

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.

Ethiopian government and ruling party
officials intimidated voters and unlawfully restricted the media ahead
of the May 23, 2010 parliamentary elections, Human Rights Watch said
today.
In assessing the polls, international election observers should
address the repressive legal and administrative measures that the
Ethiopian ruling party used to restrict freedom of expression during
the election campaign, Human Rights Watch said.
"Behind an orderly facade, the government pressured, intimidated and
threatened Ethiopian voters," said Rona Peligal, acting Africa director
at Human Rights Watch. "Whatever the results, the most salient feature
of this election was the months of repression preceding it."
In the weeks leading up to the polls, Human Rights Watch documented
new methods used by the ruling Ethiopian People's Revolutionary
Democratic Front (EPRDF) to intimidate voters in the capital, Addis
Ababa, apparently because of government concerns of a low electoral
turnout.
During April and May, officials and militia (known as tataqi
in Amharic) from the local administration went house to house telling
citizens to register to vote and to vote for the ruling party or face
reprisals from local party officials such as bureaucratic harassment or
even losing their homes or jobs.
The May poll was the first national parliamentary election in
Ethiopia since the government violently suppressed post-election
protests in 2005; almost 200 people, including several police officers,
died after the 2005 poll and tens of thousands of people were arrested,
including opposition leaders, journalists and civil society activists.
In a March 2010 report, "'One Hundred Ways of Putting Pressure': Violations of Freedom of Expression and Association in Ethiopia,"
Human Rights Watch described the complex and multi-faceted way in which
the government has sought since 2005 to silence dissent, restrict the
media and independent civil society, and leverage government resources
such as civil service jobs, loans, food assistance and educational
opportunities to encourage citizens to join the ruling party or leave
the opposition.
The government's efforts to ensure the election outcome continued
right up to polling day in Addis Ababa, according to Human Rights
Watch's research in different areas of the capital, including in
Merkato, Piazza, Wollo Sefer, Meskel Flower, Aya Ulet, Kera, Gotera,
Hayat, Kotebe-CMC and Bole neighborhoods.
"Intimidation to register and to vote for the ruling party is
everywhere," a resident of Addis Ababa told Human Rights Watch. "If the
local administration is against you, they'll be after you forever. They
can come and round you up at will."
Residents of Addis Ababa described numerous forms of intimidation in Addis Ababa in recent weeks.
Pressure to Register to Vote
Many people told Human Rights Watch that tataqi, local kebele
(or neighborhood) militia members came house-to-house asking to see
registration cards and checking if people were members of the ruling
EPRDF party.
A couple living in the Meskel Flower area said they were visited on
a weekly basis by members of the neighborhood militia who were checking
whether they were registered as EPRDF members. The wife told Human
Rights Watch: "One of them approached my husband. 'We know who you
are,' he told him. 'If you don't want to register, no problem, but then
don't come to the sub-kebele and ask for your ID renewal, or for any
other legal paper. We won't help you. It's up to you, now." The
following day the couple registered.
Pressure to Join the Ruling Party When Registering
Different sources across the capital confirmed to Human Rights Watch
that alongside registration, voters were requested to sign a paper,
under a heading "Supporter of EPRDF," that included ID number, age, and
address.
An Addis Ababa resident said, "There's a lot of pressure for you to
obey. They have your name, they ask you to sign. If you don't, it means
you're against them. And they can come back to you whenever they want.
At the end of the day, you just have to do what they force you to do."
Pressure to Vote for the Ruling Party
Pressure to vote for the EPRDF appeared to take a number of different
forms. Pressure was particularly acute among civil servants, people
living in government-owned housing, and those living in poor
neighborhoods.
An elderly resident living in state-owned housing said local
government officials visited her house a few weeks before the elections
asking to see her registration card. She said they wrote down her house
number and told her, "We are going to check. And don't forget to vote
for EPRDF. We provide you the house, we can have it back." She said
that she was frightened by the threat and registered even though she
had not intended to vote.
Civil servants are particularly pressured to vote for EPRDF, saying
that ruling party officials remind them that it is the EPRDF government
that employs them. Patterns of intimidation of teachers and others that
were recently documented in Addis Ababa echo the examples previously
documented across the country by Human Rights Watch in "'One Hundred
Ways Putting Pressure'." For example, a teacher in a public school in
Addis Ababa said: "A few weeks ago my headmaster called us all. He
asked us to show him our registration cards. He wanted to know whom we
were going to vote for as well. I refused. He harassed me and said,
'You better get your card, and vote properly, otherwise after the
elections you might lose your job.'"
Residents also described an EPRDF pyramid recruitment strategy called One-for-Five. A coordinator (ternafi) had to identify five recruits or fellow voters (teternafiwoch)
among family members, friends, colleagues or neighbors. Coordinators
then tried to compel their five signers to go to the polling stations
and vote all together.
A woman in Aya Ulet area said, "A neighbor came to me. He said: 'I
know you voted for the opposition last time. Are you going to vote for
them again? Do I have to report it to the kebele?' I am a civil
servant; I know that party officials and local administrators are the
same thing. For fear of losing my job, the next morning I went to his
place and signed."
Pressure on the Media and Foreign Diplomats
Simultaneous with the increased pressure on voters, in the weeks before
the polls the Ethiopian government of Prime Minister Meles Zenawi acted
to restrict electoral scrutiny by independent media and foreign
diplomats.
The government issued several codes of conduct covering media and
diplomatic activity. Initial drafts of the media regulation restricted
foreign and local journalists from even speaking to anyone involved in
the election process, including voters on election day, in violation of
the right to freedom of expression. Several journalists in different
countries told Human Rights Watch that when they applied for media
visas to cover the elections, they were extensively questioned by
Ethiopian embassy diplomats.
The government told Embassy staff they needed travel permits for any movement outside of Addis Ababa between May 10 to June 20.
"The government has used a variety of methods to strong-arm voters
and try to hide the truth from journalists and diplomats," said
Peligal. "Donor governments need to show that they recognize that these
polls were multi-party theater staged by a single-party state."
Repressive Context of the Elections
Since 2005, Human Rights Watch has documented patterns of serious human
rights violations by the Ethiopian government. Members of the security
forces and government officials have been implicated in numerous war
crimes and crimes against humanity both within Ethiopia and in
neighboring Somalia. The pervasive intimidation of voters and
restrictions on movement and reporting are serious concerns for the
integrity of the electoral process, but represent only one aspect of
the Ethiopian ruling party's long-term effort to consolidate control.
The EPRDF's main instrument for stamping out potential dissent is the local administrative (kebele)
structure, which monitors households and can restrict access to
important government programs, including seeds and fertilizer,
micro-loans and business permits, all depending on support for the
local administration and the ruling party.
Since 2008 the government has also passed new laws to clamp down on independent civil society and the media.
The Charities and Societies Proclamation restricts Ethiopian
nongovernmental organizations from doing any human rights work,
including in the areas of women's and children's rights, if they
receive more than 10 percent of their funding from foreign sources.
Since the law's adoption in 2009, the leading Ethiopian human rights
groups have closed most of their offices, scaled down their staff, and
removed human rights advocacy from their mandates. The new regulatory
agency established by the Charities and Societies Proclamation froze
the bank accounts of the largest independent human rights group, the
Ethiopian Human Rights Council. At least six of Ethiopia's most
prominent human rights activists fled the country in 2009.
Another law, the Anti-Terrorism Proclamation, has also been used to
threaten with prosecution human rights activists and journalists for
any acts deemed to be terrorism under the law's broad and vague definition of the term.
Several journalists also fled in 2009, including the editors of a
prominent independent Amharic newspaper, and in February 2010 Prime
Minister Meles acknowledged that the government was jamming Voice of
America radio broadcasts.
Human Rights Watch urged the international election observer teams
from the European Union and the African Union to take into account in
their public reporting the insidious apparatus of control and the
months of repression that frame the 2010 polls.
Ethiopia is heavily dependent on foreign assistance, which accounts
for approximately one-third of government spending. The country's
principal foreign donors - the United States, the
United Kingdom, and the European Union, which provide more than US$2
billion annually in humanitarian and development aid, - were timid in
their criticisms of Ethiopia's deteriorating human rights situation
ahead of the election.
Human Rights Watch called on the principle donors and other
concerned governments to publicly condemn political repression in
Ethiopia and to review policy towards Ethiopia in light of its
deteriorating human rights record.
"Ethiopia is an authoritarian state in which the government's
commitment to democracy exists only on paper," said Peligal. "The
question is not who won these elections, but how can donors justify
business as usual with this increasingly repressive government?"
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.
A leader at the human rights group called the proposal "a dangerous and dramatic step backwards and a product of ongoing impunity for Israel’s system of apartheid and its genocide in Gaza."
As Israel continues its "silent genocide" in the Gaza Strip one month into a supposed ceasefire with Hamas and Israeli settler attacks on Palestinians in the illegally occupied West Bank hit a record high, Amnesty International on Tuesday ripped the advancement of a death penalty bill championed by far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir.
Israel's 120-member Knesset "on Monday evening voted 39-16 in favor of the first reading of a controversial government-backed bill sponsored by Otzma Yehudit MK Limor Son Har-Melech," the Times of Israel reported. "Two other death penalty bills, sponsored by Likud MK Nissim Vaturi and Yisrael Beytenu MK Oded Forer, also passed their first readings 36-15 and 37-14."
Son Har-Melech's bill—which must pass two more readings to become law—would require courts to impose the death penalty on "a person who caused the death of an Israeli citizen deliberately or through indifference, from a motive of racism or hostility against a population, and with the aim of harming the state of Israel and the national revival of the Jewish people in its land."
Both Hamas—which Israel considers a terrorist organization—and the Palestine Liberation Organization slammed the bill, with Palestinian National Council Speaker Rawhi Fattouh calling it "a political, legal, and humanitarian crime," according to Reuters.
Amnesty International's senior director for research, advocacy, policy, and campaigns, Erika Guevara Rosas, said in a statement that "there is no sugarcoating this; a majority of 39 Israeli Knesset members approved in a first reading a bill that effectively mandates courts to impose the death penalty exclusively against Palestinians."
Amnesty opposes the death penalty under all circumstances and tracks such killings annually. The international human rights group has also forcefully spoken out against Israeli abuse of Palestinians, including the genocide in Gaza that has killed over 69,182 people as of Tuesday—the official tally from local health officials that experts warn is likely a significant undercount.
"The international community must exert maximum pressure on the Israeli government to immediately scrap this bill and dismantle all laws and practices that contribute to the system of apartheid against Palestinians."
“Knesset members should be working to abolish the death penalty, not broadening its application," Guevara Rosas argued. "The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment, and an irreversible denial of the right to life. It should not be imposed in any circumstances, let alone weaponized as a blatantly discriminatory tool of state-sanctioned killing, domination, and oppression. Its mandatory imposition and retroactive application would violate clear prohibitions set out under international human rights law and standards on the use of this punishment."
"The shift towards requiring courts to impose the death penalty against Palestinians is a dangerous and dramatic step backwards and a product of ongoing impunity for Israel's system of apartheid and its genocide in Gaza," she continued. "It did not occur in a vacuum. It comes in the context of a drastic increase in the number of unlawful killings of Palestinians, including acts that amount to extrajudicial executions, over the last decade, and a horrific rise of deaths in custody of Palestinians since October 2023."
Guevara Rosas noted that "not only have such acts been greeted with near-total impunity but with legitimacy and support and, at times, glorification. It also comes amidst a climate of incitement to violence against Palestinians as evidenced by the surge in state-backed settler attacks in the occupied West Bank."
