Human Rights Day

December 10, 2011 will mark the 63rd anniversary of the creation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I think this anniversary will also mark many accomplishments in the 63 years since its inception. I could use this opportunity to mark all of the injustices that are still going on and the obstacles that are still stalling human rights legislation/action to end these injustices, but...well yeah I guess I am going to talk about that as well. 


Since the creation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, treaties, conventions, NGOs, resolutions, court cases and military action have been used to end the infringement of our basic human rights.  


We had NATO ignore the Security Council to intervene during the Bosnian genocide. 
We had  "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repealed AND New York was added to the list of states that allow same-sex marriage, plus D.C. 
We had the Arab Spring blow up in the Middle East.
We have had the majority of the European Council abolish capital punishment in all cases.


The list goes one. There have been many triumphs for human rights over the years and I think it is something to be celebrated.


63 years of a document inspiring more and more social, economic, cultural and political change. 


However there is still so much to do! 


U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been promoting gay rights recently when she stated that "gay rights are human rights and human rights are gay rights." 

Photo from The Moderate Voice

"No practice or tradition trumps the human rights that belong to all of us, and this holds true for inflicting violence on LGBT people," she said. "It is a violation of human rights when people are beaten or killed because of their sexual orientation, or because they do not conform to cultural norms about how men and women should look or behave."

In March a document passed in the United Nations supporting rights for everyone, regardless of sexual identity or orientation. 85 states are now parties to this change. Laws are not only created by legislation but also by jus cogens, customary law.  Legislation such as the ICCPR, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, is viewed as a living document, meaning that as societal changes occur, so do the interpretations of the laws set forth in the document. It's plain to see that gay rights are becoming a prominent topic in the ever-evolving human rights discussion.

Hillary said it best: 

"Gay people are born into -- and belong to -- every society in the world. They are all ages, all races, all faiths. They are doctors, and teachers, farmers and bankers, soldiers and athletes...Being gay is not a Western invention. It is a human reality."

President Obama has also been taking action by sending a memo to U.S. government agencies that deal with foreign aid to help those being targeted for being gay or lesbian. 

Now if only more LGBT changes were made within the U.S. although I think there are many nations that make life completely unbearable and torturous if identified as gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender. 

Check this out:

The High Commissioner for Human Rights will host a global conversation on human rights through social media on Friday, 9 December at 9:30 a.m. New York time.

Torture gets you nowhere...literally

So I can't help but chuckle at the fact that George W. Bush can't really travel outside of the United States. After disclosing in his book, Decision Points, that he had given the ok to use certain interrogation techniques. Not the kind a person generally wants to go through. In February of this year Mr. Bush actually canceled a trip to Switzerland because many were calling for his arrest.   

Courtesy of the White House website

Now the reason Mr. Bush can't actually go to many countries is because 149 nations are a party to the United Nations Convention Against Torture. Even the United States ratified the document (although not without reservations that made it clear that America has a different definition of torture...).  The best part of this treaty is that when it is ratified, article 7 of the document makes it so that any court has jurisdiction over torture cases. This "universal jurisdiction" basically means that any state that has ratified the convention can arrest and place charges against a public official for torture and cruel/inhuman treatment. 


The UN Convention Against Torture defines torture as, "means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions."

Protesters demonstrate water boarding to 

volunteer Maboud Ebrahim Zadeh, 

Nov. 5, 2007, in front of the Justice Department. 

The demonstration was protesting the nomination

of Michael Mukasey for Attorney General.

AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta

Now how do you justify torture? Is water-boarding okay as long as it protects a large amount of people? Or by giving up our morals and duty to protect all human life damage us as a nation more? 


A part of me wonders if Bush is just being targeted more for personal reasons. How many leaders in other nations have given the thumbs up on torture and gotten away with it? I doubt it is a small number. 


