Category: Human rights,

Group minutes


Minutes of the December meeting

December 2024

We have pleasure in attaching the minutes of our December meeting thanks to group member Lesley for preparing them. They contain details of the group’s recent activities including a schools talk, carol singing and Write for Rights. Future activities are also listed and if you are thinking of joining us, coming along to one of those would be a good place to start. Seasons greetings to our readers!

December minutes (Word)Download

Recent posts:

Correction: school visits date should be 21st January not 23rd as shown.

0

Arms sales and the revolving door


New report from the Campaign Against the Arms Trade reveals extent of this activity

November 2024

[ADDED: 16 December] If you want to see ministers squirm in front of a select committee when discussing arms sales to Israel (via USA) watch this YouTube video. Usual claims of ignorance and unable to answer basic questions. Even though the RAF is regularly flying over Gaza, it seems they are unaware of the destruction as the purpose they say is to look for hostages.

The question of arms sales has risen up the political agenda partly because of the question of whether we should continue to sell weapons to Israel. It also cropped up with the decision recently to award a GCVO to the King of Bahrain presented by King Charles. It was also an issue during the war in Yemen where British weapons and personnel were involved in helping Saudi in their ferocious bombing campaign in that country. All these and other examples revealed an industry with considerable political influence. They result in a distortion of our political process and an almost complete disregard for the effects of the arms on people at the end of them. The destruction being carried on in Gaza is facilitated by the continuing sale of F-35 aircraft elements of which are made in the UK. An ‘ethical dimension’ to our policy seems to be a thing of the past. There is little sign that arms sales are restricted to states which ignore human rights or International Humanitarian Law.

Not so much a revolving door as an ‘open plan office’

Campaign Against the Arms Trade CAAT has campaigned on these issues for many years and their current magazine, Issue 270, Autumn 2024 contains a number of articles on the topic of arms. One concerns what has been known as the ‘revolving door’. In an article ‘Government and Arms Industry Joined at the Hip’, they explore the deeply compromising nature of this relationship. They have published a report From Revolving Door to Open Plan Office: the Ever Closer Union Between the UK Government and the Arms Industry. They argue that the arms industry has become so deeply embedded in the government that the boundary has almost disappeared. It is now not so much a revolving door as an ‘open plan office’. 40% of top military staff and civilian personnel leaving the MOD hold positions in the arms and security industries. Transparency International research shows that one company, BAE, had more meetings with ministers and with Prime Ministers than any other company.

Private Eye carried out an extensive survey in 2016. This went into great detail and named names.

Why does it matter?

It matters for three main reasons:

  • Firstly, arms cause great misery for millions of people. The harrowing images on news programmes of property destruction, dead bodies, lines of people on the move or rows of tents housing displaced people are the result of the activities of this trade,
  • The lobbying power is such that government ministers seem to fall into line almost as soon as they assume power. Grand statements by Sir Keir Starmer and David Lammy for example are quickly forgotten as the next trade deal is signed. The arms trade seems to wield enormous power and influence over government policy,
  • Thirdly, the ‘open plan office’ means senior staff in the Civil Service and in the MOD and armed services are keeping an eye on prospects as they approach retirement. Lucrative board appointments and ‘consultancy’ contracts await them. Are they going to ask uncomfortable questions or raise difficulties with an arms contract and jeopardise these prospects?

As CAAT put it:

‘When these ‘revolvers’ leave public service for the arms trade, they take with them extensive contacts and privileged access. As current government decision-makers are willing to meet and listen to former Defence Ministers and ex-Generals, particularly if they used to work with them, this increases the arms trade’s already excessive influence over our government’s actions.

‘On top of this, there is the risk that government decision-makers will be reluctant to displease arms companies as this could ruin their chances of landing a lucrative arms industry job in the future. Beyond individual decisions, the traffic from government to the private sector, and vice versa, is part of a process where the public interest becoming conflated with corporate interest, so that it becomes normal to unquestioningly meet, collaborate and decide policy with the arms industry, then take work with it.’

0

Anniversary supper


November 2024

Some members of the Amnesty group met last evening to celebrate the 50th anniversary of its foundation. We are, sad to say, the last surviving group in Wiltshire. As we have noted before, the founders in 1974 may have thought that human rights were now a part of the political agenda and that it might naturally wither on the vine especially when the Human Rights Act became law in the UK. That has not been the case and the need for vigilance is ever present.

The world situation is dire for millions in countries like Burma where the minorities such as the Rohingya are persecuted; China where the Uyghurs and Tibetans suffer monstrous persecution; sub Saharan Africa where wars rage and millions flee or are driven from their homes; Syria – although quiet at present – has been a country where large numbers have been killed or driven from their homes and currently, the Middle East where a fearsome death toll and suggestions of ethnic cleansing are taking place in Gaza.

In the UK, hostility to the HRA is ever present and was a fixture of Conservative party policy for some years. Only yesterday we reported on a Daily Mail article which gave its readers only partial details of a report critical of the HRA produced by a secretive think tank. Several of the tabloids and the right wing press generally have maintained a steady stream of anti human rights stories suggesting the act is a get out of gaol card for criminals, terrorists and assorted ne’er-do-wells.

The They Work for You website reveals that both local MPs – John Glen and Danny Kruger – generally vote against human rights proposals. Kruger has written often on this subject and we have reviewed some of his activities on this site. The last Conservative government passed several pieces of legislation to limit protests and giving more powers to the police to arrest people taking part in protests. Indeed, the issue of arrests of journalists was part of the last Salisbury Democracy Café debate on Saturday 9th.

Both internationally and in the UK, the continuing need for a spotlight on human rights issues is vital and the group hopes to carry on with this work in the years to come. We always welcome new members and the best thing is to follow this site or Facebook (salisburyai) to see what we are doing and come along and make yourself known. Oh, and we had a very enjoyable meal!

Pic: Jane Miller

0

Report critical of human rights


Report published by Policy Exchange claiming the HRA has curtailed the rights of Parliament

November 2024

Slightly amended 13 November

An article appeared in the Daily Mail on 11 November under the headline ‘Rights Act ‘curtailed power of Parliament ”. It said ’eminent lawyers have compiled a dossier of 25 cases where the Human Rights Act was applied and have shown how its use removed power from Parliament’. It continued that ‘power once held in Westminster is increasingly being transferred to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg’ and quotes the example of the government’s wish to deport ‘illegal’ immigrants to Rwanda which was frustrated at the last minute by the Court.

The Mail did not tell its readers however, who produced this report and a reference does not appear in the online version either. It was in fact written by the Policy Exchange and published on 11th. The organisation promotes itself ‘as an educational charity [and] our mission is to develop and promote new policy ideas which deliver better public services, a stronger society and a more dynamic economy‘.

The problem is that the Exchange is an opaque organisation and does not reveal who funds it, does not reveal funding on its website nor tells us the amounts given by funders. Open Democracy is very critical about the secretiveness of this organisation, its ‘dark money’ and its influence in government both with the Conservatives and now, it alleges, Labour.

It was revealed by Rishi Sunak who admitted that Policy Exchange received funding from US oil giant ExxonMobil who helped the government write its draconian anti-protest laws. It serves as confirmation by the then prime minister of Open Democracy’s revelations that last year’s controversial policing bill, which became the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts (PCSC) Act, may have originated in a briefing from Policy Exchange. The organisation has form therefore in being hostile to rights and protests. It is curious that the Daily Mail, in the vanguard in promoting parliamentary sovereignty and a powerful force in the Brexit debate, failed to mention the influence of American money believed to be behind several of this and other think tanks. Quite where is this ‘sovereignty’ they are keen on?

The limited information provided to Daily Mail readers meant they are unaware of who funds these reports or the motives of the assumed funders (if indeed ExxonMobil are one of the funders). The report’s arguments are thin and present the reader with the notion that human rights were amply protected by our common law and there is no need for this ‘foreign’ court. Were that so and the victims of Hillsborough for example might disagree having been let down by the courts, the police and elements of the media in their search for justice. They finally achieved justice partly with the aid of the Human Rights Act so despised by the Mail. There are many victims of injustice who have found our institutions to be less than favourable to their interests – the Post Office scandal anyone?

1

The World Cup and sportswashing


Major law firm heavily criticised for a whitewash report on Saudi Arabia

November 2024

The 2034 World Cup is to take place in Saudi Arabia a country with a huge range of human rights issues. Women have restricted rights both in law and in practice. They are prevented from participation in sporting activities. Human Rights defenders are routinely intimidated or arrested on spurious charges. There is no religious freedom. There is a heavy toll of death sentences usually by beheading in public. By September 2024, 198 had been executed. Torture is common and suspects are kept for long periods often in solitary confinement without legal representation. Altogether a Kingdom where few freedoms or human rights exist.

FIFA, the world governing body, has been racked by years of controversy and corruption allegations. It would hardly be surprising therefore if the decision to host the 2034 competition in Saudi – following the massive scandal of the Qatar competition – was not accompanied by some corruption or other shady activities.

Enter Clifford Chance, a major London law firm with apparently a good reputation. They have produced a 39 page report in support of the Kingdom which somehow misses the key issues and the multiple human rights infringements. Clifford Chance, along with many other organisations, has a range of fine words praising their high principles. ‘[We] are committed to the highest ethical and professional standards’ they claim. ‘[We act] with integrity, professionalism and fairness.‘ As a firm ‘we have agreed to support and respect internationally recognised human rights both as part of our own commitment to the UN Global Compact and consistent with the UN Guiding Principles.’

So how, it might be asked, does a law firm with such principles and policy statements come to write a report which seems to overlook the massive infringements taking place in the Kingdom? It helps if you do not ask those in a position to know such as the many human rights organisations who have produced report after report detailing the dreadful state of human rights. Instead, you ask the Saudi sports authority itself, SAFF, who helpfully identified the five human rights ‘focal points’ for the (allegedly) ‘independent’ assessment. Reading the 39 pages there is no mention of the multiple human rights infringements which regularly take place in the Kingdom.

The report has produced a ‘shitstorm’ in the Clifford Chance headquarters

The report is nothing short of a disgrace. It is reported that it has produced an ‘internal shitstorm’ in the London headquarters. Eleven human rights organisations have condemned it. A common response to criticisms such as these is that sport enable a better understanding of human rights through sport. Global Citizen is a champion of this view. The difficulty with this idea, noble though it is, is that sport is being used by the likes of Saudi to promote – not human rights and brotherhood – but its own interests.

Another issue is the kafala system which immigrant labour works in desperate conditions for 16 hours a day sometimes in searing heat. The death toll is enormous and it is reported that 21,000 Nepali, Bangladeshi and Indian workers who have died in Saudi since the Vision 30 plan was launched in 2016. The Clifford Chance report dances around this issue with a host of weasel words.

And we must not forget the murder and dismemberment of Jamal Khashoggi almost certainly on MBS’s orders.

But should we be surprised? The Kingdom has enormous wealth and company after company is happy to do business there and hold their noses whilst doing so. Why should Clifford Chance be any different? It is alleged that the firm facilitated the removal of fortunes from 400 citizens who were locked in a hotel by Mohammed bin Salman. It is claimed £100bn was removed from them. The enormous wealth of the Gulf states has profited many European and American corporations eager to benefit from the largesse. Any moral scruples seem all too easily to be set aside. That a major law firms should join this jamboree is deeply disappointing. Thousands will die during the course of construction. Hundreds more will be detained without trial. Hundreds will continue to be beheaded. Whatever happened to those ‘highest ethical and professional standards?’

All this in aid of football. The ‘beautiful game’ has become mired in sleaze, corruption and graft. It has now dragged down a respected law firm in its quest to earn big fees.

[UPDATE: 15 November. Inside World Football reports that FIFA deliberately agreed with Saudi to limit the scope of the report into human rights.]

Sources: Amnesty, FIFA, Clifford Chance, The Guardian, New York Times, The Observer, Inside World Football.

0

Group minutes: September


September 2024

We are pleased to attach the minutes of our group meeting in September 2024 – thanks to group member Lesley for preparing them. The minutes contain a lot of interest including future group actions (see the last page). We are celebrating our formation 50 years ago and we shall be holding a brief photo op in Salisbury market square on 3 October near the Guildhall. All supporters and those with an interest in human rights are welcome to come.

We are 50 this year!

Note that we are no longer on X due to its recent history but we do have a presence on Mastodon with the handle @SalisburyAmnesty

Amnesty Minutes – September 2024Download

0

Trudi Warner case dropped


The new government has decided not to appeal against the judge’s decision to throw out the contempt of court case

August 2024

Readers may recall an earlier post discussing the Trudi Warner decision. This concerned a judge not allowing defendants to say they were climate campaigners in their defence. Warner stood outside the court with a placard saying that juries had a right to decide a case based on their conscience and not necessarily as the judge directs. The government’s legal department has indicated to the Appeal Court it is dropping the matter.

0

Shamima Begum


Court of Appeal turns down Shamima Begum appeal to challenge citizenship ruling.

August 2024

Shamima Begum’s appeal to overturn the government’s decision to remove her British citizenship was turned down by the Court of Appeal on 7 August. They said her appeal ‘[did] not raise an arguable point of law’. She fled the country in 2015 with two others – now believed to be dead – in order to join ISIS then in the process of trying to establish an Islamic caliphate. ISIS committed a number of horrific crimes, including beheadings, and large numbers of people died during their violent reign.

Begum was 15 when she fled and once there, she became a bride, had three children all of whom died young. She is now 24 and is living in al-Roij camp in Syria. A great deal of rage settled on her and various commentators have tried to understand this – why her? Partly it seems to be a mixture of misogyny and the fact she did not conform to the standard narrative of someone who had done what she did and now sought forgiveness. She became a kind of figurehead for the rage people felt about the terrible actions of ISIS. It also seems to have been forgotten that she was a child of 15 when she left.

Removing someone’s citizenship is a severe retribution however and seems to have been done by the then home secretary Said Javid in response to tabloid rage. The argument that she was a ‘threat to national security’ is absurd and in what way was never explained. It has never been claimed that she committed any atrocity. How she would be a threat if she returned to the UK is also not explained. The government tried to argue that she could become a Bangladeshi citizen, an argument Lord Sumption described as a ‘legal fiction’.

Amnesty has issued a press release on this topic.

“It’s deeply concerning that the Supreme Court has concluded there’s no point of law to be considered on such a serious matter as stripping a British person of her citizenship – particularly when that was done on the back of her being exploited as a 15-year-old child.

“Stripping Shamima Begum’s nationality was profoundly wrong – she is and has always been British.

“Begum is now exiled in dangerous and inhuman conditions, along with thousands of other people, including women and children, in north-east Syria”.

“The UK should follow others by taking responsibility for nationals stranded in Syria – including by assisting in their safe return to the UK, whether or not that means facing possible criminal investigation or prosecution on their return.”

It is interesting to note that in an article in the Daily Mail on line, they report that the residents of Bethnal Green (where Shamima Begum used to live) would ‘welcome her back’.

There is now likely to be an appeal to the European Court of Human rights.

0

Starmer’s wish to see more facial recognition technology


The prime minister wishes to see more facial recognition technology following riots in Southport and elsewhere

August 2024

Following the terrible murder of three little girls and the wounding of eight others in Southport last week, riots have broken out in various parts of the UK. A mixture of extremists and far right groups have assembled outside mosques and refugee centres to engage in violent acts including attacks on the police. These groups have claimed links to asylum seekers and immigrants to the murders and this has led them to take these violent actions. Several people phoning in the the BBC’s Any Answers programme on Saturday 3 August, made claims linking the murders to boat people even though the young man who has been charged is from Cardiff and is not a boat person.

People have been rightly outraged by the high-jacking of the tragic deaths of the three little girls by large numbers of far right groups many of whom travel to the area with the intention of engaging in violence. There is a natural desire to see these people to be identified, arrested and brought to justice. There is great pressure on the new government to ‘do something’ and the Home Secretary and the Prime Minister have made statements. The latter has called for the greater use of facial recognition technology (FR) in the task of identifying ‘thugs’.

We should be very wary of going down this path. It has echoes of Jeremy Bentham’s idea of a panopticon in the nineteenth century: a prison where prisoners could be watched at all times. It fed into the idea of complete control by governments or their agents as a means of social control.

There are several reasons for being wary of introducing more FR. Although it could be used to locate and arrest those involved in the current mayhem or any future outbreaks, it would introduce into the public realm greater powers for the police and politicians. The last decade has seen a number of laws enacted to prevent or seriously limit protests and demonstrations. Britain has had a history of such protests and they have led to improvements in the role of women in society, better housing, an end to slavery and a range of social improvements and rights for ordinary people. This technology would however, give police considerably enhanced powers to clamp down on protests. We may deplore the sometimes extreme actions of the climate protestors, but without such protests, the government would be unlikely to take action of climate change.

To tackle the violence and riots in other words, we would be giving the government enhanced powers over other forms of legitimate protest. There is also the vexed issue of control. The various scandals we have seen in recent years including the Post Office, the biggest one of all, have shown an inability by the vast range of controls, audits, select committees, etc. etc. to exert any kind of realistic control over these organisations. They achieve lives of their own and seem impervious to moral principles or honest dealings. Do we really want to give them yet more technology?

Another objection is that it would give yet more power to the tech giants over our lives. A feature of the riots is how easy it has been for rioters to assemble by using such media as X and Telegram. These are American firms and are more of less completely outside anyone’s control. It was Elon Musk who decided to allow Tommy Robinson back onto X for example. So we have politicians and journalists making speeches, statements and writing opinion pieces, when it was the decision by one man on the other side of the pond which has provided a key weapon for the far right groups. Although Sir Keir is making noises about the tech giants, will the government actually do anything?

Finally, it sees the solution to these problems in technological terms: we have problem, lets install some more kit and problem solved. The issues are much deeper than simply arresting some thugs. Poverty, low wages, poor housing, inflation and a host of other issues have led to groups of people feeling left behind or ignored by the politicians and to an extent the media.

We should think very carefully before giving politicians yet more power to intrude into our lives. Even though it may mean some of the rioters escaping justice. China has this system installed offering the government almost complete control over its citizens. They have 700 million such cameras used widely as a means to monitor its citizens and to repress minorities. Perhaps we should remember the Chinese proverb ‘a journey of a thousand miles begins with just a single step’. Our liberties are fragile and we should be extremely cautious of giving government’s powers to limit them further. It has the power to be the biggest threat to human rights and civil liberties in the UK.

0

Rights Lawyers in China: 9 Years after 709 Crackdown


China: 9th Anniversary of 709 Crackdown on Rights Lawyers and Defenders: 10 Notable Events Over Past Year
0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