OUR CRUCIAL SPRING CAMPAIGN IS NOW UNDERWAY
Please donate now to keep the mission and independent journalism of Common Dreams strong.
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
The Burundian authorities should release Jean Claude Kavumbagu, a
journalist arrested on treason charges on July 17, 2010, the Committee
to Protect Journalists, the East and Horn of Africa Human Rights
Defenders Project, and Human Rights Watch said today. The arrest
violates his right to free expression, the groups said.
Kavumbagu, editor of the online news service Net Press, is believed
to have been arrested for a July 12 article in which he criticized
Burundi's security forces and questioned their ability to defend the
country against attack. The article was in response to the July 11
bombings in Kampala, Uganda and threats from the Somali insurgent group
al-Shabaab to target Burundi because of the presence of Burundian troops
in the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM).
"Kavumbagu's arrest is a big step backward for freedom of expression
in Burundi," said Rona Peligal, Africa director at Human Rights Watch.
"His continued detention and prosecution will have a chilling effect,
sending a message that no criticism of the security forces is tolerated.
The charges should be dropped immediately."
In the article, Kavumbagu wrote that, "the anxiety has been palpable
in Bujumbura and all those who have heard about [the bombings] yesterday
in Kampala were convinced that if the al-Shabaab militants wanted to
try 'something' in our country, they would succeed with disconcerting
ease, [given that] our defense and security forces shine in their
capacity to pillage and kill their compatriots rather than defend our
country.
The authorities charged Kavumbagu with treason under article 570 of
Burundi's criminal code, which penalizes "any Burundian who, in times of
war... knowingly participates in an attempt to demoralize the Army or
the Nation, with the object of weakening national defense." The penalty
for treason is life in prison.
The authorities have not provided Kavumbagu's lawyer with any
explanation as to how his article is aimed at weakening national
security. Nor have they explicitly stated that Burundi is "at war" to
justify the charge of treason as defined in the criminal code.
Kavumbagu's lawyer was not present during his interrogation.
"Burundi's vibrant press is tarnished every time authorities single
out journalists solely on the basis that they have expressed opinions
that are provocative or unpopular among government circles," said Tom
Rhodes, East Africa consultant at the Committee to Protect Journalists.
"The government must reverse this trend."
At the time Kavumbagu was charged, the magistrate, without
explanation, ordered his detention, pending trial. Under article 71 of
the Burundian criminal procedure code, pre-trial detention of suspects
is to be used only when necessary to preserve evidence; to protect
public order; to protect the suspect; to prevent the crime from
continuing; or to guarantee that the suspect appears before a court.
The Committee to Protect Journalists, the East and Horn of Africa
Human Rights Defenders Project, and Human Rights Watch said that
Kavumbagu's criticisms of the security forces constitute speech that is
protected by international law and should not result in criminal
penalties. Under the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights, to which Burundi is a party, restrictions on free expression for
reasons of national security must be provided by law and be strictly
necessary and proportional to the purpose being sought.
The Johannesburg Principles on National Security, Freedom of
Expression and Access to Information, drawn up by leading experts in
freedom of expression in 1996 and endorsed by the UN Human Rights
Council, provide that any law restricting free speech "must be
accessible, unambiguous, drawn narrowly and with precision so as to
enable individuals to foresee whether a particular action is unlawful."
In addition, "[n]o one may be punished for criticizing or insulting the
nation, the state or its symbols, the government, its agencies, or
public officials...unless the criticism or insult was intended and
likely to incite imminent violence."
"Jean Claude Kavumbagu should be freed immediately," said Hassan
Shire Sheikh, executive director of the East and Horn of Africa Human
Rights Defenders Project. "The current security situation both in
Burundi and East Africa in general cannot be used as an excuse to
violate fundamental principles of freedom of expression or lead to a
step back in efforts to decriminalize press offenses throughout the
world."
Background
Kavumbagu was arrested at approximately noon on July 17 by police
Col. David Nikiza, who came to his office with a mandat d'amener
(order to appear before a prosecutor) issued by the Bujumbura
prosecutor's office. Kavumbagu was taken to a magistrate for
questioning.
