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
Index on Censorship is appalled by the decision by the University of Cape Town to rescind an invitation to Danish editor Flemming Rose to deliver the annual TB Davie lecture on academic freedom – especially at a time when academic freedom is under threat around the world – and considering recent events in Turkey.
Rose, the editor responsible for publishing controversial cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in 2005, was invited last year to give the August 2016 lecture, which UCT describes as a “flagship lecture to promote academic freedom and freedom of speech” and which is organised by the university’s academic freedom committee.
What follows in the letter is an attempt by Price to justify a decision that makes a mockery of the university’s supposed defence of free speech and academic freedom.
Price – who signed an Index on Censorship letter defending academic freedom last year – begins by pointing out that no freedoms are unlimited, and highlights the limitations on free speech imposed by the South African constitution in which the right to free speech does not extend to propaganda for war, incitement of violence or advocacy of hatred. The implication of this reference is that Rose’s speech might amount in some way to one of these three. This is a dangerous and damaging route for an academic institution to take.
The letter then goes on to say that Rose’s appearance might provoke conflict on campus, pose security risks and might “retard rather than advance academic freedom on campus.” Although the letter acknowledges that the university considered holding the event as a debate with some representatives of the Muslim community – and acknowledges these representatives had been open to the idea – the letter goes on to say: “However, Mr Rose is seen by many as persona non grata and while most would protest peacefully against him, we believe there is a real danger that among those offended by the cartoons, an element may resort to violence.”
The academic freedom committee responded to Price, saying in a statement: “Academic freedom is severely compromised when security and other pragmatic considerations preclude inviting speakers who – while controversial – in no way violate our Constitutional limitations on free speech… We regret the Executive’s decision and what it reveals about the limited scope of academic freedom at UCT. Ours should be a campus on which people are free to express and contest ideas, even unpopular ones.”
The decision taken by the administration of UCT is a clear example of a type of “assassin’s veto” in which those who argue they are offended by the speech of others can use the threat of violence to silence those with whom they disagree.
Jodie Ginsberg, Index on Censorship chief executive said: “This a huge blow to free expression and academic freedom and UCT’s attempts to dress this up as otherwise are to be condemned in the strongest terms.”
The University of Cape Town rescinded an invitation to journalist and editor Flemming Rose, who had been scheduled to deliver the annual TB Davie lecture on academic freedom in August. In 2005 Rose commissioned the cartoons of the prophet Mohammed that sparked protests and riots across the world.
Regarding my thoughts on the matter and the arguments put forward as motivation for taking back the invitation I find three things important:
1. I find it disgraceful that the Vice-Chancellor Mr. Max Price puts the blame on me instead of taking responsibility for his decision. He is afraid that some people might react in certain ways to my presence. That’s not my responsibility. If they choose to act in a way that concerns the VC, it’s their decision, not mine. The VC has to hold them responsible for their actions, not me. It’s the heckler’s veto. Mr. Price talks about “the harm that unlimited freedom of expression could cause.” I don’t know any person including myself who is in favor of unlimited free speech, that’s a caricature of free speech activists. What I oppose is the kind of “I am in favor of free speech, but”-position that Mr. Price provides a classic example of. His approach to free speech would make it possible to ban any speech.
2. Mr. Price is misrepresenting my position. He writes: “Mr. Rose is regarded by many around the world as right wing, Islamophobic, someone whose statements have been deliberatively provocative, insulting and possibly amount to hate speech, and an editor of a publication that many believe took a bigoted view of freedom of expression.” He adds that I am defender of “selective blasphemy”. What are the sources for these accusations? An article from 2006 at the height of the cartoon crisis, when a lot of unchecked information and rumors were making the rounds, among them that I was working for Mossad, the KGB’s successor in Russia and the CIA. My guilt seems to be that I have met and interviewed Daniel Pipes. The other source is a review of my book The Tyranny of Silence: How One Cartoon Ignited a Global Debate on the Future of Free Speech by a Danish professor who has been biased against me and Jyllands-Posten from the outset.
I find it strange that the VC uses Peter Hervik’s review as a source of authority. Hervik labels me a “radical rightwing activist” without defining what he means by that and even worse without quoting anything from what I have said and written. I am a classical liberal. I do not defend selective blasphemy, I defend the right to blasphemy as such. To provide you with an impression of his approach let me quote from the review. He writes about me:
“Not least his enormous urge to gather any news coverage from around the world in order to show that ‘I was right and that others were wrong’.”
Sounds a bit like a fanatic, or at least that’s the impression he wants to convey.
This is what I actually wrote:
“At first I wanted to document that I was right and others were wrong. But along the way, I found out that I needed to look inward, to reflect on my own story and background. Why was this debate so important to me? Why was I from the outset, almost, instinctively, able to identify the core issue… I am fully aware that other versions exist that are no less true than my own; in some cases they may be even more complete.”
“I do have strong opinions when it comes to certain things. But I am not a person who takes an instant stand on just anything. I am a natural skeptic. I ponder at length and lose myself in layers of meaning and the many sides of an issue, I don’t see that trait as a flaw: It is the condition of modern man and indeed the core strength of secular democracies, which are founded on the idea that there is no monopoly on truth. Doubt is the germ of curiosity and critical questioning, and its prerequisite is a strong sense of self, a courage that leaves room for debate.”
A bit different than Hervik’s version, right?
To me this looks like a deliberate distortion of I was trying to say in that paragraph. Disagreement is necessary and fine but we have to present the point of view of our opponents in a more or less fair way. Anyone who needs to misrepresent the point of view of his opponent usually has a bad case.
It’s really a sign of poor judgement and bad academic standards to disinvite me on the basis of what other people say about me, when I have published a book that covers my own story, which tells how my views on politics were formed and analyses the history of tolerance and free speech. The book is not only focusing on Islam. I write about the Russian Orthodox’ Church silencing of criticism, Hindu-nationalists attacks on an Indian Muslim artist and so on and so forth. Why use second-hand sources when you can read the primary source in English and make up your mind?
This doesn’t mean that I would favour banning a “radical right wing” speaker, whatever that means. I would defend such a speaker’s right to make his case. After all, that’s the way we learn to argue against points of views that we don’t like.
3. Mr. Price is also getting the facts wrong about Jyllands-Posten and its position. The newspaper published several cartoons ridiculing Jesus, even by Kurt Westergaard, the artist that did the cartoon of the Mohammad with a bomb in his turban. The Jesus cartoons that were refused were submitted by a freelancer not a staffer, so it was like refusing any other article or cartoon by a freelancer.
In my book (the Danish version) I have included some of those and other images. Apart from Westergaard’s I have added Serrano’s Piss Christ and an image by Jens Jørgen Thorsen, a Danish artist who in 1984 painted Jesus with an erection on a public building and cartoons from the Nazi Magazine Der Stürmer, George Grosz’ drawings of a Christ-like figure equipped with a gas mask on the cross next to a canon (World War I) and Manet’s Lunch on the Green Grass. All this to show examples of images that throughout history have caused controversy.
Contrary to what Mr. Price writes, Jyllands-Posten published antisemitic cartoons and cartoons mocking the Holocaust (a full page on 4 February, 2006 at the height of the cartoon crisis) that previously had been published in Arab newspapers. We, like most other Danish newspapers, published submissions to the Iranian Holocaust cartoon contest as well. We did it, not because we support the views expressed in the cartoons (the same point goes for the Mohammed-cartoons) – publication does not mean endorsement. We did it in order for our readers to see what makes people laugh in the countries where many were so upset by the Mohammed cartoons.
Recently I have defended radical imams’ right to hate speech, and I have (in Danish) written favorably about a book by a socially conservative Norwegian Muslim (title: Is it possible to love the Koran and Norway at the same time?).
Turkey has faced severe turmoil since last Friday’s attempted military coup. While it was ultimately thwarted, 290people were left dead as of 18 July with many more injured. In response, the government has since cracked down on dissent and suspended the European Convention on Human Rights, with more than 50,000 people rounded up, sacked or suspended from their jobs.
In addition, the country has seen an increase in violations against media workers, with journalists murdered, held hostage, arrested and physically attacked, as well as having equipment confiscated or destroyed. These violations have raised concerns from the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, whose representative on freedom of the media, Dunja Mijatović, has said: “Fully recognising the difficult times that Turkey is going through, the authorities need to ensure media freedom offline and online in line with their international commitments.”
Worries over these freedoms have only increased since President Erdogan announced on Wednesday that Turkey would be in a state of emergency for the next three months, enabling the government to initiate arrests and investigations in response to the failed coup.
Here are five reports from Index on Censorship’s Mapping Media Freedom project that give us most cause for concern.
15 July, 2016: Mustafa Cambaz, a photojournalist for the pro-government newspaper Yeni Safak, was shot and killed by soldiers during the failed coup attempt. Earlier that day, he had tweeted: “We are taking the streets following our commander-in-chief Erdogan’s call and order”. The Committee to Protect Journalists was quick to condemn the attack, with the Europe and Central Asia Program coordinator Nina Ognianova calling on “Turkish authorities to punish those responsible for killing Mustafa Cambaz to the full extent of the law”.
15 July, 2016: Renegade members of the Turkish militaryseized control of several media outlets and studios throughout Turkey, taking hostages and disrupting broadcasts. In Istanbul, soldiers gained control over the Dogan Media Center, which contains multiple news outlets including Hurriyet newspaper, the English-language Hurriyet Daily News and television stations CNN Turk and Kanal D.
Hostages were also taken in Ankara, where a news anchor for state broadcaster Turkish Radio and Television was forced to read a televised statement announcing the coup attempt at gunpoint. All hostages were eventually released and broadcasting resumed as normal by the morning of 16 July.
17 July: Turkey’s telecommunications regulatory body, TIB, blocked access to five websites including media outlets Gazetport, Haberdar, Medyascope, ABC Gazetesi, and Can Erzincan TV. Twenty more were blocked two days later following approval from a judge.
18 July: A pro-government Twitter user released a list of journalists who were accused of involvement in the coup and therefore subject to arrest. Journalists from both state and privately run media outlets were included on the list, which was circulated via social media at a time when public authority figures began to take measures to shut down websites that were critical of the government.
19 July: At least 34 journalists had their press credentials revoked in the aftermath of the coup. The decertifications impacted journalists from a variety of media outlets, including the daily newspaper Meydan, the liberal Taraf, Nokta magazine and Irmak TV. The Directorate General of Press and Information of Turkey stated the decertifications were done for the sake of national security in the aftermath of the coup.
Mapping Media Freedom logged a number of threats to press freedom from Turkey over the past seven days. Here are the rest of the reports:
15 July: One hour after the first reports of the coup attempt, social media sites, including Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube, were blocked. Access was eventually restored.
15 July: A photographer for Hurriyet, Selcuk Samiloglu, was physically attacked by a group of men while attempting to cover clashes on the Bosphorus Bridge.
15 July: CNN Turk cameraman Ahmet Akpolat was restrained by the neck and verbally threatened by military personnel when he refused to comply with a demand to hand over a tape during a raid of the Dogan TV building in Istanbul. His camera was broken.
19 July: The office of Istanbul newspaper Gazetem Istanbul was vandalised by several dozen men claiming the publication had supported the failed coup.
19 July: Valentin Trushnin, a reporter for Russian TV channel REN, was revealed to be on Turkey’s “banned foreigners list” when he was taken into custody at Ataturk Airport.
19 July: Turkish Radio and Television Supreme Council canceled broadcasting licenses for 24 TV channels and radio stations due to their alleged ties to the Gülen movement.
20 July: Local police barred LeMan, a satirical Turkish magazine, from printing and distributing its newest issue, a special edition on the failed coup.
20 July: Access to Wikileaks was blocked after it released 30,000 emails from President Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP).
20 July: The office of Meydan was searched and editor-in-chief Levent Kenez and editorial manager Gulizar Baki were arrested. They have since been released.
Although the USA is considered to have relativelygenerous freedoms of speech and the press protected under the First Amendment to the US Constitution, these freedoms have their limits. Many whistleblowers are not afforded protection in the USA and are subjected to lengthy prison terms after disclosing classified information to the public.
Chelsea Manning’s suicide attempt on 5 July, six years into her 35-year sentence, highlights the severity the USA practices when sentencing whistleblowers. Manning was responsible for the leaks of classified US military information to Wikileaks including videos, incident reports from the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, information on detainees at Guantanamo and thousands of Department of State cables. She was sentenced on 21 August 2013 to 35 years at the maximum-security US Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth.
Manning’s case appears to be the rule, not the exception, in the USA.
Jeffrey Sterling
Considered to be a whistleblower by some, Jeffrey Sterling, who worked for the CIA from 1993 to 2002, was charged under the Espionage Act with mishandling national defense information in 2010. Sterling was sentenced to three and a half years in prison for his contributions to New York Times journalist James Risen’s book, State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration, which detailed the failed CIA Operation Merlin that may have inadvertently aided the Iranian nuclear weapons program. Risen was subpoenaed twice to testify in the case United States v Sterling but refused, resulting in a seven-year legal battle.
On 11 May 2015, at Sterling’s sentencing, judge Leonie Brinkema stated that although she was moved by his professional history, she wanted to send a message to other whistleblowers of the “price to be paid” when revealing government secrets.
Stephen Jin-Woo Kim
Stephen Kim is a former US Department of State contractor who, on 11 June 2009, spoke to Fox News reporter James Rosen about North Korean plans for a nuclear bomb test. Kim allegedly sought Rosen out after becoming frustrated that there was little being done in the Department of State in response to the threats of nuclear tests in North Korea, tests that were ultimately carried out. Fox News published Rosen’s article, North Korea Intends to Match U.N. Resolution With New Nuclear Test, which resulted in an FBI investigation. Kim subsequently pleaded guilty to a single felony count of unauthorised disclosure of national defense information and was sentenced to 13 months in prison on 7 February 2014.
John Kiriakou
John Kiriakou, a former CIA officer, was charged with disclosing information to journalists on several occasions, including revealing the use of torture on Abu Zubaydah and connecting a covert operative to a specific undercover operation. Kiriakou accepted a plea bargain that spared the journalists he had spoken with from having to testify by pleading guilty to one count of violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.
On 28 February 2013, Kiriakou began serving his 30-month sentence. He has stated that his case was more about punishment for exposing torture than leaking information and that he would “do it all over again”.
Edward Snowden
Although the most famous whistleblower on this list has not been tried and sentenced, Edward Snowden could face up to 30 years in prison for his multiple felony charges under the World War I-era Espionage Act. Snowden was charged on 14 June 2013 for his role in leaking classified information from the National Security Agency, notably a global surveillance initiative.
Snowden has expressed a willingness to go to prison for his actions but refuses to be used as a “deterrent to people trying to do the right thing in difficult situations” as so many whistleblowers often are.
Barrett Brown
The political climate in the US has become so hostile towards leaks that even journalists can face repercussions for their involvement with whistleblowers. American journalist and essayist Barrett Brown’s case became well-known after he was arrested for copying and pasting a hyperlink to millions of leaked emails from Stratfor, an American private intelligence company, from one chat room to another. The leak itself had been orchestrated by Jeremy Hammond, who is serving 10 years in prison for his participation, and did not involve Brown. Brown faced a sentence of up to 102 years in prison, once again for sharing a hyperlink, before the 12 counts of aggravated identity theft and trafficking in stolen data charges were dropped in 2013.
Although the dismissal of these charges was heralded as a victory for press freedom, Brown was still convicted of two counts of being an accessory after the fact and obstructing the execution of a search warrant. On 22 January 2015, Brown was sentenced to 63 months in prison and ordered to pay $890,250 in fines and restitution to Stratfor.
The failed 15 July coup, bloody and despicable, delivered a lethal blow to the already crippled democratic order in Turkey. The cabal behind the putsch has become a midwife to Turkey’s “autogolpe” or self-coup. With every step, President Reccep Tayyip Erdogan and his Justice and Development Party (AKP) backers have introduced further restrictive sanctions.
This creeping self-coup is a prospect I raised in early 2014 with a long analysis for the German edition of Le Monde Diplomatique entitled Putsch im Zeitlupe. In that article I pointed out the parallels between the career of Alberto Fujimori, the former Peruvian president who is in prison for his corruption, and the increasingly autocratic methods employed by Erdogan.
The reaction to the totally unacceptable coup so far sadly has endorsed my theory. The reformatting of the Turkish state is now in fast-forward mode with a massive purge underway.
Tension has spilled over into academia. The head of the Supreme Board of High Education (YÖK), which itself is the product of the 1980 military coup d’état, called all the presidents of universities to an emergency meeting. It was followed by two drastic steps: YÖK issued a directive demanding the resignations of 1,577 deans across the country and, on Wednesday morning, blocked travel for all academics who were travelling abroad. YÖK also ordered all Turkish academics resident in universities in other countries to return home.
The media has been strangled even further. Within the past 48 hours, around 20 news sites were blocked by the Telecommunications Authority (TIB). On Tuesday night, the High Board of Radio and TV (RTUK) cancelled the licences of 24 TV and radio channels. The office of the press directorate announced that the press cards of 34 editors and reporters were cancelled. Officials cited “linkage with FETO structures” when explaining the bans. According to Turkish authorities, FETO is the terrorist organisation headed by the US-based cleric Fetullah Gulen, who has created a parallel state and is behind the failed coup.
The daily Özgür Düşünce, now accused of being an extension of “FETO terror organisation”, announced on Wednesday it was shutting down. The irony is that the daily that had assembled the finest core of liberal columnists who for many years struggled for a democratic order.
Also on Wednesday the editor of Meydan daily Levent Kenez and managing editor Gülizar Baki were arrested during a police raid without any explanation. Both are first class journalists.
Another drama has been developing around Wikileaks, which has published nearly 300,000 emails along with thousands of attached files from 762 mailboxes that allegedly belong to email domain of the AKP. The e-mails span between 2010 and June 2016.
Wikileaks was banned after some hours. “Turks will likely be censored to prevent them reading our pending release of 100k+ docs on politics leading up to the coup,” an earlier statement by Wikileaks read. It was later reported that ”WikiLeaks’ infrastrucutre was under sustained attack” following its announcement.
Concerns are at the alert level internationally. The International Federations of Journalists and the European Federations of Journalists contacted the Council of Europe about a series of new press freedom violations. Mapping Media Freedom has logged 18 violations of press freedom aimed at news outlets or professionals since the night of the coup attempt.
All journalists affiliated with the independent outlets know they have to work on the realistic presumption that conditions will worsen for them. If the Erdogan-led government has decided to deepen the path towards a self-coup and to utilise the extraordinary circumstances to ruthlessly settle scores with all dissent and opposition, the presumption is legitimate. All segments of civil society may soon be unable to avoid feeling they have been “taken hostage” as a result of the coup attempt that has pushed Turkey back decades.
The 6 March 2016 edition of Yarına Bakış, an independent newspaper print houses now refuse to publish
On Tuesday 19 July, Turkey’s independent and critical journalists, academics and law experts woke up to another day of concern and fear.
The uncertainty is driven by the lack of assurances on media freedom or even a basic respect for the rule of law. At a time when the country is purging its administration of alleged coup plotters, its leaders should be calming nerves and calling for transparency. On the contrary, President Reccep Tayyip Erdoğan and Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım appear to be in favour the reintroduction of the death penalty.
The media is the most fragile element in the middle of the mess.
Arzu Yıldız, a rigorously independent expert reporter on judicial affairs, was one of the first to feel the heat. An arrest order — with no reason given — was issued against her but the police who came to her flat early on Monday morning were unable to find her. She later tweeted that, since she “had nothing to fear” she would surrender to the police. So far, no further news has been heard about her.
Colleagues I spoke to share the view that by silencing such an expert reporter the authorities may be intending to erect a wall to hide what has been “really” happening — what many of us see as a massive purge within the judiciary — where more than 2,500 members (judges and prosecutors) are sought under a mass arrest order. Yıldız knows many of them, who they are and what they stand for.
Hours after the collapse of the coup attempt, a long list of journalists “to be arrested” went into circulation. Most of them are either editors or columnists — mainly liberals and leftists — who have been writing for newspapers as Özgür Düşünce, Yarına Bakış and Yeni Hayat. They have all now been smeared as affiliates of the Gülen Movement. Can Dündar, the editor of Cumhuriyet daily, is also among those targeted.
Since the day after the bloody coup attempt a media blackout has spread. More than 10 news websites have been shut down. On Monday night it was reported that several print houses refused to print Yarına Bakış and Yeni Hayat dailies, with no reason given. The editors feel that political pressure or fear lie behind them. Yarına Bakış issued an editorial online stating that it was forced to suspend its print edition, citing oppressive measures. On Tuesday, the liberal Özgür Düşünce daily, many of whose columnists found themselves to be victims of the witch hunt, announced it was also considering discontinuing its print edition. The independent website Haberdar, that was the first to break the coup attempt story, is to radically downsize, closing its newsroom and firing staff, according to inside sources.
There seems to be agreement among Turkey’s down-trodden, critical journalists and their foreign colleagues that the “dark times” will be long lasting and it may spell an end to independent journalism altogether.
Many fear a crackdown will sweep through the Turkish and Kurdish media. There are concerns over the closure of one free outlet after the other, the financial struggles these organisations face and the journalists forced into unemployment, declared as “public enemies” or “pariahs” and left without mediums to report and comment. The situation could not be any more serious.
As Greece tries to deal with around 50,000 stranded refugees on its soil after Austria and the western Balkan countries closed their borders, attention has turned to the living conditions inside the refugee camps. Throughout the crisis, the Greek and international press has faced major difficulties in covering the crisis.
“It’s clear that the government does not want the press to be present when a policeman assaults migrants,” Marios Lolos, press photographer and head of the Union of Press Photographers of Greece said in an interview with Index on Censorship. “When the police are forced to suppress a revolt of the migrants, they don’t want us to be there and take pictures.”
Last summer, Greece had just emerged from a long and painful period of negotiations with its international creditors only to end up with a third bailout programme against the backdrop of closed banks and steep indebtedness. At the same time, hundreds of refugees were arriving every day to the Greek islands such as Chios, Kos and Lesvos. It was around this time that the EU’s executive body, the European Commission, started putting pressure on Greece to build appropriate refugee centres and prevent this massive influx from heading to the more prosperous northern countries.
It took some months, several EU Summits, threats to kick Greece out of the EU free movement zone, the abrupt closure of the internal borders and a controversial agreement between the EU and Turkey to finally stem migrant influx to Greek islands. The Greek authorities are now struggling to act on their commitments to their EU partners and at the same time protect themselves from negative coverage.
Although there were some incidents of press limitations during the first phase of the crisis in the islands, Lolos says that the most egregious curbs on the press occurred while the Greek authorities were evacuating the military area of Idomeni, on the border with Macedonia.
In May 2016, the Greek police launched a major operation to evict more than 8,000 refugees and migrants bottlenecked at a makeshift Idomeni camp since the closure of the borders. The police blocked the press from covering the operation.
“Only the photographer of the state-owned press agency ANA and the TV crew of the public TV channel ERT were allowed to be there,” Lolos said, while the Union’s official statement denounced “the flagrant violation of the freedom and pluralism of press in the name of the safety of photojournalists”.
“The authorities said that they blocked us for our safety but it is clear that this was just an excuse,” Lolos explained.
In early December 2015, during another police operation to remove migrants protesting against the closed borders from railway tracks, two photographers and two reporters were detained and prevented from doing their jobs, even after showing their press IDs, Lolos said.
While the refugees were warmly received by the majority of the Greek people, some anti-refugee sentiment was evident, giving Greece’s neo-nazi, far-right Golden Dawn party an opportunity to mobilise, including against journalists and photographers covering pro- and anti-refugee demonstrations.
On the 8 April 2016, Vice photographer Alexia Tsagari and a TV crew from the Greek channel E TV were attacked by members of Golden Dawn while covering an anti-refugee demonstration in Piraeus. According to press reports, after the anti-refugee group was encouraged by Golden Dawn MP Ilias Kasidiaris to attack anti-fascists, a man dressed in black, who had separated from Golden Dawn’s ranks, slapped and kicked Tsagari in the face.
“Since then I have this fear that I cannot do my work freely,” Tsagari told Index on Censorship, adding that this feeling of insecurity becomes even more intense, considering that the Greek riot police were nearby when the attack happened but did not intervene.
Following the EU-Turkey agreement in late March which stemmed the migrant flows, the Greek government agreed to send migrants, including asylum seekers, back to Turkey, recognising it as “safe third country”. As a result, despite the government’s initial disapproval, most of the first reception facilities have turned into overcrowded closed refugee centres.
“Now we need to focus on the living conditions of asylum seekers and migrants inside the state-owned facilities. However, the access is limited for the press. There is a general restriction of access unless you have a written permission from the ministry,” Lolos said, adding that the daily living conditions in some centres are disgraceful.
Ola Aljari is a journalist and refugee from Syria who fled to Germany and now works for Mapping Media Freedom partners the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom. She visited Greece twice to cover refugee stories and confirms that restrictions on journalists are increasing.
“With all the restrictions I feel like the authorities have something to hide,” Aljari told Index on Censorship, also mentioning that some Greek journalists have used bribes in order to get authorisation.
Greek journalist, Nikolas Leontopoulos, working along with a mission of foreign journalists from a major international media outlet to the closed centre of VIAL in Chios experienced recently this “reluctance” from Greek authorities to let the press in.
“Although the ministry for migration had sent an email to the VIAL director granting permission to visit and report inside VIAL, the director at first denied the existence of the email and later on did everything in his power to put obstacles and cancel our access to the hotspot,” Leontopoulos told Index on Censorship, commenting that his behaviour is “indicative” of the authorities’ way of dealing with the press.
Index has released a special collection of apartheid-era articles from the Index on Censorship magazine archives to celebrate Nelson Mandela day 2016. Holly Raiborn has selected the collection, tracing the breadth of writing during the apartheid era from authors both in the country and in exile. The articles selected trace the history of this period in South Africa’s history. Significant South African writers, including Nadine Gordimer, Don Mattera, Pieter-Dirk Uys and Desmond Tutu, discuss the impacts this era of oppression had on themselves, their peers and their country. The collection will now form a reading list available to students who are researching the apartheid years, and will be available via Sage Publishing in university libraries.
Before 1948 “apartheid” was just a word in Afrikaans with a simple meaning: separateness. However, over the course of the next 50 years, the word “apartheid” would take on a new level of significance. The connotation of the word grew darker with every dissident banned, prisoner tortured, child left uneducated and home destroyed. Apartheid is no longer just a word; it carries the history of brutality, censorship and maltreatment of South Africans. For a limited period, Index and Sage are making the collection free to non-subscribers. For those who want to study the history of censorship further, Index on Censorship magazine’s archives are held at the Bishopsgate Institute in London and are free to visit.
Nadine Gordimer, Apartheid and “The Primary Homeland”
1972; vol. 1, 3-4: pp. 25-29
An address regarding the 1972 plans of the South African government to abolish the right of appeal against decisions brought by the State Publications Control Board, effectively ridding writers of a means to combat the rulings of government-appointed censors. The censorship in South Africa at this time caused a breakdown in communication between “the sections of a people carved up into categories of colour and language.”
An extensive report on the state of the “free” press in South Africa prepared for the United Nations’ Unit on Apartheid in November 1972. Ginwala posits that apartheid attempts to segregate freedom and this attempt “extinguishes freedom itself”.
A personal narrative reflecting the experiences of Robert Royston as a black poet in South Africa during a period of popularity for black poetry amongst white readers. Royston describes a disconnect between the language he speaks and the language understood by the government and white citizens, although they technically share the same tongue.
An article by a New York Sunday Times staff writer arguing that the proposed cultural boycott would ultimately negatively affect black South Africans more than white South Africans who were merely irritated. Slater feared black South Africans suffer from feelings of isolation from the outside world because of the cultural boycott.
A discussion regarding the often contradictory aspects of the South African “free” press in which newspapers censor themselves. Strict laws preventing communism, sabotage and terrorism were often twisted to prevent the publications of black viewpoints.
In the UK in the 1970s, news about South Africa was contributed by the white minority while black South Africans were not interviewed by major European news outlets about events predominantly affecting their community such as the Soweto riots. This article discusses the clear racial bias, blaming it for the misinformation and misconceptions in Europe about apartheid-era South Africa.
A report regarding the glaring health violations within the overwhelmingly black South African mental hospitals that were largely ignored due to racial factors and censorship brought about with the 1959 Prisons Act. This act made reporting “false information” on prisons or prisoners punishable with jail time or fines which led to prison and mental patient camp, conditions being largely neglected in the media.
An article about a significant yet short-lived South African journal, Bandwagon, whose purpose was to unite individuals banned under the Suppression of Communism Act. The act featured strictly enforced limits on social life and essentially made any meetings, social or otherwise, illegal for a banned person; therefore, the impact and importance of this publication should not be understated.
Hachten discusses the new found power of being a black journalist (the literacy rate of black South Africans had recently surpassed whites) and the growing hazards of the profession in the late 1970s. Journalists were arrested for reporting the events of the Soweto riots and faced constant police and legislative pressure on top of fines and censorship imposed by the white-controlled newspapers they had no choice but to work for.
An address from a banned poet who pointed out the cruelty of white South African society so that they may never claim ignorance to the atrocities. He questions why his words are deemed so dangerous that he is not allowed to attend social gatherings like birthdays and funerals
Gordimer hypothesised that the successful appeal of her novel’s banning, and that of many novels by other white writers, was due to the fact that she is white. She argued that South Africa would never be rid of censorship until it was rid of apartheid.
Woods wrote about the shift from editors of South African newspapers facing fines for disobeying censorship statutes to jail time in the late 1970s and explained that this shift signalled that dissent and bold writing was permitted in white politics but would not be permitted from black perspectives. He argued that the reason the government did not censor the press entirely was because they enjoyed the façade of a “free press” and there was no reason for them to need full censorship.
Tomaseli explained that censorship was often as financially driven as it is culturally. He wrote that censorship interferes at three stages, namely during: finance, distribution and through state censorship law. Tomaseli expands on the circumstances that led to many different films being banned or harshly edited.
Mzamane claimed that the Bantu Education Act of 1956 was clearly a ploy to create compliant Africans within a society increasingly controlled by Afrikaners. Bantu schools were essentially vocational training for servitude to whites and textbooks were blatant indoctrination, he argued.
A clever take on the South African censor. Hope addresses the reasons and methodology of the South African censor with tongue and cheek commentary as he reviews the Publications Appeal Board: Digest of Decisions. This collection is comprised of the totality of decisions made by the South African Publications Appeal Board.
Sepamla writes about the struggles of continuing to write under such strict scrutiny by censors after the banning of his latest novel, A Ride on the Whirlwind. He speaks of the disenchantment experienced by any writer that has faced censorship and specifically black South African writers who faced this treatment all too often.
Music was divided along race and class lines. Music was banned under the Publications Act if it was found to be unsafe to the state, harmful to the relationship between members of any sections of society, blasphemous, or obscene Songs with even symbolic mention of freedom or revolution were banned.
Reverend Pityana wrote of the paradox that Christianity teaches that all are equal under god but the church in South Africa still degraded and segregated. He writes that The Bible teaches that all are created in God’s image and the plight of the Jews and other marginalised groups within the Bible give hope, guidance and reassurance to those suffering under apartheid.
Tlali, a black female South African novelist, addresses the added difficulties of being black and a woman in Afrikaner-controlled society. She speaks both from personal experience and about the struggles of her peers.
An honest first-hand account of the Soweto riots by a 20-year-old unemployed black South African. Rantete wrote a sympathetic eyewitness report of the September riot and the first reaction of the South African authorities to confiscate and ban it.
The white South African novelist on the intimidation tactics and stalking committed by the security police after his controversial novel, Cry, The Beloved Country, was published. He notes that he suspects his treatment would have been even worse had he been black.
Former editor of the Cape Times, who was awarded the International Federation of Newspaper Publishers’ Golden Pen of Freedom in 1986, Heard was dismissed from his position after his interview with banned leader of the African National Congress Oliver Tambo. Heard speaks about 16 years of editing under apartheid and the circumstances surrounding his dismissal in August 1987.
‘The importance of international pressure in giving a measure of protection to the South African press cannot be overestimated’ wrote the co-editor of the Johannesburg Weekly Mail in this assessment of Botha’s policy towards the alternative press. Harber offered a compelling plea for protection of the South African alternative press by the international media.
An extensive review of restrictions in South Africa at that time including the Defence Act, Police Act, Prisons Act, Internal Security Act and the Publications Act. The writers offer suggestions for the safety and protection of journalists in the future.
Rive discusses the racial factors that have contributed to his writing style and the works of any black writer in South Africa. He emphasises the hypocrisy of the society he lives in which will criticise black writers as simplistic but not allow quality education and where the books of black writers sitting in libraries that they are not allowed to enter.
Albie Sachs was asked by Index on Censorship to look ahead to constitutional reform that was not foreseeable at that point and how to enshrine freedom of expression in a post-apartheid South Africa. Four months later came the unbanning of the ANC on 2 February, the release of Nelson Mandela on 11 February and his reunion with Oliver Tambo in Sweden on 12 March, all of which promised real change. These are extracts from the conversation about a future South Africa. He offers suggestions for the then-looming transition from apartheid to democracy.
In May 1986 Oliver Tambo, president of the African National Congress, was interviewed by Andrew Graham. The ANC president discussed the beginning of the end for apartheid and traces the lineage of the racism that fuelled the apartheid for nearly 50 years. Tambo optimistically plans for a new reign of government made up of representation that actually reflects the populous.
On 11 July 1979, Nadine Gordimer’s novel Burger’s Daughter was banned by the South African directorate of publications on the grounds – among others – that the book was a threat to state security. After an international outcry the director of publications appealed against the decision of his own censorship committee to the publications’ appeal board. In this article, Nadine Gordimer reflects on these events, and on the new censorship policy they heralded. Gordimer reflects on censorship under previous administrations and what she expects from President FW de Klerk’s reign as president.
A reflection on how far South Africa had come and still had to go by this frequently banned author. Using the Descartes method, Gordimer considers the role reversal that has occurred in post-apartheid South Africa as her once banned colleagues ascend to political power.
An Index interview with Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Tutu discusses the urgency of healing the past before South Africa can truly move on to a brighter future. This brighter future was to be achieved with the aid of the Truth Commission. He argued that only honesty, compassion and forgiveness would lead to national unity in South Africa, even if that means prosecuting former ANC members. He stresses that the commission’s goal is reparations and not compensation.
