Warning: Undefined array key "label" in /home/jwkxumhx/public_html/newsite02may/wp-content/themes/Divi/includes/builder/class-et-builder-element.php on line 8927 Index on Censorship | A voice for the persecuted Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type bool in /home/jwkxumhx/public_html/newsite02may/wp-content/plugins/expand-divi/inc/ExpandDiviSetup.php on line 217
Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type bool in /home/jwkxumhx/public_html/newsite02may/wp-content/plugins/expand-divi/inc/ExpandDiviSetup.php on line 218
As she was getting ready for bed on 3 July, Bahraini women’s rights defender Ebtisam Al-Sayegh was arrested by masked officers. Her whereabouts remain unknown.
Just before midnight, five civilian cars and one minibus arrived at Al-Sayegh’s home. Two female officers demanded she handed over both her mobile phone and her national identity card. No arrest warrant was presented and the officers did not answer questions from her family on why she was being arrested. Her family believe these officers are from the Bahraini National Security Agency.
“Index calls for the immediate release of Ebtisam Al-Sayegh. The conditions of her arrest are deeply concerning and we fear she is again at risk of torture,” said Melody Patry, head of advocacy at Index on Censorship. “The unceasing harassment and persecution of human rights defenders in Bahrain are blatant violations of human rights and in total contraction with claims of progress or improvement in this regard.”
Al-Sayegh, a human rights defender with Salam for Democracy and Human Rights, was detained and tortured in late May 2017 for documenting the abuses in Duraz where five protesters were killed and about 300 arrested.
During this time, Al-Sayegh was blindfolded and sexually assaulted while standing for seven hours of interrogation. Al-Sayegh told Amnesty:“The men told me ‘no one can protect you’. They took away my humanity, I was weak prey to them.”
Al-Sayegh was also detained in March after she participated in the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. In June, the UN released a statementabout the increasingly hostile situation in Bahrain. UN experts said: “We are particularly worried about these measures, coupled with the campaign of harassment aimed at human rights defenders, who are increasingly being charged with offences for which the death penalty may be imposed.”
Within the last month, Index on Censorship’s Mapping Media Freedom platform has recorded a number of restrictions on media access to events in Spain by police and politicians.
Melody Patry, Index’s head of advocacy, called to attention these encroachments on press freedoms by Spanish law enforcement: “The police are clearly — intentionally or not — restricting access to information and interfering with legitimate journalistic work,” she said. “This further highlights the need for improved policy and training of law enforcement bodies to protect freedom of expression and ensure journalists’ safety.”
On 10 June, police officers blocked access to journalists covering an eviction in Santiago de Compostela and threatened to fine them.
During a protest against an eviction, police obliged reporters to stand behind the police cordon a hundred meters from where the eviction was taking place. This restricted access made it difficult for the journalists to see and report on the event.
Police agents in plain clothes asked reporters for their IDs and personal documents while simultaneously refusing to identify themselves. According to the journalists, the police acted aggressively, wielding batons against them, threatening them with fines for taking photos and warning reporters that photos already taken would be erased.
Journalist Cristina Fallarás received a €600 fine on 13 June for disobeying police orders and standing on the street during a Madrid protest.
On 18 May, Fallarás participated in a protest against the assassination of Mexican journalists in front of the Mexican embassy in Madrid. Police cordoned off a road near the embassy. “There were so many people at the protest, we were squeezed, so I went on the road. A policeman told me to go back to the pavement,” the journalist told Público. Fallarás then explained to the policeman that she had not interrupted traffic on the road and that there were many people on the pavement. He asked for her ID.
“When I gave my ID I knew they were going to fine me but I didn’t think it would be a €600 fine,” Fallarás said. She was fined according to the Citizen Security Law, which some critical media outlets have called a ‘gag law’. She was notified of the fine on 13 June and has indicated a plan to appeal it.
On 16 June, the Spanish newspaper El País removed an article it had published on the parliament spokesman of the ruling party because the editor-in-chief considered it to be “inappropriate”.
The article criticised the behaviour of MP Rafael Hernando during a debate with MP Irene Montero. Within the opinion article, author Salazar called Hernando a “male chauvinist and misogynist”.
“They (El País) told me that the article is fantastic, that it will be published on the cover page of the web edition,” Salazar told Público. A few hours later, after 300 comments appeared on the article, El País told Salazar that the editor-in-chief, Antonio Caño, had read the article and said that it would have to be either “softer” or removed. “I told them that there was nothing to change,” said Salazar. He received another phone call, this time from the director of El País, who told him that to call Hernando a “male chauvinist and misogynist” was not appropriate. The article was then removed from the website.
The left-wing Podemos party failed to invite six Spanish media outlets to an “off the record” breakfast briefing on 20 June where they introduced the new party spokespeople to the rest of media.
Podemos excluded reporters from El País, la Cadena SER, El Periódico de Catalunya and online outlets El Independiente, Voz Pópuli and Ok Diario. The Madrid Press Association called it a “veto” on the media and asked Podemos to refrain from such actions in the future. According to the APM, all affected journalists typically report on Podemos.
