Monthly Archives: July 2022

COLOMBO (News 1st); Oppositionn Leader Sajith Premadasa says that the Government has initiated a wave of oppression against the people amidst the continued calls for both the Prime Minister and the President to resign.

He says that the wave of oppression with guns and other arms has been initiated against unarmed protestors.

While condemning the oppressive measures which are being taken by the Government, the Opposition Leader demanded whether the President actually resigned or whether he simply paused for a moment.

Therefore, he emphasizes that the current administration, which continues to oppress the people, should resign, without dragging the country into a much worse situaton, and stated that they cannot continue to swear into positions as they require.

Accordingly, he appealed the tri-forces and the Police forces of the country to think of the unarmed protestors, and to not to become tools of the President and the Prime Minister, and to not to proceed to harm any protestors in the process.

He also added that the Party Leaders meeting which was supposed to be held today, was cancelled, and demanded whether the Parliament is not taking any steps to appoint a new President in the near future, as previously planned.

The Opposition Leader also requested the protestors to not to cause harm to any public property, and to peacefully continue their dissent.

See the original post:

Govt initiated a wave of oppression - Newsfirst.lk

HAVANA -- A year ago, thousands of people filled Cuba's streets and public squares in the country's largest outpouring of protest in decades.

On Monday's anniversary, its main cities looked relatively normal students sat in schools and people went to work, and as usual there were long lines of people looking for food or waiting for a bus as the island faces shortages in an economic crisis.

Hundreds were arrested during the unrest last July, and some have been sentenced to up to 25 years in prison. That is about all the two sides agree on.

Critics of the government said the events showed Cubans fighting against oppression. The authorities portrayed it as a moment when Cuba avoided a soft coup fomented by the U.S.

On July 11 and 12, 2021, protesters took to the streets to vent their frustrations over shortages, long lines and a lack of political options. Some were drawn to the marches by calls on social media, while others joined in spontaneously when marchers passed by.

The economy is still in crisis, with rising prices for what goods are available, and there has been a spike in migration to the U.S.

Cuba's economy also remains hobbled by U.S. sanctions. Despite his promises while campaigning to end the sanctions, President Joe Biden has only eased some, including allowing U.S. residents to send more money to Cuban relatives.

Since the protests, relations between the two countries have been tense.

In a message to Cubans on Monday, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that Americans watched with admiration on July 11, 2021, as tens of thousands of you took to the streets to raise your voices for human rights, fundamental freedoms and a better life. He said the U.S. stand with the marchers.

Cuba's government offered a different take.

"There was vandalism, some with cruelty and tremendous belligerence, Cuban President Miguel Daz-Canel said in comments published in official media Monday. If there's anything to celebrate it is the victory of the Cuban people, of the Cuban revolution, before the attempts of making (the protests) into a soft coup."

Responding to Blinken, Foreign Minister Bruno Rodrguez said his message was a confirmation of the direct involvement of the U.S. government in attempts to subvert order and peace in Cuba.

Authorities havent said how many people were arrested during the protests, but an independent organization formed to track the cases, Justice 11J, has counted more than 1,400. In June, Cuba's prosecutors office said courts had imposed sentences on 488 protesters, ranging up to 25 years in prison.

The government insists protesters were not arrested for political reasons but for violating laws against public disorder, vandalism or sedition. It says many acted at the instigation of U.S.-based opposition groups using social media to attack Cuba's communist system.

Saily Nez's husband, Maikel Puig, was among the protesters. He has been sentenced to 20 years in prison.

More than a sad day, I feel proud that my brave (husband) was there on the streets, Nez said on her Twitter account Monday.

Read the rest here:

On protest anniversary, Cuba, US far apart on what happened - ABC News

For the first time, a United Nations committee focused on addressing torture will scrutinize the actions of the Palestinian Authority and its treatment of those under its care.

The U.N. Committee against Torture (CAT) a subsidiary of the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) convenes today in Geneva, where it will investigate instances of enforced disappearances, violent interrogations and the holding of the remains of Israeli soldiers, among other issues. In addition to investigating the Palestinian Authority, the committee will also probe Botswana, Nicaragua and the United Arab Emirates.

CAT, which holds broad powers to probe incidents of torture and cruel treatment, is expected to review reports submitted by American, Palestinian and Israeli NGOs, including Human Rights Watch, the Palestinian Coalition Against Torture, the Hebrew University of Jerusalems Clinic on International Human Rights and others.

We welcome the fact that for the first time ever the Palestinian Authority will come under scrutiny at the United Nations for its record on torture, Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, an independent non-governmental organization based in Geneva, told Jewish Insider.

In preparation for the session and in accordance with the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (from which CAT derives its authority), the Palestinian Authority (PA) was required to submit a report of its current adherence to the convention.

The PA begins its report by reiterating its territorial claim to the Gaza Strip, with the caveat that it is not responsible for the actions of the Hamas-led government that controls the area. The Gaza Strip is legally subject to the authority of the State of Palestine and the actions taken by Hamas there since [2007] are inadmissible and illegal in the eyes of the Government of the State of Palestine, the report reads.

In response to the claim, Joe Truzman, research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told JI, Hamas rules Gaza, thats pretty much it. He continued, Even though [Palestinian Authority officials] say Gaza is theirs, I think they just they say it because they want to make it appear that they have power in the enclave, but they dont they barely do.

