shahrezad's profileShahrezad's hjerterumPhotosBlogListsMore Tools Help

Blog


    AIMPLB wants Taslima thrown out of India

     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
                                              
    BURQA ROW: Bangladeshi author Taslima Nasreen has termed the burqa as an apparel of discrimination ( PTI )
     
     
                 AIMPLB wants Taslima thrown out of India
           

    NEW DELHI: Controversial Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen's article in national weekly, Outlook , criticising the wearing of the veil by women has drawn the ire of the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board, which on Thursday said she should be thrown out of the country.

    “Taslima should be thrown out of the country,” AIMPLB member Kamal Farooqi said. “The article written by her in Outlook was derogatory and outrageous.”

    Farooqi also said the AIMPLB will soon approach the external affairs ministry to ask that Taslima be thrown out of India. The author has been living in India ever since she fled Bangladesh in 1994 after having received death threats for her novel Lajja .

    Taslima, in an article entitled, Let's burn the Burqa , criticised the wearing of veils and asked Muslim women to “throw away this apparel of discrimination and burn their burqas” .

    Taslima's article was written with the intention of hurting Muslim sentiments and was “highly objectionable”, he further said.
     

    KLM-Mjøen inn i Muhammed-debatten

     

     

     

                         

             KLM-Mjøen inn i Muhammed-debatten

     
    KUNST. "Ytringsfrihet?" heter dette bildet som Lars Mjøen har fått laget.

    Med et bilde av en pipe, ledsaget av ordene "Dette er ikke Muhammed", kaster komikeren Lars

    Mjøen seg inn i debatten om ytringsfrihet.

                                                               

    Lars Mjøen er kjent som en tredel av humortrioen KLM. Sammen med Trond Kirkvaag og Knut Lystad har Mjøen preget norsk fjernsynshumor i flere tiår. De huskes av mange for seriene om Brødrene Dal, men allerede midt på 70-tallet brøt de barrierer med sine etter hvert så kjente prestesketsjer.

    Nå kaster Mjøen ser inn i debatten rundt ytringsfrihetsdiskusjonen, som har eskalert etter at danske Jyllands-Posten trykket karikaturer av islams grunnlegger Muhammed 30. september i fjor. Aviser i mer enn 150 land gjengav tegningene.

    - Fundamental

    - Jeg anser ytringsfrihetsdiskusjonen rundt Muhammed-karikaturene som svært fundamental for oss satirikere og kunstnere. Må vi begynne å kamuflere vår ytringsfrihet ved hjelp av hemmelige kulturelle koder for å forsvare våre gjennom hundrevis av år tilkjempete rettigheter? spør Mjøen i en kommentar til Magazinet.

    Komikeren har fått en billedkunstner til å lage et maleri etter instruksjoner, og dette vil bli utstilt under Stipendutstillingen på Kunstnernes hus i perioden 27. desember i år til 16. januar 2007.

    Maleriet viser en tobakkspipe og tittelen er "Ytringsfrihet?". Mjøen ønsker ikke å utdype sine synspunkter nå, men vil la bildet tale for seg.

    Maleriet er en vri på et kjent maleri av den belgiske surrealistiske maleren René Magritte (1898-1967) med tittelen "Dette er ikke en pipe". Poenget til Magritte skal ha vært at det ikke var en pipe, men et bilde av en pipe.

    Mr. Bean

    Mjøen er ikke alene i komikermiljøet om å være bekymret over ytringsfrihetens vilkår. I 2004 kastet den britiske skuespilleren Rowan Atkinson, bedre kjent som Mr. Bean, seg inn i debatten om å bevare retten til å kritisere og sette spørsmålstegn ved ideer og dermed også kritisere religiøse ideer.

    - Friheten til å kritisere alle ideer, selv om det er overbeviste ideer, er en av de fundamentale frihetene i et åpent samfunn, sa han til BBC, da han og en rekke skribenter, parlamentsledere og representanter fra National Secular Society tok til orde mot et lovforslag som de mente ville kraftig innskrenke kunstneres frihet.

    15/12/2006 kl 23:26



    Øyvind Kleiveland
    oyvind@magazinet.no
    http://www.magazinet.no/default.asp?linktype=2&linkid=25267

     

    Freedom of Expression Is Not Welcome

    Accused: Orhan Pamuk
     
     
     
     
                 Freedom of Expression Is Not Welcome



    The pubic prosecutor for the Istanbul district of Sisli has brought a suit against Turkish writer Orhan Pamuk, winner of the German Book Industry's Peace Prize. The reason: "public defamation of the Turkish people." A report by Gabriela Schaaf.

                                                photo: dpa
    Under the watch of conservative opinion-makers and nationalist circles - best-selling Turkish author Orhan Pamuk.
    |
    The basis for the suit against him stems from an incident that occurred months ago: In February 2005 in an interview with a Swiss newspaper Orhan Pamuk spoke about Turkey's past.

    Pamuk said that we must live with past atrocities, but we should also talk about them. In this context he mentioned that thirty thousand Kurds and one million Armenians had been killed in Turkey.