Podemos’ members say that the party has a right to decide who will be invited to their private events and that there was a lack of confidence with the reporters in question.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Mapping Media Freedom
Click on the bubbles to view reports or double-click to zoom in on specific regions. The full site can be accessed at https://mappingmediafreedom.org/[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
To mark the release of the issue, Index has compiled a reading list for people wishing to learn more about its legacy in the world today. This list includes works from Soviet Russia and post-Soviet Russia, including Russia under Putin today.
An excerpt of a longer poem written by Solzhenitsyn while in a labour camp in North Kazakhstan. The camp later became the inspiration for Solzhenitsyn’s novel A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich.
Glezer was responsible for organising the now famous unofficial art exhibitions in Moscow in 1974. The first exhibition, on 15 September, was ‘”bulldozed” by police and KGB agents, and a number of artists who tried to exhibit their work were arrested. Two weeks later, however, an open-air exhibition did take place, after the authorities gave permission, and some 10,000 people turned up to see paintings and sculptures by modern Soviet artists who did not enjoy official favour.
This article examines Soviet interpretations of 1984, including the assertion that George Orwell was actually critiquing capitalism, not the USSR, with his novel.
This is an article about the musician Vladimir Vysotsky, once called “the most idolised figure in the Soviet Union”. His songs were circulated on homemade tapes, though never officially recorded until after his death.
An Estonian reporter’s exposé prompts a call from the army. Madis Jurgen, who brought to light the dark side of the Soviet armed forces, left Tallinn on Friday 13 October, bound for New York and Toronto, from where he decided to await events.
Early on 26 April 1986, a series of explosions destroyed the nuclear reactor and building of the fourth power generator unit of Chernobyl atomic power station. These extracts are not about the Chernobyl disaster but about a world of Chernobyl of which we know almost nothing. They are the unwritten history.
As they say, still waters run deep. On 8 February 2000, an announcement was made in the St Petersburg Gazette by members of the St Petersburg State University Initiative Group. Shortly beforehand they had, in competition with others, nominated Putin as a presidential candidate and now wished to demonstrate their enthusiasm for their former pupil. What they published was a denunciation.
An article on the disappeared in Chechnya, who officially number about 1,000, but unofficially are almost 2,000. They disappeared throughout the war. The author, Anna Politkovskaya, was murdered in her Moscow apartment in a contract killing in 2006.
Ali Kamalov, the head of Dagestan’s journalists’ union fears for the future of press freedom following the murder of the country’s most prominent editor. On 15 December 2011, Hadjimurad Kamalov was murdered in Makhachkala, the seaboard capital of Dagestan.
Although the Russian constitution enshrines freedom of expression, the authorities routinely clamp down on anybody who treasures this fundamental right. State officials, judges, deputies, prosecutors and police officers serve the ruling regime and control society, rather than defend the constitution or protect human rights.
Helen Womack interviews the founder of the last free radio station in Putin’s Russia. These men are not dissidents, just journalists dedicated to professional principles of objectivity and balance. But in Putin’s Russia, where almost all the media spout state propaganda, that position looks like radical nonconformity, and it seems a wonder that Echo survives.
In the winter 2014 issue of Index on Censorship magazine, Andrei Aliaksandrau investigates the new information war between Russia and Ukraine as he travels across the latter country.
Andrei Aliaksandrau examines the evolution of censorship in Russia, from Soviet institutions to today’s blend of influence and pressure, including the assassination of journalists.
Andrey Arkhangelsky explores Russian journalism a decade on from Anna Politkovskaya’s murder and argues that the press still struggles to offer readers the full picture.
*Articles which are free to read on Sage. All other articles are available via Sage in most university libraries. To find out more about subscribing to the magazine in print or digitally, click here.
Today, 84 organisations and individuals from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK and the USA sent letters to their respective governments insisting that government officials defend strong encryption. The letter comes on the heels of a meeting of the “Five Eyes” ministerial meeting in Ottawa, Canada earlier this week.
The “Five Eyes” is a surveillance partnership of intelligence agencies consisting of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. According to a joint communique issued after the meeting encryption and access to data was discussed. The communique stated that “encryption can severely undermine public safety efforts by impeding lawful access to the content of communications during investigations into serious crimes, including terrorism.”
In the letter organised by Access Now, CIPPIC, and researchers from Citizen Lab, 83 groups and individuals from the so-called “Five Eyes” countries wrote “we call on you to respect the right to use and develop strong encryption.” Signatories also urged the members of the ministerial meeting to commit to allowing public participating in any future discussions.
