18 Dec 2017 | Journalism Toolbox Spanish, Volume 46.02 Summer 2017 Extras
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Las violentas represalias que están sufriendo los reporteros que cubren la persecución de los homosexuales en Chechenia pone de relieve los peligros de sacar la verdad a la luz en un estado corrupto. Un periodista checheno habla de las dificultades a las que se enfrenta”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_column_text]
Manifestantes en Toronto (Canadá) marchan para concienciar sobre la situación de las personas LGTB en Chechenia, JasonParis/Flickr
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Una sola ley gobierna la labor de los periodistas de Chechenia: todos somos parte del servicio de prensa de Ramzan Kadyrov. Desde que Kadyrov llegó al poder en 2007 como jefe de la república, los medios de comunicación se han convertido en su herramienta personal de propaganda. Una vez casi me quedé sin trabajo por utilizar, para un reportaje, metraje en el que salía Alu Aljanov, expresidente de la república y predecesor de Kadyrov. Aljanov es un político decente, pero a Kadyrov no le gusta. Por eso no se puede mencionar su nombre. En otra ocasión, grabé una entrevista con un hombre al que las autoridades chechenas habían torturado. Cuando salió la entrevista a la luz, el hombre tuvo que huir del país para permanecer a salvo. Sigo creyendo es mi culpa.
Los periodistas de aquí y ahora saben lo que pueden y no pueden escribir si quieren mantenerse sanos y salvos. Desgraciadamente, lo que pueden escribir no es mucho. La principal fuente de noticias de cualquier publicación son Kadyrov, su familia y sus parientes. No hay prácticamente una sola historia emitida por los medios chechenos que no nombre a Kadyrov. Tal vez haga referencia al propio jefe de Chechenia; a su padre, asesinado en 2004; a su madre, que dirige una fundación benéfica, o a su mujer e hijos. Así funciona con las noticias de política y hasta con los deportes. Por ejemplo, puede salir un titular diciendo que Kadyrov ha visitado el ensayo de una compañía de danza, ha elogiado a los artistas o le ha entregado al solista las llaves de un coche o incluso de un piso. Otro dirá que Kadyrov se ha pasado por el torneo anual de artes marciales mixtas en Grozny, o mostrará a Kadyrov visitando un hospital y repartiendo sobres de dinero a los pacientes. El único momento de las noticias en el que el jefe de Chechenia no sale nombrado es en el pronóstico meteorológico.
La televisión se utiliza no solo como propaganda sino también como instrumento de intimidación. Las historias que parecen atraer más atención muestran a personas disculpándose ante Kadyrov por haberse quejado de las autoridades. El asunto funciona de la siguiente manera: en las redes sociales, alguien critica a las autoridades y habla de la corrupción, los salarios retenidos o algún secuestro. Las autoridades lo ven, encuentran a su autor y le dan una paliza o lo amenazan, colocan una cámara y lo obligan a disculparse.
Otro ejemplo: cuando Kadyrov empezó a usar Instagram, los chechenos entendieron su presencia en esta red social como una oportunidad de dirigirse a él directamente. Al ver que regalaba pisos, coches y cosas caras a gente distinguida, los ciudadanos empezaron a hablarle de problemas reales, como no tener un techo, tener un hijo enfermo, estar en el paro o cobrar un sueldo ridículamente bajo. Un equipo especial contactaba con el autor de cada petición, acudía a la dirección correspondiente e investigaba la situación. A primera vista, todo muy humanitario; pero, en realidad, el equipo había sido creado para proteger a Kadyrov de los problemas de quienes le hacían peticiones. A menudo la «verificación» terminaba siendo una noticia emitida por televisión en la que denunciaban que la persona en cuestión era un vago o un impostor.
En Chechenia también hay un ejército de trolls de internet. La organización está ubicada en un edificio del complejo de las Torres Grozny-City. Tiene empleadas a una docena de personas que monitorizan constantemente los medios chechenos y rusos y ponen comentarios sobre cualquier cosa que tenga que ver con Kadyrov y con Chechenia. Si es una buena noticia, los empleados de la organización la confirman. Si es mala, la niegan. En una ocasión, un «comentario» escrito por un tal Nikolai de Arjangelsk decía: «Volví ayer de Chechenia. No hay ningún secuestro. Todo el mundo quiere a Kadyrov. Grozny es la ciudad más segura del mundo.»
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Los empleados cobran grandes sumas por su trabajo como trolls. Algunos trabajadores de los medios de comunicación también reciben primas si suben buenas noticias sobre Chechenia a las redes sociales.
Hay medios de comunicación independientes, de Rusia y otros países, que operan en Chechenia, pero también el suyo es un trabajo difícil. Kadyrov dice mucho que los medios de comunicación como Ejo Moskvy, Novaya Gazeta, RBC, Dozhd de Rusia y Meduza de Letonia son traicioneros, hostiles y solo buscan la ruina del país. Por ejemplo, cuando Novaya Gazeta publicó en marzo una serie de artículos de investigación en los que informaban de que estaban atrapando a hombres sospechosos de homosexualidad y torturándolos en prisiones secretas, la historia fue tachada de falsa. Alvi Karimov, portavoz de Kadyrov, describió el reportaje de Novaya Gazeta como “puras mentiras” en una entrevista con la agencia de prensa Interfax, financiada por el estado ruso, en la que decía que no había gais en Chechenia a los que perseguir.
El descrédito no es la única amenaza: los reporteros corren verdadero peligro. Los periodistas de estas publicaciones están sometidos a vigilancia e intimidaciones constantes. A veces los matan. En el último par de décadas, dos periodistas de Novaya Gazeta han sido asesinados mientras cubrían noticias de Chechenia, y el reportero que trabajaba en los casos sobre homosexualidad ha recibido amenazas. En una reunión de unos 15.000 hombres el pasado 3 de abril, Adam Shahidov, consejero de Kadyrov, llamó a los periodistas de Novaya Gazeta «enemigos de nuestra fe y nuestra patria», y prometió «venganza», según denunció el Comité para la Protección de los Periodistas.
Por otro lado, están las dificultades de encontrar gente a la que entrevistar. La gente normal tiene demasiado miedo de hablar con periodistas y los cargos públicos simplemente se niegan a hacerlo. Estos medios de comunicación no pueden contar con corresponsales anónimos en Chechenia porque es casi imposible permanecer en el anonimato. Chechenia es pequeña; todo el mundo se conoce. Los periodistas pueden ocultar su nombre, pero si quieren realizar una labor periodística normal, necesitan entrevistar a gente, dar detalles, describir lo sucedido. Es muy fácil usar esos detalles para entender acerca de qué y de quién se ha escrito el artículo en cuestión. Sabiendo de lo que son capaces las autoridades chechenas en lo que respecta a aplastar la disidencia, nadie quiere exponer alguien solo porque acceda a que lo entrevisten.
Hasta la prensa extranjera sufre. Hasta hace poco estaba bien representada, y los periodistas venían y realizaban entrevistas a menudo. La gente se sentía más cómoda al hablar con ellos, quizá porque los artículos se publicaban en idiomas extranjeros y raras veces se traducían. Pero la situación cambió drásticamente en marzo de 2016, cuando un grupo de periodistas que viajaban con activistas pro derechos humanos sufrieron palizas y graves lesiones en la república vecina de Ingushetia. Alguien prendió fuego a su vehículo y tuvieron que ser hospitalizados. Nadie dudó por un momento que los atacantes habían actuado por orden de las autoridades chechenas. Tras el incidente, pocos periodistas extranjeros se han arriesgado a venir. Sin ellos, la esperanza de poder ofrecer información veraz sobre lo que está ocurriendo en Chechenia es aún más escasa.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
El autor de este artículo es originario de Chechenia y lleva más de diez años trabajado en medios del país. Ha preferido permanecer anónimo por razones de seguridad.
Este artículo fue publicado en la revista Index on Censorship en verano de 2017.
Traducción de Arrate Hidalgo.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row content_placement=”top”][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_custom_heading text=”100 years on” font_container=”tag:p|font_size:24|text_align:left” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2F2017%2F12%2Fwhat-price-protest%2F|||”][vc_column_text]Through a range of in-depth reporting, interviews and illustrations, the summer 2017 issue of Index on Censorship magazine explores how the consequences of the 1917 Russian Revolution still affect freedoms today, in Russia and around the world.
With: Andrei Arkhangelsky, BG Muhn, Nina Khrushcheva[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_single_image image=”91220″ img_size=”medium” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2017/12/what-price-protest/”][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/3″ css=”.vc_custom_1481888488328{padding-bottom: 50px !important;}”][vc_custom_heading text=”Subscribe” font_container=”tag:p|font_size:24|text_align:left” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fsubscribe%2F|||”][vc_column_text]In print, online. In your mailbox, on your iPad.
Subscription options from £18 or just £1.49 in the App Store for a digital issue.
Every subscriber helps support Index on Censorship’s projects around the world.
SUBSCRIBE NOW[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
22 Nov 2017 | Bahrain, Bahrain Statements, Campaigns -- Featured, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Protesters call for freedom for Nabeel Rajab outside the Bahraini embassy in London.
