

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.

The conviction of Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, the leader of a Congolese armed group, for using children in armed conflict shows the International Criminal Court (ICC) can bring the world's worst offenders to justice for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, Amnesty International said.
The conviction of Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, the leader of a Congolese armed group, for using children in armed conflict shows the International Criminal Court (ICC) can bring the world's worst offenders to justice for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, Amnesty International said.
A Trial Chamber made up of three judges delivered the ICC's first-ever verdict on Wednesday against Thomas Lubanga Dyilo for the war crime of enlisting and conscripting children under 15 into the Forces patriotiques pour la liberation du Congo (FPLC) amid armed conflict in the Ituri region of Democratic Republic of Congo between 2002 and 2003.
In the coming weeks, the ICC will sentence Lubanga and hold a hearing on reparation for his victims. The judgment can be appealed within 30 days.
On 17 March 2006, Thomas Lubanga Dyilo was the first person to be arrested on an ICC arrest warrant. His trial began on 26 January 2009.
He was the alleged founder and president of the Union of the Congolese Patriots (UPC) and commander in chief of its armed wing, the FPLC. The FPLC was involved in numerous human rights violations, including the abduction and use of children as soldiers.
"Today's verdict will give pause to those around the world who commit the horrific crime of using and abusing children both on and off the battlefield," said Michael Bochenek, Director of Amnesty International's Law and Policy Programme.
"It will help to strip away the impunity they have enjoyed for crimes under international law because national authorities have consistently failed to investigate these crimes. This guilty verdict demonstrates that the ICC can step in to bring them to justice."
The recruitment and use of children in armed conflict by foreign and Congolese armed groups continue to this day in the north-east and east of the DRC. The Congolese national army has also used child soldiers.
Amnesty International remains disappointed that the ICC's Prosecutor did not pursue allegations of other crimes committed by the FPLC under Lubanga Dyilo - including crimes of sexual violence against abducted girls, including girl soldiers, and other civilians - potentially denying justice and reparation to many more victims.
"The Prosecutor's office must review its limited investigation strategy adopted in the Lubanga case, especially in light of such decisions precluding victims from participating in trials and obtaining reparation. Lessons need to be learned for future cases," said Michael Bochenek.
The organization also said that the length of proceedings should be reviewed. More than two years passed between the ICC's decision to confirm the charges against Thomas Lubanga Dyilo on 29 January 2007 and his trial's opening on 26 January 2009. The case was twice delayed due to stays imposed by the judges in response to the Office of the Prosecutor's failure to disclose information to the defence.
Other fugitives from the ICC
Regrettably, the ICC is also being prevented from delivering justice in a number of other cases because governments are failing to arrest and surrender suspects. These include:
* Bosco Ntaganda (Democratic Republic of Congo), whom the ICC has also charged with enlisting and conscripting children while he was allegedly Thomas Lubanga Dyilo's deputy. The Congolese government is shielding him following his integration into the national army.
* Joseph Kony (Uganda) and other senior leaders of the Lord's Resistance Army continue to evade trial after being charged with crimes against humanity and war crimes. They are currently moving between the Central African Republic, north-eastern Democratic Republic of Congo and South Sudan.
* President Omar al-Bashir (Sudan) has been charged with genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in the Darfur region of Sudan. He has yet to be arrested despite regularly conducting state visits abroad.
The ICC is also being blocked from investigating crimes in situations such as Syria - which has signed but not ratified the Court's statute - because the United Nations Security Council has not yet referred the situations to the ICC Prosecutor.
In 2010, Amnesty International launched a Campaign for International Justice to ensure access to justice, truth and reparation for victims of all of these crimes.
The organization's members and supporters have been campaigning for governments to cooperate fully with the ICC to arrest suspects and surrender them for trial. It is also calling for the United Nations Security Council to refer the human rights situation in Syria and other countries to the ICC.
