By Carlos Harrison for The Huffington Post

It’s been a troubled – some might say, tragic – 10 years for the detention camps at the Guantánamo Naval Base in Cuba. And as they slouch into their 11th year on January 11, there’s no end in sight.

“We say to ourselves, in sort of gallows humor: Guantánamo will close when the last detainee there dies of natural causes,” Jeremy Varon, an organizer with Witness Against Torture, told the Huffington Post on Wednesday.

Franz Kafka himself would have been hard-pressed to concoct a more bewildering and brutal contradictory reality. Allegations over the years have included sexual humiliation, waterboarding, and the use of dogs to scare detainees. Released detainees reported being locked in in sensory deprivation cells, beaten repeatedly, and forced to race while wearing leg shackles. If they fell, they were punished.

If it sounds like Abu Ghraib, it should. The U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee found that intelligence teams transported the “aggressive” interrogation techniques perfected at Guantánamo to Afghanistan and Iraq.

The link between Cuba and the war zones, the New York Times reported, was Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller, then the head of detention operations at Guantánamo. At his insistence, the Times wrote, the Defense Department sent training teams on 90-day tours in Iraq, showing the soldiers there the techniques utilized on the island. The timing, Amnesty International points out, happened to coincide with when the worst abuses occurred at Abu Ghraib.

Thanks to reports like those, the detention camps have become an international symbol of what democracy and justice are not. They’ve been plagued by suicide attempts by desperate detainees and condemned by the United Nations, human rights groups, even former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, who called for the immediate closing of the camps in 2006.
“The value of holding prisoners there was unclear, but the price we were paying around the world for doing so was obvious,” Powell said.

The camps were created in 2002 as a deliberately “extraterritorial” place to extract information from captives in the “War on Terror.” By putting them at Guantanamo, the United States, meant to be beyond the jurisdiction of both the Geneva Conventions and U.S. courts.

That didn’t put them outside the range of public opinion. The camps sparked outrage on day one. Pictures flew around the world of shackled and handcuffed detainees on their knees on the ground with black hoods over their heads and mittens on their hands.

The indignation grew as the first 20 captives went into wire cages at Camp X-Ray, described by critics as “kennels.” Soon, though, the detainees were transferred to permanent cells, and Camp X-Ray was closed.

But the human rights complaints continued, even from some of America’s closest allies.
In 2006, speaking on BBC radio, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said:

“I am absolutely clear that the U.S. has no intention of maintaining a Gulag in Guantanamo Bay. They want to see the situation resolved and they would like it other than it is. However, that is the situation that they have.”

In all 779 detainees have been held in the camps. Eight have died there, including six suicides. One man died of colon cancer, another after an apparent heart attack.

And, in the 10 years since it opened, only six detainees have been convicted of war crimes.
The last 171 still there are caught at the conflicting conjunction where bureaucracy, politics, and military regulations collide – offering little chance, at least for the foreseeable future, of gaining their release.

Forty-six are classified as “indefinite detainees,” held without charges, but considered too dangerous to be released; 89 are eligible for release or transfer but in perpetual custody because there is no place to send them. Five more have been convicted of war crimes; and six face trial – perhaps this year – for the 9/11 attacks and the October 2000 U.S.S. Cole bombing.
That makes Guantanamo, as Carol Rosenberg of the Miami Herald described it in a piece for Foreign Affairs, “arguably the most expensive prison camp on earth, with a staff of 1,850 U.S. troops and civilians managing a compound that contains 171 captives, at a cost of $800,000 a year per detainee.”

But even the budget conscious Congress resists closing the base. In fact, it has used its spending oversight powers to thwart the president’s efforts to do just that. It has used that authority to prevent the trial of detainees on U.S. soil and to block the purchase of a dedicated prison facility in Illinois to house transferred detainees.
And no one wants to risk having a released captive later become involved in an act of terrorism or insurgency, which happened with at least one-fourth of the 500 detainees set free under President George W. Bush.

So, the captives remain in Guantanamo. Until when no one knows.
As Marc Thiessen, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, told CNN:

“We have the right to continue to hold them as long as al Qaeda is at war with us.”

Having the right, though, doesn’t make it right, said Geneve Mantri, government relations director for national security, Amnesty International.

Speaking to The Huffington Post on Wednesday, he said the 89 cleared for release by both the Bush administration and a review ordered by President Obama, “represent little or no threat.”

“This has always been sold as a question of the worst of the worst and the reality is that a large number of the people that have been picked up, I hate to say it are in the insignificant and rather pathetically sad story category,” he said.

“There is a minority of people (in the camps) that no one doubts are truly dangerous. That minority of people should be placed in front of a US court. Because we have the most efficient system, the fastest and cheapest and best system for looking at all the evidence. You produce it all in a court of law. Have a real defense — an internationally recognized defense. And then put them away forever.”

Filed under: Afghanistan, Democracy, Freedoms, Hate Crime, homegrown terror, Middle East, Pakistan, Pakistani Taliban, President Obama, United States Tagged: Civil Rights, Constitutional Rights, Cuba, GITMO, Guantanamo, Guantanamo Bay, Gulag, Human rights, NDAA, President Obama, United Nations

The following story (part 2, the 1st instalment as it were, was published at http://foreignpolicyblogs.com/2011/11/16/a-window-into-womens-world-in-yemen/) is that of Amal Hassan, a young Yemeni woman who from the time she drew her first breath has had to fight for what many in the West take for granted: freedom, education, pursuit of happiness.

Raised in a conservative Muslim Yemeni family, Amal came across society’s biased view of what a woman should be, should do and should most importantly NOT want.
A free spirit and a brave soul, Amal fought all her life. Now facing an injustice she can no longer fight alone, she needs your help, our help.
Will you step up or simply let her fire extinguished in Yemen’s Great prison?

Written by Mogib Hassan on behalf and for Amal Hassan, Edited by Catherine Shakdam

“After years of silence and darkness I feel I must speak out the truth and paint to the world the harsh reality of living in Yemen. All over the world women seem to be enjoying freedom and independence…where I come from, where I was raised, Yemen, those words have no meaning. The reality of being a woman in Yemen is pretty bleak. No Freedom, no choice, no independence, only obedience to men-made rules in a men-made system.
For I was born a girl I spent all my waking hours in shackles, a prisoner in my own home, my own heart and my own mind.
Yemen, my country, my home is and always has been my prison.

Most Yemeni men have a very clear vision of what a woman should do and should be: a devoted and submissive object which only purpose in life should be to serve and obey.
If there is one thing that unites men in my country it is that belief that women have to be kept in check and prevented from bringing shame to the family.
I wish men would use this energy and dedication to bring down injustices rather than stand up for a system which is not only unjust but also obsolete.

Strangely enough Islam is the only religion which clearly enounces women’s right, given them a status which on many aspects is far greater than men. Rather than belittle women as many westerners would believe, Islam gives women their rightful place within society, Islam puts women at the centre of it all, since women are after the pillars of any society.

But men in my country chose to turn a blind eye, preferring to assert their own predominance through violence and repression.

The corrupt regime under which my countrymen are living under has managed to turn my nation into a vile and jungle like world where only the powerful and mighty are allowed to oppress and abuse the weak without fear of consequences.
Most of all, women are suffering. But maybe most troubling of all, women are conditioned in such a way that they live in the belief that thing are the way they should be.