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched the devastating assault on Gaza in response to the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on October 7, 2023. Since then, Israeli soldiers and settlers have also killed more than 1,000 Palestinians in the West Bank, according to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
Netanyahu is now wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and crimes against humanity, and Israel faces an ongoing genocide case at the International Court of Justice. The ICJ separately said last year that Israel's occupation of Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, is unlawful and must end; the Israeli government has shown no sign of accepting that.
The Amnesty campaigner said Tuesday that "it is additionally concerning that the law authorizes military courts to impose death sentences on civilians, that cannot be commuted, particularly given the unfair nature of the trials held by these courts, which have a conviction rate of over 99% for Palestinian defendants."
As CNN reported Monday:
The UN has previously condemned Israel's military courts in the occupied West Bank, saying that "Palestinians' right to due process guarantees have been violated" for decades, and denounced "the lack of fair trial in the occupied West Bank."
UN experts said last year that, "in the occupied West Bank, the functions of police, investigator, prosecutor, and judge are vested in the same hierarchical institution—the Israeli military."
Pointing to the hanging of Nazi official and Holocaust architect Adolf Eichmann, Guevara Rosas highlighted that "on paper, Israeli law has traditionally restricted the use of the death penalty for exceptional crimes, like genocide and crimes against humanity, and the last court-ordered execution was carried out in 1962."
"The bill's stipulation that courts should impose the death penalty on individuals convicted of nationally motivated murder with the intent of 'harming the state of Israel or the rebirth of the Jewish people' is yet another blatant manifestation of Israel's institutionalized discrimination against Palestinians, a key pillar of Israel’s apartheid system, in law and in practice," she asserted.
"The international community must exert maximum pressure on the Israeli government to immediately scrap this bill and dismantle all laws and practices that contribute to the system of apartheid against Palestinians," she added. "Israeli authorities must ensure Palestinian prisoners and detainees are treated in line with international law, including the prohibition against torture and other ill-treatment, and are provided with fair trial guarantees. They must also take concrete steps towards abolishing the death penalty for all crimes and all people."
"In our democracy, the press is a watchdog against abuse," said Marion County Record publisher Eric Meyer. "If the watchdog itself is the target of abuse, and all it does is roll over, democracy suffers.”
A Kansas county has agreed to pay $3 million over 2023 police raids of a local newspaper and multiple homes—one of which belonged to its elderly publisher, whose death shortly followed—sparking nationwide alarm over increasing attacks on the free press.
Marion County agreed to pay the seven-figure settlement and issue a formal apology to the publishers of the Marion County Record admitting that wrongdoing had occurred during the August 11, 2023 raids on the paper's newsroom and two homes.
The apology states that the Marion County Sheriff's Office "wishes to express its sincere regrets to Eric and Joan Meyer and Ruth and Ronald Herbel for its participation in the drafting and execution of the Marion Police Department’s search warrants on their homes and the Marion County Record. This likely would not have happened if established law had been reviewed and applied prior to the execution of the warrant."
Bernie Rhodes, an attorney for the Record, told the paper, "This is a first step—but a big step—in making sure that Joan Meyer’s death served a purpose, in making sure that the next crazed cop who thinks they can raid a newsroom understands the consequences are measured in millions of dollars."
Rhodes was referring to the 98-year-old Record co-owner, who was reportedly in good health for her age, but collapsed and died at her home in the immediate aftermath of the raid by Marion police and country sheriff's deputies.
"This is a first step—but a big step—in making sure that Joan Meyer’s death served a purpose."
Eric Meyer, Joan Meyer's son and the current publisher of the Record, said: “The admission of wrongdoing is the most important part. In our democracy, the press is a watchdog against abuse. If the watchdog itself is the target of abuse, and all it does is roll over, democracy suffers.”
According to the Record, awards include:
Record business manager Cheri Bentz—who suffered aggravation of health conditions following one of the raids—previously settled with the county for $50,000.
Katherine Jacobsen, the US, Canada, and Caribbean program coordinator at the Committee to Protect Journalists, hailed the settlement as "an important win for press freedom amid a growing trend of hostility toward those who hold power to account."
