December, 10 2012, 02:03pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Youn Hwang, Greenpeace Seoul Office Communications Officer
pkr@greenpeace.org +82 10 4089 6980, +82 2 3144 1996
Greg McNevin, Greenpeace International Communications
greg.mcnevin@greenpeace.org, +82 2 3144 1995
Greenpeace International Press Desk Hotline, Amsterdam +31 20 7182470
Greenpeace Files Court Case to Challenge South Korea's Silencing of Nuclear Critics
WASHINGTON
Greenpeace International and Greenpeace East Asia have launched a legal challenge against the South Korean government seeking a declaration that the government's prohibiting of key international staff from entering the country was unlawful and an attempt to silence criticism of nuclear policies.
Through the lawsuit, lodged on Monday on international Human Rights Day, Greenpeace is seeking compensation of almost 70 million Korean won for disruption of six staff members' ability to conduct their campaign about the risks of nuclear energy and for other damages.
Greenpeace is also seeking recognition that the denial of entry of its staff was an attack on freedom of expression and a violation of international human rights.
"Following the Fukushima disaster, the South Korean government is trying to silence us for highlighting the tremendous risks nuclear power poses. It refuses to hear criticism of its nuclear programme and actively attacks those attempting to inform the public," said Pino Lee, nuclear campaigner with Greenpeace East Asia, based in Seoul.
"This illustrates the dangerous influence the nuclear industry has on Korea's political system, and represents a violation of the right to freedom of expression under Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the Korean government has acceded to."
Since establishing an office in South Korea in June 2011, the government has denied entry to four Greenpeace East Asia staff without justification. In addition, two Greenpeace International staff members have been prohibited from entering South Korea.
Coupled with the South Korean government's crackdown on domestic anti-nuclear groups and a 10 billion won (US$9 million) investment in a pro-nuclear advertising campaign, Greenpeace says the prohibition of entry is clearly aimed at shutting down criticism of the country's dangerous nuclear expansion programme.
As South Korea was recently elected as a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council, Greenpeace is demanding that it listen to concerns by the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, uphold its commitment to respect the promotion and protection of human rights and cease its attempts to silence NGOs speaking out on issues of national importance.
"By unjustly prohibiting Greenpeace staff from entering Korea without reason, the government has created a chilling effect among those who wish to voice their concerns about nuclear power," said Lee.
"The quality of South Korea's democracy is under threat, as is the health of our people, our environment and our economy. Renewable energy is the only truly clean and safe way forward and Greenpeace will not allow those who support clean energy rather than nuclear power to be silenced."
Greenpeace organisations do not accept donations from governments or corporations but rely on contributions from individual supporters and foundation grants. www.greenpeace.org/korea
Notes:
1) Text of Greenpeace's complaint to the Korean Government: https://bit.ly/TUdHM7
2) Greenpeace staff prohibited entry to South Korea:
1. Jan Beranek, Greenpeace International energy team leader, 8 October 2012
2. Rianne Teule, Greenpeace International nuclear campaigner, 8 October 2012
3. Gavin Edwards, seconded to Greenpeace East Asia as climate and energy manager for the Seoul office, 20 April 2012
4. Dr. Mario Damato, Executive Director of Greenpeace East Asia, 2 April 2012
5. Fung Ka Keung, organisational support and regional development director, Greenpeace East Asia, November 2011 and April 2012
6. Rashid Kang, organisational development manager for Seoul office, Greenpeace East Asia, November 2011 and April 2012
3) "According to local news media, the Korea Nuclear Energy Promotion Agency under the Ministry of Knowledge Economy will seek to set aside 10 billion won ($9.3 million) next year to beef up the publicity of nuclear energy safety." https://www.koreaherald.com/national/Detail.jsp?newsMLId=20110819000786
4) Lessons from Fukushima report including executive summary: https://bit.ly/JbUAWz
5) In 2010, South Korea was criticised for its record of protecting free expression by Mr. Frank La Rue, UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, saying: "I am concerned that in recent years, there has been a shrinking space for freedom of expression in the Republic of Korea [..]. For the Republic of Korea to be a leader internationally, it must not only show the world its economic and technological prowess, but also its commitment to a truly democratic model of governance with full respect for human rights." https://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/opinion/docs/ROK-Pressstatement17052010.pdf
Greenpeace is a global, independent campaigning organization that uses peaceful protest and creative communication to expose global environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future.
