Daily Archives: February 9, 2020

Brazils democratic institutions are under attack. Since taking office, the Jair Bolsonaro administration, helped by its allies on the far right, has systematically undermined cultural, scientific and educational institutions in the country, as well as the press.

Early on, prominent members of Bolsonaros political party started a campaign to encourage university and high school students to covertly film their teachers and denounce them for ideological indoctrination. This persecution campaign, ominously called School Without Party, created a sense of intimidation and fear in educational institutions in a country barely three decades out of an oppressive military regime. Last month, Bolsonaro suggested that the state should censor textbooks to promote conservative values.

The Bolsonaro administration has made it clear it will not tolerate deviation from its ultra-conservative politics and worldview. Last year the administration fired the marketing director of Banco do Brasil, Delano Valentim, for creating an ad campaign promoting diversity and inclusion, which was then censored by the government. Later that year, as Brazils Amazon forest burned at an alarming rate, Bolsonaros administration retaliated against scientists who dared to present facts. Ricardo Galvo, the former director of Inpe (National Institute for Space Research), was removed from his post for releasing satellite data on deforestation in the Amazon.

The government is also dangerously hostile to the media. On 21 January this year, the federal prosecutors office opened a baseless investigation into the American journalist Glenn Greenwald and his team for participating in an alleged conspiracy to hack the cellphone of Brazilian authorities. The prosecution, a clear attack on freedom of the press, was a response to a series of exposs that Greenwald and the Intercept published concerning possible corruption in Bolsonaros inner circle.

This is not an isolated case. Government officials throughout the country, from regional courts to the military police, have taken it upon themselves to ideologically defend Bolsonaro and curtail free expression. In 2019 alone, there were 208 reported attacks on media and journalists in Brazil.

On 16 January, Bolsonaro and the then special secretary for culture, Roberto Alvim, filmed a joint broadcast that laid out their ideological plans for the country. They praised the conservative turn and the resumption of culture in the country. The next day, Alvim went further: during a video segment to announce a new national arts award, he made apparent allusions to Nazi principles and lifted phrases from the Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels.

Domestic outrage and international condemnation caused Alvim to step down. But Alvim was merely giving voice to Bolsonaros far-right political project, which continues in full force: a continuous affront to freedom of expression, justified in the name of national culture. Public institutions that represent Brazils multicultural heritage the Superior Council of Cinema, Ancine, the Audiovisual Fund, the National Library, the Institute of National Historical and Artistic Heritage (Iphan) and the Palmares Foundation for Black Culture have faced censorship, funding cutbacks and other political pressure.

The Brazilian film-maker Petra Costa, director of the documentary The Edge of Democracy, currently has a chance of becoming the first female Latin American director to win an Oscar. Yet Bolsonaros secretary of communication recently used his official Twitter channel to disseminate a video attacking Costa as an anti-patriot spreading lies about the Bolsonaro government. Similarly, the feature films Bacurau, Invisible Life and Babenco received international acclaim at the Cannes and Venice film festivals, but Bolsonaro has declared that no good films have been produced in Brazil for a long time.

The Bolsonaro government is also working to reverse several important social achievements of the last two decades, including affirmative action. Between 2003 and 2017, the proportion of black students entering Brazilian universities increased 51%; the Bolsonaro regime wants to roll back this progress. Bolsonaro and his ministers routinely disparage ethnic minorities and the LGBTQ+ community all while ignoring the violence and criminality of rightwing paramilitary militias.

This is a government that has no development plan for its people. Instead, the Bolsonaro regime is engaged in a dangerous culture war against contrived internal threats. It denies global warming and the burning of the Amazon, despises leaders who fight for the preservation of the environment, and disrespects the culture and environmental preservation carried out by indigenous communities.

We fear that these attacks on democratic institutions may soon become irreversible. Based on the most extreme and narrow conservative principles, Bolsonaros project is to change the content of school textbooks and Brazilian films, restrict access to funding for scholarships and research, and intimidate intellectuals, journalists and scientists. We ask the international community to:

Pressure Brazil to fully respect the universal declaration of human rights, and thereby respect freedom of expression, thought and religion.

Finally, we call on human rights bodies and the international press to put a spotlight on what is happening in Brazil. This is a grave political moment. We must reject the rise of authoritarianism.

Read more from the original source:

Democracy and freedom of expression are under threat in Brazil - The Guardian

Captivity is a mentality! Has Netflix renewed OA for the fourth season???

OA, an American mystery drama, is all set to say our goodbye as Netflix has canceled further seasons of it. This is one of the saddest news for the fans who were eagerly waiting for the suspense left in season 2 to get revealed in the third one. Soon, after the release of 2nd season on 22nd March 2019, which was a massive hit as it broke the records of the previous seasons. On 5th August 2019, Netflix officially canceled the further seasons of the show, leaving the suspense with a big question mark. The news extremely hurts fans.