Read the letter in full:
Senator the Hon. George Brandis
Attorney General of Australia
Hon. Christopher Finlayson
Attorney General of New Zealand
Hon. Ralph Goodale
Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness of Canada
Hon. John Kelly
United States Secretary of Homeland Security
Rt. Hon. Amber Rudd,
Secretary of State for the Home Department, United Kingdom
CC: Hon. Peter Dutton, Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, Australia;
Hon. Ahmed Hussen, Minister of Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship, Canada;
Hon. Jeff Sessions, Attorney General for the United States;
Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould, Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Canada;
Hon. Michael Woodhouse, Minister of Immigration, New Zealand
To Ministers Responsible for the Five Eyes Security Community,
In light of public reports about this week’s meeting between officials from your agencies, the undersigned individuals and organisations write to emphasise the importance of national policies that encourage and facilitate the development and use of strong encryption. We call on you to respect the right to use and develop strong encryption and commit to pursuing any additional dialogue in a transparent forum with meaningful public participation.
This week’s Five Eyes meeting (comprised of Ministers from the United States, United Kingdom, New Zealand, Canada, and Australia) discussed “plans to press technology firms to share encrypted data with security agencies” and hopes to achieve “a common position on the extent of … legally imposed obligations on … device-makers and social media companies to co-operate.” In a Joint Communiqué following the meeting, participants committed to exploring shared solutions to the perceived impediment posed by encryption to investigative objectives.
While the challenges of modern day security are real, such proposals threaten the integrity and security of general purpose communications tools relied upon by international commerce, the free press, governments, human rights advocates, and individuals around the world.
Last year, many of us joined several hundred leading civil society organisations, companies, and prominent individuals calling on world leaders to protect the development of strong cryptography. This protection demands an unequivocal rejection of laws, policies, or other mandates or practices—including secret agreements with companies—that limit access to or undermine encryption and other secure communications tools and technologies.
Today, we reiterate that call with renewed urgency. We ask you to protect the security of your citizens, your economies, and your governments by supporting the development and use of secure communications tools and technologies, by rejecting policies that would prevent or undermine the use of strong encryption, and by urging other world leaders to do the same.
Attempts to engineer “backdoors” or other deliberate weaknesses into commercially available encryption software, to require that companies preserve the ability to decrypt user data or to force service providers to design communications tools in ways that allow government interception are both shortsighted and counterproductive. The reality is that there will always be some data sets that are relatively secure from state access. On the other hand, leaders must not lose sight of the fact that even if measures to restrict access to strong encryption are adopted within Five Eyes countries, criminals, terrorists, and malicious government adversaries will simply switch to tools crafted in foreign jurisdictions or accessed through black markets. Meanwhile, innocent individuals will be exposed to needless risk. Law-abiding companies and government agencies will also suffer serious consequences. Ultimately, while legally discouraging encryption might make some useful data available in some instances, it has by no means been established that such steps are necessary or appropriate to achieve modern intelligence objectives.
Notably, government entities around the world, including Europol and representatives in the U.S. Congress, have started to recognise the benefits of encryption and the futility of mandates that would undermine it.
We urge you, as leaders in the global community, to remember that encryption is a critical tool of general use. It is neither the cause nor the enabler of crime or terrorism. As a technology, encryption does far more good than harm. We, therefore, ask you to prioritise the safety and security of individuals by working to strengthen the integrity of communications and systems. As an initial step, we ask that you continue any engagement on this topic in a multi-stakeholder forum that promotes public participation and affirms the protection of human rights.
We look forward to working together toward a more secure future.
Sincerely,
Access Now
Advocacy for Principled Action in Government
American Library Association
Amnesty International
Amnesty UK
Article 19
Australian Privacy Foundation
Big Brother Watch
Blueprint for Free Speech
British Columbia Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA)
Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA)
Canadian Journalists for Free Expression (CJFE)
Center for Democracy and Techology
Centre for Free Expression, Ryerson University
Chaos Computer Club (CCC)
Constitutional Alliance
Consumer Action
CryptoAustralia
Crypto.Quebec
Defending Rights and Dissent
Demand Progress
Digital Rights Watch
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Electronic Frontiers Australia
Electronic Privacy Information Center
Engine
Equalit.ie
Freedom of the Press Foundation
Friends of Privacy USA
Future Wise
Government Accountability Project
Human Rights Watch
i2Coalition
Index on Censorship
International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group (ICLMG)
Internet NZ
Liberty
Liberty Coalition
Liberty Victoria
Library Freedom Project
My Private Network
New America’s Open Technology Institute
NZ Council for Civil Liberties
OpenMedia
Open Rights Group (ORG)
NEXTLEAP
Niskanen Center
Patient Privacy Rights
PEN International
Privacy International
Privacy Times
Private Internet Access
Restore the Fourth
Reporters Without Borders
Rights Watch (UK)
Riseup Networks
R Street Institute
Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy & Public Interest
Clinic (CIPPIC)
Scottish PEN
Subgraph
Sunlight Foundation
TechFreedom
Tech Liberty
The Tor Project
Voices-Voix
World Privacy Forum
Brian Behlendorf, executive director, Hyperledger, at the Linux Foundation
Dr. Paul Bernal, lecturer in IT, IP and media law, UEA Law School
Owen Blacker, founder and director, Open Rights Group; founder, NO2ID
Thorsten Busch, lecturer and senior research fellow, University of St Gallen
Gabriella Coleman, Wolfe Chair in scientific and technological literacy at McGill University
Sasha Costanza-Chock, associate professor of civic media, MIT
Dave Cox, CEO, Liquid VPN
Ron Deibert, The Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs
Nathan Freitas, Guardian Project
Dan Gillmor, professor of practice, Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication, Arizona State University
Adam Molnar, lecturer in criminology, Deakin University
Christopher Parsons, The Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs
Jon Penney, research fellow, The Citizen lab, Munk School of Global Affairs
Chip Pitts, professorial lecturer, Oxford University
Ben Robinson, directory, Outside the Box Technology Ltd and Discovery Technology Ltd
Sarah Myers Wes, doctoral candidate at the Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism
J.M. Porup, journalist
Lokman Tsui, assistant professor at the School of Journalism and Communication, the Chinese University of Hong Kong (Faculty Associate, Berkman Klein Center)
Index on Censorship magazine celebrated the launch of its summer 2017 issue with an evening exploring the 1917 Russian Revolution and its effects on our freedoms today.