"As we have seen in the last week with the spotlight on ICC fugitive Joseph Kony, there is massive public support to ensure justice for victims of war crimes and crimes against humanity," said Michael Bochenek.
"Global public support for the ICC's work is needed to help overcome the major challenges the Court still faces in its other cases."
Amnesty International is calling on people around the world to tell UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon that they support the UN's vital role in bringing about the arrest of the 11 ICC fugitives still at large and protecting civilians in the affected areas.
The organization strongly supported the establishment of the International Criminal Court in 2002 to investigate and prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in cases where national authorities are unable or unwilling to do so.
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.
"Does anyone truly believe that caving in to Trump now will stop his unprecedented attacks on our democracy and working people?" asked Sen. Bernie Sanders.
US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday implored his Democratic colleagues in Congress not to cave to President Donald Trump and Republicans in the ongoing government shutdown fight, warning that doing so would hasten the country's descent into authoritarianism.
In an op-ed for The Guardian, Sanders (I-Vt.) called Trump a "schoolyard bully" and argued that "anyone who thinks surrendering to him now will lead to better outcomes and cooperation in the future does not understand how a power-hungry demagogue operates."
"This is a man who threatens to arrest and jail his political opponents, deploys the US military into Democratic cities, and allows masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to pick people up off the streets and throw them into vans without due process," Sanders wrote. "He has sued virtually every major media outlet because he does not tolerate criticism, has extorted funds from law firms and is withholding federal funding from states that voted against him."
If Democrats capitulate, Sanders warned, Trump "will utilize his victory to accelerate his movement toward authoritarianism."
"At a time when he already has no regard for our democratic system of checks and balances," the senator wrote, "he will be emboldened to continue decimating programs that protect elderly people, children, the sick and the poor while giving more tax breaks and other benefits to his fellow oligarchs."
Sanders' op-ed came as the shutdown continued with no end in sight, with Democrats standing by their demand for an extension of Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits as a necessary condition for any government funding deal. Republicans have so far refused to negotiate on the ACA subsidies even as health insurance premiums skyrocket nationwide.
The Trump administration, meanwhile, is illegally withholding Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) funding from tens of millions of Americans—including millions of children—despite court rulings ordering him to release the money.
In a "60 Minutes" interview that aired Sunday, Trump again urged Republicans to nuke the 60-vote filibuster in the Senate to remove the need for Democratic support to reopen the government and advance other elements of their agenda unilaterally. Under the status quo, Republicans need the support of at least seven Democratic senators to advance a government funding package.
"The Republicans have to get tougher," Trump said. "If we end the filibuster, we can do exactly what we want. We're not going to lose power."
Congressional Democrats have faced some pressure from allies, most notably the head of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), to cut a deal with Republicans to end the shutdown and alleviate the suffering it has inflicted on federal workers and many others.
But Democrats appear unmoved by the AFGE president's demand, and other labor leaders have since voiced support for the minority party's effort to secure an extension of ACA subsidies.
"We're urging our Democratic friends to hold the line," said Jaime Contreras, executive vice president of the 185,000-member Service Employees International Union Local 32BJ.
In his op-ed on Sunday, Sanders asked, "Does anyone truly believe that caving in to Trump now will stop his unprecedented attacks on our democracy and working people?"
"If the Democrats cave now, it would be a betrayal of the millions of Americans who have fought and died for democracy and our Constitution," the senator wrote. "It would be a sellout of a working class that is struggling to survive in very difficult economic times. Democrats in Congress are the last remaining opposition to Trump's quest for absolute power. To surrender now would be an historic tragedy for our country, something that history will not look kindly upon."
"Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food," one lawyer said.
As the Trump administration continued its illegal freeze on food assistance, the US Department of Agriculture sent a warning to grocery stores not to provide discounts to the more than 42 million Americans affected.
Several grocery chains and food delivery apps have announced in recent days that they would provide substantial discounts to those whose Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits have been delayed. More than 1 in 8 Americans rely on the program, and 39% of them are children.
But on Sunday, Catherine Rampell, a reporter at the Washington Post published an email from the USDA that was sent to grocery stores around the country, telling them they were prohibited from offering special discounts to those at greater risk of food insecurity due to the cuts.
"You must offer eligible foods at the same prices and on the same terms and conditions to SNAP-EBT customers as other customers, except that sales tax cannot be charged on SNAP purchases," the email said. "You cannot treat SNAP-EBT customers differently from any other customer. Offering discounts or services only to SNAP-eligible customers is a SNAP violation unless you have a SNAP equal treatment waiver."
The email referred to SNAP's "Equal Treatment Rule," which prohibits stores from discriminating against SNAP recipients by charging them higher prices or treating them more favorably than other customers by offering them specialized sales or incentives.
Rampell said she was "aware of at least two stores that had offered struggling customers a discount, then withdrew it after receiving this email."
She added that it was "understandable why grocery stores might be scared off" because "a store caught violating the prohibition could be denied the ability to accept SNAP benefits in the future. In low-income areas where the SNAP shutdown will have the biggest impact, getting thrown off SNAP could mean a store is no longer financially viable."
While the rule prohibits special treatment in either direction, legal analyst Jeffrey Evan Gold argues that it was a "perverted interpretation of a rule that stops grocers from price gouging SNAP recipients... charging them more when they use food stamps."
The government also notably allows retailers to request waivers for programs that incentivize SNAP recipients to purchase healthy food.
Others pointed out that SNAP is currently not paying out to Americans because President Donald Trump is defying multiple federal court rulings issued Friday, requiring him to tap a $6 billion contingency fund to ensure benefit payments go out. Both courts, in Massachusetts and Rhode Island, have said his administration's refusal to pay out benefits is against the law.
One labor movement lawyer summed up the administration's position on social media: "Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food."
"You need to understand that he actually believes it is illegal to criticize him," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy.
After failing to use the government's might to bully Jimmy Kimmel off the air earlier this fall, President Donald Trump is once again threatening to bring the force of law down on comedians for the egregious crime of making fun of him.
This time, his target was NBC late-night host Seth Meyers, whom the president said, in a Truth Social post Saturday, "may be the least talented person to 'perform' live in the history of television."
On Thursday, the comedian hosted a segment mocking Trump's bizarre distaste for the electromagnetic catapults aboard Navy ships, which the president said he may sign an executive order to replace with older (and less efficient) steam-powered ones.
Trump did not take kindly to Meyers' barbs: "On and on he went, a truly deranged lunatic. Why does NBC waste its time and money on a guy like this??? - NO TALENT, NO RATINGS, 100% ANTI TRUMP, WHICH IS PROBABLY ILLEGAL!!!"
It is, of course, not "illegal" for a late-night comedian, or any other news reporter or commentator, for that matter, to be "anti-Trump." But it's not the first time the president has made such a suggestion. Amid the backlash against Kimmel's firing in September, Trump asserted that networks that give him "bad publicity or press" should have their licenses taken away.
"I read someplace that the networks were 97% against me... I mean, they’re getting a license, I would think maybe their license should be taken away,” Trump said. "All they do is hit Trump. They’re licensed. They’re not allowed to do that.”
His FCC director, Brendan Carr, used a similar logic to justify his pressure campaign to get Kimmel booted by ABC, which he said could be punished for airing what he determined was "distorted” content.
Before Kimmel, Carr suggested in April that Comcast may be violating its broadcast licenses after MSNBC declined to air a White House press briefing in which the administration defended its wrongful deportation of Salvadoran immigrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
"You need to understand that he actually believes it is illegal to criticize him," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on social media following Trump's tirade against Meyers. "Why? Because Trump believes he—not the people—decides the law. This is why we are in the middle of, not on the verge of, a totalitarian takeover."