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
Malaysian cartoonist Zunar, who is facing a trial for his work, is to have four of his most celebrated cartoons exhibited at London’s Cartoon Museum.
“This will be my very first exhibition held in a cartoon museum. At a time when I am facing pressure from the Malaysian government for my works this is genuine encouragement, a tribute I humbly acknowledge and am tremendously grateful for,” said Zunar, who is facing nine charges under the Sedition Act and potentially up to 43 years in prison.
Zunar’s work will be on display at the museum’s cartoon and caricature gallery from 4 Nov 2015, alongside a new exhibition Gillray’s Ghost, marking the 200th anniversary of the death of English caricaturist James Gillray who was also regarded as a provocative figure in his day.
“Zunar is part of a great political cartooning tradition which asks awkward questions of those in power in images which endure in people’s memory,” said Anita O’Brien, director of The Cartoon Museum. “No doubt Gillray would be sympathetic to his cause so it is appropriate that their works are on show at the same time.”
When: From Wednesday, 4 Nov 2015 to January 2016
(Hours: Mon – Sat: 10.30 – 17.30, (inc. Bank Holidays); Sun 12.00 – 17.30) Where: The Cartoon Museum, 35 Little Russell Street, London WC1A 2HH (map) Tickets:Admission information
The Association of Serbian Journalists reports that since 2013 there have been 65 attacks on Serbian journalists. Assailants in 11 of the incidents — around 17% of cases — have been prosecuted.
Believe it or not, a 17% conviction rate could be considered good news. But it isn’t enough.
International media organisations routinely assess that fewer than 10% of crimes committed against journalists worldwide result in prosecution. While the cavalier attitude by law enforcement and authorities to go after criminals gave rise to the phrase “impunity from prosecution,” many of us wonder if the term “immunity” might be more apt.
And that’s why I welcomed the initiative of Serbian authorities who, in early 2014, established a commission to support investigations into the deaths of Serbian journalists dating back to 1994, including Dada Vujasinović, Slavko Ćuruvija and Milan Pantić. In order to highlight the importance of their work and to raise the awareness of the importance of fighting impunity, my office supported the commission’s Chronicles of Threats campaign.
Ćuruvija, the owner of the newspaper Dnevni Telegraf and the magazine Evropljanin, was gunned down in front of his home in Belgrade in 1999. Thanks in part to the work of the commission, authorities re-opened the case last year and put four former state security officials under investigation for his murder. A trial is underway and while this is a start, his family and fellow journalists still need to see results.
This is why I why I wholeheartedly support all consciousness-raising efforts that take place on November 2 each year – the United Nations proclaimed International Day to End Impunity for Crimes Against Journalists which was initiated in 2013.
This landmark UN resolution condemns attacks on journalists and other media members. It also urges countries to do their utmost to prevent violence and make perpetrators accountable for their crimes, in order to promote a safe working environment.
But setting aside a day to cajole authorities to take the crimes against media seriously can only go so far. That is why the modest successes of the commission in Serbia provide a glimmer of hope that justice can be served.
But in order for societies to provide that safe working environment envisioned by the UN, a systematic array of steps must be undertaken at the local and national level. None of these steps are easy and their ability to succeed is questionable.
To begin with, local officials must be given the financial resources to conduct thorough investigations of all crimes committed. This is no small task in many of the 57 countries that comprise the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe — the region in which I work. Many of these nations have economies in transition, tax revenues are scarce and it’s a hard sell for authorities to suggest earmarking money to find justice for one class of victims when the needs of the whole community are not being adequately served.
Prosecutors and judges also need to be adequately trained to understand the importance of the fair application of existing criminal laws, especially when the rule of law in society is often buttressed only by a robust and independent media. This is the same media which is often critical of the prosecutors and judges who make up the judicial hierarchy.
In the end, getting past those hurdles may be seen, in retrospect, as the easiest steps. Because what’s really necessary to create a safe working environment is for society as a whole to accept that good journalism is necessary for a good society.
People must recognise that the free flow of information and ideas is essential in dynamic cultures and the secrecy and repression are antithetical to freedom and prosperity.
Creating a society where good journalism can flourish starts with making sure journalists can do their jobs and live to talk about it. And that means making sure that those who would run roughshod over journalists pay for their crimes.
In the 18th century, Mary Wollstonecraft and her daughter, Mary Shelley, were fiercely rebellious about sexuality. They also were great feminists. In the 20th century, Emma Goldman spoke for women who believed love should be free.
Our age tends to divide things by decades and generalise about them. So, it’s assumed that the 70s and the second wave of feminism introduced sexual freedom to women. This is absolutely not true. If you read The Group by Mary McCarthy (1963), Tropic of Cancer by Henry Miller (1934), or Ulysses by James Joyce (1922), you see that sexual rebels have always been with us.
What was different about [my 1973 novel] Fear of Flying was that it was a book that tried to reveal how women thought about sex in an age when most books about women didn’t show this. So, when the book came out both women and men were shocked. Some said: “Women don’t think like this!” and some said: “Thank God, somebody is talking about how women really think!” What was fascinating to me as an author was how contradictory the responses were.
I always wanted to write the books for women that did not exist. There is a huge gap between what we write about and what we think about. I wanted to rip the top of the head off a lusty woman and expose her fantasies to the light. Fantasies are important but they don’t necessarily have to become realities. The zipless fuck was a fantasy of perfect idealized sex with a stranger, but it is often impossible to fulfill. Many readers missed that.
Now I see woman writers writing about bondage and discipline, cruelty and submission, and I wonder whether that is fantasy too. I’ve never been much interested in submission, so I read these books as fairytale fantasies for women.
I think it’s important not to take literature literally. We turn to writers to document our dream lives. We turn to writers to show us what we are afraid to show ourselves. Many writers who become known for sexuality are not that different from you and me. They have a need to reveal the unconscious mind. If we take them literally, we miss the point.
The big change in sexual writing happened in the 1960’s when books like Lolita and Tropic of Cancer were liberated by the courts. The change in literature emerged from the change in the law. Male writers got very excited and produced books like John Updike’s Couples (1968) and Philip Roth’s Portnoy’s Complaint (1969). Suddenly it was possible to publish these very honest works. I wanted to show honesty from a woman’s point of view. I was not advocating a kind of behavior, but many people did not understand that.
In Fear of Dying, I have also been attempting to reveal something unrevealed before. An editor once told me there had never been a bestseller about a woman over 40. But as I watched women growing older, still feeling sexy, looking for a way to overcome mortality, I realised that we needed new books that showed how women had changed.
Like Fear of Flying, Fear of Dying is such a book.
Erica Jong is a novelist whose works include Fear of Flying and the newly-published Fear of Dying. (Her books are available on Amazon, iTunes, Waterstones or your local independent bookshop.)
Erica Jong explains why pornography is to art as prudery is to the censors
Pornographic material has been present in the art and literature of every society in every historical period. What has changed from epoch to epoch – or even from one decade to another – is the ability of such material to flourish publicly and to be distributed legally. After nearly 100 years of agitating for freedom to publish, we find that the enemies of freedom have multiplied, rather than diminished.
Azerbaijani citizens are set to go to the polls this Sunday to vote for their representatives in 125 parliamentary districts, but this process will be far from democratic. This country has not held a democratic election for more than 20 years, and Azerbaijan’s parliament, the Milli Mejlis, is little more than a rubber-stamping body. These elections also take place against a backdrop of unprecedented repression as well as recent criticism from international bodies.
The leadership of the OSCE parliamentary assembly has recently cancelled a planned observation mission to the upcoming parliamentary election. And the OSCE parliamentary assembly’s democracy and human rights chairperson, Isabel Santos, said this week: “The Azerbaijani government’s crackdown on independent and critical voices has a particularly damaging effect ahead of the country’s 1 November parliamentary elections.”
“On the eve of parliamentary elections, when independent voices are crucial for having an informed debate about the country’s direction, Azerbaijani citizens will especially suffer from the silence their government has imposed,” Santos said.
A recent European Parliament statement said it expressed its “serious concern as to whether the conditions are in place for a free and fair vote on 1 November 2015, given that leaders of opposition parties have been imprisoned, media and journalists are not allowed to operate freely and without intimidation, and a climate of fear is prevalent”.
In addition to the OSCE parliamentary assembly, the OSCE’s office for democratic institutions and human rights as well as the European Parliament have also taken the unprecedented step of cancelling their election-monitoring missions to Azerbaijan.
There are now dozens of political prisoners in Azerbaijan, including prominent journalists, bloggers, human rights defenders, politicians, youth activists, and others who dared to express opinions critical of the ruling regime. Young journalist Rasim Aliyev, Institute for Reporters’ Freedom and Safety chairman, was tragically murdered in August, and there appears to be no hope of justice in his case. Independent media continue to be ruthlessly targeted, in particular online television station Meydan TV, whose staff and their relatives have been facing extensive pressure ranging from threats to detention.
As detailed in a new report from the Sport for Rights campaign group, No Holds Barred: Azerbaijan’s Human Rights Crackdown in Aliyev’s Third Term, this brutal crackdown started with the re-election of President Ilham Aliyev to a third term in October 2013. In the two years that followed, the Aliyev regime aggressively targeted its critics, starting with those who told the truth about that fraudulent election, then moving on to the human rights defenders working to defend the rights of those political prisoners.
Although the election’s results may be a foregone conclusion, they do have political significance for Azerbaijan’s international relations. As the Sport for Rights’ report details, during Aliyev’s third term Azerbaijan’s relations with key international bodies have sharply deteriorated – in particular, the OSCE and the European Parliament.
This move was a serious blow to the Aliyev regime, which needs international observers to lend an air of legitimacy to what can only be an illegitimate vote.
The Aliyev regime should think carefully about how to proceed, before this damage to its international relations becomes irreparable. Something the Azerbaijani leadership does not seem to have realised is that the affirmation it is seeking from these international bodies – and indeed, the good public relations it seeks – cannot be bought. But real steps towards democratic reform would, in turn, generate more positive coverage of the country, not to mention genuinely improve its standing with international bodies.
Whilst it is too late to salvage Sunday’s parliamentary elections, it is not too late for the ruling Azerbaijani regime to right the serious wrongs being perpetrated in the country and to repair its relations with international bodies. Immediately and unconditionally releasing political prisoners would be an excellent – and very welcome – start.
Saudi Arabian blogger and activist Raif Badawi is the winner of this year’s Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought, awarded by the European Parliament.
Badawi, who also won 2015 PEN Pinter Prize for an International Writer of Courage, was convicted in May 2014 for insulting Islam and founding a liberal website. He received a fine of 1 million riyals (£175,000) and a ten-year prison sentence. In addition, the court in Jeddah sentenced him to 1,000 lashes.
On 9 January 2015, after morning prayers, Badawi was flogged 50 times, but subsequent floggings have been postponed. Earlier this week however, Raif Badawi’s wife Ensaf Haidar, was informed that the floggings were to resume.
Meanwhile, his lawyer and brother-in-law Waleed Abulkhair is serving 15 years in prison for his peaceful activism.
Please join us in front of the Saudi embassy in London on Friday 30 October, from 9am. Activists are asked to meet at the Curzon Street entrance to the Embassy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Mayfair, London.
When: Friday, 30 Oct, 2015, from 9am Where: Saudi embassy in London, Curzon Street entrance (note: the postal address of the Embassy is 30-32 Charles Street).
Malaysian cartoonist Zulkiflee Anwar Haque, aka Zunar, is currently in the UK to raise awareness ahead of his court case in his home country at the start of next month. He is facing nine charges of sedition for criticising Malaysia’s judiciary over the recent incarceration of a Malaysian opposition leader and could be sentenced to a maximum of 43 years imprisonment.
While in the UK, Zunar will be part of an exhibition at the Cartoon Museum.
“I want people to understand the situation in Malaysia through cartoons,” he said during an interview with Index on Censorship. The full video can be seen above.
“I will never stop,” he added. “It is my right as a citizen to express my view and my responsibility as a cartoonist to give alternative views.”
Zunar and his work have been repeatedly targeted by the Malaysian authorities. In September this year, police opened an investigation on his latest book of political cartoons, Sapuman – Man of Steal. A sales assistant who manages online sales of the title was questioned by police under the Sedition Act. A number of his cartoon books been banned by the government.
This article was posted on 29 October 2015 at indexoncensorship.org
Holding a dustbin in front of his chest the young bare-chested student stands defiantly in the middle of a dusty road, facing down a squad of heavily-armed riot police.
Suddenly his body begins jerking crazily like a puppet on a string as bullets fired by a police marksman armed with a high-powered FN rifle smash through his useless shield and thud into his body. Almost four decades later this deadly tableau that played out on an Alexandra Township street a few days after the 16 June 1976 student uprising against the use of Afrikaans began in Soweto is still etched into my memory.
As a young reporter, I had been assigned that day to cover the unrest that had spread to Alex, as the flames of insurrection raced across apartheid South Africa like wildfire.
Over the weeks that followed, I regularly witnessed how police reacted with deadly brute force against student protesters armed only with rocks and anti-apartheid songs.
I also remember the mass meetings and marches in the early 70s against harsh apartheid laws by students at Johannesburg’s Wits University, which were inevitably broken up by police with vicious dogs and armed with whips, batons and tear gas.
So it was with a sense of déjà vu that I sat and watched on television almost two decades into South Africa’s young democracy as riot police used rubber bullets, stun grenades and tear gas to break up country-wide protests by students against above-inflation university fees hikes. They were also demanding that universities end the outsourcing of campus cleaning and maintenance jobs and for the people who do them to become full-time employees.
What South Africa has been witnessing is a reawakening of activism among students after a hiatus of almost two decades. For a week, campuses across the country embarked on the biggest nationwide student protests since the birth of the new democratic society in 1994.
But student and youth-led activism in South Africa is not new. It was pressure by the ANC Youth League leaders, including Nelson Mandela, which forced the organisation’s leadership to adopt a programme of action in 1949, including mass resistance tactics like strikes, boycotts and civil disobedience. It was also pressure on the leadership by youth that resulted in the 1952 launch of the Defiance Campaign against unjust apartheid laws.
But one big difference in these latest protests was the harnessing of social media as a rallying and activism tool. Powered by the #FeesMustFall hashtag the issue went viral with over half a million tweets and counting as Twitter became a powerful tool in the hands of the protestors.
With the ubiquity of smartphones among the students, Twitter became the go-to source to keep up with the rapidly unfolding story as the protests spread to 18 university campuses in eight of the country’s nine provinces, forcing the suspension of lectures and the cancelation of exams.
In the early days of the protests, some callers to radio shows at first dismissed the students’ actions as hooliganism.
Having evicted students, many holding their hands in the air as a sign of non-violence, the protest continued on the streets around Parliament–but once again police reacted with a heavy-handed response.
But Twitter also captured some poignant lump-in-the-throat moments as social media showed students of all races and political persuasions joining hands, and white students forming a human shield around black students in the belief that police were less likely to act against them.
As demonstrators on the lawns outside chanted and sang, President Jacob Zuma met with university chancellors and students leaders, before his government capitulated to student demands. As the protests continued outside, Zuma appeared live on national TV and announced that there would be a 0% increase in university fees in 2016.
The news immediately spawned the jubilant new hashtag #FeesHaveFallen with some protesters saying that the suspension of 2016 fees was just the beginning of their struggle and vowed to continue the fight for free university education.
One thing is clear: after a week of protests by South Africa’s future generation of leaders, the country’s democracy was far stronger than when it began – and the high toll paid by the young man with the dustbin lid and others had not been in vain.
Romania has a lot of high-calibre journalists to its name. However, many media outlets are now fighting to survive while maintaining professional standards due to judicial investigations, political scandals and struggles with high debt loads. This is according to the authors of The Men Who Bit the (Watch) Dogs, which explores the media landscape in the country.
