Daily Brief Audio Series
If any god, prophet, or saint were to show up in a courtroom and testify about the injury they claimed to have suffered due to some person’s words, then I might – might – be convinced blasphemy is a crime. Until that happens, however, I will consider all such charges bogus.
There is simply no “there” there in blasphemy. No victim, no harm, no nothing. It’s a manufactured crime with zero foundation in objective reality.
Unfortunately, despite being absurdly invented, the “crime” of blasphemy is used to punish innocent people in many parts of the world, encompassing many different faiths. People can receive fines, prison sentences, and even death sentences.
One particularly egregious example comes from Indonesia, where 74-year-old Apollinaris Darmawan has spent more than three years behind bars under the country’s “blasphemy” law. His story demonstrates just how nonsensical such laws are everywhere.
Darmawan is a retired railway company executive who converted from Islam to Catholicism. He wrote a book and social media posts criticizing Indonesia’s Muslim leaders and Islamic law. In August 2020, a Muslim mob stormed his home in Bandung, West Java, dragged him into the street, and stripped him.
Police came to Darmawan’s rescue but then took him into custody and charged him with the “crime” of blasphemy. He was accused of defaming Islam and insulting the Prophet Muhammad.
In December 2020, the Bandung district court convicted Darmawan, sentencing him to five years in prison and handing him a fine equivalent to US$ 55,000. It’s not his first time either: Darmawan spent several years behind bars for an earlier blasphemy conviction, as well.
As my colleague and Indonesia expert Andreas Harsono details, his prosecution and conviction violate Darmawan’s rights to freedom of expression and belief, which are protected by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other treaties ratified by Indonesia.
And, of course, it’s not just one case nor just one country that’s the problem here - the basic concept of “blasphemy” laws is inherently flawed.
The UN Human Rights Committee, which provides authoritative interpretations of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, has made it clear: “blasphemy laws … are incompatible with the Covenant.”
Such laws may not “discriminate in favour of or against one or certain religions or belief systems, or their adherents over another, or religious believers over non-believers. Nor would it be permissible for such prohibitions to be used to prevent or punish criticism of religious leaders or commentary on religious doctrine and tenets of faith.”
Yes, some people might be offended by what somebody says about their sacred ideas or holy objects. I get that, and I wouldn’t go out of my way to insult anyone’s religious beliefs. I would personally consider it rude to do so.
But, at most, that’s all it would be: rude.
And if we’re only allowed to say what offends no one, then we hardly have freedom of speech, right?
The end of one year and the beginning of another inevitably leads to thoughts of “the big picture.” What was the global trend of last year? And what’s in store for the next twelve months?
The calendar is completely arbitrary, of course. You could ask the same question at any moment of the year. Still, the annual reflections and resolutions are a tradition, and the media feeds it with reviews of the year past and prognostications for the one ahead.
Human Rights Watch also takes part. Our annual World Report will be published on Thursday.
Following months of writing, editing, and translating by hundreds of people across the organization, the World Report will be an overview of 2023 through the lens of human rights in about 100 countries. To bring it all together, our executive director, Tirana Hassan, will summarize the year globally in an essay.
I don’t think I’m giving anything away here by telling you the World Report makes for some grim reading. The year 2023 brought horrors and abuses to many parts of the world, and since it’s our job to bring these to light, that’s what we do. Still, there were some positive stories in the last 12 months, and we highlight those, as well. The “big picture” – as always – is a mixed bag.
Or maybe the “big picture” is that there really is no “big picture”? This is my tenth World Report at Human Rights Watch and looking back on a decade of these annual reviews, I’m leaning toward that way of thinking.
Of course, as humans, we naturally crave narratives. We want to see things moving in a direction. Pessimism pushes us one way, optimism another, but we’re all desperate for a trend. Things are getting worse. Things are getting better. We all want a simple story that’s easy to remember, easy to repeat.
But I also know global reality is not a single trend, nor some kind of balance between positives and negatives. The truth is eight billion stories, and each one of us our own multitudes.
The year 2024 will be an unprecedented year of elections around the world, “the biggest election year in history.”
If you’re fortunate enough to live where your rights are respected – where you can speak openly, organize freely, and elect your leaders fairly, get engaged in the public debate and challenge politicians to uphold human rights.
Most of all, make your vote count. Examine the candidates and their records and choose the ones you think will best guarantee human rights where you live – and around the world.
Twelve months from now, it will be 2025, and everyone will be reflecting on 2024. Resolve to be able to look back and be proud of what you worked to achieve for the defense of fundamental freedoms.
Whatever you think of 2023, it is up to each one of us to make 2024 better.
There’s a peculiar type of libertarian loudmouth on social media. You’ve surely seen at least one at some point, railing against regulations as the source of all anti-entrepreneurial evil and economic woe.
Next time you encounter one online, send them this short article by my colleague, Sarah Sanbar.
In it, she looks at a number of tragedies in Iraq – a fire in a wedding hall that killed 122, two hospital fires that together killed 174, a ferry sinking that killed 128, and others – and she finds a common theme in all of them. They all stem from a failure to enforce regulations.
Investigations into the fires found local authorities were negligent in their duty to uphold safety regulations and conduct inspections. Contractors used cheap, highly flammable construction materials to cut costs. Fire escapes, sprinkler systems, and evacuation plans were absent or insufficient. And corruption helped allow violators get away with ignoring the rule.
Authorities recorded nearly 40,000 fires across Iraq in 2022. The two leading causes were voltage fluctuations and defective wires, often because contractors cut corners in violation of building codes.
In the ferry sinking, river police had warned the current was too swift that day, in fact twice the highest limit for safe operation. And the ferry with a maximum capacity of 80 was carrying 287 people.
In January, a building under construction collapsed, killing three and injuring nine. The Iraqi Civil Defense Directorate then warned that more than 2,500 buildings across Iraq are on the verge of collapse. They blamed authorities greenlighting sub-standard buildings.
It’s all well and good to imprison, fire, and fine those whose negligence was found to be responsible for these kinds of tragedies. Indeed, the Iraqi authorities have done so in many cases.
But it’s just as important – if not more important – to prevent such things in the first place. Like every country, Iraq has regulations on fire safety, construction standards, and reliable transport. But they only save lives if enforced and obeyed.
And for those on social media and elsewhere who think having and following regulations are too costly, ask them if they are really willing to pay the price of ignoring them?
When I see authoritarian regimes holding bogus elections and then announcing results with absurdly high vote tallies for the dictator, I often wonder how the specific winning percentage is decided. I imagine a committee of people sitting around a table and fierce debates like:
“I say he should win with 95 percent. Anything less would be an embarrassment and an insult to our great leader!”
“No, no, it should look more credible, like 85 percent. People won’t believe 95 percent!”
“Order, order! Esteemed ladies and gentlemen of the High Council of Election Rigging, it’s getting late, and we need to come to a decision. Can we please find a compromise figure we can agree on?”
Now, I doubt my fantasy scenario is how things really work in dictatorships but I do know that Egyptian authorities yesterday announced that President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi had “won” a third six-year term with 89.6 percent of the vote.
I also know his unbelievable victory followed a wave of arrests, intimidation, and excessive requirements for candidates that essentially prevented meaningful competition. In the months leading up to the election, security forces stifled peaceful protests. They harassed, detained, and prosecuted dozens of journalists, as well as political and human rights activists.
In particular, authorities targeted perceived supporters and family members of Ahmed Tantawy, a vocal opponent of the country’s rulers and a potential presidential challenger whose candidacy the authorities eliminated by preventing him from qualifying.
In the words of my colleague and expert, Amr Magdi: “It is clear that the election was a meaningless charade in which Sisi was unwilling to face a real challenger.”
None of this is new for Egypt, he explains. Under Sisi’s rule, the military has strengthened its control over all aspects of Egyptians’ lives, and repression has largely destroyed civic space – that is, activities independent of the authorities. The right to political participation is essentially ignored in the country.
Thousands of perceived critics have been wrongly jailed, often in horrendous conditions. The courts are no more than another obedient tool of the government’s repression.
Meanwhile, the European Union is seeking closer ties with Sisi’s regime, forging ahead with negotiations on an upgraded bilateral partnership agreement. The deal will likely include additional political and economic support for Egypt without addressing some of the root causes of the country’s dire economic situation, like its systematic repression.
My vision at the beginning here of a “High Council of Election Rigging” was pure fantasy, of course. But it’s nothing compared to the fantasyland Egypt’s partners seem to live in with their supportive approach to authoritarian brutality.
Israel Weaponizing Starvation, Daily Brief December 18, 2023
Daily Brief, December 18, 2023
We’ve looked at violations of international humanitarian law – the “laws of war” – on multiple sides of the Israel-Palestine crisis several times in this newsletter. Today we add another war crime: the government of Israel is using starvation of civilians as a weapon of war.
Israeli forces are deliberately blocking the delivery of water, food, and fuel. They are also willfully impeding humanitarian assistance and apparently destroying agricultural areas. In short, they are depriving Gaza’s civilian population of the means to survive.
It’s critical to understand this is not simply a byproduct of the conflict, an unfortunate result of a terrible situation. It is Israeli government policy.
Since October 7, high-ranking Israeli officials – including Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, and Energy Minister Israel Katz – have made public statements expressing their aim to deprive civilians in Gaza of food, water, and fuel.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on October 19 that Israel would not allow humanitarian assistance “in the form of food and medicines” into Gaza through its crossings “as long as our hostages are not returned.”
What’s been happening on the ground, backed by such top-level statements from Israeli leaders, is “reflecting an intent to starve civilians as a method of warfare,” as my colleague and expert Omar Shakir says.
The laws of war clearly prohibit this. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court says that intentionally starving civilians by “depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including willfully impeding relief supplies” is a war crime.
Now, of course, taking hostages is also a war crime – it’s heinous in every way – and Hamas should release them immediately and unconditionally. No ifs, ands, or buts. However, in conflicts, their war crimes do not justify your war crimes. In fact, nothing excuses war crimes. Not for anyone.
What’s more, Israel’s continuing blockade of Gaza, not to mention its illegal closure of Gaza for more than 16 years, amounts to collective punishment of the civilian population. As we have said before, this is another war crime.
As the occupying power in Gaza under the Fourth Geneva Convention, Israel has the obligation to provide the civilian population with essential supplies. The government should bring adequate quantities of desperately needed food, medical aid, and fuel into Gaza. They should also fully restore water and electricity, and the means needed to deliver it.
The government of Israel needs to immediately stop weaponizing starvation, and concerned governments should call on Israel to do so. Countries providing military assistance and arms to Israel – the US, UK, Canada, Germany, and others – should suspend military support as long as Israeli forces continue to commit war crimes.
Iran should suspend military support to the Palestinian armed groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad, as well, so long as they continue to commit war crimes, such as holding hostages and firing indiscriminately on civilian areas.
Gaza’s humanitarian catastrophe demands an urgent and effective response from the international community. We cannot stand by as a government deliberately drives people to starvation.