Verified X user (@BeingPolitical1) shared the images of his interactions side-by-side, alleging that the same person was doubling as a porter and a student on different days. At the time of this article being written, the post racked up nearly 800,000 views and was reshared 5,000 times. (Archive)

Rahul Gandhi Drama Company

Ek din Coolie
Ek din Du ka student pic.twitter.com/u1hyGX5Xln

— Being Political (@BeingPolitical1) May 27, 2025

The pro-Right X handle, Hindutva Knight (@HPhobiaWatch), also shared the images with a similar claim. Alt News has previously called out this user for amplifying communal misinformation. (Archive)

US Polo shirt wearing DU student on odd days
Adidas shoe wearing Coolie on even days

This is how India became 4th largest economy under Modi Govt pic.twitter.com/rOiesqt9hm

— Hindutva Knight (@HPhobiaWatch) May 27, 2025

Another X user, Jitendra Pratap Singh (@jpsin1), also posted the comparison images with the same claim. (Archive) 

वही कभी कुली बन जाते हैं वही कभी डियू के स्टूडेंट बन जाते हैं।

साला इसमें भी घोटाला
pic.twitter.com/8UQPQDg9ua

— Jitendra pratap singh (@jpsin1) May 27, 2025

Other X users, such as @rahuldev2, @BesuraTaansane and @ChandanSharmaG also amplified these allegations. (Archives 1, 2, 3)

Fact Check

To verify the authenticity of the claims, we first looked for the source images used in the comparison.

On March 1, 2025, Rahul Gandhi shared some images from his meeting with porters at the New Delhi Railway Station. The Congress leader was thanking them for their service following the stampede that took place at the station on February 15, when the Maha Kumbh Mela was underway, in which at least 18 died, and many were injured.

अक्सर सबसे अंधकार भरे समय में ही इंसानियत की रोशनी सबसे ज़्यादा चमकती है।

नई दिल्ली रेलवे स्टेशन पर भगदड़ के दौरान कुली भाइयों ने इंसानियत की मिसाल पेश करते हुए कई यात्रियों की जान बचाई थी। इसके लिए मैंने देशवासियों की ओर से आज उनका धन्यवाद किया।

लेकिन ऐसे हादसों से सीख लेना… pic.twitter.com/w4DHfrGEdH

— Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) March 1, 2025

We also found a video of this interaction uploaded on Rahul Gandhi’s official YouTube channel on March 5.

The other picture, which allegedly shows the same person appearing to be a student, has been taken from a meeting between Rahul Gandhi and the Delhi University Students Union (DUSU). The official X handle of the Indian Youth Congress (@IYC) had posted about this meeting on May 27. 

LoP Shri @RahulGandhi interacted with DUSU students and united in the fight against BJP/RSS’s anti-reservation agenda.

“Not Found Suitable” (NFS) is the new face of Manuvad , a deliberate tool to exclude SC/ST/OBC candidates from education and leadership roles.

At Delhi… pic.twitter.com/o6zHdFSDu1

— Indian Youth Congress (@IYC) May 27, 2025

A video of this interaction was also shared on Gandhi’s YouTube channel on May 27.

Based on these images and videos, we closely examined the two people that social media users claimed were the same person. The comparison below clearly shows that these allegations do not hold water.

Alt News was also able to confirm the identity of the person highlighted in the DUSU meeting. He is Lokesh Choudhary, the joint-secretary of the student body (@Lokeshnsui9). On May 28, Choudhary also responded to the viral claims, calling them claims spread out of fear by Right-wing social media users and the BJP.

Thus, claims implying that Rahul Gandhi and the Congress employed ‘actors’ to pose as different people for their interactions are baseless. Alt News was able to verify that the two people social media users claimed were the same are, indeed, two different individuals, with one of them being Delhi University student body secretary Lokesh Choudhary.

The post Allegations that same person posed as porter on one occasion and DU student on another with Rahul Gandhi baseless appeared first on Alt News.

This content originally appeared on Alt News and was authored by Prantik Ali.

“Turkish authorities in Ankara must take the threats made against journalist İsmail Arı and his relatives seriously and take decisive steps to better ensure their safety,” said Özgür Öğret, CPJ’s Turkey representative. “The authorities should swiftly and comprehensively investigate the threats and hold those responsible to account, so all journalists in Turkey can safely do their jobs.”

Arı, based in the capital Ankara, said in a post on X that he filed a criminal complaint on May 16 notifying authorities that he was insulted, threatened and sent a list of his relatives via messaging app by an unknown foreign number earlier in the day, and at least one of his relatives was threatened in a phone call, according to the complaint reviewed CPJ.

Arı told CPJ via messaging app on Monday that the police provided a “caution protection” number for him to call and report incidents for 90 days. The journalist also contacted the Interior Ministry about the matter but did not receive a reply as of Monday evening.

Arı was previously targeted with death threats in late 2023 in connection with his reporting on an Islamist group in southern Turkey.

CPJ’s emailed request for comment to Turkey’s Interior Ministry, which oversees the police, did not receive a reply. 

This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by CPJ Staff.

On Tuesday May 6th, JVP Action brought nine students from Columbia University to meet with members of Congress to speak about their experiences as Jewish students who have been steadfastly committed to advocating for the safety and freedom of the Palestinian people. The students warned members of Congress that the Trump regime is using false allegations of antisemitism to crack down on dissent, and called for elected officials to do more to protect student activists from the Trump administration’s authoritarian attacks, and to call for the release of non-citizen student activists being targeted for deportation including their classmate Mahmoud Khalil who is currently a political prisoner in an ICE detention facility in Louisiana.

“I’m here asking my representatives to call for the release of my friend Mahmoud Khalil and to put real pressure on the Trump regime. I cannot stand to see the Trump administration smear Mahmoud as an antisemite when it could not be further than the truth,” said Shay Orentlicher, Jewish Junior at Columbia.

For the past 1.5 years, Columbia University and its student protests have remained in the public eye, yet very few Jewish student activists have been able to tell their stories. On May 6, a little over one year since the launch of the student encampment movement, these students traveled to Congress to tell their elected officials what it’s like being a Jewish student who supports Palestinian rights in an increasingly repressive campus environment. These students told members of Congress about the beautiful multicultural connection and grief that has been core to their activism on campus.

“This Passover we held a beautiful seder with not only our fellow Jewish students but also our community members in the broader anti-war movement at Columbia. Rooted in our tradition of remembrance and liberation, we came together to tell the story of Passover and offered a heartfelt prayer for Mahmoud’s freedom” said Carly Shaffer, a Jewish graduate student in SIPA and friend of Mahmoud Khalil's.

The students felt it was especially important to make their voices heard prior to today’s House Committee on Education & the Workforce hearing in which far-right members of Congress will once again operate under the guise of caring about antisemitism in order to attack the right to political dissent and free speech.

“The Trump Regime is using false allegations of antisemitism to disappear our friends, punish student protestors, and dismantle higher education. What we are seeing has nothing to do with keeping Jews safe, and everything to do with crushing dissent. Thousands of Jews on campuses across the country have spoken out in solidarity with the people of Gaza and we will not be silent.” said Tallie Beckwith-Cohen, a Jewish senior at Barnard College.

“The far-right does not care about Jewish safety. Trump and his allies in Congress are platforming neo-Nazis and Christian Nationalists, all while pretending to care about antisemitism in order to take a hatchet to our communities and most basic freedoms. This is intended to silence the Palestinian rights movement, sow chaos, and sharpen authoritarian tools that will then be used to dismantle civil liberties and democracy itself.” said Beth Miller, Political Director of JVPA.

In one of many egregious examples of its absurd claims, in a letter to Haverford College ahead of the House Committee’s hearing tomorrow, the Committee’s Republican leadership refers to an academic talk given by Rabbi Dr. Rebecca Alpert about the history of Jewishness and anti-Zionism as an example of “antisemitism”. Rabbi Dr. Rebecca Alpert is not only a Rabbi, but also a scholar of Jewish history who was invited to speak on campus because of her expertise.

“My ancestors fled fascism and taught me to fight supremacy and fascism wherever it occurs. I am seeing rising fascism here as the Trump regime lies and targets non citizens, human rights activists, and everyone who challenges their authoritarian agenda. I refuse to be silent because I know that it was silence that allowed the persecution of my ancestors in Europe.” said Sarah Boris, who is a Senior studying English and Jewish studies at Columbia University.

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Newswire Editor.

Police arrested the journalists over a March 23 episode of “Addis Meiraf,” which has since been taken down, in which Birtukan Temesgen said she was abducted and raped by men in military uniforms when she was a student in 2020.

Birtukan recanted her claims on state-owned Ethiopian Broadcasting Corporation on March 27 and EBS founder Amman Fissehazion apologized on March 28, saying the station discovered the allegations were fabricated after the program aired. 

On April 1, the regulatory Ethiopian Media Authority said it had suspended “Addis Meiraf”pending “corrective actions.” Birtukan and the journalists were remanded for 14 days while police investigate.

“Arresting journalists on terrorism allegations is a disproportionate response to concerns over lapses in journalistic ethics, particularly as EBS has already faced regulatory sanction,” said CPJ Africa Program Coordinator Muthoki Mumo.

Police said the journalists sought to incite conflict, threaten the constitutional order, and overthrow the government in coordination with “extremist” groups in Amhara region, according to court documents, reviewed by CPJ.

Nebiyu Tiumelissan, Tariku Haile, Hilina Tarekegn, and Niter Dereje were arrested on March 26, when police raided EBS and forced it off air for several hours, while Girma Tefera, Henok Abate, and Habtamu Alemayehu, were arrested on March 27 and March 28.

Birtukan did not name her university but observers suggested it was Dambi Dollo University in western Oromia state, where ethnic Amhara students were abducted in 2019. The university said Birtukan was never their student.

In restive Oromia, rebels are fighting the government and other groups and civilians have been massacred. In Amhara region, the government is fighting Fano militias, who it says have also carried out attacks in Oromia.

The journalists’ lawyers argue editorial lapses should be addressed under Ethiopia’s media law, which stipulates administrative and civil remedies, and a proclamation against hate speech, not antiterrorism legislation.

CPJ’s emails requesting comment from Ethiopia’s federal ministry of justice were unanswered.

This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by CPJJ Staff.

A man has been charged with the rape and sexual assault of one of the Virgin Australia crew members in the early hours of New Year’s Day, near a nightclub in Martintar, Nadi.

Police confirm he has been charged with one count of sexual assault and one count of rape.

They say he is in custody and will appear in the Nadi Magistrates Court on Monday.

• READ MORE: Virgin Australia confirms ‘serious security incident’ with crew in Fiji

Police have yet to charge anyone in relation to the robbery of another crew member.

Meanwhile, the crew members have now returned to Australia.

A female crew member, who was allegedly sexually assaulted near the club, flew back to Australia yesterday while her male colleague returned on Thursday after receiving treatment for facial wounds.

Five other crew members remained in Fiji to assist the investigation, staying close to their hotel as directed by their airline’s headquarters.

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Tourism Viliame Gavoka said in an earlier statement that regrettably incidents like this could happen anywhere and Fiji was not immune.

He reminded tourists to exercise caution in nightclub areas and late at night.

Republished from Fijivillage News with permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

President-elect Trump, himself found liable in court for sexual abuse, has picked a striking number of suspected sexual predators for key positions in his incoming administration. Trump’s early pick of former Florida Congressmember Matt Gaetz for attorney general was shot down amid a firestorm over sexual misconduct allegations. Now Trump is pushing hard to keep the rest of his picks on track, including Fox host Pete Hegseth for defense secretary and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for health and human services secretary. Hegseth paid an undisclosed amount to a woman who accused him of sexual assault. Meanwhile, a woman who worked for RFK Jr. as a babysitter accused him of sexual assault at his home in 1998. Even one of the few women Trump has chosen, professional wrestling mogul Linda McMahon for education secretary, was sued for allegedly ignoring complaints that a WWE ringside announcer sexually abused children for years. “Trump really is the embodiment of a male entitlement,” says Deborah Tuerkheimer, professor of law at Northwestern University. Tuerkheimer says the president and these Cabinet picks are a bellwether for how society responds to abuse. “The #MeToo movement was about and continues to be about not just individual allegations, but this larger question of who’s held accountable and what kind of cultural toleration do we have for abuse by powerful men.”

This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up for Dispatches, a newsletter that spotlights wrongdoing around the country, to receive our stories in your inbox every week.

A new settlement that will end a payday-like loan operation in Minnesota puts additional pressure on a Native American tribe that has been on the defensive for its high borrowing rates across the country.

The Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians has been telling customers that its practices are allowable, but that stance has become harder to maintain. Shortly before Thanksgiving, the Wisconsin tribe agreed to settle a civil suit filed by Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison alleging that LDF broke state law, which requires reasonable lending rates, by charging Minnesotans between 200% and 800% annual interest. The state also claimed LDF had violated statutes on consumer fraud, deceptive trade and false advertising.

In the consent decree, LDF’s top official denied the allegations but formally agreed to stop lending to people in Minnesota unless the tribe adheres to the state’s strict usury laws and other regulations, including licensing requirements.

Tribal Council President John Johnson Sr., the lone defendant in the case, also promised that the tribe’s lending arm would forgive all outstanding loans to Minnesotans, estimated to be worth more than $1 million. A judge must still approve the consent agreement.