    Defamed as a traitor

    At the time his statements inspired insults and threats against him from nationalist circles and the media. He canceled a reading tour in Germany and hung low in the United States for a few months.

    Then in June he heard the news that the German Book Industry had awarded him their peace prize, the country’s most important cultural honor.

    So why has he only now been hit with a law suit, months later? Poet and translator Joachim Sartorius says this has to do with the rather slow moving bureaucracy in Turkey. Sartorius, who has worked for Germany's Foreign Service in Turkey as well as in other countries, will give the oration for Pamuk in October at the Frankfurt Book Faire.

    "Narrow-minded and nationalist circles"

    When asked to what extent the internationally recognized author is currently in danger, Sartorius replied: "If you asking if his life is in danger, I think it is really hard to say. There are fanatics everywhere in the world."

    He continued: "Don't forget that Pamuk is incredibly popular among the learned society in Istanbul. When he walks through the streets there he is greeted with the highest respect. One should not take a skewed view of this and imagine that there is a large Front against him. It is only a few nationalist and narrow-minded circles."

    Pamuk himself is from a well-to-do middle class family in Istanbul that is familiar with both Western European modernity and Oriental traditions.

    He is a cosmopolitan who always brings these two different cultures together in his literature - exposing all the conflicts that arise between them, but also showing great respect for both.

    This has brought him international fame, as mentioned in the German Book Industry's reasoning for granting him the peace prize.

    New controversy in Turkey's bid for the EU

    Joachim Sartorius believes that Pamuk's case will once again expose the problems involved with Turkey's attempt to join the EU:

    "I think that Orhan Pamuk has taken a very differentiated stance on entering the EU, saying on the one hand that this country, which is still only half-democratic, really has to do a lot of homework before it comes knocking on the EU's door. And on the other hand, he has always wanted to join the EU because he thinks that would force the government to follow through on all the rule of law reforms."

    The Istanbul public prosecutor's suit against Pamuk for "public defamation of the Turkish people" has sent a different message. The case against him will begin on December 16.

    In its statement the German writer's association PEN has said that this constitutes a "brutal attack on freedom of expression and unworthy of a country that wants to join the EU."


    Gabriela Schaaf

    © DEUTSCHE WELLE/DW-WORLD.DE 2005


    Translation from German: Christina White


     

    Journalist banned from leaving the country to collect prize

     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    18 January 2007

    Journalist banned from leaving the country to collect prize
     
     
     
     
                              
     
     

    Reporters Without Borders expressed concern after freelance journalist, Taghi Rahmani, was prevented from leaving Iran as he prepared to travel to Denmark on 13 January 2007, to receive a prize awarded by the local section of the freedom of expression organisation, PEN International.

    “We are very disturbed by this step, which has no legal basis,” the worldwide press freedom organisation said. “A ban on leaving the country, often used in Iran against independent voices, is designed above all to cut journalists off from the external world. This harassment is also intended to punish them for having links with foreign media and organisations”, it added.

    Rahmani told Reporters Without Borders that he had been arrested on the tarmac at Tehran international airport, moments before boarding the plane for Copenhagen. He added that the authorities had also seized his passport.

    The journalist, who is a leading press freedom activist, has worked for several Iranian publications, which has brought him into frequent conflict with the regime. Between 1981 and 2005, he was sentenced to a total of 5,000 days in prison for articles he had written.

    Elsewhere, Reporters Without Borders repeated its anxiety about the plight of Kaveh Javanmard, journalist on the weekly Karfto, held secretly for exactly one month. His family has not received any news of him since his arrest, on 18 December 2006, from his home in Sanandej (Iranian Kurdistan) by intelligence ministry agents.

     

     


    Iran: Prosecute Torturers, Not Bloggers

     
               
     
     
     For mere information om Internetcensur i Iran læs denne artikel fra human right watch(I listen Klik for Iran) :
    eller  direkt link:
     
                        

     
     
     
              Prosecute Torturers, Not Bloggers
                     
     
                                           
     
     
     
    " The Iranian judiciary is trying to prosecute government critics using vague, overbroad laws whose very names restrict free expression. Iran should be prosecuting the officials accused of torture, not the bloggers accused of holding opinions. "
    Sarah Leah Whitson, director of the Middle East division at Human Rights Watch.
     
    New York, December 12, 2006) – The Iranian Judiciary should prosecute officials responsible for the arbitrary detention and alleged torture of several bloggers in 2004, instead of prosecuting the bloggers for expressing their opinions, Human Rights Watch said today.  

    On December 3, branch 1059 of Tehran’s Judiciary commenced a trial against four men, Roozbeh Mirebrahimi, Shahram Rafizadeh, Omid Memarian, and Javad Gholam Tamimi, on charges of “participation in formation of groups to disturb national security,” “propaganda against the state,” “dissemination of disinformation to disturb public opinion by writing articles for newspapers and illegal internet sites,” and “interviews with foreign radio broadcasts.” The court has held one closed-door session, and the trial is scheduled to resume on December 17.  
     
