May, 25 2012, 11:53am EDT

Equatorial Guinea: End Harassment of Jailed Opponent, Lawyers
Prisoner Transferred to Isolated Cell; Attorney Suspended
NEW YORK
Authorities in Equatorial Guinea should cease all harassment of a jailed political opponent and those close to him, Human Rights Watch, Physicians for Human Rights and EG Justice said today.
Dr. Wenceslao Mansogo Alo, a medical doctor, human rights defender and leading member of the political opposition who was convicted and sentenced on May 7, 2012, to three years in prison following a politically motivated trial, was transferred on May 18 without explanation to a filthy, isolated cell in Bata central prison. The conditions of his confinement are now significantly worse than where he had previously been held with other prisoners, according to information Human Rights Watch obtained. In addition, one of Mansogo's lawyers, Ponciano Mbomio Nvo, was suspended from legal practice for two years for criticizing the government in closing arguments in the case.
"Dr. Mansogo doesn't deserve to be imprisoned at all and now governmental authorities are making matters worse by holding him in a dungeon-like cell," said Daniel Bekele, Africa director of Human Rights Watch. "They should stop harassing him and ensure that he is treated in accordance with basic human rights standards."
The US State Department human rights report on Equatorial Guinea, released on May 24, noted that although the government had renovated the Bata prison and two others, conditions "remained inadequate." Among other problems, it noted that "holding cells were overcrowded and dirty, and prisoners and detainees rarely had access to medical care, exercise, or mattresses. Provisions for sanitation, ventilation, lighting, and access to potable water were inadequate. Diseases, including malaria and HIV/AIDS, were serious problems."
The State Department report covers events of 2011 and does not mention Mansogo's case, which began with his arrest on February 9, 2012.
Human rights groups, including Amnesty International, EG Justice, Human Rights Watch and Physicians for Human Rights have condemned Mansogo's politically motivated arrest and conviction. All have called for his release. The governments of Spain and the United States have also issued statements of concern in the case and called for his rights to be fully respected. Mansogo's lawyers have until May 28 to file a notice of their intent to appeal his conviction and sentence.
"Mansogo's unfair conviction is an attack not only on one human rights defender, but on all the patients he serves," said Hans Hogrefe, Washington director of Physicians for Human Rights. "The harassment of medical professionals is amplified by the harm it exacts on entire communities."
Human Rights Watch, Physicians for Human Rights and EG Justice expressed concern about the retaliation against Mbomio. Following on an earlier threat, on April 27 the lawyer's association of Equatorial Guinea issued a decision suspending his license to practice law. The order was officially communicated to him on May 21.
The decision found that Mbomio had disregarded the association's norms when he issued "opinions, judgments and criticisms of the government and its institutions" in closing arguments in the Mansogo case. It also accused Mbomio of wanting to "impose the law of the jungle" for failing to appear at a hearing on the matter and instead sending a written response critical of the leadership of the lawyer's association, which consists of senior judges appointed by the country's president.
Equatorial Guinea's judiciary lacks independence. Lawyers assigned to sensitive cases concerning human rights or national security have reported that judges regularly tell them that judges need to consult with the office of the president regarding their decisions.
Acquittals and releases on appeal are uncommon, particularly in cases involving critics of the government. In the past, President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo has been known to grant amnesties to prisoners. For example, in June 2011 he released 22 political prisoners on his 69th birthday. President Obiang, who is now the world's longest-serving head of state and recently appointed his controversial eldest sonto one of two vice president posts, turns 70 on June 5. The constitution, revised following a referendumin November 2011, only contemplates a single post for vice president.
Mbomio has filed a complaint with the International Association of Lawyers, seeking reversal of the suspension order by Equatorial Guinea's lawyers association. Although he hopes to continue practicing law in Equatorial Guinea until the matter is resolved, it remains unclear if he will be allowed to do so. In 2008, Mbomio was suspended for one year under similar circumstances.
"Ponciano Mbomio is entitled to free speech, both inside and outside the courtroom," said Joseph Kraus, program and development director at EG Justice, a human rights group in the United States founded by an exile from Equatorial Guinea. "The decision to punish him for his vigorous defense of Dr. Mansogo at the trial is inconsistent with Equatorial Guinea's own laws, as well as international standards, and should be reversed without delay so he can carry on his important work."
Mansogo's Conditions of Detention
Mansogo's new cell is isolated and on the second floor, away from other prisoners, who are housed on the first floor. Whereas prisoners on the first floor are permitted to go out to a patio during the day and their cells are not locked, access to the second floor is behind a locked door that is opened by prison authorities twice a day to allow entry to Mansogo's wife, who brings him food. Other prisoners housed on the second floor are in unlocked cells and are permitted to spend time in a shared hallway. Mansogo, however, is kept in a locked prison cell. He has no contact with other prisoners and is not permitted to leave the cell for fresh air or exercise.
