industryterm:finance

#néo-libéralisme #marchandisation #études_supérieures #UK #Angleterre #pensions #résistance

Diary by #Stefan_Collini

‘But why have they done this?’ Standing in the foyer of the National Theatre in Prague, having just taken part in a debate on ‘The Political Role of Universities?’, I had fallen into conversation with a former rector of Charles University, who was asking me to explain the dramatic and – as we both thought – damaging changes imposed on British universities in the past decade. It wasn’t the first time I had been asked some version of this question during visits to European universities in recent years. From Prague to Porto, Bergen to Geneva, puzzlement bordering on disbelief had been expressed by academics, journalists, officials and others. Diverse as their local situations may have been, not least in the financial or political pressures they experienced, they had been united in their admiration for the quality and standing of British universities in the 20th century. They weren’t just thinking about Oxford and Cambridge. These people were knowledgable about the recent past of British universities, sometimes having studied at one of them, and their view was that a high level of quality had been maintained across the system in both teaching and research, underwritten by an ethos that blended autonomy and commitment, whether at London or Edinburgh, Leeds or Manchester, Leicester or Swansea, Sussex or York. They knew this wasn’t the whole story: that the quality varied and there was an informal pecking order; that not all teachers were diligent or all students satisfied; that British academics grumbled about their lot as much as academics anywhere else. But still, British universities had seemed to them an obvious national asset, imitated elsewhere, attracting staff and students from around the world, contributing disproportionately to the setting of international standards in science and scholarship. So, I was asked again and again, why have they done this?

I didn’t find it an easy question to answer. I couldn’t deny the accuracy of their observations (other than a tendency to neglect or misunderstand the distinctiveness of the situation in Scotland). Successive British governments have enacted a series of measures that seem designed to reshape the character of universities, not least by reducing their autonomy and subordinating them to ‘the needs of the economy’. ‘#Marketisation’ isn’t just a swear-word used by critics of the changes: it is official doctrine that students are to be treated as consumers and universities as businesses competing for their custom. The anticipated returns from the labour market are seen as the ultimate measure of success.

Last year the government imposed a new wheeze.

Universities are now being awarded Olympic-style gold, silver and bronze medals for, notionally, teaching quality. But the metrics by which teaching quality is measured are – I am not making this up – the employment record of graduates, scores on the widely derided #National_Student_Survey, and ‘retention rates’ (i.e. how few students drop out). These are obviously not measures of teaching quality; neither are they things that universities can do much to control, whatever the quality of their teaching. Now there is a proposal to rate, and perhaps fund, individual departments on the basis of the earnings of their graduates. If a lot of your former students go on to be currency traders and property speculators, you are evidently a high-quality teaching department and deserve to be handsomely rewarded; if too many of them work for charities or become special-needs teachers, you risk being closed down. And most recently of all, there has been the proposal to dismantle the existing pension arrangements for academics and ‘academic-related’ staff, provoking a more determined and better-supported strike than British academia has ever seen.

My European colleagues are far from complacent about their own national systems. They are well aware of the various long-term constraints under which their universities have operated, not least in those countries which try to square the circle of combining universal post-18 access to higher education with attempts to strengthen institutions’ research reputations. Universities are further handicapped in countries, notably France and Germany, that locate much of their research activity in separate, often more prestigious institutions such as the CNRS and the grandes écoles or the Max Planck Institutes, while universities in southern Europe are hamstrung by the weakness of their parent economies. European commentators also realise that extreme market-fundamentalist elements in their own political cultures are keeping a close eye on the British experiments, encouraged to imagine what they may be able to get away with when their turn in power comes (to judge by recent policy changes, the moment may already have arrived in Denmark, and perhaps the Netherlands too). But still, Britain is regarded as a special case, and an especially poignant one: it is the sheer wantonness of the destruction that causes the head-shaking. And European colleagues ask what it means that the new policies excite so little public protest. Has something changed recently or did universities in Britain never enjoy wide public support? Is this part of a longer tradition of anti-intellectualism, only ever kept in partial check by historical patterns of deference and indifference, or is it an expression of a newly empowered ‘revolt against elites’?

My answers have been halting and inadequate. Familiar narratives of the transition from an ‘elite’ to a ‘mass’ system of higher education fail to isolate the specificity of the British case. The capture of government by big corporations and the City goes some way to identifying a marked local peculiarity, as does the extent of the attack in recent years on all forms of public service and public goods, allowing the transfer of their functions to a profit-hungry private sector. But that general level of analysis doesn’t seem to account for the distinctive animus that has fuelled higher education policy in England and Wales, especially since 2010: the apparent conviction that academics are simultaneously lofty and feather-bedded, in need on both counts of repeated sharp jabs of economic reality. There seems to be a deep but only partly explicit cultural antagonism at work, an accumulated resentment that universities have had an easy ride for too long while still retaining the benefits of an unmerited prestige, and that they should now be taken down a peg or two.

Visiting a variety of European universities, I have found myself wondering whether, for all the material disadvantages many of them suffer, they haven’t succeeded rather better in retaining a strong sense of esprit de corps and a certain standing in society, expressive in both cases of their membership of a long-established guild. An important manifestation of this sense of identity in the majority of European systems – something that marks a significant contrast with Anglo-Saxon traditions – is the practice of electing the rector of a university. Over time, and in different institutions, the electorate has varied: it might consist only of professors, or include all full-time academic staff, or all university employees (academic and non-academic) or, in some places, students. In Britain, by contrast, a subcommittee of the university’s court or council (bodies with a majority of non-academic members), often using the services of international head-hunting firms, selects a candidate from applicants, practically always external, and then submits that name for rubber-stamping by the parent body. (The ‘rectors’ still elected in the ancient Scottish universities, usually by the student body, have a much more limited role than the vice-chancellors or principals of those institutions.)

In encouraging a sense of guild identity and shared commitment to a common enterprise, the Continental system has some clear advantages. First, it ensures the occupant of the most senior office is an academic, albeit one who may in recent years have filled an increasingly administrative set of roles. Second, the rector will be familiar with his or her particular academic community and its recent history, and therefore will be less likely to make the kinds of mistake that a person parachuted in from some other walk of life may do. Third, where the rector is elected from the professorial ranks, the expectation is that he or she will revert to that status when their term is over (though in practice some may end up pursuing other administrative or honorary roles instead). This makes a significant contribution to collegiality.
It is easy to ventriloquise the business-school critique of this practice. The individuals chosen are, it will be said, bound to be too close, personally and intellectually, to the people they now have to manage. They will be unable to make the hard decisions that may be necessary. The institution needs shaking up, needs the benefit of the view from outside. Above all, it needs leadership, the dynamic presence of someone with a clear vision and the energy and determination to push through a programme of change. What is wanted is someone who has demonstrated these qualities in turning around other failing institutions (one of the more implausible unspoken premises of free-market edspeak is that universities are ‘failing institutions’). The governing bodies of most British universities have a majority of lay members, drawn mainly from the worlds of business and finance, which ensures that these views do not lack for influential exponents – and that vice-chancellors are selected accordingly.

For a long time, Oxford and Cambridge had, as usual, their own distinctive practices. Until the 1990s, the vice-chancellorship at both universities was occupied for a limited term (usually two or three years, never more than four) by one of the heads of their constituent colleges. The system, if one can call it that, wasn’t quite Buggins’s turn – some heads of colleges were passed over as likely to be troublesome or inept, and notionally the whole body of academic staff had to confirm the proposed name each time – but in reality this was a form of constrained oligarchy: the pool of potential candidates was tiny, and anyway vice-chancellors in these two decentralised institutions had strictly limited powers. This gentlemanly carousel came to be seen, especially from outside, as an insufficiently professional form of governance for large institutions in receipt of substantial sums of public money, and so by the end of the 20th century both Oxford and Cambridge had moved to having a full-time vice-chancellor, usually selected from external candidates: it is a sign of the times that five of the last six people to occupy the post at the two universities have worked for the greater part of their careers outside the UK, even if they had also had a local connection at some earlier point.

Across British universities generally, vice-chancellors – and in some cases pro-vice-chancellors and deans as well – are now nearly always drawn from outside the institution, sometimes from outside academia entirely. New career paths have opened up in which one may alternate senior managerial roles at different universities with spells at a quango or in the private sector before one’s name finds its way onto those discreet lists kept by head-hunters of who is papabile. The risk in this growing trend is that vice-chancellors come to have more in common, in outlook and way of life, with those who hold the top executive role in other types of organisations than they do with their academic colleagues. Talking to a recently elected deputy rector in a Norwegian university, I was struck by her sense of the duty she had to represent the values of her colleagues and their disciplines in the higher councils of the university and to the outside world. Talking to her newly appointed counterparts in many British universities, one is more likely to be struck by their desire to impress the other members of the ‘senior management team’ with their hard-headedness and decisiveness.

These contrasts may bear on two issues that have been much in the news lately. If you think of vice-chancellors as CEOs, then you will find yourself importing a set of associated assumptions from the corporate world. As soon as you hear the clichéd talk of ‘competing for talent in a global market’, you know that it is code for ‘paying American-level salaries’. Perhaps an academic elevated for one or two terms on the vote of his or her colleagues would be less likely to be awarded, or award themselves, salaries so manifestly out of kilter with those of even the highest-paid professors. (The rector of the Université Libre de Bruxelles was at pains to emphasise to me that, as rector, he receives no increase over his normal professorial salary.) Marketisation is a virulent infection that affects the whole organism, and that includes internalised expectations about ‘compensation’. Inflated salaries for vice-chancellors are the new normal, but they are recent: in 1997 the VC of Oxford was paid £100,000; in 2013 the incumbent received £424,000.