Nabeel Rajab’s sentence to two years in prison for speaking to journalists was upheld on 22 November 2017 by a Bahraini appeals court at the conclusion of a long-running, unfair trial.
Rajab will serve his sentence at notorious Jau Prison until December 2018, by which time he will have actually spent two and a half years in prison. He faces up to 15 years in prison in a second case related to his comments on Twitter, with the next hearing on 31 December. Index on Censorship and the Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy (BIRD) condemns Rajab’s imprisonment, which is a reprisal against his work as a human rights defender, and calls for his immediate and unconditional release.
Rajab was sentenced in absentia on 10 July 2017 on charges of “publishing and broadcasting fake news that undermines the prestige of the state” under article 134 of Bahrain’s Penal Code. This is in relation to statements he has made to media that:
-
International Journalists and researchers are barred from entering the country
-
The courts lack independence and controlled by the government. Use judiciary as a tool to crush dissidents.
-
Foreign mercenaries are employed in the security forces to repress citizens
-
Torture is systematic in Bahrain.
In the last appeal court hearing on 8 November, the judge refused to allow the defence’s evidence, which included testimonies of high-profile journalists and researchers who had been banned from entering Bahrain.
Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, Director of Advocacy, BIRD: “This is a slap in the face of free expression and tragically proves Nabeel’s point that the justice system is corrupt. Bahrain’s rulers are fearful of the truth and have lashed out against it once again. This Bahraini repression has been enabled by their western allies in the US and UK.”
Jodie Ginsberg, CEO, Index on Censorship: “This is an outrageous decision. Nabeel has committed no crime. Bahrain needs to end this injustice and its harassment of Nabeel.”
The Bahraini courts have failed to provide Rajab, the president of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR), a fair trial at every turn. He has been prosecuted for his expression, as protected under article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. During his hospitalisation earlier this year, multiple court hearings were held in Rajab’s absence, including his sentencing in July.
Rajab had a separate hearing on 19 November 2017 in a concurrent case relating to his tweets about torture in Bahrain’s notorious Jau Prison and the Saudi-led coalition’s war in Yemen, for which he faces up to 15 additional years in prison. The court heard a prosecution witness, who had already appeared in a previous hearing last year, and who was not able to provide any evidence against Rajab. The trial was adjourned to 31 December 2017, when the security officer who confiscated Rajab’s electronic devices for another case will be brought as a prosecution witness. The next court hearing will be the eighteenth since the trial began.
Rajab also has been charged with “spreading false news” in relation to a letter he wrote to the New York Times in September 2016. A new set of charges were brought against Rajab in September 2017 in relation to social media posts made in January 2017, when he was already in detention and without internet access.
The human rights defender was transferred to Jau Prison on 25 October 2017, having been hospitalised the previous six months, since April, after a serious deterioration of his health resulting from the authorities’ denial of adequate medical care and unhygienic conditions of detention.
Rajab was subjected to humiliating treatment on arrival at the prison, when guards immediately searched him in a degrading manner and shaved his hair by force. Prison authorities have singled him out by confiscating his books, toiletries and clothes, and raiding his cell at night. Rajab is isolated from other prisoners convicted for speech-related crimes and is instead detained in a three-by-three meter cell with five inmates. Prison officers have threatened him with punishment if he speaks with other inmates, and he is not allowed out of his cell for more than one hour a day.
One of Rajab’s outstanding charges is that he spoke out about the degrading treatment in Jau Prison.The evidence he and BCHR gathered proving torture in the prison was exposed in a joint-NGO report, Inside Jau, in 2015. Human Rights Watch also reported on the same incidents of torture.
The upholding of the sentence means Rajab will be imprisoned at least until December 2018, by which time he will have spent 30 months in prison. This itself reflects the unfair court procedures: Rajab was first arrested in June 2016 and charged with spreading fake news in media interviews. However, the prosecution did not begin investigating his charges until six months into his detention, in December 2016.
International Positions
The UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office has avoided expressing concern over Nabeel Rajab’s sentencing in its answers to four parliamentary questions since July. In their latest statement, they stated: “We continue to closely monitor the case of Nabeel Rajab and have frequently raised it with the Bahraini Government at the highest levels.”
25 British MPs have condemned the sentence.
Following Rajab’s sentencing on 10 July, the United States, European Union and Norway all called for Rajab’s release. Germany deplored his sentence. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ office called for his unconditional release.
In September 2017, the UN condemned the increasing number of Bahraini human rights defenders facing reprisals, naming nine affected individuals, Rajab among them. The UN Committee Against Torture has called for Rajab’s release.