What is OA all about???

OA is a science-based fuction series. The co-creator of it is Brit Marling. It was premiered on Netflix on 16 December 2016. The director is Batmanglij. Previously, the OA story was divided into 5 phases and therefore ought to be directed in 5 seasons. Still, after the release of the second season, Netflix canceled its further seasons leaving behind the unveiled secrets. When co-creator Brit Marling got the news, she was shocked and said while posting on Instagram Zal and I are deeply sad not to finish this story. The first time I heard the news, I had a good cry.

When is Releasing??

As it is canceled. So, how will it release??

Cast-

The cast of season 2 included Brit Marling, Jason Isaacs, Patrick Gibson, Emory Lohen,Ian Alexander, Phyllis Smith, Brandon Perea, Brendon Meyer, Will Brill, Alice Krige, Chloe Levine and many more.

Plot :

As season 3 cancelation has been done. Therefore, there is no need to discuss the scheme. But let us talk about the plot of the second season

The second season follows the OA as she traverses to another dimension and ends up in San Francisco to continue her search for her former laptop. Hap and her fellow captives, as prarie passes paths with private eye Karim Washington to assist in the investigation of surreal disappearance of a missing girl.

The news of cancellation is a heartbreak for the fans, and they will need time to heal themselves.

Continued here:

You Will Find Your Freedom : Has Netflix Renewed Season 3 of OA? - Union Journalism

Last November, each of the presidential campaigns received a questionnaire about an issue seldom discussed on the campaign trail, but one crucial to our democracy freedom of the press. To date, only Michael BloombergMichael Rubens BloombergBloomberg meets with Democratic governors Bloomberg wins endorsement from Democrat who flipped Michigan seat Bill Maher to Steve Bannon: 'I wish we had someone on our side as evil as you' MORE has replied.

Where are the rest?

This is a trying time for journalism. Its a moment begging for new ideas to build trust, for a new tone to our discourse, for transparency over obscurity. A good place to start is with those who seek to occupy the White House.

Thats why we at the National Press Club Journalism Institute, together with the National Press Club, the Society for Professional Journalists and other industry partners,asked presidential candidatesfrom both parties to describe what a free press means to them, to define their obligations to the free flow of information, and to articulate their commitments to transparency. Bloomberg deserves credit for giving the questions serious consideration.

The Bloomberg campaign said the former three-term New York mayor wants the next president to be afirm and outspoken champion of the news media, has misgivings about the need for a federal media shield law and would restore regular press briefings to the White House.

Bloomberg, of course, is not a disinterested party. He is the founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP, which includes Bloomberg News. Bloomberg Philanthropies is a donor to the National Press Club and the NPCJI. Widely respected, the news organization has nonetheless drawn flack for apolicy of not investigating Bloombergas a candidate and for applying that policy to the other Democratic presidential candidates.

The Institute submitted the same questionnaire to President Donald TrumpDonald John Trump Biden says Buttigieg is 'not a Barack Obama' on NH campaign trail Democrats make final pitch at rowdy NH political spectacle Pelosi: Vindman ouster is 'shameful' MOREs campaign as well, though his track record answers some of the questions, and his contempt for journalists and news organizations is a recurrent theme in his Twitter feed.

But over the course of the presidential campaign most other candidates have given only passing reference to issues of press freedoms.

At theDec. 19 Democratic presidential debate, former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete ButtigiegPeter (Pete) Paul Buttigieg Biden says Buttigieg is 'not a Barack Obama' on NH campaign trail Iowa Democratic Party reviewing results from 95 precincts following caucuses Bloomberg meets with Democratic governors MORE took note of the presidents disdain. When the American president refers to unfavorable press coverage as the product of the enemy of the people, democracy around the world gets weaker, he said.

At the same debate, Sen. Amy KlobucharAmy Jean KlobucharDemocrats make final pitch at rowdy NH political spectacle Sunday shows preview: Top tier 2020 Democrats make their case before New Hampshire primary Pelosi's miscalculation and Trump hatred MORE (D-Minn.) noted that in separate Senate Judiciary Committee hearings she asked Trump attorneys general Jeff SessionsJefferson (Jeff) Beauregard SessionsBloomberg has thoughts on press freedom; the other candidates should give us theirs, too Doug Jones says he will vote to convict Trump Senate Democrats outraise Republicans, but GOP has cash edge MORE and William BarrWilliam Pelham BarrRepublican senators call on Twitter to suspend Iran's Khamenei, Zarif The Hill's Morning Report Trump basks in acquittal; Dems eye recanvass in Iowa Trump 'apoplectic' in phone call with UK's Johnson about Huawei decision: report MORE whether they would imprison journalists for doing their jobs and neither gave her an unequivocal answer. My dad was a newspaperman, Klobuchar said. So this is not just talking points to me.

Meanwhile, Andrew YangAndrew YangDemocrats make final pitch at rowdy NH political spectacle Yang hits candidates for acting like Trump is 'the cause of all our problems' Overnight Defense: Impeachment witness Vindman escorted from White House | Esper says Pentagon protects service members from retribution | Trump ousts EU envoy Sondland MORE hasproposed invigorating journalismand sowing news deserts with a $1 billion fund administered by the Federal Communications Commission to make grants to for-profit, non-profit, and local government entities to help support local news operations.

Good for them for addressing the issue.

It deserves more.

Its time to hear from the rest of the pack. Its time for voters to demand a commitment to press freedom. Its time to ask: Do you believe the president has a role in restoring faith in a free press and the checks it places on our institutions?

Record numbers of journalistsare being imprisoned abroad. Killings, miraculously down, still continue. In many cases, as in the coldblooded murder of Jamal Khashoggi, the responsible parties are state actors who make a mockery of justice.So we have asked the candidates how they would use diplomatic tools to promote a free press across the globe.

Wouldcandidates grant asylum to journalists such asEmilio Gutierrez Soto, who fled Mexico amid death threats from the military?Gutierrez' asylum claimshave twice been rejected by an immigration judge; deportation would mean returning tothe deadliest country for journalists.

At home, the last two administrationshave targeted journalistic sourcesas if they were spies. Forty-nine states have statutes or case law that protect reporters from revealing sources to government officials. Yet, the federal government offers no such protection.

Journalists working in the United States havebeen detained, their equipment confiscated, their homes searched. Federal agencies and the Supreme Court have limited information available to the public through the Freedom of Information Act. And journalists are routinelydenied access to government experts, no matter the subject.

Journalism is the key to an informed public. And in the end, only an informed public can govern itself. We need to know where the candidates stand. Its time.

Jim Kuhnhenn is a veteran Washington correspondent for the Associated Press and Knight Ridder who is now the Press Freedom Fellow for the National Press Club Journalism Institute. He is a former member of the congressional Standing Committee of Correspondents and a former president of the Washington Press Club Foundation. Follow him on Twitter @jkuhnhenn

Read more:

Bloomberg has thoughts on press freedom; the other candidates should give us theirs, too | TheHill - The Hill

Visitors to the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center were greeted today, by the sounds of jazz and treated to a day of art culture and history.Andre DuBois of Arts Wave said the Freedom Center was the perfect location to recognize the art of the Queen City.What better place than the Freedom Center during Black History Month to celebrate all the diverse arts that we have in our city. Dubois said.Docents guided tours, sharing lessons of the past and perhaps inspiring visions of a more perfect future.The National Underground Railroad Freedom Center, Arts Wave's community partner, offered free admission to the public, including its brand-new exhibition, "Motel X," a multimedia interactive experienced designed by Cincinnati artist Christine Shrum.Katie Branell of The National Underground Freedom Center describes Arts Wave's kickoff as a perfect compliment to the Freedom Centers mission.We are able to talk about Black History Month and tell people why we are here, the underground railroad, and feature our special exhibit Motel X which is an interactive multimedia exhibit on human trafficking.Arts Waves partnered with the museum as part of Lifting as We Climb in commemoration of Black History Month. Watching the reaction of patrons, DuBois said he is encouraged by the agencys mission. In this particularly event, I just love the interaction we have with different African-American artists. I think it is so important, because art is always a reflection of life.For many in the tri-state and even around the world, this Freedom Center has served throughout its 15 years as a beacon to talk about the social crises of humanity. Organizers say with Arts Wave, the internationally renowned research center serves as a bridgeWe want to be the premier institution that talks about what we call inclusive freedom. So we want to teach people about this history and then encourage them to become active on fighting against injustices today.Branell said. Arts Wave raises more than $12 million annually to support the fine arts in the Cincinnati region.

Visitors to the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center were greeted today, by the sounds of jazz and treated to a day of art culture and history.

Andre DuBois of Arts Wave said the Freedom Center was the perfect location to recognize the art of the Queen City.

What better place than the Freedom Center during Black History Month to celebrate all the diverse arts that we have in our city. Dubois said.

Docents guided tours, sharing lessons of the past and perhaps inspiring visions of a more perfect future.

The National Underground Railroad Freedom Center, Arts Wave's community partner, offered free admission to the public, including its brand-new exhibition, "Motel X," a multimedia interactive experienced designed by Cincinnati artist Christine Shrum.

Katie Branell of The National Underground Freedom Center describes Arts Wave's kickoff as a perfect compliment to the Freedom Centers mission.

We are able to talk about Black History Month and tell people why we are here, the underground railroad, and feature our special exhibit Motel X which is an interactive multimedia exhibit on human trafficking.

Arts Waves partnered with the museum as part of Lifting as We Climb in commemoration of Black History Month. Watching the reaction of patrons, DuBois said he is encouraged by the agencys mission.

In this particularly event, I just love the interaction we have with different African-American artists. I think it is so important, because art is always a reflection of life.

For many in the tri-state and even around the world, this Freedom Center has served throughout its 15 years as a beacon to talk about the social crises of humanity. Organizers say with Arts Wave, the internationally renowned research center serves as a bridge

We want to be the premier institution that talks about what we call inclusive freedom. So we want to teach people about this history and then encourage them to become active on fighting against injustices today.Branell said.

Arts Wave raises more than $12 million annually to support the fine arts in the Cincinnati region.

Link:

Arts Wave partners with the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center to celebrate Black History Month. - WLWT Cincinnati

Theres only one political body that is more incompetent than the Iowa Democratic party. That body was delivering what could be its last State of the Union speech on Tuesday.

For the fourth year, Donald Trump pretended to address Congress like his presidential predecessors, with some kind of legislative agenda worthy of the chief executive of the most powerful country on the planet.

But our reality-TV president has shown a stubborn resistance to playing anything like the normal role of a commander-in-chief. This time last year, he threatened war if Congress continued to investigate his many varied scandals, crimes and impeachable abuses.

If there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation, he said in a nonsense rhyme that sounded like the vaguely ominous threats of a childish bully armed with nuclear weapons. It just doesnt work that way!

Strangely enough, the investigations continued all the way to impeachment, and the Democrats still voted for his new North American free trade legislation. So his assessment of politics was as perfect as his call with the Ukraine president.

Trump is supposed to be a straight shooter but his State of the Union speeches are as unruly as his tweets. Two years ago he said his administration was working on a bipartisan approach to immigration reform. The next year he said that countless Americans are murdered by criminal illegal aliens.

This time around, he insisted he was building the worlds most prosperous and inclusive society. That was shortly before he recounted a gruesome spree of deadly violence by one immigrant.

As someone famously said, it just doesnt work that way.

In case you were wondering how Trump was going to demagogue his way through the next eight months of an election, you can now rest easy. He has identified the enemy, and it is something called free government healthcare for illegal aliens.

Like some Frankenstein amalgam of spare body parts, Trump is fabricating an entirely new Republican party by sewing together its most nightmarish fears. Its only a matter of time before he declares a war on Islamist atheists.

Sitting behind Trump was his chief tormentor. Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker, was dressed in white, along with several dozen Democrats marking the centenary of womens voting rights in the United States.

Trump showed his respect for the institution of Congress by refusing to shake Pelosis outstretched hand before he launched into his annual exercise in teleprompter reading. For most of Trumps speech, Pelosi adopted the posture of a schoolteacher reviewing the grade paper of one of her worst students.

Socialism destroys nations, said Trump after welcoming Venezuelas opposition leader, Juan Guaido. But always remember, freedom unifies the soul.

Pelosi shook her head as she mouthed the words to herself over again. Freedom unifies the soul. Can a soul be divided and shattered like a horcrux? How does freedom put a soul back together? And most importantly, did this speech get reviewed before it passed the presidents lips?

Trump's ideas about freedom are as strange as his devotion to Vladimir Putin

Trumps ideas about freedom are as strange as his devotion to Vladimir Putin. With a grand flourish, he awarded the nations highest civilian honor, the presidential medal of freedom, to the spectacularly racist hate-monger known as Rush Limbaugh. Trump said he was giving him the medal in recognition of all that you have done for our nation [and] the millions of people a day that you speak to and inspire. The fact that Limbaugh is now stricken with cancer does not erase a career of spewing the opposite of an inclusive society, especially through the Obama years.

At this point we should spare some thoughts and prayers for the people with the worst job in the White Houses west wing. Working as a speechwriter for Donald Trump is as thankless a job as trying to style his hair: theres not a lot to work with.

You start out with the doorstopper volumes of great presidential speeches, and you end up writing a line that sounds like youre driving a bulldozer. We are moving forward at a pace that was unimaginable just a short time ago, said Demolition Donald, and we are never ever going back!

This is the kind of rhetorical flourish a speechwriter crafts when the facts fail them. Trump constructed his big speech around some economic statistics his team had cherrypicked about the active workforce.

Somehow he failed to say that economic growth has slowed to 2.1% for the last two quarters. When economic growth under Obama was around this level, back in 2012, Trump himself thought this was less than great. The economy is in deep trouble, said the man with a tweet for all occasions.

The sick joke of the Trump presidency is that its becoming increasingly hard to tell the difference between funny strange and funny haha. After bragging about getting his NATO allies to help pay their fair share, Trump pointed to his greatest military innovation.

Just weeks ago, for the first time since President Truman established the Air Force more than 70 years earlier, he declared, we created a new branch of the United States Armed Forces, the Space Force.

At this point the cameras turned to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, who looked like he could barely stifle his giggles.

It has long been unclear how much of this presidents entourage is engaged in a daily stifled giggle.

On the eve of his impeachment acquittal, so many of the jurors listening to Trumps state of the union treat him like a man-child whose conduct cannot be judged by normal adult standards. I believe that the president has learned from this case, Senator Susan Collins of Maine told CBS News. The president has been impeached. Thats a pretty big lesson.

Yes, thatll teach him. Now he knows he can ignore congressional budgets, use military aid for his own personal gain, and coerce a foreign government to interfere with an American election.

This is a special place, Trumps America. Its the kind of country where senators can openly surrender their principles and power out of fear for their own reelection. Its the kind of country where half of Congress can cheer race-baiting radio stars and a president who demonizes immigrants.

And its the kind of country where a presidents speechwriters can just give up on the whole speechwriting thing to list a bunch of randomly famous American names to wind up one final Trumpian state of the union.

This is the home of Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglass, Amelia Earhart, Harriet Tubman, the Wright Brothers, Neil Armstrong, and so many more, Trump said as his speechwriting staff threw in the towel. This is the country where children learn names like Wyatt Earp, Davy Crockett, and Annie Oakley.

One day they will learn the name of Donald Trump too. Hes the guy who put kids in cages, watched TV all day, and made a Space Force. He got caught lying and cheating but there were no referees, so he never stopped.

See original here:

Freedom unifies the soul: Trump's State of the Union speechwriters have thrown in the towel - The Guardian

North Carolina has become a freer state over the past decade. But if we want to make our license plate slogan First in Freedom more than just a lofty aspiration, there is still plenty of work left to be done.

I am using the term freedom here in its political context. To be free is to enjoy the right to make your own decisions, to transact business and associate with other free people at your discretion, and to live according to your own values. Americas founding creed captures it well, that we all enjoy equal rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

While government obviously poses a significant threat to our freedom, it can also help us defend and exercise it. Our rights are more secure when law enforcement and the courts offer protection and the fair adjudication of disputes. And to the extent government is involved in financing education or other public goods, it can either shove us around or maximize our freedom to choose service providers that best match our particular needs and values.

When I say North Carolina has become freer over the past decade, then, here are some examples of what I mean.

Taxes are necessary to fund basic government services. But excessive taxes, and taxes applied selectively in an attempt to engineer economic or social outcomes, have the effect of reducing our freedom.

Three nonpartisan think tanks the Tax Foundation, the Cato Institute, and the Fraser Institute issue regular rankings of state tax codes. According to all three, North Carolina has improved its ranking since 2010. In the Tax Foundations State Business Tax Climate Index, for example, North Carolina was far below average at the start of the decade. Now, we rank 15th. On the Frasier Institutes tax measure, North Carolina improved from 39th in 2010 to 19th in the most recent year available (2017).

Another key indicator is educational freedom the extent to which states regulate homeschooling and private education and enable or constrain parental choice and competition among schools. According to the Cato Institutes reckoning, North Carolina now ranks 6th in educational freedom, up from 15th in 2010.

When it comes to freedom in the workplace, North Carolina gets mixed marks. We are a right-to-work state where employees cannot be compelled to join unions. Thats one reason the Frasier Institute ranks North Carolina 9th in labor-market freedom, up from 19th in 2010.

On the other hand, our state makes it harder than the average state does to choose your line of work. Thanks to strict licensing laws and other regulations, North Carolina ranks 37th in Catos occupational-freedom index, worse than our 33rd ranking in 2010. Other areas where we tend to fare poorly in national rankings include the freedom to make, sell and consume alcoholic beverages (35th) and restrictions on health insurance (30th).

While I recognize that other values matter in public policy, I place the highest priority on maximizing freedom. I do so for both foundational and practical reasons.

In the first case, North Carolinas constitution explicitly authorizes institutions of state and local government so that the great, general, and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and established. Among the inalienable rights of North Carolinians protected by the state constitution is the enjoyment of the fruits of their own labor. In other words, limiting government to maximize freedom isnt just a possible policy direction. I believe it to be the responsibility of all constitutional officers of the state.

The practical argument for freedom is simply this: it works better. People usually make better choices for themselves than politicians and bureaucrats can make on their behalf. Freer economies grow more rapidly and produce higher living standards over time. Freer societies give people greater opportunity to opt into the communities and relationships that are most consistent with their deeply held beliefs and values.

Fair warning: I plan to keep pressing my case until North Carolina is truly First in Freedom.

John Hood is chairman of the John Locke Foundation. Follow him @JohnHoodNC.

See the rest here:

Making NC truly 'First in Freedom'? - personcountylife.com

Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia independently reviewed the records without redactions and found the Justice Department had overreached in its efforts to conceal information.

Boasberg wrote in an opinion, nowhere does the White House directly ask for legal advice in the email, nor is there any other statement that can even be fairly construed as a solicitation of legal counsel.

As the Courts review makes clear, the communications here reveal no deliberative process that could expose the agencys policy deliberations to unwarranted scrutiny. Absent more, the privilege cannot apply. A record is not protected merely by virtue of being a relevant predecisional communication, he found.

As previously mentioned, the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, the most recent amendment of the law, included provisions specifically seeking to constrain overuse and abuse of Exemption 5. One requires agencies to apply a foreseeable harm standard when seeking to withhold records under the exemption. The standard would require agencies to sufficiently show that disclosure of the requested records would cause a specific harm.

An amicus brief filed by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press in an ongoing FOIA appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit notes the purpose and intent of the foreseeable harm reform to curtail abuse of Exemption 5. (Amicus briefs are legal documents filed by parties not involved in the case but who have an interest in the subject and want to offer expertise or perspective on the issues under consideration by the court.) Congress enacted the foreseeable harm standard to reverse the growing trend toward excessive government secrecy; Congress was concerned, in particular, with overuse of the deliberative process privilege, the Reporters Committee argued in the brief.

The brief also emphasizes the importance of requiring agencies to identify a specific harm that FOIA exemptions were meant to prevent. An agency cannot prevail by speculating that harm might result from disclosure, or by reciting generic rationales that could be applicable to broad categories of agency records, the Reporters Committee wrote. If an agency fails to satisfy the foreseeable harm standard as to any particular record or portion thereof, the [FOIA Improvement] Act makes clear that it must be released.

Effectively reining in overuse of Exemption 5 might also require new FOIA reforms. One potential reform would be to further shrink the amount of time records can be withheld under that exemption, perhaps to 12 years, the same cap for shielding presidential records involving deliberative process.

Another promising reform would involve mandating a balancing test if an agencys redactions are challenged. CREWs Anne Weismann recently wrote in support of such a change that Congress should reform the [FOIA] statute to mirror how the deliberative process privilege is treated in the discovery context.

When a litigant challenges the governments invocation of the deliberative process privilege in discovery, a reviewing court balances the governments interest in secrecy against the litigants interest in disclosure. Exemption 5, by contrast, has no balancing test when considering an agency claim that material is protected by the deliberative process privilege, she wrote. Accordingly, Congress should amend Exemption 5 to require agencies and reviewing courts to weigh an agencys need to protect the quality of its decisions against the publics interest in disclosure.

As Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) said in support of the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, a truly democratic system depends on an informed citizenry to hold their leaders accountable. Allowing agencies to use Exemption 5 as a get out of jail free card to avoid disclosing embarrassing or politically problematic records whenever they want runs directly contrary to that goal.POGO will continue working with our partners to pursue further reforms to improve FOIA and increase transparency and accountability in government.

Read the original:

The Most Abused Freedom of Information Act Exemption Still Needs to Be Reined In - Project On Government Oversight

Recently, the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh Yogi Adityanath said during a pro-CAA rally that anyone raising azaadi slogans will be booked for sedition. This stern warning by a chief minister whose administration has brutally cracked down on anti-CAA protesters is not a surprise. The important question is, who is afraid of the azaadi slogan?

In the last few months, this slogan has come under severe attack from the right-wing media ecosystem. Several fake videos have been broadcast on mainstream media platforms, aiming to delegitimise the detractors of the BJP government, who have raised slogans demanding azaadi.

The azaadi slogan went viral in 2016 in the aftermath of the infamous 9 February incident at JNU in Delhi. When then JNUSU president was released on bail, the university students had raised cries for freedom from poverty, from Brahmanism and from capitalism, feudalism, casteism, unemployment and hunger. Thereafter, the rhythmic chanting of azaadi slogans captured imaginations across the country.

The slogan was further popularised in 2019 when Zoya Akhtar featured it in her blockbuster movie, Gully Boy. Since then, several versions of the azaadi chant have been floating online. They have become so popular that a section of Pakistani students have also chanted it in their own country. In any case, in India the azaadi slogan has become a solid part of the protest repertoire.

For example: When women are not able to go out in the night without fearing molestation and harassment, what they are experiencing is a lack of azaadi.

The azaadi slogans began in Kashmir, but perhaps were first heard in mainland India in 2012-13, during the anti-rape movement after the Nirbhaya incident. Those protesters rejected the idea of protection as a deterrent for sexual crimes and advocated the opposite idea, that of freedom without fear. Several places in Delhi had then reverberated with azaadi slogans. Those protesters, who included men and women, demanded freedom from rape culture, freedom from patriarchy, freedom to move around at night, to love, and freedom to marry or not marry, and so on.

Curiously, even the right-wing groups such as the ABVP, which participated in the 2012-13 protests in Delhi, raised these slogans, probably because the anti-rape movement had also taken on a strong anti-Congress flavour. Azaadi slogans of that time were an attempt to break away from notions of victim-blaming, to which is related the idea of forcing on women the protection of patriarchy. They argued the converse; that the more women stepped outside the confines of their homes, the safer the streets would be for them. The movement therefore redefined the meaning of azaadi from political to social freedom.

One curious aspect of azaadi is that in order to have it you have to fight for it, reclaim it. During the colonial period, Indians fought for azaadi from the British. They wanted Indians to be the masters of their own fate. This is what azaadi actually meansthe capacity to decide your present and future. Naturally, when you try to break the shackles that are holding you back, you come up against them in all their power and fury: the British also unleashed brute force upon Indians countless times during colonial rule.

Freedom is never complete. Azaadi is an ongoing process that you have to assert and fight for at every turn. In India, where communities hold a large measure of control over individuals and their aspirations, where identities are controlled by caste or patriarchal structures and their moralistic orders, the fight for azaadi is even more important. The demand for freedom exists only in those conditions where an individual or group feels that their aspirations are being hindered by unfavourable political conditions or economic and social constraints. Thus the demand for azaadi is an expression of unequal power relations in the socio-economic and political spheres.

Naturally, those in the upper echelons of the power hierarchy, who believe they are the sole custodians of culture, will resist any movement that threatens to take away their power. That is why the chants of azaadi have been met with both outright physical violence and symbolic violence. Women demanding azaadi to take their own decisions are being vilified and slut-shamed. This conservative backlash is well-represented by Haryana Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattars utterances. He once remarked that if youmeaning womenwant freedom, then why dont you just roam around naked.

Those who believe in azaadi are routinely branded as tukdey-tukdey gang members. We also encounter slogans such as Afzal wali azaadi, Burhan wali azaadi, bandook se denge azaadi, Gauri Lankesh wali azaadi; and so on from right-wing organisations. Their slogans are directed against voices that are critical of the present regime. Yet, for all the reactions it has invoked, azaadi has continued to reverberate across India as a powerful slogan of protest.

Logically, those who are afraid of azaadi slogans are those who fear a political and economic change that would topple them from their position of power. Their fear also emanates from a psychological condition whose origins lie in a crisis of legitimacy. Over the last five years, many celebrities, intellectuals and media personalities have advocated for the present regime. Their future and interests are linked with the present government and so they have thrown their weight behind it. Any political change will create a deep legitimacy crisis for them. The situation is a kind of downward spiral: they have to continuously create a fear psychosis and narrative that favours the regime while delegitimising the protesters and their repertoire.

For example: When you are strolling in the park with your sweetheart and suddenly a bunch of people come and start thrashing you, you are experiencing a lack of azaadi.

Though the azaadi slogans are political, as the saying goes, the personal is also the political. So you find the younger generation seeking azaadi against curfew hours in hostels and opposing the strong societal and familial resistance against own-choice marriages, against moral policing and so on. Each of these are instances of lack of freedom experienced by the youth in one way or another.

The following slogan sums up this sentiment: When you want to pursue education, but are unable to or you are unable to avail quality medical services due to lack of money, you experience a lack of azaadi.

Arguably, the azaadi slogans also add a dimension to the fertile discourse over what constitutes development in India. The Nobel laureate economist Amartya Sen has been arguing that development should also be measured through the lens of freedom, which means that it should entitle people to basic services such as education, healthcare, and employment. Development, in this context, also means building capacity, especially among the marginalised. Therefore, when the youth, women and marginalised groups hit the streets with slogans demanding azaadi, they are not just protesting against a law but breaking their shackles to become more confident and empowered.

For instance: When Dalits are not able to enter temples or fetch water from public sources, they are experiencing a lack of azaadi.

Azaadi cannot be boxed in. Its meaning is redefined by every generation based on their context. The contemporary popularity of azaadi slogans reflects the ambitions of the youth. To criminalise their hopes and aspirations is just the old resisting the birth of the new.

The author is a PhD scholar at JNU in Delhi. The views are personal.

Go here to see the original:

Azaadiphobia: Who is Afraid of Freedom and Why - NewsClick

Ottawa sociology professor Hassan Diab says his long fight against accusations of terrorism wiped out his savings and caused chronic stress, depression and severe insomnia, prompting his lawsuit for financial compensation from the federal government.

Diab appealed to the government Friday to resolve the case in a humane and fair manner as he, his wife and two young children filed a statement of claim in Ontario Superior Court seeking tens of millions of dollars over his extradition to France.

Throughout this time, my family was an ocean away. I missed the birth of my son. I missed birthdays, first steps, first words and so many other irreplaceable moments, Diab, 66, told a news conference.

For nearly a decade, my freedom and my life were stolen from me.

Born in Lebanon, Diab became a Canadian citizen in 1993, working in Ottawa as a university teacher.

The RCMP arrested him in November 2008 in response to a request by France. French authorities suspected he was involved in the 1980 bombing of a Paris synagogue that killed four people and injured dozens of others, an accusation he has always denied.

Following drawn-out proceedings that went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, Diab was extradited to France where he spent three years behind bars, including time in solitary confinement.

In January 2018, French judges dismissed the allegations against him and ordered his immediate release.

Diab accuses the Canadian government of negligent investigation and malicious prosecution and says federal officials violated his constitutional guarantees of freedom of movement, liberty and security of the person.

The statement of claim contends the government withheld crucial fingerprint evidence prior to his extradition hearing.

Guy Pratte, Diabs lawyer, said Friday the evidence would have affected the outcome of the extradition proceedings.

The assertions, first outlined in an initial notice last month, have not been proven in court and the federal government has yet to file a defence.

Pratte said Diab and his family hope the government will want to right this terrible wrong without a prolonged court battle.

Upon his return to Canada, Diab said he did not want financial compensation from the Canadian government, just changes to the lousy extradition law.

An external review of Diabs extradition case for the Canadian government concluded that federal lawyers who worked on the file acted in a manner that was ethical and consistent with law and policy.

Diab has rejected the report as a whitewash exercise.

He lamented Friday the government had taken no meaningful action to reform the extradition law since his release.

The reality is that my ordeal could have been prevented, Diab said. And I am here today to ensure that no Canadian ever has to go through the same experience again.

Amnesty International Canada and the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association are among the many groups that have called for a public inquiry into the Diab case and a review of Canadas extradition system.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 7, 2020.

Follow @JimBronskill on Twitter

Read the rest here:

'My freedom and my life were stolen from me,' says Diab, suing over extradition - National Post

Fiveyoung peoplewith theSunflower CountyFreedom Project put on a play Saturday afternoon at the Meridian Arts+Entertainment Experience to highlight theperspectives of black, female activists.

A Song for Coretta, by Pearl Cleave, takes the audience to the outside of Atlantas Ebenezer Baptist Church, where people of different generations are waiting in line to pay their respects to Coretta Scott King.

The conversations that ensue, make up the play, with moments of serious discussion about past experiences, historical moments and generational differences, mixed with moments of light-hearted fun.

Each character was played by a young member of the Sunflower County Freedom Project.

The cast was comprised of Kennedye Rash, 13; Amyah Nash, 13; Phillystity Gray, 16; Braelyn Ingram, 14; and Jamiyah McCloud, 14.

After the play, the cast answered questions from the audience.

One person asked, Why this play?

InBlack History Month, people dont always talk about what the females did, and thats why I liked this play, because its about what she (Coretta) did, not what her husband (Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.) did, McCloud said.

The rest of the cast echoed that sentiment, as they believe that sometimes the classroom lessons dont always give credit where its due.

They also said the play was an effort to educate people.

The play is to inform people about black history and how much it changed from then to today, Rash said.

The group was led by Kandace Stevenson, director of programming for the Sunflower County Freedom Project.

I first wanted to find a play to reflect our history, and I noticed this was a group of young ladies auditioning, Stevenson said. This is my second year with this drama troupe. I noticed the growth and maturity, the raw emotion, dedication and trying to do better than last year.

Im super excited, I think it was fantastic. These five young ladies came to Meridian, out of their shell, totally unaware of what they would run into and they showed out, said Adrian Cross, executive director of the Meridian Freedom Project.

They were very open, especially during the question and answer segment, I think that was one of my favorite parts because they got a lot of feedback and they took their constructive criticism, but they were also able to express themselves even more.

The play was received with a standing ovation at its close.

Audience members took some thoughts back with them after viewing the performance.

I feel that we dont get the chance to hear from the female perspective on the civil rights movement, and I liked how they talked about the trauma during the Katrina hurricane, the young lady in the military, and it was all done from womens perspectives, Deborah Todd, of Meridian, said.

More information on the group can be foundwww.sunflowerfreedom.org. More information about The Meridian Freedom Project can be foundat TheMeridianFreedomProject.org.

Read the original here:

Freedom Project: Play highlights civil rights perspective of black women - Meridian Star