His prison cell, approximately 4 meters by 3 meters, has only a tiny window insufficient to allow natural light or adequate ventilation from the extreme tropical heat. The conditions of hygiene are extremely poor, particularly the rudimentary toilet facilities. Even after efforts by Mansogo to clean the cell, it remains filthy and foul-smelling, according to information obtained by Human Rights Watch.
One of Mansogo's lawyers, Elias Nzo Ondo, said he was not given any grounds by prison officials for his client's transfer when he inquired. The officials only told him the transfer was carried out "on orders from above."
The lawyer said access to his client was difficult. On May 22, prison authorities repeatedly told him to return later, but after he insisted on seeing his client, he was eventually allowed in. Even so, the prison guard came by repeatedly to interrupt him and tell him to leave. He said that on a prior visit he also was initially turned back and had to insist on being allowed to see his client.During a visit to the prison on May 24, a guard again interrupted his meeting with his client several times and told him to leave.
Mansogo's wife told Human Rights Watch that on May 21, for the first time, prison authorities began searching her when she arrived at the prison and that on that day guards also searched her as she left, including a review of each piece of paper in her possession. Although subsequent inspections occurred once per visit and were less intensive, she said she was searched much more closely than other visitors.
In addition, personal possessions that prison officials took from Mansogo on April 17, including a laptop computer and books, have not been returned, despite a petition from the lawyer. Mansogo has an electric fan and a television that his wife delivered to him in his new cell. But electricity is sporadic and Equatorial Guinea's only television station is state-run.
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.
LATEST NEWS
IDF Chief Says Ceasefire Line Is a ‘New Border,’ Suggesting Goal to Annex More Than Half of Gaza
Dr. Mustafa Barghouti, a physician and Palestinian leader, said the statement "indicates dangerous Israeli intentions of annexing 53% of the little Gaza Strip, and to prevent reconstruction of what Israel destroyed in Gaza."
Dec 08, 2025
The top-ranking officer in the Israel Defense Forces suggested that Israel may plan to permanently take over more than half of Gaza, which it currently occupies as part of a temporary arrangement under the latest "ceasefire" agreement.
That agreement, signed in early October, required Israel to withdraw its forces behind a so-called "yellow line" as part of the first phase, which left it occupying over half of the territory on its side. Gaza's nearly 2 million inhabitants, meanwhile, are crammed into a territory of about 60 square miles—the vast majority of them displaced and living in makeshift structures.
The deal Israel agreed to in principle says this is only a temporary arrangement. Later phases would require Israel to eventually pull back entirely, returning control to an "International Stabilization Force" and eventually to Palestinians, with only a security buffer zone between the territories under Israel's direct control.
But on Sunday, as he spoke to troops in Gaza, IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir described the yellow line not as a temporary fixture of the ceasefire agreement, but as “a new border line" between Israel and Gaza.
Zamir stated that Israel has "operational control over extensive parts of the Gaza Strip and we will remain on those defense lines,” adding that "the yellow line is a new border line—serving as a forward defensive line for our communities and a line of operational activity."
The IDF chief did not elaborate further on what he meant, but many interpreted the comments as a direct affront to the core of the ceasefire agreement.
"The Israeli chief of staff said today that the yellow line in Gaza is the new border between Israel and Gaza," said Dr. Mustafa Barghouti, who serves as general secretary of the Palestinian National Initiative, a political party in the West Bank. He said it "indicates dangerous Israeli intentions of annexing 53% of the little Gaza Strip, and to prevent reconstruction of what Israel destroyed in Gaza."
Zamir's statement notably comes shortly after a report from the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor last week provided new details on a US-led proposal to resettle tens of thousands of Palestinians at a time into densely packed "‘cities’ of prefabricated container homes" on the Israeli-controlled side of the yellow line that they would not be allowed to leave without consent from Israel. The group likened the plan to "the historical model of ghettos."
The statement also notably came on the same day that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told German Chancellor Friedrich Merz at a joint press conference that Israel's annexation of the West Bank "remains a subject to be discussed." This year has seen a historic surge of violence by Israeli settlers in the illegally occupied territory, which ramped up following the ceasefire.
Israel has already been accused by Gaza authorities of violating the ceasefire several hundred times by routinely launching strikes in Gaza. On Saturday, the UN reported that at least 360 Palestinians have been killed since the truce went into effect on October 10, and that 70 of them have been children.
The IDF often claims that those killed have been Palestinians who crossed the yellow line. As Haaretz reported last week: "In many cases, the line Israel drew on the maps is not marked on the ground. The IDF's response policy is clear: Anyone who approaches the forbidden area is shot immediately, even when they are children."
On Sunday, Al Jazeera and the Times of Israel reported, citing local medics, that Israeli forces had shot a 3-year-old girl, later identified as Ahed al-Bayok, in southern Gaza’s coastal area of Mawasi, near Khan Younis. The shooting took place on the Hamas-controlled side of the yellow line.
Within the same hour on Sunday, the IDF posted a statement on social media: "IDF troops operating in southern Gaza identified a terrorist who crossed the yellow line and approached the troops, posing an immediate threat to them. Following the identification, the troops eliminated the terrorist." It remains unconfirmed whether that statement referred to al-Bayok, though the IDF has used similar language to describe the shootings of an 8- and 11-year-old child.
Until recently, Israel has also refused to allow for the opening of the Rafah Crossing, the most significant entry point for desperately needed humanitarian aid, which has been required to enter the strip "without interference" as part of the ceasefire agreement.
Israel agreed to open the crossing last week, but only to facilitate the exit of Palestinians from Gaza. In response, eight Arab governments expressed their “complete rejection of any attempts to displace the Palestinian people from their land."
Zamir's comments come as the ceasefire limps into its second phase, where US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will push for the full demilitarization of Hamas, which Israel has said would be a precondition for its complete withdrawal from Gaza.
“Now we are at the critical moment," said Qatari Premier and Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, at a conference in Doha on Saturday. "A ceasefire cannot be completed unless there is a full withdrawal of the Israeli forces [and] there is stability back in Gaza."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Watchdog Denounces Trump AI Order Seen as Giveaway to Big Tech Billionaire Buddies Like David Sacks
"David Sacks and Big Tech want free rein to use our children as lab rats for AI experiments and President Trump keeps trying to give it to them."
Dec 08, 2025
President Donald Trump is drawing swift criticism after announcing he would be signing an executive order aimed at clamping down on state governments' powers to regulate the artificial intelligence industry.
In a Monday morning Truth Social post, Trump said that the order was needed to prevent a fragmented regulatory landscape for AI companies.
"We are beating ALL COUNTRIES at this point in the race, but that won’t last long if we are going to have 50 States, many of them bad actors, involved in RULES and the APPROVAL PROCESS," the president wrote. "THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT ABOUT THIS! AI WILL BE DESTROYED IN ITS INFANCY! I will be doing a ONE RULE Executive Order this week. You can’t expect a company to get 50 Approvals every time they want to do something."
Although specifics on the Trump AI executive order are not yet known, a draft order that has been circulating in recent weeks would instruct the US Department of Justice to file lawsuits against states that pass AI-related regulations with the ultimate goal of overturning them.
Emily Peterson-Cassin, policy director at watchdog Demand Progress, slammed Trump over the looming AI order, which she said was a giveaway to big tech industry billionaire backers such as David Sacks, a major Trump donor who currently serves as the administration's czar on AI and cryptocurrency.
"David Sacks and Big Tech want free rein to use our children as lab rats for AI experiments and President Trump keeps trying to give it to them," she said. "Right now, state laws are our best defense against AI chatbots that have sexual conversations with kids and even encourage them to harm themselves, deepfake revenge porn, and half-baked algorithms that make decisions about our employment and health care."
Peterson-Cassin went on to say that blocking state-level regulations of AI "only makes sense if the president’s goal is to please the Big Tech elites who helped pay for his campaign, his inauguration and his ballroom."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) also accused Trump of selling out Americans to do the bidding of Silicon Valley oligarchs.
"This is a direct ask from Big Tech lobbyists (who also donated millions to Trump’s campaign and ballroom) who only care about their own profits, not our safety," Jayapal wrote in a social media post. "States must be able to regulate AI to protect Americans."
Some critics of the Trump AI order questioned whether it had any legal weight behind it. Travis Hall, the director for state engagement at the Center for Democracy and Technology, told the New York Times that Trump's order should not hinder state governments from passing and enforcing AI industry regulations going forward.
“The president cannot pre-empt state laws through an executive order, full stop,” Hall argued. “Pre-emption is a question for Congress, which they have considered and rejected, and should continue to reject.”
Matthew Stoller, an antitrust advocate and researcher at the American Economic Liberties Project, also expressed doubt that Trump's order would be effective at blocking state AI regulations.
"Trump can issue an executive order mandating it rain today, it doesn't really matter though," said Stoller.
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) predicted the Trump order would be repeatedly struck down in courts.
"Trump’s one rule executive order on AI will fail," Lieu posted on social media. "Executive orders cannot create law. Only Congress can do so. That’s why Trump tried twice (and failed) to put AI preemption into law. Courts will rule against the EO because it will largely be based on a bill that failed."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Wyden Says Trump's $12 Billion Farmer Bailout Exposes Folly of 'Destructive Tariff Spree'
"Donald Trump’s trade war is taxing families, killing markets for our farm goods, and driving farmers into bankruptcy," said Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden.
Dec 08, 2025
Democratic US Sen. Ron Wyden was among those who emphasized Monday that President Donald Trump's erratic tariff policies have helped create the very conditions the White House is now citing to justify its new $12 billion relief plan for American farmers.
“Instead of proposing government handouts, Donald Trump should end his destructive tariff spree so American farmers can compete and win on a level playing field," said Wyden (D-Ore.), the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee. "Donald Trump’s trade war is taxing families, killing markets for our farm goods, and driving farmers into bankruptcy."
"Trump’s plan to bail out farmers won’t even get agriculture communities back to even," the senator added. "They’re still paying more for fertilizer, equipment, and seeds, while grown-in-the-USA farm goods are facing more obstacles than ever in foreign markets. Don’t forget that all of this trade destruction and taxing was to raise money for Trump’s massive handouts to billionaires and the ultra-wealthy.”
Trump formally unveiled the relief plan Monday afternoon at a White House roundtable with top officials, lawmakers, and farmers of corn, soybeans, and other crops. Reuters reported that up to $11 billion of the funds are "meant for a newly designed Farmer Bridge Assistance program for row crop farmers hurt by trade disputes and higher costs." The other $1 billion is earmarked for commodities not covered by the program.
"Quite an admission that his policies have hurt Americans," economist Justin Wolfers wrote in response to the plan.
Farm Action, a farmer-led agricultural watchdog group, welcomed the relief package but said it's not enough to end suffering caused by "tariffs, soaring input costs, and years of volatile markets."
"The current problems facing our agriculture system have been decades in the making due to failed policy that prioritizes commodity crops for export, which only benefits global grain traders and meatpackers," said Joe Maxwell, Farm Action’s co-founder and chief strategy officer. "Without addressing the root causes of this issue, farmers will be left to continue relying on government assistance into the future. That is why Congress must take action and fix our failed subsidy system in the next farm bill."
Rebecca Wolf, senior food policy analyst at Food & Water Watch, said that "bailouts are a denigrating Band-Aid to farmers whom decades of misguided domestic policy have left vulnerable to trade wars."
"Trump’s tariff tantrum and belittling bailouts will deepen agricultural sector consolidation, funneling money to a powerful few corporations, while running farmers further into the ground," said Wolf. "If Trump is serious about helping farmers, lowering sector consolidation and dropping food prices, he needs to look in the mirror. Chaotic tariff tantrums are no way to run farm policy. US farmers need fair prices, regional food markets, and policies that reward sustainable, humane production models—not trade wars.”
The $12 billion relief program comes after months of Trump tariffs and retaliatory actions by key nations—particularly China—that have amplified challenges facing US farmers, a key political constituency for the president.
Farmers and organizations representing them have been vocal in their criticism of Trump's tariffs and his proposed policy responses to the problems that the duties have intensified. As the Washington Post summarized:
Earlier this spring, Trump’s tariffs on China prompted the country to halt purchases of US soybeans. Then, the president offered a $20 billion bailout to Argentina, whose soybean crop sales to China have replaced those from US farmers. Later, Trump announced that the United States would buy beef from Argentina to bring down prices for US consumers, opening a new rift between Trump and cattle ranchers.
The new assistance package is particularly aimed at helping soybean farmers, who have seen a precipitous drop in sales this year, leaving them with extra supply, as the price of soybeans fell.
In October, Illinois soybean producer John Bartman said in a message to the Trump administration that "we don't want a bailout, we want a market."
"Bailouts don't work. Bailouts are band-aids," Bartman added. "What Trump is doing is destroying our markets, and when those markets disappear, we're not gonna get them back."
Ryan Mulholland and Mark Haggerty of the Center for American Progress echoed that sentiment in an analysis last month, noting that "writing a check to farmers helps in the short term, but even in the most optimistic scenario, input costs are likely to remain high, demand volatile, the climate ever-changing, and corporate consolidation and investor ownership of land firmly entrenched."
"Planning for next year’s planting season will be extremely difficult, but without a comprehensive plan to make farming a more sustainable, more prosperous enterprise, planning in subsequent years likely will not be any easier," they added. "President Trump’s 'solution' is to simply pay off farmers. Farmers want trade, not aid. And they want government policy that supports farmers and the communities where they live over the long term."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