A July 5 meeting between PA President Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas senior political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Algeria, Truzman suggested, might indicate attempts at reconciliation. However, he said, Theres still a long way to go. Theres a lot of grievances and a lot of obstacles to overcome before that even happens. There are efforts there, but its not happening anytime soon.

As U.N. Watch notes in its alternative report on torture in the Palestinian state which CAT will also consider aside from initially placing blame for Gazas dire economic problems upon Hamas, the Palestinian report makes no mention of the treatment by Hamas or the PA of those within its territory, including Gaza. Instead, the Palestinian report is focused largely on calling out Israel for ill treatment. The report also omits Palestinian human rights abuses, such as the PAs 2021 assassination of Palestinian human rights activist Nizar Banat.

Regrettably, the Palestinians own report to the U.N. committee seeks to waste its time by attacking Israel, omitting critical information about their own record, when the review is supposed to be about the Palestinians, said Neuer. This is a pattern at the U.N. whenever the Palestinians are reviewed, they try to deflect attention from their systematic abuse and oppression of their own people, and their antisemitic policies and practices targeting Israeli Jews.

Asked about the potential for future investigations of Palestinian human rights abuses, Truzman said, Theres a huge lack of detail and information on Palestinian abuses. I still havent figured out why. Now, some say, Oh, its because the U.N. has an anti-Israel agenda, some say, []theyre just being lazy. Its tough to say but its just [that] the U.N. has a track record of not doing I think their due diligence when it comes to the Palestinian side of the conflict and their potential abuses. So Im not hopeful to see more of it, just because of their history.

The PA report was initially due in 2015, but was not submitted until 2019 a delay not addressed in the report.

CAT works closely with the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture (SPT), which has a mandate to investigate torture and abuses of human or civil rights on the ground. Because the PA is a party to the Optional Protocol, SPT will have the authority to investigate reports of torture and other abuses on the ground.

CATs concluding observations, in which they will outline their recommendations for reform, are expected to be released on or about July 29.

Read more:

UN to review reports of torture carried out by the Palestinian government - Jewish Insider

Does government intervention create its own externalities (or neighborhood effects)? Many economists think so and the question appears especially important in the current storm of dirigisme. Sixty years ago, Milton Friedman defended the idea in his influential book Capitalism and Freedom. A mainstream neoclassical economist and moderate classical liberal, Friedman wrote (p. 32):

Our principles offer no hard and fast line how far it is appropriate to use government to accomplish jointly what is difficult or impossible for us to accomplish separately through strictly voluntary exchange. In any particular case of proposed intervention, we must make up a balance sheet, listing separately the advantages and disadvantages. Our principles tell us what items to put on one side and what items on the other and they give us some basis for attaching importance to the different items. In particular, we shall always want to enter on the liability side of any proposed government intervention, its neighborhood effects in threatening freedom, and give this effect considerable weight. Just how much weight to give to it, as to other items, depends upon the circumstances. If, for example, existing government intervention is minor, we shall attach a smaller weight to the negative effects of additional government intervention.

This is an important reason why many earlier liberals, like Henry Simons, writing at t time when government was small by todays standards, were willing to have government undertake activities that todays liberals would not accept now that government has become so overgrown.

Technically, externalities are usually modelled as non-intentional effects of activities carried on for other purposes. Otherwise, everything that imposes indirect costs or benefits on somebody would be an externality; pretty much all activities would fall in that category. It seems to follow that the typical government intervention should not count as a positive or negative externality, because it is explicitly designed to create benefits for some groups and impose corresponding costs on others. However, if it also has indirect consequences on everybodys liberty, it can be considered as creating freedom externalities, as Friedman suggests. (In this perspective, a government intervention whose purpose is to increase government power and to decrease individual liberty would not generate freedom externalities, but only direct freedom costs.)

Does growing government intervention, besides increasing freedom externalities, also increase their rate of increase, as the Friedman criterion above seems to say? For any individual, the cost of a given intervention in terms of his own individual liberty will conceivably be larger the higher is the starting level of government intervention and power. One reason would be that, at higher thresholds of power, the more likely an additional intervention will combine with existing controls to give irresistible power to government and seriously undermine the liberty of the subject (or citizen). If government surveillance is widespread, for example, the more likely a new public morality or lifestyle law can be used to harass unpopular minorities. Another reason is simply that, as individual liberty decreases, the more an individual will find the remainder valuable.

Note how in other to avoid the serious problem of cost-benefit analysiswhich is that no scientific basis exists for weighing the benefits of some individuals against the costs imposed on otherwe should formulate the problem of freedom externalities la James Buchanan: each individual estimates his own cost and benefit from a given intervention and can be presumed to consent to it only if, for him, the latter is larger than the former. The only assumption made here is that, everything else equal, no individual wants to be more oppressed; oppression is a cost, not a beneficial or neutral condition. If some individuals like to be slaves for the mere pleasure of servitude, freedom externalities are not unambiguously positive or negative. The problem then becomes more complicated.

Considering only negative freedom externalities, Friedmans warning is valid: the higher the level of government intervention, the larger are the negative freedom externalities of any new proposed intervention. I suggest that it is not easy today to find any new government interventionor at least any net interventionthat would survive the Friedman criterion.

