Archive for category: Government

,

Human Rights in Norway

Human Rights in Norway

Norway is a small Scandinavian country with a population of approximately 4.9 million. It is a parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarchy, and a range of political parties operate freely there.

Recent reports on human rights in Norway show it is one of the best countries for political, civil and individual rights except a few minor, worrying trends in immigration and the rights of religious minorities. “Norway has ranked first on the UN Development Program’s Human Development Index for 12 of the last 15 years, and it consistently tops international comparisons in such areas as democracy, civil and political rights, and freedom of expression and the press.”

Below is a breakdown of characteristic details of human rights in Norway in the past couple of years.

Political pluralism: Norway’s Constitution promotes political pluralism and guarantees it in practice. All political parties from a range of ideological backgrounds participate freely in elections. The country’s political freedom is such that the indigenous Sami population, “the only group in Scandinavia recognized as an indigenous people by international conventions,” has its own legislature, the Sameting, which works to protect the language and political, cultural and economic rights of the group.

Press freedom: Freedom of the press is constitutionally guaranteed and protected in public life. The government subsidizes the majority of newspapers, although private and partisan, in an effort to promote political pluralism and democracy. Citizens’ digital rights are respected. Internet access is free and unimpeded. There is respect for academic freedom, and private discussions are free and vibrant.

The freedom of belief: The freedom of religion is constitutionally guaranteed and respected in practice. Norway is a secular country where the church and the state were separated by a 2012 constitutional amendment. All religious beliefs enjoy freedom, but lately, there is seemingly a rise in anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim violence and harassment.

In 2015, a new special police unit in Oslo – founded to strengthen efforts against hate crimes – reviewed 143 crimes, roughly double the number reviewed in 2014. “In June of this year, Norway became the first Nordic country to propose a ban on the burqa -full face and body covering- in kindergartens, schools and universities.”

Although according to the Huffington Post “very very few” of three percent of Norway’s Muslim population, or roughly 150,000 individuals, wear a niqab – the veil that covers the face, showing only the eyes – it still is a matter of civilian liberty and has to be dealt with accordingly. In August 2015, the U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination criticized the country for lack of a comprehensive approach to halt these crimes, as it scars the overall picture of human rights in Norway.

Associational/organizational rights: The Norwegian constitution guarantees the rights to assembly and protest. In 2015, following a terrorist attack on a synagogue, hundreds of Norwegians made a “ring of peace” around an Oslo Synagogue to show solidarity with the Jewish community. The right to assembly and strike is guaranteed to labor organizations/unions and workers except for senior civil servants and the military.

Immigration: Like many other European countries, Norway has seen a surge in the immigration in recent years as it has increased fivefold since the 1970s. “In 2015, Norway received asylum applications from 31,000 people, primarily from Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan; this was a significant increase from the 11,000 applications received in 2014.” The country is witnessing the rise of anti-immigration right-wing politics. Consequently, the controversial practice of refoulment, which the international law forbids, continued in 2015, affecting more than 1,000 people.

Prisoners’ rights: Norway is known globally for its radical humaneness toward prisoners. The incarceration rate is among the lowest in the world at 75 persons per 100,000. In the U.S., it is 10 times higher. There is no death penalty nor lifetime imprisonment, and the maximum sentence for most crimes is 21 years. Norway’s recidivism rate of 20 percent is one of the lowest in the world. However, the country’s capacity has not been sufficient with more than 1,000 prisoners waiting to serve their sentences in recent years.

Individual rights: Norway is also one of the best countries for personal autonomy. Citizens from the European Union do not need a permit to work in Norway. The Gender Equality Act provides equal rights for both men and women. Conscription in armed forces is gender-neutral according to a law that took effect in 2015. In 2013, women won 40 percent of seats in parliament. A gender-neutral marriage act passed in 2009 granted Norwegian same-sex couples identical rights as opposite-sex couples, including in adoption and assisted pregnancies.

Given its credible record in the past, it is very likely that the strong presence of NGOs and civil society networks with the cooperation of government, will strengthen efforts to redress discriminatory practices because they are a threat to pluralism and the positive image of human rights in Norway.

– Aslam Kakar

Photo: Flickr

,

Austerity Among Causes of Poverty in Greece

Causes of Poverty in GreeceIs there poverty in Greece? Yes. Among the countries riding the rising EU economy, Greece finds itself adrift with high unemployment and rampant poverty.