The Calvert 22 Foundation-hosted event examined the role of propaganda, culture and politics from around the globe.
Speakers included Don Guttenplan, editor-at-large for The Nation, who spoke on the cultural Cold War; Katya Rogatchevskaia, lead curator of Central and East European collections at the British Library, who examined the role of Russian propaganda both during the Cold War and today; and Adam Cathcart, a specialist in Chinese history at Leeds University, who spoke on the impact of Soviet art and music in North Korea.
Guests were invited to listen to actors performing excerpts from speeches by Lenin, Stalin and Putin. Guttenplan noted the speeches reminded him of the dialogue he hears in today’s political realm. “When we were listening to Lenin’s speech, I was thinking, well that doesn’t sound that different from John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn,” he said.
Rogatchevskaia discussed how art and propaganda influenced the Russian Revolution. “It was important that a revolution was happening at the same time in art and in social and political life,” she said. “These two revolutions actually met at one point and that created a fantastic abundance of really great art, and that’s why we remember this period.”
Cathcart spoke of the “cultural cold war” with South Korea on one side and China and North Korea on the other. He explained how cultural revolutions in South Korea have influenced the Chinese mindset and their favour of North Korean customs. “Chinese scholars have to come to grips with the Korean wave,” Cathcart said. “This is a country that has done extremely well, everybody’s on high broadband internet, the pop bands are doing extremely well. North Korea exports almost nothing culturally. North Korean music is something they’ve [the Chinese] tried to bring in competition with South Korea.”
Index’s summer publication, which was given to all attendees, features reports from across the globe including Uzbekistan, China, Russia, Cuba and Turkey. Writers for this issue include David Aaronovitch, Nikita Khrushchev’s great-granddaughter Nina Khrushcheva, and an interview with author Margaret Atwood.
The event was held on at Calvert 22 Foundation, which celebrates the culture and creativity of the New East.
Katya Rogatchevskaia, lead Curator of Central and East European collections at the British Library, discusses Russia’s revolutionary propaganda. (Photo: Sean Gallagher / Index on Censorship)
An actor reads from a speech by Vladimir Lenin. (Photo: Sean Gallagher / Index on Censorship)
Adam Cathcart, a specialist and lecturer in Chinese history at Leeds University, explores the impact of Soviet art on North Korean art and culture. (Photo: Sean Gallagher / Index on Censorship)
Index on Censorship magazine editor Rachael Jolley introduces the summer 2017 issue. (Photo: Sean Gallagher / Index on Censorship)
Don Guttenplan, Editor-at-Large for The Nation, shares his take on the cultural cold war, (Photo: Sean Gallagher / Index on Censorship)
Actors read from speeches by Lenin (Matthew Romain), Stalin (Amanda Wilkin) and Putin (Jennifer Leong). (Photo: Sean Gallagher / Index on Censorship)
An actor reads from a speech by Vladimir Putin. (Photo: Sean Gallagher / Index on Censorship)
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row content_placement=”top”][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_custom_heading text=”100 Years On” font_container=”tag:p|font_size:24|text_align:left” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2017%2F06%2F100-years-on%2F|||”][vc_column_text]Through a range of in-depth reporting, interviews and illustrations, the summer 2017 issue of Index on Censorship magazine explores how the consequences of the 1917 Russian Revolution still affect freedoms today, in Russia and around the world.
With: Andrei Arkhangelsky, BG Muhn, Nina Khrushcheva[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_single_image image=”91220″ img_size=”medium” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/magazine”][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/3″ css=”.vc_custom_1481888488328{padding-bottom: 50px !important;}”][vc_custom_heading text=”Subscribe” font_container=”tag:p|font_size:24|text_align:left” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2Fsubscribe%2F|||”][vc_column_text]In print, online. In your mailbox, on your iPad.
Subscription options from £18 or just £1.49 in the App Store for a digital issue.
Every subscriber helps support Index on Censorship’s projects around the world.
Index on Censorship was part of Activism Row at Afropunk London 2017 to raise awareness of free expression. We spoke to hundreds of Afropunkers about our work and the incredible artists, activists and journalists we support via the Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards and Fellowship. You can find the photos from our #DontLoseYourVoice campaign on Facebook and Flickr. Feel free to share and tag yourself!
Vice-President and Prime Minister
His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al-Maktoum
Prime Minister’s Office
PO Box: 212000
Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Fax: +971 4 330 4044
27th June 2017
RE: Urgent Appeal
Your Highness,
On the 100th day since the detention of Mr. Ahmed Mansoor, we, the undersigned, would like to express our deepest concern for his current detainment and appeal to the United Arab Emirates government for Mr. Mansoor’s immediate and unconditional release.
According to our information, Ahmed Mansoor was arrested in his home in Dubai in the early hours of 20 March 2017, as ordered by the Public Prosecution for Cybercrimes. He is being investigated on charges of “promoting false and shaded information through the Internet and serving agendas aimed at spreading hatred and sectarianism”. Mr Mansoor is an internationally respected human rights campaigner, the winner of the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders in 2015 and a member of both the advisory committee of Human Rights Watch and the Gulf Centre for Human Rights. These charges relate solely to his peaceful exercise of his right to freedom of expression and therefore we consider him a prisoner of conscience.
The official statement by the UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation (MOFAIC) of 29th March 2017 states that “he has the freedom to hire a lawyer and that his family has full access to the place of confinement and is allowed to visit him”. However, we have received news that Mr. Mansoor currently has no lawyer representing him and that his family have only been allowed one visit, on 3 April 2017. We are also concerned to hear allegations that he is being held in solitary confinement. These practices are not only in violation of international human rights law but also contravene the UAE Penal Code, including Federal Law No. 43 of 1992 on Regulating Penal Institutions.
In a joint statement published on 28 March 2017 by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, various bodies condemned the arbitrary arrest and detention of Mr. Mansoor. Signatories included the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, on Enforced Disappearances, and the Special Rapporteurs on the situation of human rights defenders, Mr. Michel Forst; on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Mr. David Kaye; and on freedom of peaceful assembly and association, Mr. Maina Kiai. Furthermore, they called on the government “to respect the right of everyone to freedom of opinion and expression, including on social media and the internet.” The EU Parliament’s Subcommittee on Human Rights followed with a statement by its chair, Pier Antonio Panzeri, who affirmed that “all charges against [Ahmed Mansoor] should be dropped, as they appear to be motivated only by his legitimate and peaceful human rights work. Equally, his and his family’s total security and integrity should be guaranteed by the authorities and all his confiscated possessions be returned.”
We therefore call on the UAE government, as a member of the UN Human Rights Council, to adhere to its obligations to uphold human rights at home, including respecting the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and to freedom of association and peaceful assembly.
We urge the UAE authorities to:
Immediately and unconditionally release Mr. Ahmed Mansoor;
Pending his release, ensure that he is granted access to a lawyer and family visits and that he is protected from torture and other ill-treatment;
End all other forms of arbitrary punishment towards Ahmed Mansoor such as the travel ban against him, which violates his right to liberty of movement;
Sign and ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR);
Comply with the international human rights instruments and protect the right to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly.
The continuing detention of such a high-profile and internationally respected human rights campaigner is extremely damaging to the UAE government’s reputation abroad. Therefore, we urge you to address this issue without delay.
Yours Faithfully,
Arab Organization for Human Rights (AOHR)
COJEP International
Detained in Dubai
Index on Censorship
International Campaign for Freedom in the UAE (ICFUAE)
International Center for Justice and Human Rights (ICJHR)
Martin Ennals Awards Foundation
PEN International
Tom Brake, MP for Carshalton and Wallington
Andrew Byles, Garden Court North Chambers
Rt Hon Alistair Carmichael, MP for Orkney and Shetland
Noam Chomsky, Professor
Ron Deibert, Director of the Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto
Jonathan Emmett, Author
Andy Fitzpatrick, Barrister, Garden Court North Chambers, Manchester
Councillor David Haigh, Solicitor, UAE torture survivor, Former MD of Leeds United Football Club
Chris Haughton, Author and illustrator
Miles Kenyon, Communications Officer, Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto
Caroline Lucas, MP for Brighton Pavilion
Michael Mansfield, QC
Bill Marczak, Senior Researcher, Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto
Fadi Al Qadi, Human Rights, Civil Society, Advocacy and Media Expert
Chris Riddell, Author, Illustrator and Political Cartoonist at the Observer
Andy Slaughter, MP for Hammersmith
Dr. David Wearing, School of Oriental and African Studies
Pete Weatherby, QC Garden Court North Chambers, Manchester
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”As the Summer 2017 issue of Index on Censorship magazine looks at the modern implications of the Russian revolution 100 years on, Margaret Flynn Sapia lists 10 global songs inspired by revolutions of the last century”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_video link=”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2wneBVssPc&list=PLCY0ZVWasL3FginL7uuYQJy6JfXGIWmGu”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Music has an undeniable ability to move people; musicians can reach across borders and boundaries, pull at the heartstrings and say the unsayable. As a result, music has long been used to call for revolution, urging listeners to rise up against injustice and power. For the launch of Index on Censorship magazine’s summer 2017 issue, 100 Years On: What difference Russia’s revolution makes to our freedom today,we have compiled a playlist themed around the idea of revolution.