The interrogation largely centered around an article by Kavumbagu in
which he claimed that Burundi was vulnerable to al-Shabaab. On the day
the article was published, al-Shabaab's Sheikh Ali Mohamed Raghe told
journalists that Burundi would be attacked unless it withdrew its forces
from Somalia.
After two hours of interrogation, Kavumbagu was charged with treason
and immediately transferred to Mpimba prison in Bujumbura.
Burundian and regional media organizations, including the Burundian
Journalists' Union and the East African Journalist Association, have
condemned the arrest.
Burundi is often recognized for its vibrant media, which includes
over a dozen private radio stations, a private television station, and
several newspapers, many of which express opinions critical of the
government. However, journalists have been arbitrarily arrested,
harassed, or threatened on numerous occasions.
In April 2006, 30 journalists were briefly detained by police at a
news conference at the residence of a former member of parliament. In
June 2006, Aloys Kabura of the Burundian Press Agency was sentenced to
five months in prison for defamation after he questioned, during a
private conversation in a bar, police conduct during the April events.
In November 2006, three more journalists - Serge Nibizi and Domitille
Kiramvu of Radio Publique Africaine and Mathias Manirakiza of Radio
Isanganiro - were all detained for alleged violations to the national
security of the country. They were tried and acquitted in January 2007.
Kavumbagu has been arrested on five previous occasions. On the most
recent occasion in 2008, he was held in pre-trial detention for seven
months on defamation charges after he published an article accusing
President Pierre Nkurunzizaof misuse of public funds
during the 2008 Olympics in China. Kavumbagu was tried and acquitted in
March 2009, although the prosecutor appealed the acquittal, and the case
remains open.
In recent months, several Burundian journalists have been beaten or
threatened by police or by political party activists while covering the
elections currently under way. In other cases, human rights activists,
including members of the Burundian organizations Association for the
Protection of Human Rights and Detained Persons (APRODH), Forum for the
Strengthening of Civil Society (FORSC), and the Anti-corruption and
Economic Malpractice Observatory (OLUCOME), have been threatened or
subjected to surveillance after criticizing the 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.
"No other retailer in U.S. history has come anywhere close to such enrichment at public expense," asserted one opponent of the nine-figure subsidy.
Opponents of a contentious $1 billion subsidy for online retail behemoth Amazon's data centers in Oregon on Friday decried what one critic called "corporate welfare" for a company that raked in more than a half a trillion dollars in revenue last year.
Amazon already has four data centers in Morrow County, Oregon and plans on building six more Amazon Web Services (AWS) cloud-computing facilities there. Earlier this month, Port of Morrow commissioners approved tax breaks for Amazon with an estimated value of $1 billion.
"With this new award, we now know of $6.1 billion in subsidies given to Amazon in the United States alone," said Kasia Tarczynska, a senior analyst at the public interest watchdog Good Jobs First. "No other retailer in U.S. history has come anywhere close to such enrichment at public expense."
\u201cAmazon gets a $1 billion corporate welfare payment for AWS data centers in rural Oregon, with residents getting one day's notice before the vote. https://t.co/4r0UzGAM7x\u201d— David Dayen (@David Dayen) 1684516422
While local officials hope the incentives will secure $12 in billion new investment by Amazon in the remote county on the Columbia River about 185 miles east of Portland, opponents bristled when residents were given just one day's notice before the final commission vote.
Oregonians are also angered by Amazon's efforts to fight proposed state legislation that would compel data centers to use clean energy.
In a statement following the commission's vote, Amazon said that "we've been an active member of eastern Oregon communities since 2011, investing more than $15.6 billion while supporting thousands of local jobs."
"Investments like these create and support high-paying, highly skilled jobs in local communities, and projects that benefit local education, healthcare, public services, and more," the company added.
Common Dreamsreported last year that Amazon dodged $5.2 billion in federal corporate taxes in 2021 while paying an effective tax rate of 6%, far lower than the statutory 21%.
\u201cAmazon made $514 billion in 2022.\n\nWe can\u2019t believe we need to say this, but here goes: Amazon. does. not. need. tax. breaks.\n\nhttps://t.co/bAvzbQTWXD\u201d— Patriotic Millionaires (@Patriotic Millionaires) 1684005900
Good Jobs First executive director Greg LeRoy said Friday that "in a 2016 study looking at major internet companies and their data center subsidies, we found a cost per job of almost $2 million."
"The AWS grab in Morrow could be several times that," he added. "At these obscene costs, the only clear outcome is a massive transfer of wealth from Oregon taxpayers to Amazon shareholders."
As Good Jobs First argued: "Oregonians should not pay Amazon to do what it would do anyway."
"The BLET is currently working to secure similar sick leave agreements with the other Class 1 railroads," said the union's national president, "and I hope this settlement will help bring those negotiations to a positive conclusion."
A leading railroad workers' union this week struck a landmark deal with industry giant Norfolk Southern to provide more than 3,300 employees up to seven days of paid sick leave each year.
"This is a big day for the BLET," declared Scott Bunten, a Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen general chairman. "Our members are the heart of the railroad, and this agreement is a major win in our tireless efforts to improve the quality of their experience on and off the job."
Similarly describing the union's engineers as "the hardest-working folks on the railroad," fellow BLET chairman Jerry Sturdivant said the agreement "recognizes the critical contributions our members make to keep the railroad and the American economy running."
Under the deal, Norfolk Southern engineers will get five paid sick days annually, plus they will be able to use up to two additional days of existing paid time off as sick leave. The new policy will take effect once union members ratify an accompanying quality-of-life agreement, which they are expected to vote on within the next month.
\u201cThe Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen and Norfolk Southern Corporation announced Thursday that they have reached an agreement to provide up to seven paid sick days per year to BLET members. \n\nRead the full story: https://t.co/lsuG4IACyw\u201d— Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (@Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen) 1684442616
"We are proud to be the first to have reached a paid sick leave agreement for our dedicated BLET membership," said Dewayne Dehart, another union general chairman. "This trailblazing new deal ensures that engineers finally have access to the time they need and deserve to manage their personal well-being."
Although Norfolk Southern president and CEO Alan Shaw refused to commit to seven paid sick days for all employees while testifying before Congress in March, this week he also highlighted the historic nature of the new agreement, saying it "continues our industry-leading effort to enhance quality of life as we become the first railroad to reach an engineer sick leave deal."
https://www.commondreams.org/news/norfolk-southern...
According to a joint statement from the company and union, "With this agreement, almost all Norfolk Southern craft employees—approximately 98%—have entered into paid sick leave deals."
As The Associated Pressreported:
This deal follows the model established by the conductors union in its first sick-time deals with Norfolk Southern and CSX. Those train crew workers are getting better deals, with five days of sick time, than the other smaller rail unions that received four days of sick time. But train crews work much more unpredictable and demanding schedules than other rail workers.
The railroads have also agreed to pay workers for any unused sick time at the end of the year.
"The BLET is currently working to secure similar sick leave agreements with the other Class 1 railroads," said Eddie Hall, the union's national president, "and I hope this settlement will help bring those negotiations to a positive conclusion."
Railroad employees and their unions have generated national discussions about paid leave over the past year. In December, President Joe Biden signed related legislation—which blocked a looming strike and forced through a White House-brokered agreement that did not include any paid sick leave—while ignoring calls for an executive order guaranteeing rail workers sick days.
Since then, Norfolk Southern has become a household name, and federal lawmakers have proposed rail safety reforms, in the wake of a company train that carried hazardous materials derailing in East Palestine, Ohio—near the Pennsylvania border—in February.
The new deal comes as paid sick leave advocates on Capitol Hill renew their push for national legislation. Joined by leaders from nursing and railway unions on Wednesday, Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) along with Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) introduced the Healthy Families Act (HFA) and the Family and Medical Insurance Leave (FAMILY) Act.
Mike Baldwin, president of the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen, said that "the BRS would like to thank those members of Congress who support paid sick leave. Rail workers were deemed essential during the pandemic. They came to work sick because they didn't want to miss a day's pay, or worse be disciplined for their absence."
"This legislation is important to rail workers," Baldwin added of the HFA. "It is an essential need, and it isn't just a frivolous want."
"We don't need to give in to Republican extortion or default," the House progressives asserted. "The Constitution grants the president another option."
After GOP House negotiators bailed on U.S. debt ceiling talks on Friday, around two-thirds of the Congressional Progressive Caucus urged President Joe Biden to "invoke his constitutional authority granted in the 14th Amendment" in order "to end Republican hostage-taking of the economy that could trigger a financial catastrophe."
Led by Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Deputy Chair Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), and Whip Greg Casar (D-Texas), 66 CPC members sent Biden a letter noting the "unremitting efforts by congressional Republicans to hold the economic health of our nation hostage," and calling on him to "fulfill the executive's constitutional duty to faithfully and impartially administer the funds already enacted by law at the direction of Congress."
The letter—which follows a similar call from some Senate Democrats and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—cites Section 4 of the 14th Amendment, which states that "the validity of the public debt of the United States... shall not be questioned."
Biden said earlier this month that he has been "considering" invoking the 14th Amendment, "but the problem is, it would have to be litigated," and "I don't think that solves our problem now."
\u201cNEW: 66 CPC members are calling on @POTUS to prepare all possible measures, including invoking the 14th Amendment, to protect our economy.\n\nWe don't need to give into Republican extortion or default. The Constitution grants the President another option.\nhttps://t.co/qriXLfepBi\u201d— Progressive Caucus (@Progressive Caucus) 1684528145
"Congressional Republicans who now refuse to pass a clean debt ceiling increase voted on three separate occasions under President [Donald] Trump to raise the debt ceiling without any preconditions or extraneous, harmful policies attached," the lawmakers noted. "They now threaten the full faith and credit of the United States, which Treasury Secretary [Janet] Yellen warned would 'produce an economic and financial catastrophe' and could occur as soon as June 1."
The letter points out that although House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) "stated that 'the greatest threat to our future is our national debt,' he led House Republicans in passing the 'Limit, Save, Grow Act,' which rescinds funding for [Internal Revenue Service] enforcement against tax evasion by wealthy individuals, which would increase the deficit by nearly $500 billion over the next 10 years."
"Republicans—who in 2017 voted unanimously to pass the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) that increased the federal deficit by $1.9 trillion over 10 years, with 83% of the law's benefits estimated to accrue to the richest 1% by 2027—also rejected commonsense proposals offered by your negotiators to close tax loopholes and raise revenue in the current budget discussions," the progressives added.
\u201cBREAKING: 60+ of us @USProgressives are calling on @POTUS to follow his constitutional responsibilities and end the Republican default crisis.\n\nWe should not let right-wing extremists risk the livelihoods of millions just to give further tax cuts to their corporate donors.\u201d— Congressman Greg Casar (@Congressman Greg Casar) 1684526306
The letter continues:
We believe that relenting to Congressional Republicans' economic ransom and negotiating on devastating budget cuts, additional work requirements for essential food and economic support, and fast-tracking fossil fuel projects that undermine our shared climate achievements is antithetical to our shared Democratic values. Surrendering to these extremist demands also sets a dangerous precedent that emboldens Republicans to pursue additional, anti-democratic hostage-taking, particularly after having been told previously that a clean debt ceiling increase was nonnegotiable.
GOP leaders insist that any debt ceiling deal would have to come with cuts to social safety net programs, and Biden has signaled his openness to considering some reductions. The CPC letter warns that the Republican framework could take jobs from 780,000 people; nutrition assistance from 1.2 million women, infants, and children; Medicaid coverage from up to 21 million Americans; rental assistance from 640,000 families; and more.
"If the options are either agreeing to major cuts to domestic priorities under the Republican threat of destroying the economy and moving forward to honor America's debts, we join prominent legal scholars, economists, former budget officials, and a former president in advocating for invoking the 14th Amendment of the Constitution," the progressives wrote.
"Not only does the debt ceiling run counter to the Constitution's mandate that the validity of America's public debt shall not be questioned," their letter adds, "it contradicts the appropriations law that requires the Treasury to issue debt for the funding you are obligated to administer at Congress' direction."