“I will not allow Minnesotans to be exploited by predatory lenders,” Ellison said in a press release announcing the settlement.

Johnson did not return calls or emails seeking comment. He is board president of the LDF Business Development Corp., which runs a variety of tribal companies, including its lending operation.

Previously, Johnson has said LDF’s lending practices are transparent and its collection methods are fair and ethical. “In offering unsecured loans, we consciously embrace the risk involved, reflecting our commitment to aid those facing urgent financial needs,” Johnson said in an April email to ProPublica.

The move by Minnesota to cut off lending companies controlled by LDF comes shortly after ProPublica reported extensively in August and September on LDF’s loan operations, finding that over the past decade, the tribe has grown to become one of the leading players in the tribal lending industry. Its loans contribute to the debt people shoulder throughout the country. A ProPublica analysis found companies owned by the LDF tribe showed up as a creditor in roughly 1 out of every 100 bankruptcy cases sampled nationwide.

The Minnesota attorney general’s office reported in its federal court filing that the state had received many consumer complaints about LDF Holdings, the tribe’s lending arm, that described extreme hardship caused by “continuing demands for payment of excessive interest.”

It gave the example of a Burnsville resident who took out a $1,398 loan from the LDF company Lendumo in December 2023 at an annual percentage rate of 795%. The loan snowballed to $8,593.

After Minnesota authorities reached out to LDF on behalf of the borrower, LDF argued that the loan was legal and not subject to state law, but Lendumo resolved the complaint “as a courtesy” — though not before demanding an additional $389, court records state.

“These are the highest, most nefarious APRs that we see,” said Anne Leland Clark, executive director of Exodus Lending, a nonprofit in Minnesota that refinances payday loans for borrowers using tax dollars and private donations. About a quarter of the loans they have refinanced since 2015 are tribal loans, she said.

This summer, in a class-action lawsuit out of Virginia, tribal council leaders agreed to a landmark settlement that cancels $1.4 billion in outstanding loans nationwide and provides $37.4 million in restitution and attorney fees. LDF officials will pay $2 million of that, while the remainder is to be paid by nontribal partners involved in five of the tribe’s lending firms. A final approval hearing is scheduled for Dec. 13.

Despite the national settlement and the action in Minnesota, Johnson has not signaled that the tribe will exit the lucrative lending business or alter its practices. ProPublica previously determined that LDF entered the loan business in 2012 and set up at least two dozen lending companies and websites, some of which remain active today.

LDF works with outside firms to operate businesses offering short-term installment loans. Unlike traditional payday loans, these are not due by the next pay period; typically, they are repaid over months in installments via automatic bank deductions.

One defunct website associated with LDF, Lendgreen, was the subject of a 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that held that tribes must abide by the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, including provisions protecting debtors from continued collection efforts and harassment during the restructuring process.

Only a few dozen of the country’s 574 federally recognized tribes engage in online lending. Those that do often see it as an economic boon for their community, bringing in much-needed revenue for tribal government operations, which have limited options for expansion in their often-remote areas of the country.

LDF grew its footprint, ProPublica found, by partnering with multiple outside managers and financiers. Revenue data is not public, but historically, in the tribal lending model of payday lending, these outsiders have taken the lion’s share of the profits, according to lawsuits.

In a prior email to ProPublica, Johnson described LDF’s lending operation as an engine for community improvement. “The importance of our business extends far beyond simple economics; it is interwoven with the very fabric of our community, supporting a myriad of vital services,” Johnson wrote.

LDF and other tribal lenders contend that they are able to offer loans at exorbitant rates because of Native American tribes’ sovereign rights and immunities.

LDF’s loan documents have included provisions waiving Minnesota law, according to the state’s lawsuit, and improperly limited consumers’ rights to challenge repayment demands, falsely claiming Minnesota law doesn’t apply because of sovereign immunity.

The attorney general’s office also cited a letter from LDF Holdings to a borrower that stated: “the loan is not subject to state law and the [LDF lender] is not required to be licensed with any state. Your loan is legal.”

The tribe has stressed that it follows tribal law and federal law, which has no interest rate cap except for active-duty military members and their families.

States are not powerless, however, to address the issue.

Courts have ruled that while states cannot pursue tribes for monetary damages, they can sue the executives in charge and obtain injunctions stopping future harm.

“The truth is that out-of-state businesses and businesses incorporated under the laws of other sovereigns must comply with Minnesota law when transacting business in Minnesota,” Ellison wrote.

The LDF settlement is the second enforcement action by Ellison directed at tribal lenders operating in Minnesota.

In February, his office obtained a settlement agreement with top lending executives of the Fort Belknap Indian Community in Montana. It, too, bars the tribe — which denied any wrongdoing — from making future loans in Minnesota. Calling itself an industry leader, the Fort Belknap operation revealed in an annual report that it had processed more than 300,000 loans nationwide in 2021. The tribe’s economic development arm, which legal filings show gets most of its revenue from lending, reported more than $180 million in revenue that year.

In an interview with ProPublica in March, Ellison said other states with strong usury laws could follow Minnesota’s lead. “I hope other states do look at what we did and take note.” He declined to be interviewed for this story.

Minnesota strengthened its usury laws with legislation that took effect in January 2024 governing small-dollar loans. It eliminated a sliding scale of set fees and imposed a stricter APR cap: 36% in many instances, but 50% for licensed lenders that conduct an analysis on whether a borrower can repay.

Johnson told the attorney general’s office that the tribe had stopped originating new loans to Minnesotans as of Dec. 31, 2023, a day before the law took effect, according to the consent decree.

This content originally appeared on ProPublica and was authored by by Megan O’Matz and Joel Jacobs.

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

Former President Donald Trump’s media company has forced out executives in recent days after internal allegations that its CEO, former Rep. Devin Nunes, is mismanaging the company, according to interviews and records of communications among former employees.

Several people involved with Trump Media believe the ousters are retaliation following what they describe as an anonymous “whistleblower” complaint regarding Nunes that went to the company’s board of directors.

The chief operating officer and chief product officer have left the company, along with at least two lower-level staffers, according to interviews, social media posts and communications between former staffers reviewed by ProPublica. The company, which runs the social media platform Truth Social, disclosed the departure of the chief operating officer in a securities filing Thursday afternoon.

ProPublica has not seen the whistleblower complaint. But several people with knowledge of the company said the concerns revolve around alleged mismanagement by Nunes. One person said they include allegations of misuse of funds, hiring of foreign contractors and interfering with product development.

In a statement, a spokesperson for Trump Media did not answer specific questions but said that ProPublica’s inquiry to the company “utterly fabricates implications of improper and even illegal conduct that have no basis in reality.”

“This story is the fifth consecutive piece in an increasingly absurd campaign by ProPublica, likely at the behest of political interest groups, to damage TMTG based on false and defamatory allegations and vague innuendo,” the statement said, adding that “TMTG strictly adheres to all laws and applicable regulations.”

Trump Media’s board comprises a set of powerful figures in Trump’s world, including his son Donald Trump Jr., former U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and the businesswoman Linda McMahon, a major donor and current co-chair of Trump’s transition planning committee.

Nunes was named CEO of the company in 2021, with Trump hailing him as “a fighter and a leader” who “will make an excellent CEO.” As a member of Congress, Nunes was known as one of Trump’s staunchest loyalists.

After the internal allegations about Nunes were made at Trump Media, the company enlisted a lawyer to investigate and interview staffers, according to a person with knowledge of the company.

Then, last week, some employees who were interviewed by the lawyer were notified they were being pushed out, the person said. The employees being pushed out include a human relations director and a product designer, along with Chief Operating Officer Andrew Northwall and Chief Product Officer Sandro De Moraes. The person with knowledge of the company said Trump Media asked the employees to sign an agreement pledging not to make public claims of wrongdoing against the company in exchange for severance.

On Thursday afternoon, Northwall posted on Truth Social announcing he had “decided to resign from my role at Trump Media,” adding that he was “incredibly grateful” to Trump and Nunes “for this opportunity.”

“As I step back, I look forward to focusing more on my family and returning to my entrepreneurial journey,” the statement said.

De Moraes now identifies himself on his Truth Social bio as the “Former Chief Product Officer” of the company.

Some word of the departures became public earlier this week when former Trump Media employee Alex Gleason said in a social media post that “Truth Social in shambles. Many more people fired.”

Trump personally owns nearly 60% of the company. That stake, even after a recent decline in the company’s stock price, is worth nearly $2 billion on paper, a significant chunk of Trump’s fortune. He said last month he was not planning to sell his shares. What role Trump plays, if any, in the day-to-day operations of the company is not clear.

Since it launched in 2021, the company has become a speculation-fueled meme stock, but its actual business has generated virtually no revenue and Truth Social has not emerged as a serious competitor to the major social media platforms.

Among Nunes’ moves as CEO, as ProPublica has reported, was inking a large streaming TV deal with several obscure firms, including one controlled by a major political donor. He also traveled to the Balkans over the summer and met with the prime minister of North Macedonia, a trip whose purpose was never publicly explained by the company.

Trump Media has a formal whistleblower policy, adopted when the company went public in March, that encourages employees to report illegal activity and other “business conduct that damages the Company’s good name” and business interests.

Do you have any information about Trump Media that we should know? Robert Faturechi can be reached by email at robert.faturechi@propublica.org and by Signal or WhatsApp at 213-271-7217. Justin Elliott can be reached by email at justin@propublica.org or by Signal or WhatsApp at 774-826-6240.

This content originally appeared on ProPublica and was authored by by Robert Faturechi, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski.

• The federal election interference case against Donald Trump advanced today, with U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan allowing prosecutors to file documents later this month that could reveal damaging allegations about the former president.
• President Joe Biden touted $7 billion for rural clean energy projects in Wisconsin, while Trump pledged tax cuts, and energy approvals in New York speech.
• The Department of Justice launched a civil rights investigation into conditions at two California women’s prisons amid sexual abuse allegations.
• Officials, students, and clean energy advocates urged California Governor Gavin Newsom to sign a bill expanding solar benefits for schools.
• Pirate Party protests Reboot 2024 tech conference in San Francisco, citing conservative group involvement.

The post Judge allows prosecutors to move forward and file documents in Trump election interference case that could reveal damaging allegations – September 5, 2024 appeared first on KPFA.

This content originally appeared on KPFA - The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays and was authored by KPFA.

“Somali authorities must immediately free journalist AliNur Salaad, drop all legal proceedings against him, and allow journalists to report and comment freely on public affairs,” said Angela Quintal, head of CPJ’s Africa program, in New York. “Somalia must end its practice of harassing and arbitrarily detaining journalists.”

On July 22, police officers arrested Salaad, founder and CEO of the privately owned Dawan Media, and detained him at Waberi District police station in the capital Mogadishu, according to media reports and the Somali Journalists Syndicate (SJS) rights group.

Those sources linked Salaad’s detention to a social media video, which has since been deleted, in which the journalist allegedly suggested that Somali security forces were vulnerable to attacks by the militant group Al-Shabaab because of their consumption of the narcotic khat.

The Banadir Regional Police said Hassan had been arrested on allegations of “immorality, false reporting, and insulting the armed forces,” according to a statement published by the state-run Somali National Television.

On July 23, Salaad was charged without a lawyer present before the Banadir Regional Court, which has jurisdiction over Mogadishu, and remanded for 45 days in custody pending investigations, SJS said on X, formerly Twitter.

Attorney General Sulayman Mohamed Mohamoud and Deputy Information Minister Abdirahman Yusuf Omar Al Adala did not respond to CPJ’s requests for comment via messaging app.

This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

A former Papua New Guinea army leader, Major-General Jerry Singirok, is furious after being arrested and charged under the Capital Markets Act.

He was a trustee of Melanesian Trustee Services Ltd, part of a superannuation agency with 20,000 unit holders, but its trustee licence was revoked last year.

General Singirok said the agency was already embroiled in legal action over that revocation and he said his arrest on Wednesday was aimed at undermining that action.

• READ MORE: Other Jerry Singirok reports

He said Task Force Shield, which he said had been set up by Trades Minister Richard Maru, had made a series of allegations about the degree of oversight at Melanesian Trustee Services Ltd.

The Post-Courier reported that Singirok was released on 6000 kina (NZ$2700) bail.

“They said that we did not audit, [but] we got audited, annual audits for the past 10 years,” he said.

“They said we didn’t do that. [They claimed] we continued to function without consulting our unit holders, which is wrong.

“There is a list of complaints, and as I said, it is now going to be subjected to a court. What’s important is that they are using the Capital Markets Act to charge us.”

General Singirok said in a Facebook post that he had spent his entire life fighting for the rights of the ordinary people and he would clear his name after what he is calling a “witchhunt”.

He said he had been a member of the superannuation operator since 1989.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Leer en español.

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

In the summer of 2010, as U.S. agents dug into allegations that a powerful drug mafia had poured money into Mexican politics, the investigators took direct aim at the man who is now the country’s president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador.

According to confidential government documents obtained by ProPublica, the Drug Enforcement Administration knowingly risked a political furor to try to penetrate López Obrador’s campaign organization before Mexicans could elect a government that might be beholden to the traffickers.

