Havana frees four
Cuban journalists Jose Ramon and Alejandro Gonzalez, dissident Omar Pernet and trade unionist Pedro Alvarez were released on 16 February.
“Can anybody live like this?”
Despite the extension of her visa, novelist Taslima Nasrin remains confined to a room in an undisclosed location, writes Sanal Edamaruku
The good news first: India has granted a visa extension to exiled Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasrin. For now, the nightmare of an ill and desperate Taslima being forcefully expelled from her adoptive home of seven years. “All I want to do is live peacefully in this country. I have nowhere else to go,” Taslima recently wrote. When the showdown began and time was running out, Rationalist International started an international campaign and appealed to the prime minister of India. Within three days, our appeal had been supported by more than 3,800 letters from India, USA, Canada, Australia and all over Europe. The Forum for the Protection of Free Speech and Expression, led by Mahashweta Devi, Arundhati Roy, Ashish Nandy and Girish Karnad published an open letter to the prime minister, supported by many writers and intellectuals. Under public pressure, the government of India allowed her to stay.
The success, however, is tarnished. Now comes the bad news. While staying in India, Taslima Nasrin’s life will — according to a statement from the foreign ministry — be restricted to the “status quo”. And that is what horrifies her. The “status quo” describes a rather inhuman situation. For nearly three months now, the government of India has kept Taslima in complete isolation at an undisclosed location near Delhi. Nobody, not even she herself, knows her exact whereabouts. Guarded by officials, she has not even been allowed to meet close friends. Her only connections to the outer world are her mobile phone and laptop.
Censorship of condescension
London Underground’s ban of an exhibition advert is elitist, writes Edward Lucie-Smith
Exhibition organisers at the Royal Academy are expressing bewilderment and outrage, at least in public, because the people who run advertising for the London Underground have decided to ban a poster featuring a nude Venus by the German 16th century artist Lucas Cranach the Elder. In private, they must be hugging themselves. At the time of writing three major newspapers have picked up the story – the Guardian, the Daily Mail and the Evening Standard, and it is out on the Press Association wire service. Doubtless other newspapers will follow. It’s the kind of publicity you couldn’t buy, for an exhibition that many people might think of as being a bit esoteric and scholarly – in a phrase, above their heads. The RA have even got an influential MP on their side. John Whittingdale, chair of the Commons Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee, is quoted as saying: “The decision is absolutely bonkers. This was painted around 500 years ago.” (more…)
Extreme but not illegal
Yesterday’s overturning of the convictions of five young men under the Terrorism Act signifies a change in how the courts deal with extremism, writes Jo Glanville
The quashing of the conviction of five students under the Terrorism Act at the Court of Appeal this week marks a sea change. The main evidence against the five young men (one of whom was a schoolboy at the time of his arrest) was the extremist material they had downloaded and shared on the Internet. They were prosecuted under Section 57 of the Terrorism Act 2000 for possessing articles for the purposes of terrorism.
In its judgment, the Court of Appeal revealed that Section 57 was designed to allow action to be taken against people found in possession of bomb-making material – in circumstances where there was a reasonable suspicion of a connection with terrorism. The material the young men had downloaded was described variously as propagandist, extremist and ideological. It was not material that contained instructions on how to make weapons or explosives. However the prosecution argued that the students were planning to travel to Pakistan, where they were going to train and then fight against the government in Afghanistan: this was the terrorist purpose for which they had downloaded material from the Internet. The Court of Appeal ruled that there was no direct connection between the material and a terrorist plan: the evidence did not support the case.
It is a judgment that breaks the link (which until now has gone virtually unquestioned) between extremism and terrorism. The Internet is seen as the hub of extremist activity – an underworld of activity that must be controlled. Jihadi material is viewed as such a toxic force that viewing it – “possessing” it – has become a criminal act. The Court of Appeal has poured cold water on these assumptions and demanded a much more rigorous, restricted interpretation of the law. The public response to the Samina Malik case last year marked the first shift in attitude towards extremist literature and any connection with terrorism. The Court of Appeal has now fundamentally called into question the application of the law.
Further reading from Index on Censorship Dec 2007 (pdfs)
Road to Jihad – Shiraz Maher
Taking on the radicals – David Livingstone