6 Dec 2024 | Georgia, Iran, News and features, Newsletters, South Korea, United Kingdom
Protests have the power to rally people, express objection to political decisions, and in the most successful cases, elicit change. They are a fundamental form of self expression, and a crucial mechanism of any democracy. This week, we saw South Koreans take to the streets to protest President Yoon Suk Yeol’s shock move to impose martial law, which temporarily placed the military in charge and suspended many civilian rights, including the right to protest.
The move was immediately declared illegal and unconstitutional. The leader of the country’s largest opposition party was able to rally MPs to vote down the declaration in parliament, and ordinary citizens to protest against it, despite the ruling that they couldn’t. Within 24 hours, Yeol’s attempt was toppled and he now faces impeachment charges.
South Korea’s bizarre turn of events shows the potential effectiveness of collective action against authoritarianism. The power of persistent campaigning was also brought to light in Iran this week, when the jailed rapper and activist Toomaj Salehi (a former winner in the arts category of Index’s Freedom of Expression Awards) was released from prison. He had previously been sentenced to death (later overturned) for voicing support for anti-government protests, including the Woman, Life, Freedom movement in 2022. Tireless international protest from campaign groups – jointly led by Index, the Human Rights Foundation and Doughty Street Chambers – undoubtedly put pressure on Iranian authorities to permit his release.
But of course, attempts to congregate against injustice are not always successful, or accepted. In Georgia this week, where we have seen a degradation of democracy under the Georgian Dream party, there was a horrendous crackdown on peaceful protesters.
Since the country’s contested election in October, where the party secured a fourth term, citizens have come out in droves and have been met with state violence, including being physically assaulted, and attacked with water cannon and tear gas. You can read more about the steady decline towards autocracy in Georgia in this piece by Index CEO Jemimah Steinfeld, who visited Tbilisi in October.
This response is just one example of how peaceful protest is being eroded, despite it being protected as a human right under international law. We’re seeing examples of this all over the world. Last month, Clemence Manyukwe reported for Index on how anti-government protesters in Mozambique were injured and even killed following the country’s disputed presidential election.
And even when violence isn’t used, legal mechanisms can be utilised to undermine people’s right to show dissent. On our own shores, the previous government introduced the Public Order Act, which has substantially restricted people’s ability to protest freely, and has made it easier to criminalise protesters by lowering the threshold at which police can arrest them. The result has been hundreds of activists being arrested and prosecuted, including the climate activist Greta Thunberg.
Earlier this year, the High Court found that the former home secretary Suella Braverman had acted unlawfully in introducing this legislation, but the Home Office appealed the ruling. The new Labour government has continued the appeal, which has spurred criticism from human rights organisations. Katy Watts, lawyer at Liberty, said: “For the countless people currently in the over-stretched criminal justice system because of these unlawful regulations, we must see the law quashed and the government respecting our fundamental right to protest.”
Protest movements are not always against governments. Also in the UK this week, we saw a large media workers’ strike from staff at The Guardian and The Observer over the sale of the The Observer to Tortoise Media, an acquisition which has proved controversial.
Whilst the sale of a business does not, on its own, represent a risk to free expression, concerns have been raised over whether there are safeguards in place to protect the newspaper’s editorial independence, as one of the few remaining liberal news outlets in the UK. There have also been concerns over the ability of company staff to speak out publicly against the deal without fear of punishment or recrimination, with some employees reporting being warned against voicing their opinions freely.
Index was one of many signatories of a letter addressed to The Scott Trust – which owns the Guardian Media Group – and Tortoise raising concerns about the risks to free expression from the mechanisms of the sale. Despite the 48-hour strike, the sale went ahead this morning, indicating that protest is not always an effective mechanism for change.
But whilst it may not always result in the desired outcome, it sends a message – whether to governments or private businesses – about individuals’ rights to express their disapproval or outrage. The ability to do so without fear of criminal reprisal or violence is a fundamental right and must be protected at all costs.
10 May 2024 | Bahrain, Belarus, Brazil, Canada, China, Ecuador, Eritrea, Hong Kong, India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Magazine Contents, Mexico, North Korea, Palestine, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Thailand, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Volume 53.01 Spring 2024
Contents
19 Apr 2024 | Iran, News and features
While Iran and Israel continue to provoke each other in the aftermath of the 7 October attacks by Hamas, there are concerns that the fate of protesters in Iran, particularly those that started after the murder in custody of Jina ‘Mahsa’ Amini, are being forgotten as the Iranian leadership cracks down.
“Governments often utilise external conflicts to divert attention from domestic issues,” says exiled Iranian film-maker Vahid Zarezadeh. “In Iran, while the government addresses threats from abroad, it simultaneously intensifies its grip on civil liberties at home, particularly targeting women’s freedoms. This approach helps consolidate power internally by rallying nationalistic sentiments while suppressing dissent.”
Zarezadeh, who made the documentary White Torture in collaboration with the jailed 2023 Nobel Peace Prize winner Narges Mohammadi and Gelareh Kakavand, says, “Given the complexities of the current events in Iran and the ongoing regional tensions, it’s crucial to understand the multifaceted nature of the strife affecting the nation, particularly its impact on women and civil society. As Iran navigates its ongoing conflict with Israel, another critical issue persists domestically: the war against women in the streets of Tehran and other cities. This battle is intensifying with new legislative measures concerning the hijab, marking the beginning of a renewed phase of systematic suppression.”
Last September, Iran’s parliament passed a bill with a huge majority that meant that refusing to wear a hijab, either in person or even on video on social media, was considered as nudity. The bill allows for jail sentences of up to ten years for those who fail to adhere to the new measures. Iranian businesses that “promote or allow immoral behaviour”, including not wearing the hijab, are also targeted by the bill.
Zarezadeh says that pressure from the Iranian authorities on protest and dissent has increased markedly.
“A stringent crackdown on dissent has emerged, characterised by the systematic suppression of women and civil activists,” he says. “While the massive protests have lessened in visibility due to severe governmental crackdowns, underlying discontent remains. The fear of reprisal, particularly the death penalty, has tempered the public’s willingness to protest as openly as before.”
Even with the new stricter laws on dress code, he says that resistance against the compulsory hijab continues as a symbol of wider discontent with systemic gender-based restrictions.
“Despite the risks, including severe penalties such as the death penalty, the spirit of dissent still simmers, manifesting in smaller, yet persistent protests,” he says.
The resistance is still being kept alive through social media, and X in particular, where the hashtag #جنگ_علیه_زنان (“war against women”) has gained traction. Its widespread usage serves as a barometer for the internal sentiment against the current regime’s policies.
Videos showing women being violent attacked in broad daylight by the morality police and being thrown into the backs of vans are being widely shared using the hashtag, such as this:
Many women human rights defenders and activists have been thrown in prison, and face dire conditions with no adequate medical or sanitary provisions.
“A poignant example is Bahareh Hedayat, a prominent student activist who was temporarily released for medical treatment due to uterine cancer but has since been returned to prison,” says Zarezdeh. “Such cases underscore the severe and deteriorating conditions faced by women behind bars.”
One powerful symbol in the protests over the last two years were the actions of schoolgirls in protesting against the restrictions on women.
However, young protesters, including many schoolgirls, have since faced detention and other forms of intimidation. Detailed follow-ups on their situations are scant due to restrictions on information flow within the country.
The fate of the Iranian woman climber Elnaz Rekabi is also far from clear. Rekabi competed in a climbing tournament in South Korea in 2022 without a hijab.
“After her act of defiance by competing without a hijab, Elnaz Rekabi faced both support and significant pressure upon her return to Iran,” says Zarezdeh
When she flew home from South Korea, Rekabi said that her hijab had fallen off inadvertently. Her family’s villa in Iran was subsequently demolished, seemingly in punishment.
Zarezdeh says, “The full extent of Rekabi’s current situation remains unclear with concerns about her freedom and well-being continuing to linger.”
There continues to be a hunger for reform despite the crackdown. “The initial surge in hope for a potential regime change has been dampened by the forceful response from the authorities,” says Zarezadeh. “However, the desire for reform and change persists among various sectors of the society.”
14 Jul 2023 | China, Netherlands, News and features
One day last October, journalist and former China correspondent with the Dutch daily newspaper de Volkskrant Marije Vlaskamp received an odd email. It contained confirmation of a hotel reservation at the Holiday Inn Express in The Hague made on Booking.com in her name.
Two things struck her as extremely strange. One is that the reservation had been made on the Chinese language version of the website; the second is that she had never made the booking.
After calling the hotel to cancel the reservation, things became even more unsettling.
She received a message from the Chinese dissident Wang Jingyu, whom she had interviewed before. Wang had recently found refuge in the Netherlands and she had been in touch with him for a story about the ‘long arm of China’. He told Vlaskamp that a room had been booked in his name in the same hotel. Wang had also received an anonymous threat in Chinese: “‘One tip-off from me and the police will come and arrest you and your journalist friend.”
This was the moment Vlaskamp thought it was about time to inform her superiors at the paper – but not before she made herself a pot of jasmine tea. After having worked in China as a correspondent between 2001 and 2019, she knew the intimidation tactics of the Chinese state very well. She just never expected to be confronted with them after her return to the Netherlands.
Vlaskamp told the story in a long-form article in de Volkskrant in early April.
In it she revealed that the hotel reservation was just the first step in a campaign of intimidation targeted at both her and Wang.
Vlaskamp says as part of the campaign that she had received an anonymous warning that her name would be linked with bomb threats. A day later, she saw on the news that the residence of Dutch prime-minister Mark Rutte had been cordoned off and police, fire brigades and the bomb disposal unit were on the scene. Her heart “skipped a beat” when she heard that the threat was a car with a foreign number plate parked in the street where the Chinese embassy is located, just 200 meters away from the PM’s residence. That’s when she knew that the messages were part of a serious threat against her.
What is unclear is who is sending these intimidating messages. Putting pieces of the puzzle together, there is no doubt that they were acting on behalf of the Chinese state. In her article, Vlaskamp writes about researchers and scientists who have been warning for some time that China has been working on a network of influencing, subversion and intimidation abroad, while digital traces lead Dutch police investigators to IP-addresses in China and Hong Kong. But the Chinese state couldn’t be caught red-handed.
Vlaskamp is one of the first journalists to be subject to an intimidation campaign by China outside Chinese borders. In the summer 2023 issue of Index on Censorship magazine, we wrote about the case of Australian journalist Vicky Xiuzhong Xu. She and her family were harassed after contributing to a 2020 report on human rights violations in Xinjiang.
The frightening events Vlaskamp experienced illustrate perfectly just how far China is willing to go to protect its interests and silence dissidents and journalists.
But would it be wise to publish? No one could predict what effect a publication would have, and whether it would bring more risks for Vlaskamp. Both her and Wang had been threatened anonymously and told to stop their interviews and not to re-publish previous articles about Wang. They both refused to comply.
Eventually, the decision to publish was made but only after six months of soul-searching and journalistic research.
The paper explained at the time: “We only wanted to publish this story if our reporter was fully behind it. Which she is. As she writes herself, the journalistic duty to reveal wrongs takes precedence here. Besides, it is by no means certain that the intimidations would stop if she would not write about this. If her assailants believe that these intimidating practices are effective, only more of the same would be in store for her later on. And not just for Marije Vlaskamp. We are worried about a chilling effect: if de Volkskrant allows itself to be muzzled by persons claiming to act on behalf of a foreign power, this essentially affects all journalists who write critically about autocratic regimes.”
In a strongly-worded comment piece two days after the publication, de Volkskrant put the intimidation campaign against Vlaskamp and dissident Wang in a broader perspective. Not just the perspective of press freedom, which was clearly in jeopardy here, but also that of autocrats like China’s Xi Jinping and Russia’s Vladimir Putin, who increase pressure on those who refuse to surrender to the autocrat’s personal version of reality. Within their own borders, their methods are harsh, and abroad they resort to increasingly shameless psychological warfare, the paper wrote.
Thomas Bruning, secretary general of the Dutch Association of Journalists, said that the events underscore the importance of not underestimating the use of spyware and other forms of digital surveillance. He said: “Vlaskamp’s case makes clear that journalists who critically follow regimes like China’s are vulnerable and deserve protection. More generally, journalists should be aware that digital intimidation and threats are an issue against they will have to arm themselves pro-actively.”
A search in the archives of de Volkskrant shows that the piece of early April is the last one Vlaskamp wrote about China. The paper has had a new China correspondent since 2019 but Vlaskamp had continued to write pieces for which her extensive knowledge of the country gave her analysis extra depth. Since April, she has written about Pakistan, India, Japan, North and South Korea, but not about China.
It begs the question of whether this is to protect her. Both Vlaskamp and de Volkskrant have refused to say.
[Both Vlaskamp and de Volkskrant were contacted to contribute to this story but would not comment further.]