"Journalists must be able to work freely and without fear of having their homes raided and equipment seized due to the overreach of authorities," she added.
The raids—during which police seized the Record‘s electronic equipment, work product, and documentary materials—were conducted with search warrants related to an alleged identity theft investigation.
However, critics—who have called the warrants falsified and invalid—noted that the raids came as the Record investigated sexual misconduct allegations against then-Marion Police Chief Police Gideon Cody. The raids, they say, were motivated by Cody's desire to silence the paper's unfavorable reporting about him.
State District Judge Ryan Rosauer ruled last month that Cody likely committed a felony crime when he instructed a witness with whom he allegedly had an improper romantic relationship to delete text messages they exchanged before, during, and after the raids.
While Cody will not be tried in connection with Meyer's death or the 2023 raids, Rosauer ordered him to stand trial over the deleted texts.
Meyer at the time expressed dismay that Cody wasn't being tried for his mother's death or the raids. He also worried that Cody was being made a scapegoat, as other people and law enforcement agencies were involved in the incident.
Following the announcement of the settlement, Meyer said that "this never has been about money, the key issue always has been that no one is above the law."
"No one can trample on the First and Fourth Amendments for personal or political purposes and get away with it," he continued. "When my mother warned officers that the stress they were putting her under might lead to her death, she called what they were doing Hitler tactics."
"What keeps our democracy from descending as Germany did before World War II is the courage she demonstrated—and we’ve tried to continue—in fighting back," Meyer added.
"This never has been about money, the key issue always has been that no one is above the law."
Five consolidated federal civil rights lawsuits have been filed in the US District Court for the District of Kansas, alleging wrongful death, unlawful searches, retaliation for protected speech, and other claims tied to the raids.
“It’s a shame additional criminal charges aren’t possible,” Meyer said, “but the federal civil cases will do everything they can to discourage future abuses of power.”
Although unable to savor the Record's victory, Joan Meyer presciently told the officers raiding her home, "Boy, are you going to be in trouble."
“She was so right," said Rhodes.
Despite Mamdani's campaign pledge, legal experts have consistently cast doubt on a New York City mayor's authority to order the arrest of a foreign leader.
New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani may have a chance to fulfill one of his campaign promises on his first day of office, although legal experts have repeatedly cast doubt on his power to make it happen.
Republican New York City Councilwoman Inna Vernikov on Tuesday sent a formal invitation to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak in New York City on January 1, 2026, while at the same time daring Mamdani to keep his pledge to have him arrested on war crimes charges.
"On January 1, Mamdani will take office," Vernikov wrote in a post on X. "And also on January 1, I look forward to welcoming Bibi to New York City. NY will always stand with Israel, and no radical Marxists with a title can change that."
The International Criminal Court (ICC) last year issued an arrest warrant for Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during Israel's war in Gaza that has killed at least 69,000 Palestinians.
During his successful mayoral campaign, Mamdani repeatedly said that he would enforce the warrant against Netanyahu should the Israeli leader set foot in his city.
Although Mamdani backed off some of his most strident past statements during the campaign, particularly when it comes to the New York Police Department (NYPD), he doubled down on arresting Netanyahu during a September interview with The New York Times.
"This is a moment where we cannot look to the federal government for leadership," Mamdani told the paper. "This is a moment when cities and states will have to demonstrate what it actually looks like to stand up for our own values, our own people."
However, legal experts who spoke with the Times cast doubt on Mamdani's authority as the mayor of a major American city to arrest a foreign head of government, even if the person in question has been indicted by the ICC.
Among other things, experts said that the NYPD does not have jurisdiction to arrest Netanyahu on international war crimes charges, and the Israeli leader would have to commit some crime in violation of local state or city laws to justify such an action.
Additionally, the US has never been party to the ICC and does not recognize its legal authority.
Matthew Waxman, a professor at Columbia Law School, told the Times that Mamdani's stated determination to arrest Netanyahu was "more a political stunt than a serious law-enforcement policy."