continent:europe

  • Trump Administration Considered Tariffs on Australia - The New York Times
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/02/business/trump-australia-tariffs.html

    Some of President Trump’s top trade advisers had urged the tariffs as a response to a surge of Australian aluminum flowing onto the American market over the past year. But officials at the Defense and State Departments told Mr. Trump the move would alienate a top ally and could come at significant cost to the United States.

    The administration ultimately agreed not to take any action, at least temporarily.

    The measure would open yet another front in a global trade war that has pitted the United States against allies like Canada, Mexico, Europe and Japan, and deepened divisions with countries like China. It would also be the end of a reprieve for the only country to be fully exempted from the start from steel and aluminum tariffs that Mr. Trump imposed last year.

    #guerre_commerciale #etats-unis

  • ICC submission calls for prosecution of EU over migrant deaths

    Member states should face punitive action over deaths in Mediterranean, say lawyers.

    The EU and member states should be prosecuted for the deaths of thousands of migrants who drowned in the Mediterranean fleeing Libya, according to a detailed legal submission to the international criminal court (ICC).

    The 245-page document calls for punitive action over the EU’s deterrence-based migration policy after 2014, which allegedly “intended to sacrifice the lives of migrants in distress at sea, with the sole objective of dissuading others in similar situation from seeking safe haven in Europe”.

    The indictment is aimed at the EU and the member states that played a prominent role in the refugee crisis: Italy, Germany and France.

    The stark accusation, that officials and politicians knowingly created the “world’s deadliest migration route” resulting in more than 12,000 people losing their lives, is made by experienced international lawyers.

    The two main authors of the submission are Juan Branco, who formerly worked at the ICC as well as at France’s foreign affairs ministry, and Omer Shatz, an Israeli lawyer who teaches at Sciences Po university in Paris.
    Most refugees in Libyan detention centres at risk – UN
    Read more

    The allegation of “crimes against humanity” draws partially on internal papers from Frontex, the EU organisation charged with protecting the EU’s external borders, which, the lawyers say, warned that moving from the successful Italian rescue policy of Mare Nostrum could result in a “higher number of fatalities”.

    The submission states that: “In order to stem migration flows from Libya at all costs … and in lieu of operating safe rescue and disembarkation as the law commands, the EU is orchestrating a policy of forced transfer to concentration camps-like detention facilities [in Libya] where atrocious crimes are committed.”

    The switch from Mare Nostrum to a new policy from 2014, known as Triton (named after the Greek messenger god of the sea), is identified as a crucial moment “establishing undisputed mens rea [mental intention] for the alleged offences”.

    It is claimed that the evidence in the dossier establishes criminal liability within the jurisdiction of the ICC for “causing the death of thousands of human beings per year, the refoulement [forcible return] of tens of thousands migrants attempting to flee Libya and the subsequent commission of murder, deportation, imprisonment, enslavement, torture, rape, persecution and other inhuman acts against them”.

    The Triton policy introduced the “most lethal and organised attack against civilian population the ICC had jurisdiction over in its entire history,” the legal document asserts. “European Union and Member States’ officials had foreknowledge and full awareness of the lethal consequences of their conduct.”

    The submission does not single out individual politicians or officials for specific responsibility but does quote diplomatic cables and comments from national leaders, including Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron.

    The office of the prosecutor at the ICC is already investigating crimes in Libya but the main focus has been on the Libyan civil war, which erupted in 2011 and led to the removal of Muammar Gaddafi. Fatou Bensouda, the ICC prosecutor, has, however, already mentioned inquiries into “alleged crimes against migrants transiting through Libya”.

    The Mare Nostrum search and rescue policy launched in October 2013, the submission says, was “in many ways hugely successful, rescuing 150,810 migrants over a 364-day period”.

    Criticism of the policy began in mid-2014 on the grounds, it is said, that it was not having a sufficient humanitarian impact and that there was a desire to move from assistance at sea to assistance on land.

    “EU officials sought to end Mare Nostrum to allegedly reduce the number of crossings and deaths,” the lawyers maintain. “However, these reasons should not be considered valid as the crossings were not reduced. And the death toll was 30-fold higher.”

    The subsequent policy, Triton, only covered an “area up to 30 nautical miles from the Italian coastline of Lampedusa, leaving around 40 nautical miles of key distress area off the coast of Libya uncovered,” the submission states. It also deployed fewer vessels.

    It is alleged EU officials “did not shy away from acknowledging that Triton was an inadequate replacement for Mare Nostrum”. An internal Frontex report from 28 August 2014, quoted by the lawyers, acknowledged that “the withdrawal of naval assets from the area, if not properly planned and announced well in advance – would likely result in a higher number of fatalities.”

    The first mass drownings cited came on 22 January and 8 February 2015, which resulted in 365 deaths nearer to the Libyan coast. It is alleged that in one case, 29 of the deaths occurred from hypothermia during the 12-hour-long transport back to the Italian island of Lampedusa. During the “black week” of 12 to 18 April 2015, the submission says, two successive shipwrecks led to the deaths of 1,200 migrants.

    As well as drownings, the forced return of an estimated 40,000 refugees allegedly left them at risk of “executions, torture and other systematic rights abuses” in militia-controlled camps in Libya.

    “European Union officials were fully aware of the treatment of the migrants by the Libyan Coastguard and the fact that migrants would be taken ... to an unsafe port in Libya, where they would face immediate detention in the detention centers, a form of unlawful imprisonment in which murder, sexual assault, torture and other crimes were known by the European Union agents and officials to be common,” the submission states.

    Overall, EU migration policies caused the deaths of “thousands civilians per year in the past five years and produced about 40,000 victims of crimes within the jurisdiction of the court in the past three years”, the report states.

    The submission will be handed in to the ICC on Monday 3 June.

    An EU spokesperson said the union could not comment on “non-existing” legal actions but added: “Our priority has always been and will continue to be protecting lives and ensuring humane and dignified treatment of everyone throughout the migratory routes. It’s a task where no single actor can ensure decisive change alone.

    “All our action is based on international and European law. The European Union dialogue with Libyan authorities focuses on the respect for human rights of migrants and refugees, on promoting the work of UNHCR and IOM on the ground, and on pushing for the development of alternatives to detention, such as the setting up of safe spaces, to end the systematic and arbitrary detention system of migrants and refugees in Libya.

    “Search and Rescue operations in the Mediterranean need to follow international law, and responsibility depends on where they take place. EU operations cannot enter Libya waters, they operate in international waters. SAR operations in Libyan territorial waters are Libyan responsibility.”

    The spokesperson added that the EU has “pushed Libyan authorities to put in place mechanisms improving the treatment of the migrants rescued by the Libyan Coast Guard.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/law/2019/jun/03/icc-submission-calls-for-prosecution-of-eu-over-migrant-deaths
    #justice #décès #CPI #mourir_en_mer #CPI #cour_pénale_internationale

    ping @reka @isskein @karine4

    Ajouté à la métaliste sur les sauvetages en Méditerranée :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/706177

    • L’Union Européenne devra-t-elle un jour répondre de « crimes contre l’Humanité » devant la Cour Pénale Internationale ?

      #Crimes_contre_l'humanité, et #responsabilité dans la mort de 14 000 migrants en 5 années : voilà ce dont il est question dans cette enquête menée par plusieurs avocats internationaux spécialisés dans les Droits de l’homme, déposée aujourd’hui à la CPI de la Haye, et qui pourrait donc donner lieu à des #poursuites contre des responsables actuels des institutions européennes.

      La démarche fait l’objet d’articles coordonnés ce matin aussi bien dans le Spiegel Allemand (https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/fluechtlinge-in-libyen-rechtsanwaelte-zeigen-eu-in-den-haag-an-a-1270301.htm), The Washington Post aux Etats-Unis (https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/fluechtlinge-in-libyen-rechtsanwaelte-zeigen-eu-in-den-haag-an-a-1270301.htm), El Pais en Espagne (https://elpais.com/internacional/2019/06/02/actualidad/1559497654_560556.html), The Guardian en Grande-Bretagne, et le Monde, cet après-midi en France... bref, ce qui se fait de plus retentissant dans la presse mondiale.

      Les auteurs de ce #plaidoyer, parmi lesquels on retrouve le français #Juan_Branco ou l’israélien #Omer_Shatz, affirment que Bruxelles, Paris, Berlin et Rome ont pris des décisions qui ont mené directement, et en connaissance de cause, à la mort de milliers de personnes. En #Méditerrannée, bien sûr, mais aussi en #Libye, où la politique migratoire concertée des 28 est accusée d’avoir « cautionné l’existence de centres de détention, de lieux de tortures, et d’une politique de la terreur, du viol et de l’esclavagisme généralisé » contre ceux qui traversaient la Libye pour tenter ensuite de rejoindre l’Europe.

      Aucun dirigeant européen n’est directement nommé par ce réquisitoire, mais le rapport des avocats cite des discours entre autres d’#Emmanuel_Macron, d’#Angela_Merkel. Il évoque aussi, selon The Guardian, des alertes qui auraient été clairement formulées, en interne par l’agence #Frontex en particulier, sur le fait que le changement de politique européenne en 2014 en Méditerranée « allait conduire à une augmentation des décès en mer ». C’est ce qui s’est passé : 2014, c’est l’année-bascule, celle où le plan Mare Nostrum qui consistait à organiser les secours en mer autour de l’Italie, a été remplacé par ce partenariat UE-Libye qui, selon les auteurs de l’enquête, a ouvert la voix aux exactions que l’on sait, et qui ont été documentées par Der Spiegel dans son reportage publié début mai, et titré « Libye : l’enfer sur terre ».

      A présent, dit Juan Branco dans The Washington Post (et dans ce style qui lui vaut tant d’ennemis en France), c’est aux procureurs de la CPI de dire « s’ils oseront ou non » remonter aux sommet des responsabilités européennes. J’en terminerai pour ma part sur les doutes de cet expert en droit européen cité par El Pais et qui « ne prédit pas un grand succès devant la Cour » à cette action.

      https://www.franceculture.fr/emissions/revue-de-presse-internationale/la-revue-de-presse-internationale-emission-du-lundi-03-juin-2019


      #UE #Europe #EU #droits_humains

    • Submission to ICC condemns EU for ‘crimes against humanity’

      EU Commission migration spokesperson Natasha Bertaud gave an official statement regarding a recently submitted 245-page document to the International Criminal Court by human rights lawyers Juan Branco and Omer Shatz on June 3, 2019. The case claimed the EU and its member states should face punitive action for Libyan migrant deaths in the Mediterranean. The EU says these deaths are not a result of EU camps, rather the dangerous and cruel routes on which smugglers take immigrants. Bertaud said the EU’s track record on saving lives “has been our top priority, and we have been working relentlessly to this end.” Bertaud said an increase in EU operations in the Mediterranean have resulted in a decrease in deaths in the past 4 years. The accusation claims that EU member states created the “world’s deadliest migration route,” which has led to more than 12,000 migrant deaths since its inception. Branco and Shatz wrote that the forcible return of migrants to Libyan camps and the “subsequent commission of murder, deportation, imprisonment, enslavement, torture, rape, persecution and other inhuman acts against them,” are the grounds for this indictment. Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron were named specifically as those knowingly supporting these refugee camps, which the lawyers explicitly condemned in their report. The EU intends to maintain its presence on the Libyan coast and aims to create safer alternatives to detention centers.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=28&v=AMGaKDNxcDg

    • Migration in the Mediterranean: why it’s time to put European leaders on trial

      In June this year two lawyers filed a complaint at the International Criminal Court (ICC) naming European Union member states’ migration policies in the Mediterranean as crimes against humanity.

      The court’s Prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, must decide whether she wants to open a preliminary investigation into the criminality of Europe’s treatment of migrants.

      The challenge against the EU’s Mediterranean migrant policy is set out in a 245-page document prepared by Juan Branco and Omer Shatz, two lawyer-activists working and teaching in Paris. They argue that EU migration policy is founded in deterrence and that drowned migrants are a deliberate element of this policy. The international law that they allege has been violated – crimes against humanity – applies to state policies practiced even outside of armed conflict.

      Doctrinally and juridically, the ICC can proceed. The question that remains is political: can and should the ICC come after its founders on their own turf?

      There are two reasons why the answer is emphatically yes. First, the complaint addresses what has become a rights impasse in the EU. By taking on an area stymying other supranational courts, the ICC can fulfil its role as a judicial institution of last resort. Second, by turning its sights on its founders (and funders), the ICC can redress the charges of neocolonialism in and around Africa that have dogged it for the past decade.
      ICC legitimacy

      The ICC is the world’s first permanent international criminal court. Founded in 2002, it currently has 122 member states.

      So far, it has only prosecuted Africans. This has led to persistent critiques that it is a neocolonial institution that “only chases Africans” and only tries rebels. In turn, this has led to pushback against the court from powerful actors like the African Union, which urges its members to leave the court.

      The first departure from the court occurred in 2017, when Burundi left. The Philippines followed suit in March of this year. Both countries are currently under investigation by the ICC for state sponsored atrocities. South Africa threatened withdrawal, but this seems to have blown over.

      In this climate, many cheered the news of the ICC Prosecutor’s 2017 request to investigate crimes committed in Afghanistan. As a member of the ICC, Afghanistan is within the ICC’s jurisdiction. The investigation included atrocities committed by the Taliban and foreign military forces active in Afghanistan, including members of the US armed forces.

      The US, which is not a member of the ICC, violently opposes any possibility that its military personnel might be caught up in ICC charges. In April 2019 the ICC announced that a pre-trial chamber had shut down the investigation because US opposition made ICC action impossible.

      Court watchers reacted with frustration and disgust.
      EU migration

      An estimated 30,000 migrants have drowned in the Mediterranean in the past three decades. International attention was drawn to their plight during the migration surge of 2015, when the image of 3-year-old Alan Kurdi face-down on a Turkish beach circulated the globe. More than one million people entered Europe that year. This led the EU and its member states to close land and sea borders in the east by erecting fences and completing a Euro 3 billion deal with Turkey to keep migrants there. NATO ships were posted in the Aegean to catch and return migrants.

      Migrant-saving projects, such as the Italian Mare Nostrum programme that collected 150,000 migrants in 2013-2014, were replaced by border guarding projects. Political pressure designed to reduce the number of migrants who made it to European shores led to the revocation and non-renewal of licenses for boats registered to NGOs whose purpose was to rescue migrants at sea. This has led to the current situation, where there is only one boat patrolling the Mediterranean.

      The EU has handed search and rescue duties over to the Libyan coast guard, which has been accused repeatedly of atrocities against migrants. European countries now negotiate Mediterranean migrant reception on a case-by-case basis.
      A rights impasse

      International and supranational law applies to migrants, but so far it has inadequately protected them. The law of the sea mandates that ships collect people in need. A series of refusals to allow ships to disembark collected migrants has imperilled this international doctrine.

      In the EU, the Court of Justice oversees migration and refugee policies. Such oversight now includes a two-year-old deal with Libya that some claim is tantamount to “sentencing migrants to death.”

      For its part, the European Court of Human Rights has established itself as “no friend to migrants.” Although the court’s 2012 decision in Hirsi was celebrated for a progressive stance regarding the rights of migrants at sea, it is unclear how expansively that ruling applies.

      European courts are being invoked and making rulings, yet the journey for migrants has only grown more desperate and deadly over the past few years. Existing European mechanisms, policies, and international rights commitments are not producing change.

      In this rights impasse, the introduction of a new legal paradigm is essential.
      Fulfilling its role

      A foundational element of ICC procedure is complementarity. This holds that the court only intervenes when states cannot or will not act on their own.

      Complementarity has played an unexpectedly central role in the cases before the ICC to date, as African states have self-referred defendants claiming that they do not have the resources to try them themselves. This has greatly contributed to the ICC’s political failure in Africa, as rights-abusing governments have handed over political adversaries to the ICC for prosecution in bad faith, enjoying the benefits of a domestic political sphere relieved of these adversaries while simultaneously complaining of ICC meddling in domestic affairs.

      This isn’t how complementarity was supposed to work.

      The present rights impasse in the EU regarding migration showcases what complementarity was intended to do – granting sovereign states primacy over law enforcement and stepping in only when states both violate humanitarian law and refuse to act. The past decade of deadly migration coupled with a deliberately wastrel refugee policy in Europe qualifies as just such a situation.

      Would-be migrants don’t vote and cannot garner political representation in the EU. This leaves only human rights norms, and the international commitments in which they are enshrined, to protect them. These norms are not being enforced, in part because questions of citizenship and border security have remained largely the domain of sovereign states. Those policies are resulting in an ongoing crime against humanity.

      The ICC may be the only institution capable of breaking the current impasse by threatening to bring Europe’s leaders to criminal account. This is the work of last resort for which international criminal law is designed. The ICC should embrace the progressive ideals that drove its construction, and engage.

      https://theconversation.com/migration-in-the-mediterranean-why-its-time-to-put-european-leaders
      #procès

    • Naufrages en Méditerranée : l’UE coupable de #crimes_contre_l’humanité ?

      Deux avocats – #Omer_Shatz membre de l’ONG #Global_Legal_Action_Network et #Juan_Branco, dont le livre Crépuscule a récemment créé la polémique en France – ont déposé une plainte auprès de la Cour pénale internationale (CPI) à Paris le 3 juin dernier.

      Cette plainte qualifie de crimes contre l’humanité les politiques migratoires des États membres de l’Union européenne (UE) en Méditerranée.

      Selon le journal Le Monde :
      Pour les deux avocats, en permettant le refoulement des migrants en Libye, les responsables de l’UE se seraient rendus complices « d’expulsion, de meurtre, d’emprisonnement, d’asservissement, de torture, de viol, de persécution et d’autres actes inhumains, [commis] dans des camps de détention et les centres de torture libyens ».

      Les deux avocats ont transmis un rapport d’enquête (https://www.la-croix.com/Monde/Europe/Deces-migrants-Mediterranee-lUnion-europeenne-poursuivie-crimes-contre-lhu) de 245 pages sur la politique méditerranéenne de l’UE en matière de migration, à la procureure de la Cour, Fatou Bensouda, qui doit décider si elle souhaite ouvrir une enquête préliminaire sur la criminalité liée au traitement des migrants en Europe.

      Ils démontrent que la politique migratoire de l’UE est fondée sur la dissuasion et que les migrants noyés sont un élément délibéré de cette politique. Le droit international qu’ils allèguent avoir été violé – les crimes contre l’humanité – s’applique aux politiques étatiques pratiquées même en dehors des conflits armés.

      Sur les plans doctrinal et juridique, la CPI peut agir. La question qui demeure est politique : la CPI peut-elle et doit-elle s’en prendre à ses fondateurs sur leurs propres territoires ?

      Il y a deux raisons pour lesquelles la réponse est catégoriquement oui. Premièrement, la plainte porte sur ce qui est devenu une impasse en matière de droits au sein de l’UE. En s’attaquant à un domaine qui paralyse d’autres cours supranationales, la CPI peut remplir son rôle d’institution judiciaire de dernier ressort. Deuxièmement, en se tournant vers ses fondateurs (et ses bailleurs de fonds), la CPI peut répliquer à ses détracteurs qui l’accusent d’avoir adopté une posture néocolonialiste vis-à-vis du continent africain, une image qui la poursuit depuis au moins la dernière décennie.
      La légitimité de la cour pénale

      La CPI est la première cour pénale internationale permanente au monde. Fondée en 2002, elle compte actuellement 122 états membres.

      Jusqu’à présent, la cour n’a poursuivi que des ressortissants issus de pays africains. Cela a conduit à des critiques persistantes selon lesquelles il s’agit d’une institution néocoloniale qui « ne poursuit que les Africains », ne jugeant que les adversaires politiques de certains leaders ayant fait appel à la CPI.

      En retour, cela a conduit à des pressions à l’encontre de la cour de la part d’acteurs puissants comme l’Union africaine, qui exhorte ses membres à quitter la cour.

      Le premier départ du tribunal a eu lieu en 2017, avec le Burundi. Les Philippines en est sorti en mars 2019.

      Les deux états font actuellement l’objet d’enquêtes au sein de la CPI : respectivement au sujet d’exactions commises au Burundi depuis 2015 et aux Philippines concernant la campagne de lutte contre la drogue menée par le président Duterte. L’Afrique du Sud avait menacé de se retirer, avant de faire machine arrière.

      C’est dans ce contexte sensible que le procureur de la CPI avait décidé en 2017 d’enquêter sur les exactions commises en Afghanistan par les talibans, mais aussi par les forces militaires étrangères actives en Afghanistan, y compris les forces armées américaines. Si l’acte avait été alors salué, le projet n’a pu aboutir.

      Les États-Unis, qui ne sont pas membres de la CPI, se sont violemment opposés à toute possibilité d’investigation. En avril 2019, la CPI a annoncé qu’une chambre préliminaire avait mis fin à l’enquête car l’opposition américaine rendait toute action de la CPI impossible. Une décision qui a suscité de vives réactions et beaucoup de frustrations au sein des organisations internationales.

      La CPI connaît une période de forte turbulence et de crise de légitimité face à des états récalcitrants. Un autre scénario est-il envisageable dans un contexte où les états mis en cause sont des états membres de l’Union européenne ?
      Migrations vers l’Union européene

      On estime que plus de 30 000 personnes migrantes se sont noyées en Méditerranée au cours des trois dernières décennies. L’attention internationale s’est attardée sur leur sort lors de la vague migratoire de 2015, lorsque l’image du jeune Alan Kurdi, 3 ans, face contre terre sur une plage turque, a circulé dans le monde.

      Plus d’un million de personnes sont entrées en Europe cette année-là. Cela a conduit l’UE et ses États membres à fermer les frontières terrestres et maritimes à l’Est en érigeant des clôtures et en concluant un accord de 3 milliards d’euros avec la Turquie pour y maintenir les migrants. Des navires de l’OTAN ont été positionnés dans la mer Égée pour capturer et rapatrier les migrants.

      Les projets de sauvetage des migrants, tels que le programme italien Mare Nostrum – qui a permis de sauver 150 000 migrants en 2013-2014,- ont été remplacés par des projets de garde-frontières. Les pressions politiques visant à réduire le nombre de migrants qui ont atteint les côtes européennes ont conduit à la révocation et non-renouvellement des licences pour les bateaux enregistrés auprès d’ONG dont l’objectif était de sauver les migrants en mer. Cela a conduit à la situation actuelle, où il n’y a qu’un seul bateau de patrouille la Méditerranée.

      L’UE a confié des missions de recherche et de sauvetage aux garde-côtes libyens, qui ont été accusés à plusieurs reprises d’atrocités contre les migrants. Les pays européens négocient désormais l’accueil des migrants méditerranéens au cas par cas et s’appuyant sur des réseaux associatifs et bénévoles.

      Une impasse juridique

      Le droit international et supranational s’applique aux migrants, mais jusqu’à présent, il ne les a pas suffisamment protégés. Le droit de la mer est par ailleurs régulièrement invoqué.

      Il exige que les navires recueillent les personnes dans le besoin.

      Une série de refus d’autoriser les navires à débarquer des migrants sauvés en mer a mis en péril cette doctrine internationale.

      Au sein de l’UE, la Cour de justice supervise les politiques relatives aux migrations et aux réfugiés.

      Mais cette responsabilité semble avoir été écartée au profit d’un accord conclu il y a déjà deux ans avec la Libye. Cet accord est pour certains une dont certains l’équivalent d’une « condamnation à morts » vis-à-vis des migrants.

      De son côté, la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme a été perçue comme une institution ne soutenant pas spécialement la cause des migrants.

      Certes, en 2012 ce tribunal avait mis en avant la situation de ressortissants somaliens et érythréens. Interceptés en mer par les autorités italiennes, ils avaient été forcés avec 200 autres à retourner en Libye où leurs droits civiques et physiques n’étaient pas respectés, et leurs vies en danger. Portée par des organisations humanitaires, l’affaire avait conduit à un jugement de la cour stipulant :

      « que quand des individus sont interceptés dans des eaux internationales, les autorités gouvernementales sont obligées de s’aligner sur les lois internationales régulant les droits de l’Homme. »

      Cette position avait été célébrée dans ce qui semblait constituer une avancée pour les droits des migrants en mer. Il n’est cependant pas clair dans quelle mesure cette affaire peut s’appliquer dans d’autres cas et faire jurisprudence.

      Si les tribunaux européens sont invoqués et rendent leurs avis, le contexte migratoire empire, or les mécanismes, les politiques et les engagements européens et internationaux existants en matière de droits ne produisent pas de changement.

      Dans cette impasse juridique, l’introduction d’un nouveau paradigme semble essentielle.
      Remplir pleinement son rôle

      Dans ce contexte complexe, un élément fondateur de la CPI peut jouer un rôle : le principe de complémentarité.

      Elle [la complémentarité] crée une relation inédite entre les juridictions nationales et la Cour permettant un équilibre entre leurs compétences respectives.

      Cela signifie que le tribunal n’intervient que lorsque les États ne peuvent ou ne veulent pas agir de leur propre chef.

      Jusqu’à présent, la complémentarité a joué un rôle central inattendu dans les affaires dont la CPI a été saisie jusqu’à présent, les États africains s’étant autoproclamés incompétents, invoquant le manque de ressources (notamment juridiques) nécessaires.

      Cela a cependant grandement contribué à l’échec politique de la CPI sur le continent africain. Des gouvernements abusifs ont ainsi profité de ce système pour remettre à la CPI des adversaires politiques tout en se plaignant simultanément de l’ingérence de la CPI dans leurs affaires internes.

      Ce n’est pas ainsi que la complémentarité devait fonctionner.
      Le refus d’action de l’UE doit pousser la CPI à agir

      L’impasse dans laquelle se trouve actuellement l’UE en ce qui concerne les droits en matière de migration montre ce que la complémentarité est censée faire – accorder la primauté aux États souverains sur l’application de la loi et intervenir uniquement lorsque les États violent le droit humanitaire et refusent d’agir.

      La dernière décennie de migrations meurtrières, conjuguée à une politique de réfugiés délibérément délaissée en Europe, constitue une telle situation.

      Les migrants potentiels ne votent pas et ne peuvent pas être représentés politiquement dans l’UE.

      Leur protection ne dépend donc que des normes relatives aux droits de l’Homme et des engagements internationaux qui les entérinent. Ces normes ne sont pas appliquées, en partie parce que les questions de citoyenneté et de sécurité des frontières sont restées largement du ressort des États souverains. Ces politiques se traduisent aujourd’hui par un « crime contre l’humanité » continu.

      La CPI est peut-être l’institution qui sera capable de dénouer la situation complexe et l’impasse actuelle en menaçant de traduire les dirigeants européens en justice, faisant ainsi écho avec les idéaux progressistes qui ont nourri sa construction.

      https://theconversation.com/naufrages-en-mediterranee-lue-coupable-de-crimes-contre-lhumanite-1

  • En « bon » gendarme de l’Union européenne, le Maroc fait la chasse aux migrants
    https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/international/030619/en-bon-gendarme-de-l-union-europeenne-le-maroc-fait-la-chasse-aux-migrants

    En 2019, plus de 150 migrants sont morts noyés au large du Maroc. Des militants doivent identifier par eux-mêmes les cadavres. Alors que les violences policières se multiplient à l’encontre des Noirs, l’Union européenne paye de plus en plus cher pour aider le Maroc à bloquer « la migration irrégulière ». > A Tanger, avec ces mineurs qui risquent leur peau pour l’Europe

    #Reportage #Tanger,_réfugiés,_Rabat,_Maroc,_migrants,_identification,_A_la_Une

  • L’Afrique de l’Ouest consomme de plus en plus de « faux lait » européen
    https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/international/030619/l-afrique-de-l-ouest-consomme-de-plus-en-plus-de-faux-lait-europeen

    L’Europe exporte en #Afrique de l’Ouest de plus en plus de poudre de lait ré-engraissée avec des matières grasses végétales. Vendu à bas prix, ce produit concurrence le lait local. Les consommateurs l’utilisent sans savoir qu’il ne s’agit pas d’un produit laitier à proprement parler.

    #produits_laitiers,_Afrique_de_l’Ouest

  • Europe écologie-Les Verts : une “#vague_verte ” porteuse de désillusions | Le Journal Lutte Ouvrière
    https://journal.lutte-ouvriere.org/2019/05/28/europe-ecologie-les-verts-une-vague-verte-porteuse-de-desill #EELV

    Au Parlement européen, le groupe écologiste, même renforcé, n’aura aucun pouvoir véritable, d’abord parce que les institutions européennes sont faites pour que cette assemblée n’en ait aucun. Ce n’est pas la création d’un « comité de surveillance et d’initiative » annoncé par #Jadot le soir des élections qui y changera quelque chose. Et, pour le reste, les perspectives qu’il a tracées, à savoir la création d’un grand parti écologiste pour les élections municipales et nationales à venir, visent simplement à occuper la place longtemps tenue par la gauche aujourd’hui moribonde, pour participer à la gestion du capitalisme en crise.

  • Trump pousse Londres à opter pour un Brexit sans accord et sans payer
    https://www.crashdebug.fr/international/16089-trump-pousse-londres-a-opter-pour-un-brexit-sans-accord-et-sans-pay

    À la veille d’une visite d’État à Londres, le président américain qui a l’habitude de pourfendre l’Europe, a recommandé au Royaume-Uni de quitter l’UE sans accord et sans payer quoi que ce soit.

    Le président américain Donald Trump a une nouvelle fois sauté à pieds joints dans le débat du Brexit en recommandant au Royaume-Uni de quitter l’Union européenne sans accord, dimanche à la veille d’une visite d’Etat de trois jours dans le pays.

    Pour le dirigeant américain, pourfendeur de l’UE, le futur successeur de Theresa May à la tête du gouvernement britannique devrait tout simplement arrêter de discuter et claquer la porte du club européen sans payer la facture du divorce convenue dans l’accord conclu avec Bruxelles en novembre.

    "J’aime beaucoup Nigel. Il a beaucoup à offrir" (...)

    #En_vedette #Actualités_internationales #Actualités_Internationales

  • #Bilderberg, l’entre-soi des puissants au-delà des fantasmes
    https://lemediapresse.fr/economie/bilderberg-lentre-soi-des-puissants-au-dela-des-fantasmes

    Les quelques lettres suffisent à remplir des pages et des pages de théories imaginatives et de sites internet parfois obscurs. Groupe #secret composé d’illuminatis ou de francs-maçons, réunion occulte d’atlantistes, expression ultime du #Néolibéralisme mondialisé ? Les réunions annuelles et opaques du groupe Bilderberg réunissent les personnalités politiques, économiques et médiatiques les plus influentes d’Europe et d’Amérique du Nord et cristallisent tous les fantasmes. Décryptage.

    #Économie #Politique #Société #élite #élites #Capitalisme #Complot #Complotisme #Complotiste #démocratie #Europe #libéralisme #réseaux #transparence #UE

  • Nouveau monde. L’un des superordinateurs les plus puissants du monde inauguré en France (Franceinfo)
    https://www.crashdebug.fr/actualites-france/16086-nouveau-monde-l-un-des-superordinateurs-les-plus-puissants-du-monde

    Doté de près de 80 000 microprocesseurs, le nouveau supercalculateur qui sera installé au centre de calcul du CEA à Bruyères-Le-Châtel (Essonne), est l’un des plus puissants d’Europe. Il est fabriqué par l’entreprise française Atos.

    franceinfo : À quoi va servir ce supercalculateur ?

    Thierry Breton, PDG d’Atos : Il s’agit d’une coopération entre le CEA, le CNRS et le ministère de la Recherche (GENCI, grand équipement national de calcul intensif). Cette machine servira à la recherche académique française et européenne dans le domaine de l’intelligence artificielle, l’astrophysique, la recherche moléculaire, la météorologie ou encore la chimie. Sa puissance de 9 pétaflops, qui sera étendue en 2020 à 22 pétaflops, en fait l’un des supercalculateurs des plus puissants d’Europe.

    Une telle machine doit être (...)

    #En_vedette #Actualités_françaises

  • La Roumanie, nouvel « eldorado » de l’incinération de déchets Adeline Percept avec Thomas Chantepie - 2 Juin 2019 - RTBF
    https://www.rtbf.be/info/monde/detail_la-roumanie-nouvel-eldorado-de-l-incineration-de-dechets?id=10236367

    La chine accueillait 8 millions de tonnes de déchets plastiques par an, dont 424.000 depuis la Belgique. Le problème concerne particulièrement aussi l’Allemagne ou l’Autriche. Le temps de réorganiser les réseaux après la décision chinoise, c’est en Europe de l’Est que l’on s’inquiète.

    La Roumanie est une destination « idéale » pour l’incinération de déchets. La loi y est souple car une centaine de types de déchets peuvent être incinérés comme les pneus, les huiles et des plastiques divers. Problème : des ONG écologistes telles que Rise Project et Zero Waste tirent la sonnette d’alarme : le pays n’exerce aucun contrôle indépendant de l’impact environnemental pour ces déchets incinérés dans les cimenteries du pays.

    « Tous malades »
    Comme les autres cimenteries de Roumanie, celle de Chiscadaga, en Transylvanie, a remplacé le combustible conventionnel par l’incinération de déchets. Une avancée écologique ? Pas vraiment, selon les voisins de l’usine. Marius et Otilia racontent un enfer quotidien : « On prend tous des antidépresseurs. On peut plus respirer, se plaint Otilia. Et il y a cette odeur de pneus brûlés, de textiles brûlés… ils brûlent toutes ces saletés », raconte-t-elle. « On va tous être malades. C’est une question de temps, avance Marius, résigné. Il y a tellement de gens malades ici que je ne sais pas s’il y a encore 10% de la population qui soit en bonne santé. »µ

    La police a récemment saisi des déchets médicaux en provenance d’Italie. Ils étaient cachés dans une remorque de déchets variés, tous à destination de cette cimenterie pour y être brûlés. C’est l’équipe de Razvan Huber, de la Garde environnementale roumaine, qui a fait cette découverte au poste-frontière tout proche. « Dans des camions qui transportent des pneus venus d’Allemagne, d’Autriche ou d’Italie, on a déjà eu des situations où étaient carrément mélangées des batteries de voiture », se souvient-il.

    Poubelle de l’Europe
    Mais la Garde environnementale a peu de prérogatives. On ne compte que quelques inspections à la frontière chaque année. Des dizaines de bennes de déchets illégaux passent chaque jour, selon le procureur Teodor Nita : « Les déchets arrivent ici à cause de l’attractivité économique. 17 euros la tonne de déchets à brûler ici, au lieu de 250 euros en Europe de l’Ouest ».

    Il n’existe aucune étude indépendante de l’impact environnemental de la combustion des déchets autour des cimenteries roumaines. À Chiscadaga, Marius et Otilia demandent que la Roumanie ne devienne pas la poubelle de l’Europe.

    #egis #ue #poubelle #union-européenne #poubelles unter_menschen #déchets #pollution #environnement #recyclage #écologie #plastique #santé #pollutions #Roumanie

  • Les naufragés. L’odyssée des migrants africains

    Les naufragés réunit les #témoignages de plusieurs dizaines d’hommes, de femmes et d’enfants originaires d’#Afrique_de_l’Ouest, arrivés en Europe après la chute de Mouammar Kadhafi en #Libye.


    http://www.karthala.com/terrains-du-siecle/3236-les-naufrages-l-odyssee-des-migrants-africains.html
    #livre #migrations #asile #réfugiés #Etienne_Dubuis

  • Le numéro 1, un très beau numéro de la revue
    #Nunatak , Revue d’histoires, cultures et #luttes des #montagnes...

    Sommaire :

    Une sensation d’étouffement/Aux frontières de l’Iran et de l’Irak/Pâturages et Uniformes/La Banda Baudissard/
    À ceux qui ne sont responsables de rien/Des plantes dans l’illégalité/Conga no va !/Mundatur culpa labore

    La revue est disponible en pdf en ligne (https://revuenunatak.noblogs.org/numeros), voici l’adresse URL pour télécharger le numéro 1 :
    https://revuenunatak.noblogs.org/files/2017/03/Nunatak1HiverPrintemps2017.pdf

    Je mettrai ci-dessous des mots-clés et citations des articles...

    –—

    métaliste des numéros recensés sur seenthis :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/926433

  • FAR RIGHT NETWORKS OF DECEPTION
    https://avaazimages.avaaz.org/Avaaz%20Report%20Network%20Deception%2020190522.pdf?slideshow

    Avaaz investigation uncovers flood of disinformation, triggering shutdown of Facebook pages with over 500 million views ahead of EU elections. Ahead of the EU elections, Avaaz conducted a Europe-wide investigation into networks of disinformation on Facebook. This was the first investigation of its kind and uncovered that far-right and anti-EU groups are weaponizing social media at scale to spread false and hateful content. Our findings were shared with Facebook, and resulted in an (...)

    #Facebook #algorithme #manipulation #élections #Avaaz

  • ’I had pain all over my body’: Italy’s tainted tobacco industry

    Three of the world’s largest tobacco manufacturers, #Philip_Morris, #British_American_Tobacco and #Imperial_Brands, are buying leaves that could have been picked by exploited African migrants working in Italy’s multi-million euro industry.

    Workers including children, said they were forced to work up to 12 hours a day without contracts or sufficient health and safety equipment in Campania, a region that produces more than a third of Italy’s tobacco. Some workers said they were paid about three euros an hour.

    The Guardian investigation into Italy’s tobacco industry, which spanned three years, is believed to be the first in Europe to examine the supply chain.

    Italy’s tobacco market is dominated by the three multinational manufacturers, all of whom buy from local producers. According to an internal report by the farmers’ organisation ONT Italia, seen by the Guardian and confirmed by a document from the European Leaf Tobacco Interbranch, the companies bought three-fifths of Italian tobacco in 2017. Philip Morris alone purchased 21,000 tons of the 50,000 tons harvested that year.

    The multinationals all said they buy from suppliers who operate under a strict code of conduct to ensure fair treatment of workers. Philip Morris said it had not come across any abuse. Imperial and British American said they would investigate any complaints brought to their attention.

    Italy is the EU’s leading tobacco producer. In 2017, the industry was worth €149m (£131m).

    Despite there being a complex system of guarantees and safeguards in place for tobacco workers, more than 20 asylum seekers who spoke to the Guardian, including 10 who had worked in the tobacco fields during the 2018 season, reported rights violations and a lack of safety equipment.

    The interviewees said they had no employment contracts, were paid wages below legal standards, and had to work up to 12 work hours a day. They also said they had no access to clean water, and suffered verbal abuse and racial discrimination from bosses. Two interviewees were underage and employed in hazardous work.

    Didier, born and raised in Ivory Coast, arrived in Italy via Libya. He recently turned 18, but was 17 when, last spring, a tobacco grower in Capua Vetere, near the city of Caserta, offered him work in his fields. “I woke up at 4am. We started at 6am,” he said. “The work was exhausting. It was really hot inside the greenhouse and we had no contracts.”

    Alex, from Ghana, another minor who worked in the same area, said he was forced to work 10 to 12 hours a day. “If you are tired or not, you are supposed to work”, otherwise “you lose your job”.

    Workers complained of having to work without a break until lunchtime.

    Alex said he wasn’t given gloves or work clothes to protect him from the nicotine contained in the leaves, or from pesticides. He also said that when he worked without gloves he felt “some sickness like fever, like malaria, or headaches”.

    Moisture on a tobacco leaf from dew or rain may contain as much nicotine as the content of six cigarettes, one study found. Direct contact can lead to nicotine poisoning.

    Most of the migrants said they had worked without gloves. Low wages prevented them from buying their own.

    At the end of the working day, said Sekou, 27, from Guinea, who has worked in the tobacco fields since 2016: “I could not get my hands in the water to take a shower because my hands were cut”.

    Olivier added: “I had pain all over my body, especially on my hands. I had to take painkillers every day.”

    The migrants said they were usually hired on roundabouts along the main roads through Caserta province.

    Workers who spoke to the Guardian said they didn’t have contracts and were paid half the minimum wage. Most earned between €20 and €30 a day, rather than the minimum of €42.

    Thomas, from Ghana, said: “I worked last year in the tobacco fields near Cancello, a village near Caserta. They paid me €3 per hour. The work was terrible and we had no contracts”.

    The Guardian found African workers who were paid €3 an hour, while Albanians, Romanians or Italians, were paid almost double.

    “I worked with Albanians. They paid the Albanians €50 a day,” (€5 an hour), says Didier. “They paid me €3 per hour. That’s why I asked them for a raise. But when I did, they never called back.”

    Tammaro Della Corte, leader of the General Confederation of Italian Workers labour union in Caserta, said: “Unfortunately, the reality of the work conditions in the agricultural sector in the province of Caserta, including the tobacco industry, is marked by a deep labour exploitation, low wages, illegal contracts and an impressive presence of the caporalato [illegal hiring], including extortion and blackmailing of the workers.

    “We speak to thousands of workers who work in extreme conditions, the majority of whom are immigrants from eastern Europe, north Africa and sub-Saharan Africa. A large part of the entire supply chain of the tobacco sector is marked by extreme and alarming working conditions.”

    Between 405,000 and 500,000 migrants work in Italy’s agricultural sector, about half the total workforce. According to the Placido Rizzotto Observatory, which investigates worker conditions in the agricultural sector, 80% of those working without contracts are migrants.

    Multinational tobacco companies have invested billions of euros in the industry in Italy. Philip Morris alone has invested €1bn over the past five years and has investment plans on the same scale for the next two years. In 2016, the company invested €500m to open a factory near Bologna to manufacture smokeless cigarettes. A year later, another €500m investment was announced to expand production capacity at the factory.

    British American Tobacco declared investments in Italy of €1bn between 2015 and 2019.

    Companies have signed agreements with the agriculture ministry and farmers’ associations.

    Since 2011, Philip Morris, which buys the majority of tobacco in Campania, has signed agreements to purchase tobacco directly from ONT Italia.

    Philip Morris buys roughly 70% of the Burley tobacco variety produced in Campania. Approximately 900 farmers work for companies who supply to Philip Morris.

    In 2018, Burley and Virginia Bright varieties constituted 90% of Italian tobacco production. About 15,000 tons of the 16,000 tons of Italian Burley are harvested in Campania.

    In 2015, Philip Morris signed a deal with Coldiretti, the main association of entrepreneurs in the agricultural sector, to buy 21,000 tons of tobacco a year from Italian farmers, by investing €500m, until 2020.

    Gennarino Masiello, president of Coldiretti Campania and national vice-president, said the deal included a “strong commitment to respect the rights of employees, banning phenomena like caporalato and child labour”.

    Steps have been taken to improve workers’ conditions in the tobacco industry.

    A deal agreed last year between the Organizzazione Interprofessionale Tabacco Italia (OITI), a farmers’ organisation, and the ministry of agriculture resulted in the introduction of a code of practice in the tobacco industry, including protecting the health of workers, and a national strategy to reduce the environmental impact.

    But last year, the OITI was forced to acknowledge that “workplace abuses often have systemic causes” and that “long-term solutions to address these issues require the serious and lasting commitment of all the players in the supply chain, together with that of the government and other parties involved”.

    Despite the code, the migrants interviewed reported no change in their working conditions.

    In 2017, Philip Morris signed an agreement with the UN’s International Organization for Migration (IOM) to hire 20 migrants as trainees within the Campania tobacco producing companies, to “support their exit from situations of serious exploitation”. Migrants on the six-month trainee scheme receive a monthly salary of €600 from Philip Morris.

    But the scheme appears to have little impact.

    Kofi, Sekou and Hassan were among 20 migrants hired under the agreement. Two of them said their duties and treatment were no different from other workers. At the end of the six months, Sekou said he was not hired regularly, but continued to work with no contract and low wages, in the same company that signed the agreement with Philip Morris.

    “If I didn’t go to work they wouldn’t pay me. I was sick, they wouldn’t pay me,” he said.

    In a statement, Huub Savelkouls, chief sustainability officer at Philip Morris International, said the company is committed to ensuring safety and fair conditions in its supply chain and had not come across the issues raised.

    “Working with the independent, not-for-profit organisation, Verité, we developed PMI’s Agricultural Labor Practices (ALP) code that currently reaches more than 350,000 farms worldwide. Farmers supplying PMI in Italy are contractually bound to respect the standards of the ALP code. They receive training and field teams conduct farm visits twice a month to monitor adherence to the ALP code,” he said.

    “Recognising the complex situation with migrant workers in Italian agriculture, PMI has taken supplementary steps to gain more visibility and prevent potential issues through a mechanism that provides direct channels for workers to raise concerns, specifically funding an independent helpline and direct engagement programme with farm workers.”

    On the IOM scheme, he said: “This work has been recognised by stakeholders and elements are being considered for continued action.”

    Simon Cleverly, group head of corporate affairs at British American Tobacco, said: “We recognise that agricultural supply chains and global business operations, by their nature, can present significant rights risks and we have robust policies and process in place to ensure these risks are minimised. Our supplier code of conduct sets out the minimum contractual standards we expect of all our suppliers worldwide, and specifically requires suppliers to ensure that their operations are free from unlawful migrant labour. This code also requires suppliers to provide all workers, including legal migrant workers, with fair wages and benefits, which comply with applicable minimum wage legislation. To support compliance, we have due diligence in place for all our third-party suppliers, including the industry-wide sustainable tobacco programme (STP).”

    He added: “Where we are made aware of alleged human rights abuses, via STP, our whistleblowing procedure or by any other channel, we investigate and where needed, take remedial action.”

    Simon Evans, group media relations manager at Imperial Tobacco, said: “Through the industry-wide sustainable tobacco programme we work with all of our tobacco suppliers to address good agricultural practices, improve labour practices and protect the environment. We purchase a very small amount of tobacco from the Campania region via a local third party supplier, with whom we are working to understand and resolve any issues.”

    ONT said technicians visited tobacco producers at least once a month to monitor compliance with contract and production regulations. It said it would not tolerate any kind of labour exploitation and would follow up the Guardian investigation.

    “If they [the abuses] happen to be attributable to farms associated with ONT, we will take the necessary measures, not only for the violation of the law, but above all to protect all our members who operate with total honesty and transparency.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/may/31/i-had-pain-all-over-my-body-italys-tainted-tobacco-industry?CMP=share_b
    #tabac #industrie_du_tabac #exploitation #travail #migrations #Caserta #Italie #néo-esclavagisme #Pouilles #Campania

    ping @albertocampiphoto @marty @reka @isskein

  • Italie : La capitaine Pia Klemp menacée de 20 ans de prison - Secours Rouge
    https://secoursrouge.org/Italie-La-capitaine-Pia-Klemp-menacee-de-20-ans-de-prison


    Pia Klemp

    Pia Klemp a participé au sauvetage de réfugiés dans la méditerranée avec l’association Sea-Watch. Elle est maintenant accusée par la justice italienne d’aide à l’immigration illégale. Le parquet exige une peine de prison de 20 ans. Pour ses investigations, le parquet a eu recourt à des écoutes téléphoniques et à des agents infiltrés. Dans le cadre de ses six missions en tant que capitaine des bateaux de sauvetage Sea-Watch 3 et Iuventa, Pia Klemp dit avoir pu sauver les vies de 5000 personnes.

    • German boat captain Pia Klemp faces prison in Italy for migrant rescues

      Pia Klemp stands accused of aiding illegal immigration after she saved people from drowning in the Mediterranean. The Bonn native has accused Italian authorities of organizing “a show trial.”

      Nearly 60,000 people had signed a petition by Saturday afternoon demanding that Italy drop criminal proceedings against German boat captain Pia Klemp and other crew members who have rescued thousands of migrants in the Mediterranean Sea.

      In an interview with the Basler Zeitung daily on Friday, Klemp said that a trial against her was due to begin soon after she and some of her compatriots were charged in Sicily with assisting in illegal immigration.

      She said that she was told by her Italian lawyer that she could be looking at “up to 20 years in prison and horrendous fines.”

      Klemp added, however, that she intended to fight the case up to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France, if she had to.

      The 35-year-old Bonn native has been under investigation in Italy since her ship, the Iuventa, was impounded in the summer of 2017, and the government has moved to ban her from sailing around the Italian coast. According to German public broadcaster WDR, through the work on that ship and the Sea-Watch 3, Klemp has personally assisted in the rescue of more than 1,000 people at risk of drowning in unsafe dinghies as they attempted to cross to Europe in search of a better life.

      Read more: Italy’s Matteo Salvini wants hefty fines for migrant rescue vessels

      Salvini’s crackdown

      An already immigrant-unfriendly government in Rome became even more so in June 2018, when newly appointed Interior Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini of the far-right League party promised a crackdown the likes of which modern Italy had never seen.

      Since assuming office, Salvini has sought to put a stop to migrant rescue ships docking on Italian shores and allowing refugees to disembark. In January, the nationalist leader made headlines with the forced evacuation of hundreds of asylum-seekers from Italy’s second-largest refugee center and his refusal to clarify where the people, many of whom had lived in Castelnuovo di Porto for years and become integrated into town life, were being taken.

      Shortly thereafter, Sicilian prosecutors ruled that Salvini could be charged with kidnapping more than 177 migrants left stranded on a ship he had ordered impounded.

      ’A yearslong show trial’

      What frustrates Klemp the most, she told the Basler Zeitung, is that the costs — amounting to hundreds of thousands of euros — that she has had to prepare to cover from her own savings and some new donations “for what is likely to be a yearslong show trial” require money that could have been spent on rescue missions.

      “But the worst has already come to pass,” she said. “Sea rescue missions have been criminalized.”

      For this, the captain blames not only the Italian government but what she sees as a failure of the European Union “to remember its avowed values: human rights, the right to life, to apply for asylum, and the duty of seafarers to rescue those in danger at sea.”

      Klemp added that “demagogues” such as Salvini, former Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz and German Interior Minister Horst Seehofer were effectively allowing thousands to perish in the Mediterranean each year.

      She pushed back at criticism that rescue missions encouraged more people to attempt the highly dangerous crossing. “There are scientific studies that disprove the idea that sea rescues are a so-called pull factor,” she said. “The people come because, unfortunately, there are so many reasons to flee.” And if countries close their borders, “they come via the Mediterranean because there is no legal way to get here,” she added.

      To cover her potentially exorbitant legal costs, a bar in Bonn has announced a fundraising campaign to help Klemp. Cafe Bla has announced that for every patron who orders the “Pia beer,” 50 euro cents will be donated to their former waitress.


      https://www.dw.com/en/german-boat-captain-pia-klemp-faces-prison-in-italy-for-migrant-rescues/a-49112348?maca=en-Twitter-sharing

    • Mobilisation pour la capitaine d’un navire humanitaire

      L’ancienne capitaine du « #Iuventa », immobilisé depuis 2017, encourt vingt ans de prison en Italie. Accusée de complicité avec les passeurs, elle affirme n’avoir fait que respecter le droit international, qui impose de porter secours à toute personne en détresse.

      https://www.liberation.fr/planete/2019/06/11/mobilisation-pour-la-capitaine-d-un-navire-humanitaire_1732973

    • I Helped Save Thousands of Migrants from Drowning. Now I’m Facing 20 Years in Jail | Opinion

      In today’s Europe, people can be sentenced to prison for saving a migrant’s life. In the summer of 2017, I was the captain of the rescue ship Iuventa. I steered our ship through international waters along the Libyan coastline, where thousands of migrants drifted in overcrowded, unseaworthy dinghies, having risked their lives in search of safety. The Iuventa crew rescued over 14,000 people. Today, I and nine other members of the crew face up to twenty years in prison for having rescued those people and brought them to Europe. We are not alone. The criminalization of solidarity across Europe, at sea and on land, has demonstrated the lengths to which the European Union will go to make migrants’ lives expendable.

      Two years ago, Europe made renewed efforts to seal the Mediterranean migrant route by draining it of its own rescue assets and outsourcing migration control to the so-called “Libyan Coast Guard”, comprised of former militia members equipped by the EU and instructed to intercept and return all migrants braving the crossing to Europe. NGO ships like the Iuventa provided one of the last remaining lifelines for migrants seeking safety in Europe by sea. For European authorities, we were a critical hurdle to be overcome in their war against migration.

      In August 2017, the Iuventa was seized by the Italian authorities and the crew was investigated for “aiding and abetting illegal immigration.” Thus began an ongoing spate of judicial investigations into the operation of search and rescue vessels. Sailors like myself, who had rallied to the civil fleet when it seemed no European authority cared people were drowning at sea, were branded as criminals. The ensuing media and political campaign against us has gradually succeeded in removing almost all NGOs from the central Mediterranean, leaving migrants braving the sea crossing with little chance of survival.

      We sea-rescuers have been criminalized not only for what we do but for what we have witnessed. We have seen people jump overboard their frail dinghies on sighting the so-called Libyan Coast Guard, preferring death at sea over return to the slavery, torture, rape and starvation that awaits them in EU-funded Libyan detention centers. We have also seen what becomes of those who are found too late. For days, I steered our ship through international waters with a dead two-year-old boy in the freezer. No European country had wanted to save him when they had the chance. His mother lived, and after days of drifting in wait of an open port, our ship brought her to Europe—when it no longer mattered to her. We rescuers know that those who drown at Europe’s doorstep are not unlucky casualties of the elements. The transformation of the Mediterranean into a mass grave for migrants is a European political project.

      Over the past year, Italy’s interior minister Matteo Salvini has provided a useful alibi for centrist European political forces–those avowedly committed to “European values” of human rights. His persistent targeting of rescue NGOs and his decision to seal Italian ports to ships carrying rescued migrants has seen him cast as the “rotten egg” of an otherwise largely liberal European Union. But Matteo Salvini is neither the architect of Fortress Europe, nor its sole gatekeeper.

      Alongside Italy’s ostentatious prosecution of sea rescuers, other European nations have adopted shrewder, subtler tactics, revoking their flags or miring ships’ crews in unnecessary and lengthy bureaucratic procedures. When Salvini sealed Italian ports, other member states expressed righteous indignation—but not one of them offered its own ports as havens for later rescues. One of two remaining rescue ships, Sea-Watch 3, has since spent weeks motoring along the European coast line with hundreds of refugees on board, pleading for an open port, only to find that their “cargo” was not wanted anywhere in Europe.

      In the coming months, as the conflict in Libya intensifies, thousands more will be forced to brave the sea crossing. I know from experience that without rescue, the majority of them will die. Common sense tells me that with humanitarian vessels barred from saving lives and European commercial and military and Coast Guard ships instructed to avoid migrant routes, their chances of rescue are shrinking. I suspect European leaders share my common sense.

      Meanwhile, we sea rescuers are not alone in facing charges for “crimes of solidarity.” On land across Europe, hundreds of men and women stand trial for having offered food, shelter or clothing to migrants. Among us are countless migrants criminalized for having helped other migrants in need, whose faces will likely not appear in esteemed publications.

      None of us has been prosecuted for helping white Europeans. The simple truth is that in intimidating and punishing those of us who have offered their solidarity to migrants, Europe has worked systematically and with precision to segregate, humiliate and isolate its weakest members—if not based on race and ethnicity de jure, then certainly de facto.

      None of us facing charges for solidarity is a villain, but neither are we heroes. If it is alarming that acts of basic human decency are now criminalized, it is no less telling that we have sometimes been lauded by well-intentioned supporters as saints. But those of us who have stood in solidarity with migrants have not acted out of some exceptional reserve of bravery or selfless compassion for others. We acted in the knowledge that the way our rulers treat migrants offers a clue about how they would treat the rest of us if they thought they could get away with it. Politicians who target, scapegoat and exploit migrants, do so to shore up a violent, unequal world—a world in which we, too, have to live and by which we, too, may be disempowered.

      The criminalization of solidarity today is not only about stripping Europe’s most precarious of their means of survival. It is also an effort at foreclosing the forms of political organization that alliances between Europeans and migrants might engender; of barring the realization that in today’s Europe of rising xenophobia, racism, homophobia and austerity, the things that migrants seek—safety, comfort, dignity—are increasingly foreclosed to us Europeans as well.

      And in hounding migrants and those standing in solidarity with them, Europe is not only waging a brutal battle of suppression. It is also belying its fear of what might happen if we Europeans and migrants made common cause against Fortress Europe, and expose it for what it is: a system that would pick us off one by one, European and migrant alike, robbing each of us in turn of our freedoms, security and rights. We should show them that they are right to be afraid.

      Captain Pia Klemp is a vegan nature-lover, animal-rights and human-rights activist. Before joining search and rescue missions, Captain Pia Klemp was an activist for maritime conservation with Sea-Shepherd. Chloe Haralambous, a researcher and fellow rescue crew member, contributed to this op-ed.

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own.​​​​​

      https://www.newsweek.com/refugees-mediterranean-sea-rescue-criminalization-solidarity-1444618

  • A Notre-Dame, les failles de la protection incendie
    https://www.lemonde.fr/culture/article/2019/05/31/a-notre-dame-les-failles-de-la-protection-incendie_5470055_3246.html

    Des anciens chefs d’équipe de l’entreprise chargée de la sécurité du site avaient alerté leur hiérarchie et la direction régionale des affaires culturelles sur des dysfonctionnements de matériel et d’organisation.

    Personne ne voulait vraiment les écouter, ou les prendre au sérieux. « La cathédrale est debout depuis plus de huit cents ans, elle ne va pas brûler comme ça », recevaient régulièrement en guise de réponse les anciens chefs d’équipe du PC sécurité de Notre-Dame, qui, à longueur de notes et de rapports, alertaient sur un système de protection incendie qu’ils jugeaient trop bancal.

    Lundi 15 avril, lorsque les flammes ont ravagé la toiture de l’édifice sur lequel ils ont veillé des journées entières et dont ils connaissaient les moindres recoins, un sentiment de gâchis a gagné ces spécialistes de la sécurité, la plupart ex ou encore employés de la société privée Elytis.
    Les premiers éléments de l’enquête qui leur sont parvenus – laquelle écarte toujours, à ce jour, l’acte criminel – n’ont rien arrangé.

    Une mauvaise interprétation du signal au moment du déclenchement de l’alerte a considérablement retardé l’intervention des secours, comme l’ont déjà évoqué Marianne et Le Canard enchaîné. La personne en poste au PC ce jour-là, à peine formée, ne connaissait pas bien les lieux. Grâce à de nombreux témoignages, Le Monde a pu reconstituer cette demi-heure où tout a basculé et prendre la mesure, documents à l’appui, des failles du système que ces hommes dénonçaient.

    Notre-Dame, monument historique le plus visité d’Europe, est l’unique cathédrale en France à être dotée d’un PC sécurité. Le local est installé dans le presbytère, cette petite maison côté Seine qui ne jouxte pas tout à fait l’église mais abrite l’appartement du gardien.

    En 2014, lorsque la société Elytis s’y installe, deux de ses salariés sont prévus par vacation. Dans le jargon de la protection incendie, le Ssiap 2, chef d’équipe, veille sur le SSI (système de sécurité incendie), cette espèce de grande armoire sur laquelle des voyants et un petit écran s’allument en cas de « feu », ou de « dérangement ». Le Ssiap 1, lui, fait des rondes, et doit effectuer la « levée de doute », en moins de cinq minutes, lorsque l’alerte retentit. Mais, rapidement, le dispositif est allégé : un seul salarié Elytis par vacation et, en appui, un surveillant de la cathédrale formé aux bases de la sécurité incendie.

    Une demi-heure de perdue

    Lundi 15 avril, M. D., employé d’Elytis (nous avons fait le choix de ne pas publier les noms des agents) prend son poste à 7 h 30. A 15 h 30, comme personne ne le relève, il enchaîne avec la deuxième vacation, celle qui se termine à 23 heures. Ce sont ses premières heures au PC de Notre-Dame : il a déjà travaillé trois jours, depuis le début du mois, mais n’a encore jamais fait le tour complet du bâtiment.

    A 18 h 18, lorsque le voyant rouge « feu » s’allume, il alerte l’agent d’astreinte et lui lit ce qui s’affiche à l’écran : « combles nef/sacristie », suivi d’un code à plusieurs chiffres.

    C’est Jean-Paul B., l’agent de permanence ce soir-là. Ancien policier, depuis cinq ans à Notre-Dame, il connaît bien la cathédrale. En une minute à peine, le voilà à la sacristie. Rien à signaler dans les combles, annonce-t-il à la radio. Mais, à 18 h 23, l’origine de l’alerte n’étant toujours pas trouvée, les haut-parleurs diffusent le message d’évacuation générale. Quelque 600-800 visiteurs – à l’échelle du site, ce n’est pas la grande foule –, dont certains sont venus assister à la messe du soir, se retrouvent sur le parvis.

    Lundi 15 avril, M.D., employé d’Elytis, prend son poste à 7 h 30. Ce sont ses premières heures au PC de Notre-Dame
    Dans le même temps, averti du signal, Joachim, l’ancien chef sacristain et désormais gardien de la cathédrale, part rejoindre Jean-Paul B. à la sacristie. Employé de Notre-Dame depuis trente-cinq ans, il est de ceux qui connaissent le mieux le bâtiment. Et quasiment le seul à s’y retrouver lorsqu’il fallait, il y a encore quelques années, 700 clés pour ouvrir et fermer portes, grilles et portails de l’église. Depuis peu, deux-trois passes lui ont simplifié le travail.

    En passant devant le PC, le gardien demande à l’employé d’Elytis – qu’il sait tout nouveau à ce poste – d’appeler son responsable, Emmanuel P., pour savoir à quoi renvoie précisément le code de l’écran. A la sacristie, le gardien aide le surveillant à fouiller les bureaux du premier étage, mais toujours rien à signaler. Et pour cause : c’est dans les combles de la nef qu’il faut se rendre, explique Emmanuel P. d’Elytis en appelant Jean-Paul B. sur son portable. Il est alors 18 h 43.

    Mauvais pressentiment

    Les escaliers sud du transept sont les plus proches pour gagner les hauteurs. Les plus pratiques aussi, car ils mènent directement aux combles. Mais il faut bien cinq minutes au surveillant, accompagné cette fois du régisseur de la cathédrale, qui devait organiser une répétition de concert une fois la messe terminée, pour atteindre la charpente, la « forêt », comme étaient surnommées ces centaines de poutres multiséculaires qui soutenaient l’édifice. Gagné par un mauvais pressentiment, Joachim, le gardien, a préféré commencer à déverrouiller les portes de l’église au cas où les secours devraient intervenir.

    Inévitablement, l’enquête s’attardera sur ce délai et sur l’interprétation qui a été faite de l’alarme, retardant considérablement l’arrivée des pompiers

    L’ascension vers le toit est sportive. Vers 18 h 45, l’alarme générale retentit une seconde fois et les fidèles qu’on avait fait rentrer dix minutes plus tôt pour la messe sont à nouveau évacués. Lorsque les deux employés de Notre-Dame franchissent enfin la troisième porte qui sépare le rez-de-chaussée des combles et gravissent la dernière volée de marches, des flammes de plusieurs mètres dévorent déjà la charpente, non loin du mécanisme de l’horloge situé juste avant la croisée des transepts. L’horloge, dont les quatre cadrans donnaient l’heure aux passants, était remontée tous les mercredis matin de 254 coups de manivelle.

    « Il y a le feu, il y a le feu », alertent les deux hommes, à la radio, en dévalant les escaliers. Il est 18 h 48. Le PC sécurité prévient enfin les secours. Soit une demi-heure après la première détection. Inévitablement, l’enquête s’attardera sur ce délai et sur l’interprétation qui a été faite de l’alarme, retardant considérablement l’arrivée des pompiers. Les premiers engins arrivent un peu avant 19 heures, mais, très vite, il n’y a plus aucun espoir de sauver la toiture.

    Un seul salarié Elytis au poste de sécurité

    Nombreux sont les chefs d’équipe d’Elytis qui ont dénoncé, ces dernières années, une organisation défaillante au regard de ce qui pouvait être attendu pour un tel édifice.

    Certains d’entre eux ont détaillé aux enquêteurs les incidents relatés sur la main courante, ce grand registre où tout est inscrit : les prises de poste des agents, le nom des personnes à qui les clés sont remises, les détecteurs hors service, mais aussi les allers et venues des entreprises de travaux. Le 9 mars 2018, il est ainsi précisé que « la société Europe échafaudage [celle chargée d’édifier la structure autour de la flèche de la cathédrale] interviendra le lundi 12 mars sur le site ».

    Lorsque les dysfonctionnements étaient jugés trop sérieux, un rapport d’incident était rédigé par les chefs d’équipe d’Elytis puis adressé à leurs supérieurs hiérarchiques, ainsi qu’à la personne de la direction régionale des affaires culturelles (DRAC) chargée de cette question, la responsable unique de sécurité (RUS). Contactés, ces derniers n’ont pas donné suite aux sollicitations du Monde.

    Le passage de deux à un seul salarié Elytis au poste de sécurité est la critique qui revient le plus fréquemment dans les témoignages. Les premiers mois, en 2014, « le dispositif est bien dimensionné », explique Cee Elung, ancien de la société, le seul à bien vouloir s’exprimer en son nom depuis qu’il est aux prud’hommes après avoir été licencié par son ex-employeur. Mais, très vite, l’allègement du dispositif rend les vacations inconfortables.

    Avec la nouvelle organisation – un chef d’équipe Elytis secondé par un surveillant cathédrale –, les rondes de prévention sont devenues impossibles

    Avec la nouvelle organisation – un chef d’équipe Elytis secondé par un surveillant cathédrale –, s’entraîner à monter en haut des tours et les rondes de prévention sont devenus impossibles, déplorent les agents.
    Pourtant, la main courante du 9 février 2015 prouve l’utilité de celles-ci : « Pendant la ronde [dans la] charpente et la forêt, tours nord et sud : des mégots au sol partout : des matériaux de haut potentiel calorifique trouvés partout. Mr Benjamin Mouton [architecte] informé. Réponse de Mr Mouton : ça fait rien – rien peut passer que on ne peut pas maîtriser [sic]. Mr P. [Emmanuel P.] avisé. » Quant aux agents, ils n’ont désormais plus d’autre choix que de rester la journée entière, l’œil rivé sur l’écran. Les pauses sont un casse-tête, à moins de laisser le SSI sans surveillance.

    L’appareil n’est d’ailleurs pas 100 % fiable, écrivent-ils. Ici, relève un salarié, le 9 février 2015, c’est un déclencheur manuel qui renvoie au « magasin » alors qu’il a été déclenché dans la tour. Là, c’est la « sonorisation », qui ne fonctionne plus. Ce problème, très fréquent l’hiver et au printemps 2015, agace d’ailleurs Cee Elung. « Si une personne se présentait pour un renseignement ou une remise de clés, c’était autant de temps pendant lequel je quittais l’écran des yeux et que je prenais le risque de manquer une détection », explique-t-il. Le 27 mai 2015, il écrit avoir une énième fois « rendu compte » à son supérieur de ce « dysfonctionnement du SSI ». Mais ce dernier, ajoute-il, l’aurait alors accusé d’un « manque de loyauté envers Elytis » et de « mettre en danger leur contrat » avec Notre-Dame. Ambiance.

    Surveillance des travaux problématique

    Il arrive aussi que la relève ne se présente pas. Certaines fois sont plus problématiques que d’autres. Dimanche 18 octobre 2015, le chef d’équipe Elytis constatant qu’à 12 h 30 on lui rapporte passe et radio, et qu’« il n’y a pas d’agent Ssiap dans la cathédrale pour le reste de la journée/soirée », il signale l’incident en lettres rouges sur la main courante et rédige un rapport.

    Le PC sécurité est censé aussi être informé des chantiers en cours. Or, le 18 mai 2015, à 13 h 45, le chef d’équipe s’étonne que des « travaux de point chaud » aient été effectués « sans permis feu ». « Lors de rondes, l’agent trouve des ouvriers en train de découper et de faire du meulage. Après vérification, aucune confirmation avec le PC SSiap-NDP. Aucun email, document ou appel téléphonique pour nous informer ou aviser. »

    Avec la nouvelle organisation, la délivrance de ces permis feu et la surveillance des travaux sont devenues problématiques. « Contrairement à ce qui a pu être dit, personne n’allait vérifier le chantier après le départ des ouvriers », rapporte aujourd’hui un agent de la cathédrale.

    Tous ces hommes, anciens employés ou toujours en poste, déplorent avoir été si souvent pris de haut et déconsidérés. La première oreille attentive qu’ils aient réellement trouvée, c’est finalement celle de la brigade criminelle, ces dernières semaines.

  • Je viens seulement de réaliser la présence d’un bandeau sur toutes les vidéos provenant de RT :

    RT est financée entièrement ou partiellement par le gouvernement russe.

    avec lien vers la page Wikipédia.

    À l’initiative de qui ?

    Va-t-on bientôt voir les vidéos de Guillaume Meurice, ornées d’un bandeau ?

    France Inter est financée entièrement ou partiellement par le gouvernement français.

    • C’est juste la mise en place du « code de bonne conduite » annoncé par Zuzu contre les #fakenews. Je m’en suis rendue compte y’a quelques jour avec un bandeau sous un des flux d’infos locales qui alimentent ma page « karacole » : @indymedianantes : ça montrait la traduction automatique du résumé Wikipedia anglais... qui met l’accent sur les raids judiciaires qui ont attaqué plusieurs collectifs...

    • L’outil de lutte contre les fakes news de Youtube fait un lien entre Notre-Dame et le 11 Septembre — RT en français
      https://francais.rt.com/france/61089-outil-lutte-contre-fakes-news-youtube-lien-notre-dame-11-septembr

      YouTube, qui appartient à Google, a introduit cette fonction l’année dernière dans l’optique de lutter contre la propagation des théories dites complotistes, notamment celles qui remettent en cause la version officielle des attentats du 11 septembre. « Ces bandeaux sont générés de manière algorithmique et nos systèmes peuvent parfois se tromper », s’est justifié un porte-parole de la plateforme de partage, cité par l’AFP. Cette nouvelle fonctionnalité est pour l’instant « uniquement disponible aux Etats-Unis et en Corée du Sud », a-t-il ajouté, précisant que le bandeau en question avait été enlevé.

      Présent donc depuis l’année dernière aux États-Unis et en Corée du Sud et maintenant « ouvert » en France depuis peu (article du 16 avril où ce n’était visiblement pas le cas).

      le tweet cité :
      @BenjaminNorton, 15 avril 2019
      https://twitter.com/BenjaminNorton/status/1117875121656619013

    • L’audiovisuel public français irrité par une nouvelle fonctionnalité de YouTube (02/05/2019)
      https://www.lemonde.fr/actualite-medias/article/2019/05/02/l-audiovisuel-public-francais-irrite-par-une-nouvelle-fonctionnalite-de-yout

      Pour prévenir tout risque de propagande, la plate-forme américaine avertira l’utilisateur quand un média est doté d’un financement public. Le service public craint d’être assimilé à des chaînes proches du pouvoir.

      A moins d’un mois des élections européennes, les grandes plates-formes en ligne multiplient les garde-fous pour empêcher que des campagnes de manipulation de l’opinion puissent altérer le résultat du scrutin. Facebook, Google et Twitter sont attendus au tournant, après les interférences russes dans l’élection présidentielle américaine de 2016 sur les réseaux sociaux, ou la diffusion massive de fausses informations sur la messagerie WhatsApp, propriété de Facebook, par des partisans du candidat élu Jair Bolsonaro pendant la dernière campagne présidentielle au Brésil.

      Après Facebook et Twitter, Google vient, lui aussi, de dévoiler son arsenal pour déjouer les opérations de désinformation et les tentatives d’ingérence étrangères. En France et dans plusieurs pays d’Europe, les utilisateurs de son service vidéo YouTube verront bientôt s’afficher un bandeau sous les vidéos des médias publics ou gouvernementaux. Ce « label de transparence », qui précise le financement de l’éditeur et renvoie vers sa page Wikipédia, doit permettre aux internautes de « mieux comprendre les sources des actualités qu’ils regardent », a expliqué Google sur son blog, le 24 avril. En clair, de les aider à repérer les campagnes de propagande, même si le géant américain tient à préciser qu’il « ne s’agit pas d’un commentaire de YouTube sur la ligne éditoriale de l’éditeur ou de la vidéo, ni sur l’influence du gouvernement sur le contenu éditorial ».

      Si cette mesure existe déjà depuis un an aux Etats-Unis, en Irlande, au Royaume-Uni et en Inde – où elle s’applique aux chaînes YouTube de Franceinfo, d’Arte ou de Radio France –, son arrivée en France suscite l’embarras de l’audiovisuel public. « On assimile des médias du service public dans des démocraties à des médias d’Etat dans des régimes autoritaires », se désole un cadre de France Télévisions, sous couvert d’anonymat, en citant sans détour les déclinaisons françaises de Russia Today (RT) et Sputnik, deux médias financés par le gouvernement russe et régulièrement soupçonnés d’être sous son influence.

      Dans les pays où cette fonctionnalité est déjà active, YouTube distingue bien les « services audiovisuels publics » des « médias financés entièrement ou en partie par un gouvernement ». Mais, pour un autre dirigeant de France Télévisions, « ce n’est pas suffisant ». Selon lui, le simple fait que cette démarche « englobe » ces deux types d’acteurs risque « d’induire en erreur » le public, pour qui « la subtilité institutionnelle du service public à la française n’est pas forcément très claire ».

      De son côté, la présidente de RT France, Xenia Fedorova, dénonce, au contraire, cette « hiérarchie ». « Nous avons toujours été transparents sur le fait que RT France est financé par la Russie, tout comme France 24 est financé par l’Etat français ou la BBC par l’Etat britannique. »

      France Médias Monde (France 24, RFI, Monte Carlo Doualiya), juge « essentiel » que son « indépendance par rapport au pouvoir politique soit prise en compte dans les dénominations utilisées dans toutes les langues ». Le groupe, dont une large partie de l’audience est réalisée sur YouTube à l’étranger, n’était pas concerné par le dispositif dans les premiers pays où il a été lancé, de même que TV5 Monde. Contacté par Le Monde, Google explique que cela devrait désormais être le cas pour ces deux chaînes, sans détailler la liste définitive des médias ciblés.

      Plusieurs acteurs concernés déplorent, par ailleurs, le manque de concertation avec l’entreprise californienne. « C’est nous qui nous sommes rapprochés de Google après avoir découvert cette annonce dans une dépêche, fustige-t-on au sein de France Télévisions. Tout ce qui permet davantage de transparence va dans le bon sens, mais cela ne peut pas se faire dans le dos des éditeurs. »

      Les critères retenus suscitent aussi l’incompréhension. « Pourquoi ne pas afficher le même message quand un média est détenu par un actionnaire privé ? », interroge un cadre du groupe public, qui regrette une « transparence à géométrie variable ».

      Parmi les mesures prévues par Google à l’approche des élections européennes, YouTube va également « renforcer la visibilité » des éditeurs « faisant autorité », lorsqu’un événement important se produit. Reste à savoir si cette mesure, en bénéficiant aux grands médias publics, suffira à apaiser leur mécontentement.

    • Deux poids, deux mesures : YouTube instaure une nouvelle fonctionnalité discriminant RT — RT en français (article du 17/05/2019, jour de l’entrée en fonction du dispositif)
      https://francais.rt.com/france/62164-deux-poids-deux-mesures-youtube-instaure-nouvelles-fonctionnalite

      YouTube labellise désormais les médias d’Etat sous leurs vidéos, mais avec une différence sémantique notable : RT France est ainsi « financée par le gouvernement russe », quand France 24 ou la BBC sont des « chaînes de service public ».

      Le 17 mai, YouTube a introduit une nouvelle fonctionnalité, en ajoutant un bandeau sous les vidéos des médias publics ou gouvernementaux. Ce « label de transparence », selon les termes de Google (à qui YouTube appartient), indique le financement de l’éditeur de la vidéo, et renvoie à la page Wikipédia qui lui est consacrée. Selon Google, le but est de permettre aux internautes de « mieux comprendre les sources des actualités qu’ils regardent ».

      Et Google de préciser qu’il ne s’agit en rien d’un commentaire de la part de YouTube sur la ligne éditoriale de l’éditeur ou de la vidéo, ni sur l’influence du gouvernement en question sur le contenu éditorial. En d’autres termes, il ne s’agirait que d’une information à caractère purement objectif.

      Pourtant à y regarder de plus près, tout le monde n’est pas logé à la même enseigne, suivant le pays d’origine de son financement. Ainsi, RT, qui n’a jamais caché être financé par la Russie, dispose désormais d’un bandeau indiquant qu’elle est « entièrement ou partiellement financée par le gouvernement russe ».

      Or la différence sémantique est notable concernant France 24 ou encore la BBC, dont le financement dépend respectivement de la France et du Royaume-Uni, qui sont elles qualifiées de « chaînes de service public » française et britannique.

      La présidente de RT France, Xenia Federova s’inquiète : « Nous sommes plus préoccupés par le deux poids, deux mesures qu’induit cette procédure. Nous avons constaté une inéquité dans l’application de ces bandeaux. Certains médias étant ainsi labellisés, tandis que d’autres, avec le même mode de financement, ne le sont pas. De plus, même parmi ceux qui sont labellisés, une hiérarchie persiste. Par exemple, le fait que BBC News soit qualifié de "service public", et non pas "financé par le gouvermenent", même s’il reçoit un financement substantiel directement du Royaume-Uni. »

      Elle rappelle également que « RT France n’a jamais caché la source de son financement ». Avant d’ajouter : « Nous étions, dès le début, très clairs et transparents sur le fait que RT France est financée par la Russie. Tout comme France 24 est financée par l’Etat français ou la BBC l’Etat britannique. Dans le même temps, le lancement de cette initiative en France juste avant les élections européennes pourrait semer la confusion pour le public en créant une opinion erronée selon laquelle les sources de financement provenant du secteur privé ou de grands groupes sont meilleures – plus légitimes, crédibles ou objectives – que d’autres, publiques. Le critère pour juger un média étant alors uniquement la source de financement et non la réalité de son travail ou la qualité des contenus. »

      Une inquiétude d’autant plus légitime que les bandeaux en question renvoient vers la fiche Wikipédia des médias concernés. Or, le moins que l’on puisse dire, c’est que l’objectivité de l’encyclopédie en ligne sur le sujet prête à débat. Concernant RT, Wikipédia donne en effet une définition générale qui fait froid dans le dos : « RT est généralement considéré par les médias et experts occidentaux comme un instrument de propagande au service du gouvernement russe et de sa politique étrangère, se livrant à la désinformation, proche de l’extrême droite sur internet, complotiste et antisémite. »

      On notera que l’avis repose donc sur les médias, qui par définition sont les concurrents de RT, et celui d’obscurs « experts occidentaux ». Le son de cloche est tout autre quand on s’intéresse à la fiche Wikipédia de la BBC qui dispose selon l’encyclopédie, « d’une réputation d’excellence culturelle ».

      Si l’intention de YouTube est louable – comprendre qui tient les cordons de la bourse dans le paysage médiatique permet effectivement d’en avoir une lecture plus avisée –, les mesures prises à l’heure actuelle par la plateforme risquent d’avoir l’effet opposé de celui recherché.

  • Une page oubliée de l’histoire : comment 12 000 volontaires palestiniens se sont battus aux côtés des Britanniques durant la seconde guerre mondiale.

    12,000 Palestinians fought for U.K. in WWII alongside Jewish volunteers, historian finds - Israel News - Haaretz.com
    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-historian-12-000-palestinians-fought-for-u-k-in-wwii-alongside-jew

    In 2015, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sparked an uproar when he claimed that Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini was the one who’d urged Hitler to annihilate the Jews. In the wake of the criticism this elicited, Netanyahu said his intention was not to absolve Hitler of responsibility for the Holocaust, but to note that “the Mufti played an important role in the Final Solution.”

    But it turns out that there was another side to the story that also escaped mention by Netanyahu, the historian’s son: the forgotten role played by thousands of Palestinians who did not heed the Mufti of Jerusalem’s call to support the Axis countries, and went so far as to take up arms to fight the Nazis, often shoulder to shoulder with young Jews from Mandatory Palestine.

    Professor Mustafa Abbasi, a historian at Tel Hai Academic College, has spent years tracing their story. Having recently published an academic article on the subject, this week he suggested an opposite narrative to the one that Netanyahu put forward. The prime minister had sought to paint the Palestinians as supporters of the Third Reich, but Abbasi says, “The Mufti did not find a receptive audience among the Palestinians for his call to aid the Nazis. Not at all.”

    >> Read more: Moments before their fatal mission, Jewish WWII soldiers took these incredible photos of Egypt ■ 76 years later, stories of Jewish soldiers killed in Nazi bombing can finally be told

    The subject of Abbasi’s research is unusual. Many studies have been published about Jewish volunteerism in the war against the Nazis, which reached a peak with the formation of the Jewish Brigade. But “the thousands of Arab volunteers are hardly mentioned and sometimes the record is often distorted,” Abbasi says.

    In an article in the latest issue of the periodical Cathedra (“Palestinians Fighting the Nazis: The Story of Palestinian Volunteers in World War II”), he explains why these Palestinian fighters have been left out of the history books.

    On the one hand, Zionist historians naturally placed an emphasis on the role played by Jewish volunteers in the fight against the Nazis. On the other hand, their Palestinian counterparts were focusing on the struggle against British rule and were not eager to glorify the names of those who cooperated with Britain not so many years after the British put down the Arab Revolt of 1936-1939, and thereby indirectly helped the Jews establish a state.
    Stay up to date: Sign up to our newsletter
    Email*

    “Neither side wished to highlight this subject,” says Professor Abbasi. “But I think it’s the historian’s job to be faithful to the sources and to try to describe history as it was, without being hostage to any national narrative that would limit him and prevent him from writing history freely.”
    Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem
    Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, greeting Muslim Waffen-SS volunteers with a Nazi salute, November 1943. Bundesarchiv / Wikimedia Commons

    One has to wonder why no organization was ever established to commemorate the actions of these Palestinian volunteers. “Many of them were killed and many others are still listed as missing. But no memorial has ever been established for them,” says Abbasi. In fact, the records of the Palestinian volunteers, along with much of their personal archives and papers, have disappeared, much of it lost in the War of Independence.

    Over the last few years, Abbasi was able to learn of their story in Palestinian newspapers from the Mandate era, in memoirs and personal journals, and through interviews he conducted with a few of the last remaining volunteers who are still alive. He also collected material from various British archives, from the Zionist Archive, and the archives of the Haganah and the IDF.

    Abbasi estimates that about 12,000 young Palestinians enlisted in the British Army in World War II. Hundreds became POWs, many others (the exact figure is unknown) were killed. “Compared to other peoples, this is not an insignificant number,” he says, and also points out that, unlike other groups, the Palestinians volunteered for the British Army from the first stage of the war.

    Initially, the Palestinian and Jewish volunteers served in mixed units. “They received training and drilled at the same bases and in many instances fought shoulder to shoulder, and were also taken prisoner together,” says Abbasi. And as reported here two years ago, the proximity of the Jewish and Palestinian fighters sometimes led to unusual outcomes, as in the case of Shehab Hadjaj, a Palestinian who enlisted in the British Army, was taken prisoner in Germany and died in 1943. To this day, he is listed at Mount Herzl as “a casualty of Israel’s wars” because someone mistakenly thought his surname indicated that he was Jewish.

    “Relations among the fighters were generally good, and if there was any friction it was mainly over service conditions, like mail and food,” Abbasi says. However, there were certain key differences between the two groups, too. For example, while the Jews were united in their goal of fighting the Nazis to promote the establishment of the Jewish state, the Palestinians “had no clear national agenda,” Abbasi writes. For this reason, unlike the Jews, they did not seek to form separate Palestinian units and there was no “Palestinian Brigade” parallel to the Jewish Brigade, in which thousands of Jews from Mandatory Palestine served.

    So who were the Palestinians who volunteered for the British Army to fight the Nazis? Abbasi says they mostly came from the Palestinian elite and that, contrary to what many think, represented “an important and central part of the Palestinian public.” A part of the public that believed it was necessary to stand by Britain at this time, and to temporarily put aside the Palestinian national aspirations – akin to the Jewish idea to “fight Hitler as if there were no White Paper, and fight the White Paper as if there were no Hitler.”

    They did this at a time when the Mufti of Jerusalem had left Palestine for exile in the Arab countries and Europe, where he met with Hitler and congratulated the Muslim volunteers of the Free Arab Legion – an Arab unit established in the army of Nazi Germany. “He left Palestine for a decade in 1937. What kind of leader abandons his people at such a time?” Abbasi wonders. “He had no influence on the public. He was detached and the public was already tired of him and his methods. They didn’t see him as a leader,” he says. “Anyone who says differently is distorting history,” he adds in a not so subtle dig at certain politicians.

    In his research, he documented pro-British propaganda conferences that were held from 1940 on in Abu Dis (next to Jerusalem), in Jenin, in villages in the Nablus area, in Tul Karm and in Lod. Among the supporters of Britain’s fight against the Nazis were the mayors of Nablus and Gaza. Radio Palestine broadcast the comments of an Egyptian writer who said, “The war is between the lofty and humane values represented by England and the forces of darkness represented by the Nazis.”
    Britain’s then-Home Secretary Winston Churchill, right, escorted by High Commissioner Herbert Samuel in Jerusalem during the British Mandate era, March 1921.
    Britain’s then-Home Secretary Winston Churchill, right, escorted by High Commissioner Herbert Samuel in Jerusalem during the British Mandate era, March 1921.GPO

    Motivations for volunteering were varied. “Some did it for ideological reasons, out of opposition to the Nazi ideology and loyalty to the British and the values that they represented,” says Abbasi. This motivation was common among upper middle class and highly educated Palestinian volunteers from urban backgrounds. Rural Palestinians were motivated largely by financial reasons. “And there were also those who were seeking adventure and wanted a chance to travel abroad,” he says.

    Abbasi found that some Palestinian women also volunteered to fight the Nazis. Almost 120 young women did so as part of the

    Auxiliary Territorial Service, the women’s branch of the British Army, alongside Jewish women. A British recruiting poster in Arabic, published in the Falastin newspaper in January 1942, read: “She couldn’t stop thinking about contribution and sacrifice, she felt ongoing pride and exaltation of spirit – when she did what she saw as her sacred duty for her nation and its sons. When your country is crying out to you and asking for your service, when your country makes it plain that our Arab men need your love and support, and when your country reminds you of how cruel the enemy is – when your country is calling you, can you stand by and do nothing?”

    Abbasi is one of the only researchers in Palestinian society who is studying this area, which was also the subject of a 2015 article by Dalia Karpel in Haaretz Magazine. He came to it thanks to his maternal grandfather, Sa’id Abbasi, who was one of the volunteers in the British Army during the war. “The family didn’t talk about it, until one day when I asked my grandmother why there was such a big age difference between her children,” he says. “Her answer was: ‘Don’t remind me of the time your grandfather left me for so many years.’” Abbasi decided to find out more about that time, and came to see that his family story was part of his people’s history.

    In the future, he hopes, the original material he has collected will be developed into a book that, for the first time, will tell the optimistic story of a rare moment in history in which Jews and Palestinians joined forces for a lofty shared goal.
    Ofer Aderet

    Ofer Aderet

    Haaretz Correspondent

  • Pour archivage... un #rapport de Migreurop sur les « #frontières assassines » de l’Europe... c’était 2009, et on parlait notamment dans ce rapport des #push-back (#refoulements) dans la région de l’#Evros :


    http://www.migreurop.org/IMG/pdf/Rapport-Migreurop-oct2009-def.pdf

    Je le partage aujourd’hui car ce qui est raconté ici, donc autour de 2009, se répète dans l’Evros autour des années 2012-2013 (j’en avais parlé sur @visionscarto : https://visionscarto.net/a-kumkapi-avant-de-passer-la-frontiere) et on en reparle aujourd’hui, v. notamment : https://seenthis.net/messages/710720

    #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Grèce #Turquie

  • Revue de presse du jour comprenant l’actualité nationale et internationale de ce vendredi 31 mai 2019
    https://www.crashdebug.fr/revue-de-presse/16078-revue-de-presse-du-jour-comprenant-l-actualite-nationale-et-interna

    Bonjour à toutes et à tous, j’espère que vous allez bien. Veuillez trouver ci-dessous la Revue de presse de notre Contributeur anonyme, et bien sûr plus de titres dans la Defcon Room,

    Amitiés,

    L’Amourfou / Contributeur anonyme / Chalouette / Doudou

    La Revue de presse du jour comprenant les informations de ce qui fait l’actualité française et internationale du 27 au 29 mai 2019 vues par notre contributeur anonyme.

    DON : https://www.paypal.me/revuedepresse ou https://www.paypal.com/pools/c/7ZGVkA4zY3

    EUROPE :..précarité explose...l’emploi n’est plus une garantie contre la pauvreté

    https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2019/05/21/la-precarite-en-toile-de-fond-de-la-campagne-des-europeennes_5465143_3210.ht

    https://fr.express.live/emploi-nevite-plus-la-pauvrete

    FRANCE (...)

  • UK: Johnson ordered to face accusations that he lied to the public ...
    https://diasp.eu/p/9129729

    UK: Johnson ordered to face accusations that he lied to the public

    Source: National Public Radio [US state media]

    “A British court is ordering Boris Johnson to face accusations that while holding public office, he lied in order to sway voter opinion on Brexit. The case was brought by a ‘private prosecutor’ who says Johnson abused the public’s trust while holding official posts. Johnson has quickly emerged as a front-runner to replace Prime Minister Theresa May, who is resigning next month. But with today’s ruling, he must also face charges of misconduct in public office. The case was brought by Marcus Ball — who has raised more than $300,000 to fund his effort. Ball says Johnson is guilty of ‘misleading the public by endorsing and making statements about the cost of European Union (...)

    • – lien propre :

      http://rationalreview.com/archives/337859

      – article relié :
      https://www.npr.org/2019/05/29/727832275/boris-johnson-is-ordered-to-face-accusations-that-he-lied-to-the-public

      #UK #EU #UE #Europe #Brexit

      A British court is ordering Boris Johnson to face accusations that while holding on Brexit. The case was brought by a “private prosecutor” who says Johnson abused the public’s trust while holding official posts.

      Johnson has quickly emerged as a front-runner to replace Prime Minister Theresa May, who is resigning next month. But with today’s ruling, he must also face charges of misconduct in public office. The case was brought by Marcus Ball — who has raised more than $300,000 to fund his effort.

      Ball says Johnson is guilty of “misleading the public by endorsing and making statements about the cost of European Union Membership, which he knew to be false.”

      Johnson is currently a member of Parliament. He resigned as the U.K’s foreign secretary last summer, in a protest against May’s plans to leave the European Union. He has also served as London’s mayor.

      Johnson has repeatedly made the false claim that Britain paid £350 million each week to be in the European Union. The claim was famously touted on a Vote Leave campaign bus during the run-up to the Brexit vote.

      In 2017, the head of the U.K.’s Statistics Authority sent Johnson a letter expressing his disappointment and telling Johnson it was “a clear misuse of official statistics” to say leaving the EU would free up £350 million (more than $440 million) weekly to spend on national healthcare.

      In 2018, Johnson acknowledged that the figure was inaccurate — but he said it was “grossly underestimated.”

      On his crowdfunding page, Ball stresses that he’s not trying to stop Brexit from happening. Instead, he’s targeting what he sees as the real threat facing society: lying, particularly the falsehoods that flow from those in power.

      “Lying in politics is the biggest problem. It is far more important than Brexit and certainly a great deal older,” Ball wrote. “Historically speaking, lying in politics has assisted in starting wars, misleading voters and destroying public trust in the systems of democracy and government.”

      He added, “When politicians lie, democracy dies.”

      Ball says he wants to set a precedent by making it illegal for an elected official to lie about financial matters. If he’s successful, he says, the case could have a wide ripple effect.

      “Because of how the English common law works, it’s possible that such a precedent could be internationally persuasive by influencing the law in Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Canada and India.”

      In Britain’s legal system, private prosecutions can be started by any person or company with the time and money to do so.

      As the London-based law firm Edmonds Marshall McMahon (which was once involved in Ball’s case) states, “Other than the fact the prosecution is brought by a private individual or company, for all other purposes they proceed in exactly the same way as if the prosecution had been brought by the Crown.”

    • La source du mal est le principe de substitution, autorisé en Europe en 2003 → https://blog.monolecte.fr/2005/01/26/merci-pour-le-chocolat

      Genre, les biscuits de ton enfance, ils ont toujours la même gueule, le même nom et tu jugerais le même goût (spoiler alert : en fait, non !), sauf qu’au lieu du biscuit au beurre et au chocolat de ton enfance, tu te tapes un gruau à cochon, essentiellement composé d’huile de palme, d’amidon de maïs et de sirop de glucose-fructose.

      Ces ingrédients n’ont absolument pas les mêmes qualités nutritionnelles que ceux qu’ils remplacent, mais surtout, ils sont absolument partout. De l’entrée au dessert, en gros, tu ne manges que ça. Un mélange à engraisser les cochons, sans qualités ni variété. Du coup, ton corps est carencé, mais à un point que nous n’imaginons pas et pour obtenir les nutriments dont il a besoin, il t’envoie des messages de faim. Et donc, tu continues à bouffer du magma à cochon, à être de plus ne plus carencé et à avoir faim.

      On sent que ça va mal finir, cette histoire, non ?

      Ben c’est exactement ce qui arrive.

      Et si je le sais, quelles chances que tous ceux qui ont participé à la mise en place de ce système l’ignorent ?

  • Jambon, lasagnes, sodas : l’abus d’aliments « ultra-transformés » augmente le risque d’AVC, selon une nouvelle étude (FranceBleu)
    https://www.crashdebug.fr/actualites-france/16077-jambon-lasagnes-sodas-l-abus-d-aliments-ultra-transformes-augmente-

    L’abus de plats industriels "ultra-transformés" augmente le risque cardiovasculaire et de décès, selon les conclusions provisoires de deux études européennes publiées jeudi.

    Image d’illustration, alimentation, industrie des plats cuisinés (c) Maxppp - Jean-François FREY

    Ces dernières années, les chercheurs avaient déjà établi un lien entre les aliments ultra transformés et l’augmentation des risques d’obésité, d’hypertension artérielle, voire de cancers. Dans ces deux nouvelles études publiées jeudi et menées sur 120.000 volontaires en Europe, ils se sont penchés sur les maladies cardiovasculaires (accident vasculaire cérébral, infarctus...). Ils ont regardé ce qu’on appelle les aliments ultra-transformés : sodas, barres chocolatées, lasagnes.

    Nugget, soupe en poudre, (...)

    #En_vedette #Actualités_françaises

  • #CHAM, Memories of colonial slavery: a photographic investigation

    I started the Cham (1) project with the urgency of answering this question: How was made possible the deportation of twelve million men and women from African continent to the Americas and Europe. How was organized the social, political and moral consensus around the slave trade for four centuries, and then, how it was possible to erase this tragedy of the collective memory of the West countries (and not only), even in textbooks? Have the memories of slavery, discarded by the rails of official history, survived to this day and, if so, in what forms, in what practices and places? How these memories, repressed by some, preserved by others, define our everyday relationships, our perception of others and the place of everyone in society?


    http://www.nicolalocalzo.com/en/the-cham-project

    #photographie #esclavage #mémoire #Nicola_Lo_Calzo #traite #traite_négrière #commerce_triangulaire

    ping @albertocampiphoto @reka @philippe_de_jonckheere

  • Hundreds of Europeans ‘criminalised’ for helping migrants – as far right aims to win big in European elections

    Elderly women, priests and firefighters among those arrested, charged or ‘harassed’ by police for supporting migrants, with numbers soaring in the past 18 months.

    These cases – compiled from news reports and other records from researchers, NGOs and activist groups, as well as new interviews across Europe – suggest a sharp increase in the number of people targeted since the start of 2018. At least 100 people were arrested, charged or investigated last year (a doubling of that figure for the preceding year).


    https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/hundreds-of-europeans-criminalised-for-helping-migrants-new-data-show
    #délit_de_solidarité #solidarité #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Europe
    #Allemagne #criminalisation #statistiques #chiffres #Suisse #Danemark #Espagne #France #journalisme #journalistes #presse #Grèce #Calais

    #Norbert_Valley #Christian_Hartung #Miguel_Roldan #Lise_Ramslog #Claire_Marsol #Anouk_Van_Gestel #Lisbeth_Zornig_Andersen #Daphne_Vloumidi #Mikael_Lindholm #Fernand_Bosson #Benoit_Duclois #Mussie_Zerai #Manuel_Blanco #Tom_Ciotkowski #Rob_Lawrie

    ping @isskein @karine4

    • The creeping criminalisation of humanitarian aid

      At the heart of the trial of a volunteer with American migrant aid group No More Deaths that began in Arizona last week lies the question of when humanitarian aid crosses the line and becomes a criminal offence.

      Scott Warren, 37, faces three felony charges after he helped two undocumented migrants by providing them food, shelter, and transportation over three days in January 2018 – his crime, prosecutors say, wasn’t helping people but hiding them from law enforcement officers.

      Whichever way the case goes, humanitarian work appears to be under growing threat of criminalisation by certain governments.

      Aid organisations have long faced suspensions in difficult operating environments due to geopolitical or domestic political concerns – from Pakistan to Sudan to Burundi – but they now face a new criminalisation challenge from Western governments, whether it’s rescue missions in the Mediterranean or toeing the US counter-terror line in the Middle East.

      As aid workers increasingly find themselves in the legal crosshairs, here’s a collection of our reporting to draw attention to this emerging trend.

      http://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news/2019/06/07/creeping-criminalisation-humanitarian-aid

      Dans l’article une liste d’articles poubliés dans The New Humanitarian sur le délit de solidarité un peu partout dans le #monde...

    • European activists fight back against ‘criminalisation’ of aid for migrants and refugees

      More and more people are being arrested across Europe for helping migrants and refugees. Now, civil society groups are fighting back against the 17-year-old EU policy they say lies at the root of what activists and NGOs have dubbed the “criminalisation of solidarity”.

      http://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news-feature/2019/06/20/european-activists-fight-criminalisation-aid-migrants-refugees

      Et le #rapport:
      Crackdown on NGOs and volunteers helping refugees and other migrants


      http://www.resoma.eu/sites/resoma/resoma/files/policy_brief/pdf/Final%20Synthetic%20Report%20-%20Crackdown%20on%20NGOs%20and%20volunteers%20h

    • Documentan incremento de amenazas contra defensores de migrantes tras acuerdo con EU

      Tras el acuerdo migratorio que México y los Estados Unidos firmaron el pasado junio, se han incrementado los riesgos y amenazas que sufren las y los activistas que defienden a migrantes en Centroamérica, México y Estados Unidos. Esa es la conclusión del informe “Defensores sin muros: personas defensoras de Derechos Humanos criminalizadas en Centroamérica, México y Estados Unidos”, elaborado por la ONG Frontline Defenders, el Programa de Asuntos Migratorios de la Universidad Iberoamericana y la Red Nacional de Organismos Civiles Todos los Derechos para Todas y Todos. El documento identifica 69 eventos de detención, amenazas, acoso, difamación, agresión, deportación, vigilancia o negación de entrada a un país. La mayoría de ellos, 41, tuvieron lugar durante 2019, según un listado que acompaña al informe. Uno de los grandes hallazgos: la existencia de colaboración entre México y Estados Unidos para cerrar el paso a los migrantes y perseguir a los activistas. “Los gobiernos tienen relaciones tensas, difíciles, complicadas. México y Estados Unidos están pasando por uno de sus peores momentos en bilaterales, pero cuando se trata de cooperar para restringir Derechos Humanos hay colaboración absoluta”, dijo Carolina Jiménez, de Amnistía Internacional. Entre estas colaboraciones destaca un trabajo conjunto de ambos países para identificar a activistas y periodistas que quedaron fichados en un registro secreto. El informe se presentó ayer en la Ciudad de México, al mismo tiempo en el que el presidente estadounidense, Donald Trump, habló ante la asamblea general de las Naciones Unidas, agradeciendo al presidente Andrés Manuel López Obrador “por la gran cooperación que estamos recibiendo y por poner a 27 mil soldados en nuestra frontera sur”.

      https://www.educaoaxaca.org/documentan-incremento-de-amenazas-contra-defensores-de-migrantes-tras-a
      #Amérique_centrale #Mexique

    • Migration and the Shrinking Humanitarian Space in Europe

      As of October 10th, 1071 deaths of migrants were recorded in the Mediterranean in 2019.[1] In their attempt to save lives, civilian maritime search and rescue organisations like Sea Watch or Proactive Open Arms have gained high levels of media attention over the last years. Cases such as the arrest of the captain of the Sea Watch 3, Carola Rackete, in June 2019 or the three weeks odyssey of Open Arms in August 2019 dominate the media and public discourse in Europe. The closing of ports in Italy, Spain and Malta, the confiscation of vessels, legal proceedings against crew members alongside tight migration policies and anti-trafficking laws have led to a shrinking space for principled humanitarian action in Europe. While maritime search and rescue (SAR) activities receive most of the attention, focusing solely on them prevents one from seeing the bigger picture: a general shrinking of humanitarian space in Europe. In the following, the analysis will shed some light on patterns in which the space for assisting and protecting people on the move is shrinking both on land and at sea.
      Migration and Humanitarian Action

      Migration is not a new phenomenon. Throughout history people have left their homes to seek safety and pursue a better life. Yet, due to increasing human mobility and mounting crisis migration the number of people on the move is consistently rising (Martin, Weerasinghe, and Taylor 2014). In 2019, The International Organisation for Migration (IOM) documents more than 258 million international migrants worldwide, compared to 214 million in 2009.[2]

      This number is composed of a variety of different migrant groups, such as students, international labour migrants or registered refugees. Based on a distinction between voluntary and involuntary migration, not all these groups are considered people in need of international protection and humanitarian assistance (Léon 2018). Accordingly, unlike refugees or internally displaced persons (IDPs) migrants generally fall out of the humanitarian architecture.[3] Yet, notwithstanding the reasons for migrating, people on the move can become vulnerable to human trafficking, sexual exploitation and other forms of abuse during their journey. They strand at borders and live in deplorable conditions (Léon 2018).

      The UN Secretary General’s Agenda for Humanity therefore stresses the importance of addressing the vulnerabilities of migrants. This entails providing more regular and legal pathways for migration but also requires “a collective and comprehensive response to displacement, migration and mobility”, including the provision of humanitarian visas and protection for people on the move who do not fall under the narrow confines of the 1951 Refugee Convention.[4] The view that specific vulnerabilities of migrants are to be integrated into humanitarian response plans is reflected in the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement’s approach to migration, which is strictly humanitarian and focuses on the needs and vulnerabilities of migrants irrespective of their legal status, type, or category (Linde 2009).

      Thereby, the term ‘migrant’ is deliberately kept broad to include the needs of labour migrants, vulnerabilities due to statelessness or being considered irregular by public authorities (ibid.). Despite this clear commitment to the protection of people on the move, migrants remain a vulnerable group with a high number losing their lives on migratory routes or going missing. Home to three main migratory routes, the Mediterranean is considered one of the world’s deadliest migration routes.[5]

      When in 2015 an unprecedented number of people made their way into Europe this exposed the unpreparedness of the EU and its member states in reacting quickly and effectively to the needs of people on the move. A report by the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) on refugees and vulnerable migrants in Europe concludes that “Europe’s actual humanitarian response must be judged a failure in many respects; basic needs have not been met and vulnerable people have not been protected” (De Largy 2016).

      For humanitarian organisations with experience in setting up and managing camps in countries of the Global South, managing the humanitarian response in their own backyard seems to have posed significant challenges. When more than one million people arrived in 2015, most international humanitarian organisations had no operational agreement with European states, no presences in affected areas, no funding lines for European activities and no established channels to mobilise resources (ibid.). This has led to protection gaps in the humanitarian response, which, in many cases, have been filled by activists, volunteers and civil society actors. Despite a number of factors, including the EU-Turkey deal, arrangements with Libya and toughening border controls, have since lead to a decline in the number of people arriving in Europe, sustained humanitarian action is needed and these actors continue to provide essential services to refugees and vulnerable migrants. However, with hostile attitudes towards migrants on the rise, and the marked effects of several successful smear campaigns, a number of organisations and civil society actors have taken it upon themselves to bring much needed attention to the shrinking space for civil society.
      Shrinking Humanitarian Space in Europe

      The shrinking space for civil society action is also impacting on the space for principled humanitarian action in Europe. While no agreed upon definition of humanitarian space[6] exists, the concept is used in reference to the physical access that humanitarian organisations have to the affected population, the nature of the operating environment for the humanitarian response including security conditions, and the ability of humanitarian actors to adhere to the core principles of humanitarian action (Collinson and Elhawary 2012: 2). Moreover, the concept includes the ability of affected people to reach lifesaving assistance and protection. The independence of humanitarian action from politics is central to this definition of humanitarian space, emphasising the need to adhere to the principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence as well as to maintain a clear distinction between the roles and functions of humanitarian in contrast to those of military and political actors (OCHA, 2003). Humanitarian actors within this space strive to achieve their mission of saving lives and alleviating suffering by seeking ongoing access to the affected population.

      Though the many organisations, volunteers and individuals that work on migration issues in Europe would not all self-identify or be considered purely humanitarian organisations, many of them provide life-saving services to people on the move. Thus, the humanitarian space is occupied by a diversity of actors, including human rights organisations, solidarity networks, and concerned individuals alongside more traditional humanitarian actors (Léon 2018).

      Referring to the limited room for agency and restricted access to the affected population, the shrinking humanitarian space in Europe has been linked to the spreading of populism, restrictive migration policies, the securitisation of migration and the criminalisation of humanitarian action (Hammerl 2019). These developments are by no means limited to Europe. Other regions of the world witness a similar shrinking of the humanitarian space for assisting people on the move. In Europe and elsewhere migration and asylum policies have to a great extent determined the humanitarian space. Indeed, EU migration policies have negatively affected the ways in which humanitarian actors are able to carry out their work along the migration routes, limiting the space for principled humanitarian action (Atger 2019). These policies are primarily directed at combatting human trafficking and smuggling, protecting European borders and national security interests. Through prioritising security over humanitarian action, they have contributed to the criminalisation of individuals and organisations that work with people on the move (ibid.). As has been particularly visible in the context of civilian maritime SAR activities, the criminalisation of humanitarian action, bureaucratic hurdles, and attacks on and harassment of aid workers and volunteers have limited the access to the affected population in Europe.
      Criminalisation

      The criminalisation of migration that has limited the space for principled humanitarian action is a process that occurs along three interrelated lines: first, the discursive criminalisation of migration; second, the interweaving of criminal law and policing for migration management purposes; and finally, the use of detention as a way of controlling people on the move (Hammerl 2019, citing Parkin). With media and public discourse asserting that migrants are ‘illegal’, people assisting them have been prosecuted on the grounds of facilitating illegal entry, human trafficking and smuggling.

      Already back in 2002, the Cypriot NGO Action for Equality, Support and Anti-Racism (KISA) was prosecuted under criminal law after it had launched a financial appeal to cover healthcare costs for a migrant worker (Fekete 2009). This is just been one of six cases in which the Director of an organisation has been arrested for his work with migrants.[7] While KISA takes a clear human rights stance, these trends are also observable for humanitarian activities such as providing food or shelter. Individuals and organisations providing assistance and transportation to migrants have faced legal prosecution in France and Belgium for human smuggling in 2018. Offering shelter to migrants in transit has led to arrests of individuals accused of human trafficking (Atger 2019).[8] The criminalisation of civilian maritime SAR activities has led to the arrest and prosecution of crew members and the seizing of rescue vessels.

      The tension between anti-smuggling and anti-trafficking laws and humanitarian action is a result of the European ‘Facilitators’ Package’ from 2002 that defines the facilitation of unauthorised entry, transit and residence.[9] Though the Directive and its implementation in national legislatures foresees humanitarian exemptions[10], the impact of these laws and regulations on the humanitarian space has been critical. Lacking clarity, these laws have been implemented differently by EU member states and created a sense of uncertainty for individuals and organisations assisting migrants, who now risk criminal prosecution (Carrera et al. 2018). In several EU member states with humanitarian exemptions, humanitarian actors were reportedly prosecuted (ibid.). A case in point is Greece, which has a specific humanitarian exemption applying to maritime SAR activities and the facilitation of entry for asylum seekers rescued at sea. Despite sounding promising at first, this has not prevented the prosecution of volunteer crew members of the Emergency Response Centre International (ERCI) due to the existence of two legal loopholes. The first of these works on the basis that rescuers are not able to identify who is in need of international protection, and second, the legal framework contains an exemption from punishment, but not prosecution.[11]
      Bureaucratic Hurdles

      Besides the criminalisation of humanitarian activities, across Europe – predominantly at borders – administrative decisions and rules have narrowed the space for humanitarian action (Atger 2019). In countries such as France, Germany, Hungary, Spain and Italy, laws and regulations prevent organisations from accessing reception centres or transit zones between borders (Hammerl 2019, Amnesty 2019). A reduction of financial support and tighter legal requirements for operation further hinder organisations to assist people on the move (Atger 2019). In the case of maritime SAR operations, NGOs had to stop their operations due to de-flagging of rescue ships as ordered by EU member state authorities.[12]

      Access to people on the move is obstructed in manifold ways and organisations face a mix of intimidations strategies and bureaucratic obstacles in their mission to deliver aid (Léon 2018). In Germany, new asylum policies in 2015 changed the provision of the previous cash-based assistance to in-kind aid.[13] This is inconsistent with German humanitarian policy in other migrant and refugee hosting countries, where the German Foreign Ministry promotes cash-based programming as an efficient, effective and dignified way of assisting people in need.

      Apart from instructions and orders by public authorities and law enforcement entities, other tactics range from frequent ID checks, parking fines to threats of arrest (Amnesty 2019). In Calais, humanitarian action was obstructed when the municipality of Calais prohibited the distribution of food as well as the delivery of temporary showers to the site by a local charity with two municipal orders in March 2017 (Amnesty 2019). In 2017, the Hungarian Parliament passed the so-called LEX NGO. Like the foreign agent law in Russia, it includes provisions for NGOs that receive more than EUR 23 000 per year from abroad (including EU member states) to register as “organisations receiving foreign funding”. Coupled with a draft bill of a new Tax Law that establishes a 25% punitive tax to be paid for “propaganda activities that indicate positive aspects of migration”, these attempts to curtail work with migrants has a chilling effect both on NGOs and donors. As the punitive tax is to be paid by the donor organisation, or by the NGO itself in case the donor fails to do so, organisations risk bankruptcy.[14]
      Policing Humanitarianism[15]

      An increasingly hostile environment towards migration, fuelled by anti-immigrant sentiments and public discourse, has led to suspicion, intimidation and harassment of individuals and organisations working to assist and protect them. The securitisation of migration (Lazaridis and Wadia 2015), in which migrants are constructed as a potential security threat and a general atmosphere of fear is created, has given impetus to a general policing of humanitarian action. Even when not criminalised, humanitarian actors have been hindered in their work by a whole range of dissuasion and intimidation strategies. Civilian maritime SAR organisations in particular have been targets of defamation and anti-immigration rhetoric. Though analyses of migratory trends have proved that a correlation between SAR operations and an increase of migrant crossings was indeed erroneous (Cusumano and Pattison, Crawley et al. 2016, Cummings et al. 2015), organisations are still being accused of both constituting a pull-factor for migration (Fekete 2018) and of working together with human traffickers. In some instances, this has led to them being labelled as taxis for ‘illegal’ migrants (Hammerl 2019). In Greece, and elsewhere, volunteers assisting migrants have been subject to police harassment. Smear campaigns, especially in the context of SAR operations in the Mediterranean, have affected the humanitarian sector as a whole “by creating suspicion towards the work of humanitarians” (Atger 2019). Consequently, organisations have encountered difficulties in recruiting volunteers and seen a decline in donations. This prevented some organisations from publicly announcing their participation in maritime SAR or their work with migrants.[16] In severe cases, humanitarian actors suffered physical threats by security personnel or “self-proclaimed vigilante groups” (Hammerl 2019).

      Moreover, having to work alongside security forces and within a policy framework that primarily aims at border policing and migration deterrence (justified on humanitarian grounds), humanitarian actors risk being associated with migration control techniques in the management of ‘humanitarian borders’ (Moreno-Lax 2018, Pallister-Wilkins 2018). When Italy in 2017 urged search and rescue organisations to sign a controversial Code of Conduct in order to continue disembarkation at Italian ports, some organisations refused to do so. The Code of Conduct endangered humanitarian principles by making life-saving activities conditional on collaborating in the fight against smugglers and the presence of law enforcement personnel on board (Cusumano 2019).

      Beyond the maritime space, the politicisation of EU aid jeopardises the neutrality of humanitarian actors, forcing them to either disengage or be associated with a political agenda of migration deterrence. Humanitarian organisations are increasingly requested to grant immigration authorities access to their premises, services and data (Atger 2019). In Greece, a legislation was introduced in 2016 which entailed the close monitoring of, and restrictive access for, volunteers and NGOs assisting asylum seekers, thereby placing humanitarian action under the supervision of security forces (Hammerl 2019). As a consequence of the EU-Turkey Deal in 2016, MSF announced[17] that it would no longer accept funding by EU states and institutions “only to treat the victims of their policies” (Atger 2019).
      The Way Ahead

      The shrinking space poses a fundamental challenge for principled humanitarian action in Europe. The shrinking humanitarian space can only be understood against the backdrop of a general shrinking civil space in Europe (Strachwitz 2019, Wachsmann and Bouchet 2019). However, the ways in which the shrinking space affects humanitarian action in Europe has so far received little attention in the humanitarian sector. The problem goes well beyond the widely discussed obstacles to civilian maritime SAR operations.

      Humanitarian organisations across Europe assist people arriving at ports, staying in official or unofficial camps or being in transit. An increasingly hostile environment that is fuelled by populist and securitisation discourses limits access to, and protection of, people on the move both on land and at sea. The criminalisation of aid, bureaucratic hurdles and harassment of individuals and organisations assisting migrants are just some of the ways in which humanitarian access is obstructed in Europe.

      A defining feature of humanitarian action in Europe has been the important and essential role of volunteers, civil society organisations and solidarity networks both at the grassroots’ level and across national borders. Large humanitarian actors, on the other hand, took time to position themselves (Léon 2018) or have shied away from a situation that is unfamiliar and could also jeopardize the financial support of their main donors – EU member states.

      Since then, the humanitarian space has been encroached upon in many ways and it has become increasingly difficult for volunteers or (small) humanitarian organisations to assist and protect people on the move. The criminalisation of humanitarian action is particularly visible in the context of civilian maritime SAR activities in the Mediterranean, but also bureaucratic hurdles and the co-optation of the humanitarian response into other political objectives have limited the space for principled humanitarian action. In order to protect people on the move, national, regional and international responses are needed to offer protection and assistance to migrants in countries of origin, transit and destination. Thereby, the humanitarian response needs to be in line with the principles of impartiality, neutrality, and independence to ensure access to the affected population. While the interests of states to counter organised crime, including human trafficking, is legitimate, this should not restrict humanitarian access to vulnerable migrants and refugees.

      In Europe, the biggest obstacle for effective humanitarian action is a lacking political will and the inability of the EU to achieve consensus on migration policies (DeLargy 2016). The Malta Agreement, a result of the latest EU Summit of Home Affairs Ministers in September 2019 and subsequent negotiations in Luxembourg in October of the same year, has failed to address the shortcomings of current migration policies and to remove the obstacles standing in the way of principled humanitarian action in the Mediterranean. For this, new alliances are warranted between humanitarian, human rights and migration focussed organizations to defend the humanitarian space for principled action to provide crucial support to people on the move both on land and at sea.

      http://chaberlin.org/en/publications/migration-and-the-shrinking-humanitarian-space-in-europe-2

      Pour télécharger le rapport:
      http://chaberlin.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/2019-10-debattenbeitrag-migration-shrinking-humanitarian-space-roepstorff
      #CHA #Centre_for_humanitarian_action

  • Au Sénat, quasi-unanimité sur le #cannabis_thérapeutique | Public Senat
    https://www.publicsenat.fr/article/parlementaire/au-senat-quasi-unanimite-sur-le-cannabis-therapeutique-141627
    https://www.publicsenat.fr/sites/default/files/styles/pse_accueil_entete/public/medias/2019/05/dailymotion-x79q2qy.jpg?itok=udsBUpWY

    Mardi après-midi, dans un hémicycle clairsemé, Esther Benbassa a introduit le débat sur le cannabis thérapeutique comme enjeu de santé publique.

    La sénatrice EELV du Val-de-Marne a commencé par rappeler les grands enjeux liés au cannabis thérapeutique. Entre 300 000 et 1 million de patients pourraient être concernés, et plus de 82 % des Français sont favorables à une utilisation dans un cadre médical. « Il n’y a aucune raison d’exclure une molécule, sous prétexte que c’est du cannabis, alors qu’elle peut être intéressante », a-t-elle expliqué.

    Esther Benbassa a souligné les avancées dans le monde à propos de cette question (21 pays en Europe ont légalisé le cannabis thérapeutique). Le comité de l’Agence nationale de sécurité du médicament et des produits de santé (ANSM) se réunit jusqu’à juin afin d’étudier les modalités de mises à disposition dans le cadre de la phase expérimentale du cannabis en France.