For they fear for their “honour” men are locking their wives, daughters and mothers away. In the world I grew up in, women are always responsible, always to blame…we are the root of all evil it seems.
This circle went on for too long. I stand today to say no more repression, no more shackles and no more fear. Today I stand for me and my sisters, I stand for freedom and justice.
Today I reclaim my life, not as a Muslim or a Yemeni and not even as a woman but as me, Amal Hassan.”

It took Amal many years to gather up the courage and the necessary strength she needed to embark on this revolutionary journey. For many her plight might seem benign and foreign, but to so many Middle Eastern women her plight will ring true.

Beyond feminism and a simple stand for rights equality, Amal is defying a millennia old misogynist system where women have no place but behind the walls of their homes.

Beside her brother, her entire family has turned its back on her.

Despite the risks and maybe because of them, Amal decided that she would see her fight through, that she would stand the course of her life no matter the outcome.

She said: “I knew it was going to be an endless war between me and Society. But I also knew that I had to start even though I ventured onto unknown territory. I am doing my utmost not to lose in a society where women are always the losers.”

Though Yemeni law is based on Islamic sharia (inspired from the Quran and the teachings of Prophet Mohamed PBUH) it has been interpreted in such a way that men have gained the advantage, corrupting the very essence of Islam’s position on women.

Even though she knew she stood no chance, Amal decided back in 2010 to end her nightmare of a life with her abusive husband.
She urged her family to stand by her and support her while she was seeking a divorce.
Although she argued her spouse was treated her more like a possession than the woman with whom he had built a home with, constantly beating her and lying to her, she failed to gain her family’s support.

In many families, divorces are seen as shameful, a dent in one’s stature and morality.
Of course no matter the circumstances women are to blame for the split.

In Yemen and to an extent the Arab World, a woman is expected to stay married. The fact that her husband might turn out to be a cold blooded murderer is of very little importance for Society. The words ‘till death do us part take on a whole new meaning in Yemen as in essence only in death can women escape their husbands.
This is not to say that many families do not live in perfect harmony, in respect and understanding of each other. But for those marriages which do fail, there is no hope of escape for women. They are doomed to endure a life of misery for Society frown upon divorce the same way the West did on those who contracted Syphilis.

Most young women in Yemen do not even have the luxury of meeting their future husband as men and women should not mix. Some do not even have the luxury to choose whom they will be linked to for the rest of their life.

“In Yemen, marriages are business transactions where a father trades his daughter to the highest bidder and where the groom tries to bank a discount bride. The then sold bride has to honourably stay by her husband’ sides forever holding her tongue.
If the man however feels unsatisfied he can always send back his possession back to her family where she will bury her shame.
And if in Islam men and most importantly husbands are meant to protect, cherish and provide for their other half, Yemeni laws have translated those duties into something much sinister, allowing men to physically punish their wives if they feel they failed to obey them. Battery is a man’s right, his prerogative where I was born.
Luckily some men prefer not to exercise that right!
I gradually realised that there was something illogical in that way of thinking.
After years of suffering I took up the challenge. My protector was my abuser, and I was going to fight to pry myself from him.”

Amal filed for a divorce after 14 years of abuse.

For more than a decade she lived his prisoner, forced to stay at home while he was away on holiday with other women, forced to live from the scraps he was given her and her children for he cared little for their wellbeing while he was living large elsewhere.

“He was feeding me and the children the way he wanted, allowing us out when he wanted and not showing the slightest respect to me as a person with a mind, interests, rights and feelings which is in a way typical of the average marriage in Yemen. No one would seriously consider women’s feelings or rather winnings.”

Amal appealed to several NGOs in the hope that they would help her get her freedom as she knew that without proper legal representation she did not stand a chance of appearing to Court.
Sadly she never heard back from any of them.

“Despite being an Academic my husband refused to understand my thirst for knowledge preventing me from exploring my interests. I felt trap, condemned to live in misery for my own parents refused to see my unhappiness.”

After years of struggle Amal claimed her freedom. For that she had to outcast herself from her family, becoming a pariah within her own people.

“The price paid was accepting the fact that I was no longer part of my own family but at the same time no longer under threat from my brothers who were supposed to be the decision makers in my life.”

After obtaining her divorce and paying a rather high sum of money to her husband in exchange for her release she was finally able to take flight, free to do what she wanted.
While planning her future she moved in with her brother, Mogib Hassan the one man who had constantly supported her and encouraged to be her own person no matter what anyone else said.

In a matter of months Amal learnt how to drive and enrolled herself at University to complete her Master degree, hoping to then be able to provide for her 3 children.

At the time Amal did not know that Yemen’s justice system gave men a 3 month timeframe within which they could unilaterally revoke the divorce, without even informing or consulting their wives.
To do this the man needs only to go to a notary and write a letter claiming his wife back unconditionally. Unfortunately it is what Abdul Malek Almamary (Amal’s ex-husband) did.

From that moment on Amal was legally obliged to return to her husband.

“This confirms my great regret of being a woman in such an abusive culture. No matter the risk I will never go back to him. I am a free human being, and if I am ever forced to go back I would kill myself.”

Amal then turned to human rights organizations, hoping that they would intervene on her behalf and free her forever from her master. Time and time again she appealed; time and time again she was let down.

Although Amal’s husband had failed for years to provide for her and their children preferring to pursue other pleasures, he was never held accountable for his actions. Yemen justice system had declared him the winner from the” get go”, for Amal had no means to pressure anyone into defending her interests and her rights.

Things got even more complicated when the Revolution broke out.
Her brother, Mogib who was so far financially supporting her lost his job as a journalist and was threatened by the regime for speaking out against President Ali Abdullah Saleh.
Soon enough Mogib and Amal realized that they had to flee in order to remain safe.

Their apartment became one of the regime’s target and they both feared that Homeland Security would come one day and imprison them all.

Problem is, in Yemen a woman cannot travel out of the country without a written authorization from her guardian, in which case her husband.
After many trials and tribulations, Mogib managed to bribe enough government officials for his sister to be let through at the airport.

Amal, Mogib and the 3 children left for Cairo, Egypt.

Her husband has now taken several steps towards “recovering” Amal as he now knows that she is in hiding in Egypt.
Potentially Amal could be deported back to Yemen against her consent since she is still legally bound to her husband and given he has the final say.

Her only hope now lies in being granted a refugee status by the UN or having Yemeni officials stand up for her rights and pronounces an irrevocable divorce for which there are legal grounds.

On Monday Januray 10th, Amal is meeting with UN officers in relation to her case (UN reg NO: 28031).

Citizens’ statement of concern about the democratic process in Pakistan democratic and safety of human rights defenders, to be released to the media on Jan 5, 2012 (to endorse, please enter your information in the form at this link)

We, the undersigned, express our grave concern that Pakistani human rights defenders are being threatened and intimidated for their stance in the ‘memogate’ case. We are also concerned at the danger this crisis poses to Pakistan’s democratic political process that had taken a step forward with the elections of 2008.

No elected civilian government in Pakistan has yet completed its tenure and handed over power to the next government following democratic elections. If the current government manages to do this, it will be a first step in an ongoing process that is essential to Pakistan’s peace, progress and prosperity in the long run.

Those under threat include former Ambassador of Pakistan to the US, Husain Haqqani, who returned to Pakistan and tendered his resignation in order to ensure a free and fair inquiry into the ‘memogate’ matter that he is accused of engineering.