Tracy Chapman – Talkin ‘Bout A Revolution
In a world gripped by the denouement of the Cold War, Tracy Chapman saw change on the horizon. “Poor people gonna rise up /And get their share/ Poor people gonna rise up/And take what’s theirs” sums up the sentiment of Talkin ‘Bout A Revolution. Optimistic, perhaps, but the song arrived in 1988, at the cusp of a global uprising that saw the fall of Apartheid South Africa, the Soviet Union and several smaller communist regimes, as well as a Western ideological shift away from the ruthless capitalism of Thatcher and Reagan.
Gil Scott-Heron – The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
The Revolution Will Not Be Televised was released in 1970, at the end of a turbulent decade that saw the assassinations of several civil rights heroes including John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X and Fred Hampton. It calls on people to unite and take action beyond watching a television screen, warning that the revolution will not come with the glitz and glamour of television, and that the television will not be on their side. Gil Scott-Heron, an important figure and musician during the US Civil Rights movement, is keen to call for realistic understandings of how change can be achieved in this song.
The Specials – Nelson Mandela
The Specials’ Nelson Mandela drew popular attention to Mandela’s mistreatment in South Africa when it was released in 1984, bringing the injustice of his then two-decade imprisonment into common knowledge. When it was performed at a Wembley concert on Mandela’s 70th birthday in 1988, its chorus of “free Nelson Mandela” became a global rallying cry for the end of apartheid. Two years later, Mandela walked out of prison, and the apartheid regime fell shortly after.
David Zé – Mwangolé (O guerrilheiro)
One of Angola’s most renowned revolutionary artists, David Zé is particularly adept in his descriptions of the suffering and abuse of Angolans under Portuguese colonial rule.Mwangolé O guerrilheiro may not call for a specific course of revolutionary action, but its representation of the enduring pain and intolerable living conditions of Angolans remind listeners of what can drive a person to risk everything and revolt for their freedom. In a country that suffered through a generation-long civil war, that context can never be forgotten.
Carlos Puebla –Y en eso llego Fidel
“The fun was over, El Comandante came and ordered them to stop”, Puebla sings in this famous hymn to the Cuban revolution. Throughout the song, Carlos Puebla celebrates Castro’s arrival and overtake of the island, putting an end to capitalism’s prior corruption and exploitation of the island’s people. The droves of people who fled the subsequent corruption and exploitation by Castro’s communist regime might dispute the song’s celebratory tone.
The Korean People’s Army State Merited Chorus – Defend the Headquarters of the Revolution(혁명의 수뇌부 결사옹위하리라)
In North Korea, even revolutionary music – what should be defined and expressed by the people, free of censorship – is an unyielding expression and promotion of state power. Defend the Headquarters of the Revolutionprovides no mention of Korean culture or history preceding Kim Jong II, instead extolling the virtue of picking up arms for the Kims and fighting to the death, viewing this fight as a revolution against the rest of the world.
Vasily Agapkin – Farewell of Slavianka
Farewell of Slavianka (Proshchaniye slavyanki) became so popular during the 1917 Revolution that, despite its non-communist roots, the Soviet Union eventually adopted it as an official national song. This piece represents two fundamental components of revolution: popular sentiment during the people’s initial rebellion, and post-revolutionary appropriation of that sentiment into state propaganda.
Yulduz Usmonova – Ayting Ayting
Songs which explicitly detail Soviet occupation in Uzbekistan are scarce. However, songs sung in Uzbek instead of Russian (especially before the country’s independence) have long served as expressions of nationalism and rejection of the Russian hierarchy. Ayting Ayting is not a typical revolutionary song, but its defiance lies in its subtle refusal to conform to Russian norms.
Yoko Ono and John Lennon – Imagine
“Imagine there’s no countries, it isn’t hard to do, nothing to kill or die for”, sings John Lennon. This song co-written by Lennon and his wife Yoko Ono asks us to contemplate a different kind of revolution – not a singular uprising or struggle, but a new peaceful world where the divisions of religion and nationality have disappeared. The chorus of “You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one” hints at the faint possibility of this future, if people could only come together long enough to realise how similar they are. In a sad irony, he was eventually assassinated by a mentally ill Christian extremist who considered this blasphemy.
Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young – Ohio
The Vietnam War and its national impact are deeply entrenched within US society, and have inspired countless pieces of art, film and music. Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young’s song Ohio was written in response to the 1970 Kent State University massacre, in which national guard soldiers opened fire on anti-war student protesters leaving four dead and nine wounded. The song was released just a few weeks after the incident, and placed the blame directly on the Richard Nixon administration. It was soon adopted as an anthem of the US’s anti-establishment movement.
Print copies of Index on Censorship magazine are available on Amazon, or you can find information about print or digital subscriptions here. Copies are also available at the BFI, the Serpentine Gallery, MagCulture, (London), News from Nowhere (Liverpool), and Home (Manchester). Each magazine sale helps Index on Censorship continue its fight for free expression worldwide
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row content_placement=”top”][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_custom_heading text=”100 Years On” font_container=”tag:p|font_size:24|text_align:left” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2F2017%2F06%2F100-years-on%2F|||”][vc_column_text]Through a range of in-depth reporting, interviews and illustrations, the summer 2017 issue of Index on Censorship magazine explores how the consequences of the 1917 Russian Revolution still affect freedoms today, in Russia and around the world.
With: Andrei Arkhangelsky, BG Muhn, Nina Khrushcheva[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_single_image image=”91220″ img_size=”medium” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/newsite02may/magazine”][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/3″ css=”.vc_custom_1481888488328{padding-bottom: 50px !important;}”][vc_custom_heading text=”Subscribe” font_container=”tag:p|font_size:24|text_align:left” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fnewsite02may%2Fsubscribe%2F|||”][vc_column_text]In print, online. In your mailbox, on your iPad.
Subscription options from £18 or just £1.49 in the App Store for a digital issue.
Every subscriber helps support Index on Censorship’s projects around the world.
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship is pleased to announce that it has been awarded funding by Arts Council England for the next four years to support its work tackling censorship and self-censorship in the arts.
The funding — £172,488 over four years — will help Index provide and disseminate information and expertise to arts and cultural organisations so they are better able to deal with issues around controversial and sensitive art.
“Index on Censorship is a strong voice for the arts and culture sector and is uniquely placed to offer guidance and support on issues of censorship nationally across all artforms, including museums, galleries and archives,” Arts Council England wrote in its assessment. “There is plentiful evidence of national and international demand for Index on Censorship’s work.”
Index on Censorship is a strong voice for the arts and culture sector and is uniquely placed to offer guidance and support on issues of censorship nationally
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Index’s work on the arts in the UK includes a series of guidelines on free expression and the law in England and Wales: Art and Offence. The guidelines on art and public order have been distributed to every police force in the country.
Index is one of 58 group funded under a new Arts Council England new category: sector support organisations, which provide support services to the sector rather than produce or deliver art and culture.
“A risk-averse culture militates against artistic excellence,” said Index on Censorship chief executive Jodie Ginsberg. “Arts and cultural organisations – and individual artists – need information and confidence to deal with controversial issues address and we aim to provide that through our work. We’re excited that the Arts Council England has recognised the importance of defending and celebrating free expression as a way of supporting a vibrant arts and culture sector.”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”12″ style=”load-more” items_per_page=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1498571218981-424c7412-9c2c-3″ taxonomies=”5692″ exclude=”91672″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
Journalist and human rights activist Rafael Marques de Morais received a Freedom of Expression Journalism Award in 2015. (Photo: Alex Brenner for Index on Censorship)
The Angolan government should immediately drop all charges against journalist and human rights activist Rafael Marques de Morais, winner of Index on Censorship’s Freedom of Expression Award and Fellowship in 2015.
As the publisher of website Maka Angola, Marques is charged with “outrage to a body of sovereignty” and “insult against public authority”. As a private citizen, he is charged with abuse of press freedom, injury, and defamation. The indictment followed the publication of an article by Marques, in which he documented an illegal real estate transaction made in 2011 by Angola’s Attorney General, João Maria Moreira de Sousa.
David Heinemann, Index on Censorship’s head of fellowship said: “It is no coincidence that these charges come just two months before elections in Angola. Fearless in his reporting, Marques de Morais has been a beacon for free expression in the region and an exemplar internationally. These charges are clear retaliation for his reporting and an attempt to silence the work of someone who would elsewhere be considered a national treasure.”
Marques has previously faced criminal charges for libel regarding his 2011 book Blood Diamonds: Torture and Corruption in Angola, which exposed human rights abuses. Index condemned the move to convict him in 2015.
Other international organisations including CPJ and Human Rights Foundation have spoken out against the charges Marques faces, which carry a potential sentence of six years in prison.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”12″ style=”load-more” items_per_page=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1498559133604-39ac5146-3bef-7″ taxonomies=”6964, 6938″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
Brothers Ahmet Altan and Mehmet Altan. Credit: CEFTUS
Throughout June, Index on Censorship’s Mapping Media Freedom project has recorded a number of violations in Turkey, which is now the biggest jailer of journalists in the world.
Turkish journalists charged with sending “subliminal messages”
The first hearing of the ongoing trial of Turkish journalists for involvement in last year’s coup took place on Monday 19 June. Political commentators and brothers Ahmet Altan and Mehmet Altan are accused of offences against Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the Turkish government including “attempting to overthrow the Government of Turkey” and using “subliminal messaging” to encourage the coup.
The Altan brothers have been in pretrial detention for 11 months. Ahmet is a well-known journalist in Turkey and has worked as a reporter and editor at several newspapers. He has previously been charged with “denigrating Turkishness” after writing about the Armenian genocide. Mehmet is a professor at Istanbul University who has called on Turkey to improve its human rights record.
The hearing was delayed, and the judge spent several hours reading a long summary of the indictment, according to Index’s head of advocacy Melody Patry, who formed part of an international delegation of observers to the trial.
In his defence statement, Ahmet called the indictment against him “untruthful and nonsensical”. He described the charges and refuted them, explaining his lack of connection to instigating the coup. “I take you through all these things in such detail because I want everyone to see the recklessness with which this prosecutor and his like have darkened people’s lives, how they have abused their power,” he said. “I want all this to be documented for the day the law wakes up.”
Ahmet quoted portions of the indictment against him, including an excerpt in which he questioned the case of Can Dundar, another Turkish journalist who was convicted of espionage for publishing evidence of Turkey sending arms to Syria. Ahmet maintains that Turkish people had a right to know about these events. “Perhaps the prosecutor is giving a not at all ‘subliminal’ message to Turkey that whoever defends the rule of law will be thrown in jail,” he said.
According to Patry, this case is significant because of the potential three life sentences the journalists face as the first instance of journalists prosecuted for being complicit in the coup.
On 1 June, Turkish police detained eight people for using the chat software ByLock, the software the authorities in Turkey suspect was used by the group that plotted the 15 July coup attempt.
Former regional bureau chief of the Cihan news agency, referred to only as KA in news reports, was among those arrested.
İlker Yücel, the editor-in-chief of Aydınlık newspaper, was taken into custody and arrested on 2 June. The arrest was related to a 2014 story in Aydınlık which was found insulting to Berat Albayrak, Turkey’s Energy Minister and the son-in-law of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. The newspaper failed to print a correction or pay a TL 100,000 fine,
A court received an indictment for two consecutive life sentences without the possibility of parole for 13 journalists on 6 June. The charge from Istanbul’s Chief Prosecutor lists Gökçe Fırat Çulhaoğlu, Yakup Çetin, Bünyamin Köseli, Cihan Acar, Abdullah Kılıç, Oğuz Usluer, Atilla Taş, Hüseyin Aydın, Murat Aksoy, Mustafa Erkan, Seyit Kılıç, Yetkin Yıldız and Ali Akkuş as suspects.
The 13 journalists are charged with “attempting to overthrow the constitutional order” and “attempting to overthrow the government of the Republic of Turkey,” in connection with the 15 July coup attempt. They previously stood trial for “membership of a terrorist organisation” but were released 31 March. All but one of them were rearrested on the new charges.
The managing editor of the newspaper Evrensel, Çağrı Sarı, and former copyrights owner of the newspaper Arif Koşar each received five-month prison sentences on 6 June. They were convicted of “Denigrating the Turkish Nation, the State of the Republic of Turkey, the Agencies and Institutions of the State.” The charges were regarding a story published in Evrensel on Nusaybin.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Mapping Media Freedom
Click on the bubbles to view reports or double-click to zoom in on specific regions. The full site can be accessed at https://mappingmediafreedom.org/[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”91878″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
Warning: Attempt to read property "term_id" on null in /home/jwkxumhx/public_html/newsite02may/wp-content/plugins/divi-overlays/divi-overlays.php on line 2979
Warning: Attempt to read property "url" on bool in /home/jwkxumhx/public_html/newsite02may/wp-content/plugins/divi-overlays/divi-overlays.php on line 2990
Warning: Undefined variable $separator_content in /home/jwkxumhx/public_html/newsite02may/wp-content/plugins/exclusive-divi/includes/modules/Divider/Divider.php on line 340
We are currently working hard to ensure that our new website is in perfect working order so we can continue to bring you the latest news, views and content from around the world. You may find that some pages are currently offline or that you are unable to find something that you are looking for. This is only temporary - and we apologise for any convenience this may cause.
Please consider subscribing to our weekly newsletter below, so that you are among the first to hear from our contributors and don't miss anything in future.
Thanks for your understanding.
?
STAY INFORMED.
Be the first to hear from uncensored writers and artists
For over 50 years, Index has published work by censored writers and artists. Subscribe to our email newsletter to get regular updates from our incredible contributors.
Warning: Undefined variable $separator_content in /home/jwkxumhx/public_html/newsite02may/wp-content/plugins/exclusive-divi/includes/modules/Divider/Divider.php on line 340
Be the first to hear from uncensored writers and artists
For over 50 years, Index has published work by censored writers and artists. Subscribe to our email newsletter to get regular updates from our incredible contributors.
?
SUPPORT OUR WORK
Index on Censorship’s work is only possible because of donations from people like you.
Please consider chipping in to help us give a voice to the voiceless:
Guests were invited to listen to actors performing excerpts from speeches by Lenin, Stalin and Putin. Guttenplan noted the speeches reminded him of the dialogue he hears in today’s political realm. “When we were listening to Lenin’s speech, I was thinking, well that doesn’t sound that different from John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn,” he said.
