Republican White House hopeful in racism row - YouTube: ""
'via Blog this'
For the establishments of social net works and institutions for Free fair elections in Africa
Friday, December 30, 2011
Monday, December 19, 2011
South Sudan Press freedom hard to come | PRI.ORG
Published 19 December, 2011 09:00:00 The World
http://media.theworld.org/audio/121420115.mp3
Publisher Dhieu Mathok shows Dengdit Ayok's column, criticizing President Salva Kiir for allowing his daughter to marry out of their tribe.. (Photo by Pierre Fink.)
The new constitution of South Sudan is one of the most progressive in Africa. It guarantees freedom of the press, however in practice, reality is very different.
It all began with the wedding of the daughter of South Sudan President Salva Kiir.
Instead of marrying within the Dinka tribe, his daughter chose to marry a businessman from Ethiopia – and her father allowed her to do it.
“An insult against his people,” is how Dengdit Ayok described the marriage in his column in The Destiny newspaper.
That criticism didn’t go down well with the new government of Africa’s newest country. South Sudan became independent on July 9. It separated from Sudan, after more than 20 years of civil war.
In November, South Sudan’s National Security Services summoned Destiny Editor-in-chief Ngor Garang to its offices in Juba. Destiny publisher Dhieu Mathok, who went with him, said they thought they were going in for a “constructive dialogue.”
“But unfortunately after two hours in discussion, we were served with the letter of suspension of the newspaper,” Mathok said. “And then the editor-in-chief was arrested.”
Several days later, Ayok was also arrested. Both men were held at NSS headquarters, a windowless building on the outskirts of Juba. After two weeks in detention, pressure from NGOs and diplomats led to their release. Dengdit Ayok said their treatment was harsh.
“On the day they arrested me I was badly beaten.”
He said that they were released without charges and forced to write a statement of apology. But Ayok said he doesn’t regret what he wrote in his column and wants to continue his work as a journalist in South Sudan.
President Kiir said the arrests of the Destiny journalists were justified — though South Sudan’s new constitution, among the most progressive in Africa, prohibits holding anyone for more than 24 hours without a judge’s approval. It also guarantees freedom of the press. Atem Yaak Atem, Deputy Information Minister, said he had no comment on the arrest of the journalists.
Atem unofficially said, however, that he thought President Kiir and the head of the NSS believed they were above the law. Tom Rhodes, of the Committee to Protect Journalists, said the Destiny case is only the most blatant example of a worrisome trend in the new country.
“We have come across earlier cases of short term detentions of journalists in South Sudan and it’s done completely arbitrarily without any address to the law, or any official charges brought forward,” Rhodes said.
Though both journalists are free, the Destiny newspaper remains shut. Mathok said he’s worried his new country is not living up to its promises.
“Nobody likes anybody to be tortured, nobody likes any human right abuse in this young country because our Sudan, Sudan is born out of a struggle against all this kind of inhumanity, so we don’t want to see them in our new country.”
Mathok said he’s concerned that South Sudan may become just like the country it broke away from — Sudan.
http://media.theworld.org/audio/121420115.mp3
Publisher Dhieu Mathok shows Dengdit Ayok's column, criticizing President Salva Kiir for allowing his daughter to marry out of their tribe.. (Photo by Pierre Fink.)
The new constitution of South Sudan is one of the most progressive in Africa. It guarantees freedom of the press, however in practice, reality is very different.
It all began with the wedding of the daughter of South Sudan President Salva Kiir.
Instead of marrying within the Dinka tribe, his daughter chose to marry a businessman from Ethiopia – and her father allowed her to do it.
“An insult against his people,” is how Dengdit Ayok described the marriage in his column in The Destiny newspaper.
That criticism didn’t go down well with the new government of Africa’s newest country. South Sudan became independent on July 9. It separated from Sudan, after more than 20 years of civil war.
In November, South Sudan’s National Security Services summoned Destiny Editor-in-chief Ngor Garang to its offices in Juba. Destiny publisher Dhieu Mathok, who went with him, said they thought they were going in for a “constructive dialogue.”
“But unfortunately after two hours in discussion, we were served with the letter of suspension of the newspaper,” Mathok said. “And then the editor-in-chief was arrested.”
Several days later, Ayok was also arrested. Both men were held at NSS headquarters, a windowless building on the outskirts of Juba. After two weeks in detention, pressure from NGOs and diplomats led to their release. Dengdit Ayok said their treatment was harsh.
“On the day they arrested me I was badly beaten.”
He said that they were released without charges and forced to write a statement of apology. But Ayok said he doesn’t regret what he wrote in his column and wants to continue his work as a journalist in South Sudan.
President Kiir said the arrests of the Destiny journalists were justified — though South Sudan’s new constitution, among the most progressive in Africa, prohibits holding anyone for more than 24 hours without a judge’s approval. It also guarantees freedom of the press. Atem Yaak Atem, Deputy Information Minister, said he had no comment on the arrest of the journalists.
Atem unofficially said, however, that he thought President Kiir and the head of the NSS believed they were above the law. Tom Rhodes, of the Committee to Protect Journalists, said the Destiny case is only the most blatant example of a worrisome trend in the new country.
“We have come across earlier cases of short term detentions of journalists in South Sudan and it’s done completely arbitrarily without any address to the law, or any official charges brought forward,” Rhodes said.
Though both journalists are free, the Destiny newspaper remains shut. Mathok said he’s worried his new country is not living up to its promises.
“Nobody likes anybody to be tortured, nobody likes any human right abuse in this young country because our Sudan, Sudan is born out of a struggle against all this kind of inhumanity, so we don’t want to see them in our new country.”
Mathok said he’s concerned that South Sudan may become just like the country it broke away from — Sudan.
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Monday, December 12, 2011
Thousands protest Russian elections | WBEZ
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS | DEC. 10, 2011
Tens of thousands of people held the largest anti-government protests that post-Soviet Russia has ever seen to criticize electoral fraud and demand an end to Vladimir Putin's rule. Police showed surprising restraint and state-controlled TV gave the nationwide demonstrations unexpected airtime, but there is no indication the opposition is strong enough to push for real change from the prime minister or his ruling party.
Nonetheless, the prime minister seems to be in a weaker position than he was a week ago, before Russians voted in parliamentary elections. His United Party lost a substantial share of its seats, although it retains a majority.
The independent Russian election-observer group Golos said Saturday that "it achieved the majority mandate by falsification," international observers reported widespread irregularities, and the outpouring of Russians publicly denouncing him throughout the country undermines Putin's carefully nurtured image of a strong and beloved leader.
Putin "has stopped being the national leader — in the eyes of his team, the ruling political class and society," analyst Alexei Malachenko of the Moscow Carnegie Center wrote on his blog.
Putin, who was the president of Russia in 2000-2008 before stepping aside because of term limits, will seek a new term in the Kremlin in the March presidential elections. The protests have tarnished his campaign, but there is not yet any obvious strong challenger.
A statement released late Saturday by Putin's press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, acknowledged the day's protests by people "displeased" with the elections but noted demonstrations in support of the elections in recent days.
"We respect the point of view of the protestors, we are hearing what is being said, and we will continue to listen to them," the statement said. "The citizens of Russia have a right to express their point of view, in protest and in support, and those rights will continue to be secured as long as all sides do so in a lawful and peaceful manner."
The most dramatic of Saturday's protests saw a vast crowd jam an expansive Moscow square and adjacent streets, packed so tight that some demonstrators stood on others' toes. Although police estimated the crowd at 30,000, aerial photographs suggested far more, and protest organizers made claims ranging from 40,000 to 100,000 or more.
Elsewhere in Russia, some 7,000 protesters assembled in St. Petersburg, and demonstrations ranging from a few hundred people to a thousand took place in more than 60 other cities. Police reported only about 100 arrests nationwide, a notably low number for a force that characteristically quick and harsh action against opposition gatherings.
The police restraint was one of several signs that conditions may be easing for the beleaguered opposition, at least in the short term. Although city authorities generally refuse opposition forces permission to rally or limit the gatherings to small attendance, most the protests Saturday were sanctioned. In a surprise move, Moscow gave permission for up to 30,000 people to rally and police took no action when the crowd appeared to far exceed that. Just as striking, police allowed a separate unauthorized protest to take place in Revolution Square.
State-controlled television, which generally ignores or disparages opposition groups, broadcast footage not only of the Moscow protest — which was so big it would have been hard not to report — but in several other cities as well.
United Russia official Andrei Isayev on Saturday acknowledged that the opposition "point of view is extremely important and will be heard in the mass media, society and the state."
Yet the concessions may be only a way of buying time in hope the protests will wither away. The opposition says the next large Moscow protest will be on Dec. 24. What it will do in the interim to keep morale high is unclear. In addition, the social media that nourished Saturday's protests may be coming under pressure. A top official of the Russian Facebook analog Vkontakte said this week his company has been pressured by the Federal Security Service to block opposition supporters from posting. On Friday, he was summoned by the service for questioning.
Meanwhile, though United Russia may be shaken by the last week's events, it still can count on a large cadre of supporters. The head of its youth wing, Timur Prokopenko, was quoted by the Interfax news agency as saying he had nearly 170,000 activists "who are ready at moment to go to rallies" in support of the government.
Saturday's Moscow protest was notable not only for its size, but also for attracting political forces from across the spectrum — from liberals to communists to extreme nationalists.
"United Russia made a miracle, prompting all of us to unite against it," nationalist leader Konstantin Krylov told the rally.
Thousands of protesters also were allowed to march from a gathering place near the Kremlin across downtown to a square where the main rally was held. Police were out in force, blocking all side lanes to prevent the demonstrators from approaching government buildings.
" Russia will be free!" "Russia without Putin!" ''United Russia is a Party of Crooks and Thieves!" protesters chanted.
"We will fight to the end, to the cancellation of this shameful, false election," said Grigory Yavlinsky, leader of the liberal Yabloko party that failed to make it to parliament in last Sunday's vote. "We are launching a campaign to drive Putin from power."
The organizers sought to send a message of unity, urging the crowd to respect the diversity of speakers' views. At one point, the audience booed a military veteran when he called for the restoration of the Soviet Union, but chanted slogans of support when he denounced the vote-rigging and said the army was with people.
"The army is with us, 80 percent of officers hate the defense minister," retired Maj.-Gen. Yevgeny Kopyshev shouted.
The organizers also praised police for helping maintain order, as demonstrators chanted "Police with people!"
The rally demanded the cancellation of the election results, the punishment for officials responsible for vote-rigging, registration of the opposition parties that were denied it, liberalization of the electoral law and holding new elections. The organizers urged protesters to brace for another rally in two weeks.
"We'll come again!" the crowd chanted.
The Moscow organizers appeared to realize they are facing a tough challenge of keeping protest momentum.
"Nothing will change it if it remains a single rally," said Sergei Parkhomenko, the editor of Vokrug Sveta monthly magazine who was one of the demonstration's organizers. "It must be the first in a long series of protests."
Vladimir Milov, a former energy minister who is now an opposition activist, also acknowledged that the organizers need to plan their strategy to preserve the protests' energy. "Otherwise people will just grow tired and stop attending the rallies," he said, adding that the opposition must focus on next year's presidential election.
Yevgeniya Albats, editor of the liberal New Times weekly, said the opposition must gather signatures for the cancellation of the vote results and for Putin to step down. "This is only the beginning of a long and difficult struggle," she said. "This is our land, and we must get it back."
Oleg Orlov, the head of Memorial rights group, said the rally turned a new page in history.
"We are now changing the nation's history to the better," Orlov said. "We will force the government to realize that they will have to pay a price for rigging the vote, and the price is their legitimacy."
Orlov said the protests must focus on challenging Putin's re-election bid. "We can deal a blow on this rule of thieves next March and show the real price to that "national leader,'" he said.
The organizers read a letter from Ilya Yashin, an opposition leader jailed for taking part in a protest earlier this week. "Even behind bars we are feeling free, unlike those who are hiding from the people in the Kremlin," Orlov said.
Congo election: Two men declare themselves president - CSMonitor.com
International observers reject the Congo election results that put President Joseph Kabila on top. His main rival, meanwhile, declares himself president.
Supporters of Congolese president Joseph Kabila take to the streets in celebration in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo, Friday, after the electoral commission declared their candidate the winner. Since then, opposition candidates and international observers have rejected the results citing irregularities. The main opposition candidate says he won with 54 percent of the vote.
Jerome Delay/AP
Congolese police have launched a crackdown in the capital Kinshasa, rounding up Congolese youths from their homes, as opposition candidates and international observers reject Friday's results from recent presidential and parliamentary elections.
The Carter Center, one of several election observer missions that followed the Nov. 28 elections, said that multiple irregularities in the election and tallying process made them conclude that the election results “lack credibility.” Etienne Tshisekedi, the main opposition candidate, meanwhile, declared himself president, saying that his own party’s vote tallies taken from polling stations showed that he had won with 54 percent of the vote.
“The problem was obviously with the tabulation process,” says David Pottie, mission manager for the Carter Center in Kinshasa, speaking with the Monitor by phone. Among the irregularities: Results from 2,000 separate polling stations in Kinshasa went missing, and some polling stations with improbably high turnout reported 100 percent voter support for the incumbent president. The Carter Center rated 40 percent of the 169 compilation centers around the country as “poor.”
“In our conclusion we find the irregularities are significant enough to undermine the credibility of the election results,” says Mr. Pottie. “But having said that, we don’t have a smoking gun to reveal 1.5 million votes, and to reverse the order of the final results.”
This is not the election that the people of the Democratic Republic of Congo hoped for and deserved. These are the Democratic Republic of Congo’s second set of elections since the fall of the dictatorship of President Mobutu Sese Seko, and a decade-long civil and regional war that killed as many as 5 million Congolese in the late 1990s and early 2000s.
With 19,000 UN peacekeepers on the ground in Congo, there is little chance of a return to outright war. But a failed election in Congo has the potential to extend human suffering in the country, to delay the kind of development that could put Congo on par with other fast-growing African neighbors, and to encourage meddling from its stronger neighbors.
Official results show that incumbent President Joseph Kabila had won the election with 49 percent of the vote, compared with 32 percent for Mr. Tshisekedi. Tshisekedi’s supporters, both inside Congo and in the widespread diaspora community in Europe and America, rejected the results. His supporters also indicated that they could not trust either a recount by the country’s independent election commission – the chairman of which is the personal pastor of Kabila – or a legal challenge in Congo’s court system, as they view the judges to be pro-Kabila.
Among the most glaring irregularities was the vote count in the locality of Mulemba-Nkulu, in southern Katanga province. Voter turnout across the country was a relatively-low 59 percent, but in Mulemba-Nkulu, turnout was 99.46 percent. All 266,000 votes in Mulemba-Nkulu went to President Kabila.
In Kinshasa, Tshisekedi told reporters that based on his own party’s vote count, “I consider myself from this day on as the elected president." Agence-France Presse news agency quoted government spokesman Lambert Mende as saying that Tshisekedi’s statement was “an attack on the constitution,” and said that Tshisekedi should be arrested for instigating violence.
On the streets of Kinshasa, there were instances of looting, but little major organized protest at press time. But Associated Press reported that police had gone house to house in pro-Tshisekedi neighborhoods and taken youths from their homes, firing AK-47s into the air to clear the streets and prevent interference. Human Rights Watch said in a report that 18 people had been killed, most of them by Kabila’s elite Presidential Guard, in the lead-up to the elections.
Get daily or weekly updates from CSMonitor.com delivered to your inbox. Sign up today.
Related stories
Friday, December 9, 2011
Friday, November 11, 2011
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Monday, October 24, 2011
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Today’s elections in Liberia: Will there be development or instability? « Rock the Vote Blog
Roc
Following Liberia’s civil crises from 1989-1996, Mr. Charles Taylor was named head of the National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL), the leading rebel group during the aforementioned war days. Taylor was one of seven councilmen who participated in Liberia’s interim government and mandated post-war democratic elections in 1997. These elections were not completely democratic because candidates were relegated to campaign in only certain parts of the country. Taylor ended up winning the majority of the vote because many people feared he would wage full-scale war if he lost.
His regime was marred by national insecurity and a lack of basic social services, including education and healthcare. Civil servants were even unpaid for up to twenty-two months.
Liberians quickly grew tired of Taylor’s discrimination and the abject poverty of his regime. As a result, a rebel group called Liberian United for Reconciliation and Development (LURD) launched a major insurgency against the government. This brought the country into another round of chaos.
In 2003, with the assistance of the international community, President Taylor was taken out of the country. This event marked the end of Liberia’s war, suppression and destruction of lives and properties. A transitional government was established and the Comprehensive Peace Agreement was created. The purpose of the agreement was to stabilize the country and conduct democratic elections in 2005.
Madam Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, a graduate of Harvard University and candidate for the Unity Party, won the 2005 election. Once President Sirleaf was elected, Liberians anticipated a restoration of their country’s reputation, values, basic social services, and above all: peace. With a broken infrastructure, no electricity, no pipe born water, unusable roads, and destroyed bridges, hospitals, and schools, there was much to be done. Since 2006, President Sirleaf has done a tremendous restoration; yet as a Liberian, I can say that we are far from finished.
On Tuesday, October 11, 2011, Liberians will once again head to the polls to elect a leader for another six-year term. The question is what will we decide is most important as we exercise our right to vote? Will we choose national growth and development or personal interest? The task of national development is undoubtedly huge. We must choose the candidate that will work unselfishly to improve our country, and this leader must patiently listen to his or her people, taking everyone’s needs and opinions into account. Democracy is tolerance and respect for each other, and this notion must be carried out by all Liberians, including its leader.
The destiny of our country lies in the votes that we will cast today. It is dire that each Liberian vote and make the best decision for not his or herself, but for Liberia as a whole. I want to particularly call on all young people who are eligible to vote; you must exercise this right without fear and instead, with the knowledge that we can stand together if the election’s results run awry.
The results of today’s election will be announced 15 days after ballots are cast. I urge all Liberians, to exercise the power of democracy in order to better our country for which we have fought so hard.
Unfortunately, I will not be able to cast a ballot in today’s ever-important election, as I am temporarily working in the United States. My time in the United States has made me realize that it is important for people to stand up for their rights not only in Liberia, but all over the world. I had the opportunity to attend one of the several “Occupy” rallies spreading throughout the U.S. At Washington DC’s rally, I saw with my own eyes Americans standing up against the greed of the wealthy and the dysfunction of their government. As these people stood together, a sense of nationalism was present. These peaceful yet powerful protests reminded me that violence is not needed to make the point that a country’s people should stand together for the sake of each other and not for the sake of a select few. The protest had me hoping that today Liberians will peacefully cast their ballots holding on to the same notion.
Tags: 2011, 2011 protest, Former President Charles Taylor, Occupy rallies, October 11, President Sirleaf, violence October 25
 | isatu@rockthevote.com Bio: Isatu Ville has worked with the Liberian Council of Churches Youth Desk (LCCYD) and Federation of Liberia Youths (FLY) and is the current head the National Student Christian Council(NSCC). She is temporarily working at Rock the Vote before returning to Liberia. Email the author at: blog(at)rockthevote.com |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)