Some popular vacation spots that Mr. Bush probably won't ever visit include:


Australia
Costa Rica
Germany
Italy
Mexico
New Zealand
Sweden (not sure how popular this is but I desperately want to visit)...
and the list goes on...for 141 more states. 


On the bright side he can still go to the Bahamas, Comoros (wtf?), Dominican Republic, Gambia, India, Palau, Sudan(!!!!) and a couple of others. Hard to choose which list I'd rather pick my vacation from...


My question is this: Which country would actually arrest him and bring him to the international courts? I think it's smart for Bush to stay home and enjoy the splendors of Tejas. 

Social Media & Journalism

Humans are narcissists. We love to talk about ourselves and share things that are generally mundane with people. Social media allows for that. We share our feelings, emotions and daily happenings on Facebook. So I'm not surprised that journalists turned to social media to track down sources and to use that information for stories. It's done even more so today than in 2009 when the Annie Le story broke.  Ethically speaking, Bailey should have told Del Rocco from the get go that she was a journalists and that she would like to use the information she learned on her Facebook page for a story. I think the way the Independent  handled the information they were receiving as the story developed was very good. They were careful not to affect the publics perception of the case and to ensure that the investigation wasn't damaged. The Society of Professional Journalists state that journalists should consider certain things when it comes to the ethics of the job. One of them is to minimize harm and I think that the Independent was working that way. Bailey admitted later that she should have told Del Rocco that she was a journalists when she had added her as a friend.  I feel that if someone refuses to be interviewed it goes without saying that you shouldn't use information on their Facebook page. Although people should be more wary of what they post on Facebook. Nothing leaves the Internet once it's posted and privacy on the Internet is somewhat limited.

Pope in a Sex Club

I think we are all very aware of the scandals within the Catholic Church, (insert Catholic priest joke). On September 13, 2011 the sex abuse victims asked the International Criminal Courts to charge Pope Benedict XVI with crimes against humanity. When I read that I honestly thought, what the hell? I'm not here to defend the actions of the men who sexually abused members of their congregations. Not even close. I'm a cradle Catholic, but my brother calls me a cafeteria Catholic. I pick and choose what I believe in. Clever isn't it? 

People get up in arms when it comes to the Catholic Church, but my question is how many Baptist Ministers, Presbyterians, Buddhists and Imam's have done terrible things to the people that trust them? The Catholic Church represents a huge group of people and has a lot of influence across the world. The sex scandals alone cost the Vatican $700 million. (Makes me wish I had applied for a scholarship from the Church).  Some have also stated that more charges are brought against the Catholic Church because of the amount of money and influence they have. Whether this is true or not, I don't know. However I could see how this is true for some, small amount of cases. Maybe. (People are opportunists and this is America right?)


The charges being brought against the Church are most likely to raise awareness to the sex abuse within the clergy. I think people are starting to take notice.


Recently a Catholic bishop in Kansas City is being charged for failing to report sex abuse within his diocese. This is unprecedented because charges are rarely raised against the hierarchical level and normally just the perpetrator.  The clergy for the most part has the bad habit of playing priest shuffle (which stems from historical Canon law that made it difficult for bishops to defrock a priest) but it seems that more and more people are being held responsible. 


The LA Times reports that it is uncertain whether charges like this will begin to pop up in other regions or if it is only for this case. 


"What remains to be seen is whether the indictment of Bishop Robert Finn will be an isolated event or will encourage prosecutors elsewhere to investigate allegations of coverup against members of the church leadership.

Prosecutors announced Friday that Finn had been charged with a single misdemeanor count of failure to report child abuse after he allegedly learned — but failed to tell authorities — that a priest in his diocese had a laptop computer containing hundreds of images of child pornography. Finn's diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph was also charged.

"I can assure you that this has nothing — nothing — to do with the Catholic faith," Jackson County Prosecutor Jean Peters Baker said in announcing the indictments. "This is about the facts of this case, and this is about protecting children."

The exposure that the Survivors Network have brought to the international courts will no doubt be dismissed, but what it does do is raise awareness of the problem. My issue is that the Catholic Church always ends up being the sexual abuser. I'd like to see the rates within other communities. Sexual abuse is not a phenomenon to the Catholic clergy. I think there needs to be more aid to the victims and more charges being raised against specific members of the clergy that are abusers. I think that the charges brought to the ICC no doubt have raised awareness, but I think detrimental to the positive works done within the Church. It isn't fair to paint a whole group with guilt when only individuals are to blame. 

Media Blackout, Social Media firestorm at Zuccotti Park

"Cops just violently shoved me away as I tried to shoot this
man in a stretcher being loaded into ambulance"
--@JoshHarkinson

After I spent my evening completing assignments and enjoying a book (for once as a pastime), I went through my routine of checking my email and Twitter feed. I was amazed to see Zuccotti Park, OWS and NYPD completely blowing up my feed. What shocked me even more was the fact that this raid and eviction from the base of operations for Occupy Wall Street protestors was at 1 a.m.  For the most part, Occupy Wall Street demonstrators have remained fairly passive. Oakland's Occupy Wall Street movement has probably been the biggest outbreak of violence. Another key point is that the media was forced out of the park and placed in an area where they could not see anything. They were not allowed to cover the event. Reports that the air space above the park was also "cleared out" to ensure that the press could not have helicopters overhead. 


Whether you agree with the 99% or not, I should hope that the right to free speech and assembly would be protected.  The right is protected by domestic and international law.  Despite this, protestors found themselves being forcibly removed from the park in New York City.  Josh Harkinson, a writer for Mother Jones magazine, witnessed and tweeted the police raid as it happened.  With the media being blacked out, journalists and citizens took to social media to document the event and raise awareness of the police raid. Harkinson tweeted that protestors were resisting peacefully and that the police were rounding up the media in a pen away from Zuccotti Park. Tweet after tweet, Harkinson and many others shed light on Zuccotti Park where no one else could. 


@tedalexandro was also constantly updating his followers with the location of the protestors after being evicted from the park.  He commented to his followers after the eviction about the gross violations of the 1st amendment, tweeting, "Helluva night for 1st Amendment: Protects the freedom of religion, speech, the press, as well as the right to assemble/petition govt. #OWS" and "No matter how you feel about #OWS, I hope the absolute disregard for freedom of the press during tonight's raid on the park gives you pause." 



Another account by D.C. reporter, @gzornick, stated over 10 hours ago, "NYC authorities clearly feel #OWS eviction is just and reasonable. That's why they are doing it at 2am and barring all press." 


James West, another writer for Mother Jones magazine, has now begun using Twitter to crowd-source photos and information from those who were at the park when the NYPD raid began.


According to the Huffington Post, "The surprise raid on the Occupy Wall Street encampment included an aggressive, sometimes violent approach to the journalists covering the event." The journalists that were forced or kept out of the area began, like protestors and citizens, tweeting with the hashtag #mediablackout.  Some journalists were reportedly arrested as well,  yet Mayor Michael Bloomberg stated that "Journalists were barred from covering the raid to protect members of the press and to prevent a situation from getting worse." NPR reporter Julie Walker and New York Times reporter Jared Malsin were arrested and a city councilman Ydanis Rodriguez was beaten. 


Education reporter for NY1, Lindsey Christ, tweeted "Reporters/photogs being thrown to ground and pushed to wall if they get in front of the wrong officer. Other officers calm and polite." 

"NYPD officer lines are four deep at the northwest
corner of Zuccotti #OWS"
--Andrew Katz, @Katz
12:53pm Nov. 15, 2011

The courts are now dealing with the issue. Follow Nick Pinto for updates on Twitter from inside the courthouse.


This is the most recent photo that has popped up on my Twitter feed. -->




What do you think, excessive or warranted? Was Bloomberg justified in forcing out the demonstrators? How about the media blackout? 