Since the 2008 financial crisis, several countries including Greece, Ireland, Cyprus and Portugal have relied on the EU and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for bailouts. All are rebounding except for Greece, which is now on its third bailout and has yet to see a decrease in its 14 percent poverty rate.

Many Greeks say the bailouts are not enough. With the highest unemployment rate in the EU at 23 percent and youth unemployment at nearly 48 percent, many Greeks believe that the causes of poverty in Greece include the bailouts themselves.

The EU and IMF have been cautious issuing the Mediterranean nation new bailouts, requiring the Greek government to enact several austerity measures. These measures have ranged from increasing taxes and cutting pensions to scaling back all government spending.

Austerity and Poverty in Greece

Many believe that these austerity measures are the causes of poverty in Greece. Increased taxes and pension cuts leave citizens with less disposable income, and in Greece’s case, nearly no disposable income. Being a largely service-oriented economy, consumer spending is the most important economic driver.

As spending falls, businesses tighten the belt and hire fewer or lay off workers. The first to suffer are young and inexperienced Greeks. Due to the inability of the Greece’s youth to find employment, many families subsist on parents’ or grandparents’ pensions, which are to be cut this year as part of the new round of austerity measures.

Many young Greeks have left the nest to head to the cities, where incomes are higher, and poverty is less prevalent. Greece’s rural population has experienced a contraction as a result, and food assistance lines in the city have grown.

There is some good news on Greece’s horizon. As part of a program to incorporate Syrian refugees into mainstream Greek society, the EU is planning on giving Greece 209 million euros. The money will help refugees with rent and living expenses and the new cash infusion could help move the economy forward, only time will tell.

The Greek government has also decided to issue bonds on the market. Finding a buyer for Greece’s risky debt will prove challenging, but if done, will prove to the EU that the economy is turning a corner.

The causes of poverty in Greece are many and systemic. After the global financial crisis of 2008 and the following austerity measures, Greece has had it rough in the last decade, but many can see a light at the end of the tunnel.

– Thomas Anania

Photo: Flickr

,

Threats to Human Rights in Armenia

Human Rights in ArmeniaHuman rights is an internationally discussed topic, with the issues spanning from free speech to the rights of detained suspects. International councils have long harbored an interest in building alliances to eradicate violations of human rights in as many nations as possible. Human rights in Armenia are of special interest now. In June 2017, a human rights defender, Artur Sakunts, received death threats.

Sakunts is the director of the Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly Vanadzor Office (HCA-Vanazdor). HCA-Vanazdor is a high-profile defender of human rights in Armenia. Sakunts received a highly specific death threat via Facebook, which illustrates that the issue of human rights is hotly debated in Armenia. The Armenian government’s record with respect to human rights is somewhat uneven. In 2008, the government pledged to combat violence against women. However, no legislation was passed since. For example, there is no law criminalizing domestic violence.

LGBTQ populations also do not have anti-discrimination protection or legal protection against hate speech. The lack of legislation makes it difficult for women and LGBTQ groups to find a legal solution to advocate for their rights. Peaceful protesters are sometimes met with excessive force and with ill treatment in custody.

Founding Parliament, a radical group opposed to the government, seized a police station in the capital of Armenia, Yerevan, killing a policeman and taking several others hostage on July 17, 2016. The gunmen eventually surrendered on July 31. Yet the seizure of the police station proved to be a catalyst for protest movement against the government.

In late July, peaceful protesters were showing their support for Founding Parliament in the same neighborhood of the seized police station. Without warning the protesters, police fired stun grenades into the crowd. The protesters sustained first and second-degree burns and fragmentation wounds. Other protesters were beaten with clubs.

Journalists covering the protest were warned by the police, but some journalists suffered the after-effects of stun grenades fired specifically at them. Protest leaders and participants were detained, with the authorities citing criminal charges leveled against them. Detainees were held up to 12 hours without documentation. Authorities relied primarily on police testimony to press criminal charges. Detainees were also denied access to lawyers and were not permitted to inform relatives about their detentions.

The explosive events of July 2016 demonstrate the palpable tensions between Armenian citizens and the government.  Fortunately, groups such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch continue to report violations of human rights in Armenia. Generating awareness for human rights issues can pave a path towards finding legal, political and more permanent solutions for such human rights violations.

– Smriti Krishnan

Photo: Pixabay

Achieving Sustainable Peace After Colombia’s Class War

Colombia's Class War
In 2016, Senators Ben Cardin, Bob Corker and 14 co-sponsoring senators of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee passed a resolution to help Colombia end its armed conflict of about 50 years. The violence of Colombia’s class war between the rebel militias Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the National Liberation Army (ELN) and right-wing paramilitaries has resulted in the displacement of three million people and the harming of more than eight million people.