Famed satirist Pieter-Dirk Uys questioned if information about the atrocities of the apartheid could actually be uncovered by the Truth Commission. Uys asked how the country could heal when so many willing participants in the apartheid already seemed eager to forget or to forge their own accounts of history to avoid blame. His pessimistic view contrasted with that of Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s.
All articles from Index on Censorship magazine, from 1972 to 2016, are available via Sage in most university libraries. More information about subscribing to the magazine in print or digitally here.
Index on Censorship is delighted to be one of the nine groups honoured by the Turkish Journalists Association (TGC) with this year’s Press Freedom Prize.
TGC announced on Wednesday that it was awarding a coalition of international press freedom organisations with the award “for the unique solidarity unparalleled in the past, it showed against the assaults on press freedom in Turkey, for its efforts to bring to international platforms the violation of rights and for instilling in their Turkish colleagues the feeling that they are not alone.”
The organisations – Reporters Without Frontiers, Committee for the Protection of Journalists, International PEN, International Press Institute, Index on Censorship, International Federation of Journalists, European Federation of Journalists, Ethical Journalism Network, Article 19 and World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers – have worked together in a number of ways to bring attention to the increasing attacks on media freedom by the Turkish government.
This includes press freedom monitoring and advocacy missions, petitions and joint statements to governmental and international bodies in an effort to highlight the dangerous environment in which journalists now operate.
“This is a great honour,” said Index senior advocacy officer Melody Patry, who took part in the coalition’s emergency press freedom mission last October. “Members of the press in Turkey are facing relentless attacks and for the coalition to receive this prize sends a strong message that international solidarity is crucial to supporting media freedom in the country.”
Press freedom in Turkey has declined particularly rapidly in the last six months. Some 70 incidents have been recorded on Index’s Mapping Media Freedom database since the beginning of the year, including the death of three journalists and 34 incidents of arrest and detention.
Charges of acquiring and divulging state secrets, membership of, and administration of a terrorist organisation brought against five journalists, including four former members of Taraf newspaper’s editorial and investigative staff, must be dropped and one of the accused, Mehmet Baransu, must be released immediately and unconditionally, PEN International, English PEN, German PEN, Swedish PEN, PEN America, ARTICLE 19, the Committee to Protect Journalists, the European Federation of Journalists, the Ethical Journalism Network, IFEX, Index on Censorship, the International Federation of Journalists, Global Editors Network and Reporters Without Borders said in a joint statement today.
‘These charges are a clear infringement of the right to free expression and a free press in Turkey and must be dropped, and Baransu released. It’s yet another example of abuses by the Turkish authorities of the problematic Anti-Terror law to silence investigative journalists. The law must be reformed without delay,‘ said Carles Torner, Executive Director of PEN International.
The charges concern Taraf editor, Ahmet Altan; deputy editor, Yasemin Çongar; Taraf journalists Mehmet Baransu, Yıldıray Oğur and, a fifth journalist, Tuncay Opçin. All five journalists are facing charges of acquiring and divulging documents concerning the security of the state and its political interests punishable by up to 50 years in prison. Mehmet Baransu and Tuncay Opçin are facing additional charges of ‘membership and administration of a terrorist organization’ and face a possible 75-year prison term.
The charges are detailed in a 276 page indictment, which was accepted on 20 June 2016 by the Istanbul High Criminal Court, 16 months after the initiation of the investigation. Baransu has been held in pre-trial detention since his arrest on 2 March 2015. The journalists’ next hearing is due to be held on 2 September 2016.
The indictments and the materials presented by the prosecutor in relation to the case are open to very serious doubts, suggesting that the charges are politically motivated.
While large parts of the indictment against the journalists focuses on a series of controversial news reports, titled the ‘Balyoz (Sledgehammer) Coup Plan’[1], published in Taraf between 20-29 January 2010, about an alleged military coup to overthrow the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government, the charges do not, in fact, relate to this story. Indeed, the indictment does not suggest Taraf’s decision to publish the Balyoz papers was criminal and Balyoz does not figure in the specific charges presented at all.
Instead, the indictment brings charges of acquiring and divulging state secrets against the five journalists concerning the ‘Egemen Operation’ plan – an out of date military war plan to respond to a Greek invasion. However Taraf did not publish state secrets regarding this operation, as a prior judgment of the Turkish Constitutional Court affirms.
‘Beyond the simple problem of a lack of evidence, there are serious concerns regarding the indictment which suggest it has been written to obfuscate facts and to implicate the journalists in involvement in the Balyoz case, an already controversial story, to limit public support for their situation,’ said Erol Önderoğlu from Reporters Without Borders (RSF).
Additionally, 46 pages of the indictment prepared against the former Taraf journalists have been copied directly from the indictment against Cumhuriyet journalists, Can Dündar and Erdem Gül, who exposed illegal arms transfers by the Turkish Intelligence Service (MIT) into Syria and were sentenced to prison for five years for this crime. The degree of direct reproduction is evident from the fact that one paragraph of the indictment even starts with the words “The Defendant Can Dündar.”
‘The fact that large parts of the indictment have been copied from another high profile case targeting journalists raises significant concerns about the motivation and professionalism of the Prosecutor: not only does this call into question the extent to which the facts and evidence of the case have been properly examined, it reinforces concerns that the charges may be politically motivated’ said Katie Morris, Head of the Europe and Central Asia Programme at Article 19.
PEN International, English PEN, German PEN, Swedish PEN, PEN America, ARTICLE 19, the Committee to Protect Journalists, the European Federation of Journalists, the Ethical Journalism Network, IFEX, Index on Censorship, the International Federation of Journalists, Global Editors Network and Reporters Without Borders call on the Turkish authorities to immediately and unconditionally release Baransu and to drop all charges that the five journalists face as a result of their work in public interest. Such legal actions against journalists, result in a pervasive ‘’chilling-effect’’ among the rest of the media in the country, which is compounded where fundamental fair trial safeguards are not upheld.
________
[1] These reports were based on a series of classified documents and CDs acquired from an anonymous source. They led to widespread discussion in the country, which prompted Turkish prosecutors to initiate a controversial trial against the alleged coup-plotters named in the documents. The army officers implicated in the alleged coup plot revealed by Taraf have repeatedly claimed that the evidence against them was fabricated. In 2014, Turkey’s highest court ruled that the authorities had violated the officers’ right to a fair trial, leading to fresh hearings and mass releases from prison; including releases for several officers that had previously received sentences of up to 20 years in prison.
“Censorship is as much with us as it ever was,” said author, lawyer and early Index supporter Louis Blom-Cooper, in a speech to mark the 250th issue of Index on Censorship magazine, during its launch at London’s magCulture on Tuesday 12 July.
The event saw special performances by actor Simon Callow, who read Maya Angelou’s poem Caged Bird, Norwegian singer Moddi, and spoken-word artist Jemima Foxtrot, who had created a poem especially for the occasion.
When the first issue of Index on Censorship magazine was printed in 1972, the world was still in the grip of the Cold War, the internet was embryonic for high-end researchers and Britain had yet to join the European common market.
The next 249 issues chronicled the pressures faced by free speakers and free thinkers all over the world — from Argentina’s Dirty War to the rise of China’s Great Firewall. Against this backdrop of change, Index has remained committed to covering unreported stories and publishing silenced voices.
The event, The Power of Print, was held as a celebration of the magazine’s longevity and constant vigilance, as well as a tribute to all who have shared their stories and struggles.
Rachael Jolley, editor of Index on Censorship magazine, emphasised the importance of magazine culture in our lives today, despite the rise of modern technology. In a short speech she said, “Index is a global magazine read by people all over the world in 172 countries”. She said the global reach has made an impact in promoting the cause of freedom of expression, and reminded those attending of the dangers journalists face worldwide. The latest issue has a special report on the risks of reporting.
“The power of magazines remains as relevant as ever,” added Jeremy Leslie, owner of magCulture, a new specialist magazine shop and a new stockist of the magazine.
Order your full-colour print copy of our journalism in danger magazine special here, or take out a digital subscription from anywhere in the world via Exact Editions (just £18* for the year). Each magazine sale helps Index on Censorship fight for free expression worldwide.
*Will be charged at local exchange rate outside the UK.
Magazines are also on sale in bookshops, including at the BFI and MagCulture in London, Home in Manchester, Calton Books in Glasgow and News from Nowhere in Liverpool as well as on Amazon and iTunes. MagCulture will ship anywhere in the world.
Norwegian musician Moddi has collated an album of songs from around the world that had been banned, censored or silenced. Unsongs includes cover versions of songs from countries including China, Russia, Mexico and Vietnam, on topics such as drugs, war and religion. Index has put together a playlist of some of these songs to coincide with the release of the 250th issue of Index on Censorship magazine, which includes a feature by Moddi about the inspiration behind the album.
1. Izhar Ashdot – A Matter of Habit
Israeli singer Izhar Ashdot was preparing to sing A Matter of Habit on army radio station Galatz in 2012 when he received a message saying it wasn’t welcome. The station stating “We should avoid celebrating a song that demonises our soldiers.” The song describes the fear and confusion of Israeli soldiers, until “killing is a matter of habit”.
2. Pussy Riot – Punk Prayer
Punk Prayer became internationally known after Russian feminist punk band Pussy Riot staged a performance of the song at Moscow’s Cathedral of Christ the Saviour. The group said it was a protest against the Orthodox church’s support for Russia’s President Vladimir Putin. Three members of the group were sentenced to two years in prison for “hooliganism motivated by religious hatred”.
3. Kate Bush – Army Dreamers
Kate Bush’s 1980 hit Army Dreamers tells the story of a mother’s grief after her son is killed in battle, and reflects the brutality and emotional effects of military conflict. During the Gulf War the BBC were wary of playing songs with an anti-war sentiment and told to think carefully before playing them.
4. Victor Jara – Prayer for a Worker
Chilean folk singer Victor Jara was killed in the 1973 military coup that overthrew socialist president Salvador Allende. His songs followed a theme of peace and social justice. A Prayer for a Worker highlights the failed attempts of the Christian Democratic Party and the Socialist Party to reconcile before the coup.
5. Los Tucanes di Tijuana – My Three Animals
In their 1990s narco-corrido (drugs ballad) Mis Tres Animals, Mexican group Los Tucanes di Tijuana sing of drug-trafficking but disguise cocaine, marijuana and heroin with the names of animals: a parrot, a goat and a rooster. The song made it on to the radio thanks to this word play, but narco-corridos are often censored as they are blamed for encouraging drug use and trafficking.
6. Richard Burgess – Eli Geva
Eli Geva was an soldier who refused to lead his forces into Beirut during the 1982 Lebanon war. His act caused a great deal of controversy in Israel, and Geva became an icon for the peace movement. This ode to the Israeli commander was written by Richard Burgess and performed by Norwegian singer Birgitte Grimstad, but Grimstad was warned against singing the song during a tour in Israel. The above video is Moddi’s cover version.
7. Billie Holiday – Strange Fruit
Strange Fruit, originally recorded by Billie Holiday in 1939, was a protest against the brutality and racism in the United States, particularly the lynching of African Americans. Holiday approached both her record label and producer about recording the song but they turned it down, fearing a negative reaction. Instead a friend, Milt Gabler, helped her to record and distribute the song after her a cappella version of it bought him to tears.
Order your full-colour print copy of our journalism in danger magazine special here, or take out a digital subscription from anywhere in the world via Exact Editions (just £18* for the year). Each magazine sale helps Index on Censorship fight for free expression worldwide.
*Will be charged at local exchange rate outside the UK.
Magazines are also on sale in bookshops, including at the BFI and MagCulture in London, Home in Manchester, Carlton Books in Glasgow and News from Nowhere in Liverpool as well as on Amazon and iTunes. MagCulture will ship anywhere in the world.
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:
