A star-studded Australian documentary which won Best Feature Film and Best Documentary Director for Feature Film at the Monaco International Film Festival
With a powerful and moving message on the vital importance of peace to world sustainability, Soldiers of Peace takes the viewer on an inspiring journey across 5 continents and 14 countries to show the extraordinary peace efforts of ordinary individuals across the globe.
Narrated by actor Michael Douglas and featuring interviews with Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Sir Bob Geldof, Sir Richard Branson, Dr Hans Blix, and Tim Flannery, Soldiers of Peace aims to put peace back on the world agenda and to illustrate the connection between individual acts of enterprise and heroism and the systemic changes needed for our planet's survival in the 21st Century.
The film visits religious fundamentalists in Nigeria who preach a peaceful co-existence; IRA bomber Pat Magee reconciling with the daughter of one of his victims; a young Kenyan woman bringing clashing tribes together through football; and former militia men who advocate peace through music.
A One Tree Films' production, Soldiers of Peace is the brainchild of Australian businessman and philanthropist, Steve Killelea, who is also the founder of the Global Peace Index, an annual ranking of the world's most peaceful nations. It is directed and filmed by award-winning director and war correspondent, Tim Wise.
SPECIAL BENEFIT SCREENING
Thursday, 19th March 7pm
Footbridge Theatre, Parramatta Road
(Sydney University)
Speakers: Director Tim Wise, Professor Jake Lynch, Director Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, and Professor Stuart Rees Director of Sydney Peace Foundation
Tickets $15. Book online at Moshtix
For more information visit: Soldiers of Peace Movie
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Friday, February 20, 2009
International Social Justice Day February 20, 2009
February 20, 2009 is an important day for all persons in our global village but especially for those of us committed to living the Good News of peace and justice. The World Day of Social Justice is being observed for the first time following its unanimous adoption by the 192 member States of the United Nations during their November 2007 General Assembly. You are invited and asked to share with your members the enclosed prayer for this day. It was developed by members of the USG/UISG Secretariat Commission for Justice Peace and Integrity of Creation in Rome. For a copy of the prayer go to: Click here for more information
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
The World Calls On UN To Stop Genocide Of Tamils In Sri-Lanka
Dr C P Thiagarajah
Countercurrents.org February 17, 2009
Robert Evans, Chairman of the European Parliament Delegation for Relations with South Asia , (according to IANS on 13 February 2009) called on UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon to send a peacekeeping mission as soon as possible. This clarion call is most timely in view of the non-compliance of the Govt of Sri-Lanka (GSL) to UNHRC request to abide by international war laws in protecting civilians.
About a month earlier, on 14 Jan 2009, John Holmes, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, in a debate at United Nations Security Council on the protection of civilians in armed conflict said that, the Council's focus must be on the conduct of hostilities and the need for strict compliance with international humanitarian law. In Sri Lanka , strict compliance with international humanitarian law was all the more critical with the intensification of fighting in the Vanni. Consequently humanitarian needs assessment was difficult. He was, concerned about the 350,000 civilians trapped in an increasingly confined space.
NORIHIRO OKUDA ( Japan ) emphasized at the same session at UNHRC the importance of a) protecting and empowering civilians in armed conflict from a human security perspective. b) taking care of the dire situation of vulnerable civilians in armed conflicts worldwide, including Sri-Lanka , Afghanistan , Iraq , Darfur, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Somalia . c) stopping deliberate attacks against civilians, journalists, aid workers as well as the recruitment of child soldiers, restriction of humanitarian access and other human rights violations.
The surprising aspect of the UN declaration with the expectation that the Sri-Lankan polarised government would abide by it assiduously have had tragic consequences. It had been estimated that 2000 were massacred within the period 1 January and 15 February 2009. The scene of the carnage heaped on the Tamils by the Sinhala GSL is heart rending and cannot be looked at.
Further, Ranjith Jayasundera, a Sinhalese, in Sunday Leader of 14 December under the title “Govt's war costing more lives than in Lanka's history” revealed that the Sri-Lanka Air Force already holds the unenviable record of being the first, only and thus most frequent dropper of bombs on its own citizens, and the government would gain little from being seen in the eyes of the world as having used cluster munitions on a refugee camp as alleged by some NGOs and the LTTE.
When the GSL is not paying any attention to the UN the only remedy lies in a more united drastic action by the UN. Canada and UK had already called for such a move. Here are some of the Western parliamentarians who sincerely felt that immediate action should be taken by the UN.
Mr Bob Ray Canadian MP told The Star, on February 04, 2009 “The UN can’t allow the Sri Lankan government to say “it’s an internal matter” and stay away”.
UK Parliament had a one and a half hours adjournment debate on 5 February 2009. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North) (Lab):
I endorse the strength Minister’s call for a ceasefire. That said, if the Government of Sri Lanka are simply not prepared to listen to the international community's calls for a ceasefire, is it not time for some degree of sanctions, such as suspension from the Commonwealth or the suspension of military or trade agreements, to show that the rest of the world means business in trying to bring about peace in Sri Lanka?
Mr. Philip Hollobone ( Kettering ) (Con):
Is it not important for the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the head of the International Committee of the Red Cross to visit Sri Lanka as soon as possible so that they can see at first hand what is going on and have face-to-face meetings with the President of Sri Lanka?
Mr. Keith Simpson (Mid-Norfolk) (Con): we should spell out to the Sri Lankan Government the types of ultimate sanction that the international community could impose. A number of organisations could do that.
Joan Ryan (Enfield, North) (Lab): A recent report by the Genocide Prevention Project highlighted Sri Lanka as one of eight red alert countries where genocide or mass atrocities are under way or at risk of breaking out. I do not think that any of us can afford to ignore such an alert. We have said many times in the aftermath of genocide that we could have seen it coming and that we could and should have done more to prevent it. We must say and do more to prevent it from happening in Sri Lanka .
Mr. Edward Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD):
I am also delighted that the Foreign Secretary achieved, through his discussion with Secretary Clinton in the United States, a joint US-UK call for a ceasefire. However, I urge the Government to go further. As I said in a letter to the Prime Minister recently, they should go to the United Nations Security Council. We need the whole international community to speak as one. We need to work for that, because the Sri Lankan Government should be in no doubt about how the international community feels.
Mr. Neil Gerrard (Walthamstow) (Lab):
Members have suggested, we should think seriously about sanctions. For years, the Government there have not been interested in listening to any criticism.
Simon Hughes ( North Southwark and Bermondsey) (LD
Said firstly Sri-Lankan government should accept the proposed ceasefire immediately, allow the presence of the UN and the relief agencies. He wanted media freedom restored because Sri Lanka has the second worst record on press freedom in the world, behind only Eritrea .
Secondly, there has to be a reference to the UN, the Commonwealth and other bodies, so that the international community can make their voices clearer. There may be a case for reference to the International Criminal Court. At least one Sri Lankan Minister is an American citizen, and there may be a war crimes issue to be dealt with.
Siobhain McDonagh (Mitcham and Morden) (Lab):
He wanted the suspension of Sri Lanka from the Commonwealth. He urged the members to do something that hurts.---We need to do something large and bold. We need to take a step.
Stephen Hammond ( Wimbledon ) (Con
We must ensure that any sanctions that we impose hurt the people we intend to hurt.
Canada parliament also took very serious decision after two and half hours debate and concluded that Tamil’s genocide be taken to UN.
Hon. Irwin Cotler ( Mount Royal , Lib.):
We must support the call for the appointment of a United Nations special envoy for Sri Lanka to monitor and guard against abuses and to assist the peace process, as has been recommended by the United Nations itself, by the United States Department of State and by other international actors. Free press be allowed unfettered access to the conflict area to report on the ground situation.
Hon. Maria Minna (Beaches— East York , Lib.
an immediate ceasefire with international monitors put in place to ensure that it is respected. The UN should appoint a special representative to monitor the ceasefire and also to start the peace talks immediately.
It is time that the Government of Canada be aggressive on this issue with the United Nations. The Security Council of the UN should also be involved
Hon. Albina Guarnieri ( Mississauga East—Cooksville, Lib.)
Canada must call for immediate posting of international observers and peacekeepers towns in the north and east . If not this tragedy will continue to reach catastrophic proportions. Canada can also demand that Sri Lanka submit fully to an international war crimes tribunal where the actions of leaders on all sides of this conflict can be investigated and judged. The suffering in Sri Lanka will continue as long as there is no legal consequence, no opportunity for justice and no international will to bring a just peace.
Mr.John Cannis : Thanks for using the true word "Genocide", pointing these statements "go nowhere", urging "we need solutions, not papers"
Hon. Jack Layton ( Toronto —Danforth, NDP)
He called for sustained effort for all possible diplomatic pressure to achieve the ceasefire. We are also calling for an immediate end to the apparent use of cluster bombs by the Sri Lankan military. We know that this is against international law. We also have to do everything we can to ensure the supply of emergency aid and access to the conflict zone for international aid organizations.
We have to use all available channels including our influence at the United Nations and at the Commonwealth to achieve these goals
Mr. Wayne Marston ( Hamilton East— Stoney Creek , NDP):
He indicated that the international community has to face the problem of the Sri Lankan government prohibition of independent journalists and human rights monitors from accessing the area of conflict. But one thing is very clear, Sri Lankan civilians are being maimed and are dying in this conflict.
Mr. Paul Dewar ( Ottawa Centre, NDP):
is it plausible for Canada to raise in the UN General Assembly the issue of ceasefire to the Security Council? How realistic is that idea, and what can we do to advance it?
U.S. Judiciary Committee Chairman and Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy said that "it is imperative that the government and the LTTE agree to an immediate ceasefire to avoid further loss of life, permit access to UN monitors and humanitarian organizations, and permit civilians to leave for areas of safety. The Obama administration, the British, Indian and other concerned governments, should be publicly urging the same,"
If no action is taken expeditiously there will be genocide of a quarter million Tamils within a week. Just look what happened in Rwanda when UN delayed action. Nearly a million Tutsi were murdered within 100 days. Will the UN take action? Yes I am sure for Ms Navaneethan Pillay, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, in a press release issued 29 Thursday January 2009 had made it clear that the UN is aware of HR violation in Mullaitivu where GSL last battle against the LTTE is taking place. She reiterated that “it is imperative that we find out more about what exactly has been going on”.
Countercurrents.org February 17, 2009
Robert Evans, Chairman of the European Parliament Delegation for Relations with South Asia , (according to IANS on 13 February 2009) called on UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon to send a peacekeeping mission as soon as possible. This clarion call is most timely in view of the non-compliance of the Govt of Sri-Lanka (GSL) to UNHRC request to abide by international war laws in protecting civilians.
About a month earlier, on 14 Jan 2009, John Holmes, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, in a debate at United Nations Security Council on the protection of civilians in armed conflict said that, the Council's focus must be on the conduct of hostilities and the need for strict compliance with international humanitarian law. In Sri Lanka , strict compliance with international humanitarian law was all the more critical with the intensification of fighting in the Vanni. Consequently humanitarian needs assessment was difficult. He was, concerned about the 350,000 civilians trapped in an increasingly confined space.
NORIHIRO OKUDA ( Japan ) emphasized at the same session at UNHRC the importance of a) protecting and empowering civilians in armed conflict from a human security perspective. b) taking care of the dire situation of vulnerable civilians in armed conflicts worldwide, including Sri-Lanka , Afghanistan , Iraq , Darfur, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Somalia . c) stopping deliberate attacks against civilians, journalists, aid workers as well as the recruitment of child soldiers, restriction of humanitarian access and other human rights violations.
The surprising aspect of the UN declaration with the expectation that the Sri-Lankan polarised government would abide by it assiduously have had tragic consequences. It had been estimated that 2000 were massacred within the period 1 January and 15 February 2009. The scene of the carnage heaped on the Tamils by the Sinhala GSL is heart rending and cannot be looked at.
Further, Ranjith Jayasundera, a Sinhalese, in Sunday Leader of 14 December under the title “Govt's war costing more lives than in Lanka's history” revealed that the Sri-Lanka Air Force already holds the unenviable record of being the first, only and thus most frequent dropper of bombs on its own citizens, and the government would gain little from being seen in the eyes of the world as having used cluster munitions on a refugee camp as alleged by some NGOs and the LTTE.
When the GSL is not paying any attention to the UN the only remedy lies in a more united drastic action by the UN. Canada and UK had already called for such a move. Here are some of the Western parliamentarians who sincerely felt that immediate action should be taken by the UN.
Mr Bob Ray Canadian MP told The Star, on February 04, 2009 “The UN can’t allow the Sri Lankan government to say “it’s an internal matter” and stay away”.
UK Parliament had a one and a half hours adjournment debate on 5 February 2009. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North) (Lab):
I endorse the strength Minister’s call for a ceasefire. That said, if the Government of Sri Lanka are simply not prepared to listen to the international community's calls for a ceasefire, is it not time for some degree of sanctions, such as suspension from the Commonwealth or the suspension of military or trade agreements, to show that the rest of the world means business in trying to bring about peace in Sri Lanka?
Mr. Philip Hollobone ( Kettering ) (Con):
Is it not important for the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the head of the International Committee of the Red Cross to visit Sri Lanka as soon as possible so that they can see at first hand what is going on and have face-to-face meetings with the President of Sri Lanka?
Mr. Keith Simpson (Mid-Norfolk) (Con): we should spell out to the Sri Lankan Government the types of ultimate sanction that the international community could impose. A number of organisations could do that.
Joan Ryan (Enfield, North) (Lab): A recent report by the Genocide Prevention Project highlighted Sri Lanka as one of eight red alert countries where genocide or mass atrocities are under way or at risk of breaking out. I do not think that any of us can afford to ignore such an alert. We have said many times in the aftermath of genocide that we could have seen it coming and that we could and should have done more to prevent it. We must say and do more to prevent it from happening in Sri Lanka .
Mr. Edward Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD):
I am also delighted that the Foreign Secretary achieved, through his discussion with Secretary Clinton in the United States, a joint US-UK call for a ceasefire. However, I urge the Government to go further. As I said in a letter to the Prime Minister recently, they should go to the United Nations Security Council. We need the whole international community to speak as one. We need to work for that, because the Sri Lankan Government should be in no doubt about how the international community feels.
Mr. Neil Gerrard (Walthamstow) (Lab):
Members have suggested, we should think seriously about sanctions. For years, the Government there have not been interested in listening to any criticism.
Simon Hughes ( North Southwark and Bermondsey) (LD
Said firstly Sri-Lankan government should accept the proposed ceasefire immediately, allow the presence of the UN and the relief agencies. He wanted media freedom restored because Sri Lanka has the second worst record on press freedom in the world, behind only Eritrea .
Secondly, there has to be a reference to the UN, the Commonwealth and other bodies, so that the international community can make their voices clearer. There may be a case for reference to the International Criminal Court. At least one Sri Lankan Minister is an American citizen, and there may be a war crimes issue to be dealt with.
Siobhain McDonagh (Mitcham and Morden) (Lab):
He wanted the suspension of Sri Lanka from the Commonwealth. He urged the members to do something that hurts.---We need to do something large and bold. We need to take a step.
Stephen Hammond ( Wimbledon ) (Con
We must ensure that any sanctions that we impose hurt the people we intend to hurt.
Canada parliament also took very serious decision after two and half hours debate and concluded that Tamil’s genocide be taken to UN.
Hon. Irwin Cotler ( Mount Royal , Lib.):
We must support the call for the appointment of a United Nations special envoy for Sri Lanka to monitor and guard against abuses and to assist the peace process, as has been recommended by the United Nations itself, by the United States Department of State and by other international actors. Free press be allowed unfettered access to the conflict area to report on the ground situation.
Hon. Maria Minna (Beaches— East York , Lib.
an immediate ceasefire with international monitors put in place to ensure that it is respected. The UN should appoint a special representative to monitor the ceasefire and also to start the peace talks immediately.
It is time that the Government of Canada be aggressive on this issue with the United Nations. The Security Council of the UN should also be involved
Hon. Albina Guarnieri ( Mississauga East—Cooksville, Lib.)
Canada must call for immediate posting of international observers and peacekeepers towns in the north and east . If not this tragedy will continue to reach catastrophic proportions. Canada can also demand that Sri Lanka submit fully to an international war crimes tribunal where the actions of leaders on all sides of this conflict can be investigated and judged. The suffering in Sri Lanka will continue as long as there is no legal consequence, no opportunity for justice and no international will to bring a just peace.
Mr.John Cannis : Thanks for using the true word "Genocide", pointing these statements "go nowhere", urging "we need solutions, not papers"
Hon. Jack Layton ( Toronto —Danforth, NDP)
He called for sustained effort for all possible diplomatic pressure to achieve the ceasefire. We are also calling for an immediate end to the apparent use of cluster bombs by the Sri Lankan military. We know that this is against international law. We also have to do everything we can to ensure the supply of emergency aid and access to the conflict zone for international aid organizations.
We have to use all available channels including our influence at the United Nations and at the Commonwealth to achieve these goals
Mr. Wayne Marston ( Hamilton East— Stoney Creek , NDP):
He indicated that the international community has to face the problem of the Sri Lankan government prohibition of independent journalists and human rights monitors from accessing the area of conflict. But one thing is very clear, Sri Lankan civilians are being maimed and are dying in this conflict.
Mr. Paul Dewar ( Ottawa Centre, NDP):
is it plausible for Canada to raise in the UN General Assembly the issue of ceasefire to the Security Council? How realistic is that idea, and what can we do to advance it?
U.S. Judiciary Committee Chairman and Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy said that "it is imperative that the government and the LTTE agree to an immediate ceasefire to avoid further loss of life, permit access to UN monitors and humanitarian organizations, and permit civilians to leave for areas of safety. The Obama administration, the British, Indian and other concerned governments, should be publicly urging the same,"
If no action is taken expeditiously there will be genocide of a quarter million Tamils within a week. Just look what happened in Rwanda when UN delayed action. Nearly a million Tutsi were murdered within 100 days. Will the UN take action? Yes I am sure for Ms Navaneethan Pillay, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, in a press release issued 29 Thursday January 2009 had made it clear that the UN is aware of HR violation in Mullaitivu where GSL last battle against the LTTE is taking place. She reiterated that “it is imperative that we find out more about what exactly has been going on”.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Emergency rally - Stop the war on Gaza 2pm Sunday 18 January
End the brutal siege, bombing and invasion of Palestine
End the Rudd government's support for Israel's massacres
Suspend all Australia-Israel ties until Gaza is free
Freedom and self-determination for Palestine
Assemble Sydney Town Hall for rally and march 2pm Sunday 18 January
Speakers include
Palestinian activists
John Pilger, renowned author and documentary film maker
Greens MP Sylvia Hale
End the Rudd government's support for Israel's massacres
Suspend all Australia-Israel ties until Gaza is free
Freedom and self-determination for Palestine
Assemble Sydney Town Hall for rally and march 2pm Sunday 18 January
Speakers include
Palestinian activists
John Pilger, renowned author and documentary film maker
Greens MP Sylvia Hale
Saturday, January 10, 2009
PRESS RELEASE IKV Pax Christi: Talking with Hamas
Utrecht, 8 January 2009
No sustainable political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is possible without Hamas. That is one conclusion in "Talking to Hamas: On Isolation and Its Failure" a report by peace organisation IKV Pax Christi.
"The political boycott of Hamas has failed", peace organisation IKV Pax Christi notes. It has served neither the Palestinians' national aspirations nor Israel's desire for security. This strategy has left in tatters the credibility of Quartet's pursuit of peace. (The Quartet is made up of the EU, Russia, the UN and the USA.)
"The presupposition that peace talks can achieve a good result when Hamas is left out is pure fantasy", notes Jan Gruiters of IKV Pax Christi. "Isolating Hamas has reinforced its radical tendencies while weakening President Abbas. Recognition of Israel and renunciation of violence must be the results of, not the prerequisites for, political dialogue with Hamas".
Like most other EU countries, the Netherlands is a proponent of Hamas' political and diplomatic isolation. Yet, this isolation has done nothing to bring about a political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
In its report, which was written prior to incursion into Gaza, IKV Pax Christi examines various scenarios for Hamas' continued isolation, including 'more violence in Gaza', of the type now taking place. None of these scenarios leads to peace or to more security for the Israeli population. The report is based on credible sources including leading experts like Graham Fuller (ex-CIA), Efraim Halevy (ex-Mossad).
The report does not justify Hamas' strategy. IKV Pax Christi calls the shelling carried out by Palestinian extremists a contravention of international humanitarian law. Still, IKV Pax Christi calls on the international community, the EU and the Dutch government to reassess the political isolation of Hamas. Hamas must be influenced, not isolated.
An immediate and permanent ceasefire, the opening of border crossings and the raising of the blockade to admit humanitarian aid are only possible when Hamas is admitted to the political process. That is why the international community must support Arab countries' attempts to reconcile Fatah and Hamas and why it must shatter the taboo against dialogue with Hamas. These acts are also for Israel's benefit.
Note for the press
Download the report on www.ikvpaxchristi.nl/uk.
For more information please contact Helma Maas, IKV Pax Christi's press officer at +31 06 48.98.14.88 or consult our website.
IKV Pax Christi works for peace, reconciliation and justice in the world. We join with people in conflict areas to work on a peaceful and democratic society. We enlist the aid of people in the Netherlands who, like IKV Pax Christi, want to work for political solutions to crises and armed conflicts. IKV Pax Christi combines knowledge, energy and people to attain one single objective: there must be peace!
No sustainable political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is possible without Hamas. That is one conclusion in "Talking to Hamas: On Isolation and Its Failure" a report by peace organisation IKV Pax Christi.
"The political boycott of Hamas has failed", peace organisation IKV Pax Christi notes. It has served neither the Palestinians' national aspirations nor Israel's desire for security. This strategy has left in tatters the credibility of Quartet's pursuit of peace. (The Quartet is made up of the EU, Russia, the UN and the USA.)
"The presupposition that peace talks can achieve a good result when Hamas is left out is pure fantasy", notes Jan Gruiters of IKV Pax Christi. "Isolating Hamas has reinforced its radical tendencies while weakening President Abbas. Recognition of Israel and renunciation of violence must be the results of, not the prerequisites for, political dialogue with Hamas".
Like most other EU countries, the Netherlands is a proponent of Hamas' political and diplomatic isolation. Yet, this isolation has done nothing to bring about a political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
In its report, which was written prior to incursion into Gaza, IKV Pax Christi examines various scenarios for Hamas' continued isolation, including 'more violence in Gaza', of the type now taking place. None of these scenarios leads to peace or to more security for the Israeli population. The report is based on credible sources including leading experts like Graham Fuller (ex-CIA), Efraim Halevy (ex-Mossad).
The report does not justify Hamas' strategy. IKV Pax Christi calls the shelling carried out by Palestinian extremists a contravention of international humanitarian law. Still, IKV Pax Christi calls on the international community, the EU and the Dutch government to reassess the political isolation of Hamas. Hamas must be influenced, not isolated.
An immediate and permanent ceasefire, the opening of border crossings and the raising of the blockade to admit humanitarian aid are only possible when Hamas is admitted to the political process. That is why the international community must support Arab countries' attempts to reconcile Fatah and Hamas and why it must shatter the taboo against dialogue with Hamas. These acts are also for Israel's benefit.
Note for the press
Download the report on www.ikvpaxchristi.nl/uk.
For more information please contact Helma Maas, IKV Pax Christi's press officer at +31 06 48.98.14.88 or consult our website.
IKV Pax Christi works for peace, reconciliation and justice in the world. We join with people in conflict areas to work on a peaceful and democratic society. We enlist the aid of people in the Netherlands who, like IKV Pax Christi, want to work for political solutions to crises and armed conflicts. IKV Pax Christi combines knowledge, energy and people to attain one single objective: there must be peace!
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Candlelight vigil for Gaza victims
Come and show your respect for the victims of Israel's bombing and invasion of Gaza,
which has now resulted in the deaths of over 550 Palestinians
This Thursday 8 January from 7pm & next Thursday 15 January
Sydney Town Hall
which has now resulted in the deaths of over 550 Palestinians
This Thursday 8 January from 7pm & next Thursday 15 January
Sydney Town Hall
Monday, January 5, 2009
Justice says others help Obama shut Guantanamo
Editorial
January 5, 2009
‘Australia shares responsibility with the US for cleaning up the mess.’
GUANTANAMO Bay is and always has been a legal black hole, deliberately set up by the Bush Administration on a US military base in Cuba to hold terrorism suspects beyond the reach of US courts and, for that matter, international law. For six years, the world observed a charade of justice, as the Administration thwarted a succession of efforts to challenge, in a properly constituted court of law, the legal basis for the detention of 775 detainees in all.
Last June the Supreme Court finally established that the detainees could not be held beyond the reach of US law and upheld their claim to the centuries-old right of habeas corpus. Incoming president Barack Obama has already distinguished himself by denouncing Guantanamo as a "sad chapter in American history" and vowing to shut it down as he moves to rebuild "America's moral stature in the world". As his legal adviser, Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe, has said: "We can't put people in a dungeon forever without processing whether they deserve to be there."
Most of the 255 people still detained at Guantanamo are expected to be freed. Only one, Osama bin Laden's former driver Salim Hamdan, has undergone a trial by the Bush Administration's military commission that actually tested the evidence against him. Sentenced to 5½ years in prison, including his time in detention, he was released last month in his homeland, Yemen.
A minority of so-called "high-value" suspects such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the September 11 terrorism, can rightly expect to be charged and tried in a court of law that complies with the democratic norms of justice. Even then, the admissibility of confessions and other evidence has regrettably been tainted by their long detention in harsh conditions and, in some cases, torture.
Another problem the US faces is resettling detainees whom it has demonised repeatedly to justify their years of detention without trial. In several cases since the Supreme Court's ruling in June, US courts have assessed the evidence against the men brought before them as being too weak to justify their detention and ordered their release. The US has now cleared about 60 detainees for release, but is unable either to ensure their safety if they return to their home countries or to find other countries willing to accept them.
Only a few nations, such as Germany and Portugal, have said they will consider taking detainees. The Netherlands has responded with an argument that is likely to resonate with a public that is also naturally fearful of men held as terror suspects for so many years. "If they are not to be tried but cannot return to their countries, it is first and foremost the responsibility of the country which arrested and imprisoned them, the United States," a Foreign Ministry official said. In other words, it's their mess and they should clean it up on their own. Unfortunately, the likely consequence would be to doom a large number of probably innocent people to yet more time in detention.
And the US did not do this all on its own. A few nations that were once supportive of Guantanamo Bay, including Australia under the Howard government, share the shame and some responsibility for helping to shut it down. The Rudd Government is one of about 100 asked by the US to help clear the camp. Acting Prime Minister Julia Gillard said at the weekend that the Government had rejected a request to accept a group of detainees as they did not meet security and immigration criteria but that future requests would be considered on a case-by-case basis.
A number of legal experts have already sought to establish the truth about the 775 detainees deemed to be "enemy combatants". One two-year project by Professor Mark Denbeaux and his students at Seton Hall Law School, in New Jersey, based on official documents, found that 86 per cent of detainees were not enemy combatants at all. As David McColgin, a lawyer for detainees, points out, "A lot of it was justified on false reports from local Afghan people who simply wanted to get the bounty money the US Government made available, which was a real incentive to provide potentially false information." Until recently, none of this information was tested in court.
Only 14 per cent of detainees were actually captured on a battlefield, but many of those are believed to be among the people still in detention. Thus the domestic political difficulties of resettling any detainees are considerable. However, Australia has already done so in the case of two of its citizens, both of whom are now free. Three years ago, Mamdouh Habib was freed without charge after three years at Guantanamo. He had been vilified by the Bush Administration and the Howard government, in order to persuade the public he belonged among the alleged "worst of the worst" at Guantanamo. No proper explanation, no apology, was offered upon his return. David Hicks returned to Australia in May 2007 to complete a nine-month sentence, having agreed to a plea-bargain deal as a way to end his 5½-year ordeal.
The bottom line is that if other nations want the US to end the injustices endured by the detainees of Guantanamo Bay, they will probably have to help. This dark chapter must be closed soon in order to reclaim some of the high moral ground that the US and its allies so needlessly surrendered in their struggle against terrorism.
This story was found at: The Age Article
January 5, 2009
‘Australia shares responsibility with the US for cleaning up the mess.’
GUANTANAMO Bay is and always has been a legal black hole, deliberately set up by the Bush Administration on a US military base in Cuba to hold terrorism suspects beyond the reach of US courts and, for that matter, international law. For six years, the world observed a charade of justice, as the Administration thwarted a succession of efforts to challenge, in a properly constituted court of law, the legal basis for the detention of 775 detainees in all.
Last June the Supreme Court finally established that the detainees could not be held beyond the reach of US law and upheld their claim to the centuries-old right of habeas corpus. Incoming president Barack Obama has already distinguished himself by denouncing Guantanamo as a "sad chapter in American history" and vowing to shut it down as he moves to rebuild "America's moral stature in the world". As his legal adviser, Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe, has said: "We can't put people in a dungeon forever without processing whether they deserve to be there."
Most of the 255 people still detained at Guantanamo are expected to be freed. Only one, Osama bin Laden's former driver Salim Hamdan, has undergone a trial by the Bush Administration's military commission that actually tested the evidence against him. Sentenced to 5½ years in prison, including his time in detention, he was released last month in his homeland, Yemen.
A minority of so-called "high-value" suspects such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the September 11 terrorism, can rightly expect to be charged and tried in a court of law that complies with the democratic norms of justice. Even then, the admissibility of confessions and other evidence has regrettably been tainted by their long detention in harsh conditions and, in some cases, torture.
Another problem the US faces is resettling detainees whom it has demonised repeatedly to justify their years of detention without trial. In several cases since the Supreme Court's ruling in June, US courts have assessed the evidence against the men brought before them as being too weak to justify their detention and ordered their release. The US has now cleared about 60 detainees for release, but is unable either to ensure their safety if they return to their home countries or to find other countries willing to accept them.
Only a few nations, such as Germany and Portugal, have said they will consider taking detainees. The Netherlands has responded with an argument that is likely to resonate with a public that is also naturally fearful of men held as terror suspects for so many years. "If they are not to be tried but cannot return to their countries, it is first and foremost the responsibility of the country which arrested and imprisoned them, the United States," a Foreign Ministry official said. In other words, it's their mess and they should clean it up on their own. Unfortunately, the likely consequence would be to doom a large number of probably innocent people to yet more time in detention.
And the US did not do this all on its own. A few nations that were once supportive of Guantanamo Bay, including Australia under the Howard government, share the shame and some responsibility for helping to shut it down. The Rudd Government is one of about 100 asked by the US to help clear the camp. Acting Prime Minister Julia Gillard said at the weekend that the Government had rejected a request to accept a group of detainees as they did not meet security and immigration criteria but that future requests would be considered on a case-by-case basis.
A number of legal experts have already sought to establish the truth about the 775 detainees deemed to be "enemy combatants". One two-year project by Professor Mark Denbeaux and his students at Seton Hall Law School, in New Jersey, based on official documents, found that 86 per cent of detainees were not enemy combatants at all. As David McColgin, a lawyer for detainees, points out, "A lot of it was justified on false reports from local Afghan people who simply wanted to get the bounty money the US Government made available, which was a real incentive to provide potentially false information." Until recently, none of this information was tested in court.
Only 14 per cent of detainees were actually captured on a battlefield, but many of those are believed to be among the people still in detention. Thus the domestic political difficulties of resettling any detainees are considerable. However, Australia has already done so in the case of two of its citizens, both of whom are now free. Three years ago, Mamdouh Habib was freed without charge after three years at Guantanamo. He had been vilified by the Bush Administration and the Howard government, in order to persuade the public he belonged among the alleged "worst of the worst" at Guantanamo. No proper explanation, no apology, was offered upon his return. David Hicks returned to Australia in May 2007 to complete a nine-month sentence, having agreed to a plea-bargain deal as a way to end his 5½-year ordeal.
The bottom line is that if other nations want the US to end the injustices endured by the detainees of Guantanamo Bay, they will probably have to help. This dark chapter must be closed soon in order to reclaim some of the high moral ground that the US and its allies so needlessly surrendered in their struggle against terrorism.
This story was found at: The Age Article
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
