15 Oct 2022 | Middle East and North Africa, News and features, Saudi Arabia, United Kingdom
Rt. Hon. James Cleverly MP
Foreign Secretary
Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office
King Charles Street
London
SW1A 2AH
United Kingdom
15 October 2022
Dear Foreign Secretary,
On behalf of the below signed organisations, we would like to congratulate your appointment as Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs. At a time of significant global uncertainty and unrest, the UK can and must play a leading role in promoting human rights globally. While we appreciate the wide and diverse range of issues facing you and your department, we are contacting you today to draw your attention to the treatment of political prisoners in Saudi Arabia who have been imprisoned for expressing themselves.
The Specialized Criminal Court (SCC), established in 2008 to try those suspected of acts of terrorism, has instead administered disproportionate sentences, including the death sentence, to people solely for expressing themselves online. Cloaked in the language of cybercrime, this has effectively criminalised free expression and has also been brought to bear against individuals outside of Saudi Arabia.
You will have heard about the shameful case of Saudi national Salma al-Shehab, who was a student at the University of Leeds at the time of her alleged ‘crimes’ – sharing content in support of prisoners of conscience and women human right defenders, such as Loujain Alhathloul. For this, upon Salma al-Shehab’s return to Saudi Arabia, she was arrested and held arbitrarily for nearly a year, before being sentenced to 34 years in prison with a subsequent 34-year travel ban. The fact that the sentence is four years longer than the maximum sentence suggested by the country’s anti-terror laws for activities such as supplying explosives or hijacking an aircraft demonstrates the egregious and dangerous standard established both by the SCC and the Saudi regime to restrict free expression. It also further illustrates the Saudi government’s abusive system of surveillance and infiltration of social media platforms to silence public dissent.
But the actions aimed at Salma al-Shehab did not happen in isolation. In fact, her sentencing is the latest in a longstanding trend that has seen the Saudi judiciary and the state at-large being co-opted to target civil society and fundamental human rights. The same day that al-Shehab was sentenced, the SCC sentenced another woman, Nourah bint Saeed Al-Qahtani, to 45 years in prison after using social media to peacefully express her views. Ten Egyptian Nubians were sentenced to up to 18 years in prison after they were arrested and detained – for two months they were held incommunicado and without access to their lawyers or family – after organising a symposium commemorating the 1973 Arab-Israeli war. Dr Lina al-Sharif was arbitrarily detained for over a year following her social media activism after a group of agents of the Presidency of State Security raided her family home and arrested her without a warrant. A worrying dimension is the use of violence and torture to coerce confessions, as well as ongoing persecution or surveillance following a prisoner’s release, further eroding the legitimacy of the SCC and its verdicts.
The UK’s close relationship with Saudi Arabia should not bind your hands to upholding human rights commitments and calling out violations when they are brought to your attention, particularly, in the case of al-Shehab, where they relate to the application of Saudi legislation for actions that took place within the territory of the United Kingdom. In fact, this relationship places you in a strong position to call for the release of all prisoners unlawfully held in Saudi Arabia without delay.
Acting definitively so early in your tenure would be a powerful symbol both to our allies and others that the UK can be a trusted protector of human rights and the rule of law.
We await your action on this important issue and further support the calls to action outlined by over 400 academics, staff and research students from UK universities and colleges in a letter authored to you and the Prime Minister.
If you require any more information we would be happy to organise a briefing at a time that works best for you.
Kind regards,
Index on Censorship
ALQST For Human Rights
SANAD Organisation for Human Rights
CIVICUS
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR)
SMEX
Vigilance for Democracy and the Civic State
Access Now
Human Rights Watch
PEN International
English PEN
Front Line Defenders
IFEX
12 Oct 2022 | News and features, United Kingdom
Index on Censorship has been tracking the Online Safety Bill and the precursor debate on ‘online harms’ for many years. It seems that finally, under the premiership of Liz Truss, there may be the prospect of sensible and workable regulation on how content is moderated online. It has been encouraging to hear the Prime Minister confirming at PMQs on 7 September 2022 that the Bill will be amended to better balance the trade offs on safety online and individual freedoms.
So how does the government move forward with one of its signature pieces of legislation in this Parliament?
Firstly, the Bill has benefitted from high level scrutiny in Parliament and in particular by the DCMS, Joint Select Committee and Lords’ Communications and Digital Committees. These bodies have carefully heard evidence from the tech industry, civil society, victims of abuse, academics, legal experts and others and produced detailed analyses that were ignored by the previous Secretary of State for DCMS, the fourth to be charged with the task of regulating online harms. It is time to listen to the detailed scrutiny that Parliament has undertaken.
Secondly, it is vitally important that the government legislates in a way that observes the principle of legality, namely that people, business and courts can apply the rules that Parliament sets with certainty. The common law has a long tradition of presuming the legislative intent of Parliament as contributing to existing bodies of law, including fundamental constitutional principles and rights . So far however, the Online Safety Bill has sought to invert the historic right of free speech online so that perceptions of subjective harm trump objective legality. Our legal analysis indicates that if the Bill is not amended with practicability in mind, free speech would be threatened by over removal of content and tech companies would likely leave the UK – diminishing our thriving digital economy/society. Efficacy and workability should be at the heart of this new legislation, not vague commitments to cure the ills of the internet.
Thirdly, the new Secretary of State has a promising track record on this issue given her work on the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill. Indeed her comments on the problems the Higher Education Bill was designed to resolve could equally be applied to the problems the Online Safety Bill will create: “the damage that the erosion of free speech causes goes well beyond the classroom. It hits our communities, where ngenuity and diversity of ideas have flowed from throughout our country’s history. It stifles creativity, where some of our greatest artists and composers have made their name challenging the accepted wisdom of the day. The implications for our economy and our public life are catastrophic.” The new Secretary of State for DCMS should apply the dictum that what is legal to say should be legal to type.
It is never too late for the government to listen and heed the extensive warnings to prevent bad regulation. In this briefing, we have highlighted the five key areas for decision-makers to consider in order to protect free speech for adults. These changes are not an attempt to ‘water down’ the Bill but to purposefully demarcate protections that are only appropriate for children as distinguished from adults:
1. Remove the ‘legal but harmful’ provision completely
2. Prevent the algorithmic censorship of lawful speech
3. Illegality should be decided by courts not corporates
4. Private communication and encryption need protection
5. Parliament should be sovereign
Download our new briefing on the Online Safety Bill here or read it below.
5 Oct 2022 | Kazakhstan, Legal action against journalists, News and features, Statements, United Kingdom
The urgent need to introduce anti-SLAPP measures, proposed by the UK government in July, has been underscored by the recent announcement that a UK registered company and a Kazakhstan endowment fund have issued legal proceedings against a number of UK media outlets.
In January and February 2022, openDemocracy and The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ), amongst other outlets, published separate reports on the Nazarbayev Fund and Jusan Technologies Ltd. The Nazarbayev Fund is a Kazakhstan university and schools endowment fund, associated with the former president, Nursultan Nazarbayev and Jusan Technologies Ltd is a UK registered company that controlled over $7.8bn in gross asset value. This included an online marketplace, a mobile phone operator, financial services and shopping centres. According to the reports, the Nazarbayev Fund owned a controlling stake in the company via an intermediary until late 2021, raising questions as to why a UK company held some of Kazakhstan’s wealth.
As a result of their public interest reporting, TBIJ and openDemocracy are among the media outlets who have been threatened with legal action by lawyers instructed by both the Nazarbayev Fund and Jusan Technologies Ltd. There should be no question that investigating and reporting on the financial interests of authoritarian leaders, both during their time in office and afterwards, and entities connected with them, is clearly in the public interest. For this to be met with threats of costly and time-consuming legal action constitutes a significant and severe threat to media freedom and the public’s right to know.
The undersigned organisations call for the legal action against openDemocracy and The Bureau of Investigative Journalism to be dropped and stand in solidarity with all outlets facing SLAPPs for their reporting. We also reiterate our calls to the UK Government to be both bold and swift with their proposals to bring forward anti-SLAPP legislation to ensure all public interest reporting is robustly protected against abusive lawsuits.
Index on Censorship
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
Blueprint for Free Speech
Tax Policy Associates Ltd
ARTICLE 19
Spotlight on Corruption
Justice for Journalists Foundation
Whistleblowing International Network
Public Interest News Foundation
Rory Peck Trust
The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation
National Union of Journalists
English PEN
Rights and Accountability in Development (RAID)
The Campaign for Freedom of Information in Scotland
Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
Transparency International UK
PEN International
Global Witness
Society of Authors
Protect
30 Sep 2022 | Armenia, Azerbaijan, Burma, Hong Kong, Iran, Kyrgyzstan, Opinion, Ruth's blog, Saudi Arabia, United Kingdom, United States, Zimbabwe
The last week has been unprecedented in global news – although I do feel that every time we see the word unprecedented to refer to current events we’re just tempting fate to make it even worse. Our news has been dominated by crucially important and life-changing stories – the economic turmoil in the UK; the impact of global inflation; the real-life effects of Hurricanes Fiona and Ian on the east coast of Canada and the USA; Putin’s annexation of four more Ukrainian territories; the election of the most right-wing prime minister since Mussolini in Italy and; the suspected nation-state-orchestrated sabotage of the Nord Stream gas pipelines. This has been a busy news week. But beyond the headlines there have been so many other stories, other crises, other issues that in a ‘normal’ week (if there is such a thing anymore) would have demanded our attention.
So this week – I want to do a round-up of what we’ve missed as the world has become an even scarier place for too many people. To remind us all of what else is happening in the world that we’ve missed as we have been glued to the news that is struggling to report on everything that has happened.
- At least 18 journalists have been arrested in Iran for daring to cover the protests which have followed the brutal death of Mehsa Amina, who was beaten by state officials for incorrectly wearing a hijab.
- Prince Mohammed Bin Salman was appointed the Prime Minister of Saudi Arabia by his father, a move seemingly designed to give him an extra layer of legal protection in the ongoing lawsuits relating to the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.
- In an act of extraordinary self-sabotage which will undermine not only the British government’s global soft influence but will also significantly impact the promotion of real news and a free and fair media, the BBC World Service has announced deep cuts to their provision including ending Hindi, Arabic, Persian and Chinese radio services among others.
- Azerbaijan has launched an offensive into Armenia this month, with casualties reported on both sides. Although there is currently a ceasefire, the situation in Armenia looks bleak, with little international attention.
- Border clashes between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan have taken nearly 100 lives, with 137,000 people forced to flee the fighting in a week that has marked the worst violence in the area for years.
- The former democratic leader of Myanmar, Aung San Suu Kyi, has had a further three years added to her detention in a closed trial – her total sentence is now 23 years. In addition one of her advisors, the Australian citizen Sean Turnell, has also been sentenced to a three-year prison sentence by the military junta.
- In Zimbabwe, author Tsitsi Dangarembga has been arrested and fined for protesting against the government in the latest sign of a government crackdown against dissent.
- In Hong Kong, a man who attended the British Consulate in order to mark the passing of her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II has been arrested and charged with sedition for playing the British national anthem on his harmonica.
- A new report from Global Witness has highlighted the fact that an environmental activist is killed every two days while trying to prevent or expose aggressive forms of industry.
- In numerous states in the USA the impact of the end of Roe v Wade is now being felt. The University of Idaho has issued guidance informing faculty that they must remain neutral on issues relating to abortion or face dismissal – the rights afforded under academic freedom will not extend to this area.
- In the UK the Court of Appeal considered the case of the Colston 4 and the toppling of the statue of Edward Colston in Bristol. The judgement is far from ideal – and removes the human rights defence for future similar acts.
These are just a few of the dozens of stories that many of us missed this week while the world is in turmoil. As ever the role of Index is to make sure that these stories and those of dissidents are not ignored or forgotten.