+31 20 718 2000LATEST NEWS
US Under Fire for Downplaying Security Council Resolution as 'Nonbinding'
One expert accused the U.S. of working to "undermine and sabotage the U.N. Security Council, the 'rules-based order,' and international law."
Mar 26, 2024
Biden administration officials attempted Monday to downplay the significance of a newly passed United Nations Security Council resolution, drawing ire from human rights advocates who said the U.S. is undercutting international law and stonewalling attempts to bring Israel's devastating military assault on Gaza to an end.
The resolution "demands an immediate cease-fire for the month of Ramadan respected by all parties, leading to a lasting sustainable cease-fire." The U.S., which previously vetoed several cease-fire resolutions, opted to abstain on Monday, allowing the measure to pass.
Shortly after the resolution's approval, several administration officials—including State Department spokesman Matthew Miller, White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby, and U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Linda Thomas-Greenfield—falsely characterized the measure as "nonbinding."
"It's a nonbinding resolution," Kirby told reporters. "So, there's no impact at all on Israel and Israel's ability to continue to go after Hamas."
Watch Matt Lee ask StateSpox about the passing of the UN ceasefire resolution. Basically the US position is it makes no difference and Miller calls 🇷🇺/🇨🇳 veto cynical.
Lee: Do you expect Israel is going to announce a ceasefire?
Miller: I do not
Lee: What’s the point of the UN? pic.twitter.com/FibaSKWjuh
— Assal Rad (@AssalRad) March 25, 2024
Josh Ruebner, an adjunct lecturer at Georgetown University and former policy director of the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights, wrote in response that "there is no such thing as a 'nonbinding' Security Council resolution."
"Israel's failure to abide by this resolution must open the door to the immediate imposition of Chapter VII sanctions," Ruebner wrote.
Beatrice Fihn, the director of Lex International and former executive director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, condemned what she called the Biden administration's "appalling behavior" in the wake of the resolution's passage. Fihn said the administration's downplaying of the resolution shows how the U.S. works to "openly undermine and sabotage the U.N. Security Council, the 'rules-based order,' and international law."
In a Monday op-ed for Common Dreams, Phyllis Bennis, a senior fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, warned that administration officials' claim that the resolution was "nonbinding" should be seen as "setting the stage for the U.S. government to violate the U.N. Charter by refusing to be bound by the resolution's terms."
While all U.N. Security Council resolutions are legally binding, they're difficult to enforce and regularly ignored by the Israeli government, which responded with outrage to the latest resolution and canceled an Israeli delegation's planned visit to the U.S.
Israel Katz, Israel's foreign minister,
wrote on social media Monday that "Israel will not cease fire."
The resolution passed amid growing global alarm over the humanitarian crisis that Israel has inflicted on the Gaza Strip, where most of the population of around 2.2 million is displaced and at increasingly dire risk of starvation.
Amnesty International secretary-general Agnes Callamard said Monday that it was "just plain irresponsible" of U.S. officials to "suggest that a resolution meant to save lives and address massive devastation and suffering can be disregarded."
In addition to demanding an immediate cease-fire, the Security Council resolution calls for the unconditional release of all remaining hostages and "emphasizes the urgent need to expand the flow of humanitarian assistance."
Israel has systematically obstructed aid deliveries to Gaza, including
U.S.-funded flour shipments.
Farhan Haq, deputy spokesman for the U.N. secretary-general, stressed during a briefing Monday that "all the resolutions of the Security Council are international law."
"They are as binding as international laws," Haq said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
​State of Emergency Declared After Cargo Ship Destroys Baltimore Bridge
Maryland Congressman Jamie Raskin said he was "deeply concerned for the safety and well-being of everyone affected by the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore."
Mar 26, 2024
A state of emergency was declared in Maryland early Tuesday morning after a large cargo ship slammed into the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, leading to its total collapse and sending a number of vehicles and people into the Patapsco River.
As the Baltimore Sunreports:
In a Tuesday morning news conference, just a few hours after the incident, Baltimore Fire Department Chief James Wallace said authorities are "still very much in an active search and rescue posture" noting they are searching for "upwards of seven individuals" and that sonar has detected the presence of vehicles in the water. There is no indication that the event was intentional, Wallace said.
"This is a tragedy that you could never imagine … It looked like something out of an action movie," Mayor Brandon Scott said.
