SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Eritrea's extensive detention and torture of its citizens and its policy of prolonged military conscription are creating a human rights crisis and prompting increasing numbers of Eritreans to flee the country, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.
The 95-page report, "Service for Life: State Repression and Indefinite Conscription in Eritrea," documents serious human rights violations by the Eritrean government, including arbitrary arrest, torture, appalling detention conditions, forced labor, and severe restrictions on freedom of movement, expression, and worship. It also analyzes the difficult situation faced by Eritreans who succeed in escaping to other countries such as Libya, Sudan, Egypt, and Italy.
"Eritrea's government is turning the country into a giant prison," said Georgette Gagnon, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. "Eritrea should immediately account for hundreds of 'disappeared' prisoners and open its jails to independent scrutiny."
Human Rights Watch called on the United States and European Union to coordinate with the UN and the African Union to resolve regional tensions and ensure that development aid to Eritrea is linked to progress on human rights.
The EU recently approved a EUR122 million assistance package to Eritrea despite concerns that development projects in Eritrea are carried out by conscript or prison labor in violation of international law.
Based on more than 50 interviews with Eritrean victims and eyewitnesses of abuses in three countries, the report describes how the Eritrean government uses a vast apparatus of official and secret detention facilities to incarcerate thousands of Eritreans without charge or trial. Many of the prisoners are detained for their political or religious beliefs, others because they tried to evade the indefinite national service or flee the country.
Torture, cruel and degrading treatment, and forced labor are routine for conscripts as well as detainees. Detention conditions are appalling, with detainees typically held in overcrowded cells - sometimes underground - or in shipping containers that reach searing temperatures by day and are freezing at night.
Those who try to flee risk severe punishments and the possibility of being shot while crossing the border. The government also punishes the families of those who escape or desert from national service with exorbitant fines or imprisonment. Despite these severe measures, thousands of Eritreans are trying to escape their country.
Most refugees first flee to neighboring Ethiopia and Sudan, and then travel to Libya, Egypt, and Europe. Hundreds of Eritreans have been forcibly repatriated from Libya, Egypt, and Malta in the past few years and have faced detention and torture upon their return.
Because of the risk of mistreatment faced by those who are returned, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has advised against deporting anyone to Eritrea, including rejected asylum seekers. Human Rights Watch called on all countries hosting Eritrean asylum seekers not to forcibly return them, given the risk of torture.
"Countries receiving Eritrean refugees need to make sure that they get the protection and assistance they need," said Gagnon. "Under no circumstances should Eritreans be returned to Eritrea, where they face almost certain detention and torture simply for having fled."
Eritreans celebrated when the country gained its independence from Ethiopia in 1993 after a bloody 30-year war. But the government of President Isayas Afewerki, who led Eritrea through much of its extraordinary struggle for independence, has steadily restricted democratic freedoms, particularly since a 2001 crackdown on political opposition and media.
Eritrea claims its prolonged mass mobilization is justified by security concerns stemming from a two-year border conflict with Ethiopia that cost tens of thousands of lives from 1998 to 2000. The government often blames the United States, the United Nations, and African states for the current political impasse, contending that they have failed to pressure Ethiopia to implement the border demarcation decision of an independent UN commission, which awarded a disputed area to Eritrea.
Eritrea has had tense relations or military clashes with all of its neighbors at one point or another, and the political stalemate between Eritrea and Ethiopia has contributed to regional instability. Each government has supported armed opposition groups against the other, and Eritrea's support for militant Islamist groups in Somalia has exacerbated the conflict in that country.
"Eritrea's human rights crisis is worsening and making the Horn of Africa ever more volatile," said Gagnon. "The US, European, and other governments need to coordinate their policies on the Horn to defuse regional tensions, and make human rights progress an essential benchmark for engagement with Eritrea."
Selected accounts from Eritrean refugees:
"I sacrificed my life for the prosperity, development and freedom of my country but the reverse is true... we did not spend 65,000 martyrs for this!"
- An elderly man who fought for the Eritrean People's Liberation Front (EPLF) in the liberation struggle
"It's okay to do national service, it's fair to serve one's country but not always. It's not fair when it's indefinite."
- A young man who recently fled national service
"If someone is suspected of escaping then they are tied up - just hands or hands and feet, or ferro [with iron handcuffs]. ... Individuals decide what kind of punishment is given, there's no law. They do not have any crimes but [people are punished because] they hate the military or hate to be a soldier. That is the main reason. Because everyone in Eritrea hates to be in the army."
- A former army officer who explained how those suspected of trying to escape from the army were tortured
"First you do your military training then they hold you forever without your rights. The military leaders can ask you for anything and if you refuse their demands then you can be punished. Almost every woman in the military experiences this kind of problem."
- A female recruit who served as a conscript for 10 years and suffered repeated sexual harassment
"In Dahlak there is no time limit, you are waiting for two things: either someone is coming to transfer you or to kill you. When I left Dahlak I was 44 kilograms. My haemoglobin was nothing. I needed a stick to walk. We were living underground, the temperature was 44degC; it was unbelievable. There is no word to express the inhumanity."
- A former political prisoner detained on Dahlak Island in the Red Sea
"If one of the men escapes, you have to go to his home and find him. If you don't find him you have to capture his family and take them to prison. Since 1998, it's standard to collect a family member if someone flees. The administration gives the order to take family members if the national service member is not around. If you disappear inside Eritrea then the family is put in prison for some time and often then the child will return. If you cross the border, then [your family] pays 50,000 Nakfa [US$3,300]. If there's no money then it can be a long time in prison. I know people who are in prison for six months."
- An officer formerly responsible for rounding up national service deserters
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
Unionized machinists are set to vote on the contract on Thursday.
A tentative deal made early Sunday morning between aerospace giant Boeing and the union that represents more than 33,000 of its workers was a testament to the "collective voice" of the employees, said the union's bargaining committee—but members signaled they may reject the offer and vote to strike.
The company and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) District 751 reached an agreement that if approved by members in a scheduled Thursday vote, would narrowly avoid a strike that was widely expected just day ago, when Boeing and the bargaining committee were still far apart in talks over wages, health coverage, and other crucial issues for unionized workers.
The negotiations went on for six months and resulted on Sunday in an agreement on 25% general wage increases over the tentative contract's four years, a reduction in healthcare costs for workers, an increase in the amount Boeing would contribute to retirement plans, and a commitment to building the company's next aircraft in Washington state. The union had come to the table with a demand for a 40% raise over the life of the contract.
"Members will now have only one set of progression steps in a career, and vacation will be available for use as you earn it," negotiating team leaders Jon Holden and Brandon Bryant told members. "We were able to secure upgrades for certain job codes and improved overtime limits, and we now have a seat at the table regarding the safety and quality of the production system."
Jordan Zakarin of the pro-labor media organization More Perfect Union reported that feedback he'd received from members indicated "a strike may still be on the cards," and hundreds of members of the IAM District 751 Facebook group replied, "Strike!" on a post regarding the tentative deal.
The potential contract comes as Boeing faces federal investigations, including a criminal probe by the Department of Justice, into a blowout of a portion of the fuselage on an Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 jetliner that took place when the plane was mid-flight in January.
The Federal Aviation Administration has placed a limit on the number of 737 MAX planes Boeing can produce until it meets certain safety and manufacturing standards.
As The Seattle Timesreported on Friday, while Boeing has claimed it is slowing down production and emphasizing safety inspections in order to ensure quality, mechanics at the company's plant in Everett, Washington have observed a "chaotic workplace" ahead of the potential strike, with managers "pushing partially assembled 777 jets through the assembly line, leaving tens of thousands of unfinished jobs due to defects and parts shortages to be completed out of sequence on each airplane."
Holden and Bryant said Sunday that "the company finds itself in a tough position due to many self-inflicted missteps."
"It is IAM members who will bring this company back on track," they said. "As has been said many times, there is no Boeing without the IAM."
Without 33,000 IAM members to assemble and inspect planes, a strike would put Boeing in an even worse position as it works to meet manufacturing benchmarks.
On Thursday, members will vote on whether or not to accept Boeing's offer and on reaffirming a nearly unanimous strike vote that happened over the summer.
If a majority of members reject the deal and at least two-thirds reaffirm the strike vote, a strike would be called.
If approved, the new deal would be the first entirely new contract for Boeing workers since 2008. Boeing negotiated with the IAM over the last contract twice in 2011 and 2013, in talks that resulted in higher healthcare costs for employees and an end to their traditional pension program.
"Expressing one's vote will be useless as long as Macron is in power," said one demonstrator.
In cities and towns across France on Saturday, more than 100,000 people answered the call from the left-wing political party La France Insoumise for mass protests against President Emmanuel Macron's selection of a right-wing prime minister.
The demonstrations came two months after the left coalition won more seats than Macron's centrist coalition or the far-right Rassemblement National (RN) in the National Assembly and two days after the president announced that Michel Barnier, the right-wing former Brexit negotiator for the European Union, would lead the government.
The selection was made after negotiations between Macron and RN leader Marine Le Pen, leading protesters on Saturday to accuse the president of a "denial of democracy."
"Expressing one's vote will be useless as long as Macron is in power," a protester named Manon Bonijol toldAl Jazeera.
A poll released on Friday by Elabe showed that 74% of French people believed Macron had disregarded the results of July's snap parliamentary elections, and 55% said the election had been "stolen."
Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the leader of La France Insoumise (LFI), or France Unbowed, also accused Macron of "stealing the election" in a speech at the demonstration in Paris on Saturday.
"Democracy is not just the art of accepting you have won but the humility to accept you have lost," Mélenchon told protesters. "I call you for what will be a long battle."
He added that "the French people are in rebellion. They have entered into revolution."
Macron's centrist coalition won about 160 assembly seats out of 577 in July, compared to the left coalition's 180. The RN won about 140.
Barnier's Les Républicains (LR) party won fewer than 50 parliamentary seats. French presidents have generally named prime ministers, who oversee domestic policy, from the party with the most seats in the National Assembly.
Barnier signaled on Friday that he would largely defend Macron's pro-business policies and could unveil stricter anti-immigration reforms. Macron has enraged French workers and the left with policies including a retirement age hike last year.
Protests also took place in cities including Nantes, Nice, Montpellier, Marseilles, and Strasbourg.
All four left-wing parties within the Nouveau Front Populaire (NFP) coalition have announced plans to vote for a motion of no confidence against Barnier.
The RN has not committed to backing Barnier's government yet and leaders have said they are waiting to see what policies he presents to the National Assembly before deciding how to proceed in a no confidence vote.
"Our fight to ensure that voters—not politicians—have the final say is far from over," said one organizer.
Campaigners who last month celebrated the success of their effort to place an abortion rights referendum on November ballots in Missouri faced uncertainty about the ballot initiative Friday night, after a judge ruled that organizers had made an error on their petitions that rendered the measure invalid.
Judge Christopher Limbaugh of Cole County Circuit Court sided with pro-forced pregnancy lawmakers and activists who had argued that Missourians for Constitutional Freedom had not sufficiently explained the ramifications of the Right to Reproductive Freedom initiative, or Amendment 3, which would overturn the state's near-total abortion ban.
The state constitution has a requirement that initiative petitions include "an enacting clause and the full text of the measure," and clarify the laws or sections of the constitution that would be repealed if the amendment were passed.
Missourians for Constitutional Freedom included the full text of the measure on their petitions, which were signed by more than 380,000 residents—more than twice the number of signatures needed to place the question on ballots.
Opponents claimed, though, that organizers did not explain to signatories the meaning of "a person's fundamental right to reproductive freedom."
Limbaugh accused the group of a "blatant violation" of the constitution.
Rachel Sweet, campaign manager for the group, said it "remains unwavering in [its] mission to ensure Missourians have the right to vote on reproductive freedom on November 5."
"The court's decision to block Amendment 3 from appearing on the ballot is a profound injustice to the initiative petition process and undermines the rights of the... 380,000 Missourians who signed our petition," said Sweet. "Our fight to ensure that voters—not politicians—have the final say is far from over."
Limbaugh said he would wait until Tuesday, when the state is set to print ballots, to formally issue an injunction instructing the secretary of state to remove the question.
Missourians for Constitutional Freedom said it plans to appeal to a higher court, but if the court declines to act, the question would be struck from ballots.
As the case plays out in the coming days, said Missouri state Rep. Eric Woods (D-18), "it's a good time for a reminder that Missouri's current extreme abortion ban has ZERO exceptions for rape or incest. And Missouri Republicans are hell bent on keeping it that way."
The ruling came weeks after the Arkansas Supreme Court disqualified an abortion rights amendment from appearing on November ballots, saying organizers had failed to correctly submit paperwork verifying that paid canvassers had been properly trained.