From the start, the documents indicate, the Americans’ primary target was López Obrador, then the leader of the leftist Democratic Revolutionary Party, or PRD, and the front-runner in the 2012 presidential race.

“Should this investigation yield the evidence suggested by the multiple cooperating witnesses, the DEA will seek to indict AMLO and members of his staff and political party,” one Justice Department document states, referring to López Obrador by his initials.

“Thus, this investigation could ultimately affect who runs for president from the PRD party.” The candidate’s possible indictment in the United States, the document adds drily, “would certainly create media attention.”

The investigators initially had remarkable success, co-opting a midlevel campaign operative to act as a DEA mole inside López Obrador’s political team. They then drew up an audacious plan for a sting operation in which an undercover operative would offer the campaign millions of dollars in exchange for future protection, the documents show.

But that plan never went forward. The inquiry was shut down by senior Justice Department officials in late 2011, as the attorney general, Eric Holder, came under heavy political fire for the failure of another undercover operation in Mexico, a gun-tracking effort known as the “Fast and Furious” case.

That decision effectively ended U.S. law enforcement scrutiny of the matter, even as the extradition of major Mexican drug traffickers to the United States brought investigators new allegations about drug ties to López Obrador’s political apparatus in the years that followed.

The disclosure of the DEA’s investigation this year by ProPublica and two other news organizations jolted U.S.-Mexico relations and enraged López Obrador, who denied ever taking drug money and went on a weekslong tirade against the DEA, ProPublica and others he said were conspiring against him.

“It’s that the DEA no longer likes the policies we are applying because we are an independent and sovereign country,” López Obrador said last month, alluding to his repudiation of the closer antidrug cooperation of earlier Mexican governments with Washington.

The president’s spokesperson, Jesús Ramírez Cuevas, said López Obrador would not respond to questions about “false allegations” related to the 2006 campaign. But in a letter, he said the president wanted answers to his own questions about ProPublica’s sources and motives in reporting on the DEA inquiry. “Your reporting has damaged the image of the government and the president of Mexico,” the letter added.

Biden administration officials have sought to pacify López Obrador, on whom they are relying to hold back the flow of migrants trying to reach the U.S. southern border. While not denying reports of the DEA investigation, the officials emphasized that it has long been closed and the Mexican president is no longer under investigation.

Still, the revelations again raised a question that has long troubled U.S. officials working on Mexico: How should they deal with evidence of high-level corruption in an allied government that is steadily losing ground to some of the world’s most powerful criminals?

The documents obtained by ProPublica, which have not been previously disclosed, illuminate how U.S. officials initially weighed that question at a high point in their law enforcement relationship with Mexico and help to clarify why, after the political winds shifted, Justice Department officials halted the investigation before agents had come close to finishing their work.

The documents point to some uncertainties of the case, which began with allegations that traffickers had funneled some $2 million into López Obrador’s first presidential campaign, in 2006. (López Obrador lost that race and the one in 2012 before being elected president in 2018.) Although U.S. agents did ultimately corroborate that account with at least five different sources, they never developed any firsthand confirmation that López Obrador himself approved or even knew of the reported donations, officials said.

The DEA’s investigation of drug traffickers’ links to López Obrador’s campaign began with Roberto López Nájera, a young Acapulco lawyer who went to work for one of Mexico’s more notorious drug bosses, Edgar Valdez Villareal, a Texas-born trafficker known as “La Barbie.”

When López Nájera joined La Barbie’s gang in 2004, it was effectively a branch of the drug organization led by the kingpin Arturo Beltrán Leyva — who was in turn one of several leading figures in the trafficking syndicate known as the Sinaloa Cartel. The alliance was fluid enough, López Nájera later told investigators, that gang leaders sometimes gathered their gunmen for meet-and-greets, lest they encounter one another on the street and mistakenly start shooting.

López Nájera eventually turned on La Barbie and made his way to the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City, where he offered his help to the DEA. He was moved into protective custody in the United States and became a prized informant, sitting for endless debriefings and even typing up reminiscences of traffickers he had known and episodes he had witnessed.

Despite López Nájera’s acknowledged role as a bribe-payer, it took the DEA almost two years to start digging into his account of a January 2006 gathering at which he said La Barbie and two of his key lieutenants met emissaries from López Obrador’s then-surging presidential campaign.

As López Nájera told the story, officials said, the meeting at a hotel in the Pacific Coast resort of Nuevo Vallarta ended with a handshake agreement: In return for some $2 million he donated to López Obrador’s campaign, La Barbie was promised official protection if the candidate won, including a say in the choice of key police commanders and even the federal attorney general.

In the first months of the investigation, López Nájera worked with the DEA to set up meetings in Florida and Texas with Mauricio Soto Caballero, an operative from López Obrador’s campaign team with whom he had arranged the delivery of La Barbie’s contributions in 2006. The two men remained friendly, and López Nájera told agents that Soto had expressed an interest in making some quick money by perhaps acting as an investor on smaller drug deals.

On the night of Oct. 21, 2010, Soto met at a bar in McAllen, Texas, with a couple of men he thought were associates of López Nájera’s. In fact, the men were undercover DEA agents, and they arrested Soto at his hotel hours later. Within days, officials said, he pleaded guilty in New York to a single federal charge of conspiring to traffic cocaine. To avoid prison and return home, he agreed to help the investigators pursue others who had been involved with the traffickers’ donations to López Obrador’s campaign.

The agents, drawn from DEA teams in Mexico City and New York, submitted a “sensitive investigative activity” request to the DEA’s global operations chief, seeking authorization to use Soto as an undercover source. In essence, they were asking to plant an informant inside López Obrador’s second presidential campaign in 2012 and potentially develop evidence against the candidate himself.

“Without a confidential source in this position, it would be impossible for any entity to identify the level of corruption involved with a presidential campaign,” one undated document states. Soto “will be in a direct position to tell when a Drug Cartel provided monies to the campaign.”

“The ultimate target of this investigation,” the request adds, “is Andres Manuel LÓPEZ-Obrador.”

A list of other campaign staff members whom the agents intended to examine, included in a separate document, names two of López Obrador’s former bodyguards from the 2006 campaign and the one-star army general who headed the security team, Audomaro Martínez, now the powerful head of Mexico’s state intelligence agency.

According to several current and former officials familiar with the case, the agents had different criteria for choosing their targets for scrutiny. One former bodyguard, Silvio Hernández Soto, had been introduced to López Nájera as a contact who might prove helpful with his cocaine-smuggling efforts. Martínez, who supervised the bodyguards, was viewed as a gatekeeper to the candidate but does not appear to have been implicated in any criminal activity. (An attorney for Hernández did not respond to messages seeking comment, while Martínez did not respond to questions submitted to the president’s spokesperson.)

The agents’ first focus of attention was Mauricio Soto’s friend and former boss on the 2006 campaign, Nicolás Mollinedo Bastar, who remained one of López Obrador’s closest aides. Mollinedo had served as the campaign’s logistics chief, responsible for setting up rallies and other events around the country. In an interview, Mollinedo denied that he or the campaign ever took drug money. Soto, who did not respond to numerous requests for comment, has insisted to Mexican journalists that he was never arrested in the United States or collaborated with the DEA. (ProPublica has reviewed six U.S. government documents that state otherwise.)

Throughout the 2006 race, Soto told the U.S. investigators, he and other campaign workers would be approached by “unidentified individuals” offering “cash or high value items,” according to a document that summarizes some of Soto’s interviews. “It was understood that these individuals represented the local drug cartel and in return would request security for their organization to traffic narcotics to the United States.”

“Although at first MOLLINEDO directed his subordinates not to accept these offers, SOTO-Caballero was instructed to maintain a relationship with these individuals should they need anything in the future,” the document continues. That role continued, another summary of the investigation states, when Mollinedo authorized Soto “to receive the illicit funds and other support” that La Barbie sent to the campaign.

Soto told the investigators he discussed the Sinaloa contributions only with Mollinedo, to whom he turned over two large deposits of the traffickers’ cash, former officials familiar with the case said. The agents suspected that López Obrador, who had a reputation as a micromanager, could not have been unaware of such a large donation. But Soto told them he did not know if the candidate discussed the money with Mollinedo, one of his most trusted aides, or with the two businessmen who had claimed to represent his campaign at the meeting in Nuevo Vallarta.

López Nájera had told the investigators he had been introduced to López Obrador during a 2006 campaign stop in the northern state of Coahuila, where the candidate spoke to a huge crowd assembled with financial help from La Barbie.

López Nájera said he called La Barbie and handed his cellphone to López Obrador, who then thanked the trafficker for his donations. But officials familiar with the case said agents treated that claim skeptically: Even if López Obrador knew who was on the phone, whatever López Nájera thought he heard of the conversation would be hearsay. (López Obrador has said he would resign the presidency immediately if anyone could prove he spoke to the trafficker.)

Although the agents’ target list was both ambitious and sensitive, DEA officials said they assumed from the start that the limits of such an investigation would inevitably be set by senior policy officials in the Justice Department and other agencies.

“We were going to try to collect as much information as we could,” said a former senior DEA official who oversaw the matter for a time but, like others, would only discuss it on the condition of anonymity because of its continuing sensitivity. “You knew it was going to be a long road because of the political ramifications. And it was not surprising to us that they basically pulled the plug.”

From the start, the investigators faced a deadline: The federal prosecutors who were guiding their efforts from Manhattan believed the statute of limitations on drug-conspiracy crimes related to López Obrador’s first race would run five years from the day of the vote, July 2, 2006. By early 2011, the investigators had only months left to bring charges based on the earlier campaign.

While working secretly with the U.S. agents, Soto attended weekly meetings in Mexico City with López Obrador and the small team that was preparing his 2012 presidential run, documents show. Soto remained close to Mollinedo, who was almost constantly at López Obrador’s side.

Once officials approved Soto’s deployment as an undercover source, the agents focused their attention on Mollinedo. Hoping to further confirm his role in accepting the 2006 donations, the agents gave Soto a concealed recording device and sent him off on April 8, 2011, to surreptitiously record a chat at López Obrador’s political headquarters.

The results were disappointing. The recording was partly unintelligible, and at one point Soto shut off the device — accidentally or perhaps deliberately, the agents weren’t sure.

A two-page summary of the conversation states that Soto (referred to as “the CS,” or confidential source) told Mollinedo he was concerned that the Mexican authorities had arrested both La Barbie and a lieutenant who had joined him at the Nuevo Vallarta meeting, Sergio Villarreal Barragán, an imposing former police officer known as “El Grande.”

In the recording, Soto said he was also worried about a still-mysterious government witness who had been identified in court papers and news reports by the code-name “Jennifer.” The witness was then making headlines as the source for a big drug-corruption case, “Operation Clean-up,” and the two men had apparently figured out that Jennifer was in fact López Nájera — the young trafficker with whom Soto had dealt during the 2006 campaign.

Mollinedo was apparently worried, too. He said he doubted the traffickers would be credible witnesses, and he cut short the conversation, saying he had to meet his wife and daughter. Soto offered him a ride, but during the drive Mollinedo “mostly talked about a mistress he was currently involved with,” the summary states.

Referring to Soto, the document adds: “The CS advised investigators that he/she was not able to specifically discuss the money payments during the 2006 campaign because the CS and MOLLINEDO were never able to speak in private at the office.”

A month later, the agents tried again. A second recorded conversation on May 9 focused partly on a former bodyguard from López Obrador’s 2006 campaign, Marco Antonio Mejía, who had been making statements to prosecutors after being arrested on corruption charges while running a prison in Cancún.

Back in 2006, Soto had introduced Mejía to López Nájera as a potentially useful contact for the traffickers. In talking with Mollinedo, Soto worried aloud that López Nájera and Mejía could turn against them. (Mejía, who denied any wrongdoing during his legal case, could not be reached for comment.)

Mollinedo was a step ahead of Soto, having already obtained a copy of Mejía’s confidential court file with the statements of various witnesses.

“It’s just vague things,” Mollinedo said of the prosecutors’ file. “But they probably have a file on us.”

Parts of the conversation were again unintelligible, and much of the men’s language was ambiguous or deliberately coded. There were a few references to money that was delivered (presumably to the campaign) and a mention of the man who had first introduced Soto to López Nájera (presumably to arrange delivery of the traffickers’ donations).

DEA agents viewed the transcript as proof that Mollinedo — one of López Obrador’s closest confidants — was fully aware of La Barbie’s donations in 2006 and who had delivered them. “These meetings have revealed evidence corroborating the initial information,” the agents wrote in a subsequent investigative plan.

But Mollinedo made no explicit statements about the traffickers’ donations or what his responsibility for them might have been. As potential evidence, the prosecutors thought it was thin — the sort that a good criminal defense lawyer could tear to pieces in court.

“When you’re dealing with a sensitive, high-level political setting, the level of predication you need goes way up,” a former Justice Department official familiar with the case said, referring to the strength of the evidence needed to prove a corruption case. “That’s true domestically, too.”

Over the next few months, as the statute of limitations deadline came and went, the agents pivoted to a more ambitious plan: They would set up a sting operation, officials said, using Soto to introduce Mollinedo to a carefully chosen undercover operative — perhaps a real former trafficker from another Latin American country who was cooperating with the DEA.

As the presidential race heated up, the operative would offer a huge donation, maybe $5 million, in return for a promise that a López Obrador government would tolerate his future trafficking activities. If Mollinedo accepted, the purported donor would offer a down payment or good-faith gift of $100,000 cash. If Mollinedo pocketed it, they would seek to have him arrested and try to pressure him to cooperate against others, including possibly López Obrador, officials said.

Over the course of the investigation, the documents indicate, the DEA chief in Mexico, Joseph Evans, briefed senior U.S. diplomats in Mexico on its progress. (Evans declined to comment on the matter.) But the inquiry coincided with a period of upheaval at the U.S. Embassy. The ambassador, Carlos Pascual, resigned in March 2011 after conflicts with the Mexican government that escalated when Wikileaks released secret diplomatic cables in which he had criticized Mexican counterdrug efforts.

The documents viewed by ProPublica underscore officials’ concerns about the sensitivity of the investigation and the perils of running an undercover operation inside Mexico — a step they were generally obliged to inform the Mexican government about under the terms of a 1998 agreement on law enforcement cooperation.

Like other especially risky operations, the agents’ plan was submitted to a panel of DEA and Justice Department lawyers and policy officials called a Sensitive Activity Review Committee. That review, on Nov. 22, 2011, in Washington, “revolved around the concerns of what the Mexicans have been briefed on and what they will or will not be briefed on in the future,” a summary of the case states.

DEA officials noted that the problem of official corruption was at the core of Mexico’s failure to make real headway against the traffickers, officials said. U.S. law enforcement agencies were then working for the first time with a strongly supportive Mexican government, that of President Felipe Calderón, a bitter rival of López Obrador’s. DEA officials suggested that they could discuss their plan with Calderón’s intelligence chief, who could brief the president without other Mexican officials learning of it.

But, as some foreign policy and Justice Department officials saw it, the proposal could hardly be more fraught with peril for the U.S. relationship with Mexico. “A sting operation against the leading presidential candidate, who is also the arch-rival of the sitting president?” one former senior U.S. diplomat asked rhetorically. “Are you kidding me?”

A former Justice Department official familiar with the debate added: “You’re not in a situation where you can put an agent in there, so you’re dealing exclusively with people who are informants and criminals. It’s not just about the target of the investigation — it’s about what you’re proposing to do.”

Despite Calderón’s strong partnership with the United States and a flurry of strikes against major traffickers including the Beltrán Leyva gang, the potential for things to go catastrophically wrong in the two countries’ relationship was already on public display.

For months, a major scandal had been raging over a long-running effort by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to secretly track illegal U.S. guns going into Mexico. Hundreds of guns had been allowed to move freely to the trafficking gangs and other criminals, but the tracking had failed miserably. When the guns were identified from crimes or seizures, it was determined that they had been used in the killings of more than 150 Mexican citizens. The Mexican people, including Calderón, were furious.

“You have to have a long view about the relationship and the costs,” the Justice Department official said. “Not just the foreign policy concerns of other agencies, but also to DOJ. I had 10 other prosecutors who had cases that depended on working with (the Mexican government). And they were going to be really angry if this blew up.”

On Oct. 1, 2013, with no further prospects for the DEA investigation, Soto returned secretly to federal court in Manhattan to be sentenced on the cocaine-conspiracy charge to which he had pleaded guilty almost three years earlier, officials said. With the prosecutors’ endorsement, a judge gave him five years’ probation but did not require him to report back in person.

He flew home almost immediately, officials said, and went back to work in the Mexico City government.

Do You Have a Tip for ProPublica? Help Us Do Journalism.

This content originally appeared on ProPublica and was authored by by Tim Golden.

French police and gendarmes force were deployed around the political headquarters of the pro-independence Caledonian Union in Kanaky New Caledonia’s Nouméa suburb of Magenta in a crackdown today.

The public prosecutor confirmed that eight protesters had been arrested, including the leader of the CCAT action groups, Christian Téin, as suspects in a “criminal conspiracy” investigation, local media report.

Prosecutor Yves Dupas said that the Prosecutor’s Office “intends to conduct this phase of the investigation with all the necessary objectivity and impartiality”.

• READ MORE: Nouméa’s Tontouta International Airport reopened after civil unrest
• Other New Caledonia unrest reports

The arrests were made in Nouméa and in the nearby township of Mont-Dore.

This was part of the investigation opened by the prosecution on May 17 — for days after the rioting and start of unrest in New Caledonia.

The Caledonian Union (UC) is the largest partner in the pro-independence umbrella group FLNKS (Kanak and Social National Liberation Front).

Presidential letter
Meanwhile, RNZ Pacific reports that French President Emmanuel Macron had written to the people of New Caledonia, confirming that he would not convene the Congress (both houses of Parliament) meeting needed to ratify the controversial constitutional electoral amendments.

Local media reports said Macron was also waiting for the “firm and definitive lifting” of all the roadblocks and unreserved condemnation of the violence — and that those who had encouraged unrest would have to answer for their action.

Macron had previously confirmed he had suspended but not withdrawn New Caledonia’s controversial constitutional amendment.

The changes would allow more people to vote with critics fearing it would weaken the indigenous Kanak voice.

In this letter, the President said France remained committed to the reconstruction of the Pacific territory, and called on New Caledonians “not to give in to pressure and disarray but to stand up to rebuild”.

The need for a return to dialogue was mentioned several times.

He wrote that this dialogue should make it possible to define a common “project of society for all New Caledonian citizens”, while respecting their history, their own identity and their aspirations.

This project, based on trust, would recognise the dignity of each person, justice and equality, and would need to provide a future for New Caledonia’s younger generations.

Macron’s letter ended with a handwritten paragraph which read: “I am confident in our ability to find together the path of respect, of shared ambition, of the future.”

‘Financial troubles’
Nicolas Metzdorf, a rightwing candidate for the 2024 snap general election, said he had contacted the President following this letter to tell him that it was “unsuitable given the situation in New Caledonia”.

New Caledonia’s local government Finance Minister Christopher Gygès said the territory was trying to get emergency money from France due to financial troubles.

One of the factors is believed to be the ongoing civil unrest that broke out on May 13, which prevented most of the public sector employees from being able to pay their social contributions.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

The government of Narendra Modi, India’s prime minister, has furiously denied the allegations, saying there is no such policy.

Nevertheless, the American Biden administration as well as Canada, Britain and Australia continue to demand accountability over claims that  New Delhi is engaging in “transnational repression” of spying, harassing and killing Indian opponents living in Western states.

The accusations have severely stained political relations. The most fractious example is Canada. After Prime Minister Justin Trudeau publicly accused Indian state agents of involvement in the murder of an Indian-born Canadian citizen last year, New Delhi expelled dozens of Canadian diplomats.

Relations became further strained this month when The Washington Post published a long article purporting to substantiate claims that Indian security services were organizing assassinations of U.S. and Canadian citizens. The Post named high-level Indian intelligence chiefs in the inner circle of Prime Minister Modi. The implication is a policy of political killings is sanctioned at the very top of the Indian government.

The targets of the alleged murder program are members of the Sikh diaspora. There are large expatriate populations of Sikhs in the U.S., Canada and Britain. In recent years, there has been a renewed campaign among Sikhs for the secession of their homeland of Punjab from India. The New Delhi government views the separatist calls for a new state called Khalistan as a threat to Indian territorial integrity. The Modi government has labeled Sikh separatists as terrorists.

The Indian authorities have carried out repression of Sikhs for decades including political assassination in the Punjab territory of northern India. Many Sikhs fled to the United States and other Western states for safety and to continue their agitation for a separate nation. The Modi government has accused Western states of coddling “Sikh terrorists” and undermining Indian sovereignty.

Last June, a prominent Sikh leader was gunned down in a suburb of Vancouver in what appeared to be a professional hit-style execution. Hardeep Singh Nijjar was murdered by three assailants outside a religious temple. Indian state media described him as a terrorist, but Nijjar’s family denied he had any involvement in terrorism. They claim that he was targeted simply because he promoted Punjabi separatism.

At the same time, according to The Post report, the U.S. authorities thwarted a murder plot against a well-known American-Sikh citizen who was a colleague of the Canadian victim. Both men were coordinating efforts to hold an unofficial referendum among the Sikh diaspora in North America calling for the establishment of a new independent state of Khalistan in the Punjab region of northern India.

The Post article names Vikram Yadav, an officer in India’s state spy agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), as orchestrating the murder plots against the Sikh leaders. The Post claims that interviews with US and former Indian intelligence officials attest that the killings could not have been carried out without the sanction of Modi’s inner circle.

A seemingly curious coincidence is that within days of the murder of the Canadian Sikh leader and the attempted killing of the American colleague, President Biden was hosting Narendra Modi at the White House in a lavish state reception.

Since the summer of last year, the Biden administration has repeatedly pressured the Modi government to investigate the allegations. President Biden has personally contacted Modi about the alleged assassination policy as have his senior officials, including White House national security advisor Jake Sullivan, Secretary of State Antony Blinken and CIA director William Burns. Despite New Delhi’s denial of such a policy, the Modi government has acceded to American requests to hold an internal investigation, suggesting a tacit admission of its agents having some involvement.

But here is where an anomaly indicates an ulterior agenda. Even U.S. media have remarked on how lenient the Biden administration has been towards India over what are grave allegations. It is inconceivable that Washington would tolerate the presence of Russian or Chinese agents and diplomats on its territory if Moscow and Beijing were implicated in killing dissidents on American soil.

As The Washington Post report noted: “Last July, White House officials began holding high-level meetings to discuss ways to respond without risking a wider rupture with India, officials said. CIA Director William J. Burns and others have been deployed to confront officials in the Modi government and demand accountability. But the United States has so far imposed no expulsions, sanctions or other penalties.”

What appears to be going on is a calculated form of coercion by the United States and its Western allies. The allegations of contract killings and “transnational repression” against Sikhs in the U.S., Canada, Britain, Australia and Germany are aimed at intimidating the Indian government with further embarrassing media disclosures and Western sanctions. The U.S. State Department and the Congress have both recently highlighted claims of human rights violations by the Modi government and calls for political sanctions.

The objective, it can averred, is for Washington and its Western allies to pressure India into toeing a geopolitical line of hostility towards China and Russia.

During the Biden administration, the United States has assiduously courted India as a partner in the Asia-Pacific to confront China. India has been welcomed as a member of the U.S.-led Quad of powers, including Japan and Australia. The Quad overlaps with the U.S. security interests of the AUKUS military partnership with Britain and Australia.

Another major geopolitical prize for Washington and its allies is to drive a wedge between India and Russia.

Since the NATO proxy war blew up in Ukraine in February 2022, the United States has been continually cajoling India to condemn Russia and to abide by Western sanctions against Moscow. Despite the relentless pressure, the Modi government has spurned Western attempts to isolate Russia. Indeed, India has increased its purchase of Russian crude oil and is importing record more quantities than ever before the Ukraine conflict.

Furthermore, India is a key member of the BRICS forum and a proponent of an emerging multipolar world order that undermines U.S.-led Western hegemony.

From the viewpoint of the United States and its Western allies, India represents a tantalizing strategic prospect. With a foot in both geopolitical camps, New Delhi is sought by the West to weaken the China-Russia-BRICS axis.

This is the geopolitical context for understanding the interest of Western powers in making an issue out of allegations of political assassination by the Modi government. Washington and its Western allies want to use the allegations as a form of leverage – or blackmail – on India to comply with geopolitical objectives to confront China and Russia.

It can be anticipated that the Western powers will amplify the media campaign against India in line with exerting more hostility toward China and Russia.

• First published in Strategic Culture Foundation

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Finian Cunningham.

The arrests highlighted concerns over Beijing's attempts to infiltrate democracies and extend its political influence far beyond its borders.

Beijing on Friday summoned Germany's Ambassador Patricia Flor to protest the arrests of four people for allegedly spying for China.

"I was summoned to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs today," Flor said via her X account on Friday. "A quite telling move – but, after all, a good opportunity to explain a few things."

The summons came after German prosecutors on April 22 accused three people of providing information to Chinese intelligence that could have a military purpose, and accused Guo Jian, a parliamentary aide to far-right MEP Maximilian Krah, of spying on the parliament and on overseas dissidents for China.

Flor, who was last summoned in September 2023 after German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock referred to Communist Party leader Xi Jinping as a "dictator," added: "We do not tolerate espionage in Germany, regardless of which country it comes from.” 

She noted that it is for the courts to decide whether the accusations against the four defendants are true or not.

Six accused of spying

Flor's summoning came after German police arrested four people on suspicion of spying for China, and as police in the United Kingdom charged two people with spying for China.

Christopher Cash, 29, a former researcher for a prominent British lawmaker in the governing Conservative Party, and Christopher Berry, 32, appeared in a London court on April 26 after being charged with providing prejudicial information to China in breach of the Official Secrets Act. 

Neither defendant entered a plea, and only confirmed their names and addresses at a brief hearing at Westminster Magistrates' Court.

A spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in London said the claims of spying for China were "completely fabricated and nothing but malicious slander." 

"We ... urge the U.K. side to stop anti-China political manipulation and stop putting on such self-staged political farce," the spokesperson said in comments posted to the embassy website on April 22.