In a later press conference, officials said that two members of a construction crew that was on the bridge at the time of the collision had been rescued while six others remained unaccounted for.
The terrifying footage of the bridge's collapse—which CNN correspondent Omar Jimenez commented was "almost unbelievable" to watch—is circulating widely on news channels and social media:
This video is almost unbelievable. The Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore literally collapsed this morning after it was struck by this large ship. pic.twitter.com/rYuy4U2r7H
— Omar Jimenez (@OmarJimenez) March 26, 2024
U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said Tuesday that he had spoken with Mayor Scott and well as Maryland Governor Wes Moore and was helping to coordinate federal assistance.
"Rescue efforts remain underway and drivers in the Baltimore area should follow local responder guidance on detours and response," said Buttigieg.
Moore said in a statement he had declared a state of emergency and that work was underway to "quickly deploy federal resources" to the area.
"We are thankful for the brave men and women who are carrying out efforts to rescue those involved and pray for everyone's safety," said Moore. "We will remain in close contact with federal, state, and local entities that are carrying out rescue efforts as we continue to assess and respond to this tragedy."
Early reporting indicated that no crew members aboard the container ship, which sails under a Singapore flag, were injured or missing. A local harbor pilot was also said to be on board at the time of the crash.
"Deeply concerned for the safety and well-being of everyone affected by the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore," said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) following the accident. "I'm profoundly thankful to first responders on the scene and will track rescue efforts by local, state, and federal authorities."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Grave 'Threat to Journalists' Remains as UK Court Delays Assange Extradition Ruling
"The Biden administration should take the opportunity to drop this dangerous case once and for all," said the executive director of the Freedom of the Press Foundation.
Mar 26, 2024
The United Kingdom's High Court ruled Tuesday that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange cannot immediately be extradited to the United States and gave the Biden administration three weeks to provide "assurances" that the publisher's First Amendment rights will be protected and that he won't face the death penalty.
If the U.S. does not provide the requested assurances, Assange will be allowed to pursue a limited appeal of his extradition. Should the U.S. submit assurances by the April 16 deadline, a hearing will be held on May 20 to determine whether they are "satisfactory."
Assange, whose health has deteriorated badly during his five years in a high-security London jail, faces 17 counts of violating the Espionage Act and a possible 175-year prison sentence in the U.S. for publishing classified information—a common journalistic practice. WikiLeaks disclosures exposed grave U.S. and U.K. war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Press freedom and human rights groups say the extradition of Assange to the U.S. would set a dangerous precedent and pose a dire threat to journalism everywhere.
Trevor Timm, executive director of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, said in a statement Tuesday that "we are glad Julian Assange is not getting extradited today."
"But this legal battle is far from over, and the threat to journalists and the news media from the Espionage Act charges against Assange remains," said Timm. "Assange's conviction in American courts would create a dangerous precedent that the U.S. government can and will use against reporters of all stripes who expose its wrongdoing or embarrass it. The Biden administration should take the opportunity to drop this dangerous case once and for all."
"It's long past time for the U.S. Justice Department to abandon the Espionage Act charges and resolve this case."
The U.S., which has been aggressively pursuing Assange's extradition for years, previously provided the U.K. government with assurances that Assange would not be held at a supermax prison that's notorious for its inhumane treatment of inmates.
Human rights groups have said such assurances from the U.S. government are "inherently unreliable" and should not be taken seriously by British authorities.
"While the U.S. has allegedly assured the U.K. that it will not violate Assange's rights, we know from past cases that such 'guarantees' are deeply flawed—and the diplomatic assurances so far in the Assange case are riddled with loopholes," noted Simon Crowther, legal adviser at Amnesty International.
"The U.S. must stop its politically motivated prosecution of Assange, which puts Assange and media freedom at risk worldwide," Crowther said Tuesday. "In trying to imprison him, the U.S. is sending an unambiguous warning to publishers and journalists everywhere that they too could be targeted and that it is not safe for them to receive and publish classified material—even if doing so is in the public interest."
Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, echoed that message, saying in a statement that "prosecuting Assange for the publication of classified information would have profound implications for press freedom, because publishing classified information is what journalists and news organizations often need to do in order to expose wrongdoing by government."
"It's long past time for the U.S. Justice Department to abandon the Espionage Act charges and resolve this case," said Jaffer.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular