Honduras: Post Coup Censorship

Media in Honduras Call for "Normalcy" After Coup
<http://knightcenter.utexas.edu/blog/?q=en/node/4459>

The country's two leading radio networks, Radio América and Radio HRN,
opponents of ousted President Manuel Zelaya, called on Hondurans early Monday
to resume their normal activities and not to follow citizen organizations that
are pushing to restore Zelaya to office, Italy's ANSA news agency reports from
Tegucigalpa. (See latest news here.)

TV stations are not broadcasting news, and international networks such as CNN
and Telesur were blacked out, the agency says. The radio stations have not
condemned restrictions on press freedom, nor the fact that only official
information was being broadcast, ANSA says. Nor has the national human rights
commissioner condemned violations of Hondurans' right to information, the
agency says.

The Sunday morning coup in Honduras shocked President Manuel Zelaya, who was
still in his pajamas while giving a news conference in Costa Rica.

Amid the confusion, a crowd outside the Presidential Palace attacked a
photographer for El Heraldo newspaper, the newspaper reports. (See other
photos here.)

News organizations sympathetic to Zelaya (an ally of Hugo Chávez), such as
Venezuela's official news agency and Cuba's Granma published a statement by
the Latin American Journalists Federation (FELAP), supporting journalists who
were seeking to report the truth. The statement condemned those media that
supported the "oligarchic forces" and the military that ousted Zelaya.

While many international news organizations compiled their first reports from
Mexico, Venezuela, the United States, and other countries, Argentine
journalist Gonzalo Verge, who lives in Tegucigalpa, found himself in the right
place at the right time, with a birds-eye view of the action.

In a report for MDZ Online Verge said he awoke Sunday to the sound of
helicopters and sirens. From his apartment overlooking the Government Palace,
he saw troops surrounding the perimeter and "tanks that drove by like autos."

Switching on the radio and TV, he learned of Zelaya's arrest, but minutes
later, all broadcasts were cut. Using a laptop and cellphone to access the
Internet and the mass media, "all were giving different, contradictory
information," contributing to a general disorder."

Philippines: Journalist finds himself on Army "hit list"

PHILIPPINES: JOURNALIST FINDS HIMSELF ON ARMY "HIT LIST"

Last week a journalist the accused the Philippine Army of putting his name
on a military "hit list", report the Center for Media Freedom and
Responsibility (CMFR), the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and
Reporters Without Borders (RSF).

Carlos Conde, who regularly writes for "The New York Times", "International
Herald Tribune" and his blog http://carlosconde.com/ , said his name
allegedly appeared in an "order of battle" document prepared by the army in
2007.

Conde said the official document amounts to a "hit list" that contains more
than a hundred names, mostly members of anti-government groups. Allegedly he
is the only journalist on the list, and is classified as "targeted."
Orders of battle are usually extensive military plans that include tactics
and targets.

According to the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP), at
least one person on the list has been murdered; Celso Pojas, a peasant
leader in Davao City, was killed in 2008. "Others have been threatened and
harassed," the NUJP statement said.

In the past, political activists who have appeared on such lists are among
those who have been murdered in the Philippines allegedly by military and
paramilitary units. According to CMFR, more than 1,000 political activists
and 40 journalists have been killed in the Philippines since 2001.

Now based in Manila, Conde worked for a long time in Southern Mindanao,
covering the military's decades-old conflict with Muslim and communist
rebels. He told CMFR he believes his inclusion on the list is connected to
his being the former coordinator of NUJP in Davao City. He was also the
union's secretary-general from 2004-06, at which time he led local campaigns
against the killing of journalists.

"Why my name is included in the 'order of battle' is a mystery. Unless, that
is, the armed forces considers my and NUJP's advocacy for press freedom, as
well as pressuring the government to end the killings, as the work of
enemies of the state (and) unless the Armed Forces of the Philippines views
my job and my writing as threats to my country," he said in a 19 May
statement.

CPJ reports that this year alone, four radio journalists have been shot on
Mindanao, with a fifth attempted shooting in the northern province of Abra.
Extrajudicial killings have been the subject of concern by the United
Nations and human rights groups.

Officials of the 10th Infantry Division, the list's alleged authors, have
disowned the document. Colonel Lysander Suerte said in an interview with
CMFR that whoever came out with the document only wants to misinform and
"agitate the people to go against the military."

Related stories on IFEX.org:
- Journalist included in military "order of battle":
http://www.ifex.org/philippines/2009/05/21/conde_order_battle/
- Broadcaster critically injured in latest shooting:
http://www.ifex.org/philippines/2009/05/22/manalac_shot/
--------------------------------------------------------
The "IFEX Communiqué" is the weekly newsletter of the International Freedom
of Expression eXchange (IFEX), a global network of 80 organisations working
to defend and promote the right to free expression. IFEX is managed by
Canadian Journalists for Free Expression ( http://www.cjfe.org ).

The "IFEX Communiqué" is also available in French, Spanish, Russian (
http://www.ifex.cjes.ru/ ) and Arabic ( http://anhri.net/ifex/ ).

The views expressed in the "IFEX Communiqué" are the sole responsibility of
the sources to which they are attributed.

The "IFEX Communiqué" grants permission for its material to be reproduced or
republished provided it is credited as the source.

Contact IFEX Online Editor Natasha Grzincic at: communique (@) ifex.org

Mailing Address: 555 Richmond Street West, #1101, PO Box 407, Toronto,
Ontario M5V 3B1 Canada, Tel: +1 416 515 9622; Fax: +1 416 515 7879;
Website: http://www.ifex.org
-------------------------------------------------------
----
Mark Perkins MLIS, MCLIP
www.markperkins.info

https://keyserver.pgp.com/

Gambia: Journalists and Gambia Press Union Executive Members Detained

 

---

From: ARTICLE 19 [mailto:press@article19.org]
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 5:15 AM
To: lists@markperkins.info
Subject: The Gambia: Journalists and Gambia Press Union Executive Members Detained

PRESS RELEASE

For immediate release – 18 June 2009

The Gambia: Journalists and Gambia Press Union Executive Members Detained

Seven journalists and members of the Gambia Press Union (GPU) Executive have been held without charge by the Gambian National Intelligence Agency (NIA) since being called for questioning on 15 June 2009.

The arrests are believed to be in connection with a statement by the GPU on 11 June 2009, criticising comments made by President Yahya Jammeh during a television interview where he made what they describe as inappropriate comments about the murder in December 2004 of the editor of The Point newspaper, Deyda Hydara, and the status of Freedom of Expression in the country.

Those detained are: the, Sarata Jabbi, First Vice President of the GPU, Emil Touray GPU Secretary General, Pa Modou Faal, GPU Treasurer, Pap Saine and Ebrima Sawaneh, Editor and Deputy Editor of The Point newspaper, Sam Sarr and Abubacarr Saidykhan, Editor-in-Chief and reporter for the Foroyaa newspaper.

The arrests come only weeks after the 45th session of the African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights (ACHPR) held in May in the Gambia, where ARTICLE 19 urged the Gambian authorities to comply with their international obligations on freedom of expression and to allow journalists to work freely.

Media workers and those defending free expression in the Gambia operate in a climate of fear. ARTICLE 19 is gravely concerned that despite many recommendations and resolutions of the ACHPR, the Gambian government and its security agents continue to intimidate and harass media workers on a regular basis.

“We reaffirm our solidarity and support to the GPU and call on the Gambian authorities to immediately release those detained and to cease the intimidation and harassment of journalists” said Dr Agnes Callamard, Executive Director of ARTICLE 19.

NOTES TO EDITORS:

• For more information please contact: Fatou Jagne Senghore, Africa Programme, fatouj@article19.org + 221 3 3820 0337
• ARTICLE 19s recent statement on freedom of expression in Gambia is at: http://www.article19.org/pdfs/conferences/gambia-freedom-of-information-and-access-to-information.pdf

ARTICLE 19

ARTICLE 19 is an independent human rights organisation that works globally to protect and promote the right to freedom of expression. It takes its name from Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees free speech. For more information on ARTICLE 19 please visit www.article19.org

Free Word Centre, 60 Farringdon Road, London EC1R 3GA, United Kingdom
Tel: +44 20 7324 2500 - Fax: +44 20 7490 0566 - info@article19.org - www.article19.org

powered by phplist v 2.10.5, © tincan ltd

Ireland: Blasphemy Amendment Contrary to Free Speech

 

---

From: ARTICLE 19 [mailto:press@article19.org]
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 3:38 AM
To: lists@markperkins.info
Subject: Ireland: Blasphemy Amendment Contrary to Free Speech

STATEMENT

18 June 2009

Ireland: Blasphemy Amendment Contrary to Free Speech

The Irish government's amendment on "blasphemous matter", introduced in the Defamation Bill 2006, is contrary to the right to freedom of expression under international human rights law. ARTICLE 19 urges Ireland's Parliament, the Houses of the Oireachtas, to reject this amendment.

ARTICLE 19 very much welcomes the primary motivation behind the Defamation Bill 2006, inasmuch as it seeks to modernise defamation law in Ireland by decriminalising defamation and removing imprisonment as punishment for defamation. This is a result which ARTICLE 19 has been promoting globally for some time now and it is good that Western European countries are finally joining other countries around the world that have decriminalised defamation.

The government amendment, which was submitted to the Select Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights on 14 May 2009, provides for the offence of blasphemy whenever a person publishes matter which is "grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion" with the intention of causing such outrage. Conviction can lead to a fine of up to €100,000. There is a defence of "genuine literary, artistic, political, scientific, or academic value".

The amendment has attracted significant criticism from within Ireland and beyond, including from the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, Miklos Harazti, who has said that it "violates OSCE media freedom commitments and other international standards upholding the right to freely discuss issues of religion" and has "a chilling effect on freedom of expression".

We acknowledge the Irish government's position that, whilst it would prefer to abolish blasphemous libel altogether, the constitution precludes this, as Article 40(6)(1)(i) of the constitution of Ireland provides that the publication of blasphemous matter is an offence punishable by law. The Minister of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Dermot Ahern, has indicated that the government does not intend to propose a constitutional amendment at this time. He has further explained the government's reasons for proposing the amendment by suggesting that a 1999 decision which held that the common law offence of blasphemous libel did not survive the adoption of the constitution, Corway v Independent Newspapers (Ireland) Limited, had left a legal void which the government was bound to fill through legislation on the matter.

We consider that the amendment on "blasphemous matter" should be rejected for three reasons.

(1) We consider that the offence of blasphemy is inconsistent with a modern interpretation of international guarantees of freedom of expression, notwithstanding the continued presence of such offences in many countries. Blasphemy laws do not protect individuals against harm but serve instead to insulate the sensitivities of religious adherents by protecting religious ideas, symbols or objects from attack or insult. Blasphemy laws discriminate against atheists and non-theists by providing special protection for religious beliefs but not other deeply held views. We note that the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief has expressed concern about blasphemy laws and suggested that a useful alternative to blasphemy laws would instead be proper implementation of Article 20 of the ICCPR, providing for prohibition of incitement to hatred, including on the basis of religion. It also goes against current trends toward abolition of blasphemy laws in democracies. Notably, ! in 2008, the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel were abolished in the UK.

(2) We note that the amendment does not provide for prison sanctions for blasphemy, but it does provide for a fine of up to €100,000. This is a considerable sanction, which is likely to have a chilling effect upon speech concerning religion, as suggested by the OSCE Special Representative on Freedom of the Media.

(3) We recognise the government's argument that, if the amendment is adopted, the Irish law on blasphemy will be limited and prosecutions will be highly improbable. This cannot detract from the principled point made above, namely that the very idea of a blasphemy law runs counter to respect for freedom of expression. We note that the impact of the amendment will be felt well beyond Ireland. A compelling reason to reject this amendment is the negative message it sends to illiberal regimes seeking to justify their own repressive laws on religious offence, including blasphemy laws. It will also be seen as providing support to the arguments raised by the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) and its supporters in favour of the continuation of adoption by UN bodies of resolutions on "combating defamation of religions".

Instead of adopting a blasphemy law, the Irish government should respond positively to the essence of the Corway judgment, in which the Irish Supreme Court, in holding that the common law offence of blasphemy was void, emphasised the secular nature of the constitution and its guarantees of the right to freedom of conscience, of religion and of expression. The government should not add an offence of blasphemy to the existing law and should, instead, present in due course a referendum to delete Article 40(6)(1)(i) of the constitution, as recommended by both the Constitutional Review Group and the Joint Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution.

FURTHER INFORMATION:

• For more information please contact: Sejal Parmar, Senior Legal Officer sejal@article19.org +44 20 7324 2500
• To view the additional footnotes, please visit the ARTICLE 19 website at www.article19.org

ARTICLE 19

ARTICLE 19 is an independent human rights organisation that works globally to protect and promote the right to freedom of expression. It takes its name from Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees free speech. For more information on ARTICLE 19 please visit www.article19.org

Free Word Centre, 60 Farringdon Road, London EC1R 3GA, United Kingdom
Tel: +44 20 7324 2500 - Fax: +44 20 7490 0566 - info@article19.org - www.article19.org

powered by phplist v 2.10.5, © tincan ltd

OpenNet Initiative releases new survey of Internet filtering and surveillance in Iran

-----Original Message-----
From: rob faris [mailto:rfaris@cyber.law.harvard.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 8:29 AM
To: oni-announce@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject: [oni-announce] OpenNet Initiative releases new survey of Internet
filtering and surveillance in Iran

Dear friends,

We are pleased to share our latest report on Internet filtering in Iran.

The Internet and mobile phones have come of age in Iran over the past six
months and now play an important role in Iranian politics despite government
efforts to limit the reach and impact of these digital tools. Since last
week, when voters went to the polls, the Iranian government has blocked
access to a number of prominent political Web sites, as well as blocking
access to important Web 2.0 sites including Facebook, YouTube and Twitter.

Today the OpenNet Initiative (ONI) released a new survey of Internet
filtering and surveillance in Iran. The new profile provides context for
the recent crackdown on the Internet in Iran, describing the legal,
institutional and technical details of Iran's filtering regime. It is
available here: http://opennet.net/research/profiles/iran.

Rob Faris

ONI Asia Releases Results on Internet Controls in Asia (Penang, Malaysia, June 17)

 

---

From: jilliancyork@gmail.com [mailto:jilliancyork@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jillian York
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 10:35 AM
To: oni-announce@eon.law.harvard.edu; OpeNet Initiative
Subject: [oni-announce] ONI Asia Releases Results on Internet Controls in Asia (Penang, Malaysia, June 17)

Good Morning!

The OpenNet Initiative and ONI Asia are pleased to announce the release of two reports on Internet filtering and surveillance in Asia.  ONI research reveals accelerating restrictions on Internet content as Asian governments shift to next generation controls. These new techniques go beyond blocking access to websites and are more informal and fluid, implemented at edges of the network, and are often backed up by increasingly restrictive and broadly interpreted laws.

We will be holding a virtual press conference at 10:00 MST (UTC +8) on Twitter (http://twitter.com/oniasia).  Questions may also be submitted via e-mail (contact@opennet.net).

To access our latest reports:

Asia Regional Overview:
http://opennet.net/regions/asia

Internet Filtering in China:
http://opennet.net/research/profiles/china

China's Green Dam: The Implications of Government Control Encroaching on the Home PC:
http://opennet.net/chinas-green-dam-the-implications-government-control-encroaching-home-pc

For more information or to contact OpenNet Initiative and ONI Asia representatives, please refer to the attached press release.

Sincerely,

Jillian C. York
Project Coordinator, OpenNet Initiative
Berkman Center for Internet & Society
Harvard University
jyork@cyber.law.harvard.edu
+617-384-9108

Iran: Escalation of attacks and censorship after elections

 

---

From: ARTICLE 19 [mailto:press@article19.org]
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 2:17 AM
To: lists@markperkins.info
Subject: Iran: Escalation of attacks and censorship after elections

PRESS RELEASE

For immediate release – 15 June 2009

Iran: Escalation of attacks and censorship after elections

ARTICLE 19 calls on the Islamic Republic of Iran immediately to unblock Iranians’ access to international media, to lift bans on local newspapers and websites, and to stop harassing Iranian and foreign journalists in the wake of last Friday’s presidential elections.

The Iranian government is using various methods to block the reporting of events following the presidential election on 12 June, including by censoring and suspending newspapers blocking internet news websites and preventing access to international news media.

There have been widespread public protests in major cities across Iran, after the incumbent candidate, President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, announced a resounding victory over opposition reformist candidates early on Saturday morning.

Staff from several international news organisations, including Belgian, Spanish, Canadian, American, Emirati and Italian newscasters, have had tapes confiscated, been ordered to leave the country, been beaten while covering public protests and even been detained. The BBC English and Persian television and radio services have been interrupted by electronic jamming, apparently from within Iran, which began on Friday and has gradually intensified.

The Iranian print media has been subject to serious censorship. The Kalam-e Sabz newspaper, which supports opposition reformist candidate, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, was not printed on Monday 15 June. The intelligence ministry has also reportedly ordered all newspapers not to report anything which questions the legitimacy of the elections.

The government has censored internet sites operating within and outside Iran too, as part of an ongoing pattern of repression. Over the weekend, civilians began posting coverage and images of the post-election violence on sites such as YouTube and Facebook, filling the vacuum left by the failure of other media to report on this. The government responded by blocking social networking sites on Saturday afternoon, along with the official campaign websites of the reformist political candidates.

Several Iranian journalists have been arrested, disappeared or gone into hiding in the last two days.

SMS messaging was blocked on the eve of the elections and the main mobile telephone network for Iran cut its services in Tehran on Saturday. There have been various reports of phone lines not working for hours after the polls closed.

The national state media (IRIB), the only locally licensed television and radio services available in Iran, has refrained from covering any of the clashes between pro-reform supporters and the police.

ARTICLE 19 notes that the Republic of Iran has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which guarantees the right to freedom of expression. The attempts by the Iranian authorities to impose a news blackout on reporting on the election and its aftermath are a clear breach of the right to freedom of expression as protected by the ICCPR. ARTICLE 19 calls on Iran to respect its ICCPR obligations and to stop the censorship by unblocking access to all print, broadcast and online media immediately.

NOTES TO EDITORS:

• For more information please contact: Khashayar Karimi, Iran Programme Officer, khashayar@article19.org, or at +44 20 7324 2500.

ARTICLE 19

ARTICLE 19 is an independent human rights organisation that works globally to protect and promote the right to freedom of expression. It takes its name from Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees free speech. For more information on ARTICLE 19 please visit www.article19.org

6-8 Amwell Street London EC1R 1UQ United Kingdom
Tel: +44 20 7278 9292 - Fax: +44 20 7278 7660 - info@article19.org - www.article19.org

powered by phplist v 2.10.5, © tincan ltd

Maldives: Stop Prosecuting Criminal Defamation Cases

 

---

From: ARTICLE 19 [mailto:press@article19.org]
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 1:39 AM
To: lists@markperkins.info
Subject: Maldives: Stop Prosecuting Criminal Defamation Cases

PRESS RELEASE

For immediate release – 17 June 2009

Maldives: Stop Prosecuting Criminal Defamation Cases

The first criminal case in many years began hearings at the Criminal Court in the Maldives yesterday. ARTICLE 19 calls on the Maldivian authorities to abolish the crime of defamation, replacing it with appropriate civil defamation rules, and on the Prosecutor General, Ahmed Muiz, to refrain from bringing cases in the interim.

Muiz, appointed as an independent Prosecutor General pursuant to the new democratic 2008 Constitution, adopted after wide-ranging public consultations, announced in April 2009 that he was obliged to enforce all provisions of the Penal Code, including those on criminal defamation. Prior to the new Constitution, former Attorney General Hassan Saeed had refused to bring criminal defamation cases.

ARTICLE 19 believes that criminal defamation is a breach of the right to freedom of expression under international law, which the new Constitution closely mirrors. While Muiz does have to follow the law, his primary obligation is to uphold the Constitution, and he should not enforce provisions where there is a serious question as to their constitutionality.

In November 2008, Mohamed Nasheed, a journalist and former prisoner of conscience, overwhelmingly won the popular vote in 2008, sweeping Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, leader of the Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP), out after 30 years as president. Nasheed won the 2008 general election proclaiming that his party, the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), would consolidate democracy and press freedom. In parliamentary elections in May 2009, the MDP got the second largest number of seats, after the DRP.

In the defamation case, Hameed Abdul Kareem, ex-editor of Manas magazine, is accused of publishing defamatory remarks about former Chief Justice Sheikh Mohamed Rasheed Ibrahim. The article apparently discussed Rasheed’s loyalty to former President Gayoom and his lack of independence as the head of the judiciary.

NOTES TO EDITORS:

• For more information please contact: Toby Mendel, Senior Legal Counsel, a19law@hfx.eastlink.ca, +1 902 431-3688.

ARTICLE 19

ARTICLE 19 is an independent human rights organisation that works globally to protect and promote the right to freedom of expression. It takes its name from Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees free speech. For more information on ARTICLE 19 please visit www.article19.org

Free Word Centre, 60 Farringdon Road, London EC1R 3GA, United Kingdom
Tel: +44 20 7324 2500 - Fax: +44 20 7490 0566 - info@article19.org - www.article19.org

powered by phplist v 2.10.5, © tincan ltd

Azerbaijan: Proposed Amendments Threaten Media, Civil Society

 

---

From: ARTICLE 19 [mailto:press@article19.org]
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 2:59 AM
To: lists@markperkins.info
Subject: Azerbaijan: Proposed Amendments Threaten Media, Civil Society

        

18 June 2009

STATEMENT

Azerbaijan: Proposed Amendments Threaten Media, Civil Society

The rights to freedom of expression and freedom of association are at serious imminent risk in Azerbaijan as the country’s parliament, the Milli Mejlis, this week deliberates on further restrictions on the media and civic organisations.

In an extra-ordinary session on Friday 19 June, the Milli Mejlis will consider legislative changes relating to the establishment and activities of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the media.

Legislators propose amending the Media Law to reinforce changes adopted in March 2009. These included a provision to allow suspension of any media outlets engaged in so-called “abuse of power” through, for example, the use of anonymous sources. Criminal and civil defamation laws are used extensively in Azerbaijan to intimidate journalists and human rights defenders: several journalists and editors are currently in prison, some convicted on evidently trumped up charges.

The draft legislative amendments also contain a provision allowing the government to disband organisations convicted of writing “biased articles” three times within two years. Founders of media outlets and non-governmental organizations that are closed by the government could be banned from setting up similar organisations for up to five years.

Any non-governmental organization that wishes to operate or conduct activities in Azerbaijan would have to be registered by the state and anyone speaking on behalf of an unregistered organisation could make this organization liable to an administrative sanction, including a fine of up to 50,000 AZN (approximately USD 62,500 or EURO 44,650). If such an individual is a foreign citizen, the person could potentially be expelled. The result could be to limit access to the country for foreign representatives of international human rights organisations, which are not registered there.

Azerbaijani non-governmental organizations would no longer be allowed to operate if they have less than 50 percent local funding. In order to carry out work throughout the country, an organization would have to have branches and/or representations in one-third of Azerbaijan’s 59 administrative-territorial districts.

Foreign groups would be virtually unable to open offices using international funding, unless there is a formal international agreement between Azerbaijan and the country of origin.

“These changes will severely limit the capacity of organisations and media critical of the government, and are a direct attack on freedom of expression and association in Azerbaijan,” said Rashid Hajili of the Media Rights Institute in Azerbaijan.

Amnesty International, ARTICLE 19, Human Rights Watch and International PEN believe that these legislative changes, if adopted, would have a severe, negative impact on civil society and the media, which would come under even more intense government scrutiny and control, through more restrictive registration and financial monitoring. This will cripple the ability of independent organizations to monitor abuses of human rights and hold the government to account for its actions. The right to freedom of expression and the right to free association will both be compromised.

We call upon the Milli Mejlis not to pass any amendments that could be used effectively and unjustifiably to hinder the professional activities of civil society and the media organisations. We also call upon the Milli Mejlis to make a commitment to bring its existing legislation into line with the government’s international obligations. As a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention of Human Rights, the Government of Azerbaijan has a legal obligation to uphold the right to freedom of expression and freedom of association.

NOTES TO EDITORS:

• For more information please contact: Zulfia Abdullaeva, Campaigner on South Caucasus/Central Asia, Amnesty International, zabdulla@amnesty.org; tel: +44 20 7413 5669; Nathalie Losekoot, Senior Programme Officer; Europe, nathalie@article19.org; tel. +44 20 7324 2500; Rachel Denber, Deputy Director, Europe and Central Asia division, Human Rights Watch; tel: +1 212 216 1266 or Giorgi Gogia, South Caucasus researcher, Human Rights Watch; tel: +99 577 42 12 35
• Amnesty International is a global movement of 2.2 million people in more than 150 countries and territories who campaign to end grave abuses of human rights.
• Human Rights Watch is an independent organization dedicated to defending and protecting human rights worldwide.
• International PEN is the world association of writers bringing together members in 102 countries in a common concern for the craft and art of writing and a commitment to freedom of expression through the written word.

ARTICLE 19

ARTICLE 19 is an independent human rights organisation that works globally to protect and promote the right to freedom of expression. It takes its name from Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees free speech. For more information on ARTICLE 19 please visit www.article19.org

Free Word Centre, 60 Farringdon Road, London EC1R 3GA, United Kingdom
Tel: +44 20 7324 2500 - Fax: +44 20 7490 0566 - info@article19.org - www.article19.org

powered by phplist v 2.10.5, © tincan ltd

12 States Sign World's First Treaty on Access to Information - What About the Other 35 Council of Europe Member States?

 

---

From: ARTICLE 19 [mailto:press@article19.org]
Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2009 6:02 AM
To: lists@markperkins.info
Subject: 12 States Sign World's First Treaty on Access to Information - What About the Other 35 Council of Europe Member States?

        

For Immediate Release - 19 June 2009

12 States Sign World’s First Treaty on Access to Information
- What About the Other 35 Council of Europe Member States?

12 European countries - Belgium, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, Hungary, Lithuania, Macedonia, Montenegro, Norway, Serbia, Slovenia, and Sweden - today became the first states to sign the world’s first treaty on access to information - the Council of Europe Convention on Access to Official Documents – at a meeting of Ministers of Justice held in Tromso, Norway.

Access Info Europe and ARTICLE 19 today welcomed the leadership shown by these 12 countries, and called the Council of Europe’s other 35 Member States to demonstrate their commitment to government transparency by signing and ratifying the Convention.

“Countries like the UK, France, Germany, Denmark, and the Netherlands were all present during the negotiation of the treaty. Responding to civil society concerns about the treaty, they argued that a minimum-standard Convention would attract more signatures. Why then have they not signed? Where is their commitment to the public’s right to know?” said Helen Darbishire, Executive Director of Access Info.

Notes for Editors

• A map of those who signed can be found at www.access-info.org
• The Convention on Access to Official Documents sets a low minimum standard on the right of access to information. A positive feature is that it establishes a right to request “official documents”, which are broadly defined as all information held by public authorities, in any form. The right can be exercised by all persons with no need to demonstrate a particular interest in the information requested, and at no charge for filing requests and viewing documents.
• Signature of the Convention is the first step, and should be followed by ratification. The Convention contains optional provisions such as whether judicial and legislative bodies will be fully subject to the right to request and receive information. It will enter into force once 10 states have ratified.
• Slovenia is one country taking a lead on ratification, having already included ratification of the Convention in its legislative programme. It also plans to ratify the optional provisions on access to legislative and judicial information, setting a high standard for other European States.
• In April 2009, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that access to government-held information is a right protected by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

For more information, please contact:

• Helen Darbishire, Executive Director, Access Info Europe
+ 34 667 685 319 helen@access-info.org
• Toby Mendel, Senior Legal Counsel, ARTICLE 19
+ 44 (0)7964 015083 a19law@hfx.eastlink.ca

ARTICLE 19

ARTICLE 19 is an independent human rights organisation that works globally to protect and promote the right to freedom of expression. It takes its name from Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees free speech. For more information on ARTICLE 19 please visit www.article19.org

Free Word Centre, 60 Farringdon Road, London EC1R 3GA, United Kingdom
Tel: +44 20 7324 2500 - Fax: +44 20 7490 0566 - info@article19.org - www.article19.org

powered by phplist v 2.10.5, © tincan ltd