Awards 2014

7 Nov 2014 | Awards, Awards year slider

[vc_row full_width=”stretch_row_content_no_spaces” css_animation=”fadeIn” css=”.vc_custom_1485788605439{padding-top: 250px !important;padding-bottom: 250px !important;background-image: url(https://www.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/2014-logo-1460×490.png?id=81108) !important;background-position: center !important;background-repeat: no-repeat !important;background-size: cover !important;}”][vc_column][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row css=”.vc_custom_1472525914065{margin-top: -150px !important;}”][vc_column][vc_row_inner equal_height=”yes” content_placement=”middle”][vc_column_inner el_class=”awards-inside-desc” width=”1/2″][vc_custom_heading text=”FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AWARDS 2014″ use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship’s Freedom of Expression Awards exist to celebrate individuals or groups who have had a significant impact fighting censorship anywhere in the world.

 

  • Awards were offered in four categories: Arts, Campaigning, Digital Activism and Journalism
  • Winners were honoured at a gala celebration in London at the Barbican Centre

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_video link=”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AW9QlnDVi2Q&list=PLlUhPA3TuB55ge1Ysq9HesLEzGOE6hG96″][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row css=”.vc_custom_1472608310682{margin-top: 0px !important;margin-bottom: 20px !important;}”][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”WINNERS” font_container=”tag:h1|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” css=”.vc_custom_1477036676595{margin-top: 0px !important;}”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][staff name=”Shahzad Ahmad” title=”Advocacy Award” color=”#28a7cc” profile_image=”56254″]Shahzad Ahmad is one of the leading voices in the fight against online censorship in Pakistan. The country faces a deteriorating state of cyber freedom, as the government uses draconian censorship laws and increasing surveillance to police the internet. Ahmad is country director of Bytes4All. The group campaigns for internet rights and democracy by building capacity for human rights defenders, as well as advocacy and awareness-raising. Ahmad and Bytes4All have sued the Pakistani government over the suspected use of surveillance software, FinFisher – a piece of software that infects a computer and takes full control of it, intercepting Skype calls and allowing every keystroke the user types to be sent across the internet to another computer. Developed by UK-based company Gamma International, it has been used to target activists in Bahrain amongst other countries. He is also suing the government over its ongoing blocking of YouTube which deprives the country of one of the world’s most popular video channels.[/staff][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][staff name=”Mayam Mahmoud” title=”Arts Award” color=”#28a7cc” profile_image=”81023″]Rapper Mayam Mahmoud uses hip-hop to address issues such as sexual harassment and to stand up for women’s rights in Egypt. Women played a significant role in the demonstrations that eventually toppled the regime of Hosni Mubarak in 2011. In the aftermath, however, the problem of sexual harassment has become what activists now describe as “an epidemic”. The 18-year-old rose to prominence through her appearances on the popular TV show Arabs Got Talent. Aged 12, she was introduced to poetry by her mother. She began writing her own work, which soon turned into rap — still a male dominated music genre across the world.[/staff][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][staff name=”Shubhranshu Choudhary” title=”Digital Actvism Award” color=”#28a7cc” profile_image=”56255″]Journalist Shubhranshu Choudhary is the brain behind CGNet Swara (Voice of Chhattisgarh) a mobile-phone (no smartphone required) service that allows citizens to upload and listen to local reports in their local language. CGNet Swara is a vital tool giving people who are deprived of a voice and platform in mainstream media, on the wrong side of the digital divide, a chance to have a say on and learn about the issues that affect them the most. Furthermore, CGNet Swara also manages to circumvent India’s strict broadcast licensing laws. Choudhary estimates that there are some 100 million people in India for whom mainstream methods of communicating news don’t work, whether due to language barriers, low levels of literacy or lack of access to internet and newspapers among other things. This represents a serious barrier to their socio-economic development, as they are not updated on stories of importance to them, and their views and grievances and demands are not voiced and addressed.[/staff][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][staff name=”Azadliq” title=”Journalism Award” color=”#28a7cc” profile_image=”56243″]One of the few remaining independent media outlets in Azerbaijan, the newspaper Azadliq has continued to report on government corruption and cronyism in spite of an increasing financial squeeze enforced by the authorities. The country likes to present itself as a modern democracy, but it is widely recognised as an authoritarian regime where opposition is often brutally cracked down on and critical voices silenced. In this environment, Azadliq works to hold the ruling Aliyev family, and the rest of the powerful elite in the country to account. The latest attacks on the paper came hot on the heels of the country’s 2013 presidential election, where Ilham Aliyev was reelected in a vote labelled flawed by the OSCE. The paper has been been the target of defamation suits that have resulted in £52,000 in fines. Courts found Azadliq guilty of “damaging” the business reputation of Kabira Mamedova, director of the Baku-based Bina shopping centre, and Taghi Ahmadov, CEO of the Baku Metro, after the paper published articles critical of their activities.[/staff][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”JUDGING” font_container=”tag:h1|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_row_inner el_class=”mw700″][vc_column_inner][vc_column_text]

Criteria – Anyone involved in tackling free expression threats – either through journalism, campaigning, the arts or using digital techniques – is eligible for nomination.

Any individual, group or NGO can nominate or self-nominate. There is no cost to apply.

Judges look for courage, creativity and resilience. We shortlist on the basis of those who are deemed to be making the greatest impact in tackling censorship in their chosen area, with a particular focus on topics that are little covered or tackled by others.

Nominees must have had a recognisable impact in the past 12 months.

Where a judge comes from a nominee’s country, or where there is any other potential conflict of interest, the judge will abstain from voting in that category.

Panel – Each year Index recruits an independent panel of judges – leading world voices with diverse expertise across campaigning, journalism, the arts and human rights.

The judges for 2014 were:

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][staff name=”Samira Ahmed” title=”Journalist and BBC broadcaster” color=”#28a7cc” profile_image=”80231″]Samira Ahmed is a British freelance journalist, writer and broadcaster at the BBC, where she has presented Radio 4’s PM, The World Tonight and Sunday. She also presented two Proms for BBC Four in 2011. On BBC Radio 3, Ahmed is one of the presenters of Night Waves. Her writing has appeared in The Guardian, The Independent and for The Spectator magazine’s Arts Blog. She was a reporter and presenter on Channel 4 News from 2000 to 2011. She presented Sunday Morning Live, a topical discussion programme on BBC One from 2012 to 2013.[/staff][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][staff name=”Howard Brenton” title=”Playwright” color=”#28a7cc” profile_image=”80230″]Howard John Brenton is an English playwright and screenwriter.[/staff][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][staff name=”Edward Fitzgerald QC CBE” title=”Barrister, Doughty Street Chambers” color=”#28a7cc” profile_image=”80229″]Edward Hamilton Fitzgerald CBE QC is an English barrister who specialises in criminal law, public law, and international human rights law.[/staff][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][staff name=”Stephen King” title=”Partner, Omidyar Network” color=”#28a7cc” profile_image=”80232″]Stephen King is a partner at Omidyar Network, the philanthropic investment firm set up by Pierre Omidyar, the founder of eBay and his wife, Pam. King invests in technology platforms which drive improved government transparency and accountability worldwide.[/staff][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/3″][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row css=”.vc_custom_1473325552363{margin-top: 0px !important;margin-bottom: 20px !important;padding-top: 0px !important;padding-right: 15px !important;padding-bottom: 0px !important;padding-left: 15px !important;}”][vc_column css=”.vc_custom_1473325567468{margin-top: 0px !important;margin-bottom: 0px !important;padding-top: 0px !important;padding-bottom: 0px !important;}”][awards_gallery_slider name=”GALLERY” images_url=”80990,80991,80992,80993,80994,80995,80996,80997,80998,80999,81000,81001,81003,81004,81005,81006,81008,81009,81010,81011,81012,81014,81016,81017,81018,81019,81020,81021,81022″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

13 Nov: Is it ever better to censor than to cause offence?

6 Nov 2014 | Events, News and features

Exhibit B (Photo: © Sofie Knijff / Barbican)

Exhibit B (Photo: © Sofie Knijff / Barbican)

Exhibit B, The City, the Tricycle Theatre… Several high profile cases this past summer have ignited a debate about artistic censorship in the UK.

Join us as part of RADAR Festival at the Bush Theatre in London to explore the rights of the artist to free expression, to examine the role of arts institutions in defending and promoting free expression, and to ask the question: is it ever better to censor than to cause offence? The event features:

WHERE: Bush Theatre, London, W12 8LJ
WHEN: Thursday 13 November 2014, debate 9.00-10.00pm (following show 7.30-8.30pm)
TICKETS: £10 (early bird, including show) at www.bushtheatre.co.uk or 0208 743 5050 (box office)

Follow the discussion via the hashtag #RADAR2014

Co-produced by Index on Censorship and the Bush Theatre as part of the RADAR Festival.

Padraig Reidy: Courageous journalism should not come with a price

6 Nov 2014 | News and features, Politics and Society

People taking part in the funeral procession of Lasantha Wickrematunge (By Indi Samarajiva [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

People taking part in the funeral procession of murdered journalist Lasantha Wickrematunge (Photo by: Indi Samarajiva [CC-BY-2.0], via Wikimedia Commons)

Lasantha Wickrematunge knew he would be murdered. The founding editor of Sri Lanka’s Sunday Leader was unpopular because he wanted his paper to tell the truth. During his country’s long civil war, Wickrematunge’s loyalty was not to Colombo, or to the Tamil Tigers, but to journalism.

This would be no defence for Lasantha. President Mahinda Rajapaksa repeatedly referred to him as a “terrorist journalist” and “Kotiyek” (a Tiger).

According to exiled journalist Uvindu Kurukulasuriya, shortly before Lasantha was killed, the president offered to buy the Sunday Leader, with the intention of muting its voice. Lasantha declined the generous offer. On 8 January 2009, he was shot dead.

Days later, an astonishing editorial, written by Lasantha before his death, appeared in the Sunday Leader, and subsequently in newspapers throughout the world. After describing his pride in the Sunday Leader’s journalism, Wickrematunge wrote chillingly: “When finally I am killed, it will be the government that kills me.”

Lasantha’s murder was shocking. As was the murder of Hrant Dink, the Armenian editor who “insulted Turkishness” by daring to speak of the genocide of his people; as was the murder of Anastasia Barburova, the young Novaya Gazeta reporter who investigated the Russian far right; as was the murder of Martin O’Hagan, who took on the criminality of Northern Ireland’s loyalist gangs. As were the murders of the dozens of Filipino journalists killed in the Maguindanao massacre in 2009, too numerous to name, caught up in a ruthless turf war.

Then there are the reporters killed in war zones. The conflict in Syria has been a killing field for journalists. Where once the media were seen as protected, even potential allies, now they are seen as targets. The killings of Steven Sotloff and James Foley by ISIS in Iraq brought back memories of the beheading of Daniel Pearl in Pakistan in 2002. As Joel Simon of Committee to Protect Journalists relates in his forthcoming book, the New Censorship, that crime marked a turning point. In the Pearl case, even Osama bin Laden, who viewed the media as a potential tool in his global war, was shocked by the tactic employed by his lieutenant Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who claimed to have carried out the murder himself. From that point on, journalists were not just fair game, but trophies.

As money is drained from news, many organisations choose not to send correspondents to areas where reporters are needed most. Too dangerous, too expensive. As a result, freelancers, local journalists and fixers take ever greater risks. Under-resourced, undersupported and out on a limb, they are picked off.

Regional journalists covering tough domestic beats are easy prey. In Mexico, drug cartels boast of their ability to murder reporters. In Burma, the army kills a reporter who dares report its activities.

The numbers are horrifying: over 1,000 media workers have been killed because of their work since 1992.

Every single time, the message is sent: don’t get involved; don’t ask questions; don’t do your job. No journalism here. No inconvenient truths, no dissenting voices.

With rare exceptions, those responsible for these crimes act with impunity. Sometimes, as in the case of Anna Politkovskaya, outspoken on war crimes in Chechnya, the man who pulled the trigger is traced but those who gave the orders remain untouched. In over 90 per cent of cases of attacks on journalists, there are no convictions.

There is no greater infringement of human rights than to deliberately take an innocent life. The killing of a journalist also signals contempt for the concept of free expression as a right. As the United Nation’s Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity, states, violent attacks on journalists and free expression do not happen in a vacuum: “[T]he existence of laws that curtail freedom of expression (e.g. overly restrictive defamation laws), must be addressed. The media industry also must deal with low wages and improving journalistic skills. To whatever extent possible, the public must be made aware of these challenges in the public and private spheres and the consequences from a failure to act.”

In that famous final editorial, Lasantha Wickrematunge wrote: “In the course of the last few years, the independent media have increasingly come under attack. Electronic and print institutions have been burned, bombed, sealed and coerced. Countless journalists have been harassed, threatened and killed. It has been my honour to belong to all those categories.”

Like many journalists, Lasantha prided himself on bravery: there is no higher compliment in the profession than to call a colleague “courageous”.

But there is a danger in this that we create martyrs: that we become enamoured of the idea that a good journalist should die for the cause. That persecution and suffering are marks of valour.

They are not. Journalism should be intrepid, of course, but we shouldn’t accept the idea that intrepid journalism comes with a price. Journalism, the exercise of free expression, is a basic right both for practitioners and for the readers, viewers and listeners who benifit from it. They should be able to practice this right without fear of persecution from states, criminals or terrorists. If they are to suffer, their oppressors must face justice.

Correction 10:02, 10 November: An earlier version of this article stated that a government minister offered to buy the Sunday Leader.

Index on Censorship is mapping harassment and violence against journalists across the European Union and candidate countries at mediafreedom.ushahidi.com.

map-nov62014

This article was posted on 6 November 2014 at indexoncensorship.org

Azerbaijan: Lawyers dismissed from jailed rights activist’s case

6 Nov 2014 | Azerbaijan, Azerbaijan News, Europe and Central Asia, News and features

leyla-yunus

Two lawyers representing Azerbaijani human rights activist Leyla Yunus’s have been dismissed from her case. Javad Javaldi announced his suspension on 29 October, followed by Khalid Bagirov on 5 November. This comes as Azerbaijan’s ambassador to the United Kingdom says the government is “deeply committed” to  strengthening its cooperation with the country’s civil society.

The prosecutor general’s office has not provided explanations for the suspensions. They have also prevented Bagirov from meeting with his client Rasul Jafarov, another prominent Azerbaijani human rights activist currently imprisoned.

The lawyers’ dismissal comes less than two weeks after Yunus said she had been denied access to her lawyers. In late September, her lawyers expressed concern at being unable to meet with Yunus in person or speak on the phone with her, saying they were concerned about her physical wellbeing. She has reportedly been beaten by both guards and her cellmate and denied medical attention.

The court has also reportedly extended Yunus’s detention until 28 February. She was initially arrested on July 30 with her husband, Arif, who recently had his pretrial detention extended until 5 March. The two are charged with high treason, spying for Armenia, illegal business activities, document forgery and fraud.

Both detention extensions go against calls from the European Parliament to Azerbaijan to release political prisoners and reform human rights. Last month the European Union praised President Ilham Aliyev when he announced he would release 80 prisoners, including some human rights activists.

Thorbjørn Jagland, secretary general of the Council of Europe and chair of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, wrote on Monday that Azerbaijan has been “repeatedly warned…over its poor human rights record”.

In a response to Jagland, Ambassador Tahir Taghizadeh wrote in a letter in The Guardian on Thursday that his country has “come a long way in strengthening democracy and human rights over the last 23 years.”  He added that “there still exists a long way to go,” and the government looks forward to working with civil society to resolve “human rights issues”.

This article was originally posted on 6 November at indexoncensorship.org

SUPPORT INDEX'S WORK