See the article here:

Government Externalities and the Friedman Criterion - Econlib

The French Revolution (1789-1799) lasted until the ascent of Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821). Years of medieval oppression and financial mismanagement led the French people to want changes in politics and institutions. They overthrew the monarchy and took charge of the government. King Louis XVI tried to use his absolute power to improve the life of his people, reform the monarchy, the government, and the society. Doing this left the country on the verge of bankruptcy.

Merchants, manufacturers, and professionals were excluded from political power. Two decades of poor harvests, drought, and disease led to economic crisis. Peasants and the poor turned against the monarchy. Intellectuals wanted societal reforms to bring greater equality and equity.

The trigger to revolution? The controller general of finances, Charles-Alexandre de Calonne, increased taxes. Tempers flared.

Louis called for a meeting on May 5, 1789, of Frances clergy, nobility, and middle class. Sessions stalled on June 17. On July 14 a mob attacked the Bastille for weapons and gunpowder starting the French Revolution. Peasants attacked the homes of the elites. The government abolished feudalism on August 4. On August 26 it adopted the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen proclaiming liberty, equality, freedom of speech, popular sovereignty, and representative government. The first constitution was adopted on September 3, 1791 but was attacked by radical leaders as neither including a true republic, nor holding the king accountable. In October 1789, Louis, his family and others were taken from Versailles to a prison in Paris.

The period from 1793 to 1794, known as the Reign of Terror was the darkest period of the revolution.

Maximilien de Robespierre was an official representing the Jacobin Party and a principal planner of the Reign of Terror. He led the National Convention and the Committee of Public Safety. He passed laws that said anyone suspected of treason could be arrested and executed by guillotine. Thousands of people were executed. On January 21, 1793, Louis was condemned to death for high treason and crimes against the state and sent to the guillotine. His wife, Marie-Antoinette, was hated by commoners for her extravagance and was decapitated nine months later.

There were harsh wars with several European nations. In June of that year the Jacobins secured a majority of the National Convention. They established a new calendar and eradicated Christianity as a controlling agent of the country. Ironically, in July 1794 Robespierre was accused of treason and executed. The National Convention approved a new constitution with a bicameral government on August 22, 1795. Unfortunately, the new government was riddled with corruption. Young General Bonaparte took charge of the Army which staged a coup dtat on November 9, 1799, beginning the Napoleonic era and ending the French Revolution.

Today we face similar conditions with different twists. In 2020, U.S. voters cast aside DonnyT, who thought himself a king. He thought he had absolute power to make himself ever richer and punish those who opposed him. (The House Select Committee on January 6 Attack has revealed facts about his complicity.)

The COVID pandemic has brought death to over one million Americans. Climate change is real and is causing expanding food shortages. Instead of extending rights, the GOP and super majority on the Supreme Court have curtailed womens rights, and if left in power will prevent birth control, same sex marriage, medical aid for transgenders, and who knows what else (ask Clarence Thomas if biracial marriage will become forbidden). There have been over 300 mass shootings so far in 2022 in the United States. As for wars, we have a bin full. We must support Ukraine and Taiwan. Democracy must not change to totalitarianism. Search for facts and determine truth.

Ed Fisher writes a weekly column for the Morning Sun.

Go here to see the original:

Column: Comparing the French Revolution with the US today - The Morning Sun

The Kansas Reflector welcomes opinion pieces from writers who share our goal of widening the conversation about how public policies affect the day-to-day lives of people throughout our state. Sharon Brett is legal director at the ACLU of Kansas.

Two decisions issued by the U.S. Supreme Court last month one overturning Roe v. Wade and the other allowing for religious prayer at public school sporting events signal an alarming shift toward allowing personal religious beliefs to dominate public policy.

After reading the decisions in Dobbs v. Jackson Womens Health Organization and Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, the message from the Supreme Court was clear: Anyone who believes in religious liberty should be alarmed.

The debate about religious liberty and abortion access will collide this summer when Kansas becomes the first state to vote on the right to abortion health care in a post-Roe world.

As a civil rights attorney, I believe deeply in the right of people to practice their religion. But I believe just as deeply in the right of people to live free from any government entanglement with religion.

I am also Jewish. This means that when the government uses religion (in this case, a narrow, extremely conservative Christian worldview) to justify policy, it doesnt always line up with the religion I and millions of others practice. This is all the more reason to keep religion completely out of government: Religion is complex and nuanced, and allowing it to animate laws particularly laws that infringe on peoples rights risks the unintended oppression of non-dominant religions.

Dobbs and Kennedy were issued back to back, and although they deal with different areas of the law, when read together their message is clear. Religious freedom for non-Christian people hangs in the balance.

Lets start with Dobbs. By overturning 50-year-old precedent, the Supreme Court granted license to conservative state legislatures to pursue abortion bans in all circumstances. Anti-choice advocates often have used religion as a justification for enacting restrictive measures that remove health care decision-making authority from pregnant people. Dobbs opened the floodgates for such laws.

Then came Kennedy, in which the court held that the coach of a public high school football team could lead his team in Christian prayer on the field at the end of games. The court did not concern itself with the discomfort non-Christian athletes might feel, or the signal such prayer would send about the school districts endorsement or favoritism of one religion over another. In doing so, as Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in her dissent, the court set our country on a perilous path toward entangling states with religion, which, Is no victory for religious liberty.