The other issue on which the ethos of university governance may have a bearing is the pensions dispute. Without entering into the contested question of the different ways of assessing the financial strength of the existing pension fund, and of what changes might be required to ensure its long-term viability, it is clear that Universities UK, the association of vice-chancellors, has handled the issue in a particularly heavy-handed way. On the basis of what has been widely reported as an exaggeratedly pessimistic analysis of the scheme’s financial position, they proposed, among other measures, the complete abolition of any ‘defined benefit’ element, thus removing at a stroke one of the few things that had enabled scholars and scientists to persuade themselves that their decision to become academics had not been a case of financial irrationality. It has done nothing to dampen the hostility provoked by the move that it has come from a body of people who are paying themselves between six and ten times the average salaries of their academic staff. One cannot help wondering whether a body of rectors elected by their colleagues, and not themselves in receipt of such inflated salaries, would have taken these steps.

Britain’s vice-chancellors include many impressive and sympathetic figures, struggling to do a difficult job amid conflicting pressures. It is fruitless, and in most cases unjust, to demonise them as individuals. But somewhere along the line, any sense of collegiality has been fractured, even though many vice-chancellors may wish it otherwise. Marketisation hollows out institutions from the inside, so that they become unable to conceptualise their own activities in terms other than those of the dominant economic dogma. The ultimate criterion by which CEOs are judged is ‘the bottom line’; the operational definition of their role is that they ‘hire and fire’; their salary is determined by whatever is the ‘going rate’ in the ‘global market’. The rest of the corrosive vocabulary has been internalised too: ‘There is no alternative’; ‘We cannot afford not to make these cuts’; ‘At the end of the day we must pay our way’. Eventually it becomes hard to distinguish the rhetoric of some bullish vice-chancellors from that of Tory chancellors.
A sense of ‘guild identity’, the ‘dignity of learning’, ‘collegiality’, ‘standing in society’: this vocabulary is coming to sound old-fashioned, even archaic, despite the fact that it is hard to give an intelligible account of the distinctiveness of the university as an institution without it. Yet such language has had something of a revival in Britain in recent weeks, at least on the academic picket lines and union meetings. One of the things that has been so impressive about the strike thus far, apart from the tangible sense of solidarity and the heartening level of student support, has been the universal recognition that this is about more than the details of the pension system. My European interlocutors have repeatedly wondered why there has not been more protest in the past seven or eight years. Students, to their credit, did protest vociferously in 2011, and in smaller numbers are doing so again now. But British academics have traditionally adopted the ostrich position when confronted with unwelcome developments. Perhaps the older notion of being ‘members’ of a university rather than its ‘employees’ still lingers in some places, making all talk of unions and strikes seem like bad form. Perhaps there is still a residual sense of good fortune in being allowed to do such intrinsically rewarding work for a living, even though the daily experience for many is that intrusive surveillance and assessment, as well as increased casualisation of employment, now make that work less and less rewarding. But the mood in recent weeks has been different. Universities UK’s clumsy assault on the pension scheme has been the catalyst for the release of a lot of pent-up anger and a determination to try to do something to arrest the decline of British universities.

When I travelled from a Universities and Colleges Union rally in wintry Cambridge to that packed discussion in Prague, it was hard not to see the ironies in the contrasts between these two situations and between my own position in each. My contribution to the debate in Prague was a paper arguing against the romanticisation of the university as eternally oppositional, the natural home of heroic dissidence. I urged instead the primacy of universities’ commitment to disciplined yet open-ended enquiry, proposing that this did not issue in a single political role, oppositional or otherwise, except when free inquiry itself was threatened. But I was aware – and the awareness was deepened by some pressing questions from the audience – that my position could easily seem complacent to people who had heard the tracks of Soviet tanks clanking down the street. The older members of that Czech audience had few illusions about the likely short-term outcome whenever politics and universities clash head-on. Perhaps for that reason, they were all the keener to cherish the independence of universities in the good times, buoyed by the belief that these implausibly resilient institutions would always, somehow, outlast the bad times. They knew what it meant to have apparatchiks forcibly imposed on universities, just as the Central European University in neighbouring Budapest is currently feeling the pressure of Orbán’s steel fist. But the present fate of universities in a country such as Britain that had not known these spirit-crushing political extremes puzzled them. Was that good fortune perhaps a source of vulnerability now? Had universities never been really valued because they had never been really put to the test? Or was there some more immediate, contingent reason that explained why a relatively peaceful, prosperous country would wilfully squander one of its prize cultural assets? And so, again, I was asked: why have they done this? I wished then, as I wish now, that I could come up with a better answer.

▻https://www.lrb.co.uk/v40/n09/stefan-collini/diary
#classement #qualité #ranking

Ici aussi en français ▻https://seenthis.net/messages/662887
J’aime leur concept de soirée fermée à la presse et uniquement réservée à la gent masculine comme ils écrivent. Dans ce cas ils auraient pu mettre uniquement du personnel masculin également.
Par contre ce qu’il faut reconnaître c’est qu’en Grande Bretagne (et dans d’autres pays européens aussi) généralement quand on est mis en cause on démissionne, ce qui est n’est quasiment jamais le cas en France.

Si même le WEF le dit...
Migrants will keep coming. We should give them the skills they need to thrive

Here is one innovation that could help, among many that we need. A Global Skill Partnership is a bilateral agreement designed to sensibly share the benefits and costs of skilled migration between the migrant-destination countries and migrant-origin countries. Employers and governments in migrant-destination countries support technical training for migrants in their country of origin, before they move, with cross-subsidies to train non-migrants.

Done right, a Global Skill Partnership can benefit all involved. Young people looking to work abroad can pursue enormous opportunities for themselves and their families. The countries of destination get migrants with precisely the skills they need to contribute the most and integrate fast. The countries of origin get finance and technology transfer to support the training of both migrants and non-migrants – an engine of finance and human capital creation, not a drain.

The economic heart of a Global Skill Partnership is a dual arbitrage opportunity. The first is that workers like nurses, hospitality workers and mechanics can be hundreds of percent more valuable, in strictly economic terms, providing their services in a rich country rather than in a poor country. The second is that training those workers can be done in a poor country at a small fraction of the cost in a rich country. These mean that a Global Skill Partnership doesn’t mean taking away from some to give to others. Like all arbitrage opportunities, it is a chance to add value, to increase the size of the pie for shared benefit.

▻https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/11/migrants-will-keep-coming-we-should-train-them-first-skills-to-thrive
#apprentissage

How global university rankings are changing higher education

EARLIER this month Peking University played host to perhaps the grandest global gathering ever of the higher-education business. Senior figures from the world’s most famous universities—Harvard and Yale, Oxford and Cambridge among them—enjoyed or endured a two-hour opening ceremony followed by a packed programme of mandatory cultural events interspersed with speeches lauding “Xi Jinping thought”. The party was thrown to celebrate Peking University’s 120th birthday—and, less explicitly, China’s success in a race that started 20 years ago.

In May 1998 Jiang Zemin, China’s president at the time, announced Project 985, named for the year and the month. Its purpose was to create world-class universities. Nian Cai Liu, a professor of polymeric materials science and engineering at Shanghai Jiao Tong University, got swept up in this initiative. “I asked myself many questions, including: what is the definition of and criteria for a world-class university? What are the positions of top Chinese universities?” Once he started benchmarking them against foreign ones, he found that “governments, universities and stakeholders from all around the world” were interested. So, in 2003, he produced the first ranking of 500 leading global institutions. Nobody, least of all the modest Professor Liu, expected the Shanghai rankings to be so popular. “Indeed, it was a real surprise.”

People are suckers for league tables, be they of wealth, beauty, fame—or institutions of higher education. University rankings do not just feed humanity’s competitive urges. They are also an important source of consumer intelligence about a good on which people spend huge amounts of time and money, and about which precious little other information is available. Hence the existence of national league tables, such as US News & World Report’s ranking of American universities. But the creation of global league tables—there are now around 20, with Shanghai, the Times Higher Education (THE) and QS the most important—took the competition to a new level. It set not just universities, but governments, against each other.

When the Shanghai rankings were first published, the “knowledge economy” was emerging into the global consciousness. Governments realised that great universities were no longer just sources of cultural pride and finishing schools for the children of the well-off, but the engines of future prosperity—generators of human capital, of ideas and of innovative companies.

The rankings focused the minds of governments, particularly in countries that did badly. Every government needed a few higher-educational stars; any government that failed to create them had failed its people and lost an important global race. Europe’s poor performance was particularly galling for Germany, home of the modern research university. The government responded swiftly, announcing in 2005 an Exzellenzinitiative to channel money to institutions that might become world-class universities, and has so far spent over €4.6bn ($5.5bn) on it.

Propelled by a combination of national pride and economic pragmatism, the idea spread swiftly that this was a global competition in which all self-respecting countries should take part. Thirty-one rich and middle-income countries have announced an excellence initiative of some sort. India, where world rankings were once regarded with post-colonial disdain, is the latest to join the race: in 2016 the finance minister announced that 20 institutions would aim to become world-class universities. The most generously funded initiatives are in France, China, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan. The most unrealistic targets are Nigeria’s, to get at least two universities in the world’s top 200, and Russia’s, to get five in the world’s top 100, both by 2020.

The competition to rise up the rankings has had several effects. Below the very highest rankings, still dominated by America and western Europe—America has three of the THE’s top five slots and Britain two this year—the balance of power is shifting (see chart). The rise of China is the most obvious manifestation. It has 45 universities in the Shanghai top 500 and is now the only country other than Britain or America to have two universities in the THE’s top 30. Japan is doing poorly: its highest-ranked institution, the University of Tokyo, comes in at 48 in the THE’s table. Elsewhere, Latin America and eastern Europe have lagged behind.

The rankings race has also increased the emphasis on research. Highly cited papers provide an easily available measure of success, and, lacking any other reliable metric, that is what the league tables are based on. None of the rankings includes teaching quality, which is hard to measure and compare. Shanghai’s is purely about research; THE and QS incorporate other measures, such as “reputation”. But since the league tables themselves are one of its main determinants, reputation is not an obviously independent variable.

Hard times

The research boom is excellent news for humanity, which will eventually reap the benefits, and for scientific researchers. But the social sciences and humanities are not faring so well. They tend to be at a disadvantage in rankings because there are fewer soft-science or humanities journals, so hard-science papers get more citations. Shanghai makes no allowance for that, and Professor Liu admits that his ranking tends to reinforce the dominance of hard science. Phil Baty, who edits the THE’s rankings, says they do take the hard sciences’ higher citation rates into account, scoring papers by the standards of the relevant discipline.

The hard sciences have benefited from the bounty flowing from the “excellence initiatives”. According to a study of these programmes by Jamil Salmi, author of “The Challenge of Establishing World-Class Universities”, all the programmes except Taiwan’s focused on research rather than teaching, and most of them favoured STEM subjects (science, technology, engineering and mathematics). This is no doubt one of the reasons why the numbers of scientific papers produced globally nearly doubled between 2003 and 2016.

The rankings may be contributing to a deterioration in teaching. The quality of the research academics produce has little bearing on the quality of their teaching. Indeed, academics who are passionate about their research may be less inclined to spend their energies on students, and so there may be an inverse relationship. Since students suffer when teaching quality declines, they might be expected to push back against this. But Ellen Hazelkorn, author of “Rankings and the Reshaping of Higher Education”, argues that students “are buying prestige in the labour market”. This means “they want to go to the highest-status university possible”—and the league tables are the only available measure of status. So students, too, in effect encourage universities to spend their money on research rather than teaching.

The result, says Simon Marginson, Oxford University’s incoming professor of higher education, is “the distribution of teaching further down the academic hierarchy”, which fosters the growth of an “academic precariat”. These PhD students and non-tenured academics do the teaching that the star professors, hired for their research abilities, shun as a chore. The British government is trying to press universities to improve teaching, by creating a “teaching-excellence framework”; but the rating is made up of a student-satisfaction survey, dropout rates and alumni earnings—interesting, but not really a measure of teaching quality. Nevertheless, says Professor Marginson, “everybody recognises this as a problem, and everybody is watching what Britain is doing.”

A third concern is that competition for rankings encourages stratification within university systems, which in turn exacerbates social inequality. “Excellence initiatives” funnel money to top universities, whose students, even if admission is highly competitive, tend to be the children of the well-off. “Those at the top get more government resources and those at the bottom get least,” points out Ms Hazelkorn. That’s true even in Britain, which, despite not having an excellence initiative, favours top universities through the allocation of research money. According to a study of over 120 universities by Alison Wolf of King’s College London and Andrew Jenkins of University College London, the Russell Group, a self-selected elite of 24 universities, get nearly half of the funding for the entire sector, and increased their share from 44.7% in 2001-02 to 49.1% in 2013-14.

The rankings race draws other complaints. Some universities have hired “rankings managers”, which critics argue is not a good use of resources. Saudi Arabian universities have been accused of giving highly cited academics lucrative part-time contracts and requiring them to use their Saudi affiliation when publishing.

Intellectual citizens of nowhere

Notwithstanding its downsides, the rankings race has encouraged a benign trend with far-reaching implications: internationalisation. The top level of academia, particularly in the sciences, is perhaps the world’s most international community, as Professor Marginson’s work shows. Whereas around 4% of first-degree students in the OECD study abroad, a quarter of PhD students do. Research is getting more global: 22% of science and engineering papers were internationally co-authored in 2016, up from 16% in 2003. The rankings, which give marks for international co-authorship, encourage this trend. That is one reason why Japan, whose universities are as insular as its culture, lags. As research grows—in 2000-14 the annual number of PhDs awarded rose by half in America, doubled in Britain and quintupled in China—so does the size and importance of this multinational network.

Researchers work together across borders on borderless problems—from climate change to artificial intelligence. They gather at conferences, spend time in each other’s universities and spread knowledge and scholarship across the world. Forced to publish in English, they share at least one language. They befriend each other, marry each other and support each other, politically as well as intellectually. Last year, for instance, when Cambridge University Press blocked online access to hundreds of articles on sensitive subjects, including the Tiananmen Square massacre, at the request of the Chinese government, it faced international protests, and an American academic launched a petition which was signed by over 1,500 academics around the world. CUP backed down.

The rankings race is thus marked by a happy irony. Driven in part by nationalistic urges, it has fostered the growth of a community that knows no borders. Critics are right that governments and universities obsess too much about rankings. Yet the world benefits from the growth of this productive, international body of scholars.

https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/1280-width/images/2018/05/articles/body_5#.jpg

#Chine #classement_de_Shanghai #compétition #classement #ranking #QS #Times_Higher_Education #THE #excellence #Exzellenzinitiative #Allemagne #Inde #France #Singapour #Taïwan #Corée_du_Sud #Nigeria #Russie #USA #Etats-Unis #Angleterre #UK #recherche #publications #publications_scientifiques #enseignement #réputation #sciences_sociales #sciences_dures #précarité #précarisation #travail #inégalités #anglais #langue #internationalisation #globalisation #mondialisation

La fin est très en phase avec le journal qui a publié cet article, hélas :

Critics are right that governments and universities obsess too much about rankings. Yet the world benefits from the growth of this productive, international body of scholars.

❞

La première version de cet article a été apparemment corrigée :

Correction (May 22nd, 2018): An earlier version of this piece suggested that non-English data and books are not included in the rankings. This is incorrect. The article has been amended to remove that assertion.

–-> mais en fait, en réalité, il n’aurait pas dû l’être. Pour avoir expérimenté moi-même une fois le #H-index sur ma liste de publications, je peux vous dire qu’aucun article en d’autres langues que l’anglais avait été retenu dans l’index. Et même pas tous les articles en anglais que j’ai publiés...

FAQ - 300 Cubits
▻https://www.300cubits.tech/faq

Who is behind 300cubits?
ETH Smart Contract Tech Ltd, a company incorporated and headquartered in Hong Kong.

ETH Smart Contract Tech Limited - Hong Kong Company Formation Search
▻https://www.hongkongcompanieslist.com/eth-smart-contract-tech-limited-cfipelq

ETH Smart Contract Tech Limited
(CR No. 2553818)

ETH Smart Contract Tech Limited was incorporated on 10 Jul 2017 as a Private company limited by shares registered in Hong Kong. The date of annual examination for this private company limitedis between Jul 10 and Aug 21 upon the anniversary of incorporation. The company’s status is listed as “Live” now.

Hong Kong startup launches blockchain project designed to transform container shipping - Splash 247
▻http://splash247.com/hong-kong-startup-launches-blockchain-project-designed-transform-containe

300cubits is a project initiated by ETH Smart Contract Tech (ESCoT), a company founded in Hong Kong by Johnson Leung and Jonathan Lee. Leung started his career with Maersk. Later on he moved into the finance world, as regional shipping analyst at JP Morgan and then a senior shipping analyst for Tufton Oceanic, before joining Jefferies as the head of regional transport and industrials research for the Asia Pacific region. Lee, meanwhile, worked for a variety of Chinese, European and American banks in his career before founding ESCoT with his old university friend, Leung.

J. Leung est vice-président de l’association des anciens élèves de son université HKUST (Hong Kong University of Science and Technology)

HKUSTAA - The Executive Committee - Know More About Us
▻http://www.ustaa.hk/content/aboutUs_exe_details.htm

Deputy President
Johnson LEUNG
1994 BSc (Bio)

I am Johnson Leung, graduated in 1994 with a Biology degree from UST. During my undergraduate days I spent as much time in sports such as track & field and basketball as I did in organizing various student interest clubs and associations.

After my undergraduate studies, I had a short stint in drama production and then I spent most of my last ten years abroad through several international assignments at a shipping company, for which I have lived in places such as Beijing , Sao Paulo , Copenhagen , Lisbon , Fontainebleau and Philadelphia . My career choice brought me back to Hong Kong early 2004. Now I am practicing corporate finance in a boutique investment bank.

In my spare time, I do sports such as hiking and basketball, reading in subjects such as biography and history, and hanging out with my friends. I had three fantastic years in UST and always love the UST community. I thinkalumni association is effective as well as essential in the development of an institution and I am grateful to have this chance to serve a term in the Ex-co of the UST Alumni Association.

Ça démarre aujourd’hui.

TEU tokens – first cryptocurrency for container shipping is launched - The Loadstar
▻https://theloadstar.co.uk/teu-tokens-first-cryptocurrency-container-shipping-launched

Container shipping could see the first widespread use of a cryptocurrency this week.

Hong Kong-based blockchain developer ETH Smart Contract Tech will tomorrow start handing out its bespoke TEU tokens to shippers, forwarders and 3PLs under its 300cubits project.

The company will release some 20m TEU tokens, “custom-designed as digital shipping booking deposits, using smart contract blockchain technology, to solve the no-show and rolling problems plaguing the container shipping industry”, to container line customers for free – but on a first-come-first basis.

Interested shippers and forwarders need to demonstrate their eligibility for 300cubits, and are currently restricted to those that bought slots in 2016.

After passing the eligibility test, container line customers will allocated TEU tokens based on how much they have spent with the lines, which cumulatively saw sales of $150bn in 2016.

“For example, if the eligible participant has paid $50m as freight payment directly to container lines during 2016, the eligible participant would be entitled to at least 0.03% [$50m as a % of $150bn, the revenue of the entire container shipping industry] of the TEU tokens to be distributed to the customers of container liners – about 6,667,”according to its prospectus.

300cubits said the total supply of TEU tokens will be fixed at 100m.

#menstruations #femmes #genre #discriminations

Plusieurs articles abordent la question du vocabulaire. Faut-il les appeler migrants, réfugiés, sans-papiers, demandeurs d’asile, exilés...? Les avis sont partagés :
►https://seenthis.net/messages/414225

Only ’prisons’ in Libya - UNHCR (2)

Special envoy Cochetel tells ANSA of ’horrible conditions’

http://www.ansa.it/webimages/img_457x/2017/8/4/5aa41f20156a8f30f8a7468c89ccfa2f.jpg

A Tripoli con i migranti respinti dall’Europa fra #torture, umiliazioni e fame

Violenze dopo il salvataggio in mare, poi il trasferimento nei centri d’accoglienza: «I poliziotti ci portano via tutto. Ma ritenteremo il nostro viaggio»

▻http://www.lastampa.it/2017/08/12/esteri/tra-i-migranti-respinti-dalleuropa-nelle-celle-libiche-botte-e-disperazione-c2QjWrWjj9mgTgKx3flGjK/amphtml/pagina.amp.html
#refoulement #push-back

Noury (Amnesty Italia): «I centri d’accoglienza in Libia sono in realtà prigioni»

«Esatto, senza considerare poi che i centri d’accoglienza libici dove verrebbero condotti i respinti sono in realtà delle prigioni, alcune delle quali informali, magari vecchi capannoni industriali, o alberghi, o addirittura case private. Chiamarli “centri d’accoglienza” è del tutto sbagliato, sono luoghi di detenzione nei quali non c’è alcuna garanzia per l’incolumità fisica delle persone. Sappiamo che avvengono stupri e torture quotidianamente, ci sono prigionieri detenuti in ostaggio fino a quando i familiari non pagano, prigionieri venduti da una banda criminale all’altra. E, se noi contribuiamo a rafforzare questo sistema illegale, ne siamo pienamente complici.

▻https://left.it/2017/08/12/noury-amnesty-italia-i-centri-daccoglienza-in-libia-sono-in-realta-prigioni

A Tripoli con i migranti respinti dall’Europa fra torture, umiliazioni e fame

Violenze dopo il salvataggio in mare, poi il trasferimento nei centri d’accoglienza: «I poliziotti ci portano via tutto. Ma ritenteremo il nostro viaggio»

▻http://www.lastampa.it/2017/08/12/esteri/tra-i-migranti-respinti-dalleuropa-nelle-celle-libiche-botte-e-disperazione-c2QjWrWjj9mgTgKx3flGjK/pagina.html

Migranti, oltre mille intercettati dalla Guardia costiera libica e mandati in un campo di detenzione

Erano al largo di Sabratha. Gli occupanti sono stati arrestati e inviati a Zawia. La Marina di Tripoli: soccorse più di tremila persone in una settimana in dodici diverse operazioni. Sbarcati a Messina 135 intercettati nel Canale di Sicilia

▻http://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2017/09/17/news/migranti_libia-175746376

Rescue ship says Libyan coast guard shot at and boarded it, seeking migrants

A Libyan coast guard vessel fired shots and boarded a humanitarian ship in the Mediterranean on Tuesday, demanding that the migrants on board be handed over to them, a spokesman for the Mission Lifeline charity said.

“The Libyan man said: ‘This is our territory,’” said Axel Steier, a spokesman for the German-based charity that performed its first rescues on Tuesday.

“After a while, they fired shots,” he said, probably into the air or sea. No one was wounded.

Afterward two Libyans boarded the Lifeline ship to try to persuade them to hand over some 70 migrants they had just taken off a wooden boat in international waters.

“We told them we don’t return migrants to Libya. After a while, they gave up,” Steier said. The two men spent about 15 minutes on board, he said.

A Libyan coast guard spokesman in Tripoli declined to comment, saying he was seeking information. Italy’s coast guard, which coordinates rescues, did not respond to repeated telephone calls.

It was the latest incident reported between the Libyan coast guard and humanitarian rescue ships operating off North Africa. Financed, trained and equipped by Italy, the Tripoli-based coastguard is intercepting a growing number of migrant boats.

▻http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-libya-ngo/rescue-ship-says-libyan-coast-guard-shot-at-and-boarded-it-seeking-migrants
#Méditerranée #gardes-côtes

https://i.imgur.com/M0PnNQL.png

Avec ce commentaire de Jeff Crisp sur twitter :

As far as the Libyan coastguard/militia are concerned, ’captured and incarcerated’ might be the most accurate phrase.

Quei campi libici sono irriformabili

Hai voglia di annunciare bandi, di investire qualche milione di euro per rendere vivibile ciò che vivibile non è. Perché i lager libici sono come il socialismo reale: irriformabili. In discussione non sono le buone intenzioni che animano il vice ministro degli Esteri con delega per la Cooperazione internazionale, Mario Giro: per lui parla il lungo impegno in favore della pace e della giustizia sociale per l’Africa e il fatto, politicamente significativo, che nell’estate dominata dalla «caccia» alle Ong e da una ondata securista, Giro è stata una delle poche voci alzatesi tra le fila del governo per ricordare a tutti che i migranti intercettati sulla rotta del Mediterraneo venivano ricacciati nell’"inferno libico".

▻http://www.huffingtonpost.it/umberto-de-giovannangeli/quei-campi-libici-sono-irriformabili_a_23225947

L’Onu vuole aprire un centro di transito per i profughi in Libia

Un contingente di 250 guardie di sicurezza nepalesi arriverà in Libia in questi giorni per garantire sicurezza alla base militare dell’Onu di Tripoli. Se tutto andrà come previsto, spiega Roberto Mignone, capomissione dell’Alto commissariato delle Nazioni Unite per i rifugiati (Unhcr), all’inizio di novembre anche il personale internazionale dell’organizzazione, che dal 2014 si è spostato a Tunisi per ragioni di sicurezza, potrebbe tornare in Libia in pianta stabile.

▻https://www.internazionale.it/bloc-notes/annalisa-camilli/2017/09/29/onu-libia-centro-profughi
#centre_de_transit

ONGI IN LIBIA, VIA ALLA GARA PER UMANIZZARE I CENTRI PROFUGHI. Mia intervista a cura di Marco Menduni su Secolo XIX.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DMv4T2AWAAU3uvM.jpg

UN human rights chief: Suffering of migrants in Libya outrage to conscience of humanity

“The international community cannot continue to turn a blind eye to the unimaginable horrors endured by migrants in Libya, and pretend that the situation can be remedied only by improving conditions in detention,” Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein said, calling for the creation of domestic legal measures and the decriminalisation of irregular migration to ensure the protection of migrants’ human rights.

▻http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=22393&LangID=E

Libya : Detention centres and disembarkation points. Access by UNHCR and partners, June 2017

https://i.imgur.com/XoCewOH.png

#cartographie #visualisation

Cet extrait tiré d’un article du Sole 24 Ore (journal italien plutôt tourné économie et finance) est quand même assez incroyable, surtout le début, ce « certo »( « certes »)...

Certes... il y a toujours le problème des centres de détention dans un pays qui n’a pas signé la convention de Genève, mais certaines ONG italiennes sont en train d’entrer dans les centres pour vérifier le respect des principes humanitaires basiques...
dit l’article... « certes »...

Certo, resta sempre il problema dei centri di detenzione in un Paese che non ha firmato la convenzione di Ginevra, ma alcune Ong italiane stanno entrando nei centri per verificare il rispetto dei più elementari principi umanitari. Sarebbero oltre 700mila i migranti identificati in Libia tra gennaio e febbraio dall’Oim, l’Organizzazione internazionale per le migrazioni. Ma non ci sono numeri precisi (si parla di altri 300 o 400mila migranti) sparsi in Libia in condizioni anche peggiori dei centri. Per il 63% si tratta di giovani provenienti dall’Africa sub-sahariana, per il 29% da quella settentrionale e per l’8% da Medio Oriente e Asia.

❞
▻http://www.ilsole24ore.com/art/mondo/2018-02-24/libia-e-niger-bilancio-dell-italia-e-l-eredita-il-prossimo-governo--212

A mettre en lien, comme le suggère @isskein sur FB, avec cet autre article publié l’été passé :

Italy minister sees light at the end of the tunnel on migrant flows

Italy’s interior minister said on Tuesday (15 August) he saw light at the end of the tunnel for curbing migrant flows from Libya after a slowdown in arrivals across the Mediterranean in recent months.

►https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/italy-minister-sees-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel-on-migrant-flows

v. aussi : ▻https://seenthis.net/messages/680613

Campi libici, l’inferno nel deserto. La sentenza della Corte di assise di Milano

La qualità delle indagini e della loro resa dibattimentale, insieme alla ritenuta credibilità delle dichiarazioni delle persone offese, ha confermato, secondo i giudici dell’assise, un contesto di privazione della libertà dei migranti e di violenze di ogni tipo che scolpisce una realtà che per la sorte dei diritti umani è fondamentale non ignorare.

▻http://questionegiustizia.it/articolo/campi-libici-l-inferno-nel-deserto-la-sentenza-della-corte-di-ass

« Je voudrais faire comprendre qu’une fois entrée dans ce système de traite humaine et de rançonnage, une personne ne peut en sortir qu’en se jetant à la mer. Elle y est poussée. On ne passe plus par ce pays [la Libye], on en réchappe : Yacouba ne cherchait plus à se rendre en Europe, il voulait juste ne pas mourir en Libye. Les migrants qui embarquent sur les zodiacs ont été ballottés de ghetto en ghetto, placés en détention durant plusieurs mois. Maltraités, dépouillés, leurs corps épuisés sont alors portés par le seul espoir de retrouver un semblant de dignité sur le ’continent des droits de l’homme’. »

Source : Samuel GRATACAP, in Manon PAULIC, « Ce que l’Europe refuse de voir », Le 1, n°188, 7 février 2018, p.3.

Libya: Shameful EU policies fuel surge in detention of migrants and refugees

A surge in migrants and refugees intercepted at sea by the Libyan authorities has seen at least 2,600 people transferred, in the past two months alone, to squalid detention centres where they face torture and extortion, Amnesty International said today.

The global human rights organisation accuses European governments of complicity in these abuses by actively supporting the Libyan authorities in stopping sea crossings and sending people back to detention centres in Libya.

“The EU is turning a blind eye to the suffering caused by its callous immigration policies that outsource border control to Libya,” said Heba Morayef, Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa Director.

▻https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/05/libya-shameful-eu-policies-fuel-surge-in-detention-of-migrants-and-refugees

Ne dites pas que ce sont des #camps !

Bien sûr, tous ces #centres_fermés de rassemblement de migrants ne peuvent pas être appelés camps. Cela évoquerait des images effrayantes : les camps de concentration nazis, le système des goulags soviétiques, les camps de réfugiés palestiniens de plusieurs générations, le camp de détention de Guantánamo.

Non, en Allemagne, ces « #non-prisons » devraient être appelées « #centres_de_transit ». Un terme amical, efficace, pratique, comme la zone de transit d’un aéroport où les voyageurs changent d’avion. Un terme inventé par les mêmes personnes qui désignent le fait d’échapper à la guerre et à la pauvreté comme du « #tourisme_d’asile ». Les responsables politiques de l’UE sont encore indécis quant à la terminologie de leurs camps. On a pu lire le terme de « #centres_de_protection » mais aussi celui de « #plateformes_d’atterrissage_et_de_débarquement », ce qui fait penser à une aventure et à un voyage en mer.

Tout cela est du #vernis_linguistique. La réalité est que l’Europe en est maintenant à créer des camps fermés et surveillés pour des personnes qui n’ont pas commis de crime. Les camps vont devenir quelque chose qui s’inscrit dans le quotidien, quelque chose de normal. Si possible dans des endroits lointains et horribles, si nécessaire sur place. Enfermer, compter, enregistrer.

►https://www.tdg.ch/monde/europe/dites-camps/story/31177430

Libya: “Registration is a right for asylum seekers and refugees wherever they are”

Vincent Cochetel, UNHCR Special Envoy for the Central Mediterranean Situation, recently visited detention centers in Lybia and expressed his concerns regarding the situation of asylum-seekers and refugees and the difficulty they face to access proper documentation.

▻http://www.unhcr.org/blogs/registration-is-a-right-for-refugees

Cruel European migration policies leave refugees trapped in Libya with no way out

A year after shocking images purporting to show human beings being bought and sold in Libya caused a global outcry, the situation for migrants and refugees in the country remains bleak and in some respects has worsened, said Amnesty International.

Findings published by the organization today highlight how EU member states’ policies to curb migration, as well as their failure to provide sufficient resettlement places for refugees, continue to fuel a cycle of abuse by trapping thousands of migrants and refugees in appalling conditions in Libyan detention centres.

“One year after video footage showing human beings being bought and sold like merchandise shocked the world, the situation for refugees and migrants in Libya remains bleak,” said Heba Morayef, Middle East and North Africa Director for Amnesty International.

“Cruel policies by EU states to stop people arriving on European shores, coupled with their woefully insufficient support to help refugees reach safety through regular routes, means that thousands of men, women and children are trapped in Libya facing horrific abuses with no way out.”

Migrants and refugees in Libyan detention centres are routinely exposed to torture, extortion and rape.

One year after video footage showing human beings being bought and sold like merchandise shocked the world, the situation for refugees and migrants in Libya remains bleak
Heba Morayef, Amnesty International’s Director for the Middle East and North Africa

The UN refugee agency (UNHCR) has registered 56,442 refugees and asylum seekers in Libya and has repeatedly called on European and other governments to offer resettlement to refugees stranded in Libya, including through evacuation to Niger. However, only 3,886 resettlement places have been pledged by 12 countries and in total just 1,140 refugees have been resettled from Libya and Niger so far. Italy separately evacuated 312 asylum seekers from Libya directly to Italy between December 2017 and February 2018, but no further evacuations took place until the resettlement of 44 refugees on 7 November.

Over the past two years EU member states have put in place a series of measures to block migration across the central Mediterranean, boosting the capacity of the Libyan Coast Guard to intercept sea crossings, striking deals with militias in Libya and hampering the work of NGOs carrying out search and rescue operations.

These policies have contributed to a nearly 80% drop in the numbers crossing the central Mediterranean and arriving in Italy, from 114,415 between January and November 2017 to just 22,232 so far in 2018. There are currently around 6,000 refugees and migrants being held in detention centres in Libya.

With the central Mediterranean sea route almost completely shut off, and the Libyan authorities keeping refugees in unlawful detention and refusing to release them to UNHCR’s care, the only way out of Libyan detention centres is through evacuation to another country via programmes run by the UN. For refugees, who cannot return to their home country, the lack of international resettlement places on offer has left thousands stranded in Libyan detention centres.

The opening of a long promised UNHCR processing centre in Libya that would offer safety for up to 1,000 refugees by allowing them to relocate from the abusive detention centres has been repeatedly delayed. Its opening would undoubtedly be a positive step, but it would only assist a small proportion of refugees in detention and does not offer a sustainable solution.

“At the same time as doing their utmost to stop sea crossings and helping the Libyan Coast Guard to intercept people at sea and send them back to notorious detention centres, European governments have catastrophically failed to offer other routes out of the country for those most in need,” said Heba Morayef.

“While Europe fails to extend the desperately needed lifeline to save those stuck in Libya and at risk of abuse, it is time that the Libyan authorities take responsibility for their atrocious policies of unlawful detention and protect the human rights of all people in their territory.”

Armed clashes in Tripoli between August and September this year have also made the situation for refugees and migrants more dangerous. Some of those held in detention centres have been wounded by stray bullets. There have also been instances where detention centre guards have fled to escape rocket attacks leaving thousands of inmates locked up without food or water.

The publication of Amnesty’s findings is timed to coincide with a meeting of Libyan and other world leaders in the Italian city of Palermo on 12 and 13 November. This international conference is intended to find solutions to break the political stalemate in Libya. Amnesty International is calling on all those taking part in the conference to ensure that human rights of all people in the country, including refugees and migrants, are placed at the centre of their negotiations.

https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1060091274181705729/fyjTRUz0?format=jpg&name=600x314#.jpg

▻https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/11/cruel-european-migration-policies-leave-refugees-trapped-in-libya-with-no-w

UNHCR Flash Update Libya (9 - 15 November 2018) [EN/AR]

An estimated 5,400 refugees and migrants are presently held in detention centres in Libya, of whom 3,900 are of concern to UNHCR. Over the past month, UNHCR has registered 2,629 persons of concern in detention centres in and around Tripoli. So far in 2018, UNHCR conducted 1,139 visits to detention centres and distributed CRIs to 19,348 individuals. Through its partner International Medical Corps (IMC), UNHCR continues to provide medical assistance in detention centres in Libya. So far in 2018, IMC provided 20,070 primary health care consultations in detention centres and 237 medical referrals to public hospitals. In detention centres in the East, UNHCR’s partners have so far provided 1,058 primary health care consultations and distributed CRIs to 725 individuals.

►https://reliefweb.int/report/libya/unhcr-flash-update-libya-9-15-november-2018-enar

#statistiques #chiffres #2018

Libia, i minori abusati e torturati nei centri di detenzione per migranti finanziati dall’Ue

I minori bloccati nei centri di detenzione in Libia, finanziati anche dall’Unione europea tramite il Fondo per l’Africa, subiscono abusi e soffrono di malnutrizione, secondo quanto riportato dal Guardian.

I bambini hanno raccontato di essere stati picchiati e maltrattati dalla polizia libica e dalle guardie del campo, descrivendo la loro vita come “un inferno in terra”.

Secondo i dati analizzati dal Guardian, in Libia esistono 26 centri dei detenzione dei migranti, ma il numero dei minori detenuti non è chiaro in quanto non esistono registi affidabili.
Nonostante ciò, si pensa che siano più di mille i bambini presenti nei campi di detenzione in Libia.Secondo l’Unhcr, almeno 5.400 rifugiati sono detenuti in territorio libico.

Le rivelazioni dei bambini, che rischiano di essere puniti dalle guardie per aver parlato con i media, forniscono il resoconto più dettagliato della vita nei campi di detenzione.
Le denunce delle Ong – A inizio di novembre Amnesty International aveva già denunciato le condizioni insostenibili in cui i migranti erano costretti a vivere, raccontando come la tortura e i maltrattamenti fossero all’ordine del giorno.

“C’è un vero e proprio disprezzo da parte dell’Europa e di altri Stati per la sofferenza di coloro che si trovano nei centri di detenzione”, si legge nel rapporto di Amnesty.

Un ragazzo di 16 anni ha raccontato al Guardian cosa vuol dire viver nei centri di detenzione in Libia: “Sono qui da quattro mesi. Ho cercato di scappare tre volte per attraversare il mare diretto in Italia ma ogni volta sono stato catturato e riportato al centro di detenzione”.

“Stiamo morendo, ma nessuno se ne sta assumendo la responsabilità. Dobbiamo essere portati in un posto sicuro, invece siamo rinchiusi qui 24 ore al giorno. Non vediamo l’alba e non vediamo il tramonto “.

I centri sono progettati per mantenere i richiedenti asilo in Libia ed evitare che attraversino il Mediterraneo diretti verso l’Europa.

L’Ue ha investito decine di milioni di euro per cercare di impedire ai richiedenti asilo provenienti da zone di conflitto, come l’Eritrea e il Sudan, di entrare in Europa.

Le testimonianze – Un rifugiato eritreo di 13 anni rinchiuso in un campo di Tripoli ha raccontato che i detenuti ricevono solo una o due piccole porzioni di pasta in bianco al giorno.

Malattie come la tubercolosi sono diffuse e in molti possiedono solo una maglietta e un paio di pantaloncini, inadatte alle temperature nei centri.

“Non abbiamo niente qui, niente cibo, niente vestiti, niente telefoni. Mi mancano così tanto mia madre e mio padre”, ha detto il ragazzo.

Nei giorni precedenti un rifugiato di 24 anni ha cercato di impiccarsi nella toilette di uno dei campi e un altro si è dato fuoco nel campo di Triq al Sikka di Tripoli.

Un ragazzo eritreo di 17 anni che è fuggito da un centro di detenzione e ha raggiunto il Regno Unito aveva 50 cicatrici sul suo corpo, a dimostrazione delle torture subite in Libia.

“Quello che giovani, donne, bambini e neonati stanno soffrendo nei centri di detenzione in Libia è uno dei più grandi fallimenti della nostra civiltà”, ha affermato Giulia Tranchina, del Wilsons solicitors, che rappresenta il diciassettenne eritreo.

“I governi europei, a nostro nome, con il nostro denaro stanno pagando le autorità libiche, le milizie e i generali dell’esercito per continuare a detenere e torturare i profughi per assicurarsi che non arrivino in Europa”.

Una portavoce dell’UNHCR ha dichiarato: “Siamo incredibilmente preoccupati per la situazione dei profughi e dei migranti detenuti in Libia. Le condizioni di detenzione sono terribili”.

▻https://mediterraneomigrante.it/2018/11/26/libia-i-minori-abusati-e-torturati-nei-centri-di-detenzione-per
#enfants #enfance #torture #abus_sexuels #viols

Un #rapport de l’ONU met en lumière les «horreurs inimaginables» des migrants et réfugiés en Libye et au-delà

Les migrants et les réfugiés sont soumis à des « horreurs inimaginables » dès leur arrivée en Libye, tout au long de leur séjour dans le pays et - s’ils parviennent à ce résultat - lors de leurs tentatives de traverser la Méditerranée, selon un rapport publié jeudi, par la mission politique des Nations Unies en Libye (#MANUL) et le Bureau des droits de l’homme des Nations Unies (HCDH).

« Il y a un échec local et international à gérer cette calamité humaine cachée qui continue de se produire en Libye », a déclaré Ghassan Salamé, qui dirige la MINUS.

Assassinats illégaux, détention arbitraire et tortures, viols collectifs, esclavage et traite des êtres humains, le rapport couvre une période de 20 mois jusqu’en août 2018 et détaille une terrible litanie de violations et d’exactions commises par divers agents de l’État, armés contrebandiers et trafiquants contre les migrants et les réfugiés.

Les conclusions reposent sur 1 300 témoignages de première main recueillis par le personnel des droits de l’homme des Nations Unies en Libye, ainsi que sur des migrants qui sont rentrés au Nigéria ou ont réussi à atteindre l’Italie, retraçant tout le parcours des migrants et des réfugiés de la frontière sud de la Libye, à travers le désert jusqu’à la côte nord.

Le climat d’anarchie en Libye fournit un terrain fertile pour les activités illicites, laissant les migrants et les réfugiés « à la merci d’innombrables prédateurs qui les considèrent comme des marchandises à exploiter et à extorquer », indique le rapport, notant que « l’écrasante majorité des femmes et des adolescentes »ont déclaré avoir été« violées par des passeurs ou des trafiquants ».
Trafic d’êtres humains

De nombreuses personnes sont vendues par un groupe criminel à un autre et détenues dans des centres non officiels et illégaux gérés directement par des groupes armés ou des gangs criminels.

« D’innombrables migrants et réfugiés ont perdu la vie en captivité tués par des passeurs, après avoir été abattus, torturés à mort ou tout simplement avoir été laissés mourir de faim ou de négligence médicale », indique le rapport.

« Dans toute la Libye, des corps non identifiés de migrants et de réfugiés portant des blessures par balle, des marques de torture et des brûlures sont fréquemment découverts dans des poubelles, des lits de rivière asséchés, des fermes et le désert. »

Ceux qui réussissent à survivre aux abus et à l’exploitation, et à tenter la traversée périlleuse de la Méditerranée, sont de plus en plus interceptés - ou « sauvés » comme certains le prétendent - par les garde-côtes libyens. Depuis le début de 2017, les quelque 29 000 migrants renvoyés en Libye par les garde-côtes ont été placés dans des centres de détention où des milliers de personnes restent indéfiniment et arbitrairement, sans procédure régulière ni accès à un avocat ou à des services consulaires.

Des membres du personnel de l’ONU se sont rendus dans 11 centres de détention où sont détenus des milliers de migrants et de réfugiés. Ils ont constaté des cas de torture, de mauvais traitements, de travaux forcés et de viols commis par les gardes. Les migrants retenus dans les centres sont systématiquement soumis à la famine et à des passages à tabac sévères, brûlés avec des objets chauds en métal, électrocutés et soumis à d’autres formes de mauvais traitements dans le but d’extorquer de l’argent à leurs familles par le biais d’un système complexe de transferts d’argent.
Surpeuplement des centres de détention

Les centres de détention se caractérisent par un surpeuplement important, un manque de ventilation et d’éclairage, et des installations de lavage et des latrines insuffisantes. Outre les exactions et les actes de violence perpétrés contre les personnes détenues, beaucoup d’entre elles souffrent de malnutrition, d’infections cutanées, de diarrhée aiguë, d’infections du tractus respiratoire et d’autres affections, ainsi que de traitements médicaux inadéquats. Les enfants sont détenus avec des adultes dans les mêmes conditions sordides.

Le rapport signale l’apparente « complicité de certains acteurs étatiques, notamment de responsables locaux, de membres de groupes armés officiellement intégrés aux institutions de l’État et de représentants des ministères de l’Intérieur et de la Défense, dans le trafic illicite ou le trafic de migrants et de réfugiés ».

Nils Melzer, expert indépendant des droits de l’homme des Nations Unies sur la torture, estime que, compte tenu des risques de violations des droits de l’homme dans le pays, les transferts et les retours en Libye peuvent être considérés comme une violation du principe juridique international du « non-refoulement », qui protège les demandeurs d’asile et les migrants contre le retour dans des pays où ils ont des raisons de craindre la violence ou la persécution.

« La situation est abominablement terrible », a déclaré jeudi Michelle Bachelet, Haut-Commissaire des Nations Unies aux droits de l’homme. « Combattre l’impunité généralisée non seulement mettrait fin aux souffrances de dizaines de milliers de femmes, d’hommes et d’enfants migrants et réfugiés, à la recherche d’une vie meilleure, mais saperait également l’économie parallèle et illégale fondée sur les atteintes à ces personnes et contribuerait à l’instauration de l’état de droit et des institutions nationales ».

Le rapport appelle les États européens à reconsidérer les coûts humains de leurs politiques et à veiller à ce que leur coopération et leur assistance aux autorités libyennes soient respectueuses des droits de l’homme et conformes au droit international des droits de l’homme et du droit des réfugiés, de manière à ne pas, directement ou indirectement, aboutir à ce que des hommes, des femmes et des enfants soient enfermés dans des situations de violence avec peu d’espoir de protection et de recours.

▻https://news.un.org/fr/story/2018/12/1032271

Libya: Nightmarish Detention for Migrants, Asylum Seekers

EU and Italy Bear Responsibility, Should Condition Cooperation

(Brussels) – European Union policies contribute to a cycle of extreme abuse against migrants in Libya, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. The EU and Italy’s support for the Libyan Coast Guard contributes significantly to the interception of migrants and asylum seekers and their subsequent detention in arbitrary, abusive detention in Libya.

The 70-page report, “‘No Escape from Hell’: EU Policies Contribute to Abuse of Migrants in Libya,” documents severe overcrowding, unsanitary conditions, malnutrition, and lack of adequate health care. Human Rights Watch found violent abuse by guards in four official detention centers in western Libya, including beatings and whippings. Human Rights Watch witnessed large numbers of children, including newborns, detained in grossly unsuitable conditions in three out of the four detention centers. Almost 20 percent of those who reached Europe by sea from Libya in 2018 were children.

“Migrants and asylum seekers detained in Libya, including children, are trapped in a nightmare, and what EU governments are doing perpetuates detention instead of getting people out of these abusive conditions,” said Judith Sunderland, associate Europe director at Human Rights Watch. “Fig-leaf efforts to improve conditions and get some people out of detention do not absolve the EU of responsibility for enabling the barbaric detention system in the first place.”

In a letter to Human Rights Watch as the report went to print, the European Commission indicated that its dialogue with Libyan authorities has focused on respect for the human rights of migrants and refugees, that the EU’s engagement in Libya is of a humanitarian nature, and that concrete improvements have been achieved though challenges remain.

Human Rights Watch visited the #Ain_Zara and #Tajoura detention centers in Tripoli, the al-Karareem detention center in Misrata, and the Zuwara detention center in the city of the same name in July 2018. All are under the nominal control of the Directorate to Counter Illegal Migration (DCIM) of the Government of National Accord (GNA), one of two competing authorities in Libya. Human Rights Watch spoke with over 100 detained migrants and asylum seekers, including 8 unaccompanied children, and each center’s director and senior staff. Researchers also met with the head of DCIM; senior officials of Libya’s Coast Guard, which is aligned with the GNA; and representatives of international organizations and diplomats.

Abdul, an 18-year-old from Darfur, was intercepted by the Libyan Coast Guard in May 2018, when he attempted to reach Europe to apply for asylum. He was subsequently detained in abysmal, overcrowded, and unsanitary conditions in the al-Karareem center. He said that guards beat him on the bottom of his feet with a hose to make him confess to helping three men escape. Abdul’s experience encapsulates the struggle, dashed hopes, and suffering of so many migrants and asylum seekers in Libya today, Human Rights Watch said.

Senior officials in EU institutions and member countries are aware of the situation. In November 2017, EU migration commissioner, Dimitri Avramopoulos, said: “We are all conscious of the appalling and degrading conditions in which some migrants are held in Libya.” Yet since 2016, the EU and particular member states have poured millions of euros into programs to beef up the Libyan Coast Guard’s capacity to intercept boats leaving Libya, fully aware that everyone is then automatically detained in indefinite, arbitrary detention without judicial review.

Italy – the EU country where the majority of migrants departing Libya have arrived – has taken the lead in providing material and technical assistance to the Libyan Coast Guard forces and abdicated virtually all responsibility for coordinating rescue operations at sea, to limit the number of people arriving on its shores. The increase in interceptions in international waters by the Libyan Coast Guard, combined with obstruction by Italy and Malta of rescue vessels operated by nongovernmental organizations, has contributed to overcrowding and deteriorating conditions in Libyan detention centers.

Enabling the Libyan Coast Guard to intercept people in international waters and return them to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment in Libya can constitute aiding or assisting in the commission of serious human rights violations, Human Rights Watch said. EU and member state support for programs for humanitarian assistance to detained migrants and asylum seekers and for evacuation and repatriation schemes have done little to address the systemic problems with immigration detention in Libya, and serve to cover up the injustice of the EU containment policy.

Libyan authorities should end arbitrary immigration detention and institute alternatives to detention, improve conditions in detention centers, and ensure accountability for state and non-state actors who violate the rights of migrants and asylum seekers. The authorities should also sign a memorandum of understanding with UNHCR, the United Nations refugee agency, to allow it to register anyone in need of international protection, regardless of nationality, in full respect of its mandate.

EU institutions and member states should impose clear benchmarks for improvements in the treatment of migrants and conditions in detention centers in Libya and be prepared to suspend cooperation if benchmarks are not met. The EU should also ensure and enable robust search-and-rescue operations in the central Mediterranean, including by nongovernmental groups, and significantly increase resettlement of asylum seekers and vulnerable migrants out of Libya.

“EU leaders know how bad things are in Libya, but continue to provide political and material support to prop up a rotten system,” Sunderland said. “To avoid complicity in gross human rights abuses, Italy and its EU partners should rethink their strategy to truly press for fundamental reforms and ending automatic detention.”

▻https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/01/21/libya-nightmarish-detention-migrants-asylum-seekers

L’odissea degli ultimi. Libia, nuove cronache dall’orrore

Ancora foto choc dai campi di detenzione di #Bani_Walid, dove i trafficanti torturano e ricattano le vittime Prigionieri di criminali efferati, 150 profughi subiscono violenza da mesi.

Le immagini provengono direttamente dall’inferno di Bani Walid, distretto di #Misurata, circa 150 chilometri a sud-est di Tripoli. Sono state mandate ai familiari dai trafficanti di esseri umani per indurli al pagamento del riscatto per rilasciarli. Da sei mesi ogni giorno i detenuti subiscono minacce, percosse, torture e le donne spesso vengono stuprate dai guardiani. Tutti hanno cicatrici e bruciature per la plastica fusa gettata su arti e schiena. Ma la cifra chiesta dai libici – 4 o 5mila dollari – è troppo alta perché i parenti hanno già dovuto pagare le diverse tappe del viaggio e ora stanno chiedendo aiuto ai conoscenti. Come ha scritto di recente anche il Corriere della Sera, nel caos libico lo scontro tra il governo centrale di Serraj e quello di Haftar, l’uomo forte della Cirenaica, ha lasciato senza paghe i dipendenti pubblici, tra cui i guardiani delle galere.

https://dossierlibia.lasciatecientrare.it/wp-content/uploads/IMG20190125.jpg https://dossierlibia.lasciatecientrare.it/wp-content/uploads/IMG20190125_1.jpg

Torture and shocking conditions: the human cost of keeping migrants out of Europe

It’s been heralded as the start of a new dialogue. The first summit between the League of Arab States and EU member states ended with a lofty statement of shared values.

European leaders shook hands with their Arab counterparts and discussed issues such as Syria, Yemen and nuclear proliferation. They agreed to tackle the “common challenge” of migration.

Tonight, we’ve new evidence of how Libyan authorities are tackling that challenge.

Footage from inside camps in Libya shows migrants living in shocking conditions. And there are disturbing signs that some migrants are being tortured by people traffickers. This report contains images that some viewers will find distressing.

https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1100143721637654528/On6J6I7M?format=jpg&name=600x314#.jpg

Des migrants détenus en Libye, torturés pour s’être rebellés

L’affaire est révélée par la télévision al-Jazeera. Le sort des migrants et des réfugiés bloqués en Libye ne cesse de se dégrader. Le 26 février 2019, plus d’une centaine se sont révoltés dans le centre de Triq al-Sikka à Tripoli, pour dénoncer leurs conditions de détention. La répression a été terrible. Une trentaine de ces détenus auraient été torturés.

https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1102680454031904768/a_UaF7x2?format=jpg&name=600x314#.jpg

Libia: rifugiati “torturati” per essere evasi dal centro di detenzione

All’inizio di questa settimana circa 150 detenuti sono evasi dalle proprie celle del centro di detenzione #Triq_al_Sikka di Tripoli in segno di protesta contro i maltrattamenti subiti.

▻https://dossierlibia.lasciatecientrare.it/libia-rifugiati-torturati-per-essere-evasi-dal-centro
#Triq_al-Sikka

L’incapacité européenne face à la #maltraitance des réfugiés en Libye

#Matteo_de_Bellis, chercheur d’Amnesty International sur les migrations, revient sur les tortures et les violences contre les réfugiés et les migrants en Libye et l’incapacité honteuse de l’Europe à y mettre fin.

Farah, un jeune homme somalien, sa femme et leur fille qui venait de naître avaient passé 12 heures en mer quand les gardes-côtes libyens ont intercepté leur canot. Le couple avait fui la Libye après plusieurs mois de torture dans un hangar dans lequel Farah était battu et sa femme était violée par des bandes criminelles libyennes essayant d’obtenir une rançon de leurs proches.

Lorsqu’il a réalisé qu’il allait être renvoyé en Libye, le jeune homme de 24 ans a été pris de nausées. « Je savais qu’il valait mieux mourir que retourner en Libye, mais ils nous ont menacés avec des armes. »

Farah, sa femme et son bébé ont passé les sept mois suivants dans deux centres de détention de Tripoli. « Il n’y avait pas de nourriture ou de soins pour mon bébé. Elle est morte à huit mois. Elle s’appelait Sagal. »

Leur histoire n’est que l’une des nombreuses histoires déchirantes de violence et de cruauté inimaginable que j’ai pu entendre le mois dernier à Médenine, une petite ville du sud de la Tunisie, qui a accueilli un nombre limité mais constant de réfugiés et de migrants franchissant la frontière pour échapper à l’enfer de la Libye.

Ce weekend, de nouveaux témoignages faisant état de torture dans le centre de détention de Triq al Sikka ont été recueillis. D’après ces informations, plus de 20 réfugiés et migrants, dont des enfants, ont été conduits dans une cellule en sous-sol et torturés individuellement, à tour de rôle, à titre de punition pour avoir protesté contre leur détention arbitraire dans des conditions déplorables et l’absence de solution. En réponse à cette contestation, plus d’une centaine d’autres personnes détenues ont été transférées vers d’autres centres de détention, notamment celui d’#Ain_Zara, dans lequel Sagal est morte.

Ces témoignages de violences correspondent à ce que j’ai pu entendre en Tunisie. Un autre homme somalien, Abdi, a décrit l’extorsion et les violences qu’il a subies aux mains des gardiens des centres de détention. Comme Farah, Abdi a été arrêté en mer par les gardes-côtes libyens et renvoyé en Libye où il est passé d’un centre de détention à un autre.

Parfois, les gardes boivent et fument, puis frappent des gens. Ils demandent aussi aux gens de leur donner de l’argent en échange de leur libération, et ceux qui ne paient pas sont frappés. On voyait les gardes, tant des membres des milices que de la police, venir et frapper des gens qui n’avaient pas payé.

La plupart des personnes actuellement détenues dans les centres de détention de Libye ont été interceptées en mer par les gardes-côtes libyens, qui ont bénéficié de tout un éventail de mesures de soutien de la part des gouvernements européens en échange de leur coopération en vue d’empêcher les réfugiés et les migrants d’atteindre les côtes européennes.

L’argent des contribuables européens a été utilisé pour fournir des bateaux, créer une zone de recherche et sauvetage libyenne et construire des centres de coordination, entre autres mesures, en vue de renforcer les capacités de la Libye à empêcher ces personnes de fuir le pays et à les maintenir en détention illégale. Et ces aides ont été accordées sans la moindre condition associée, même si une telle coopération entraîne de graves violations des droits humains, comme des actes de torture.

Si les États membres de l’Union européenne veulent cesser d’être complices des violences, des viols et de l’exploitation que subissent des femmes, des hommes et des enfants, ils doivent exiger la fermeture de tous les centres de détention pour migrants en Libye et la libération des quelque 5 000 personnes qui y sont actuellement détenues.

Les gouvernements européens qui, depuis des années, prennent des mesures frénétiques, faisant adopter des politiques destinées à empêcher les arrivées en Europe quel qu’en soit le coût humain, doivent revenir à la raison, surtout maintenant que le nombre de traversées est très faible. Au-delà de mesures en vue de remédier à la crise des droits humains en Libye qui touche tant des Libyens que des ressortissants d’autres pays, la réponse doit prévoir un mécanisme rapide et fiable de débarquement en Europe des personnes en quête d’asile et des migrants secourus en Méditerranée, ainsi qu’un système équitable de partage des responsabilités en matière d’assistance entre les États membres de l’Union européenne.

Ces mesures permettraient de contribuer à éviter les événements désastreux qui se sont enchaînés l’année dernière : des bateaux de sauvetage bloqués en mer pendant des semaines face au refus des pays de l’Union européenne d’ouvrir leurs ports et de les accueillir. Non seulement ces événements aggravent les souffrances des personnes qui viennent de fuir des traitements épouvantables, mais ils découragent également les navires marchands de porter secours à des personnes en détresse et de veiller à ce que ces personnes puissent débarquer dans un lieu sûr, où elles ne pourront pas être renvoyées en Libye.

Emmanuel, un réfugié de 28 ans qui a fui le conflit au Cameroun, a décrit sa dérive en mer à bord d’un canot non loin d’une autre embarcation qui prenait l’eau, et sa stupéfaction lorsqu’un bateau a refusé de leur porter secours.

Depuis le gros bateau, ils ont passé des appels, mais nous ont dit : “Désolé, nous ne pouvons pas vous accueillir, ce n’est pas de ma faute, nous avons ordre de laisser les Libyens venir vous chercher.” Pendant ce temps, je voyais les gens mourir sur l’autre bateau. Des bouts de bateau et des corps flottaient. [Quand] un petit bateau libyen est venu nous chercher... toutes les personnes à bord de l’autre canot étaient mortes. »

Alors que des informations selon lesquelles des réfugiés de pays comme l’Érythrée retournent dans leur pays en dépit des risques bien connus pesant sur leur vie émergent, l’Europe ne peut pas se permettre d’ignorer les conséquences catastrophiques de ses politiques irresponsables destinées à freiner l’immigration en Méditerranée.

Les départs depuis la Libye sont en déclin, c’est donc le moment d’exiger des changements, notamment la fermeture des centres de détention pour migrants en Libye, la mise en place d’un système de débarquement et de relocalisation équitable en Europe et des voies sûres et légales qui n’obligent pas les personnes qui cherchent la sécurité à passer par des traversées en mer.

Cela permettrait à de nombreux enfants et adultes de sortir de ce calvaire et de quitter les centres de détention atroces dans lesquels ils sont actuellement détenus arbitrairement en Libye. Les gouvernements européens, qui ont fermé la route de la Méditerranée centrale et donc abandonné des milliers de personnes prises au piège en Libye, ne doivent pas perdre de temps.

Nous pourrions aider à sauver des dizaines d’autres Sagal, de pères et de mères.

▻https://www.amnesty.fr/refugies-et-migrants/actualites/lincapacite-europeenne-face-a-la-maltraitance-des

Dentro la Libia, l’inchiesta continua

Il reportage di Adib Fateh Ali e Nello Trocchia ha svelato atrocità, violenze e un regime di schiavitù all’interno dei centri di detenzione in Libia. L’inchiesta si arricchisce ora di nuove immagini e nuove testimonianze.

https://i.imgur.com/LeqatAr.png

▻http://www.la7.it/piazzapulita/video/dentro-la-libia-l%E2%80%99inchiesta-continua-14-03-2019-265975
#Zintan

Refugees report brutal and routine sexual violence in Libya

Abuse often filmed and sent to victims’ relatives, Women’s Refugee Commission finds.
Refugees and migrants trying to reach Europe from Africa are being subjected to horrific and routine sexual violence in Libyan detention centres, a survey has found.

People arriving at the centres are “often immediately raped by guards who conduct violent anal cavity searches, which serves the dual purpose of retrieving money, as well as humiliation and subjugation”, the report by the Women’s Refugee Commission says. Many of the victims have been forcibly returned to the country by the Libyan coastguard under policies endorsed by the European Union.

The level of psychological treatment for victims of sexual violence who reach Italy is woefully inadequate, the report adds.

Sarah Chynoweth, the lead researcher on the report, said: “Profoundly cruel and brutal sexual violence and torture are perpetrated in official detention centers and clandestine prisons, during random stops and checkpoints, and in the context of forced labor and enslavement. The fact that refugees and migrants crossing the Mediterranean are intercepted and forced back into this violence is untenable.”

The report, released at the Swedish mission in Geneva, is based on surveys and focus groups of people who have reached Italy. Much of the sexual violence it describes is too graphic to detail, but the authors make the broad point that “during the course of this research, almost all refugees, migrants, and key informants emphasised that sexual violence against male and female migrants along the entire central Mediterranean route was exceptionally high”.

A UN officer estimated that 90% of male refugees and migrants being hosted in the Italian reception system had experienced sexual violence during their journey. A local government official said that, among refugee and migrant boys, “although there are no real numbers, we know that a huge number of the minors have experienced sexual violence on the journey [to Italy]”.

The extent of sexual violence perpetrated against refugees appears in part to be contingent on their financial resources, their connections, and the year that they travelled – those traveling in recent years are seemingly more likely to have experienced sexual violence.

In many cases, sexual violence and torture are filmed on Skype and used to try to extract ransom money from the victims’ relatives, the report by the Swedish-funded, US-based commission says.

Refugees, migrants and informants told researchers that sexual violence was commonplace throughout the journey to Italy. “All along the journey they experienced sexual violence,” a health provider reported. “The whole journey is traumatic. Libya is just [the] icing on the cake.”

It had been thought that the dominance of young males in the Libyan refugee trail would reduce the risk of sexual violence. It is estimated 72% of sea arrivals in Italy were men and 18% were children, mainly unaccompanied boys.

In response to questions about sexual violence in Libya, refugees and migrants variously told the researchers that it “happened to everyone”, “is normal in Libya”, “happened to all people inside Libya” and “happened to many, many of my friends”.

Only two refugees among those surveyed explicitly reported that they had not been exposed to sexual violence, due to their ability to pay large sums in exchange for relatively safe passage.

A mental health provider in Italy working with refugees and migrants said that most of the men he spoke to had been raped in centres in Libya. A protection officer commented: “It is so widespread. Everyone knows when a man says”: ‘I’ve gone through Libya’ it is a euphemism for rape.”

Among the forms of sexual violence described to researchers was anal and oral rape, forced rape of others including corpses, castration and forced incest.

Much of the sexual violence described by research participants contained elements of profound psychological torture and cruelty.

Violence against detainees is frequently perpetrated in front of others or recorded on mobile phones, compounding the humiliation and reinforcing the experience of subjugation, the researchers found. “Perpetrators send (or threaten to send) the video footage to detainees’ family members for extortion purposes,” the report says.

A commonly reported torture technique involved forcing men to stand in a circle to watch the rape and sometimes murder of women; men who moved or spoke out were beaten or killed.

Health and mental health providers who had treated male survivors frequently reported electroshock burns to the genitals. Other genital violence included beating, burning, tying and “pulling of the penis and scrotum”.

https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/940c1e0473d59483d61953088e331a6e7afc9ba4/0_59_3300_1981/master/3300.jpg?width=620&quality=45&auto=format&fit=max&dpr=2&s=8b9a05ac86783332a5eb1c51c384f59d#.jpg

In February 2017, Italy made a deal, backed by the EU, to spend tens of millions of euros funding the Libyan coastguard, which intercepts boats heading for Italy and returns those onboard to Libya.

From January 2017 to September 2018, the Libyan coastguard intercepted and forcibly returned more than 29,000 people. Many ended up in detention centres or disappeared altogether.

▻https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/25/refugees-face-routine-sexual-violence-in-libyan-detention-centres-repor
#viols

Et ce chiffre...

A UN officer estimated that 90% of male refugees and migrants being hosted in the Italian reception system had experienced sexual violence during their journey.

v. aussi :

Il 90% dei migranti visitati nelle cliniche del Medu ha parlato di violenza estrema e torture

►https://seenthis.net/messages/598508#message599359