The so-called ‘memogate’ affair revolves around a letter that Amb Haqqani is accused of sending to then US Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen allegedly at the behest of Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari, seeking American help to prevent a military coup in Pakistan. Mansur Ijaz, an American businessman of Pakistani origin, delivered the note to former US National Security Advisor Gen. James Jones to pass on to Adml Mullen allegedly at Amb Haqqani’s behest. Amb Haqqani has denied writing any such memo at anyone’s behest or asking Ijaz to deliver it to anyone.

Amb Haqqani has been barred from leaving the country, which is a denial of his fundamental right as a free citizen of Pakistan. Under threat both by the ‘religious’ extremists and the security agencies, he is currently a virtual prisoner confined for his own safety to the Prime Minister’s residence.

Also facing threats is his lawyer, former Supreme Court Bar Association President, Asma Jahangir, who has termed the Supreme Court judgment of Dec 30, 2011 a “victory” for the security establishment that she alleges is behind the case.

Amb Haqqani’s wife, Farahnaz Ispahani, a Member of Pakistan’s Parliament, also threatened, is currently in the US where she had come for medical checkups. Columnist Marvi Sirmed, who has written fearlessly against the ‘religious’ extremists and in support of Amb Haqqani, has also been receiving threats, Columnist Marvi Sirmed, who has written fearlessly against the ‘religious’ extremists and in support of Amb Haqqani, has also been receiving threats, as has senior journalist Najam Sethi. There are numerous other journalists and activists who live under threat for their outspoken views; some are forced to seek politial asylum abroad. This is essentially the case with anyone in Pakistan who counters or challenges the narrative of the ideological security state.

Without going into merits of the case, obvious contradictions in the ‘evidence’, or political motivations behind it, it is evident that it is at the crux of a matter vital to Pakistan’s politics, that is, whether Pakistan is going to be run by a civilian elected government along the lines of a parliamentary democracy that ensures fundamental rights, or along the lines of a ideological narrative dictated by the security establishment that holds fundamental rights subservient to its interpretation of ‘national security’.

Too many people in Pakistan have fallen to the ideological monster unleashed by the establishment pursuing a narrow, ideological interpretation of ‘national security’. It is time for a fundamental paradigm shift in Pakistan’s politics, to allow the nation to fulfill its potential as a progressive, forward looking South Asian nation at peace with its neighbours and the world. We urge the Pakistan government, judiciary and security establishment to play their constitutional roles, cooperate with each other and focus on re-establishing the rule of law and in order to make this possible.

In the meantime, be aware that the world is watching to ensure that no harm comes to those who are taking a stand towards this end.

Endorsed (listed alphabetically; names still coming in are being updated; please endorse at this link):
• A. Chhachhi, Sociologist, Netherlands
• Abdul Ghafoor Chaudhry Social Activist Canada
• Abdul Hamid Bashani Khan, Barrister, Solicitor & Notary Public, Canada
• Abdullah Hussein Novelist Lahore
• Afzal Tahir Kashmir International Front/United Kashmir Journal, London, United Kingdom
• Ahmad Rafay Alam, Lawyer
• Ali Kazmi Student Islamabad, Pakistan
• Ali Arqam Blogger, Social Activist Peshawar
• Ammar Yasir, Marketing Head, Tea Break Networks Karachi
• Annie Syedah Student United States
• Anushka Jatoi Student Karachi
• Asif Khan Earth Day Network Washington DC
• Ayesha Humayun Khan Citizen of Pakistan Dubai
• Ayesha Jalal, historian, Boston/Lahore
• Ayesha Siddiqa, Political Scientist, Pakistan
• Beena Sarwar, journalist
• Faisal Mahmood Officer in National Bank Malir
• Faraz Sheikh, social activist, Lahore
• Farooq Tariq, spokesperson Labour Party Pakistan, Lahore
• Fazil Jamili, Poet, Journalist
• Fakhar Ul-Islam Project Manager United Kingdom
• Fayaz Ahmad Historian Peshawar
• Ghazi Salahuddin, journalist and columnist, Karachi
• Hamad Ur Rehman CEO/ a human and social rights activist. Lyallpur.
• Haris Gazdar, researcher
• Harsh Kapoor, South Asia Citizens Web (sacw.net)
• Ibrahim Sajid Malick, Technologist, New York
• Dr. Ijaz Khan Professor of International relations University of Peshawar
• Dr. Ilmana Fasih, physician, health activist, blogger Canada
• Iqbal Alavi, social activist
• Irfan Mufti South Asia Partnership Pakistan Lahore, Pakistan
• Kamyla Marvi Citizen Karachi
• Khawar Mumtaz, Shirkat Gah. Pakistan
• Kiran Nazish Journalist, Activist, Lahore
• Karamat Ali, Labour Rights and Peace activist
• Meera Ghani, Environmental and Peace Activist, Belgium
• Mehmal Sarfraz, Journalist, Lahore
• Mehr Alwy Finance Manager UK
• Michael Renner Researcher U.S. / Germany
• Dr. Mohammad Taqi, Physician & Columnist
• Muhammad Idris Khattak Researcher OSI Pakistan
• Mohsin Sayeed Journalist Karachi
• Moniza Inam, journalist, Dawn, Karachi
• N. D. Pancholi, Secretary, Indian Renaissance Institute, Ghaziabad (UP), India
• Nadeem Yousafi Businessman Peshawar, Pakistan.
• Noman Quadri, student
• Noorjehan Bilgrami Artsist Karachi
• Dr. Osama Siddique, Law Professor, Pakistan
• Pervez Hoodbhoy, Physicist
• Dr Pritam Singh DPhil, Reader in Economics, Faculty of Business, Oxford Brookes University, UK
• Qurratulain Zaman Media Consultant, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung
• S. Abbas Raza, Editor, 3QuarksDaily.com
• S. M. Naseem, economist
• Saba Hamid, Actor, Pakistan
• Saba Quraishi, activist, United States
• Sabahat Ashraf (“iFaqeer”) Communcator. Citizen. Fakir. Silicon Valley, California
• Sadiqa Salahuddin, educationist, Indus Resource Centre, Pakistan
• Saleha Haque Student University of Salford, UK
• Sana Saleem Activist, Blogger Karachi
• Sarah Suhail Lawyer
• Sehba Sarwar Writer
• Shahla Haeri, Associate Professor of Anthropology, Boston University
• Shandana Mohmand, Political Scientist, UK
• Shahnawaz Student Karachi
• Shama Noman Educationist
• Shayan Afzal Khan, Citizen and activist, Pakistan
• Shahzad Ahmad Country Coordinator, Bytes for All, Pakistan
• Siddharth Nayak Managing Director , The Jurists ; President : All India Law Students Association New Delhi
• Soulat Pasha director Titan Energy Karachi
• Tahera Ahmad Physician Germany
• Tahir Saeed Senior clinical psychologist Ireland
• Tazeen Project Director, Intermedia
• Waqas Ali CRSD Peshawar
• Yasser Latif Hamdani, Lawyer
• Zeeba T. Hashmi Citizen Lahore
• Zohra Yusuf, human rights activist
• Zulfiqar Shah, The Institute for Social Movements, Pakistan Hyderabad

