25 Oct 2018 | Awards, Fellowship, Fellowship 2018, News
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”103471″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara, a Cuban artist, and co-founder of award-winning Museum of Dissidence will perform in Trafalgar Square on 26 October 2018.
Along with art curator Yanelys Nuñez Leyva, they were hosted in Metal Southend for two weeks in October as part of a collaboration with Index. During their stay, they were presented their Freedom of Expression Award in the Arts category by Index which they could not formally accept in April due to visa refusal by the United Kingdom.
Otero Alcántara will be reproducing an artistic action that he exports to different cities, most recently performed in Madrid. His character, Miss Bienal, was created in 2016 and was present at all of the 2016 Havana Biennial exhibition*. The character intends to symbolise the image of the sensual mulatto woman that every foreigner typifies in clichés for tourist and artistic consumption. Dressed as a dancer from the famous Tropicana Cabaret and distributing business card to as many people as possible, where he had his personal contact details.
Miss Bienal is now visiting London and making the character his personal loudspeaker for the urgent need for artistic free expression in Cuba. Censorship on the island is becoming worse as there is a new decree 349 which will criminalise all cultural production that does not respond to the ideology of the state. Miss Bienal will have the number 349 on her costume and will be informing spectators about the limited freedom of expression in Cuba.
*This performance was part of the Hors-Pistes event: The Spring of Love, curated by Catherine Sicot (Elegoa Cultural Produtions) and Geraldine Gomez (Center Pompidou, Program Hors-Pistes).[/vc_column_text][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”12″ style=”load-more” items_per_page=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1540481508887-a7b0f0ee-6632-9″ taxonomies=”23772″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
19 Oct 2018 | Global Journalist (Spanish), Journalism Toolbox Spanish, Spain
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”«Me doy cuenta de que fue la mejor decisión de mi vida, porque de lo contrario ahora mismo estaría en la cárcel, como mis colegas».”][vc_single_image image=”101086″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Poco después de que la policía turca antidisturbios irrumpiera en la redacción de Zaman Media Group en marzo de 2016, Sevgi Akarçeşme se dio cuenta de que solo tenía dos opciones.
Akarçeşme, editora jefe de Today’s Zaman, el principal diario en lengua inglesa del país, podía convertirse en periodista favorable al Gobierno y pasarse los días publicando artículos que alabaran al régimen cada vez más autoritario del presidente Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
O podía huir del país y tratar de denunciar la situación desde el exilio. En menos de 48 horas, Akarçeşme embarcaba en un avión a Bruselas para librarse de un encarcelamiento inminente.
«No quería convertirme en una periodista progobierno y perder mi integridad», dice en una entrevista con Global Journalist. «Todo lo demás lo perdí, pero mi integridad, no».
La toma por parte del Gobierno de Zaman Group, una compañía de comunicación favorable a Hizmet —movimiento de oposición liderado por el clérigo exiliado Fetullah Gülen—, presagiaba la dura ofensiva de gran alcance contra los medios de comunicación y la sociedad civil, entre otros, que siguió al golpe fallido contra Erdogan dos meses después. En 2016, Turquía detuvo a más de 140 periodistas y cientos más perdieron sus empleos, según un informe sobre derechos humanos del Departamento de Estado de EE. UU. Hubo casi 4.000 personas acusadas de insultar al presidente, al Primer Ministro o a las instituciones del Estado. Según el Comité por la Protección de los Periodistas, Turquía tenía 73 periodistas en prisión en diciembre de 2017: más que cualquier otro país en el mundo.
De hecho, Akarçeşme no había abandonado aún el país y la administración de Erdogan ya había convertido la edición turca de Zaman en un altavoz progobierno.
Ya antes de la redada en la oficina de Zaman, Akarçeşme se había enfrentado a presiones legales por parte del Gobierno. A principios de 2015 la llevaron a juicio por «insultar» al entonces Primer Ministro, Ahmet Davutoğlu, en un tuit en el que lo acusaba de encubrir un escándalo de corrupción que involucraba a familiares de altos cargos.
Pero no fue hasta la clausura de Zaman en 2016 cuando quedó claro que el Gobierno de Erdogan no iba a tolerar más medios independientes. Incluso después de que Akarçeşme se marchase a Bélgica, el gobierno turco continuó tomando medidas punitivas contra ella: allanaron su apartamento de Estambul y le anularon el pasaporte. Akarçeşme, ahora de 39 años de edad, pasó más de un año en Bélgica antes de llegar a EE. UU. en mayo de 2017.