The report focuses on transparency and ownership of the media — particularly the most influential medium, television, over the past 25 years — from post-communist enthusiasm to today’s chaotic mix of business models.
While journalists in the early 1990s were independent of the pressures that marked the Soviet age, most of the 1,200 newspapers that were established at the time didn’t take off. Speaking to Index on Censorship, one of two Romanian academics behind the report, Manuela Preoteasa from think tank The Centre for Media Transparency, explains that at the time, well-known international media companies just weren’t interested in quality journalism.
“As we demonstrated in the report, the market was kept half-closed during the early 90s, which means that it was not open to foreign investors,” Preoteasa says. As the report highlights, the “market that was inhospitable to the promotion of professional journalism” and so “foreign investors had to focus solely on commercial success”.
The ethos of the era seemed to be: “We don’t sell our country to foreigners.” Foreign investors could not own a licence without a Romanian partner, and apart from state-owned channels, no other private entity could apply. For nine years, only local licences for each of the 41 counties and Bucharest were available.
With ownership of the media confined a handful of tycoons, many outsiders would have lost interest. “Show me a serious TV investor who would have been willing to invest in such an unfriendly market,” Preoteasa says. “I strongly believe that the media market was intentionally kept closed to serious investors.”
Print was different. “The history of the last decade shows that print media could not exist on its own, but only as part of a conglomerate, and the conglomerates were formed around TV stations,” Preoteasa explains. “That is why the TV industry has such a strong influence.”
Economically, many of these media outlets relied on state advertising. Some TV stations — already benefiting from debt cancellations and debt rescheduling — started to receive public money as state-owned companies began to advertise. The scheme was introduced by the government led by former Prime Minister Adrian Năstase (2000-2004) and was soon adopted by local politicians and businessmen.
Romania’s unfriendly business environment, high taxes, bureaucracy and a chronic economic instability also challenged the viability of commercial models within the media, the report says. Other challenges include “the lack of a clear distinction between information and opinion and the absence of marketing- and sales-related knowledge”.
These days, the media industry faces serious legal problems that involve either the owners of the main media groups or the groups themselves. Media owners such as Adrian Sârbu, Dan Voiculescu, Sorin Ovidiu Vântu, Sebastian Ghiţă and Dinu Patriciu have all been on trial or are under various criminal investigations.
In a young democracy, the media should play a key role in holding the powerful to account. However, this doesn’t seem to be the case in Romania.
So are there any signs of hope? “I believe the initiative will come from the telecom industry,” Preoteasa says. As to whether the telecom industry will swallow the existent media or would it invent a new one, the answer lies somewhere in between. “I am sure the online media started to have a say and the pressure from the interactive medium is high,” she says, offering an open suggestion: “Someone should look carefully at what young people are looking for and perhaps this will reveal the answer about what might come next.”
Malaysian cartoonist Zulkiflee Anwar Haque, aka Zunar, is facing nine simultaneous charges under the country’s Sedition Act and will appear in court on 6 November. He could be sentenced to 43 years in prison for drawing cartoons that mock Malaysia’s corrupt government officials.
Ahead of his court appearance, Zunar is coming to the UK to display a small selection of his work as part of the permanent exhibition at the Cartoon Museum and several other events.
29 Oct: My fight through cartoons: In conversation with Zunar
Join Index on Censorship, Amnesty International and SUARAM International to hear a courageous artist speak about his cartoons and his inspirations, and human rights and freedom of expression in his home country Malaysia. When: Thursday, 29 Oct, 2015, 6pm – 8:30pm Where: Amnesty International UK, Human Rights Action Centre, London, EC2A 3EA (map) Tickets: Free, but registration required Full details
In early October 2015, the country’s Supreme Court rejected a challenge to the constitutionality to the Sedition Act. The decision was a setback for Zunar, who’s trial had been postponed pending the outcome.
The court, challenged by law professor Azmi Sharom, ruled on 6 October that the Sedition Act 1948 remains constitutional and a valid piece of legislation. Azmi had argued that the Sedition Act 1948 is not a valid law as it was not enacted by parliament and contradicted with the Article 10 of Malaysia’s constitution.
At the time, Zunar said: “The decision by the court simply mocked the Constitution and [is] politically motivated.”
The cartoonist said the Sedition Act has been used as political weapon by the government to constrain and curtail freedom of expression since it was introduced in 1948. More than 200 activists – students, lecturers, lawyers, writers, religious activists, opposition leaders and cartoonist – have either been arrested, detained, investigated or charged since last year.
“I am now being slapped with nine charges under the draconian act and facing a possible 43 years of jail term,” he added. “The hope to get justice from the court is just fairy tale.”
Zunar is a Malaysian political cartoonist who has been repeatedly targeted by authorities on account of his work.
Five of his cartoon books have been banned by the Malaysian government for allegedly carrying content “detrimental to public order” and thousands confiscated in an effort to curtail freedom of expression.
On the eve of his trial, and facing a maximum penalty of 43 years imprisonment, Zunar is coming to the UK to exhibit a small selection of his work at the Cartoon Museum.
Join us to hear a courageous artist speak about his cartoons and his inspirations, and human rights and freedom of expression in his home country Malaysia.
The evening will include film, a talk and Q&A from Zunar, and a chance to draw your own cartoon, with tips from Zunar himself – telling the Malaysian authorities to drop all charges against a man who might otherwise spend the rest of his life in jail.
When: Thursday, 29 Oct, 2015, 6pm – 8:30pm Where: Amnesty International UK, Human Rights Action Centre, London, EC2A 3EA (map) Tickets: Free, but registration required
6:00pm – Arrival
6:15pm – Documentary screening
6:45pm – Introductions
7:00pm – Zunar talk and Q&A
8:00pm – Draw your own cartoons with tips from Zunar
This event is being co-hosted by Amnesty International UK, Index on Censorship and SUARAM.
This is the first of two posts by Farida Ghulam, an advocate for freedom of speech, human rights and democracy. Ghulam has campaigned for women’s rights and is currently active in the push for democratic reforms in Bahrain. Her husband, Ebrahim Sharif, who is a former Secretary General of the National Democratic Action Society (WAAD), is currently in detention awaiting trial on charges of charges of inciting hatred and sectarianism and calling for violence against the regime. He faces 10 years for expressing opinions in a speech marking the memory of a 16-year-old killed while protesting against Bahrain’s government.
Among the countless stories of suffering that the Bahraini people have endured is the story of my own family: one of hardship, sacrifice and pure injustice. My husband was arrested, incarcerated for four and a half years, released for three weeks, and promptly re-arrested.
Those three weeks were beautiful and magical. They were surreal. It’s like what Ebrahim said when his daughter landed in Bahrain and woke him up the morning after his release. He asked her: “It’s like a dream, isn’t it?” Those three weeks passed by so quickly that they don’t seem real; we’ve now plunged back into our old routines of monitored visits, monitored and limited phone calls, court hearings, and the anxiety inherent in facing a long dark tunnel with very little light ahead.
My husband and I, along with our political party, the National Democratic Action Society (also known as WAAD), have been advocating for democracy, fighting corruption, and highlighting social injustice in the Kingdom of Bahrain for a long time now. My husband, Ebrahim Sharif, is the former Secretary General of WAAD, and has run twice for a seat in Bahrain’s Parliament. During his campaign he was able to gain traction with the people of Bahrain by raising awareness of social and economic corruption, as well as stressing shortcomings of the current political system and proposing needed reforms to build a true democracy. His campaign focused on the people being the source of any government’s power, a statement which is ironically featured in Bahrain’s constitution. He challenged the government in many economic and political domains, using his skills in finance and economics to easily prove the existence of corruption and discrimination.
The courage Ebrahim showed by exposing the government in such public ways understandably threatened the establishment, especially considering that he is a Sunni man, the same religious sect as Bahrain’s ruling elites, which made him difficult to discredit along sectarian lines. Ebrahim’s point of view, along with the points of view of other prominent opposition figures in Bahrain, were never addressed by the ruling powers, although these views were supported by the majority of Bahrain’s people. The only responses that addressed these views were smear campaigns placed in pro-regime newspapers and TV networks.
After witnessing developments in Tunisia and Egypt during the Arab Spring in 2011, the Bahraini people took to the streets in peaceful demonstrations against the government. They set up a home base around Pearl Roundabout, in central Manama. It happened quickly and naturally, with no prior planning by opposition groups, which joined the mass movement a few days later by attending and giving speeches focused on peacefulness as a strategy in expressing the political demands addressed to the government. My husband was one of these opposition leaders, where he spoke about what a true constitutional monarchy means and reiterating the views of his parliamentary campaign which promised to put power in the people’s hands by raising awareness and insisting on non-violent measures to obtain the necessary changes for democratic advancement.
The government responded to this movement by cracking down a month later, sending in GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) troops, tanks, tear gas and weapons. Many people were killed in the ensuing chaos and arrests of political leaders occurred over the following days. The roundabout was demolished by the government in an attempt to quickly erase the movement from people’s memories and history and exploit their declaration of martial law as an excuse to regain control and quell the protests entirely.
My husband’s first arrest was an exercise in torment — solitary confinement, torture in the form of mass beatings by masked police, sleep deprivation, forcing him to sleep on cold-water soaked mattresses in incredibly cold air-conditioned rooms, constantly barking dogs, sexual harassment and threats, whipping with plastic pipes, insulting his family’s honor, and standing for long hours with hands held vertically in the air. At one point, he was beaten and threatened that if he issued a complaint to the military prosecution, he would be beaten again. Ebrahim filed the complaint, the man indeed kept his promise and Ebrahim was beaten again. To add to that, on the day that the military judge issued the verdict of guilty, all of the political leaders were taken to a back room in the courthouse and beaten because they had chanted the words “peacefulness, peacefulness” in response to the judge’s verdict and sentences.
We have been telling our story over and over again from 2011. Ebrahim was sentenced to 5 years in prison, while the other political figures, part of the “Bahrain 13”, a group of political leaders which the Bahraini government alleges Ebrahim is a member of, received longer sentences ranging from 10 years to life imprisonments. In June of 2015, Ebrahim was released on a royal pardon, only to be re-arrested a mere three weeks later on 12 July due to a speech he gave commemorating the death of a 16-year-old martyr who was barbarically shot at close range by police in 2012 and who received no justice.
As a family, we’ve decided that it would be important for us to write about the hardships we have personally endured on an individual and family level as a direct consequence of the punishment handed down by the government, which fears the pure and peaceful expression of speech. The right to freedom of speech is recognized worldwide by an endless array of organizations, and while Bahrain claims to respect the International Declaration of Human Rights, it is abundantly clear that it does not. While the Kingdom of Bahrain is a signatory of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, what has happened to Ebrahim and other Bahrainis opposing the injustice and discrimination in the country proves the kingdom does not hold these covenants in high regard.
This piece is intended as an informative introduction to what Bahrain has gone — and continues to go — through, as well as what we personally have gone through as a family, and to have it as a basic reference before reading the next piece which will highlight the family’s emotional struggle with losing a father and husband to an unjust sentence.
‘Light Behind Bars’ is an interactive art installation recognising the sacrifice made by people locked up for their thoughts, writings, art or politics.
Remembering past dissidents – like Richard Carlile, imprisoned in 1819 for publishing Thomas Paine’s ‘The Rights of Man’. Spotlighting present prisoners – from Raif Badawi, the Saudi blogger sentenced to 1,000 lashes, to the Iranian cartoonist Atena Farghadani, sentenced to 12 years imprisonment in a trial lasting just half an hour.
This durational installation incorporates live performers, runs from 12 noon and culminates with a speech from Hannah Machlin of Index on Censorship.
What would you go to prison for?
WHEN: Sunday 25 October, 12pm – 5.30pm (Hannah Machlin at 5pm) WHERE: Conway Hall, 25 Red Lion Square, London WC1R 4RL (Holborn tube) TICKETS: Free
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:
