June, 04 2010, 02:30pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7413 5566,After hours: +44 7778 472 126,Email:,press@amnesty.org
Human Rights Concerns in South Africa During the World Cup
There has been an increase in police harassment of informal traders
(hawkers), homeless South Africans, and refugees and migrants who are
living in shelters or high density inner city accommodation.
This harassment has included police raids, arbitrary arrests,
ill-treatment and extortion, as well as destruction of informal housing.
The tearing down of informal housing has taken place without prior
notice, provision of adequate alternative housing or compensation and in
violation of domestic law prohibiting forced evictions.
LONDON
There has been an increase in police harassment of informal traders
(hawkers), homeless South Africans, and refugees and migrants who are
living in shelters or high density inner city accommodation.
This harassment has included police raids, arbitrary arrests,
ill-treatment and extortion, as well as destruction of informal housing.
The tearing down of informal housing has taken place without prior
notice, provision of adequate alternative housing or compensation and in
violation of domestic law prohibiting forced evictions.
Regulations created to comply with FIFA World Cup requirements in
host cities are being used by police to expel homeless people and street
traders from "controlled access sites" and exclusion zones around World
Cup venues. Penalties for offences under the regulations include fines
of up to Rand 10,000 {$1,300] or imprisonment of up to six months.
In May 2010 hawkers protested outside the local FIFA operations
centre in Soweto calling for an end to evictions and the disruption of
their means of livelihood near soccer stadiums. Elsewhere tense
confrontations have occurred between police and street traders, over
seizures of street traders' goods, in the name of cleaning up the
streets for the World Cup.
Xenophobic violence
In the first five months of 2010 at least eleven incidents were
recorded in five provinces involving violent attacks and looting of
shops, particularly of Somali and Ethiopian nationals. .
This violence has often been linked to public protests over
corruption and failures of local government to deliver basic services in
poor neighbourhoods.
Migrants and refugees are perceived by some as competing for jobs,
housing and economic opportunities, and become targets of violence
during the protests. However xenophobic attitudes also fuel the violence
and appear to underlie the local police failure to respond swiftly or,
in a few cases, to connive with the perpetrators of the violence.
Access to justice and compensation for the victims has also proven very
difficult.
In early June the government responded to appeals from South African
civil society, Amnesty International and others to give urgent attention
to the indications of possible large-scale xenophobic violence,
including threats made to refugees and migrants that, "after the World
Cup" they will be driven out again from their neighbourhoods or the
country.
After its cabinet meeting on 2 June, the government announced the
establishment of an inter-ministerial committee to focus on incidents
and threats of attacks on foreign nationals and promised that law
enforcement agencies would act swiftly against any person inciting or
participating in violence against foreign nationals. Amnesty
International welcomes this move.
Violent crime and policing
The security forces have made plans to ensure the protection of
football stadiums and other areas where fans and visitors are expected
to gather.
AI has a number of concerns in light of these plans. First, that the
enormous resources which have had to be deployed for the World Cup,
largely as part of requirements set by FIFA, will have consequences for
the safety and security of South Africans, particularly those living in
poorer neighbourhoods where effective policing and crime prevention is
already a serious challenge.
Refugees and migrants, already unable to secure adequate police
protection against xenophobic attacks may be increasingly vulnerable.
Secondly, the priority given to protecting visitors may lead the
police to misuse lethal force against criminal suspects and in a manner
contrary to international human rights standards. Police contingency
plans relating to "domestic extremism" and "protests" should not result
in the excessive use of force and or violate the right of protestors to
peaceful assembly.
Amnesty International and other bodies have documented an increase in
instances of torture of suspects in criminal investigations, the
excessive use of force against protestors and deaths as a result of the
misuse of lethal force in 2009. KwaZulu-Natal province showed a 47 per
cent increase in fatal shootings by the police over the past two years.
World Cup expenditure
South Africa faces major socio-economic challenges and the government
is struggling to effectively address persistent high unemployment
rates, severe inequality and gaps in the provision of basic services in
poor urban and rural communities.
AI does not have a view on governments' expenditure in relation to
the hosting of mega-sports events. Some temporary employment
opportunities appear to have been created in the preparations for the
World Cup and there may be a longer-term benefit from the development of
improved urban public transport infrastructure. .
However, protestors from poor communities have continued to raise
concerns that the majority of South Africans are still being excluded
from the benefits of hosting the World Cup.
The requirements under the "FIFA by-laws" which create extensive
exclusion zones for informal economic activity are seen as particularly
prejudicial in the context of a country where a large group of South
Africans are totally reliant on the informal sector economy for their
survival.
One of Amnesty International's main campaign focuses in South Africa
is to promote increased and non-discriminatory access to HIV-related
health services for prevention, treatment and care, particularly for
women in distant rural areas.
While the government recently launched a new drive to combat the HIV
epidemic, it will need to display the same level of determination
evident in its World Cup preparations to overcome transport and other
obstacles to the right to health for women in these areas and who are
disproportionately affected by the epidemic.
Amnesty International calls on the South African government to:
*
End arbitrary arrests and other abuses against poor South Africans,
including street traders, and migrants through the misuse of local
government by-laws and World Cup-related regulations;
* Institute
an independent and full investigation into the alleged abuses by police
and local government authorities, and ensure access to justice and
compensation for those affected
* Ensure that any use of force by
police to maintain public order is proportionate and consistent with
international human rights standards;
* Ensure the speedy
implementation of effective prevention and emergency response
mechanisms, as well as measures to combat impunity for crimes against
refugees and others in need of international protection.
*
Increase efforts to address persistent abuses of women's rights to
dignity and equality, as key components of HIV prevention and treatment
programs
For an overview of Amnesty International's human rights concerns in
South Africa, please see the Annual Report 2010 South Africa entry which
can be found here: https://thereport.amnesty.org/sites/default/files/AIR2010_AZ_EN.pdf#page=242
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
LATEST NEWS
'Heinrich Should Be Ashamed': Lone Senate Dem Helps GOP Deliver Big Pharma Win
The provision, part of the Senate budget bill, was described as "a blatant giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that would keep drug prices high for patients while draining $5 billion in taxpayer dollars."
Jul 01, 2025
The deep-pocketed and powerful pharmaceutical industry notched a significant victory on Monday when the Senate parliamentarian ruled that a bill described by critics as a handout to drug corporations can be included in the Republican reconciliation package, which could become law as soon as this week.
The legislation, titled the Optimizing Research Progress Hope and New (ORPHAN) Cures Act, would exempt drugs that treat more than one rare disease from Medicare's drug-price negotiation program, allowing pharmaceutical companies to charge exorbitant prices for life-saving medications in a purported effort to encourage innovation. (Medications developed to treat rare diseases are known as "orphan drugs.")
The consumer advocacy group Public Citizen observed that if the legislation were already in effect, Medicare "would have been barred from negotiating lower prices for important treatments like cancer drugs Imbruvica, Calquence, and Pomalyst."
Among the bill's leading supporters is Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), whose spokesperson announced the parliamentarian's decision to allow the measure in the reconciliation package after previously advising that it be excluded. Heinrich is listed as the legislation's only co-sponsor in the Senate, alongside lead sponsor Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.).
"Sen. Heinrich should be ashamed of prioritizing drug corporation profits over lower medicine prices for seniors and people with disabilities," Steve Knievel, access to medicines advocate at Public Citizen, said in a statement Monday. "Patients and consumers breathed a sigh of relief when the Senate parliamentarian stripped the proposal from Republicans' Big Ugly Betrayal, so it comes as a gut punch to hear that Sen. Heinrich welcomed the reversal and continued to champion a proposal that will transfer billions from taxpayers to Big Pharma."
"People across the country are demanding lower drug prices and for Medicare drug price negotiations to be expanded, not restricted," Knievel added. "Sen. Heinrich should apologize to his constituents and start listening to them instead of drug corporation lobbyists."
The Biotechnology Innovation Organization, a lobbying group whose members include pharmaceutical companies, has publicly endorsed and promoted the legislation, urging lawmakers to pass it "as soon as possible."
"This is a blatant giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that would keep drug prices high for patients."
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the ORPHAN Cures Act would cost U.S. taxpayers around $5 billion over the next decade.
Merith Basey, executive director of Patients For Affordable Drugs Now, said that "patients are infuriated to see the Senate cave to Big Pharma by reviving the ORPHAN Cures Act at the eleventh hour."
"This is a blatant giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that would keep drug prices high for patients while draining $5 billion in taxpayer dollars," said Basey. "We call on lawmakers to remove this unnecessary provision immediately and stand with an overwhelming majority of Americans who want the Medicare Negotiation program to go further. Medicare negotiation will deliver huge savings for seniors and taxpayers; this bill would undermine that progress."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump-Musk Gutting of USAID Could Lead to More Than 14 Million Deaths Over Five Years: Study
"For many low and middle income countries, the resulting shock would be comparable in scale to a global pandemic or a major armed conflict," said the coordinator behind the study.
Jul 01, 2025
A study published Monday by the medical journal The Lancet found that deep funding cuts to the U.S. Agency for International Development, a main target of the Department of Government Efficiency's government-slashing efforts, could result in more than 14 million additional deaths by the year 2030.
For months, humanitarian programs and experts have sounded the alarm on the impact of cutting funding for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which is the largest funding agency for humanitarian and development aid around the globe, according to the study.
"Our analysis shows that USAID funding has been an essential force in saving lives and improving health outcomes in some of the world's most vulnerable regions over the past two decades," said Daniella Cavalcanti, postdoctoral researcher at the Institute of Collective Health and an author of the study, according to a statement published Tuesday. Between 2001 and 2021, an estimated 91 million deaths were prevented in low and middle income countries thanks programs supported by USAID, according to the study.
The study was coordinated by researchers from the Barcelona Institute for Global Health with the help of the Institute of Collective Health of the Federal University of Bahia, the University of California Los Angeles, and the Manhiça Centre for Health Research, as well as others.
To project the future consequences of USAID funding cuts and arrive at the 14 million figure, the researchers used forecasting models to simulate the impact of two scenarios, continuing USAID funding at 2023 levels versus implementing the reductions announced earlier this year, and then comparing the two.
Those estimated 14 million additional deaths include 4.5 million deaths among children younger than five, according to the researchers.
The journalist Jeff Jarvis shared reporting about the study and wrote "murder" on X on Tuesday.
In March, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the 83% of the programs at USAID were being canceled. In the same post on X, he praised the Department of Government Efficiency, which at that point had already infiltrated the agency. "Thank you to DOGE and our hardworking staff who worked very long hours to achieve this overdue and historic reform," he wrote.
Davide Rasella, research professor at Barcelona Institute for Global Health and coordinator of the study, said in a statement Tuesday that "our projections indicate that these cuts could lead to a sharp increase in preventable deaths, particularly in the most fragile countries. They risk abruptly halting—and even reversing—two decades of progress in health among vulnerable populations. For many low- and middle-income countries, the resulting shock would be comparable in scale to a global pandemic or a major armed conflict."
One country where USAID cuts have had a particularly deadly impact is Sudan, according to The Washington Post, which reported on Monday that funding shortages have led to lack of medical supplies and food in the war-torn nation.
"There's a largely unspoken and growing death toll of non-American lives thanks to MAGA," wrote Ishaan Tharoor, a Post columnist, of the paper's reporting on Sudan.
In reference to the reporting on Sudan, others laid blame on billionaire Elon Musk, the billionaire and GOP mega-donor who was initially tapped to lead the Department of Government Efficiency.
"In a less imperfect world, Musk and [President Donald] Trump would be forever cast as killers of children, and this would be front-page news for months and the subject of Sunday sermons in every church," wrote the journalist David Corn.
Keep ReadingShow Less
GOP Still Lacks Votes to Pass Budget Bill 'Because It's a Moral Monstrosity,' Says Senate Democrat
"We have been debating amendments for 21 hours and we are still going because through 12 hours of debate and 21 hours of amendment votes, Republicans still don't have 50 votes for their bill," said Sen. Chris Murphy.
Jul 01, 2025
Even after an all-night session of amendment votes and wrangling behind closed doors, Senate Republicans still did not have enough support to pass their reconciliation package as of Tuesday morning, leaving party leaders scrambling to placate GOP holdovers who are purportedly nervous about the legislation's unprecedented cuts to Medicaid and federal nutrition assistance.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) argued in a social media post that the reason for the GOP's inability to quickly rally its own members around the legislation is straightforward: "Because it's a moral monstrosity."
"We have been debating amendments for 21 hours and we are still going because through 12 hours of debate and 21 hours of amendment votes, Republicans still don't have 50 votes for their bill," Murphy wrote at roughly 5:30 am ET, as the marathon "vote-a-rama" continued with no end in sight.
With Democrats unanimously opposed to the bill, Senate Republicans can only afford to lose three GOP votes if they are to send the measure back to the House for final approval. Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) have said they will vote against the bill in its current form, and Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) are undecided. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) also suggested he's on the fence.
Republican leaders have been working to bring Murkowski into the yes column with a proposal that would temporarily exempt Alaska and other states from the bill's massive cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), the top Democrat on the Senate Agriculture Committee, ripped the proposal as "absurd" and said it would reward the states with the highest SNAP error rates.
"Insanity reigns," Klobuchar wrote on social media.
Senate Republicans' margins became more difficult after Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) announced his opposition to the legislation over the weekend, pointing to the Senate version's devastating cuts to Medicaid.
"What do I tell 663,000 people in two years or three years, when President Trump breaks his promise by pushing them off of Medicaid because the funding's not there anymore?" Tillis asked in a floor speech on Sunday, citing an estimate of the number of people in North Carolina who could lose health insurance under the Republican bill.
Throughout the country, nearly 12 million people would lose coverage under the Senate reconciliation bill, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
"Kicking millions off healthcare, blowing up the national debt by trillions, and devastating generational economic harms—all being written into law on the fly," Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said early Tuesday morning after hours of debate and amendment votes.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular