The Dangers of Swiss Freedom of Expression

On the face of it, the recent vote on whether Swiss mosques should be allowed to build minarets looks like a shocking example of xenaphopia and racism. But is it really that simple? Anyone who has lived in Switzerland or who understands its history and culture could forgive the Swiss for voting this way. Don’t get me wrong. I wouldn’t have voted in favour of the ban but I appreciate the background to the vote and its result.

Like Austria and one or two other European countries I can think of, Switzerland has a very inward looking and conservative population. With 8% of the population Muslim the rise of Islam must be alarming to those that have lived there all their lives. Lets put it in context. Think back 65 years to when black families started arriving here in the UK. Wind the clock forward 30 years and ask yourself whether you felt the same way as the Swiss do now when the Indian immigrants arrived after being expelled by Uganda. We in the UK have also seen a rise in the Islamic population and have even suffered as a direct result of the “radicalisation” of a small minority. The July 7th bombings, the attempted bombing of Glascow Airport Terminal  and other events in recent years are testimony to that. But do we have similar votes? Of course not.

This is partly due to the fact that our constitution does not allow for referendums just because 50,000 want one. It is also because we are more tolerant of ethnic and minority religions. A walk through just about any British city will show you how different races can live together without any significant friction. Take London where you could dine out every day for a year and never eat the same cuisine twice if you felt so way inclined! In my short street there is a South African couple, a couple of Irish families, a Scottish lady, a half Malaysian and half (Hong Kong) Chinese lady, an African couple (not sure from where) and an Iranian couple among the English. We all get along famously as one of our neighbours annual Christmas party can testify.

There is another side of the Swiss vote that worries me though. The vote does nothing to address “Islamophoboia”. If anything it hardens the attitude of radical Islamists. It doesn’t stop Swiss Muslims from worshiping but it may well drive them inwards so that a bunker mentality ferments itself. Such a result would inevitably result in the non-integration of Muslims into Swiss society. In my opinion one of the real problems with any radicalisation, whether that be political or religious, is that it is largely caused by a feeling of resentment that is itself caused by a feeling of not belonging. By not communicating with people in a positive and inclusive way, you are asking for trouble later on. Look at Northern Ireland if you want another example of how not to manage minority religions.

BBC Question Time and the BNP

The announcement made by the BBC that Nick Griffin, leader of the BNP, would be appearing on the political programme Question Time this week has raised a couple of interesting questions. First of all, should a senior political figure that represents an extreme right wing organisation by allowed to appear on a serious political programme. Secondly should other politicians not boycott the programme rather that add what could be seen as credence to his appearance?

As far as whether Mr. Griffin should be allowed to appear on the show, I think the BBC has got it right. Like it or not, the BNP are a political party and have elected representatives that were voted for in a fair and just contest. No matter how much we may abhor their views they are entitled to a place on the panel. Of course there are those who would suggest they should be banned. However whilst I would love never to have their like on a ballot paper ever again, you have to acknowledge that they have not done anything to warrant such treatment. They are a slippery bunch who tell the media one thing whilst telling the electorate another. They undoubtedly have a membership that is racist to its core and some of those members must have committed racist crimes, but the party itself has done nothing to make it illegal. OK their constitution may be illegal but they are committed to changing it and even if they don’t it is arguably not enough to get the party made illegal. The fact is, you can’t take the ball home just because you don’t win the game.

As to whether other politicians should attend the programme, I also think that Jack Straw and the others are doing the right thing. The presence of the BNP in British politics is something that doesn’t surprise me. They feed on political dissatisfaction and heaven knows there is a lot of that around at the moment. They have concentrated their campaigning in less well off regions of the UK where their policies would receive a more sympathetic hearing. Yet they have not been truly tested on a national stage. They are slippery and awkward but keeping them in the dark stands the chance of adding fuel to the fire of dissatisfaction on which their support feeds. Having the opportunity of hearing the true political heavyweights exposing what the BNP stands for is the best course of action to take.

No doubt Mr Griffin will be prepared. He will revel in the spotlight and won’t mind being hit from all sides. Fair play to him for that. I just hope that those that watch the programme and who may have voted, or thought of voting for, the BNP will realise that their policies are as water tight as a string vest. Only then will they see them for what they truly are.

Joining the BNP

Having discussed with some friends the enforced changes that Nick Griffin will have to make to the British National Party’s constitution, I have come up with a cunning plan. Unlike those emanating from Blackadder’s Baldrick, this one could just work. It is founded on the principle that the membership of the BNP is really quite low. The recent publication of their membership list (which bizarrely included serving policeman) has given us an idea of how small it is.

The objective is to join the BNP once the rules have been changed and then fight them from within. The ultimate goal would be to hit the self destruct button. A simple chance to their constitution should do it. We could start with something not too severe. Perhaps to force every member wear pink lycra tutu when on official business or to play any song by Ladysmith Black Mambazo at the start of every BNP meeting. It would be even more satisfying if the sudden influx of new members were from ethnic minorities.

All of this fun is of course hiding a very serious issue. The question remains that even if the constitution was changed to make it lawful, would it be a different organisation. The short term answer in “No”, but I remain ever hopeful that with another barrier to self expression demolished that things could change.

“The unseen majority”

The wait for the start of the latest Amnesty International campaign has been long awaited. The “Demand Dignity” campaign has been delayed, renamed and restyled to ensure the worldwide movement is ready for the work ahead. Well things have started with the release a report on Kenya by the Secretary General Irene Kahn. The campaign centres on campaigning for the rights of those living in poverty whose basic rights are denied, such as the right to adequate housing, clean water or appropriate health care.

In and around Kenya’s capital, Nairobi, about two million people live in slums. In Kibera, Africa’s largest informal settlement, residents have limited access to a sewerage system leaving raw sewage gathering and stagnating. The obvious health issues are exagerated by the small number of clinics and schools. As if this wasn’t enough, the real threat faced by people living in slums is the possibility of a bulldozer coming along in the middle of the night and destroying their home.

Irene Khan has met with senior figures in Kenya’s Government, including Prime Minister Raila Odinga, to discuss these matters and express Amnesty’s concerns about the lack of basic rights for the people. Later Irene heads off to Zimbabwe for her first high-level mission in that country. There she hopes to meet with senior figures of the newly formed unity government where she will discuss the importance of ensuring that human rights are at the core of its agenda.

If you want to take action on this new campaign or find out more about it, click here.

One Section… Two Votes

An idiosyncrasy of AI democracy is that two AI Sections (Canada and Belgium) are split between two groups. In the case of the European Union Association only the Belgian section comes into play with the two groups. As each of them should be allowed to vote they need a vote each. So as Amnesty works in this instance on the basis of one person one vote, all the other sections get two votes! Confused? You soon will be.

The European Union Association (EUA)

Phew! The art of communication may have come a long way in this electronic age but it just goes to show you that there really is no substitute for sitting down in a room and talking to one another.

So the AGM of the European Union Association (EUA) virtually ended 12 hours ahead of schedule. Such an outcome would not have been unheard of year ago and even before the AGM started. It’s 4:30pm on the Saturday and all the important business is complete.

Prior to today I’d have said I was pessimistic of a positive outcome. I even expected a lot of long, frustrating meetings attempting to get a consensus for the memorandum of understanding (MoU). This MoU lays down the procedures that will be used for the European Union Association to work with the IS and the rest of the international movement. However it was clear on arrival here that a lot of preparatory work has been done behind the scenes. The IEC, IS and the EUA Office had been in a lot of contact and this bore fruits when it came to agreeing the MoU.

Time for a beer.

AIUK Media Awards 2009

Last night I attended the Amnesty International UK Media Awards 2009. This annual event is a chance for Amnesty to celebrate all that is good in human rights reporting.

Needless to say the standard of entries in this year’s awards (the 18th) was high. What was noticeable was the age of those winning awards. The trend in recent years has seen the age of journalists reporting on human rights issues lower significantly. Additionally the number of smaller independent media outlets allowing their reporters to disappear off to far flung parts of the world to uncover a story has also increased. These facts were very encouraging considering the cutbacks being made in many media outlets.

The main award of the evening, the Special Award for Journalism Under Treat went to Eynulla Fetullayev. Some of you may recognise the name as he featured in the recent Greetings Card Campaign. He is currently serving a eight and a half year prison sentence in Azerbaijan having been found guilty of what Amnesty believes are trumpted up charges. Azerbaijan has a long history of suppressing freedom of speech and particularly targets journalists who dare to speak up. Eynulla dared to publish articles critical of the government and is now paying the price for his continued and persistant desire to speak out.

You can view a short video from Eynulla’s father here as well as hear about the other nominees.

Cambodian Land Rights

Returning to my home country I got off the plane and waiting in line at passport control. When my turn arrived, I stepped forward to the desk. To my surprise I found myself looking an immigration officer I had known since kindergarden. His family lived next door to mine when I was growing up. We exchanged warm greetings and chatted a little too long about each other’s families. I didn’t present my passport as I still had my nationality and therefore my passport didn’t need to be stamped. Yet when we had finished chatting, he asked for it. I told him, “You know who I am. Why do I need to present it?” He responded, “If you don’t have a passport I can’t let you through.” I tried to counter with, “Look we’ve known each other for 40 years. We grew up next door to each other. We both got into trouble at school. We went on double dates with our girlfriends at college. We know more about each other than any passport can tell us.” There was no movement and I knew I’d get nowhere when he responded, “Sorry they are the rules!”

I was reminded on this rather amusing yet sorry story on reading about the case of a Cambodian community who are currently fearful of being evicted from their homes in Phnom Phen. It is a classic story of whether someone has the right to live somewhere. The plight of the people is covered by a Channel 4 documentary called Unreported World. You can catch up on the episode here. If after watching this you want to take action, you can do so here.

The story of the passport at immigration was one I heard from the mouth of a Mexican academic returning to Mexico City for a conference. He was a highly respected member of society yet without that piece of paper that said he was a Mexican citizen, he was nobody. Without it he could not travel outside the country where he lived. On the taxi ride from the airport, he found himself looking out at the slums that climb the hills around the city. Millions of people attracted to the big city to work had built dwellings to provide them with the basics of shelter. The authorities “tolerated” such dwellings provided they didn’t interfere with their plans for the city. Where they did, they were knocked down and replaced. The residents had no rights, no recompense and above all no legality.

It’s working!

Working on cases of human rights abuses is disheartening. You deal with human mental suffering, physical pain, death, destruction. Such negativity is bound to make you give up. Right? Wrong! I’ve always taken the view that it just doesn’t cut the mustard to do nothing. Sometime, somewhere you have to take a stand. Sometime, somewhere the line will be crossed and we have to stand up and be counted.

However if you are one of those who needs good news, and I know of many human rights activists who do, look no further than the recent case of Delara Darabi which featured in an earlier post on this blog. The 60 strong army of bloggers who have taken up her case on Amnesty International’s bequest, and that includes Amnesty Colum(n), has generated in excess of 400 visits to the online campaign action in a week.

What is even better is that Delara has received good news. Her execution, scheduled for earlier this week, has been postponed for two months. This gives us more time to work on her case and get a satisfactory conclusion. If you haven’t had time to take action on her behalf, I urge you to do so now.

Just click here. Go on and make it even better news.

President Obama in reverse gear

The recent announcement of President Obama that CIA torturers are going to be shielded from prosecution is a step in the wrong direction. It stinks of a reality check. He may still be in office for less than 100 days but the reality of governing a country after eight years of George W Bush seems to be sinking in. After the initial excitement of those first “executive orders” announcing real progress on human rights issues such as the use of torture and Guantanemo Bay, the progress to right the wrongs since September 11^th seems to have slowed.

Anyone, apart maybe from the torturers themselves, cannot fail to be moved by the horrendous nature of the water boarding video, however simulated it may be. This, and other, form of psychological torture used by the US forces is a sign of the modern torturer. The days where someone could be arrested and beaten within an inch of their life are largely gone. In its place is a more sinister form of torture. A method that leaves no physical mark, yet scares the individual for life.

Is psychological torture any worse than physical torture? Of course not. Torture is torture. It’s illegal under international law and therefore where it is used, it should be investigated and charges placed against those that carry it out. There are no shades of grey. President Obama, let’s have less news stories about your new puppy, cute as he may be, and let us start putting right some of the wrongs that have been made in your name.

Maybe you don’t know what is involved. If so, I urge you to visit  www.unsubscribe-me.org.