Chen Yonglin, a former political attache at the Chinese Consulate General in Sydney, said diplomatic summonses are usually only used in response to a major incident, and that Beijing's response shows a deep level of concern over spying allegations.

"They will summon the ambassador [only] when they run into a very serious problem," Chen said. 

"The Chinese government is going to be very concerned, now that its overseas espionage activities are being cracked down on."

Interference

Chen said the summons actually constituted "interference in the internal affairs" of Germany, an accusation frequently leveled by Chinese officials at any criticism of its rights record.

"The Western political system must protect and maintain itself and its values, because it is being affected by infiltration by the Chinese Communist Party on a large scale," he said.

Germany-based legal scholar Qian Yuejun said the incident revealed Beijing's lack of understanding of the separation of powers in a democratic system.

"As an employee of the German Foreign Ministry, the German ambassador to China has no power to influence the progress of the Chinese espionage case through the German judicial system," Qian said.

He said Flor's response was also revealing.

"Stealing information from the European Parliament isn't a simple act of theft," he said of the as-yet-unproven allegations. "It undermines Europe's liberal democratic system."

"The ultimate goal is to infiltrate, and even subvert, [that] system."

He said the summoning of Flor hadn't apparently worked in Beijing's favor, however.

"It unleashed another wave of media frenzy in Germany, bumping the issue of Chinese Communist Party espionage up to a higher priority in the German press," Qian said.

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Malcolm Foster.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Yitong Wu and Kwong Wing for RFA Cantonese.

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

A new motion has accused the elected prosecutor in Elkhart, Indiana, of misconduct, alleging she presented contradictory versions of the truth against two men in connection with a shooting that occurred more than 20 years ago.

The case stems from the drive-by shooting death of a woman on Aug. 13, 2003. Prosecutors have always maintained the shooter was Ignacio Bahena. But as to who gave Bahena the gun, the prosecution offered two different versions, pinning the act on one man, then pinning it on another, according to a motion filed by one of the men’s lawyers. Both men went to prison, and one of them is still serving time for the crime and challenging his 55-year sentence.

The Elkhart case is another in a line of instances across the country in which prosecutors have been accused of presenting contradictory accounts in court, depending on the defendant they’re trying. At least 29 men have been sentenced to death in the U.S. since the 1970s in cases where prosecutors were accused of presenting opposing versions of the truth, according to a search of legal cases.

ProPublica wrote in February about a case in Baltimore in which federal prosecutors offered opposing versions of the truth while securing a conviction on a gun charge against a man named Keyon Paylor. Two days after that story was published, the Department of Justice reversed course and agreed Paylor’s conviction should be thrown out, writing, in a court filing, that “public confidence cannot sustain irreconcilable versions of one event.”

The motion in Elkhart focuses on the actions of the county’s top prosecutor and asks that her office be disqualified from handling the case further. The motion marks another challenge to the workings of Elkhart’s criminal justice system, which has been the subject of a joint investigation by ProPublica and the South Bend Tribune. The two news organizations, as part of ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network, have reported extensively on Elkhart’s system of law enforcement, chronicling wrongful convictions, prosecutorial misconduct, and dubious investigative tactics and criminal wrongdoing by police.

The Elkhart case traces to the shooting death of 20-year-old Karla Castro, who was killed when Bahena shot at and wounded her boyfriend, according to court records. Bahena fired from an SUV that pulled up next to a Ford Mustang driven by Castro’s boyfriend, according to court testimony.

Bahena has never been caught. But prosecutors did charge two men who were in the SUV with him.

One of the two men, Eduardo Brena, appeared in Elkhart Circuit Court in June 2004 and pleaded guilty to a felony charge for providing the gun to Bahena on the day Castro was killed. During the plea hearing, the judge walked Brena through the charge’s factual basis, making sure Brena understood and admitted each element.

“Did you provide a handgun to him?” the judge asked Brena.

“Yes,” Brena told the judge.

The judge later asked, “Mr. Brena, did these acts occur on Aug. 13, 2003, in Elkhart County, Indiana?”

“Yes, sir,” Brena told the judge.

Representing the state at this hearing was Vicki Becker, who was then Elkhart County’s chief deputy prosecuting attorney. Asked if she wanted the court to accept Brena’s guilty plea, Becker told the judge, “Yes, I do, your Honor,” according to a court transcript.

The following month, in July 2004, Becker represented the state at Brena’s sentencing. She said Brena “recklessly provided that handgun” to Bahena and “enabled” the shooting to happen. The judge sentenced Brena to six years on the gun charge.

The second man charged in this case, Rodolfo Alexander, stood trial in March 2005, accused of being an accomplice to Castro’s murder. Alexander had been driving the SUV at the time of the shooting, prosecution witnesses told the jury.

The prosecutor at Alexander’s trial was Becker, the same prosecutor who had been in court for Brena’s guilty plea.

She called Brena as a witness, and Brena, on the stand, contradicted what he had said in court the year before.

He testified that he gave the gun not to Bahena on the day of the shooting, but to Alexander a couple of days before the shooting. Alexander thereafter passed the gun along to Bahena, the eventual shooter.

“And so was it OK with you” that Alexander gave the gun to Bahena? Becker asked.

“Yes, ma’am,” Brena said.

By putting Brena on the stand at Alexander’s trial — and having Brena provide an account that contradicted what he had said at his own plea hearing — Becker committed misconduct by knowingly presenting false testimony, the recent motion from Alexander’s lawyers says.

Alexander was convicted of murder, as an accomplice, and sentenced to 55 years. Prosecutors maintained that in addition to supplying the weapon, Alexander positioned the SUV in a way that helped Bahena open fire on the other car. Alexander’s initial appeal was denied in November 2005; his subsequent appeals have dragged on for years.

Becker, the prosecutor in both the Brena and Alexander cases, won election in 2016 to be the county’s top prosecutor. She has held the position ever since.

When contacted by ProPublica, Becker declined to comment on the allegation from Alexander’s attorneys that she committed misconduct. “As this is an actively pending matter, I am not able to engage in an interview of any kind regarding the case, nor may a representative of the State. All information should come from observing the public proceedings at this time. Thank you for reaching out,” Becker wrote in an email.

One of Alexander’s lawyers, Kevin Murphy, with Notre Dame Law School’s Exoneration Justice Clinic, also declined to comment. (Christian Sheckler, a former South Bend Tribune reporter who worked with ProPublica on stories published in 2018 and 2019 about Elkhart’s criminal justice system, became an investigator for the clinic in 2022.) ProPublica could not locate Brena to seek comment.

In March, Alexander’s lawyers filed a motion asking that a special prosecutor be appointed to the case and that Becker and her office be disqualified. The lawyers expect Becker to be a central witness in an upcoming appellate hearing, so she has a conflict of interest, the motion says.

As of Thursday, Becker’s office had not yet filed a response to the motion and its allegations, according to court records.

This content originally appeared on Articles and Investigations - ProPublica and was authored by by Ken Armstrong.

A Papua New Guinea court application to stop the news media from reporting on an alleged sexual offence incident involving Goroka MP Aiye Tambua has been thrown out.

Magistrate Paul Puri Nii, sitting in the Waigani Committal Court, refused the application by Tambua’s lawyer yesterday, saying media freedom was everybody’s freedom.

“People won’t kill you,” Nil told the MP.

• READ MORE: Other PNG crime reports

“You are a leader, and you are subject to critics [sic]. For me, I am not going to bar the media.

“Being a magistrate, being a judge, being a leader, you are subject to critics, and that’s nothing. That’s going to either correct you or lead you in the wrong direction. But it’s up to you.

“I advocate for media freedom so I think that [for that] aspect of the motion, I will refuse it.”

Nii said the media were “the ears and the eyes of people” and that was why he advocated for media freedom.

Allowed to travel
The magistrate granted the motion seeking orders to allow Tambua, 45, to travel out of Port Moresby, but said he had to return before May 9, which was the next court appearance date.

Tambua, through his lawyer Edward Sasingian, filed a motion seeking orders to:

• ALLOW the defendant to continue to travel out of Port Moresby; and
• RESTRICT the media from reporting on the case on the basis that the media has caused repercussions on the defendant and the victims.

Sasingian also informed the court that he had served a copy of the motion on the prosecution and both had agreed on the position to restrict media until a determination is made in the committal proceedings.

He referred to a District Court decision which barred the media from reporting, but Nii said: “For me, I advocate media freedom. Other magistrates may bar the media but this is court room two, my court, so media has the freedom to report.”

Report on facts
Nii also urged media to report on facts.

“If you want to report on the matter, come to the courts, get the court files and report on the matter,” he said.

Tambua’s case was adjourned until May 9, for further mention, after the prosecution informed the court that police were still doing investigations to establish the allegations and produce a brief.

The MP, from Goroka’s Massy village, Eastern Highlands, was alleged to have committed the sexual offences on the three victims (all family members) on different occasions over a period of time.

Tambua is facing 26 charges and had his bail extended.

Boura Goru Kila is a PNG Post-Courier reporter. Republished with permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Pacific Media Watch.

Fiji’s Acting Public Prosecutor has filed an appeal against the sentences of former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama and suspended police chief Sitiveni Qiliho in their corruption case.

Bainimarama was granted an absolute discharge for attempting to pervert the course of justice while Qiliho received a conditional discharge with a fine of FJ$1500 ($NZ$1110) for abuse of office by the Suva Magistrates Court earlier today.

Magistrate Seini Puamau announced that both their convictions would not be registered.

• READ MORE: Former Fiji leader Bainimarama, suspended police chief avoid jail in corruption case
• Fiji chief justice overturns not guilty verdicts in Bainimarama, Qiliho case
• Read other Bainimarama justice reports

“The sentence delivered by Magistrate Puamau is unsatisfactory, is wrong both in fact and in law and does not reflect the considerations and tariff of cases or matters of similar nature,” Acting Director of Public Prosecution John Rabuku said in a statement following the sentencing.

The notice of appeal against the sentence was filed in the High Court this afternoon.

The state has filed four grounds of appeal:

• a. That the sentence imposed by the learned Magistrate against both the Respondents are manifestly lenient and in breach of sentencing principles, case laws and the tariff set in other similar matters and offences.
• b. That the learned Magistrate erred in law and in fact when she made a finding that there were no aggravating factors against the Respondents.
• c. That the learned Magistrate erred in law and in fact in considering irrelevant factors in sentencing the Respondents; and
• d. That the learned Magistrate erred in law and in fact when she made a finding that there was no victim and that the offending was a technical breach by both Respondents.

Lowest-level sentence
An absolute discharge is the lowest-level sentence that an offender can get. It means no conviction was registered against Bainimarama.

State broadcaster FBC News reports that Magistrate Puamau considered Bainimarama’s health.

The 69-year-old was sentenced alongside Qiliho, who was given a FJ$1500 fine without conviction as well.

The absolute discharge and a fine without conviction was given despite the prosecutors last week urging Magistrate Puamau to order immediate custodial sentences towards the high end of the tariff for both men — which would be no less than five years in jail for Bainimarama and 10 years for Qiliho.

RNZ Pacific reported earlier today that a Fiji governance professor, Dr Vijay Naidu, said the magistrate had been sypathetic to both men.

“It is surprising in that the sentencing is like the minimalist kind of approach,” he said.

“I didn’t expect the magistrate to sentence them for the maximum of you know 10 . . . and five years, but the sentence now is quite farcical because these persons are found guilty and they are given sentences that, to say the least, is quite ludicrous.”

He said Bainimarama was “not out of the woods yet” because there was a string of other charges that he would face in the coming months.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

The House of Representatives voted on Friday to defund the United Nations agency that aids Palestinians through next year — even as 1.1 million people in Gaza face threats of famine in coming months — on the basis of flimsy allegations by Israel against a tiny minority of the agency’s staff that have yet to be proven.

The vote came as part of a $1.2 trillion spending package to avert a partial government shutdown. In addition to stripping funding from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East, or UNRWA, through March 2025, the bill includes the $3.8 billion the U.S. sends to Israel every year.

The bill also contains a long-standing provision that would limit aid to the Palestinian Authority, which governs the occupied West Bank, if “the Palestinians initiate an International Criminal Court (ICC) judicially authorized investigation, or actively supports such an investigation, that subjects Israeli nationals to an investigation for alleged crimes against Palestinians.”

The Senate is debating the bill ahead of a Friday midnight deadline, and President Joe Biden has said he will sign it when it comes to his desk. 

The U.S. first suspended aid to UNRWA in late January, when the Israeli government leveled allegations that 12 of the agency’s 30,000 employees — or 0.04 percent — were involved in Hamas’s attacks on October 7 (Israel later accused two additional employees of involvement, bringing the total number to 14).

In response, Philippe Lazzarini, commissioner-general of UNRWA, immediately terminated the accused staff members and launched an investigation. The U.S. decision to cut aid to the 74-year-old aid agency, which was founded amid the creation of Israel and the ensuing Nakba — the mass displacement and dispossession of Palestinians from their homes — prompted much of the West to follow suit, including other top donors such as Germany, the European Union, and Sweden.

While several of those donors have recently announced their intention to resume funding, the U.S. government, which has historically been a top donor to UNRWA, has instead doubled down. The spending bill passed the House with a 286-135 vote. Twenty-three Democrats voted against the bill, with several issuing statements directly linking their “no” votes to the UNRWA provision.

Even in the lead-up to the Friday vote, several members of Congress slammed the idea of continuing to penalize UNRWA.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., told The Independent that members of Congress have intelligence assessments that suggest halting funding is “not grounded in solid facts.” 

“We should not be restricting, we should be restoring, I’ve been saying that on public record,” Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Ill., added. “The idea that people are literally starving to death and we are contributing to that is a problem.” Democratic Sens. Tim Kaine of Virginia, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, and Dick Durbin of Illinois expressed similar concerns.

“Tragically, many members of Congress seem to be happy to be part of this starvation caucus.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., put it more harshly earlier this week. “Sadly, tragically, many members of Congress seem to be happy to be part of this starvation caucus,” Sanders said, “happy to cut funding to UNRWA and make it harder to get aid to Palestinians in the midst of this crisis.” 

UNRWA announced Israel’s allegations against its employees on January 26, the same day the International Court of Justice ruled that Israel is plausibly committing genocide. It didn’t take very long for the allegations to start to fall apart.

On January 30, Sky News reported that it had seen Israeli intelligence documents fielding the allegations and that they “make several claims that Sky News has not seen proof of and many of the claims, even if true, do not directly implicate UNRWA.” 

That same day, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken told reporters that the allegations were “highly, highly credible,” while also admitting the U.S. hadn’t done its own investigation.

On February 3, the Financial Times wrote that Israel’s intelligence assessment “provides no evidence for the claims.” Shortly thereafter, British outlet Channel 4 reported that a confidential Israeli document detailing the allegations “provides no evidence to support its explosive new claim.” Two days later, CBC reported that Canada — another top UNRWA donor — suspended its funding without seeing any evidence to substantiate the allegation against the UNRWA staff members.

Within a few days, Lazzarini admitted that he followed “reverse due process” by firing staff members implicated in the allegations before conducting an investigation. 

“Indeed, I have terminated without due process because I felt at the time that not only the reputation but the ability of the entire agency to continue to operate and deliver critical humanitarian assistance was at stake if I did not take such a decision,” he said, explaining that the agency was already subject to “fierce and ugly attacks.”

“My judgment, based on this going public, true or untrue, was I need to take the swiftest and boldest decision to show that as an agency we take this allegation seriously.”

Just last week, the European Union’s top humanitarian aid official said he has still not seen evidence from Israel to back its accusations — nearly two months after they were made.

Even if the allegations were found to be true, many have argued cutting funding to UNRWA is tantamount to collective punishment. “We should investigate it,” Van Hollen said this week. “But for goodness’ sake, let’s not hold 2 million innocent Palestinian civilians who are dying of starvation … accountable for the bad acts of 14 people.”

Meanwhile, UNRWA’s internal investigation turned out horrific reports that Israel tortured UNRWA staff in order to force false confessions that they were involved in the October 7 attack and are members of Hamas. Staffers were allegedly beaten, waterboarded, and had their family members threatened by Israeli soldiers. UNRWA also alleged that Israeli soldiers used a nail gun on Palestinians’ knees and sexually abused the prisoners, including through “the insertion of what appears to be an electrified metal stick into prisoners’ rectums.” Israel has denied the allegations.

Over the past couple weeks, many Western states have reinstated their funding to UNRWA, including the European Union, Sweden, Canada, and Australia. The State Department, meanwhile, has continued to find ways to justify its ongoing suspension of funding to the agency.

On March 14, State Department spokesperson Matt Miller was asked about statements by U.N. officials that Israel has still not provided evidence showing that the UNRWA staff were involved with the October 7 attack. Miller responded that the initial U.S. decision to pause funding was prompted not by Israel, but by UNRWA. 

“We hadn’t heard from the government of Israel about these allegations,” Miller said. “It was about allegations that UNRWA brought to us. And when they brought us these allegations, they told us that they had investigated them and found them to be credible, and that’s why they had taken action to fire the employees in question.”

He concluded: “With respect to the ongoing investigation, we do have faith in their ability to get to the bottom of what happened.”

Yet Miller’s response evades a crucial detail: It was Israel that brought the allegations to UNRWA in the first place. And though UNRWA’s initial statement may have prompted the pause in U.S. funding, the U.S. has not shifted course even after UNRWA’s own chief said he fired the staff without full-on investigation due to external pressure. 

The paradox is telling: The U.S. apparently found UNRWA credible based on the agency’s serious response to the allegations against it. Yet UNRWA’s follow-up statements — that the agency was overzealous in its response and that it has reason to believe Israeli soldiers have tortured its staffers — don’t seem to carry the same credibility.

This content originally appeared on The Intercept and was authored by Prem Thakker.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

A disturbing video has surfaced of a female, alleged to be a rape victim, attempting to jump out of the Kuri Dom Lecture Building at the University of Papua New Guinea.

UPNG Students Representative Council (SRC) president Joel Rimbu has dispelled this allegation, saying that the female was not a student — she was an outsider visiting her boyfriend, who is alleged to be a staff member.

An argument broke out during their rendezvous where the frustrated female attempted to jump out of the building, while students filmed.

• READ MORE: Other UPNG security reports

Rimbu said he was at the location assessing the situation with Uniforce Security of UPNG.

“She was later dropped of at the nearest bus stop to go home,” he said.

“She refused to take the matter to the police.”

Speaking about the safety of female students on campus, the SRC female vice-president, Ni Yumei Paul, immediately raised the incident with the Campus Risk Group (UniForce) and they were assured that the group would investigate and report back next week.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Despite changing his citizenship to the Pacific state of Vanuatu, a Chinese man wanted for various economic crimes was arrested at Ninoy Aquino International Airport last week as he was about to board a flight for Singapore.

In a statement yesterday, the Philippine Bureau of Immigration Commissioner Norman Tansingco said Liu Jiangtao, 42, had presented himself for departure clearance at the immigration counter when the officer processing him saw that his name was on the bureau’s list of aliens with outstanding watchlist orders.

Records showed that Liu is one of 11 Chinese fugitives wanted for fraud, infringement of credit card management, capital embezzlement, money laundering and counterfeiting a registered trademark.

Bureau of Immigration prosecutors have filed deportation cases against the 11 fugitives.

Evelyn Macairan is a reporter of The Philippine Star.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

This article contains descriptions of sexual violence.

This article was produced for ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network in partnership with the Anchorage Daily News and Alaska Public Media. Sign up for Dispatches to get stories like this one as soon as they are published.

The Iditarod Trail Sled Dog Race on Thursday voted to disqualify a former champion from this year’s event following accusations he sexually assaulted multiple women.

The decision on Brent Sass, 44, came nearly four months after the race received a letter from an official at Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates Alaska on behalf of women who the letter writer said had accused Sass of sexual assault. The unanimous vote by the Iditarod Trail Committee Board also came a week after Alaska Public Media, the Anchorage Daily News and ProPublica first asked it about sexual assault allegations against Sass. The news organizations sent the Iditarod additional questions on Wednesday, and other outlets have made inquiries.

Sass denied the accusations in an interview on Tuesday with the newsrooms. “It’s all made up. None of this is true,” he said. “This is because they want to ruin my career.”

The Iditarod Trail Committee Board said its decision was based on the race rulebook’s personal conduct policy, which includes the statement, “Musher conduct that is recklessly injurious to the Iditarod, Iditarod competitors, sponsors or anyone associated with the race is strictly prohibited.” The 2024 event begins on March 2.

Sass on Friday posted a message on social media linking the disqualification to sexual assault allegations.

“You are giving the accusers exactly what they are hoping for and in the end this hurts the actual victims of sexual abuse and the sport of mushing,” he wrote. He did not respond to requests for comment after he was disqualified.

Sass, who won the Iditarod in 2022, was the second competitor to be disqualified this week by the race’s board. It said on Monday it would not allow musher Eddie Burke Jr., who faced a felony domestic violence charge, to compete, but the Iditarod reversed itself Friday after the state Department of Law said it was dropping the case. Burke said on Facebook that he is innocent.

The Planned Parenthood letter about Sass did not provide the names of any accusers. Independently, the newsrooms spoke with two women who said that Sass forced them to have sex within otherwise consensual sexual relationships that took place more than a decade ago. The newsrooms typically do not name people who allege sexual violence unless they choose to be named. The women did not file complaints with the police nor did they file lawsuits against Sass, who has not been charged with a crime.

The news organizations obtained correspondence and conducted interviews indicating the women shared information in the past about the events they are now describing. The accounts these sources provided generally supported what the two women say now.

One of the accusers said that on one occasion, Sass choked her and forced her to have sexual intercourse after she told him no. A different time, she said he forced her to have anal sex. She said on both occasions she was unable to physically stop Sass. Two of the woman’s friends also spoke to the newsrooms and, in separate conversations, said she had told them years prior about Sass having nonconsensual sex with her. The newsrooms also obtained a sworn and notarized statement that the woman prepared saying Sass had twice sexually assaulted her.

The second woman told the news organizations that Sass hit and slapped her during sex without her consent, forced her to perform oral sex on multiple occasions and forced her to have intercourse in one case after she said no. She provided the newsrooms with a letter from the Interior Alaska Center for Non-Violent Living dated Dec. 30 stating that in 2015 she had been a client of the Fairbanks domestic violence shelter, which describes itself as a provider of support and advocacy for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault, and had “identified Brent Sass as her abuser.” The woman also provided three emails sent over a two-year period telling friends and family that Sass had sexually assaulted her.

The first accuser said she didn’t go to the police at the time because she was not thinking clearly, depended on Sass for shelter at his remote dog kennel and worked for him. She said it took her time to realize what happened to her was wrong.

The second accuser said she considered going to the police but had little faith it would do any good. “Our society is highly prone to victim shaming,” she wrote to a family member at the time.

Dog mushing is the official state sport in Alaska, where sexual assault rates are highest in the nation. The Iditarod, a 1,000-mile race across the Alaska wilderness, is set to include roughly 40 competitors this year.

The Iditarod and other top sled dog races received the Planned Parenthood letter dated Nov. 2 and signed by Rose O’Hara-Jolley, the organization’s Alaska state director. It said O’Hara-Jolley had been approached by “multiple survivors” alleging sexual assault by Sass over the course of a decade.

Without providing specifics or evidence, the letter called on races to ban Sass from competing.

It is not clear how much of the information that the news organizations subsequently obtained from two women and additional sources may have been in the possession of the Iditarod when its board voted Thursday.

The newsrooms obtained a copy of a Feb. 5 email from an Iditarod lawyer, Mike Grisham, to a dog musher concerned about the Planned Parenthood letter, Emily Rosenblatt, saying the race’s governing board couldn’t speak to allegations involving a racer but adding the following:

“To be clear, this board committee is in no position to be an arbiter of evidence or to decide disputes regarding a musher’s conduct. The Iditarod lacks the resources to conduct such an investigation and process, nor is it an appropriate role for the Iditarod to play.”

The news organizations contacted Iditarod officials on Feb. 15 asking about what they had learned about sexual misconduct allegations against Sass and how they had responded. The officials did not answer the newsrooms’ written questions.

A day later, the Iditarod board issued an email to competitors saying it had been “informed of a number of accusations being made within our community concerning violence and abuse against women.” The email said the board condemned such behavior, was “monitoring the situation closely” and wouldn’t hesitate to act if the situation required it.

Another race, the Bethel-based Kuskokwim 300, asked Sass in December to withdraw from its competition in a letter and provided him with information it had obtained in addition to the Nov. 2 Planned Parenthood letter, and he withdrew, according to documents obtained by the news organizations.

A board member for the Fairbanks-based Yukon Quest Alaska said she resigned after learning about how the race was handling the accusations.

The race’s board president, Mark Weber, told the news organizations the Yukon Quest Alaska was taking the accusations seriously but said he told Sass before the Feb. 3 race start that “with the information we currently have we are not taking any action at this time.”

Sass, in addition to denying the two women’s accounts, stated more broadly in his interview Tuesday: “I have never, ever, ever, ever, ever had nonconsensual sex with anyone. I am a respectful, upstanding human being.”

In an interview, one of the women who shared her allegations with the newsrooms said she was a young adult when she moved to Alaska to work for Sass as a dog handler. Eventually, they started having sex, she said.

She said they were in a sauna together one time when Sass said he wanted to have sex with her.

“I said, ‘No.’ He pushed me against the wall, put his hand around my throat, choking me,” she said.

Sass proceeded to have sex with her, she said.

Another time, the woman said, she and Sass were having consensual intercourse when he told her he wanted to have anal sex. She said she told him “fuck no” but was unable to stop him.

The woman said she recalled Sass responding that he was going to do it anyway.

“I was, you know, underneath him, so I couldn’t really do much about it,” she said.

In the sworn statement, the woman wrote, “Brent also from time to time, without my consent, would slap me, sometimes in the face, during sex with him.”

The woman provided the news organizations a copy of a journal entry dated during the time she worked for Sass saying he suddenly slapped her in the face while they were having sex.

A friend of the woman who asked not to be named also said the accuser told her that Sass had hit her during sex.

Sass told the newsrooms that he never hit women during sex and denied each specific allegation from the former dog handler.

“None of that happened,” Sass said. “I’m going to flat out deny it. None of it happened. These are personal attacks. People just don’t want me in the sport anymore.”

The former dog handler said she was motivated to write the sworn statement in order to warn others, perhaps young women thinking about working for Sass.

The woman said she did not communicate with Planned Parenthood or the author of the Nov. 2 letter at any point before it was sent out. She said she didn’t learn about the letter until December and wrote her sworn statement in early February.

Hannah Corral, who said she was friends with the alleged victim, said the woman told her more than a decade ago about nonconsensual sex with Sass that the woman said occurred a year or two earlier.

“So she told me some pretty graphic things about some times that he definitely went over the border of consensual in a big way and was violent,” Corral said in an interview Thursday. “And, you know, she would just get very uncomfortable and sad and didn’t really know how to handle it, because she was also working with him still.”

Another one of the victim’s friends, Melanie Richter, told the newsrooms that the former dog handler told her in roughly the same time period that she had experienced nonconsensual sex with Sass in the years before she and Richter met.

“She had mentioned that he was quite aggressive and did not take no for an answer for any of his sexual advances,” Richter said.

“She didn’t have a way to get out of it while it was happening, because now they’re in a remote place,” Richter said. “There’s essentially no one, and he is her source of housing, food and income in the middle of Alaska, where she didn’t really have anybody else. And so she was just trapped at the time.”

The second woman who shared her allegations with the newsrooms also said she spent time in a consensual relationship with Sass and said he forced her to engage in sex acts to which she didn’t consent.

“I was actively saying, ‘Stop,’” she said in an interview, describing an encounter in which she said Sass forced her to have anal sex.

She also said that Sass physically abused her without her consent during sex.

The woman once described the relationship in a 2016 email to a family member. She provided a copy to the newsrooms.

In the email, the woman told her relative that Sass during sex “choked, hit, bit and otherwise caused me a lot of physical pain, all without prior consent, or any discussion on these activities.”

The woman also wrote: “When the day came that I was brave enough and in enough pain to say ‘no’ and ‘stop’ multiple times he completely ignored me. On multiple occasions, he forced me to perform oral sex.”

She told the relative that she didn’t think reporting Sass to the police would do any good.

“Why don’t I take legal action?” the woman wrote. “I’ve thought about it. Rape is extremely difficult to prove, and our society is highly prone to victim shaming. I have little faith the result would be positive for me. I struggle with the fact that he is a quasi-public figure with a sunshiney, heroic reputation. I do want people to know the truth, but it’s not a truth that people want to hear, or are likely to accept.”

The woman also provided the letter from the Interior Alaska Center for Non-Violent Living, which she said she visited to ask for resources for sexual assault victims.

The woman said she was in contact with the Planned Parenthood letter writer about Sass six years ago but was unaware of the organization’s Nov. 2 letter until after it was sent.

Sass denied the second woman’s allegations when presented with her statements to the newsrooms and a description of her 2016 email and the shelter’s letter.

“I didn’t do anything,” Sass said.

“I am being tore apart by this,” he added, “because of these false accusations.”

“The mental abuse that's happening to me right now is outrageous,” he said.

The second woman told a relative in the 2016 email that Sass warned her that “if I said anything to anyone in Fairbanks that was bad about him he would ruin me.”

Sass said Tuesday he never threatened anyone.

“If they felt that way,” Sass said “I would tell them, ‘Tell somebody.’ If they felt that way, I would be talking it out. I would never tell anyone to hide it or just not say anything.”

The Planned Parenthood letter to officials at top races followed an allegation of sexual assault that reached the Kuskokwim 300 Race Commitee in early October, according to a document that the race gave the newsrooms labeled “Factual Statement on Brent Sass.”

Sass said a fellow musher, who serves on the board for another race, the Knik 200, first told him about the Planned Parenthood letter. Sass said he knew the Planned Parenthood official, O’Hara-Jolley, as a friend whom he’d hung out with and encountered at races.

“This totally came out of the blue,” he said of O’Hara-Jolley’s letter.

He said copies of the letter went to all sled dog races where he’d registered as a competitor and also made their way into the hands of his sponsors.

Sass said he immediately began phoning race managers.

“I called everybody and just said: ‘Hey, these accusations are out there. They are completely false.’”

Sass said he hired an attorney, who sent a letter to O’Hara-Jolley.

The message was that O’Hara-Jolley “needed to shut up. That was the bottom line of the cease and desist,” Sass told the newsrooms.

O’Hara-Jolley declined the news organizations’ request for comment.

The K300 asked Sass to voluntarily withdraw from the 2024 event in a letter from race director Paul Basile on Dec. 12.

“Our organization does not have the capacity nor the desire to conduct an investigation of such matters. But while we can’t prove or disprove the allegations made against you, we feel that to dismiss them entirely would be irresponsible,” Basile wrote to Sass.

He wrote that one longtime volunteer told the race she would “have nothing to do” with it if Sass participated this year.

“Rates of sexual assault, sexual abuse and rape in our region are the highest in the nation,” Basile wrote. “Rape is obviously a serious issue anywhere, but it is an especially serious and sensitive issue here, where so many are survivors of sexual violence.”

Sass replied two days later, Dec. 14, asking the K300 organizers to reconsider. He said the sport’s premier sled dog race, the Iditarod, had “conducted a three-week investigation” and closed its inquiry “due to insufficient information.” (The Iditarod, when asked by the news organizations to address Sass’ assertion, said the race does not comment about its processes for reviewing allegations.)

In his letter to the K300, Sass wrote of the request for him to withdraw: “I understand the importance of community and the need to have their support but the K300 had the ability to change the narrative, to do something, anything to protect one of the sport’s most well known and competitive mushers.”

He told the board he would withdraw if the board decided, upon further consideration, it still wanted him to do so.

The K300’s statement said the board continued to gather information. On Dec. 21, the board voted to uphold its earlier decision asking Sass to withdraw, the document said. He did not compete.

Another premier sled dog race, the Yukon Quest Alaska, made a different decision after receiving the Nov. 2 Planned Parenthood letter.

The race, which Sass won in 2015, 2019 and 2020, was originally 1,000 miles and crossed the border between Alaska and Canada. It fractured in 2022 when American and Canadian organizers disagreed over rule changes. The two organizations now run shorter, separate races.

Sass said Weber, the Yukon Quest Alaska board president, told him after the Planned Parenthood letter that the board was not investigating.

“‘We stand by you Brent,’ is basically what his statement was,” Sass said. “‘We stand by you and we’re not going to pursue this in any way.’”

Weber confirmed he told Sass the board was not taking action but denied Sass’ claims that he voiced support for Sass or was dismissive toward the allegations.

Yukon Quest Alaska board member Jodi Bailey said she resigned on Nov. 17 because the race did not investigate the accusations.

“I was told that this might be bad for Brent and we needed to try and keep this quiet,” said Bailey, a Quest and Iditarod veteran. She said the person who told her that was Weber.

He denied making the statement to Bailey.

“The only position I had was that this was a serious allegation and that it was tragic no matter what the truth because people[’s] lives are going to be affected forever,” Weber wrote in an email. “I did not want our board to be involved in the ‘spreading’ of the allegation because we had no facts.”

Sass was allowed to compete in the Yukon Quest Alaska and on Feb. 5 won first place, receiving $7,500 among other prizes.

After obtaining copies of the Planned Parenthood letter, the Daily News, Alaska Public Media and ProPublica contacted people including some of Sass’ female former dog handlers, who were identified through social media and archived pages of Sass’ kennel website.

One woman declined to comment. Two said they had never had sex with Sass. Another wrote in a direct message, “I have had a very good experience being a handler for Brent, and I’ve never felt unsafe or anything like that around him.”

On Friday, Sass’ kennel’s Instagram page carried a letter that he had addressed to the Iditarod. The letter is undated, but the wording suggests it was written after the race board asked him to voluntarily withdraw last week but prior to his Iditarod disqualification on Thursday.

“I cannot afford to back out,” Sass wrote in the letter. “I have way too many sponsors, family and friends that have supported my kennel and my career this season. Let alone the 120,000+ fans that are eagerly waiting to watch me race in this year’s Iditarod.”

On Wednesday, with Sass still in the race, Iditarod chief executive Rob Urbach responded to a second set of emailed questions from the news organizations with a statement:

“We take all allegations of misconduct involving mushers, staff, volunteers and other community members seriously,” he wrote. “The Iditarod has processes in place to review allegations and act accordingly, but we do not comment on our processes and will provide a statement if and when any actions are taken.”

The next day, Sass was removed from the race.

This content originally appeared on Articles and Investigations - ProPublica and was authored by by Kyle Hopkins, Anchorage Daily News, and Casey Grove, Alaska Public Media.

Florida-based independent journalist Tim Burke was charged by the Justice Department with 14 felony counts alleging conspiracy, wiretapping and violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, in an indictment unsealed on Feb. 21, 2024.

FBI agents raided Burke’s home and office in May 2023 in connection to a criminal probe into “alleged computer intrusions and intercepted communications at the Fox News Network,” according to reports at the time.

In total, federal agents seized nine computers, seven hard drives, four cellphones and four notebooks from Burke’s home and the guesthouse that serves as his office. More than nine months after the raid, only a small portion of the electronic devices and files seized by law enforcement has been returned.

The indictment, which was filed on Feb. 15 but unsealed just under a week later, alleges that Burke and an unnamed co-conspirator used “compromised credentials” to gain access to websites with the live feeds of two New York City-based media companies, and to download files and disseminate them.

Burke is charged with:

• One count of conspiracy;
• Six counts of accessing a protected computer without authorization;
• Five counts of wiretapping; and
• Two counts of disclosing communications obtained through illegal wiretapping.

Attorney Mark Rasch, who is representing Burke and who created the Justice Department’s Computer Crime Unit, denied any criminal behavior by Burke and warned that the charges could set a precedent that could make routine investigative journalism techniques a felony.

“Timothy Burke committed the crime of journalism, and that’s it. He didn’t hack anything, he didn’t steal anything, he simply reported,” Rasch told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker. “The analogies that the government uses about breaking in fundamentally misunderstand how the internet works and what the norms of behavior are on the internet.”

Rasch said that Burke appeared at a courthouse in Tampa on Feb. 22 for an initial hearing on the charges, and that first the raid and now the indictment have had a serious impact on the journalist.

“He’s financially ruined and professionally devastated, and it has taken an emotional toll as well,” Rasch said.

Burke did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

This content originally appeared on U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database and was authored by U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database.

Former Fiji prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama and former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum are due to appear in court today on a charge related to abuse of office, as is a former health minister Dr Neil Prakash Sharma.

Fiji state broadcaster FBC reported the trio were interviewed by CID officers yesterday for allegedly failing to comply with statutory requirements for tenders.

All three were kept in custody at the Totogo Police Station overnight.

• READ MORE: Fiji police charge Bainimarama, Sayed-Khaiyum and former health minister

Bainimarama and Sayed-Khaiyum are each accused of recklessly abusing their position by granting a waiver of tender process without lawful justification.

Sayed-Khaiyum is also charged with obstructing the course of justice.

Sharma faces four counts of abuse of office.

The new charge against Bainimarama comes less than four months after he was found not guilty of perverting the course of justice.

In October, according to local media reports, Magistrate Seini Puamau said the state had failed to establish a compelling case.

“According to their charge sheet, it was alleged that Bainimarama sometime in July 2020 as the Prime Minister directed the Police Commissioner to stop the investigation into a police complaint, in the abuse of the authority of his office, which was an arbitrary act prejudicial to the rights of the University of the South Pacific which is the complainant,” fijivillage.com reported last year.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

During their meeting in Moscow on Tuesday, the two agreed to “drive the dynamic development of overall bilateral relations,” the North’s state-run daily Rodong Sinmun said Thursday, labeling their relationship as “strategic” and “traditionally friendly.” 

Choe made a visit to Moscow from Monday through Wednesday, following an invitation from her Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov.

The North Korean minister’s visit to Russia came amid accusations that Pyongyang and Moscow are engaged in arms trading, with Ukraine alleging that North Korean missiles have been used in Russia’s aggression against Ukraine – a claim that both Pyongyang and Moscow have denied. 

According to South Korea’s National Intelligence Service briefings in November, however, Moscow has likely offered Pyongyang technological advice for its satellite launch, as it has received more than 1 million artillery shells from North Korea since early August. 

Meanwhile, Rodong Sinmun reported separately on Thursday that the two nations agreed to form a united front to address international security matters.

Choe and Lavrov on Tuesday “specifically discussed issues related to strengthening strategic and tactical cooperation among foreign policy institutions,” the North Korean daily said, adding that the ministers reached a consensus on “actively enhancing joint actions in addressing various regional and international issues.”

Moscow also officially announced its will to further concrete its relations with Pyongyang on all fronts, including “sensitive” areas, according to Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov Wednesday.

“We have repeatedly said – and I am ready to reiterate it – that North Korea is an important partner for us and we intend to boost relations in all areas, including sensitive ones,” Peskov told reporters in Moscow, as cited by Russian news agency, Tass.

Putin and his North Korean counterpart Kim Jong Un met at the symbol of Russia’s space prowess, the spaceport of Vostochny Cosmodrome, in September where they vowed to boost their comprehensive cooperation, spanning from the economy to military. 

While the two leaders did not publicly comment on any ammunition deal during the summit, Ukraine had alleged that North Korea’s missiles have been used in Russia’s attack against the country.