  You would have to be exceptionally callous to be able to forget the image of a woman being shot in broad daylight; unarmed and seven month’s pregnant. She was amongst the five foreigners, who were shot in Kharotabad by security officials. … Continue reading →

Egyptian women marching during the January 25 revolution. Photo by Hossam el-Hamalawy

Many things could be said about the past year, but at the very least it could not be considered boring. Within two weeks of the new year, protests over government corruption in Tunisia ousted its long standing dictator, Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali. That event, which took many observers by surprise, triggered a wave of protests throughout the region. As the year went on, protests in Egypt overthrew Hosni Mubarak and brought on a NATO intervention in Libya while the Yemeni, Syrian and Bahraini governments responded to discontent in their countries with increasing violence and Morocco introduced a new constitution. Of course such protests were not limited to North Africa and the Middle East; as early as January similar protests against corruption and authoritarianism were seen in Gabon before spreading to Mauritania, Djibouti, Uganda, Malawi, Swaziland and Senegal. Further north, protest movements emerged in Spain and Greece against government austerity measures and high unemployment, while Israelis took to the streets over the summer in record numbers in the name of social justice and protests grew in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. By the end of the year, the Occupy movement broke out in the US and Canada against the large involvement of money in politics and the lack of economic opportunity for the average citizen while large student protests over educational reform broke out in Colombia and Chile. And finally, in December protests against government corruption reached all the way to the doors of the Kremlin in Russia. So numerous and active has the protest calendar been over the past 12 months, it is quite possible to narrate the entire year only in major protest movements and events.

Of course, other events happened in the field of human rights. The drama of last year’s contested presidential elections in Cote d’Ivoire continued into 2011 with open fighting between parties loyal to each of the candidates. Just two weeks after the UN Security Council approved a no-fly zone over Libya, it also adopted Resolution 1975 which allowed the French-supported peacekeeping mission there to use all necessary measures to protect civilian life. Two weeks later, incumbent president and 2010 election loser Laurent Gbagbo was arrested by UN forces in his home, ending the standoff. In late November, Gbagbo was transferred to the International Criminal Court in The Hague following an arrest warrant for crimes against humanity. His transfer means that it is likely he will be the first former head of state to stand trial at the ICC.

Both the UN intervention in Cote d’Ivoire and the NATO intervention in Libya gave the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine a boost. While some debate whether NATO overstepped its UN authorization in its campaign, possibly hurting the effectiveness of the doctrine, these two events illustrated that even the international community can learn from its past mistakes when facing imminent civilian carnage, even if the application of the policy is uneven.

Elsewhere in Africa, the Republic of South Sudan officially became independent in July after a referendum in January that saw over 98% of the population vote for independence. Yet as South Sudan celebrated a new chapter of their own history and the end of a six-year long peace process, the UN declared a famine in parts of Somalia following an ongoing drought throughout the entire region and new violence broke out along the just created border between Sudan and South Sudan.

Of course, disasters – both manmade and natural – were not limited to the Global South. In July, Anders Behring Breivik set off a car bomb in Oslo and attacked a summer camp on the Norwegian island of Utøya, killing 87 people and shocking the normally calm Nordic country. In August, a small protest against police brutality spun out of control and set off four days of rioting across the United Kingdom.

Looking at this brief summary of the past year, it is easy to understand why the UN High Commissioner of Human Rights, Navi Pillay, declared 2011 as the year where “human rights went viral.” However not all of year’s events treated human rights kindly. The execution of Muamar Gaddafi at the hands of rebel forces in Libya, and the cheers that came from some corners at the online footage of his abuse at the hands of his captors, reminded us that even monsters deserve compassion and we all have it in us to deny others basic dignity. In the US, the execution of Troy Davis brought the death penalty back into the spotlight, but even a sustained media campaign on the apparent shortcomings of the case against him could not save his life. The year was also not a good one for journalists, as the Committee to Protect Journalist announced that 45 journalists were killed in 2011, with Pakistan being the most dangerous country for journalists this year. And while some claimed 2011 to be the year of social media, that also came with tragic consequences as citizen journalists and online activists found themselves in the crosshairs of various groups, from drug cartels in Mexico to government forces in North Africa and the Middle East.

Finally, while there were many positive developments over the past 12 months, the year ended on a sour note with news that President Obama signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act, including the troublesome provision that allows the government to indefinitely detain US citizens in the United States if they are suspected of terrorism. There are many problematic aspects to this provision, not just for human rights but also for the basic principles of democracy and due process in the US. If nothing else, this quiet act at the end of 2011 will give activists a new cause to start 2012 with.

Protester in Bahrain. Photo by Al Jazeera English.

As no Year in Review would be incomplete without a list, here are some of my top picks for 2011:

Most Unexpected event

As I noted at the start, this year has been an incredibly active one for protests, the type of year that probably hasn’t been seen since 1968. Even still, 2011 has been more remarkable in many ways because of the diverse locations where these movements have sprung up and in how they built upon each other throughout the year, aided by relationships forged through social media and increased global communications. While analysts may have suggested that major uprisings or protests were due in some of these countries for a while, I doubt that any of them would have – or even could have – predicted the way these protests merged and multiplied, both online and in the streets. There is no single name for this trend or phenomenon, but that is my choice for most unexpected event of the year.

Most important person or group

Closely related to my choice for most unexpected event, my pick for the most important person or group is actually a generation. Whatever you choose to call them – Generation Y, Millennials, Generation Next, or some other iteration – their presence has been undeniable in shaping major events of the past year. In 1966, Robert F. Kennedy gave a speech at University Cape Town where he memorably stated, “Few will have the greatness to bend history, but each of us can work to change a small portion of events. And in the total of all those acts will be written the history of a generation.” After years of being mostly defined by their consumer habits and entertainment choices, this past year saw this generation find its voice against injustice, as well as the courage to work towards a different world.

Book of the year

My choice for book of the year highlights the aborted Persian Spring rather than this year’s Arab Spring. “Then They Came For Me” by Maziar Bahari tells of his months in Iran’s infamous Evin Prison for his journalistic coverage of the 2009 Iranian Election Protests. While his period in prison was Kafkaesque at times, the story also highlights the humanity of the protestors and ordinary Iranians in their search for dignity in a country that they love.

What to look for in 2012…

While 2011 was a major game-changer in some ways, on the other hand I find that my outlook for 2012 is not much different from what I predicted last year. I’m comfortable with that since much of what I predicted for 2010 came true this past year (and being only a year off is fine with me).

Digital rights and what freedom of expression means in the 21^st century will continue to be a major human rights issue, especially after the EU quietly passed the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Act earlier this month and the possibility that the US House of Representatives will pass the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the new year.

Likewise protests are also likely to continue in 2012. The four countries that managed to overthrow their dictators this year – Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen – still face significant battles in stabilizing their governments and bringing about a full democratic transition. Protests and subsequent crackdowns by the government continue in both Bahrain and Syria, with no end in sight for either. The only country in North Africa to largely escape the protests that swept the region is Algeria, but already some are predicting that may change soon. Similarly, the Occupy movement is determined to not fade away in the new year as they come up with new methods of protest even as many of their camps are disbanded. As this past year demonstrated, protests movements in one corner of the globe can bring about new movements elsewhere, so what is in store for 2012 remains a mystery to even the most astute analysts.