    “The Iranian judiciary is trying to prosecute government critics using vague, overbroad laws whose very terms restrict free expression,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, director of the Middle East division at Human Rights Watch. “Iran should be prosecuting the officials accused of torture, not the bloggers accused of holding opinions.”  
     
    Human Rights Watch said the laws on which the government has based its case are themselves incompatible with international human rights law. The Johannesburg Principles on National Security, Freedom of Expression and Access to Information (1995) provide that “no one may be punished for criticizing or insulting the nation, the state or its symbols, the government, its agencies, or public officials, or a foreign nation, state or its symbols, government [or] agency.” Compiled by experts in international law, national security and human rights, the Principles are based on international law and standards and have come to be widely recognized as an authoritative interpretation of the relationship between legitimate national security interests and the rights of free expression and to information.  
     
    The detention of the men by Iranian security forces has been fraught with allegations of serious abuse. In September and October 2004, Tehran’s prosecutor general, Saeed Mortazavi, orchestrated the secret detentions and alleged torture of 21 bloggers and staff of internet news sites known to be critical of the government. Following domestic and international protests, the authorities ordered the release of all the detainees. But the release order came only after Mortazavi had personally coerced the four bloggers now on trial to sign written confessions as a condition for their release, they said. While the Judiciary dropped the charges against the 17 others, it prosecuted those four.  
     
    According to the bloggers and their lawyers, the prosecution’s evidence for the most serious charges – conspiring with others to disturb national security – rests primarily on their false coerced confessions. In their confession letters, made public shortly after their release, the bloggers stated that they were part of a “dreadful network operating inside and directed from outside the country” that instructed them to write articles aimed at “sabotaging the image of the Islamic Republic of Iran” by portraying government actions as “anti-human rights.”  
     
    Tamimi remains in Iran, but the other three men currently reside outside Iran, represented in absentia by their lawyers.  
     
    Immediately after their release in 2004, the bloggers renounced their confessions as false and forced, and gave public statements about the conditions of their detention. On January 1, 2005, Mirebrahimi and Memarian appeared before a presidential commission set up by the former president Mohammad Khatami to investigate their detention. They detailed their arrest, solitary confinement in a secret prison, and torture at the hands of their interrogators.  
     
    Mirebrahimi, Memarian and Rafizadeh also met with the head of the Judiciary, Ayatollah Mahmoud Shahrudi, on January 10, 2005 and briefed him on the conditions of their detention. Two days later, the Judiciary’s spokesperson, Jamal Karimirad, said: “Ayatollah Shahrudi has issued a special order to investigate and probe these [detentions]. If any of the detainees’ allegations, at any level, are true then we will prosecute the violators.”  
     
    On April 20, 2005, Karimirad announced that, “following our investigation, it has been established that the interrogators and prosecutors committed a series of negligent and careless acts in this case that led to the abuse of the detainees’ words and writings in producing the confession letters.” The Judiciary did not release a report on its findings and has not held anyone accountable. Human Rights Watch called on the government to make the full findings of its investigation public.  
     
    “The Judiciary has no business prosecuting writers based on confessions it admits were coerced,” said Whitson. “Its first task should be to bring to justice those men responsible for the torture and abuse of these bloggers.”  
     
    Background  
     
    Human Rights Watch recently collected detailed testimonies from three of the bloggers who are currently on trial.  
     
    “I was held in solitary confinement in a secret prison for 86 days,” Rafizadeh told Human Rights Watch. “My cell measured barely 5 feet by 6 feet. The magistrate, Mr. Mehdipoor, was present in the detention center. He threatened me with execution if I didn’t confess to what he dictated. He told the interrogator, known as Mr. Keshavarz, he can do whatever he wants to me, such as ‘peeling the skin off my head.’ The interrogator beat me mercilessly while I was handcuffed and blindfolded. Interrogations continued under these circumstances for more than 40 days.”  
     
    Another former detainee, Mirebrahimi, told Human Rights Watch: “After 60 days of solitary confinement and ill-treatment, the interrogator informed me that I will be released if I sign a confession letter and publicly release it. One day after my release, I was summoned by Mr. Mortazavi’s office and he told me: ‘The release of your friends is dependent on publishing your confession letter. If you don’t do it, not only will they not be released, but we will put you back in prison.’ I was forced to send the confession letter, which Mortazavi dictated, to the news agencies.”  
     
    Memarian told Human Rights Watch that during their meeting with the head of Judiciary, Ayatollah Shahrudi told them “confessions in prison without the presence of your lawyers are not valid.”  
     
    “In any other country, we could file a law suit against the violators. Despite the admission by the head of the Judiciary that our detention and treatment was against the law, we are being prosecuted, not the violators,” Memarian added.

    Orginal artikel og oversættelse på persisk:

    http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/12/12/iran14824.htm

     

     

    Related Material

    False Freedom: Online Censorship in the Middle East and North Africa
    Report, November 16, 2005

    Iran: Judiciary Should Admit Blogger Abuse
    Press Release, April 4, 2005

    Iran: Torture Used to Obtain ‘Confessions’
    Press Release, December 6, 2004

    Iran
    Country Page