Most voters would not want school districts pressuring their children to pray with a coach who practiced a religion different from their own at the end of a football game. And most voters wouldnt want lawmakers to interfere with their personal health care decisions, particularly when those decisions are animated by the lawmakers religious faith.

But the signal from the court at the end of this years term was that both of these things are perfectly fine.

On Aug. 2, Kansas voters will decide on a constitutional amendment that would fundamentally alter our constitutional landscape and, in the wake of Dobbs, potentially lead to legislation next session outlawing abortion in all circumstances. These laws would apply to all Kansans, regardless of their religious beliefs.

My faith Judaism doesnt align with the religious rights view on abortion. Jewish teachings, including from the Talmud (a key text in interpreting Jewish law), and the Mishnah (a book of Jewish legal theory) clearly indicate that abortion is permitted indeed, required when the life of the mother is at risk.

My faith Judaism doesnt align with the religious rights view on abortion. Jewish teachings, including from the Talmud (a key text in interpreting Jewish law), and the Mishnah (a book of Jewish legal theory) clearly indicate that abortion is permitted indeed, required when the life of the mother is at risk.

Even the Orthodox Union, representing a decidedly more conservative branch of the Jewish faith, put out a statement in May that Jewish law prioritizes the life of the pregnant mother over the life of the fetus such that where the pregnancy critically endangers the physical health or mental health of the mother, an abortion may be authorized, if not mandated, by halacha (Jewish law) and should be available to all women irrespective of their economic status.

In my religion, personhood belongs to the person bearing the child, first and foremost; and only after that is secure do rights convey to the fetus. But abortion laws that have begun passing in states like Oklahoma and Texas and which would undoubtedly come to Kansas, if the constitutional amendment passes run contrary to this belief.

So the decision in Dobbs, although not explicitly about freedom of religion, serves to foreclose my ability to make health care decisions in a way that is consistent with religious liberty. In that way, overturning Roe sets us down the same perilous path towards dismantling the separation of church and state as the courts decision in Kennedy.

As a civil rights lawyer; as a Jewish woman; and perhaps most importantly, as the mother of two young children who I hope to raise in a state (and a world) where their religious rights are as respected as much as anyone elses, I realize how much is at stake Aug. 2.

Through its opinion section, the Kansas Reflector works to amplify the voices of people who are affected by public policies or excluded from public debate. Find information, including how to submit your own commentary, here.

Link:

With abortion rights at stake across US and Kansas, whose religious freedom do we value? - Kansas Reflector

KRAKOW, Poland

Reproductive-rights activists in Poland, where abortion laws are among Europes strictest, have a stark message for their American counterparts: Its going to be a long struggle. And some people are going to die unnecessarily.

In this predominantly Roman Catholic country on Europes eastern edge, where a hard-right ruling party holds sway, legal prohibitions on abortion are strikingly similar to those in U.S. states that have embraced the Supreme Courts dramatic unraveling of half a century of American abortion rights.

That hasnt always been the case in Poland. Decades ago, especially in the 1970s, when much of Europe had stricter abortion laws, the procedures availability made this nation a destination for those seeking to end unwanted pregnancies.

After the country shook off Communist rule in the 1990s, however, an intense campaign by religious authorities Pope John Paul II was born 30 miles from this southern city of cathedrals, crucifixes and stained glass yielded a swift reversal of most abortion rights.

But even here sentiments are shifting.

We very much want this child, said Basia, a heavily pregnant 24-year-old strolling on a cloudy day with her husband beside a verdant park on Krakows outskirts. But she did not want her full name used, because she knew that what she said next would be anathema to many close relatives.

If she had accidentally become pregnant while her husband was finishing up his graduate degree and the two were scraping by on her meager salary, she said, she would likely have sought an abortion. He nodded in sober agreement.

Womens rights activists hold a sign reading You have blood on your hands near dummies in the street to signify women who are suffering because of Polands restrictive abortion law and a proposal for further restrictions, during a demonstration in front of parliament in Warsaw on Nov. 30, 2021.

(Czarek Sokolowski/Associated Press)

The fight to outlaw abortion fits neatly with the conservative-nationalist agenda of the Law and Justice Party, which took power in 2015. Since then, it has waged what critics say is a broad assault on the rule of law and Polands independent judiciary, drawing strength from a traditionalist constituency whose worldview would not be out of step with that in much of red-state America.

During the partys time in power, restrictions inexorably tightened, and by 2021, the ban had been broadened to scrap a final major exemption: cases of confirmed fetal abnormalities. Today, many Polish citizens and some Ukrainian refugees who have taken shelter here routinely travel elsewhere, or obtain abortion pills, often from abroad, to end unwanted pregnancies.

The increasingly severe restrictions at home, however, have given rise to a small-scale but horrifying phenomenon: patients who suffer late-term pregnancy complications being denied lifesaving care if a fetal heartbeat can still be detected.

Izabela was dying, said Jolanta Budzowska, a personal-injury attorney based in Krakow. She represents the family of Izabela Sajbor, a 30-year-old hairdresser whose death is now one of at least three maternal fatalities blamed by abortion-rights advocates on restrictive laws and the medical systems overly zealous response to them.

Already the mother of a young daughter, Sajbor had learned in the second trimester of a wanted pregnancy that the fetus she was carrying had severe defects, her family said. The complication, a chromosomal abnormality known as Edwards syndrome, generally results in fetal death, or only brief survival for a baby carried to full term.

Sajbor was hospitalized in September 2021, after her water broke prematurely. Alone in the hospital due to COVID-19 restrictions in place at the time, she declared, in her final agonizing hours, that the countrys abortion measures reduced women to incubators.

In frantic texts she sent to her mother and husband, she wrote that doctors only real concern seemed to be the detection of a fetal heartbeat not her own worsening state.

Polish abortion law does allow for exceptions to the ban if the womans life or health is in danger. But Budzowska says the chilling effect of restrictions, and ambiguities in legal interpretation, mean some medical professionals delay or reject intervention even when it is clear the woman is in peril.

In the case of Izabela, abortion was theoretically permissible, said Budzowska. But even once Sajbor had developed sepsis, a life-threatening reaction to infection, doctors assumed that the fetus would die on its own, and they would not have to explain about performing an abortion or terminating a live pregnancy, the lawyer said.

In Ireland, the similarly harrowing death of 31-year-old Savita Halappanavar in 2012 galvanized the legalization of abortion to protect the womans life; in 2018, first-trimester abortions became legal after a referendum repealed a constitutional ban.

Across the European Union, abortion access in some form is the general norm, with Poland and Malta as the blocs main outliers. Last week, the European Parliament voted in favor of a resolution calling for safe and legal abortion to be included in the EUs charter of fundamental rights. It also condemned the U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

Liberalization efforts in Poland have repeatedly been stymied, even though the near-ban on abortion set off some of the biggest street protests of the post-Communist era. From 2016 onward, demonstrators by the thousands wielded black umbrellas, even on clear days, as a symbol of what they called the governments oppression and intrusion into private lives.

People place candles in tribute in Warsaw on Nov. 1, 2021, to a woman who died late in her pregnancy.

(Czarek Sokolowski/Associated Press)

Although Polish public sentiment appears mixed about the degree of restrictions that should remain in place, opinion polls point to solid majority backing for legal abortion under at least some circumstances.

The number of people supporting a more progressive law is increasing, said Kamila Ferenc of the Federation for Women and Family Planning, a Warsaw-based advocacy group known as FEDERA.

But so far, public opinion alone has not been sufficient to bring about change. The final significant exemptions to the abortion ban were scrapped by Polands highest court, which is controlled by judges loyal to Law and Justice. The conservative party is also the largest in Parliament, which last month rejected a measure that would have allowed terminations during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.

As for any external pressure on Poland, the war in Ukraine is seen as giving the ruling party greater leverage in its dealings with the EU. Poland, a staunch supporter of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskys government, has played a key role in helping arm Ukraine, and has taken in millions of Ukrainian refugees.

In the meantime, recent years have seen a pattern ominously familiar to abortion-rights advocates in the United States: a growing campaign to criminalize assistance to those seeking abortion. Activists can face prison for providing abortion pills to those in need.

One such activist, Justyna Wydrzynska, is currently on trial and scheduled to appear in court this week. She fears that authorities may seek to make an example of her; if convicted, she could be jailed for three years, or even longer. That didnt keep her from acknowledging that in 2020, she tried to send pills to someone who begged her for help, under circumstances that were wrenchingly familiar.

That same thing had happened to me, said Wydrzynska, 47, a mother of three who escaped what she described as an abusive relationship with a man who tried to force her to go through with an unwanted pregnancy. She defied him and obtained an abortion; three years later, in 2009, she managed to divorce.

I knew the risks; still, I wanted to help, she said. Now, as part of a pan-European network called Abortion Without Borders, Wydrzynska confines her efforts to counseling Polish women about where to obtain pills and how to use them not providing them directly.

The turmoil has served only to heighten the determination of groups fighting to seal off what they consider to be remaining loopholes in Polish abortion ban. Chief among them is the Catholic organization Ordo Iuris, which lobbied hard for the end of the exemption over fetal abnormalities.

Newsletter

Must-read stories from the L.A. Times

Get the day's top news with our Today's Headlines newsletter, sent every weekday morning.

Enter email address

Sign Me Up

You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.

Katarzyna Gesiak, who directs the groups Center for Medical Law and Bioethics, said allowing for such exceptions amounted to eugenics, and denied that the law as it stands strips women of necessary medical protections.

We were very happy about this judgment; that was the main issue that we wanted changed, she said. But Gesiak was critical of prosecutors she said were insufficiently rigorous in pursuing those who help women obtain medication abortions.

They dont want to chase these crimes, she said.

In the face of calls for an even harsher judicial environment, Polish abortion-rights advocates say their struggle is a lonely one at times, but that they are bolstered by their European partnerships.

That sense of sympathy and solidarity with Polish counterparts now extends across the Atlantic as well, said Irene Donadio of International Planned Parenthood Federations European network.

Watching what is happening in a country that has stood for freedom the United States is a shock to see, said Donadio, who, along with other advocates, views abortion access as a basic human right.

But what has inspired me in Poland is the fight of citizens, when theyre so determined, she said. When it comes to protecting rights, we can all learn from one another.

Excerpt from:

Poland's abortion near-ban offers grim glimpse of US future - Los Angeles Times

British prime minister Boris Johnson's resignation has called into question the future of LGBTQ+ rights. (Vudi Xhymshiti/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

Leading LGBTQ+ activists and groups have welcomed Boris Johnsons resignation, but some warned that his successor could be just as toxic.

On Thursday (7 July), Johnson stood outside 10 Downing Street to announce he is stepping down as leader of the Conservative Party.He plans to remain as caretaker prime minister until the autumn, while the Tories elect a successor.

Itbrought to an end a stormy 48 hours that saw a rebellion in his own cabinet and an unprecedented wave of resignations from all levels of the government.

As the nation waits with bated breath to learn who the next prime minister will be, LGBTQ+ activists responded with a mixture of jubilation and fear. The future of LGBTQ+ rights, they say, hangs in the balance.

Peter Tatchell, a veteran LGBTQ+ rights campaigner, toldPinkNews: Boris Johnson has a long history of anti-LGBTQ+ remarks and bad taste jokes about our community.

He stoked the culture wars; using LGBTQ+ concerns as a wedge issue to appeal to bigoted voters. It is reprehensible the way he disparaged trans people and supporteddiscrimination against them in sport and the provision of womens services.

He flip-flopped on banning conversion practices and was intent on excluding trans people from any ban.

For Nadia Whittome, Labour MP for Nottingham East, seeing the back of Johnsons head was an image she has long hoped to see. He was, after all, a prime minister who played a ruthless game of divide-and-rule, regularly attacked trans people in an attempt to stoke a culture war which would deflect from his own failings, she said.

So it was no surprise trans rights groups were especially relieved at Johnsons ousting.

Gendered Intelligence, a trans healthcare charity, welcomed Johnsons administration coming to an end. The end of Boris Johnsons term has been marked by constant attacks on trans people, including his sudden U-turn on the ban on conversion practices, a spokesperson said.

There are many social ills that need addressing in this country the legacy of COVID, child poverty, the cost of living crisis but trans people are not one of them.

To Trans Activism UK, Johnsons administration has been one that has actively devalued vital human rights and marginalised communities and threw Britain into a spiralling cascade into the Stone Age.

There were many examples of this, but the governments decision to scrap vital reforms to the Gender Recognition Act and to exclude trans people from a conversion therapy ban were high on the groups list.

Johnson himself began to echo gender critical dog whistles in interviews and statements that have made it abundantly clear that he does not stand by the scientifically-backed evidence that transgender women are women, and deserve full equal inclusion, Trans Activism UK said.

When it comes to the question of who will succeed Johnson, some sounded a more cautious tone.

Among them was Tatchell.The entireleadership of the Tories is toxic for our community, he said, well probablyend with another prime minister who will continue many of Johnsons prejudiced policies.

Campaigner and former government LGBTQ+ adviser Jayne Ozanne said: We can only hope that whoever succeeds him is from outside of Johnsons inner circle.

So far, only attorney general Suella Bravermanhas confirmed her intent to run in the leadership contest, in which some 100,000 Conservative Party members will decide Britains next prime minister.

Liz Truss is expected to announce her run imminently, with Rishi Sunak and his successor as chancellor Nadhim Zahawi, Penny Mordaunt and Ben Wallace also being discussed.

Dominic Raab and Michael Gove have said they do not intend to run in the upcoming leadership contest.

LGBT+ Conservatives, the ruling partys queer members wing, stressed it will remain neutral during the contest and hopes to work with candidates with their LGBTQ+ policies.

But setting the tone for her campaign, Braverman told ITVs Robert Peston said she will get rid of all this woke rubbish a remark that struck fear in some LGBTQ+ activists.

Sadly weve already seen potential Tory leadership candidates talk about LGBT+ equality as woke stuff they want to get rid of, said Joe Vinson, national secretary for LGBT+ Labour, the opposition partys official queer wing.

His solution was simple enough: Its clear that LGBTQ+ people dont just need a change of prime minister, they need a total change of Government

Such fears of yet another populist and polarising Tory in power were felt by Whittome as well.When you look at the candidates lining up to replace him, I have no faith that the next Conservative Prime Minister will be any better for LGBTQ+ people, she said.

And she certainly has her reasons.From Priti Patel who has made it harder for LGBTQ+ refugees to find safety here, to Ben Wallace who has voted against LGBTQ+ equality at every opportunity, to Liz Truss who opposed trans rights while Equalities Secretary, the list goes on and on.

The Tories are not on our side.

Even on the other side of the political aisle, gay Tory MP for Darlington Peter Gibson said that as he decides which hopeful to back, their commitment to LGBTQ+ rights will be a deciding factor.

I will be looking for cast-iron guarantees for the LGBT+ community, not least of which includes a commitment to a ban on conversion practices which includes Trans people. We cannot go backwards, he said.

Gendered Intelligence, however, remains hopeful. Many of the ministers who resigned among them former minister for equalities Mike Freer cited Johnsons treatment of the LGBTQ+ community in their letters of resignation, a spokesperson said.

It was not so long ago that the Conservative Party were leading the campaign for Gender Recognition reform and promising to ban conversion therapy.

We hope that they will realise that nothing stands to be gained from continuing the legacy of oppression, and instead focus on the challenges that affect all of us.

View original post here:

Tories urged to ditch Boris Johnson's 'legacy of oppression' by LGBTQ+ activists - PinkNews

The level of government neglect is alarming. Indices of unemployment, poverty, development, health infrastructure are abysmally low.

We want Freedom Pakistan Army go back. Such angry slogans are heard every day in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. Women and children have been sitting on dharna for days. Many people were arrested as they wanted to protest at the secretariat in Muzaffarabad. Clearly, people of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir have had enough. The pitiable state of poverty, unemployment, health care, infrastructure development and social opportunities has driven people into the streets. In a profoundly symbolic action, people surrounded the United Nations Observers Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) vehicles while shouting slogans against Pakistan government and Army. UNMOGIP is one of the oldest UN missions in world which came into operation on request of India to monitor cease fire between India and Pakistan. The war had started as Pakistani Army along with Tribal groups attacked Jammu and Kashmir soon after the partition. The attackers unleashed a wave of violence, rape, arson and loot. These unholy activities of the raiders delayed them and Srinagar was saved. In spite of being in stronger position in the ensuing war, India approached UN as a responsible democracy and the UNMOGIP came into existence. UNMOGIPs birth was the direct result of Pakistans unjustified aggression in Jammu and Kashmir. Later, having failed to wrest Jammu and Kashmir by force, Pakistan unleashed a proxy war here in late eighties resulting into colossal deaths and destruction which continues unabated.

Ironically, Pakistani establishment blatantly neglected Kashmir it had occupied after partition. Except for the so called name i.e. Azaad Kashmir, everything else there is a saga of utter neglect and oppression. The level of government neglect is alarming. Indices of unemployment, poverty, development, health infrastructure are abysmally low. The forest cover went down from 42 percent to 14 percent due to unchecked deforestation. The electricity produced here is sent to Punjab while the people of the region face load shedding of 18 to 20 hours. The Gilgit-Baltistan region of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK) has emerged as the suicide capital of Pakistan with over90 per centof cases being reported from there. With reports of the region being given to China, the despondency of people has increased. Recently, the Prime Minister of POK cried during an official address. POK Pakistan ke liye ek colony hai....loot ke liye ek jagah hai ...is asserted by leaders openly. Look at the investments in Jammu and Kashmir.. even the meeting of G 20 is being planned there. We want to merge with India ...... people of POK are heard saying. The protests have resultantly reached a peak in POK and people have protested in front of the UNMOGIP. This is a tight slap on the face of Pakistan Government which has already lost credibility in UN, FATF, IMF and international community.

Pakistani establishment lost credibility because it adopted terrorism as a state policy. Encouraged by the ouster of Soviets, Pakistan under Operation TOPAC started training, equipping and infiltrating terrorists into Jammu and Kashmir. The gun culture and state patronage to jehadi groups turned Pakistan into a terror state. When the subsidiary of Pakistan created Taliban, the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan started hammering its own Army, Pakistan ludicrously coined the terms Good Taliban and Bad Taliban. Today the bad Taliban, the TTP, is negotiating with Pakistan government as an equal and demanding that Pakistan Army withdraws from FATA. What kind of banana republic would do that? No matter how much Pakistani establishment denies and defends..... the world knows its reality. The diabolic policies of the establishment have turned inwards and the snake has started to bite the hand that fed it. The ungrateful snake..... fed lovingly to bite the neighbours but has turned against Pakistan.... its mentor!! Why dont snakes have scruples? Pakistan seeks sympathy on this account.

The repercussion of the negative state policies are ironically faced by Pakistani citizens who humiliatingly wait for hours at airports due to their green passports, treated like terrorists. Recently, Pakistan as expected rejected the dossier submitted by India on Pakistan terror infrastructure. They assert that Pakistan, a peace loving country does not believe in terrorism (LOL).

The ongoing economic down slide of Pakistan is clearly fatal and hence the government is accepting all dictates of IMF like raising cost of fuel, mortgaging national assets and even reducing defence budget. The spirits of Eid Festival were dampened due to unprecedented inflation. Excessive load shedding has forced people to use hand fans. And as always, the spineless Pakistani politicians are playing the bickering blame game. Pakistan is going the Sri Lanka way but ISI and Pakistan Army is busy running a proxy war in Kashmir. Pakistans obsession with Kashmir has taken it to the dooms way.

Bachaa naa sake East Pakistan.haath se nikal raha hai Baluchistan

Kashmir ka jhootha khwab dekhte dikhate, toot raha hai Pakistan

See the rest here:

PoK: A place of exploitative and predatory - Brighter Kashmir

Kurds have again been betrayed, this time to enable Sweden and Finland to apply for NATO membership. The trilateral memorandum between these two countries and Turkey paves the way for the extradition of political refugees to Turkey.

Sweden and Finland are now on track to become NATO members. Yet again, Kurds have become the currency with which geopolitical deals are made. Sweden and Finlands NATO membership hinged on a promise to extradite Kurds suspected by Turkey of having terrorist associations who have sought refuge in these countries. Since signing the agreement on 28 June, Swedish Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson has refused to deny deportations to Turkey as part of the NATO deal. Turkeys ambassador to Sweden has gone even further than what is required in the memorandum, demanding the Swedish government do something about rallies where demonstrators wave the flags of organisations banned by Turkey.

According to the 1920 Treaty of Sevres that followed the demise of the Ottoman empire, there was supposed to have been an autonomous Kurdistan. However, in an attempt to appease Turkey, which did not recognise the Kurds as a separate ethnic group despite having their own languages and culture, the United Kingdom betrayed the Kurds in the negotiations leading up to the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne, in which their lands were divided. The Kurdish population was then split into Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Turkey. Each has been ruled by tyrannical autocrats responsible for massacres of the Kurdish population, such as the chemical attack by Saddam Hussein in Halabja, Iraq in 1988. Due to the oppression of the four states occupying the land of Kurdistan, there is a large number of Kurdish refugees across the globe, many of whom found their way to Sweden. Others, such as Abdullah Ocalan, the leader of the Kurdish Freedom movement, have been in solitary confinement in Turkey for decades.

In the late 1970s, the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) emerged in Turkey against the background of ethnic cleansing and genocide against the Kurds and the prohibition of any expression of Kurdish culture, even speaking the language. Similar to other freedom movements, such as the ANC in South Africa and FRETILIN in East Timor, the PKK has used armed resistance to achieve its goals. However, unlike other freedom movements striving for human rights, the PKK has been designated a terrorist organisation by many Western states. This stems from the pathological hatred Turkish leaders have for the Kurdish people and reflects Turkeys geopolitical power. Its location, with access to the Mediterranean as well as the Black Sea, makes Turkey a desirable ally.

Two of the so-called terrorist organisations mentioned in the tripartite memorandum agreed at the NATO summit in Madrid on 28 June are the PKK and the Peoples Protection Units (YPG), organisations that were instrumental in defeating the ISIS caliphate. Their fighters were admired for their rescue of the surviving Yazidis from the marauding ISIS gangs. The agreement commits Sweden and Finland to significant changes of laws and policies to enable the extradition of people designated by Turkey as terror suspects affiliated with these organisations.

YPG is the major component of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which is supported by the US-led Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS. It serves as the defence force of the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES), formed in 2018, as an evolution of a previous autonomous administration established in 2014, following the withdrawal of the Syrian government forces during the civil war. SDF is now simultaneously fighting both ISIS sleeper cells and attacks by Turkey, both directly and through its Jihadist mercenaries. In its June 2022 report, SDF noted that it had conducted 11 security operations and arrested 17 terrorists, most of whom were funded by Turkey and operating from areas occupied by Turkey. The report emphasised that the Turkish occupations continuous threats of launching new attacks will negatively affect the SDFs fight against ISIS and would provide a safe harbour for other terrorist groups.

Both PKK and YPG are informed by the principles of democratic confederalism, which incorporates democratic institutions from the micro levels of society up to the macro level. In areas governed by AANES, also known by the Kurdish name Rojava, these principles have been implemented with equal gender representation for each governance structure, with female and male co-chairs. This level of gender equality is unusual even in the West, let alone in the more patriarchal Middle East. Furthermore, these groups have introduced a solidarity economy, prioritising social goods like ecological sustainability over profits.

That this democratic enclave has been able to survive regular onslaughts by Turkey, including rape and other forms of torture and ethnic cleansing by Jihadist mercenaries of the Turkish regime, is a testament to the resilience of the population and their strong belief in the democratic system. Turkey has recently threatened another invasion for the purpose of occupying more land, a threat that has been preceded by almost daily bombings of civilian targets, often in Christian villages. As part of the tripartite memorandum, Sweden will also lift its arms export embargo on Turkey, introduced following the 2019 invasion and occupation of Sere Kaniye (Ras al-Ain) and Gire Spi (Tel Abyad).

It is not surprising that an authoritarian leader such as Turkeys President Recep Tayyip Erdoan finds it difficult to accept the existence of adherents to this humanitarian philosophy within or in proximity of Turkeys borders. Capitalising on its beneficial geopolitical position, Turkey has successfully convinced Western democracies, including Australia, to list the PKK as a terrorist organisation and is now attempting to extend this definition to the US ally YPG. In Belgium, the only country where this classification of PKK has been legally challenged, the Court of Cassation found that the PKK is not a terrorist organisation.

Can the Australian government show moral courage and do anything to counter this inappropriate concession to Turkey in the form of betrayal of Kurds? Yes, it can bring forward the next review of the listing of the PKK as a terrorist organisation with a view of removing it from the list. PKK has been listed in Australia as a proscribed organisation since 2005, and this listing is reviewed every three years. In its submission to the 2021 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security review on the relisting, the Federation of Democratic Kurdish Society Australia argued that PKKs actions should be viewed in the light of the ongoing oppression of Kurds by Turkey, that the delisting of PKK has the potential contribute to peace and stability in the region, and that the continued listing of the PKK is traumatic for the Kurdish diaspora in Australia and leads to discrimination. The next scheduled review will occur in August 2024, when the current three-year listing expires. By starting the review now, Australia would signal its contempt for the injustice enshrined in the trilateral memorandum.

Considering the widespread listing of PKK by other countries and the large Turkish diaspora and its associated lobbying power relative to the much smaller Kurdish community, it would be a courageous move by Australia to delist it. However, demonstrating such independent foreign policy could position Australia to play an important role in achieving peace, freedom, and democracy in that part of the Middle East.

Dr Helena Grunfeld and Fionn Skiotis are co-chairs of North and East Syria Solidarity.

This article is published under a Creative Commons Licence and may be republished with attribution.

View original post here:

Sweden and Finland's NATO Aspirations Put Kurds at Risk - Australian Institute of International Affairs - Australian Institute of International...