The resolution reaffirms its commitment to the continued partnership between the United States and Colombia on issues of mutual security. These include counternarcotics cooperation, combating transnational organized crime and ensuring justice for those who caused indelible harm to our populations. In addition, it commands effort to end Colombia’s armed conflict and encourages informed public debate about the details of potential peace in advance of voter verification.

After deliberation, the United States Agency for International Development commenced the resolution called Justice for a Sustainable Peace (JSP). Responding to Colombia’s class war, JSP is a four-year commitment to expand Colombia’s justice institutions in order to serve justice at the local level. Therefore, it strengthens local civil society organizations that will increase citizen participation and support. The resolution is implemented in 45 municipalities in Cauca, Choco, Narino, Norte de Santander and Putumayo.

USAID explains that JSP promotes the rule of law in targeted areas by:

  • increasing citizen awareness of justice sector institutions and services
  • strengthening civil society engagement with government on justice issues
  • increasing citizen use of formal and informal justice services
  • strengthening ethnic justice and community conflict resolution mechanisms
  • developing effective judicial services and remedies
  • improving the effectiveness and transparency of land restitution judicial processes
  • addressing impunity for crimes such as gender-based violence, forced displacement, enforced disappearance, child recruitment, kidnapping and homicide.

Rebels and the government have been speaking on many topics, such as rural development, guaranteeing the exercise of political opposition and citizen participation, the end of armed conflict, drug trafficking and the rights of the conflict victims. Amplified communication between the people of Colombia and their government will surely produce mutuality. The methods of JSP will allow the resolution of abuses caused by Colombia’s class war and unify the people.

– Tiffany Santos

Photo: Flickr

,

Historic Abuses of Human Rights in Chile

Human Rights in Chile
During the period of 1973 to 1990, Chile was occupied by a military rule under Augusto Pinochet. In these two decades, General Manuel Contreras, who commanded Pinochet’s secret police, was responsible for an alarming number of violations of human rights in Chile.

It seems many of Chile’s current human rights issues derive from this era, as the Constitution adopted during the military government under General Pinochet made provisions outside of international human rights law. Between April and August 2016, the Chilean government began a consultation process open to all citizens as the first step toward drafting and adopting a new Constitution. The process is ongoing.

It was reported in March 2015 by the chief justice of Chile that 1,056 cases of human rights violations from the previous military rule were under investigation. A tenth of the cases were for torture, and other cases included killings and enforced disappearances. For example, in 1986, during a street protest, two teenagers were set on fire, killing one and maiming the other for life. Soldiers were forced under duress to testify that the students accidentally burned themselves with their own Molotov cocktail. It was revealed in 2014 that a patrol commander ordered soldiers to douse the students in gasoline and set them on fire.

Torture in the period of Contreras is not the only violation of human rights in Chile. Currently, torture is a common problem for detainees. Additionally, detainees are placed into overcrowded prisons where they often face repeated torture and violence.  More than 2,000 inmates were surveyed in 2013 by a Chilean prison service, and it was noted that more than 30% claimed to have suffered violence from prison guards and over 20 percent claimed to have been tortured. Chile’s current criminal code does not ban or address torture in any form.

Another issue present under the current constitution comes from the power that military courts possess over the legal process. For abuses committed by the Carabineros, the uniformed police, military courts usually hold the cases. Under the military courts, criminal proceedings lack independence and due process guaranteed under normal criminal proceedings; the investigations are held in secret, usually only conducted in writing; and most of the time lawyers cannot cross-examine witnesses.

While there are still many steps Chile needs to take in addressing both its past and ongoing human rights violations, it has recognized these as problems and is making progress towards prosecuting human rights offenders and ensuring this is a part of its history never to be repeated. Hopefully, after a new constitution is drafted, Chile can look away from its dark past and towards a better future.

– James Hardison

Photo: Flickr

, ,

Four Facts About Higher Education in Russia

4 Facts about Higher Education in Russia You need to Know
Russia seems to constantly struggle with one political or economic issue after another. It is important not to forget education in the chaos. Here are a few salient facts about higher education in Russia and how it affects the growing number of people living in poverty.

  1. Entrance exams: As in many countries, students in Russia must take a unified state exam to enter university. This system has pros and cons. The exams are extremely competitive and force teachers in secondary school to “teach to the test” to ensure students can pass exams. However, doing so leads to problems later on when students must spend time in university relearning material they should have learned in high school.
  2. Changing demographics: Until the mid-1990s, universities were comprised mainly of well-to-do urban young adults. After reforms were made, enrollment expanded, and in the early 2000s, universities became more popular among the masses. Lately, however, Russia’s gap between the rich and poor has been growing. Nearly 20 million Russians currently live in poverty, and the poverty rate has increased by 20% since last year. Consequently, history is beginning to repeat itself, with a more socioeconomically homogeneous student body developing in universities.
  3. Right to free education: According to the Russian Federation Constitution, all Russian citizens have a right to free education. Russia’s 2013 Law of Education ensures that state governments enforce this right. The right to free education is granted on a competitive basis based on grades from the Unified State Exam.
  4. Government spending is low: Only about 4 percent of Russia’s GDP goes toward education, according to the latest U.N. Human Development Report. Compared to other countries with consistently high-ranking education systems, Russia’s spending on education is low. Finland, for example, spends 6.8 percent of its GDP on education.

Increased government spending on education, as well as more well-rounded secondary education, could greatly benefit higher education in Russia and the nation as a whole.

– Sabrina Yates

Photo: Flickr

, ,

How Can Companies Improve Global Education?

Improve global education

Many CEOs don’t realize that helping improve global education is an investment in the future — not in an abstract future, but in their future. The more educated a country’s population is, the higher its gross domestic product (GDP) usually becomes.

With increased capital, more people can buy more products: someone living on less than a dollar a day will likely not buy Colgate toothpaste or Axe body wash, for example, because that money is reserved for food.

So how can companies help improve global education?

Justin W. van Fleet, director of the International Commission on Financing Global Education Opportunity, lists five strategies businesses can use when helping improve global education. Two important approaches are discussed below.

Prioritize Global Education

Companies can’t make a difference if they don’t prioritize doing so. Recognizing that alleviating global poverty — whether through health concerns or through education concerns — is investing in businesses’ futures, companies like Coca Cola have already made global poverty concerns a priority.

Coca Cola decided to invest in Tanzania in 1952, and the company has reaped benefits ever since. Coca Cola now has a presence in a previously untapped community.

“Whatever has to do with improvement of the Tanzania community it also touches improvement of, and welfare of, our company,” said a Coca-Cola Kwanza manager.

Education is integral to a healthy community, so businesses that prioritize developing countries’ education prioritize their own futures.

Collaborate with Governments

Governments are the largest sources of funding for education in developing countries. If businesses partner with government programs, then businesses may receive money for improving global education. In addition, not all funding efforts have to be out of pocket for companies.

Businesses and governments can work together in other ways, too. In 2006, for example, the Hess oil company invested $20 million in an Equatorial Guinea national educational initiative. Equatorial Guinea’s government matched that investment.

According to Brookings, “It is estimated that the program has reached roughly half of the students enrolled in primary school in Equatorial Guinea.”

Hopefully, more companies will adopt these strategies and others to improve global education in the future.

– Tyler New

Photo: Flickr

, ,

How Statelessness Affects Global Poverty

Statelessness

Statelessness is as much of an economic burden as it is a social and political one. According to a recent Foreign Policy article, statelessness results in “chronic economic instability” because it is often accompanied by joblessness and poverty.

According to the U.S. Department of State, a stateless person is someone who does not “enjoy” the rights of  “citizenship – the legal bond between a government and an individual – in any country.” In other words, these individuals do not have the same rights and opportunities as people who are recognized as citizens by the nations in which they live.

Although the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees counted 3.5 million stateless people in 2011, they estimated that the number could be as high as 12 million people. Foreign Policy reports that as many as 15 million people might be stateless today.

The Department of State notes that the causes of statelessness are diverse. They include failure to register newborns properly, birth to stateless parents, discrimination against minorities and traditional attitudes towards registration, to name a few.

Not only are stateless people denied government-issued identification, preventing them from acquiring formal labor jobs, but they are also subjects of social discrimination. These realities exclude them from even more employment opportunities, leads to fewer chances of regular employment and leaves stateless persons even more destitute.

Foreign Policy also reports that very little research exists about the effects of statelessness on economies. Some existing studies suggest that stateless persons have a negative economic impact on smaller nations in which they may make up a more significant percentage of the population. In this case, granting citizenship to stateless persons might actually improve these nations’ gross domestic product output.

Although stateless individuals can obtain cards which signify their status, only a few thousand people have been able to take advantage of this opportunity. One of the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations aims to provide everyone with legal identity by 2030, which will give people access to formal job markets and increase economic opportunities for individuals and nations.

The U.S. State Department suggests that universal birth registration and increasing access to naturalization and citizenship will help solve statelessness. As Foreign Policy points out, nations must want to increase inclusiveness with stateless persons and cease the use of political reasoning for ostracizing them before changes can occur.

Policies and prejudices might take many years to change, but the economic, social and humanitarian advantages of granting citizenship to stateless people are worth the fight.

– Addie Pazzynski

Photo: UNHCR

, ,

Differences Between Senators and Congressmen

Legislature
Within the legislature of the federal government, there are two chambers: the House of Representatives and the Senate. Senators and Congressman work within these two lawmaking bodies. Both are representative voices for their constituents, but their roles differ in terms of  length, power and apportionment. Here are some key facts on the differences between Senators and Congressmen.

House of Representatives

  1. Each state represented in Congress is entitled to at least one representative, but the number per state is determined according to population. Under the constitutional rule regarding the size of the House, “the number of Representatives shall not exceed one of every thirty Thousand.”
  2. There are currently 435 Congressional seats.
  3. A Congressperson’s term lasts two years.
  4. The minimum age for a member of the House is 25 and the elected official must have been a U.S. citizen for at least seven years.
  5. The six non-voting members in Congress are the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the Northern Mariana Islands. Although these districts are unable to vote, they may vote in a House committee and introduce legislation.
  6. In the legislature, only the House of Representatives can introduce spending bills.

Senate

  1. Each state has a total of two senators, regardless of the state’s size. For this reason, there are always 100 senators during a given period.
  2. A senator’s term lasts six years. Only one-third of the Senate seats are elected every two years. That way, only 33 or 34 seats are up for election at a given time.
  3. The minimum age for a senator is 30, and that person must be a U.S. citizen for at least nine years.
  4. The Senate has sole power of approval for foreign treatises and cabinet and judicial nominations, including appointments to the Supreme Court.
  5. The Senate is headed by the Vice President, who only votes in case of a tie.

– Nora Harless

Sources: Diffen.com, USGovInfo
Photo: Flickr

,

The Progress of Democracy in Africa

Africa_parliament_democracy_womenAccording to the Economist, only three out of 53 African countries had democracies by the end of the Cold War.

Now countries like the one-party presidential republic Eritrea and the absolute monarchy Swaziland are becoming irregularities on the continent. Indeed, this is because Africa has experienced increasing engagement in the democratic process.

While African countries have made significant progress in regards to the spread of democracy, there is still significant work to be done. For example, according to the Guardian, nine African leaders have been in power for more than 20 years with three of them holding power for more than 30 years.

This is an example of the popular notion that African countries are directed by a group of authoritarian heads called “Big Men,” who dominate and control every aspect of the country.

Although authoritarian heads have not lost complete power, women in Africa have benefited greatly from democratically held elections.

For example, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf was elected president of Liberia in 2011, becoming Africa’s first democratically-elected, female head of state. She was followed by Joyce Banda, who became president of Malawi in 2012 and Ameenah Gurib-Fakim, who was elected president of Mauritius in 2015.

The Guardian labels the notion that the transition of power in government is inherently violent to be “misguided.” There are many factors that could incite violence during the election process aside from transition of power.

These events include voter belief of election fraud, opposition initiated violence as a result of an act being considered unjust, or violence being instigated by leaders threatened by the opposition.

Kenya’s 2007 election proved to be an example of the devastation that can result from the election process when 1,133 people were killed and 600,000 displaced. However, while this kind of violent election gains the most international attention, it is the exception and there are more peaceful elections.

For example, the Guardian cites a recent peaceful election that took place in the Central African Republic, during which voters went to the polls in February in hopes of restoring democracy in Africa and ending years of struggle.

Post-Cold War advancement has been substantial for the African continent in many ways and the foundations that make up democracy in Africa have been overwhelmingly embraced by its citizens.

Alex Vines, head of the Africa program at Chatham House, a London-based think-tank told the Economist, “Progress comes in waves,” and much of West Africa has experienced a huge shift to democratic representation.

Many countries that have experienced devastatingly violent conflicts, such as Sierra Leone and Liberia, now possess, if not perfect, adequate political systems.

– Heidi Grossman

Sources: Economist 1, Economist 2, The Guardian
Photo: Flickr