by three unidentified men on 6 February in the Afghan capital, Kabul. The journalist suffered second-degree burns to his face, but the substance missed his eyes and his life is not in danger. On 18 January last year, Razaq Mamoon, who worked for several media organisations and presented a programme on independent TV station Tolo TV, was also sprayed with acid. He was seriously injured and is still receiving medical treatment abroad.

China: Dissident Zhu Yufu jailed for seven years over poem

Veteran Chinese dissident Zhu Yufu has been sentenced to seven years in prison for ”inciting subversion of state power” after he shared his poem “It’s time” over Skype. The court in Hangzhou, eastern China, sentenced Zhu following a trial hearing on 31 January. During the hearing, prosecutors cited the poem and messages the activist had sent online. In the poem, Yufu called on Chinese citizens to defend their freedoms. The court verdict said the crime deserved “severe” punishment.