UPDATE: Check out this blog on Reuters. Very interesting post on the events that happened and some great shots. 


UPDATE 11:20pm 11/16/11: This is really neat--> http://maps.occupy.net/

Silenced: Ai Weiwei and the People

Ai Weiwei tossing his ceramic sunflower seeds into the air.
Photo by: The Guardian

Ai Weiwei is a well-known contemporary Chinese artist. He is famous for his co-design of the Beijing bird's nest stadium for the Olympics and for his Sunflower Seeds exhibition at Britain's Tate Modern. Although recently all you hear about him (or don't) involves the tax fraud charges brought by the Chinese government. 


Weiwei has been very critical against the Chinese government when it comes to human rights issues. The Telegraph published a timeline of his movement at the beginning of this month:

                  "2009: publishes a list of 5,835 names of students killed in the 2008 Sichuan earthquake on his blog. This lead to his blog being shut down and he claims he was detained and beaten by police for trying to testify on behalf of his fellow investigator, Tan Zuoren, about the poor construction that lead to student casualties in the earthquake.

                   March 2010: takes part in an event entitled "Digital Activism in China" hosted by the Paley Media Centre in New York.

                   Nov 2010: placed under house arrest by the Chinese police to allegedly prevent the planned demonstrations against the demolition of his Shanghai studio.

                    April, 2011: arrested at Peking Airport just before catching a flight to Hong Kong.

                    June 2011: released on bail after close to three months' detention on charges of tax evasion. Chinese authorities said he confessed to tax evasion but his family denies he evaded any taxes. They say he is being targeted for criticizing the Communist government

                    October 2011: Ordered to pay 15m yuan in back taxes and fines. Ai says he won't pay until his design company's account books are returned and he discusses the matter with his former office manager and accountant. He has not been allowed to see them."

It isn't surprising that the Chinese government would silence Ai Weiwei. They certainly don't have a problem with shutting people down. In August, the Chinese government released a draft of the amendment changes that they were proposing that would allow Chinese police officers to perform secret arrests and investigations. 

GlobalVoices posted anonymous commentary along with their story:

"Despite the negotiation among the public security, procuratorial and peoples' courts organs, the lawyers and the scholars, there are still some hidden problems in some of the clauses. For example, clause 84 has become the focus of public attention: “Upon arrest, the suspect should be sent to a detention center within 24 hours. With the exception that the police are unable to contact the suspect's family, or if the case involves national security, terrorist activities or serious criminal activities, and if the process would obstruct the investigation, the police should notify the family members within 24 hours regarding the reason and the location of the detention.” Such exceptions also appear in “house arrest”, “arrest” and other coercion measures.

… It implies that under the above mentioned circumstances, the suspects could “be detained according to the law” and their family members would not receive any notification. This is the clause that violates fundamental human rights and that the public finds most scornful.”

Another recent example of Chinese censorship is the social networking site, Sina Weibo, shutting down German newspaper, Deutsche Welle's account. The technical term for what happened to the German account is "re-incarnating" as punishment for posting "sensitive topics."  This basically means that the account holder must recreate their account and accumulate followers back from zero. 

I thought this was humorous. Here's the link:
http://chinachannel.fffff.at/

Honestly, I get so frustrated with the politics of the world. China is a member of the United Nations and is a permanent member of the UN's Security Council. China also has a judge on the International Court of Justice and I'm sure they hold seats in specific committees.  Despite all this China consistently suffocates any form of free speech, expression and many other basic human rights. I know that China isn't the only one, but you would think that such a technically advanced and powerful country in the economic and political world would at least allow basic freedoms. Is it really that difficult? Perhaps the Arab Spring will rub off on the Chinese people. 

For more on Ai Weiwei click on his name...
Also, some of you may find this interesting, China: Enforced Disappearances.

#TwitTerrorista

The revolutions springing up from Arab countries the past few months has been spurred on by social media. The oppressed peoples of the Libya, Egypt, Iran and Syria turned to social media to reach out to the world and fight back against the governments. Social media was their window to freedom and the fire to their revolution.  


Mexican's have also faced media censure and oppression. Unlike other countries, Mexican's have been silenced not only by government bodies but by the powerful and violent drug cartels that rule the nation.  

A man and a woman were found hanging over a busy
motor way with signs attached to them stating,
"This will happen to all the internet snitches. Be warned,
we've go our eye on  you. Signed, Z." 

Lorne Matalon, a Mexican journalist for Public Radio International's the World spoke about the censorship to students at Gaylord college. 


According to the OU Daily, "He said reporters in Mexico every day ask themselves if the story they’re pursuing is worth the risk — the risk being their lives — because the cartels are watching, which is why some newspapers have resorted to self-censoring, meaning they only print stories unrelated to cartel activities, and any stories published about the cartels are direct government statements."


With journalists censoring themselves, citizens have taken the role of information providers into their own hands through social media.  Like the professional journalists, their lives are now at stake. 

Andrés Monroy-Hernández/Nexos MagazineA visualization of frequently used words on Twitter streams used to collect news--the New York Times

Citizens have taken to using Twitter and blogs to share information about the drug cartels that have taken control of their country.  According to the New York Times, Mexican citizens will use specific hash tags on Twitter about specific violent events in an area so that everyone know where the violence is, when it happened and who was possibly involved.  Cartels have retaliated by dumping bodies in public areas and sending messages to those using crowd-sourcing methods to keep tabs on the drug world. Although the facts on these cases are still being debated on whether it is corrupt government officials or drug cartels carrying out these social media murders, innocent people are still being killed. 


I've already discussed this topic before, although from the journalist perspective, but am I the only one that feels that there is a lot of talk about the drug war but no action? Everyday I hear more and more about the violence and corruption in Mexico.  Perhaps this topic hits home a bit more for me than others, but I think it should hit home to more people. The United States shares more than a border with Mexico. Also, this drug war may affect Mexicans more because they see and feel the effects of the violence, but where do the drugs go? Who are the consumers? 


I recommend reading this post on The Lede by Robert Mackey. The information he has compiled is very interesting.


What are your thoughts?

And the Nobel goes to...

Since the past couple of posts have been a bit heavy I'd like to discuss the Nobel Peace Prize winners. A little delayed since the winners were announced in early October. 


Ellen Johnson Sirleaf the president of Liberia, Leymah Gbowee of Liberia and native Yemeni Tawakkul Karman are this years winners of the Nobel Peace Prize. According to the Nobel Prize website, the three women were awarded with this years prize "for their non-violent struggle for the safety of women and for women's rights to full participation in peace building work." 

I never knew how the selections are done so here is a graphic to explain:

Only 'qualified nominators' are allowed to submit the names of people worthy of the prize. Qualified meaning members of international courts, national assemblies, governments of states, university rectors, professors (of social sciences, history, philosophy, law and theology, sorry Gaylord professors), persons who have been awarded prizes and so on. 

Back to the 2011 winners.

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

Sirleaf studied at the University of Colorado and received her masters degree in public administration at Harvard. When she returned to Liberia she served as Minister of Finance. After a violent military coup led by Samuel Kayon Doe that ended up with the President of Liberia and several other members being executed. Sirleaf chose exile in Kenya. In 1985, Sirleaf began to campaign against Doe during the elections and was forced into house arrest. She was then sentenced to prison but only spent a short time serving and then left as an exile again.From 1992-97 she worked as assistant administrator and director of the United Nations Development Program Regional Bureau for Africa. She returned in 1997 to run for presidency but was charged with treason. It wasn't until 2005 that she was inaugurated as President of Liberia. She is the first elected female president of Liberia and the first elected female leader on the continent. She is up for reelection this year. 

Leymah Gbowee

Gbowee is the executive director of the Women Peace and Security Network Africa and is also a founding member of the Women in Peacebuilding Program/West African Network for Peacebuilding.  In her work she gather several hundred women from 9 of 15 counties in Liberia for creating peace in the nation. Previous international honors include the Blue Ribbon Peace Award given to her by the Women's Leadership Board at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government. Gbowee,along with other Liberian women were given Profiles in Courage Award by the Kennedy Library Foundation.The Peace Prize highlights her major break in in mobilizing women across many divides to end civil wars in Liberia. She is also the central character in the 2008 documentary "Pray the Devil Back to Hell."

Tawakkul Karman

"We want to show the world that women can do everything." -Tawakkul Karman

Tawakkul Karman is a journalist and activist from Yemen. Karman is both the founder and chairwoman of Women Journalists without Chains and has worked to secure journalistic freedom for Yemen. Threats of violence have reached not only Karman but her family as well. Women Journalists without Chains have continued to be denied a newspaper license as another sign of opposition from the Yemeni government. Karman has also produced the "Semi-Annual Press Freedom Report" which shows increased violence against Yemeni Journalists. She continuously leads journalists to protest bans on news alerts and other protests against government policies. 
      

Out of 101 Nobel Peace Prize awards, 15 have gone to women. 

#RIPTROYDAVIS

According to Amnesty International, 2/3 of the world has abolished the death penalty in law or practice. Guess where the United States is? We are among the 58 countries that 'retain' the death penalty for 'ordinary crimes.' Our friends in the capital punishment world include: Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Zimbabwe, Egypt, Somalia, Sudan, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Uganda, Syria, Sierra Leone and plenty more. It's nice to think that we are among countries that really value human rights. 


"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."


The right to life is a common thread not only in our Declaration of Independence but in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Bible, (since we are in Oklahoma I feel it is my duty to add a nugget of religion into my argument), while it does not forbid or restrict capital punishment, it does say that only a higher power can judge. What about this forgiveness stuff as well?  Lets pull some philosophy in here just for good measure, the Golden Rule, treat others the way you would have others treat you. The Golden Rule pops up in every major religion so that has some weight behind right? 


Troy Davis was executed last night after being charged with the 1989 murder of a police officer in Georgia. I remember coming to OU my freshman year and joining Amnesty International. The very first thing that was discussed was Troy Davis. This was four years ago. The battle to prove Troy Davis' innocence and abolish the death penalty has been going on for quite sometime. Despite the national and international protest against his execution, the U.S. Supreme Court denied clemency to Troy Davis yesterday and as a result, possibly an innocent man was executed. 

His final words before he was executed was, "The incident that night was not my fault.  I did not have a gun.  I did not personally kill your son, father or brother.  I am innocent.  Look deeper into this case, so you can really find the truth.  For those who are about to take my life, may god have mercy upon your souls and may god bless your souls."


I think last night marked an important change in the United States.

Troy Davis' case made it painfully obvious about the injustices in the world. The evidence against Davis was weak at best. There was no DNA linking Davis. The gun was never found. 7 witnesses recanted. According to the Guardian, "Davis had said he wanted his case to set an example "that the death penalty in this country needs to end. They call it execution; we call it murder." 

What can we expect?

Almost a year ago, El Diario de Jaurez, published a question pointed to drug cartels in Mexico.

 What do you want from us?

This simple question had my mind spinning. Why were these journalists dedicated to exposing the truth of their city asking what these criminals wanted? I was immediately conflicted. I have family in Mexico that have seen the violence that the drug cartels and government have caused. Reading stories written by Mexican journalists I saw them as the bravest and most dedicated of people so when I read the headline I was confused. These journalists knew what they signed on for. They knew going into it that the drug cartels spare no one, so how could they expect no retaliation? 

Honestly though, what level of protection can we as journalists expect? How can we expect powerful and accurate pieces to be produced for the public if the pressures of death are looming over their heads? 

Mexico's reaction to this was to create an agreement between media outlets. This agreement outlines what journalists covering drug cartels must follow.

"1) Take a stance against violence: […] the media should never, under any circumstance, justify actions and arguments of organized crime and terrorism […].
2) Do not become an involuntary spokesman for organized crime: […] the media should avoid using the language used by delinquents […]. Prevent that delinquents or presumed ones turn into victims or public heroes […].
3) Provide context for information: Present information in its correct context and in perspective […]
4) Specifically attribute responsibility for crimes: […] In the event that any State action to combat organized crime falls into excesses, is outside the law or violates human rights, it should always be recorded […] when the State action is performed within the law, it should be clear that violence is the product of criminal groups."

In nation's that human rights are being denied and there is constant conflict, journalists are facing oppression and violence. Journalists are faced with the decision to do their job but with constraints in limits. Journalists across the world are facing this problem. In this past year alone we've lost great reporters and photographers. 

I guess what I'm trying to say (and in turn work out how I feel), as journalists we have a duty to report the facts, but does that mean whatever the costs? Where do we draw the line and do we ASK the group that is destroying not only how journalists work but a society as a whole what they expect and want from us? How can journalists ask that and still fulfill their job as reporters of the facts?  


I still haven't decided how I feel about the situation. There is no real answer except that journalists will continue doing their job despite the risks. Mexico has proved that. Libya has proved that. Pakistan has proved that. So many other countries have proved that when faced with a human rights dilemma that silences the voices of it's media and country(wo)men, people will continue to spread the message. 

Loopholes

Congress, The White House Blog

             International Human Rights law was created in 1945 with the birth of the United Nations. Since it’s creation, hundreds of treaties have been created dealing with human rights issues across the world.  The process of creating treaties is often very time consuming. Even when the treaty has been created, a country or state can create a list of reservations, meaning that the country or state will not follow certain articles of a treaty. The United States is one of those nations that almost always has a list of reservations in regards to human rights treaties. It is common knowledge that the Constitution of the United States is the supreme document in law. Nothing can contradict it or change it unless an amendment is passed. Some reservations created for treaties are done so to uphold the Constitution above any law ratified through treaties. An example of this is a reservation made when the U.S. was adopting the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

            “The Senate’s advice and consent is subject to the following reservations:

(1) That Article 20 does not authorize or require legislation or other action by the United States that would restrict the right of free speech and association protected by the Constitution and laws of the United States.”

            Article 20 in the ICCPR is not intended to limit freedom of speech, well it is but against speech that is discriminatory.

            Article 20 of the ICCPR:

1.     Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.

2.     Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

           

            This is one reservation that I agree with. Limiting speech and expression will only lead to more problems. Unfortunately we have to deal with the crazies now, but at least everyone has the right.

            The part that gets me about creating reservations, declarations and understandings for treaties is that the United States is making a loophole for itself, well mainly a loophole for congress. The point of ratifying a human rights treaty is a) to protect our rights and liberties, and b) for the courts to interpret and uphold the laws. When a reservation is made its congress that is interpreting and changing the laws. An example of this is the reservation made against another article of the ICCPR.

      

Loophole Hunters
Stoppaydaypredators.org

            “That the United States considers itself bound by Article 7 to the extent that “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment” means the cruel and unusual treatment of punishment prohibited by the Fifth, Eighth and/or Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.”

            What Congress is doing though that reservation is adopting the article but under the terms of the Constitution, meaning the original intent and purpose of the treaty is void. So when someone goes to court and calls upon the ICCPR as evidence of inhumane treatment, it is then judged in terms of what domestic law states and not the practice of what every other nation that adopted the ICCPR. Also it should be noted that every human rights treaty that the United States enters into is non self-executing. This means that it does not automatically go into domestic law and if Congress doesn’t enact it then the courts cannot uphold the laws. Again, this transfers the power to congress, which does not keep the treaty’s intentions pure or independent from political factions.

What do you think?