AZERBAIJAN: A NATION ON THE EDGE

It was reported in the past week that the country’s most popular human rights activist and newspaper editor, Khilal Mamedov, had been arrested by the Azeri authorities on alleged charges of drug possession. Azerbaijan police officials were said to have found 5.8 grams of heroin on Mamedov’s person while 28.3 grams of the substance was found in his residence. If convicted Mamedov faces three to 12 years imprisonment.


Mamedov’s Background

Mamedov of course gained notoriety as one of the creators of the “Who are you? Come on, goodbye?” video which went viral in May of this year on Twitter and was then adopted by Russian Anti-Vladimir Putin groups as their campaigns’ theme tune. Mamedov has championed the cause of the Talysh, who are a minority ethnic group in Southern Azerbaijan, a region which borders northern Iran. The Talysh are said to be often marginalised by and not adequately represented by the Baku – the country’s administrative capital – based government. An attempt by the Talysh to secede from the Baku government in 1993 was quelled by the authorities.


The Government’s Ulterior Motives

The human rights group, Institute for Peace and Democracy (IPD) has denounced the arrest of Mamedov calling it a politically motivated act on the part of the government. The IPD appear to suggest that the arrest is intrinsically linked to Mamedov’s human rights activism. Leila Yunus, the organisation’s head, in calling for the release of Mamedov stated: “Khilal Mamedov had authority among the Talysh minority, and officially Baku doesn't favour them." She added: “His arrest is a direct pressure on national minorities in Azerbaijan.”

The fears of human rights activists that the arrest is politically motivated are justified as the government has previous form in terms of stifling voices of protest. Mamedov’s newspaper’s previous editor, Tolishi Sado died in prison in 2010, two years into his 10-year prison sentence for allegedly spying for Iran, charges which most observers denounce as trumped up at best and fantasist at worst.


Government’s Defence

The government for its part has of course denied that the arrest was in any way linked to Mamedov’s activism. The Azeri Interior Ministry deputy spokesperson Ekhsan Zaidov informed the press in the aftermath of the arrest that it had no connection to the protest video or Mamedov’s professional activity, that is his human rights campaigns. Rest assured, the government’s protestations have mostly fallen on the deaf ears of those it seeks to convince otherwise about the reasons for the arrest of the prominent human rights campaigner.


A Government of Contradiction

The proverbial giving with one hand whilst taking away with the other seems to apply to the Azeri government’s recent actions. On the same week on which Mamedov appears to have been made the subject of trumped up charges, the Ilham Aliyev-led government granted amnesty to about 64 prisoners and human rights activists. Aliyev is currently serving a second term as President following an election victory in October 2008, an election which was boycotted by the main opposition parties and which many Western observers denounced at the time as fundamentally flawed. A referendum held in March 2009 effectively removed the constitutional limit on the number of terms which an acting President could serve thus paving the way for Aliyev to be ‘President for Life’.


Sound-off

What remains clear is that despite the occasional overtures made by Aliyev to placate his Western critics such as sanctioning the release of some unjustly held prisoners, his assault on human rights and the concept’s proponents show no signs of abating in the immediate future. The regime may have silenced Sado and is presently on its way to silencing Mamedov but what the government appears to underestimate is the hydra-like nature of the Azeri opposition which defies any easy solution.

WAR-AFFLICTED SUDAN AND SOUTH SUDAN IN LAST CHANCE SALOON

After months of what one can only term as the ‘digging in of heels’ of the respective parties involved in the bloody dispute, it came as a shock to most observers when the Sudanese government this week revealed that it was now ready to resume talks with South Sudan.


Origins of the Dispute

Observers recall that the present conflict stems from a border dispute between both countries which arose in April of this year. Subsequent talks engineered by the African Union unsurprisingly failed to yield the desired results due to both sides’ entrenched positions. The crux of the matter was essentially a ‘minor’ – in the grand scheme of things – disagreement as to how and where the demilitarised buffer zone was to be erected.

Whilst attempting to avoid accusations of being pessimistic, one cannot help but raise the rather valid point that if the above disagreement was sufficient in itself to halt negotiations, it is in turn overly difficult to countenance how both parties will be able to resolve other issues which have also been thrown into the mix. Both countries are at loggerheads over oil export fees as South Sudan heavily depends on Sudan for exporting oil. Further, there are accusations made by both sides regarding the other’s association or rather affiliation with armed gangs who carry out raids on each other’s territory as well as additional disputes in relation to ownership of oil producing border regions.


The United Nations Involvement

The conflict has inevitably resulted in further unnecessary loss of life which is in addition to the about 2 million lives lost during the civil war between the north and south in the period of 1955 to 2005. The UN, for all the mostly deserved criticisms levelled at it in recent times, has been swift to act on this rare occasion. The Security Council’s May 2 resolution has widely been credited for preventing further escalation of the conflict between both nations. Susan Rice, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations acknowledged as such in declaring that the conflict between both the Sudan and South Sudan was “in a better place” than was the case prior to the authorisation of the resolution.


Humanitarian Crises

In respect of the humanitarian crises which arose in the South Kordofan and Blue Nile regions which appear to be the most affected areas owing to the conflict, she stated: "What we are seeing in terms of those refugees who have made it across the border is absolutely alarming. Those are the healthy ones, comparatively, that are able to make it out…this is indeed an exceedingly worryingly situation.” She continued, "There has been no progress in terms of the government of Sudan allowing open humanitarian access, including into rebel areas."


South Sudan and its Chequered History

South Sudan has had a rather chequered history since it attained independent status last July, thus becoming the world’s newest country. Aside the war with its more illustrious neighbour, South Sudanese government officials are battling allegations of chronic corruption made by its President, Salva Kiir. The embezzlement of public funds has been blamed for the little to no evidence of State development since it succeeded in seceding from its parent country, the Sudan. This has led to the country’s president issuing an unprecedented public call, by way of a letter, for the return of public monies. In the letter to current and former government officials dated 3rd May, Mr Kiir stated: "An estimated $4 billion are unaccounted for or, simply put, stolen by former and current officials, as well as corrupt individuals with close ties to government officials."


Sound-off

Whether next week’s meeting between both countries will be successful at achieving a cessation of hostilities is anyone’s guess. What appears to be clear however is that the said meeting probably presents the last opportunity for the resolution of matters via dialogue before full scale violence engulfs this war-afflicted region of the world.

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE DEATH PENALTY

1worldinternational is pleased to have Andrea Trattner as its guest author. This week she presents a compelling polemic on the death penalty. 1worldinternational assures its readers that the views of supporters of the death penalty will be somewhat altered after viewing this page. Again, the views espoused by the author are solely hers.


Note: This article refers mainly to the USA, which is the only G8 country continuing to enforce the death penalty. Most readily available data regarding convictions and executions is from US sources, with other countries, such as China, refusing to publish official statistics relating to convictions and executions. It is therefore reasonable to assume that the actual number of executions carried out each year is substantially higher than official reports suggest.


Intoduction

In May 2012, Columbia University law professor James Liebman published an article (An Anatomy of a Wrongful Execution (2012), of his findings following an investigation into the case of Carlos DeLuna, convicted of stabbing a Hispanic woman to death in 1983. Liebman’s investigation highlighted a catalogue of errors that had led to the conviction of DeLuna, throwing serious doubt on the conviction.

However, Carlos DeLuna could not benefit from the findings of this investigation. This was because following his conviction in the state of Texas, he was executed by lethal injection in 1989, more than 20 years before Liebman’s findings were published.


Flaws in the Arguments of the Supporters of the Death Penalty

The conviction of Carlos DeLuna rested on the testimony of an eyewitness who saw a Hispanic man leaving the scene of the crime, who later identified that man to be DeLuna. The forensic evidence gathered rendered no conclusive findings and DeLuna not only claimed to be innocent, but also named the person that he believed to be guilty, a man known to the police following a string of offences, including armed robbery and as a suspect in another murder investigation. In addition, the man that DeLuna named as the murderer, a Mr Hernandez, was also reported to have confessed to the murder at one point.

Liebman concluded that the flaws in the investigation, not least “faulty eyewitness testimony, poor legal representation and evidence withheld from the defence — continue to put innocent people at risk of execution….”


Arguments against the Death Penalty

The possibility of innocence is one of the strongest arguments against the use of the death penalty. The possibility of wrongful execution is very real as no criminal justice system is without human error; people make mistakes and this has led to wrongful convictions in capital cases. Human error takes many forms within the justice system:

• eyewitness error - from confusion or faulty memory
• government misconduct - by both the police and the prosecution
• junk science - mishandled evidence or use of unqualified "experts"
• snitch testimony - often given in exchange for a reduction in sentence
• false confessions - resulting from mental illness or retardation, as well as from police torture
• other - hearsay, questionable circumstantial evidence, etc.

Since 1973, 140 people have been released from death row in light of new evidence. There is no way to accurately calculate how many innocent people have been wrongly executed as courts do not entertain claims of innocence once the defendant is dead. However, there are cases where evidence has come to light which strongly suggests the defendants’ innocence after the sentence has been carried out. Whatever the cause of the wrongful execution, there is no way to compensate for the mistake once the truth comes to light.


Executions

Globally, although fewer countries are carrying out executions (21 countries worldwide in 2011) the number of executions carried out in 2011 showed an increase from 2010 figures, mainly attributed to the “significant increase” of executions in Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

At least 676 executions were known to have been carried out in 2011 with more than 18,750 people sentenced to death worldwide by the end of 2011. According to the UK newspaper, The Guardian, the countries that carried out the most executions in 2011 are believed to be China, Iran, North Korea, Yemen and USA, with the USA being the only G8 country to have carried out executions. Official figures do not include the thousands of executions which are believed to be carried out in China as China does not provide any figures regarding convictions and executions.

The USA is not only the only remaining G8 country to carry out executions; it is also one of the five top executioners based on 2011 figures. Since reintroducing the death penalty in 1976, 1295 people have been executed. In 2011, 43 people were executed in 13 of the 33 states that retain the death penalty. This year 18 executions have been carried out so far. The state of Texas has carried out most executions since 1976, with Texan executions totalling 30% of the USA total in 2011.


The Future

In November 2012 Californians will vote in a referendum considering the abolition of the death penalty. This measure would replace the death penalty for death row inmates to life imprisonment. In California only 13 executions have been carried out since reintroducing the death penalty in 1978 with no executions being carried out since 2006.

In light of the presence of human error in the legal justice system, clearly demonstrated by cases such as that of Carlos DeLuna, it must be concluded that the death penalty is not an acceptable punishment for crimes as errors made in the conviction cannot be rectified later. Innocent people have been executed, which is not justice and cannot be compensated for after the sentence has been carried out.


Sound-off

There is currently no evidence that demonstrates that States that have death penalty laws have lower crime rates than states without such laws. The death penalty has no deterrent effect on the crime rates.

Furthermore, there is a serious moral issue with giving the power over life and death to members of the judicial system. Not least because of the known presence of human error and possibility for judgements to be influenced for personal or political gain. Legally, some countries carry out the death penalty but this does not mean that morally, it isn’t wrong.



Andrea Trattner studied law in Austria and England. She worked as a volunteer for Amnesty International for many years. She dealt in particular with issues about Africa (Zimbabwe). Her personal interest is above all the issue of death penalty and its abolition, in particular regarding death penalty in the USA.

GLOBAL POLIO ERADICATION INITIATIVE (GPEI) DECLARES LAST STAND AGAINST POLIO

Today, 1worldinternational reports on the UN and WHO's redoubled efforts to tackle the resurgence of polio. The piece was recently written by the weblog's author and published by the NGO, RESULTS UK.





The fight against Polio (poliomyelitis) received a boost last week with the launch of an ‘emergency action plan’ by the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI). The news follows recent fears about the resurgence of the disease in countries such as the Congo and China where the disease was thought to have been eradicated.


Polio

Polio is a disease caused by a virus which operates within its victims’ nervous system. It affects children mainly under the age of five and often leads to paralysis and in some cases death.


The Master plan

The plan devised by the GPEI involves increasing the WHO’s current vaccination programmes in Nigeria, Pakistan and Afghanistan, the only three countries where polio remains endemic, to levels needed to prevent the transmission of the disease. If the programme is successful in eradicating the disease, polio will become only the second disease ever to have been eradicated after small pox.


The Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI)

The GPEI was formed in 1988 and was spearheaded by the WHO, Rotary International, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and UNICEF. It is also supported by polio-affected and donor governments, private foundations, development banks, humanitarian and non-governmental organizations, corporate partners and more than 20 million volunteers.


Vaccinations and Difficulties

Vaccinations have to date been the most effective means of preventing the spread of the disease. The most common vaccines are oral polio vaccine (OPV) and inactivated polio vaccine (IPV). However, the programme has faced various challenges in the countries in which the disease is still endemic such as insecurity, weak health systems and poor sanitation. Adding to the mix are the volatile concoctions of political and religious problems which have also hampered the gains being made. For instance, extremist Islamic leaders in Pakistan and Nigeria continually denounce the vaccination programme as a western conspiracy thereby preventing health officials from administering vaccinations to populations who remain prone to contracting the disease.


The Last stand

The UN has joined the WHO in publicly highlighting the threats posed by the disease if left unchecked. "Wild viruses and wildfires have two things in common. If neglected, they can spread out of control. If handled properly, they can be stamped out for good,” the organisation’s Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said last week. According to Ban Ki-moon the Global Polio Eradication Initiative has only half of the $2 billion it needs to procure vaccines and deploy staff to cover the areas in the countries in which the disease is prevalent. The UN anticipates that about $40-50 billion will be saved in the cost of treatment by 2035, not to mention the countless lives of children at risk across the globe, if its last stand against polio is successful.