McGill Tribune: EDITORIAL: Preserving Freedom Of The Press In Russia

EDITORIAL: Preserving freedom of the press in Russia



By:


Posted: 11/25/08


In October of 2006, Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya was shot and killed in Moscow. A harsh critic of the Russian government’s human rights record, many believed that Politkovskaya’s murder was politically motivated. This October, the trial of three men accused of plotting her murder began. Unfortunately, it seems unlikely that the trial will reach a satisfactory conclusion.

Last Thursday, Judge Yengeny Zubov ordered that the trial be closed to the press, supposedly upon the jury’s request. However, the next day Yevgeny Kolesov, one of the jurors, told a Moscow radio station that no such request had been made. Zubov has made other procedural decisions on false pretenses, and Kolesov’s revelation casts further doubt upon the legitimacy of the proceedings. The Russian Supreme Court have announced an investigation into Zubov’s decision, but unfortunately the problems are systemic, and not specific to this case.

Freedom of the press is a rare commodity in Russia. In 2001, Vladimir Putin’s government and their associates began a program of media censorship. Government allies control all three of Russia’s major television networks. Earlier this year, the New York Times reported on a “so-called stop list, a roster of political opponents and other critics of the government who have been barred from TV news and political talk shows by the Kremlin.” And even opposition media like Echo of Moscow-the radio station that broadcasted Kolesov’s revelation-are regularly subjected to government intimidation.

The decline of journalistic freedom parallels human rights concerns in Russia. Politkovskaya was a vocal critic of Russia’s military involvement in Chechnya, and Echo of Moscow’s latest run-in with the government was caused by their reporting on the conflict in Georgia this summer.

At the Group of Eight meeting this summer, Prime Minister Stephen Harper told then-President Putin that “membership in the G8 club implies very high degrees … of democratic behaviour.” His rhetoric was high-minded, but so far Harper has been all bark, and no bite. If Canada is concerned about human rights, we put some muscle behind our position, and demand that the Russian government respect freedom of the press.

 


© Copyright 2008 The McGill Tribune

 

Share Button

Adygeanatpress: Meeting Organized By Maykop Mayoralty Went Out Of Control

From: MSN NicknameEagle_wng  (Original Message)    Sent: 12/22/2005 11:15 AM
Meeting organized by Maykop mayoralty went out of control
21.12.2005
On the main square of Maykop on December, 21st a meeting in protection of the head of the town administration Nikolay Pivovarov passed, IА REGNUM correspondent informed. Also it is necessary to note at once, the all-out support to the mayor among the gathered was not seen. Among the meeting’s participants – and they were nearby 600 people – not less than a half was those who were for his removal from the mayor’s post and for institution against him criminal proceeding.

At the meeting a reference of the head of the town to inhabitants and the public, the information on results of social and economic development of Maykop, the meeting’s resolution were read or widespread. In them it was spoken about achievements of the present town administration. The main reason in it was reduced to that Pivovarov received the town with 450 million rubles debt and for today he practically paid it off.

The majority of the orators, recognizing Pivovarov’s mistakes, called up the gathered to give the town administration a chance to correct their activities. But there were also those who tried “to hold up to shame” those who on the wave of the forthcoming elections to the republican parliament, “organize pickets, destabilize interethnic conditions, provoke social explosion”. Such orators were met with whistling and requirement to take off their right to speak.

At the meeting they also widespread printed materials of the town opposition – in particular, the newspaper “Business Adygeya” in which the work of Maykop administration during the same period was exposed to rigid criticism. The deputy of the republic parliament and the owner of the named newspaper Aslan Bezrukov was not given a word. More precisely, his name was declared; however, when he came up to the microphone, one of militia men disconnected the microphone and did not let him speak.

The quantity of the oppositional meeting’s participants was defined right after the announcement about the action’s ending. A part of the gathered obeying the command left the square at once; the other part, having surrounded the rebellious deputy, remained on the square quite long.

The deputy told that the claims to the town authority remained the same: the Arbitration court of Adygeya defined the sum of the no-purpose expenditure of financial means – it was about 38 million rubles. That was, in his opinion, nothing else but an attempt “of money laundering”. Now the money was hastily searched. But in any case on such fact the Criminal Code of Russian Federation provides punishment in the form of imprisonment till 5 years long. In addition to that, the mayoralty should show the other sum – approximately 100 million rubles. And the case is in the task of the competent bodies which for about two months did not react to the deputy’s inquiry.

As to the charges in his address in occasion of using the protest actions for getting of the parliamentary mandate Bezrukov named such statements, at least, insolvent. During the last elections he did not need for that purpose neither meetings no any help from the political parties of Adygeya – he won by himself. And to the problems of housing and communal services in the town he appeared to be engaged in their resolution under insisting of the voters in May of this year.

On IА REGNUM and Caucasian unit’s materials

http://www.adygeanatpress.net/stat_e.php?id=1042

Share Button

Human Rights Web:Convention On The Prevention & Punishment Of The Genocide Crime





From: Eagle_wng  (Original Message) Sent: 2/9/2007 7:58 PM





Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment
of the Crime of Genocide


 

Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948.


Having considered the declaration made by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its resolution 96 (I) dated 11 December 1946 that genocide is a crime under international law, contrary to the spirit and aims of the United Nations and condemned by the civilized world;

Recognizing that at all periods of history genocide has inflicted great losses on humanity; and

Being convinced that, in order to liberate mankind from such an odious scourge, international co-operation is required;

Hereby agree as hereinafter provided.


Article 1

The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.


Article 2

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

 


Article 3

The following acts shall be punishable:

 


Article 4

Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3 shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.


Article 5

The Contracting Parties undertake to enact, in accordance with their respective Constitutions, the necessary legislation to give effect to the provisions of the present Convention and, in particular, to provide effective penalties for persons guilty of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3.


Article 6

Persons charged with genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3 shall be tried by a competent tribunal of the State in the territory of which the act was committed, or by such international penal tribunal as may have jurisdiction with respect to those Contracting Parties which shall have accepted its jurisdiction.


Article 7

Genocide and the other acts enumerated in Article 3 shall not be considered as political crimes for the purpose of extradition.

The Contracting Parties pledge themselves in such cases to grant extradition in accordance with their laws and treaties in force.


Article 8

Any Contracting Party may call upon the competent organs of the United Nations to take such action under the Charter of the United Nations as they consider appropriate for the prevention and suppression of acts of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3.


Article 9

Disputes between the Contracting Parties relating to the interpretation, application or fulfilment of the present Convention, including those relating to the responsibility of a State for genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3, shall be submitted to the International Court of Justice at the request of any of the parties to the dispute.


Article 10

The present Convention, of which the Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall bear the date of 9 December 1948.


Article 11

The present Convention shall be open until 31 December 1949 for signature on behalf of any Member of the United Nations and of any non-member State to which an invitation to sign has been addressed by the General Assembly.

The present Convention shall be ratified, and the instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

After 1 January 1950, the present Convention may be acceded to on behalf of any Member of the United Nations and of any non-member State which has received an invitation as aforesaid.

Instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.


Article 12

Any Contracting Party may at any time, by notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, extend the application of the present Convention to all or any of the territories for the conduct of whose foreign relations that Contracting Party is responsible.


Article 13

On the day when the first twenty instruments of ratification or accession have been deposited, the Secretary-General shall draw up a proces-verbal and transmit a copy of it to each Member of the United Nations and to each of the non-member States contemplated in Article 11.

The present Convention shall come into force on the ninetieth day following the date of deposit of the twentieth instrument of ratification or accession.

Any ratification or accession effected subsequent to the latter date shall become effective on the ninetieth day following the deposit of the instrument of ratification or accession.


Article 14

The present Convention shall remain in effect for a period of ten years as from the date of its coming into force.

It shall thereafter remain in force for successive periods of five years for such Contracting Parties as have not denounced it at least six months before the expiration of the current period.

Denunciation shall be effected by a written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations.


Article 15

If, as a result of denunciations, the number of Parties to the present Convention should become less than sixteen, the Convention shall cease to be in force as from the date on which the last of these denunciations shall become effective.


Article 16

A request for the revision of the present Convention may be made at any time by any Contracting Party by means of a notification in writing addressed to the Secretary-General.

The General Assembly shall decide upon the steps, if any, to be taken in respect of such request.


Article 17

The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall notify all Members of the United Nations and the non-member States contemplated in Article 11 of the following:

 


Article 18

The original of the present Convention shall be deposited in the archives of the United Nations.

A certified copy of the Convention shall be transmitted to all Members of the United Nations and to the non-member States contemplated in Article 11.


Article 19

The present Convention shall be registered by the Secretary-General of the United Nations on the date of its coming into force.

 





Created on August 16, 1994 / Last edited on January 27, 1997



……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….







From: Eagle_wng Sent: 2/9/2007 7:59 PM







     Acts of injustice done
          between the setting and the rising sun
     In history lie like bones,
          each one.


          — W. H. Auden, “The Ascent of F6″




Human Rights Emergencies


What are Human Rights?


o An Introduction to Human Rights
o A Short History of the Human Rights Movement
o Biographies of Prisoners of Conscience


Human Rights Legal and Political Documents


o United Nations Documents
o Other Documents
o Human Rights Issues, Debates, and Discussions


What can I do to Promote Human Rights?


o Getting Started: A Primer for New Human Rights Activists
o Join a Human Rights Organization!


Human Rights Resources


Human Rights Web Administrative Page





Created on July 7, 1994 / Last edited on January 25, 1997


 

Share Button

Adygeanatpress: In Adygeya Reconstructed Site Of Federal Road Opened

From: MSN NicknameEagle_wng  (Original Message)    Sent: 11/28/2005 1:30 AM
 In Adygeya reconstructed site of federal road opened
23.11.2005  

On November, 22nd in Maykopsky area of Adygeya between village Abadzekhskaya and settlement Kanennomostsky they opened a reconstructed site of the federal road, IА REGNUM correspondent reported.

2925 meters of the federal road of excellent quality, including a viaduct – opening of the site of the motorway leading to the Caucasian reserve, was expected almost 5 years. Its real construction lasted 8 months – in the road builders’ opinion a very short term. Object was started building in 2001, however, the process of its reconstruction gauging for some years and renewed only in April this year. For travel the new bridge was actually opened already several days ago. The today’s solemn ceremony with participation of the prime minister of the republic Asfar Hagur and federal officials, was dated for the arrival of the Rosavtodor commission, who acted in the role of the project customer.

Valentine Furtas, the deputy head of the Department on construction and designing of motorways of Rosavtodor had given the work of Adygeya engineers the highest mark, having noted amazingly short terms of the construction of the object included in the federal program “Roads of Russia of the XXI century”.

At the federal level the new bridge opened a comfortable and safe way to the Caucasian reserve, and gave the republic a push to tourism development.

IА REGNUM

http://www.adygeanatpress.net/stat_e.php?id=739

Share Button

adygeanatpress: Adygs Of America Prepare Picket At Russian Consulate In New York





From: Eagle_wng  (Original Message) Sent: 4/5/2006 7:04 PM





Adygs of America prepare picket at Russian consulate in New York

2.4.2006
     

At the building of the Russian consulate in New York the Adygeyan Diaspora is going to lead a peace protest action, as the director of the popular in Caucasus Internet resource kawkazveb.net Osman Mazukabzov informed IА REGNUM correspondent.


“We intend to protest in connection with the refusal of the State Duma of Russia to recognize the genocide of Russia in the 18-19th centuries against Adygeyan people, – Osman Mazukabzov told. – The action will pass on May 21st when Adygs all over the world, after their exile from the Native land and by now located in more than 50 countries, traditionally have the Memory Day of victims of the Russian-Caucasian war”.


As IА REGNUM correspondent reminded, the organization Circassian congress which headquarters is located in Maykop, had addressed in 2005 to the State Duma of Russia with the reference for recognition of the genocide against Adygeyan people committed by Russia. As a demonstrative base the archival documents of the Russian imperial office had been enclosed to the reference – reports of the generals of the imperial army concerned results of the military operations led in Circassia. In those documents the Russian imperial generals resulted the detailed list of the burnt villages, killed wild Circassians, their wives, old men and children. Historical data testify: by the end of the centenary war with Russia Adygs-Circassians had lost more than 80 percent of the population. A part was lost on the Native land; another part was expelled to the Ottoman Empire and was lost already in the Black sea or at Turkish coast from deprivations and illnesses. Adygs do not eat a fish from the Black sea so far.


After the Revolution of 1917 Adygs who remained to live in Caucasus were divided into three republics: Adygeya, Karachaevo-Circassia and Kabardino-Balkaria. The problem of the divided people is actual for Karachais and Balkarians, too – the one people territorially divided between the two republics.


Now on the historical Native land about one million of Adygs (Adygeyans, Circassians and Kabardians) live. The aggregate number of the Circassian Diaspora in the various countries, according to the International Circassian association, makes near 6 million.


The State Duma of Russia has refused to consider the reference of Adygs about recognition of the genocide. Circassian congress received corresponding refusal notification in the end of 2005.


IА REGNUM


http://www.adygeanatpress.net/stat_e.php?id=1646

Share Button

RFE/RL: CIRCASSIANS DEMAND RUSSIAN APOLOGY FOR 19TH CENTURY GENOCIDE

From: MSN NicknameEagle_wng  (Original Message)    Sent: 7/18/2005 10:25 AM
CIRCASSIANS DEMAND RUSSIAN APOLOGY FOR 19TH CENTURY GENOCIDE

170705 Adygeia
17.07.2005 – 00:59:22

The Cherkess Congress, an organization that unites representatives of the various Circassian peoples in the Russian Federation, has recently called on Moscow first to acknowledge and then to apologize for tsarist policies against their ancestors in the 19th century, policies that Circassians say constituted a genocide…

The Cherkess Congress, an organization that unites representatives of the various Circassian peoples in the Russian Federation, has recently called on Moscow first to acknowledge and then to apologize for tsarist policies against their ancestors in the 19th century, policies that Circassians say constituted a genocide.

The Cherkess Congress announced in Maikop on 5 July that the office of the president of the Russian Federation Council has acknowledged receipt of their petition, a document that included both a written appeal and a CD containing more than 500 archival documents (http://www.regnum.ru/news/480210.html).

That appeal points out that Russian forces behaved very differently in their wars against the mountaineers of the North Caucasus than they did against European countries.

In the case of the latter, the tsarist troops behaved more or less according to the written and unwritten laws of war.

But with regard to the North Caucasus, the appeal says, the tsarist forces acted in ways that allow one to conclude that their real goal was to ´´remove entire peoples from the ethnic map.´´

Anyone who thinks otherwise must explain the ´´unheard of cruelty´´ and ´´repressions against the civilian population´´ that took place.

In the tsarist campaign against the Circassians, a campaign that lasted five years after Imam Shamil surrendered in 1859, official tsarist statistics show that more than 400,000 Circassians were killed, 497,000 were forced to flee abroad to Turkey, and only 80,000 were left alive in their native area, the appeal points out.

This unprecedented (up to that time) ´´ethnic purge,´´ the appeal continues, means that the Russian Federation as the claimed successor to the tsarist empire and the Soviet Union has a moral and legal obligation to acknowledge what happened and to issue an apology, the Cherkess Congress appeal argues.

So far, Moscow has done very little in that direction.

Former Russian President Boris Yeltsin´s May 1994 statement admitted that North Caucasian resistance to the tsarist forces was legitimate, but the current appeal notes that he did not recognize ´´the guilt of the tsarist government for the genocide committed against the peoples of the North Caucasus.´´

In 1997 and 1998, the leaders of the Kabardino-Balkaria Republic and of the Republic of Adygeya sent appeals to the Duma to reconsider the situation and to issue the needed apology.

But to date, there has been no response from Moscow, and the Circassians cannot say what has been the fate of their requests.

The Cherkess Congress puts forward two additional arguments in support of their demand, one that they say must be met before the end of July 2005.

On the one hand, they note that such an apology is important not only to the Circassian groups living in the Russian Federation but also to ´´the approximately 3 million of our compatriots abroad´´ — a reference to politically important groups in Turkey and elsewhere.

And on the other, the Cherkess Congress appeal notes that there is ample precedent for the Russian government to do what they asked.

In April 1995, for example, the Duma recognized the killing of Armenians in Turkey in 1915 as a genocide because the Russian parliamentarians said the facts warranted such a designation.

Consequently, the appeal continues, the Russian Duma ´´would be demonstrating before the entire world its good will and ability to be consistent in the realization of the widely proclaimed in Russia principles of freedom and democracy, humanism and justice, and in the rejection of xenophobia and national, racial, and religious
intolerance´´ if it acknowledged the tsarist genocide against the Circassians.

So far, there has been no response from Moscow to this latest appeal, one that was probably triggered by the demands of other groups for Moscow´s acknowledgement of past misdeeds and by the Kremlin´s efforts to merge the Republic of Adygeya into the surrounding Krasnodar Krai, a move the Circassians bitterly oppose.
(Paul Goble)

Source: RFE/RL Caucasus Report Vol. 8, No. 23, 15 July 2005

170705 Adygeia

http://www.kafkas.org.tr/absoluten/showarticle.php?articleID=1239

Share Button

KC: Kadyrovite Apostates Have Found The Mujahideen

Kadyrovite Apostates Have Found the Mujahideen


Publication time: 29 November 2008, 18:31

Several days ago leader of Chechen apostates Kadyrov announced that he personally searched for Mujahideen in forests of Nozhay-Yurt district, but could not find any. Kadyrov said that he could not find “even footsteps” of the Mujahideen. So the murtadd declared that “there are no militants left in Chechnya”.

Meanwhile, Kavkaz Center learned that mobile units of Mujahideen of the Eastern Front of the Armed Forces of the Emirate of Caucasus (commander amir Aslambek), whose zone of responsibility includes Nozhay-Yurt district of Wilayah Nokhchicho (Ichkeria), tried to encounter the apostates after receiving intelligence information about Kadyrov’s possible ramble, but did not suceed.

KC has received a video (soon to be released on the web) showing amir Aslambek, amir Huseyn and the Mujahideen complaining that they were not able to meet Kadyrov on a forest path, but promising that such meeting will certainly occur.

The video also shows youth from Khosi-Yurt village, a den Kadyrovites, joining the Mujahideen.

Meanwhile, Kadyrovite apostates ultimately managed to find the Mujahideen, but it is unlikely they were glad they did.

One Chechen policeman was killed, five more wounded in Nozhay-Yurt district of Wilayah Nokhchicho Friday morning after being attacked by a group of 30-fighter-strong Mujahideen unit in a forest 2 km from Simsir village, a member of pro-Russian Chechen security forces told RIA Novosti.

But Kavkaz Center learned that casualties among the apostates were much higher. 40-Mujahideen-strong unit ambushed a group of 300 armed apostates, killing 15 Kadyrovites and wounding many others. The Kadyrovites quickly retreated, requesting air support from kuffar. Saturday morning Russian aircraft and artillery were still shelling areas near Simsir. There were no reports of Mujahideen casualties.

 

Share Button