Corporate involvement and influence in politics is also likely to be an ongoing issue. This is the central focus of the Occupy movement, but there have been other indications that more people are focusing on corporate accountability as well. In particular, the increasing evidence of Western technology firms selling surveillance equipment to repressive regimes have raised new questions about what responsibility for-profit organization have in the consequences of their products. Elsewhere, there is growing attention on the long term impact that increased involvement of Chinese firms in Africa may have for both political and economic democracy in the region and the growth of human rights. No matter where you look, corporations are facing more scrutiny which in unlikely to go away anytime soon.

In the end, what I am left with in the final hours of 2011 is how much more optimistic I am about this coming year than I was last year. So much has happened in the past 12 months that it can boggle the mind. But while some events were heartbreaking, most of the past year has been uplifting and at times, even inspiring. If 2011 was the year when “human rights went viral” then it is now on us to make 2012 the year when the world finally consolidated those rights and made them count.

The Pakistan Medical Association, Karachi has strongly condemned the brutal murder of Dr. Baqir Shah, Police Surgeon, Quetta… The reason for his killing is obvious: that he was the key witness of the Kharotabad incident. He had conducted the post-mortem examination of the victims and had given the factual version that the victims had died due to the indiscriminate firing of the LEAs and not due to an explosion… PMA condemns colleague’s murder | Dr Baqir Shah.

It is an outrage and a violation of freedom of expression that Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) continues to block Baloch Hal in Pakistan at a time when this voice needs to be heard across the country now, more than ever.  Reproduced below, BH editorial pegged on the target killing of Dr Baqir Shah (emphasis added):

Editorial: War Against Baloch Doctors

Balochistan: Doctors sit in protest at the murder of their colleagues. Photo: Baloch Hal

The late police surgeon was somewhat an easy target for terrorists for a host of reasons. His situation could enable any murderer to immediately vanish in thin air because of the circumstances that shrouded the late doctor. He gained enormous national and international media attention after conducting the postmortem of five foreigners who were killed on May 17 in what is now remembered as the infamous and tragic Kharotabad incident.

Dr. Shah impressed everyone with his absolute honesty and professionalism when he contested the unconvincing official description of what had actually happened in Kharotabad. He contradicted the version of the events as narrated by the Frontier Corps (FC) and the police.

Police in Quetta say it is premature to say whether or not Dr. Shah’s murder was a case of targeted killing. Such assertions are simply meant either to delay investigations or exempt the government from its accountability. What have the law enforcement agencies been doing in the past two months regarding the murder cases of two other Baloch doctors? It is not a coincident that all doctors being killed in Balochistan are Balochs. While we do recognize the government’s limitations given its poor and slow investigation apparatus but does it mean that the law enforcement authorities have utterly failed to make an inch of progress in chasing elements who killed Dr. Mazhar Baloch, the provincial president of Pakistan Medical Association (PMA) on October 15? Whether these killers linked to each other and share a common hit-list of Baloch doctors and professionals remains unknown but still guessable.

In another similar case two weeks ago, on December 16th to be precise, Dr. Naseem Baloch, the chief medical officer of Gwadar’s District Headquarters Hospital, was shot dead by unidentified persons.

These killings have triggered a wave of insecurity among Baloch doctors and also tremendously infuriated the already enraged Baloch population. Besides the common Baloch in the streets even professional doctors and seasoned politicians are holding the government and its certain shadowy wings responsible for this wave of fatal violence. Even some Baloch members of the the provincial cabinet have criticized their own government.

During a session of the Balochistan Assembly on December 17th, one could see the level of legislators’ powerlessness that they walked out the assembly session against the killing of Dr. Naseem Baloch.

“The provincial government allocates Rs11 billion for the maintenance of law and order, but still police and other law enforcing agencies have failed to give an output or a positive result,” said Asadullah Baloch, minister for agriculture who is also the secretary general of the Balochistan National Party (BNP-Awami), “The senior police officers must be held accountable for their failure to protect the life and property of the people”

The Pakistan Medical Association and Baloch Doctors’ Forum (BDF) have jointly announced three days of mourning and a strike in Quetta’s Bolan Medical College Complex and the Civil Hospital. Yet, the strike is likely to have a deeper impact in the Bloch-dominated districts where it may prolong for more than three days. The BDF has also highlighted the cases of two disappeared Baloch doctors, Dr. Din Mohammad Marri and Dr. Akbar Marri whose families hold the state intelligence agencies responsible for their disappearance.

Doctors in any society deserve profound respect for their commitment to serving the humanity. In a backward area like Balochistan, where the health indicators are extremely murky, very few young men and women manage to accomplish their medical education. They strive tirelessly for at least seven years to get a degree in medicine. The first thing most of the non-local medical students (do) who study on reserved seats at the province’s lone medical college, Bolan, quit Balochistan as soon as they complete their eduction. Only some  professionally committed doctors, who surely receive a number of better offers and opportunities to go to Europe and USA for a better personal and professional life, turn down these attractions and agree to serve in the conflict-stricken province of Balochistan.

Hence, it is total senselessness to subject doctors to enforced disappearance for several months and deny him the primary human right of free trial. International human rights groups and Doctors Without Borders should quickly take up the issue with the provincial and federal authorities to ensure the recovery of the missing Baloch doctors.

Doctors like Mr. Shah are role models for our society because they selflessly cure the ailing humanity and also firmly and professionally stand against all pressures intended to urge them to compromise on their professional integrity.

Chief Minister Raisani’s intervention and approval of an inquiry into the murder is a welcome decision although dozens of such investigation committees formed in the past have culminated into stark failure. Yet, we wonder what apologies to Balochistan from leaders like President Zardari or Imran Khan mean when elements responsible for Baloch genocide are not exposed and brought to justice.

(MALIK SIRAJ AKBAR)
Editor-in-Chief
The Baloch Hal

Dec 30, 2011, Human Rights Watch press statement received today: “As the “Memogate” case proceeds, all arms of the state must act within their constitutionally determined ambit and in aid of legitimate civilian rule. In this context, justice must both be done and be seen to be done. Pakistan desperately needs a full democratic cycle and a peaceful transfer of power from one civilian administration to another. Should this process be derailed, the constitutional safeguards and legal rights protections created since 2008 may suffer irreparable damage. 
Human Rights Watch has long been a supporter of an independent judiciary in Pakistan and advocated for the restoration of the judiciary ousted by Musharraf in Pakistan and abroad. But we have also expressed our concern about the fear of judicial over-reach and unwarranted intrusion into the affairs of the legislature and the executive. HRW has noticed a tendency for the courts to find themselves embroiled in matters that they would not otherwise be an appropriate forum for, and we hope the courts will reflect on this perception. Any perception of discriminatory treatment  against one party must be speedily addressed. All parties to the Memogate affair must understand that a legal dispute cannot be made the vehicle for truncating parliamentary or presidential terms through the backdoor or as a mechanism for subverting civilian rule.

In a sense “Memogate” is a litmus test for all actors – particularly the judiciary and the army. It remains to be seen whether the rule of law or the law of the jungle prevails in Pakistan.”

In July 2008, 14-year-old Hamidullah Khan was picked up in Pakistan, his home country, and handed over to the Americans as a terrorist. He was shipped to Afghanistan and thrown into the US military prison in Bagram – unable to contact his family to tell them his location or get a lawyer to ensure his most basic rights were being met. Hamidullah was a child. The last four years of his life should have been spent playing football with his friends, going to school or spending time with his family, or in any of the other simple occupations of childhood which you or I would take for granted. Instead, he has been languishing behind bars, imprisoned in the legal black hole that is Bagram, while the final years of his childhood dwindle away to nothing.

I have never spoken to Hamidullah (lawyers are not allowed in Bagram) but as a fellow human being, I feel it is my duty to ensure that he is not forgotten, and to hope that while he has been robbed of his young life, he will not also be robbed of his adulthood.

Secret prisons like Bagram have become a crutch for the USA, and for international intelligence agencies, in the so-called “war on terror.” Used to stow away “suspects” without any need for evidence, procedure, or accountability, they have quickly become venues beyond the reach of the law. The concept of fundamental rights, including the assumption of innocence, has been cleanly erased. The US has sacrificed human rights worldwide – and in the process, human life – in the false belief that this will ensure its security.

My charity, Reprieve, along with our partners, the Justice Project, represent seven Pakistanis held beyond the rule of law in Bagram. We are trying to secure their most basic legal rights, and ultimately their release from a facility that has been described as “Guantanamo’s evil twin.” After a year of adjournments and our petition being handed from judge to judge, it had begun to look like Bagram might forever remain beyond the reach of Pakistani law – even though many of the Bagram Pakistanis have been “cleared for release.”

But there is hope yet. The recent order passed by Justice Khalid Mehmood Khan of Lahore High Court in the case of these seven individuals has begun to push the door open for the law.

The judge’s response to our petition was insightful. He asked the government’s Standing Counsel why it was that while criminals like Raymond Davis can get away with murder and be sent back to their country so quickly, innocent Pakistani children are allowed to suffer torture in a foreign country for years on end, without any evidence against them. In October, Justice Khalid Mehmood ordered Pakistan’s government to send a representative to Bagram to interview the prisoners, collect all the relevant information regarding their arrest and charges against them, if any, and report back to the court in one month.

This order is not only a victory for the innocent detainees biding their time at Bagram, but also for the Pakistani nation in general and the judiciary in particular. For Justice Khalid Mehmood Khan to stand up to US pressure, and to uphold the rights of ordinary people in this madness that is the “war on terror,” is no small feat.

Pakistan could use a lot more judges like Justice Khalid Mehmood Khan; judges with integrity, who are faithful to the law and who are not afraid of challenging the illegal practices that have spread from the US throughout the world during the “war on terror.” It is heartening to know that while the fight to bring the rule of law to Bagram is far from over, someone like Justice Khalid Mehmood Khan continues to seek the truth against all odds. As long as he does so, there is still hope for the young man who has been forced to grow up in a foreign prison, and sadly beyond the reach of the law.

By: Clive Stafford Smith, Founder and director of Reprieve, UK.
Email: info@jpp.org.pk

Over the past year, human rights and humanitarian organizations have documented abuses and human rights violations allegedly committed by the Afghan Local Police. The Afghan Local Police, or the ALP, are essentially local militias that are trained, equipped and paid by the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and the Afghan government to secure ungoverned parts of Afghanistan. Importantly, these units differ from the Afghan National Security Forces in that the ALP is purported to be largely free of central government control. It is a “bottom up” approach to security that is being implemented in concert with the development of a national security capacity.

From the point of view of ISAF, this program is filling an important gap. In theory, the ALP program is designed to provide “village level security,” bypass the central government’s corruption and help prevent the Taliban from gaining a foothold in places where international military forces are not present. In practice, serious problems exist with this program. According to Human Rights Watch, ALP units are responsible for “looting, illegal detention, beatings, killings, sexual assault and extortion.” Afghans interviewed by Human Rights Watch claim that it is difficult to distinguish between the ALP and local militias.

Recently, Human Rights Watch (HRW) called on the Obama Administration to halt plans to triple the ALP until and unless the program is overhauled. Moreover, HRW has urged the Administration to focus on training regular Afghan forces in preparation for the 2014 security transition rather than empowering local militias, or “community defense forces” in military parlance.

Last week, ISAF released a report on the ALP, which was initiated in response to serious concerns raised by HRW this past September. The investigation, which was led by a U.S. Air Force Brigadier General, substantiated many of the claims made by HRW. Some claims were not verified not because the investigators found them to be untrue, but because of an inability to locate and interview witnesses that might corroborate the findings of HRW. As ISAF’s report notes, HRW was only able to interview witnesses in exchange for confidentiality, and thus was unable to provide the names of witnesses and victims cited in its report to the investigators.

ISAF’s report urges a number of reforms to the ALP program, including improved training, oversight and accountability measures. By and large, the U.S. led military coalition acknowledges that serious problems exist with the program. Interestingly, however, the report concludes by noting that “HRW ignores the vital service ALP and VSO [village stability operations] are providing every day to give Afghans a chance to end 30 years of conflict and to live secure and peaceful lives.”

While the investigators substantiated many of HRW’s claims, the military investigation team took a cheap parting shot at the human rights group. This is especially interesting given the convergence between strategy and human rights inherent in the COIN doctrine. In other words, international military forces and human rights organizations increasingly share similar goals in Afghanistan and other counterinsurgency environments – protecting the civilian population from violence.

Sarah Sewall explains the importance of civilian protection in U.S. strategy in her introduction to the U.S. Army Field Manual:

The field manual [COIN doctrine] directs U.S. forces to make securing the civilian, rather than destroying the enemy, their top priority. The civilian population is the center of gravity – the deciding factor in the struggle…The real battle is for civilian support for, or acquiescence to, the counterinsurgents and host nation government. The population waits to be convinced. Who will help them more, hurt them less, stay the longest, earn their trust? U.S. forces and local authorities therefore must take the civilian perspective into account. Civilian protection becomes part of the counterinsurgent’s mission, in fact, the most important part.

The U.S. military brass clearly understands the importance of civilian protection to mission success as evidenced by the tightening of the rules of engagement in Afghanistan. And yet, amidst numerous credible reports documenting abuses by the ALP, ISAF has responded by suggesting it plans to triple the size of these units.

Perhaps, there is simply a disagreement over the extent of the problem. The U.N. Refugee Agency recently cited abuses by the ALP “as a factor in a 51 percent increase in displacement of Afghans in the first 10 months of 2011 compared with the same time period in 2010.” While acknowledging that problems exist, ISAF believes the ALP is “a really critical part of security.”

The U.S. military is likely feeling pressure to drawdown as rapidly as possible in Afghanistan. Empowering groups akin to local militias is a way to prevent insurgents from filling the void that international military forces leave as they begin to exit. But, it is also an incredibly shortsighted strategy. As Human Rights Watch notes in their September 2011 report:

The constant resort to militias as a quick security fix suggests a lack of understanding of how oppressive even a small militia can be when it operates without proper oversight and with impunity when it commits abuses. When militias engage in rape, murder, theft, and intimidation, and when there is little or no recourse to justice for victims, the creation of militias doesn’t decrease insecurity, it creates it.

As ISAF transitions more responsibility over to Afghans, the focus must be on ensuring that Afghan security forces operate pursuant to the rule of law. Empowering armed groups that repeatedly engage in abuse and violations of the law risks undoing the important security gains made in Afghanistan. It risks delegitimizing the central government in Kabul, inflaming sectarian tensions and could help strengthen the insurgency. The Obama Administration should re-think its shortsighted plans for the ALP if only to make good on its promise to win the war.

Image Courtesy of NATO.

The online world has been all aflutter in recent weeks over the introduction of two pieces of legislation in Congress: the PROTECT IP Act in the Senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House of Representatives. As PROTECT IP already passed in the Senate, last week the focus shifted to the hearings on SOPA and the fate that such legislation could have on the internet.

Both bills attempt to thwart online piracy and protect copyrighted intellectual property. However the way that Congress is trying to do this is by giving law enforcement and individual property owners the right to go after websites that might infringe on copyrighted materials and shutdown the website, prohibit other businesses from serving the sites, barring search results to the websites, and requiring service providers to block the websites. This may seem reasonable at the outset, but the results are far more complicated. The implications of such enforcement, and especially the individual right of action that SOPA allows, may mean that attempting to regulate the internet in this way threatens freedom of speech and information issues, places too high a burden on internet companies to comply, and fundamentally changes the way the internet will function within the United States and make it more on par with such beacons of freedom as China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Ethiopia. It is these consequences that are leading many opponents to claim that SOPA will actually break the internet.

Last Thursday the House Judiciary Committee held a session to mark-up the proposed bill. The main focus was the 55 amendments proposed to the original bill, most of which try to soften the impact of the bill and find an acceptable middle ground between proponents of the bill, including the Recording Industry Association of America and the Motion Picture Association of America, and the incredibly long list of internet-based companies and activists who are adamantly against the bill.

Throughout the hours of debating the amendments (all of which failed), netizens tracked and discussed the developments online. It is estimated that over 150,000 people from 150 different countries watched a portion of the hearings on Thursday through the KeepTheWebOpen.org webstream.  As the bill may determine how the internet functions in the US in the future, what better way of looking at the battle against the bill than seeing how it is being fought online?

The hearings are scheduled to resume on Wednesday, December 21. Follow the developments at KeepTheWebOpen.org.

Zarteef Afridi's latest photo. Courtesy: HRCP

A tribute to the human rights activist Zarteef Khan Afridi who was shot dead recently – my article in The News on Sunday. Latitude News earlier published a shorter, different version titled In Pakistan, an unlikely hero dies for his cause. 

The tribesman who showed the way

There was the letter from an anonymous writer saying he was going to hunt down and kill her. And then there was the letter from an Afridi tribesman offering to come down and protect her.

This was in the mid-1990s. The recipient of the letters was the fiery human rights lawyer Asma Jahangir, under threat for having taken on the case of Salamat Masih, the illiterate Christian boy sentenced to death for ‘blasphemy’ for having allegedly written sacrilegious words on the walls of a village mosque.

Little would anyone have thought that the writer of the second letter, Zarteef Khan Afridi, would one day himself face death threats for his stand on human rights issues. But he would have no armed guards protecting him when he rode his motorcycle, fully exposed and vulnerable, to the school where he taught for two decades in Jamrud, Khyber Agency. He was the school’s headmaster when unidentified militants, also on motorcycles, intercepted and gunned him down on his way to the school on Dec 8, 2011.

Salamat Masih

The slightly built, clean-shaven Afridi was also Coordinator, Khyber Agency, for the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), founded by Jahangir and others in 1986. His association with the HRCP began even before he offered to come down to Lahore from Khyber Agency with an armed ‘lashkar’ to protect her — an offer all the more commendable for having being made in a situation that was so fraught with risk.

The frenzy had been building up. Masked gunmen had opened fire after a court hearing in April 1994, wounding Salamat and killing Manzoor Masih, one of the co-accused in the blasphemy case. Glossy, full-colour stickers and posters cropped up all over Lahore, calling for “believers” to find and kill Jahangir. In July, a mob outside the Lahore High Court attacked her car. Luckily, she was not in the vehicle but her driver was assaulted and the car smashed. It was a few days later that that the letter vowing to hunt down and kill Jahangir was delivered to her office.

Asma Jahangir

Zarteef’s letter arrived after eight armed men broke into Jahangir’s family house in October and beat up her brother and his wife when they found her out. The assailants ran away when the house guards opened fire. One of them arrested later admitted that the aim had been to kill Jahangir and her sister Hina Jilani.

In that atmosphere of threats and intimidation, Afridi’s letter of support was a message of hope, particularly coming as it did from an area known for its religious conservatism. It showed that even there, conservative opinion is not homogenous and there are people willing to counter retrogressive trends.

“Born in this tribal milieu, Zarteef Afridi is peculiar for his pacifism and his commitment to the cause of education. Prevented in 1982 by maternal pressure from going to Soviet Russia for a degree in engineering, he turned to teaching instead,” to quote ‘In the eye of the storm’ an essay profiling Afridi’s work, published a couple of years ago by South Asia Partnership Pakistan (SAPPk).

“When he started out as a teacher (in 1983), the Afghan jihad, funded by the West, was in full flow and young men from all over the province made their way to the battlefield to either be killed or to become utterly criminalised. (But) children under the tutelage of the idealistic Zarteef were learning of the reality of the so-called jihad. Looking back, he can proudly claim that not one of the youngsters who passed through his hands went to the fight (although) many have risen to …become college professors and medical practitioners. Some have gone abroad while others have remained in their native land and in their own ways have been useful against the tide of obscurantism.”

Zarteef Khan Afridi: educationist, activist and visionary. Photo courtesy: Idrees Kamal

Although he was persuaded not to come down with armed tribesman to protect Jahangir, Zarteef Afridi continued to work for human rights. He participated in the first HRCP workshop in Peshawar conducted by the senior journalists and former newspaper editors I.A. Rehman and Hussain Naqi in 1991. The workshop trained volunteers to become correspondents to HRCP’s quarterly newsletter ‘Jehd-e-Haq’ (Fight for Rights).

Afridi was already “a practising progressive,” as Naqi puts it. “The extremists were more annoyed when he succeeded in arranging a jirga (tribal council) to oppose extremism and terrorism. He also succeeded in persuading a tribal industrialist to contribute funds for a children’s school for internally displaced refugees in camps.”

I met Zarteef Afridi at an HRCP meeting in Peshawar in 1996. All of us drove to Jamrud, where he proudly showed us the small public library he had built under the banner of the Fata Education and Welfare Society.

Since then, he catalysed 15 registered NGOs and CBOs in and around Jamrud. With a USAID endowment of Rs800,000 each, these groups focus on child rights, democracy and good governance. “In an area where women’s education did not merit much importance, Zarteef had long been a vocal proponent for it,” notes the SAPPk essay. “While he spoke for it in the hujras, he had a somewhat covert operation in progress within the homes as well. His training as an electrician and expertise in this field frequently took him into people’s homes. As he worked on their electrical appliances, he shamed the women of the household for their illiteracy. He says that over the years, this surreptitious campaign made for an increase in girls’ enrollment in schools, as well as that, it prepared older women for school.”

A primary girls' school in Khyber Agency: Zarteef Afridi furthered the cause

Zarteef Afridi’s organisation helped establish seven adult literacy centres in villages around Jamrud, for women between 17 and 65 years old. Although meant for about 30 students each, these schools cater to more than three times the number, totaling over 750 women.

In his work, Zarteef faced opposition even from his own family members. I remember him saying, “I want my daughters to marry of their own choice and not wear burqa (veil), but my wife gets angry. She says she will leave me if I encourage such ‘dishonorable’ behaviour.”

But his persistence made a dent. He ensured that no one in his family, starting with himself, received a vulvar, or bride price when marrying off their daughters. This spoke volumes for his commitment, countering the all too common hypocrisy visible in Pakistani politics, where activists who talk of human rights often stop short at practicing what they preach when it comes to their own daughters.

Zarteef Afridi was up against much bigger forces than his wife when he publicly advocated against these long-entrenched traditions. Besides countering bride price, he campaigned tirelessly for girls’ education and secular education, for women’s right to vote, and for Pakistani laws to be extended to the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata). He met some success in all these areas.

In August this year, President Zardari extended Pakistan’s Political Parties Act to the Fata, allowing political parties to operate there as they do elsewhere in the country. Increasing numbers of women and girls are attending school. Women voters are now visible on polling day in Jamrud.

Activists in Peshawar protest against the murder of Zarteef Khan Afridi. Photo courtesy: Idrees Kamal/Citizen Rights & Sustainable Development (CRSD), Peshawar

“Zarteef was the one who campaigned for women’s right to vote at elections and he took his family females to vote,” says Husain Naqi. “Both Nasim Wali and Benazir Bhutto contested and won seats in that area where the political parties had agreed that ‘their’ women will not vote!”

Even these limited gains are anathema to the extremist and criminal forces aligned with the Taliban. Afridi is the third HRCP coordinators to be murdered during 2011. “He was surely the most consistent and committed,” says Hussain Naqi.

Zarteef Afridi may be dead, but his consistency and commitment will live on in his legacy of peace, education and human rights values, shared by his community of activists in Pakistan and around the world. The loss is great and painful, but in the long run, his sacrifice and that of others killed in this path will not be in vain.

(ends)

Thank you Mark Dummett, for the report in BBC today paying tribute to Anthony Mascarenhas, the brilliant and courageous Pakistani journalist who had to flee abroad in order to be able to tell the truth – Bangladesh war: The article that changed history.

Mascarenhas

“Eight journalists, including Mascarenhas, were given a 10-day tour of the province (East Pakistan). When they returned home, seven of them duly wrote what they were told to,” writes Dummett.

“But one of them refused.”

That was Mascarenhas, who died in 1986 in London.

His wife Yvonne Mascarenhas told Dummett that she remembers him coming back distraught: “I’d never seen my husband looking in such a state. He was absolutely shocked, stressed, upset and terribly emotional. He told me that if he couldn’t write the story of what he’d seen he’d never be able to write another word again.”

“Clearly it would not be possible to do so in Pakistan. All newspaper articles were checked by the military censor, and Mascarenhas told his wife he was certain he would be shot if he tried,” writes Dummett.

Here is a case of a journalist who rose above what was no doubt being touted as the “national interest”. His subsequent reports in the Sunday Times made him a “traitor” to West Pakistan and a hero to the Bengalis. But I think he was a hero to the cause of journalism.

“There is little doubt that Mascarenhas’ reportage played its part in ending the war. It helped turn world opinion against Pakistan and encouraged India to play a decisive role,” writes Dummett… “Not that this was ever Mascarenhas’ intention”.

He was, simply, as editor of the Sunday Times, Harold Evans wrote in his memoirs, “just a very good reporter doing an honest job”.

It speaks volumes for the mainstream Pakistani narrative about the events of 1971, that I, as a journalist with a deep interest in human rights issues, never even heard of Anthony Mascarenhas until just a few years ago, and then too, quite by chance.

My uncle Zawwar Hasan, a retired journalist now over 80 years old, mentioned “Tony Mascarenhas” while reminiscing about how he ended up in this profession. Unsuccessful in getting a job in his own field, marketing, he had landed a job as a sports reporter with the government-controlled news agency Associated Press of Pakistan (APP) in Karachi in 1948. After his first assignment, a cricket match, he went to the India Coffee House with a new friend, another sports journalist, M. Akhtar.

“We wrote our reports there, and he gave me a lift to my office at APP.… Tony Mascarenhas was there – he later ended up with London Times,” said my uncle, remembering how Mascarenhas, who was editor of APP, had told him off for not coming straight back to the office after the match to file his report.

“Do you realise this is a news agency and every minute is precious. Anyway, show me what you have.”

Mascarenhas the editor then himself typed up the handwritten report (because the rookie reporter didn’t know how to type), telling him only to “come early tomorrow and learn to type.”

Being interested in the contributions of non-mainstream Muslims to Pakistan’s struggle for democracy, I was intrigued by the obviously Goan Christian name Mascarenhas. I started looking him up. I also learned how he “ended up with London Times”, initially as their correspondent in Pakistan.

According to the Times obituary of December 8, 1986, he was born Neville Anthony Mascarenhas in “Belgaum, near Goa, on July 10, 1928. A Roman Catholic, he was educated at St Patrick’s College, Karachi, before joining Reuters in Bombay in 1948.

“At the time of partition he was sent to Karachi to start their operation in the new state of Pakistan. He then helped to found Pakistan’s own news agency, APP.  In 1958 he joined the Times of Karachi as assistant editor…  From 1961 to 1971 he worked for the Morning News, mainly as assistant editor, though for two years (1963-5) he was its correspondent in India, and in 1965 was interned there with his family for three months while India and Pakistan were at war.

“In 1970 he was recruited by The Sunday Times, for which paper he wrote, the following year, the report from East Bengal which profoundly influenced opinion in the outside world, and which changed the course of his life.”

Read Dummett’s article for fascinating details about how Mascarenhas and his family escaped from Pakistan.

Later, in Cambridge MA, with access to the Harvard libraries, I found his books, The rape of Bangladesh (Delhi, Vikas Publications, 1971) and Bangladesh: a legacy of blood (Hodder and Stoughton, London, 1986). As far as I know, neither is unavailable in Pakistan although I hear that there have been some translations.

Some years ago I asked a senior journalist who had been posted in Dhaka during 1971, why no one in West Pakistan wrote the truth about what was happening. “We were not allowed,” he said simply. “There was strict censorship.”

But Mascarenhas had the courage, and the opportunity, to follow his conscience.

As I wrote in an essay for the Economic and Political Weekly, the State controlled Pakistan Television, that started broadcasts in 1964, has remained very much ‘his master’s voice’.

Along with a few newspapers and the government controlled Radio Pakistan, PTV reported only what the government allowed. This censorship was particularly evident when it came to the growing unrest in what was then East Pakistan. The news censorship and slanting was so extreme that even on Dec 16, 1971, when the Pakistan army surrendered to the Indian, the West Pakistan media was still predicting victory. An exception was Anthony Mascarenhas, the Goa-born, Karachi-educated journalist…. In 1970, recruited by The Sunday Times, London, his reports on the happenings in East Bengal “profoundly influenced opinion in the outside world, and changed the course of his life”, as his obituary in The Times notes.

“He and his family had to leave their home and all their possessions in Karachi. He arrived in Britain on June 12, 1971, and the following day his three-page story appeared in The Sunday Times. It was quoted all over the world and won him awards from IPC and What the Papers Say. But it also earned him the bitter hatred of Pakistan’s military regime, and for time he had reason to fear for his life.”

Ironically, or perhaps tellingly, he had become an Indian citizen in 1976 –obviously Pakistan had disowned him — although at the time of his death he was intending to apply for British citizenship, according to the Times obituary.