Ahora vive en Estados Unidos, donde trabaja como periodista independiente y está buscando un trabajo a tiempo completo. Habló con Lily Cusack, de Global Journalist, sobre su exilio.
Global Journalist: ¿Por qué decidiste marcharte de Turquía?
Akarçeşme: Como podrás imaginar, es una larga historia, porque Turquía no se convirtió en una dictadura de la noche a la mañana. Así que, como todo, fue un proceso. Un proceso rápido, pero un proceso igualmente.
Fue el 6 de marzo de 2016 [cuando] abandoné Estambul de improviso. Dos días antes de mi marcha, el gobierno de Erdogan nos confiscó el periódico acusándonos de cosas ridículas, por supuesto, como terrorismo y apoyo al terrorismo. Y yo, al ser la líder ejecutiva del diario en inglés, Today’s Zamam, sabía que era cuestión de tiempo que me persiguieran también.
Cuatro meses antes, en diciembre de 2015, me condenaron a prisión con suspensión de la pena por mis tuits. De hecho, ni siquiera fueron mis propios tuits. Fue por unos comentarios que pusieron debajo de mi tuit. El Primer Ministro de entonces me puso una demanda y a mí me cayó prisión con suspensión de la pena.
Así que ya había opresión, y sabía que Turquía nunca ha tenido una trayectoria de la que enorgullecerse en lo que a libertad de prensa se refiere. Pero cada vez iba a peor, y el Gobierno se centró principalmente en nuestro grupo mediático. Era casi evidente que sería cuestión de tiempo.
Fue una decisión difícil, dejar tu país con solo dos maletas… de repente, sin notificárselo a nadie, porque entonces igual te detenían en la frontera. Hay muchísima gente que tiene prohibido viajar al extranjero. Así que estaba nerviosa por si me impedían viajar, pero, por suerte, pude irme. Echando la vista atrás, me doy cuenta de que fue la mejor decisión de mi vida, porque de lo contrario ahora mismo estaría en la cárcel, como mis colegas.
GJ: ¿Recibiste amenazas a título personal?
A: Por redes sociales, sí. Igual que mis colegas, dejé de tuitear en turco. Ahora solo tuiteo en inglés de vez en cuando. Cualquier crítico te puede hablar del ejército de trolls que se dedica a identificar y acosar a gente.
GJ: ¿Cómo llegaste a la conclusión de que tenías que marcharte?
A: Fue una decisión súbita. En los dos días desde el asalto de la policía [4 de marzo de 2016] hasta que me marché, solo hablé con [Abdulhamit Bilici], editor jefe del grupo mediático al completo. A él también lo habían despedido, y también corría peligro. Pero no quería irse inmediatamente. Él creía que tenía que quedarse para apoyar a la gente que estaba en puestos de menos experiencia. Pero yo pensé que, en caso de arresto, no podría soportar las condiciones de las prisiones turcas. Así que me dije que tenía que marcharme.
Me puse bastante nerviosa en el aeropuerto, porque no sabía si me habían anulado el pasaporte. Fue un momento memorable. Solo recuerdo pasar aduanas y la revisión de pasaportes y sentirme extremadamente nerviosa. Fue gracioso, porque soy una simple periodista. Sabía que no había hecho nada malo, pero también que eso no bastaba para librarme de una posible persecución o de que evitaran mi marcha. Fue un alivio [cuando] aterrizamos en Bruselas.
En julio, cuando me fui de Bruselas y estaba de camino a EE. UU., me sacaron del avión porque me dijeron que mi pasaporte no era válido. Así que al final sí que ocurrió, pero por suerte fue después de irme de Turquía.
GJ: ¿Qué sentiste al tener que abandonar Turquía tan de repente?
A: Era una sensación terriblemente inquietante. En cierto modo cortas vínculos con tu propio país. El día que decidí marcharme, ya sentía que Turquía era un caso perdido y que allí no había futuro para mí.
Estos últimos dos años me he sentido extremadamente desilusionada [con] mi tierra natal y mi sociedad, porque [la gente] en su mayoría ha callado frente a la opresión. Incluso están a favor de Erdogan.
Así que siento que ya no es mi casa, aunque aún tenga seres queridos [allí]. Mi corazón y mis pensamientos están con todos estos prisioneros, especialmente las víctimas de purgas, decenas de miles de personas, no solo periodistas, personas de toda clase y condición.
GJ: ¿Albergas alguna esperanza de volver?
A: No tengo esperanzas. No va a mejorar. Cada día el Gobierno se hace con más y más medios de difusión. Ya no hay medios libres… Salvo por un par de [canales] de televisión web y los periódicos en el exilio, no queda ningún medio con alcance para el periodismo independiente. El discurso está totalmente controlado por el Gobierno. Así que, por desgracia, soy muy pesimista. No le veo ninguna salida a corto plazo.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
16 Oct 2018 | Fellowship, Fellowship 2017, Maldives, News
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”89549″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]After five years the president of the Maldives may be on his way out — but no one is celebrating yet.
The Indian Ocean island nation voted on Sept. 23, 2018 to oust sitting president Abdulla Yameen in favor of challenger Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, who won 58 percent of the vote. The message? They were done with Yameen’s increasingly authoritarian rule.
Yameen came into power in 2013 and has jailed or forced many of his political opponents into exile. He’s restricted protests and reduced media freedom, all while boosting corruption in the government with bribes, embezzlement and human rights abuses.
The Maldives Independent, winner of the 2017 Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Journalism Award, is one of the few independent news organisations left in the country. In 2014, Maldives Independent journalist Ahmed Rilwan, known for criticising the government, went missing. He has still not been found. Many believe Yameen’s hand played a role in his disappearance and the subsequent lack of investigation.
Two years later, Yameen signed a criminal defamation law that created fines and jail sentences for slander or defamatory speech, speech threatening “social norms” or national security, and remarks against Islam. The law was criticised by the United Nations and the United States, both calling it a move against freedom of expression.
Yameen’s biggest accomplishments have been in development, building an extension to a public hospital in the capital, new airports, and the country’s first overwater bridge. But behind these projects was even more corruption, critics say.
In 2016, Al Jazeera exposed a major scandal in which Yameen and then vice-president Ahmed Adeeb leased islands to tourism companies and embezzled the money for themselves. Zaheena Rasheed, then editor-in-chief of the Maldives Independent, appeared in Al Jazeera’s investigative documentary. Hours after the documentary went online, police raided the news organisation’s offices. Rasheed has since fled the country.
Addressing the embezzlement at a debate a week before the election, Yameen pointed his finger at the former vice president and “the system” as the cause behind the corruption, denying any wrongdoing.
With a platform based on restoring democracy and freeing Yameen’s political prisoners, Solih represents a new leaf for the nation.
Riazat Butt, current editor of the Maldives Independent, called the two candidates “night and day.” And though Solih may want to make significant changes in the government, Butt said three out of four of the parties in the coalition backing Solih have shown little interest in democracy.
“The opposition alliance has not said what will happen if the coalition falls apart,” Butt said. “There is an agreement they have to sign about steps to be taken in such an event, but the agreement has not been made public and the president-elect’s spokeswoman is refusing to answer questions on it.”
On top of the issues Solih may face within his coalition, Yameen is not going down without a fight.
The leader of Yameen’s party, the Progressive Party of the Maldives, launched an investigation into complaints regarding the authenticity of the ballots cast, citing “systematic irregularities.” The party has asked the Elections Commission to delay publishing the final results and has reportedly told their supporters to submit electoral complaints to the commission.
The move has been denounced by the opposition party and the Human Rights Watch, who say it is an attempt to annul the election.
“Yameen has too much to lose to just step aside,” Butt said. “He may find a non-violent way to steal the election after all….he just needs to do it in a way that avoids sanctions and military action against him.”
On Oct. 10, Yameen challenged the election results in the Supreme Court. If the Court finds proof of irregularities, the election could be annulled.
Meanwhile, members of the Elections Commission have received anonymous threats due to their dismissal of the ruling party’s claims of fraud.
If Solih is able to secure the presidency and move his coalition government into power, it may not result in much change regarding journalism in the country. Butts called the coalition manifesto “fantastically vague” about press freedom. Though journalists have asked for specifics, like if the anti-defamation law will be repealed or if background checks for foreign journalists will end, they have not received answers.
“There is no detail, and that’s not good enough,” she said. “I honestly think it is too soon for anyone to relax or believe that their job will become easier or safer.”
[/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:1539606582611-fd540886-18b2-7″ taxonomies=”9028″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
15 Oct 2018 | Malta, Mapping Media Freedom, Media Freedom, media freedom featured, News
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”103210″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]“The murder,” says journalist Caroline Muscat, “was a message to the country that whoever investigates those in power and makes corruption visible, has to fear for his life. So we had to send a message back.”
Muscat seems to be in an adrenaline rush while talking in her apartment in a small town in the north of Malta. The interview was postponed twice for an hour because she had to convene with her colleagues about new stories for The Shift, the journalistic website that she and a colleague launched early November 2017. It was just weeks after the shock of the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia. The Shift is the message Caroline Muscat sent back to the perpetrators.
Malta doesn’t have a lot of independent journalism. Even media outlets that are not tied to a political party, have opaque ties with the political and entrepreneurial establishment. It is because of such ties that Caroline Muscat quit her job at the widely read Times of Malta in 2016: in publications about the leaked documents known as the Panama Papers, Caruana Galizia revealed that the managing director of the Times’ publisher was implicated too.
“I could not continue to work for the Times,” she says. She freelanced and made plans to start an investigative online paper, to be launched in the spring of 2018. Caruana Galizia’s murder accelerated the launch.
“Our goal is to hold those in power to account,” Muscat says.
That’s not a spectacular goal for a journalistic project. It does lead to remarkable choices though. Muscat tells about the arrest, in December 2017, of three men suspected of placing the bomb in Caruana Galizia’s car and detonating it. “We didn’t publish that news,” Muscat says. “We were immediately criticised about that. A government official even attacked me on Twitter, asking why The Shift didn’t publish about this breakthrough in the investigation.”
She explains – and still gets furious: “The men were detained with a grand show of force. In Malta, there are only a few people who know how to make bombs. Why weren’t they taken earlier? The arrested men have no motive for the murder. We want to know who is behind Daphne’s death. The arrests were a way to conceal that no serious investigation is carried out into the murder. As a journalist, I refuse to contribute to such a scheme.”
By performing journalism that way, The Shift works in the spirit of Running Commentary, the blog of Caruana Galizia. Also, Caruana Galizia didn’t care a bit about good contacts with powerful key figures in politics and business but investigated and scrutinised them, to attack if necessary. Muscat, however, resists the idea that she is following in Caruana Galizia’s footsteps: “Nobody can replace Daphne. She has been the target of hate campaigns and threats for years. Her dogs were murdered, her house was set ablaze. We often ran into each other because we worked on the same kind of stories, but she worked alone, I worked for an established paper. I was protected. She wasn’t.”
After resigning from the Times of Malta, Muscat also lost her protection, which became all the clearer when she started The Shift. An intense disinformation and hate campaign was launched against her, especially on social media, just as had happened to Caruana Galizia. Muscat and her family are, without any grounds, being connected to alcoholism, arms trade and prostitution. In secret Facebook groups linked to the governing Labour Party – where contributors to The Shift went undercover for half a year – pictures of Caruana Galizia and Muscat surfaced, accompanied by hateful comments (“She got what she deserved,” and “She deserves some bombs too”), generously supplied with likes by sometimes highly placed government figures.
Muscat immediately notices when a picture of hers has been doing the rounds again in such online networks. “This week the owner of a grocery shop asked me if I was the woman who publishes articles online. I am starting to get an idea now of the pressure under which Daphne has lived for years. Every aspect of my life has become difficult,” Muscat says.
The Shift welcomes some hundred thousand visitors per month and lives from donations. Muscat does other freelance journalistic work if necessary to earn enough income. Maybe, when the visitor stats rise, they will try to get revenues from advertisements. They usually publish several stories per day, both backgrounds and investigative work and analyses and columns. Muscat: “The Shift is journalism, but it is a movement too. Yes, I have an agenda. My agenda is press freedom, democracy, rule of law. We don’t have the luxury anymore to demand anything else. No, I don’t think The Shift will find the final piece of the puzzle that will solve Daphne’s murder. Such an expectation is unrealistic. All we can do is continue to investigate and contribute to adding pieces of the puzzle.”
Does she fear for her life? She circles around the question. She seems unable to ponder the issue. She does, however, point to an important difference between The Shift and Caruana Galizia’s blog: “The Shift doesn’t depend on me. We have a team. If one of us falls away, The Shift will continue.” [/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:1539599196129-2228dcb5-22a8-7″ taxonomies=”18781″][vc_raw_html]JTNDaWZyYW1lJTIwd2lkdGglM0QlMjI3MDAlMjIlMjBoZWlnaHQlM0QlMjIzMTUlMjIlMjBzcmMlM0QlMjJodHRwcyUzQSUyRiUyRm1hcHBpbmdtZWRpYWZyZWVkb20udXNoYWhpZGkuaW8lMkZzYXZlZHNlYXJjaGVzJTJGOTMlMkZtYXAlMjIlMjBmcmFtZWJvcmRlciUzRCUyMjAlMjIlMjBhbGxvd2Z1bGxzY3JlZW4lM0UlM0MlMkZpZnJhbWUlM0U=[/vc_raw_html][/vc_column][/vc_row]