Yesterday, fifteen international and local NGOs wrote to states including the UK, US, EU, Norway, Germany, France, Italy, Denmark, Sweden, Ireland and Canada urging them to call for Nabeel Rajab’s immediate and unconditional release. Their voices were joined by protesters in London. In Washington D.C., a petition signed by 15,000 people calling for Rajab’s release was delivered to the Bahrain embassy.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”12″ style=”load-more” items_per_page=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1511346172721-094fe208-2d84-9″ taxonomies=”716, 3368″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
21 Nov 2017 | Bahrain, Bahrain Statements, Campaigns -- Featured, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Fifteen rights groups have written to 11 states and the European Union on 21 November 2017 calling for action ahead of the conclusion of Bahraini human rights defender Nabeel Rajab’s appeal against his two-year sentence for stating that Bahrain bars reporters and human rights workers from entry into the country.
In the letters, which are addressed to the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union, as well as Germany, Ireland, France, Sweden, Italy, Denmark, Switzerland, Norway and Canada, the rights groups ask the states “to urgently raise, both publicly and privately, the case of Nabeel Rajab, one of the Gulf’s most prominent human rights defenders.” The letter further urges governments to support Rajab “by condemning his sentencing and calling for his immediate and unconditional release, and for all outstanding charges against him to be dropped.”
On 22 November 2017 Mr Rajab is expecting the conclusion of his appeal against a two-year prison sentence. Rajab was sentenced on 10 July 2017 on charges of “publishing and broadcasting fake news that undermines the prestige of the state” under article 134 of Bahrain’s Penal Code, in relation to his statement to journalists that the Bahraini government bars reporters and human rights workers from entering the country. In a previous appeal court hearing earlier this month, the judge refused to allow the defence’s evidence, including testimonies of journalists and researchers who had been banned from entering Bahrain.
The human rights defender, who is President of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR), has been detained since his arrest on 13 June 2016. He was held largely in solitary confinement in the first nine months of his detention, violating the UN Standard Minimum Rules for Non-Custodial Measures (Tokyo Rules).
Rajab faces up to a further 15 years in prison on a second set of charges related to comments he made on Twitter criticising the Saudi-led war in Yemen and exposing torture in Bahrain. His 18th court hearing will be held on 31 December 2017. In September, the Public Prosecution brought new charges against related to social media posts made while he was already in detention; he has also been charged with “spreading false news” in relation to his letter from a Bahraini jail published in the New York Times.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_icon icon_fontawesome=”fa fa-times-circle” color=”black” size=”xl” align=”right”][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
“The ongoing judicial harassment of Nabeel Rajab is a gross injustice. Nabeel is a man of peace who seeks democratic reforms for his country. His persecution for expressing his opinions — something taken for granted in many nations — must not stand. We call on Bahrain to recognise international human rights norms by releasing Nabeel and ending its prosecution of him.” — Jodie Ginsberg, CEO, Index on Censorship
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Rajab was transferred to Jau Prison on 25 October 2017. He was subjected to humiliating treatment on arrival, when guards immediately searched him in a degrading manner and shaved his hair by force. Prison authorities have singled him out by confiscating his books, toiletries and clothes, and raiding his cell at night. Rajab is isolated from other prisoners convicted for speech-related crimes and is instead detained in a three-by-three metre cell with five inmates.
Campaigners today protested outside the Bahrain embassy in London to call on the Bahraini regime to release Nabeel Rajab and end reprisal attacks against the family of Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, a prominent UK-based human rights campaigner living in exile from Bahrain, who is Director of Advocacy at the London-based Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy.
Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, Director of Advocacy, Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy: “Nabeel Rajab has been imprisoned for exposing injustice in Bahrain. Three of my own family members have been imprisoned and tortured for my human rights campaigning. The Bahraini government pursues a pattern of revenge tactics against human rights defenders, but we will not rest until they are freed. If the UK government cares for the rights of Bahraini people, then it must tell its repressive ally that this violent campaign to silence us is unacceptable.”
The 15 rights groups are:
Americans for Democracy & Human Rights in Bahrain
Bahrain Center for Human Rights
Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy
English PEN
European Centre for Democracy and Human Rights
FIDH within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders
Front Line Defenders
Global Legal Action Network
Gulf Centre for Human Rights
IFEX
Index on Censorship
International Service for Human Rights
PEN International
Reporters Without Borders
World Organisation Against Torture within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/2″][vc_single_image image=”81222″ img_size=”full” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2017/11/letter-drop-all-charges-against-nabeel-rajab/”][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
6 Nov 2017 | Digital Freedom, News and features
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Facebook has received much criticism recently around the removal of content and its lack of transparency as to the reasons why. Although it maintains their right as a private company to remove content that violates community guidelines, many critics claim this disproportionately targets marginalised people and groups. A report by ProPublica in June 2017 found that Facebook’s secret censorship policies “tend to favour elites and governments over grassroots activists and racial minorities”.
The company claims in their community standards that they don’t censor posts that are newsworthy or raise awareness, but this clearly isn’t always the case.
The Rohingya people
Most recently, almost a year after the human rights groups’ letter, Facebook has continuously censored content related to the Rohingya people, a stateless minority who mostly reside in Burma. Rohingya have repeatedly been banned from Facebook for posting about atrocities committed against them. The story resurfaced amid claims that Rohingya people will be offered sterilisation in refugee camps.
Refugees have used Facebook as a tool to document the accounts of ethnic cleansing against their communities in refugee camps and Burma’s conflict zone, the Rakhine State. These areas range from difficult to impossible to be reached by reporters, making first-hand accounts so important.
Rohingya activists told the Daily Beast that their accounts are frequently taken down or suspended when they post about their persecution by the Burmese military.
Dakota Access Pipeline protesters
In September 2016 Facebook admitted removing a live video posted by anti-Dakota Access Pipeline activists in the USA. The video showed police arresting around two dozen protesters, although after the link was shared access was denied to viewers.
Facebook blamed their automated spam filter for censoring the video, a feature that is often criticised for being vague and secretive.
Palestinian journalists
In the same month as the Dakota Access Pipeline video, Facebook suspended the accounts of editors from two Palestinian news publications based in the occupied West Bank without providing a reason. There are no reports of the journalists violating the networking site’s community standards, but the editors allege their pages may have been censored because of a recent agreement between the US social media giant and the Israeli government aimed at tackling posts inciting violence.
Facebook later released a statement which stated: “Our team processes millions of reports each week, and we sometimes get things wrong.”
US police brutality
In July 2016 a Facebook live video was censored for showing the aftermath of a black man shot by US police in his car. Philando Castile was asked to provide his license and registration but was shot when attempting to do so, according to Lavish Reynolds, Castile’s girlfriend who posted the video.
The video does not appear to violate Facebook’s community standards. According to these rules, videos depicting violence should only be removed if they are “shared for sadistic pleasure or to celebrate or glorify violence”.
“Facebook has long been a place where people share their experiences and raise awareness about important issues,” the policy states. “Sometimes, those experiences and issues involve violence and graphic images of public interest or concern, such as human rights abuses or acts of terrorism.”
Reynold’s video was to condemn wrongful violence and therefore was appropriate to be shown on the website.
Facebook blamed the removal of the video on a glitch.
Swedish breast cancer awareness video
In October 2016, Facebook removed a Swedish breast cancer awareness campaign that had depictions of cartoon breasts. The breasts were abstract circles in different shades of pinks. The purpose of the video was to raise awareness and to educate, meaning that by Facebook’s standards, it should not have been censored.
The video was reposted and Facebook apologised, claiming once again that the removal was a mistake.
The Autumn issue of Index on Censorship magazine explored the censorship of the female nipple, which occurs offline and on in many areas around the world. In October 2017 a Facebook post by Index’s Hannah Machlin on the censoring of female nipples was removed for violating community standards.
“Napalm girl” Vietnam War photo
A month earlier, in a serious blow to media freedom, Facebook removed an iconic photo from the Vietnam War. The photo is widespread and famous for revealing the atrocities of the war, especially on innocent people like children.
In a statement made following the removal of the photograph, Index on Censorship said: “Facebook should be a platform for … open debate, including the viewing of images and stories that some people may find offensive, is vital for democracy. Platforms such as Facebook can play an essential role in ensuring this.”
The newspaper whose post was censored posted a front-page open letter to Mark Zuckerberg stating that the CEO was abusing his power. After public outrage and the open letter, Facebook released a statement claiming they are “always looking to improve our policies to make sure they both promote free expression and keep our community safe”.
Facebook’s community standards claim they remove photos of sexual assault against minors but don’t mention historical photos or those which do not contain sexual assault.
The young woman shown in the photo, who now lives in Canada, released her own statement saying: “I’m saddened by those who would focus on the nudity in the historic picture rather than the powerful message it conveys. I fully support the documentary image taken by Nick Ut as a moment of truth that capture the horror of war and its effects on innocent victims.”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1509981254255-452e74e2-3762-2″ taxonomies=”1721″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
