Letter from Baku
Witnessing Azerbaijan’s autocracy in action, Mike Harris reports from the Internet Governance Forum
Bahrain revokes citizenship of 31 activists
Bahrain is preparing for the first anniversary of the Bahrain Independent Commission for Inquiry (BICI) by placing even greater restrictions on free expression.
A Bahraini woman holds up the victory sign at a rally in May | Demotix
As violence escalates in the Gulf kingdom, the country’s government has taken new measures in the name of national security. According to an announcement made last night on the state-run Bahrain TV, the country’s government has decided to strip 31 activists of their citizenship for “being a threat to national security”. The list is mostly made up of political activists, including UK-based Saeed Shehabi and Ali Mushaima, who have been outspoken in criticising the country’s regime, and Al-Wefaq National Islamic Society member Jawad Fairouz, who was a member of parliament before resigning in protest of the country’s brutal response demonstrations that began on 14 February last year.
This is not a new tactic for Bahrain: The country also revoked the citizenship of outspoken activists in the 1980s and 1990s, forcing them into exile. The latest move, however, violates Article 17 of Bahrain’s 2002 constitution:
a. Bahraini nationality shall be determined by law. A person inherently enjoying his Bahraini nationality cannot be stripped of his nationality except in case of treason, and such other cases as prescribed by law.
b. It is prohibited to banish a citizen from Bahrain or prevent him from returning to it.
The decision comes after the tragic death of two migrant workers and the injury of another on 5 November following a bomb blast in Bahrain’s capital, Manama. While none of the 31 activists have been linked to the explosion, Bahrain continues to make efforts to portray the country’s uprising as violent.
Earlier this year, the attention around the hunger strike of imprisoned human rights activist Abdulhadi Alkhawaja and a brutal crackdown on protesters squashed Bahrain’s chances of whitewashing its public image with the Formula One race in April. After the BICI report was presented in November 2011, Bahrain’s government was determined to make the uprising history, but its unfulfilled pledges to reform came back to haunt it in the lead up to the race.
As Alkhawaja’s health deteriorated, the international community placed immense pressure on the Bahraini government to release him to Denmark, where he is also a citizen. Denmark granted Alkhawaja asylum in 1991, and the country’s government has been active in lobbying for his release. The activist moved back to Bahrain in 2001, and was jailed for his role in the country’s uprising in 2011. An editorial published in the Gulf Daily News in the race lead-up explored the “problem” of dual-citizens, claiming it was a “get out of jail free card” for criminals.
Bahrain’s failure to follow through on promised BICI-related reforms, as well as a disregard for its own constitution, signals a chilling next stage for the country. The country’s most recent violence is testament to Bahrain’s failure to diffuse unrest with reforms, rather than force.
Sara Yasin is an editorial assistant at Index on Censorship. She tweets at @missyasin
Questions remain as governor names Regina Martinez “killer”
On 30 October, the state government of Veracruz announced it had solved the murder of Proceso magazine reporter Regina Martinez, who was killed in April this year. In her 10 years as a Proseco journalist, Martinez had frequently reported on drug trafficking in the region.
A vigil calling for justice for Regina Martinez, May 2012 – Demotix
Veracruz officials named Jorge Antonio Hernadez Silva as one of two alleged murderers. Silva is reported to have confessed to the murder and named a second suspect, Jose Adrian Hernandez, who is still at large.
According to state Governor Javier Duarte, the killer told investigators that the motive for the murder was robbery . He apparently said that Martinez let both suspected killers into her home at around 11pm; an argument erupted and she was strangled and killed.
But the government version of events has been rejected by the Martinez’s former employers at Proceso magazine, and Mexico’s federal Attorney General’s office has also questioned the state investigation.
The controversy over Martinez’s killing is just the latest event to pit Veracruz’s press and Javier Duarte’s government against each other. Proceso claims that in the 23 months since Duarte took office, he has had a tense relationship with the local press. Nine reporters have been killed during that time, three more have disappeared and 30 have fled the state because of threats against them.
The governor’s press office has aggressively campaigned against “negative” news. Its press officers often call local media to ask that reporters write stories more “positively”. Proceso staffers believe that Duarte, in naming Martinez’s killer, is trying to close a high-profile case that has become a problem for his office and the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI), just weeks before the PRI President Elect Enrique Peña Nieto takes office.
Michael O’Connor of the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), has said the state investigation made no sense. The CPJ report says the state “is fabricating a murder case against the wrong people” and according to O’Connor who has interviewed Martinez’s friends and reviewed the crime scene investigation, the government’s story has some major holes.
First is the claim that Martinez willingly let the men who killed her into her home at 11pm for a late night chat. Friends of the late journalist interviewed by O’Connor said she cherished her privacy and never invited people into her house — even close friends.
Secondly, O’Connor said the crime scene investigation report states that Regina was surprised by her assailants while she was in the bathroom — this doesn’t fit with the defendants version of events.
Writing in Proceso Magazine, Alberto J Olvera, a journalist and researcher at the Universidad Veracruzana, has said: “Authorities will have to convince the Mexican people, and specially the journalism community, that the investigation is seriously backed by scientific evidence. Their case is weak”.
Of arts, bans and desires
There are clearly parallels between investigative journalists and artists who reveal uncomfortable truths. But when controversy breaks, artists are much more exposed because they use their own personal language to tell the story, and bring their own experience and imagination into the narrative.
To cater for their needs, Artsfex, the first international civil society network dedicated to promoting free expression for artists, has recently been created.
“When the international community places emphasis on the protection of freedom of speech, it generally focuses on the freedom of media and literature,” says Ole Reitov, Programme Manager at Freemuse and one of Artsfex’s promoters.
International human rights organisations include repression of media and media professionals in their annual and country reports on freedom of expression. However, they rarely document repression of artists or cultural workers.
Reitov adds:
But artistic expression is under pressure from many sides and it is frequently in the centre of conflicts between different interest groups. This is where Artsfex comes in. We hope to be able to not only document violations but support artists at risk.
Artsfex has been designed to join up pockets of campaigning that are often ignited in the wake of controversy, to amplify, reinforce and add weight to the artists’ voice when they stand up to authorities. It aims to facilitate exchange between artists and address that sense of isolation, by bringing people who have been through the fire together with those that are in the thick of it.
The network, which will recruit campaigning organisations and artists networks from around the world, aims to form an executive body that will call governments to account. Index on Censorship is part of this network, which connects, according to Reitov, “a bit over 1,200 organisations all over the world”.
“We have the ambition to analyse the mechanisms and effects of arts censorship,” says Reitov. “Several Artsfex members will take part in a UN meeting on artistic freedom in Geneva in December this year. The UN Special Rapporteur on culture (Farida Shaheed) has decided to make a report on artistic freedom, and all UN member states are now receiving a questionnaire on how they regulate the arts and protect artistic freedom. Our hope is that in the future Artsfex will help keeping governments accountable to their treatment of artists.”
The launch of Artsfex took place against the backdrop All that is banned is desired — the first ever international conference on artistic freedom of expression in Oslo last month.
The conference organisers, Freemuse and Fritt Ord, had decided to turn the platform over exclusively to the stories of practicing artists who had experienced censorship. Over two days, 25 artists from Burma, North Korea, Egypt, Cuba, Russia, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Palestine, Syria, Tunisia, China, Turkey, Tibet and Mali gave their accounts or performed.
Each story told how a play, an album, a painting, an installation, an image or an idea had unleashed extraordinary levels of violence, hostility, threats, and prejudice towards the artist. The aggressors took all forms from corporate community, government or religious groups. Each artist’s decision not to capitulate, to stand up for their right to express themselves brought them into situations of extreme personal danger and harm, risking their life and health, liberty, career, family and community relations.
A man is in solitary confinement, in a tiny, windowless cell. By straining through the bars of his cell, he can just see the edges of moonlight. He paces restlessly and in a moment of inspiration, takes the plastic bowl — the only concession to comfort in his cell — places it carefully just outside the bars and pees into it. As the pee settles, the ripples and bubbles subside, the reflected image of the full moon comes into sharp focus. The prisoner smiles at the moon.
This is the synopsis one of the short films shown at the opening presentation of the conference. The film was made by Burmese comedian, film maker and activist Zarganar, who, with fellow film-maker Min Htin Ko Ko Gyi, told of the power of art and the imagination to withstand brutal treatment by the military junta in Burma.
Bringing these artists together for the first time was an achievement, the result of four years of research and planning. The shared ground between them gave rise to countless connections, forging plans and future collaborations. Four of the participating artists will join an artist roundtable discussion Index has organised in the lead up to our Taking the Offensive conference in London on 29 January 2013 at the Southbank Centre, to defend artistic freedom of expression.
In nearly all cases the artists acknowledged a deep sense of isolation while the media storms, community conflicts and lawsuits raged around and because of them. Despite the support from family, friends, other artists, the theatre or the gallery and in some cases the general public, each artist had to find an extraordinary level of personal courage that was needed to keep going day after day, to stand by the integrity and importance of what they wanted to say.
“Freemuse has already documented more than hundred incidents of arts censorship in the past six months…. My feeling is that this is unfortunately only the tip of the iceberg,” concludes Reitov.
Julia Farrington is Head of Arts at Index on Censorship