In September, the Kremlin had also said that it would cooperate with North Korea in “sensitive areas that can’t be disclosed,” raising suspicions that Pyongyang may provide ammunition to Russia.

Edited by Taejun Kang and Elaine Chan

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Lee Jeong-Ho for RFA.

Both the panel of experts of the U.N. Security Council Sanctions Committee on North Korea and Swiss officials are investigating the ambassador’s purported involvement in ivory trafficking in Africa, according to Japan’s Kyodo News on Thursday.

It is anticipated that Han will be replaced within this year, with North Korean authorities possibly holding him accountable for being exposed, it added. 

Appointed as ambassador to Switzerland in 2017, Han also represents North Korea at the United Nations in Geneva. Notably, he was previously expelled from Zimbabwe in 1992 for engaging in rhino horn trafficking.

The news came after a report that Botswana, along with South Africa, Zimbabwe, and Mozambique, had been probing this North Korean-affiliated ivory and rhino horn smuggling operation for over a year

The ring is accused of pilfering at least 19 elephant tusks and 18 rhino horns from Botswana on two occasions last year and this year, and then channeling them through South Africa and Zimbabwe to Mozambican buyers linked to North Korea, Weekend Post reported on Sep. 26. 

The report added that the investigation discovered two buyers from North Korea were central to a major smuggling operation involving wildlife products. One of these individuals, Yi Kang Dae, confirmed as an intelligence official in North Korea’s state security, collaborated with Ambassador Han. 

The paper cited a security source in Zimbabwe as saying there is a big chance that Han may have revived the old smuggling network he ran while posted in the country in the 90s.

“The biting international sanctions against North Korea in the past decade may have prompted Han to reawaken his network which has been dormant for some time,” said the source, as quoted by Weekend Post. 

The source added that it was uncertain whether the illicit network has been dismantled, as Han’s two key operatives remain at large in Mozambique, urging “joint vigilance” to “destroy the operation at the source and at the end of the line.”

Edited by Mike Firn.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Taejun Kang for RFA.

A member of the university council who requested anonymity for fear of reprisals confirmed to Radio Free Asia that the council had received an anonymous complaint letter accusing Zhang of accepting a donation from Shenzhen-listed laser printer maker Ninestar.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security added Ninestar and eight of its Zhuhai-based subsidiaries to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List on June 12 for “for working with the government of Xinjiang to recruit, transport, transfer, harbor or receive forced labor or Uyghurs, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, or members of other persecuted groups out of Xinjiang.” 

Ninestar filed a lawsuit contesting the move in August.

According to the whistleblower’s letter, the University of Hong Kong president's office requested that the funds from Ninestar – which were intended as scholarship money for 'patriotic' students from mainland China – be transferred to a "strategic development fund" controlled by Zhang, the anonymous person said.

The letter also claimed that the first installment of 8.5 million yuan was received by the university in April, but that the students had already been given the money from other sources in September 2022.

A university spokesman told the pro-China Sing Tao Daily newspaper that the donation complied with Hong Kong and Chinese law, adding that the allegation of "money laundering" was "totally untrue and constitutes a serious defamation of the university, donors and related organizations."

It said the money was never deposited in the Strategic Development Fund controlled by the President's Office.

Zhang, who has been in his post since 2018 and who spoke out against the 2019 protest movement, also issued a statement describing the allegations as "rumor-mongering" and "serious defamation."

"It is extremely regrettable that confidential information which only members of the council should receive has been leaked," he said.

Student representative Casey Chik, who has a seat on the council, called for an independent investigation into the claims, as a special meeting planned to discuss the letter was adjourned until Monday after receiving a "legal letter" from Zhang, according to multiple media reports.

But members of the council including Chik have called for full disclosure of all relevant internal documents and for the setting up of an investigation committee whose proceedings are open to the public.

"These absolutely constitute prima facie evidence," Chik told Radio Free Asia on Tuesday.

"If the accusations are true, such disregard for the university's system will seriously damage the reputation and interests of the university community and may incur criminal and civil liabilities on the part of the university or the president and vice chancellor," Chik said. 

Chief Executive John Lee told reporters on Tuesday he is confident that the matter can be handled by the university's internal complaints processes.

"The University of Hong Kong Council and the Vice-Chancellor ... have clear responsibilities under the present guidelines," Lee said.

"What is important is things should be handled in accordance with laid-down procedures, and any matter should be dealt with in a fair and impartial manner," he said.

Zhang said the allegations "are believed to be organized and deliberate," and that he had hired a lawyer and requested more time to prepare for the special meeting.

Current affairs commentator Johnny Lau said Zhang's denial uses the language favored by the ruling Chinese Communist Party, because it claimed that the author of the letter had some kind of ulterior motive.

"They may not have used those exact words, but there is already a culture [of making such claims]," Lau said. "They are trying to create a sense of disharmony and suggest morally questionable behavior, hoping to get the final word."

The letter also claimed that the university had hired two U.S.-based headhunting firms to recruit a new dean for its medical school without putting the job out to tender, as well as refurbishing canteen facilities for senior faculty and buying a BMW worth HK$2 million without using tendering processes.

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Eugene Whong.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Siyan Cheung for RFA Cantonese.

A pair of Chinese scam artists wanted to turn a radiation-soaked Pacific atoll into a future metropolis. They ended up in an American jail instead.

How they got there is an untold tale of international bribery and graft that stretched to the very heart of the United Nations.

The stakes could scarcely have been higher for Hilda Heine, the former president of the Marshall Islands.

• READ MORE: Flashback: The Rongelap and the boat and the bomb story
• The full OCCRP investigation
• Other reports on Rongelap and the scam

A new OCCRP investigation reveals details of how Chinese-born fraudsters Cary Yan and Gina Zhou paid more than US$1 million to UN diplomats to gain access to its headquarters in New York, before embarking on a controversial plan to set up an autonomous zone near an important US military facility in the Pacific Ocean.

For years, Hilda Heine’s remote archipelago nation of just 40,000 people was best known to the world for Cold War nuclear testing that left scores of its islands poisoned.

Sitting in the centre of the Pacific Ocean, the country was a strategic but forgotten US ally.

But the arrival of a couple of mysterious strangers threatened to change all that. With buckets of cash at their disposal, the Chinese pair, Cary Yan and Gina Zhou, had grand plans that could have thrust the Marshall Islands into the growing rivalry between China and the West, and perhaps fracture the country itself.

Public controversy
First proposed in 2017, while Heine was still president, Yan and Zhou’s idea raised public controversy.

With backing from foreign investors, the couple planned to rehabilitate one irradiated atoll, Rongelap, and turn it into a futuristic “digital special administrative region.”

The new city of artificial islands would include an aviation logistics center, wellness resorts, a gaming and entertainment zone, and foreign embassies.

Thanks in part to the liberal payment of bribes, Yan and Zhou had managed to gain the support of some of the Marshall Islands’ most powerful politicians. They then lobbied for a draft bill that would have given the proposed zone, known as the Rongelap Atoll Special Administrative Region (RASAR), its own separate courts and immigration laws.

Heine was opposed. The whole thing reeked of a Chinese effort to gain influence over the strategically located Marshall Islands, she told OCCRP.

The plan was unconstitutional and would have created a virtually “independent country” within the Marshall Islands’ borders, she said.

The new Chinese investor-backed zone would also have occupied a geographically sensitive spot just 200 km of open water away from Kwajalein Atoll, where the US Army runs facilities that test intercontinental ballistic missiles and track foreign rocket launches.

Became a target
But when President Heine argued against the draft law, she became a target herself. In November 2018, pro-RASAR politicians backed by Yan and Zhou pushed a no-confidence motion to remove her from power.

She survived by one vote.

Even then, the president said she had no idea who this influential duo really were. Although they seemed to be Chinese, they carried Marshall Islands passports, which  gave them visa free access to the United States. Nobody seemed to know how they had obtained them.

“We looked and looked and we couldn’t find when and how they got [the passports],” Heine said. “We didn’t know what their connections were or if they had any connections with the Chinese government.

“But of course we were suspicious.”

The plan came to an abrupt end in November 2020, when Yan and Zhou were arrested in Thailand on a US warrant. After being extradited to face trial in New York, they pleaded guilty to a single count of conspiracy to bribe Marshallese officials.

Both were sentenced earlier this year. Zhou was deported to the Marshall Islands shortly after her sentencing, while Yan is due for release this November.

But although the federal case led to a brief burst of media attention, it left key questions unanswered.

Who really were Yan and Zhou? Who helped them in their audacious scheme? Were they simply crooks? Or were they also working to advance the interests of the Chinese government?

OCCRP spent nearly a year trying to find answers, conducting interviews around the world and poring through thousands of pages of documents.

What reporters uncovered was a story more bizarre — and with far broader implications — than first expected.

Aubrey Belford, Kevin G. Hall and Martin Young are investigative writers for the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP). Republished with permission.

• Read the full OCCRP investigation

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Former Papuan Governor Lukas Enembe has presented his case for the defence, denying the corruption and bribery charges against him, with the end of the controversial and lengthy trial at the Tipikor Court of Jakarta Central District Court this week. The verdict is due on October 9.

During the hearing, Enembe and his legal team argued there was no evidence to support the allegations made by the Anti-Corruption Commission (KPK) prosecutor.

The two-term Papuan governor and his legal team firmly stated that the KPK prosecutors had no evidence in the indictment against him.

• READ MORE: Other Lukas Enembe trial reports

In a statement presented by his lawyer, Petrus Bala Pattyona, Enembe strongly denied the allegations of receiving bribes and gratuities from businessmen Rijatono Lakka and Piton Enumbi.

Enembe emphasised that the accusations made against him were “baseless and lacked substantial evidence”.

Enembe maintains innocence
He stated that his case was straightforward, as he was being accused of accepting a staggering amount of 1 billion rupiahs (NZ$100,000) from Rijatono Lakka, along with a hotel valued at 25.9 billion rupiahs (NZ$2,815,000) and a number of physical developments and money amounting to Rp 10,413,929,500.00 or 10.4 billion rupiahs (NZ$1,131,000) from Piton Enumbi, lawyer Pattyona said during the reading, reports Kompas.com.

Enembe maintained his innocence throughout the proceedings and asserted that he had never received any form of illicit payments or favours from either businessman.

The simplicity of Lukas’ case, as stated by his lawyer, Petrus Bala Pattyona, lay in the clarity of the accusations made against his client.

Enembe and his legal team emphasised that none of the testimony of the 17 witnesses called during the trial could provide evidence of their involvement in bribery or gratuities in connection with Lukas Enembe, reports National.okenews.com.

“During the trial, it was proven very clearly that no witness could explain that I received bribes or gratuities from Rijatono Lakka and Piton Enumbi,” Enembe said through his lawyer Pattyona during the hearing, reports Kompas.com.

“I ask that the jury of pure hearts and minds, who have tried my case, may decide on the basis of the truth that I am innocent and therefore acquit me of all charges,” Enembe said.

In addition to asking for his release, Enembe also asked the judge to unfreeze the accounts of his wife and son that were frozen by the authorities when this legal saga began last year.

He claimed his wife (Yulce Wenda) and son (Astract Bona Timoramo Enembe) needed access to their funds to cover daily expenses.

Ex-Governor Enembe also discussed gold confiscated by the KPK, calling on judges to allow its return.

Enembe asked that no party criminalise him anymore. He insisted he had never laundered money or owned a private jet, as KPK had claimed.

Enembe’s lawyer also requested that his client’s honour be restored to prevent further false accusations from emerging.

KPK prosecutor’s demands
However, the public prosecutors of the KPK considered Lukas Enembe legally and conclusively guilty of corruption in the form of accepting bribes and gratuities when he served as Governor of Papua from 2013 to 2023.

The prosecutors alleged that there was evidence that Lukas Enembe had violated Article 12 letter A and Article 12B of the Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption Criminal Acts and Article 55 paragraph. (1) of I of the Criminal Code jo Article 65, clause (1), of the Criminal Code, reports Beritasatu.com.

In addition to corporal crime, the two-term governor of Papua was fined Rp 1 billion. He was also ordered to pay Rp 47,833,485,350 or 47.9 billion rupiah (NZD$5,199,000) in cash, accusing him of accepting bribes totalling Rp 45.8 billion and gratitude worth 1 billion, reports Kompas.com.

A verdict date is set
The Jakarta Criminal Corruption Court panel of judges is scheduled to read the verdict in the case against Enembe on 9 October 2023.

“We have scheduled Monday, October 9, 2023, for the reading of the verdict against the defendant Lukas Enembe,” said presiding judge Rianto Adam Pontoh yesterday at the Central Jakarta District Court after undergoing a hearing of the readings, reports CNN.com.

The date marks an important milestone in the trial as it will bring clarity to the charges against Enembe. The outcome of the judgement will have a profound impact on Enembe’s future and the public perception of his integrity and leadership, and most importantly, his deteriorating health.

Former Governor’s health
Previously, the KPK prosecutor had requested a sentence of 10 years and six months in prison.

Enembe’s senior lawyer, Professor OC Kaligis, argued that imprisonment of Enembe for more than a decade would be tantamount to the death penalty due to the worsening of his illness, calling it “brutal demands” of the KPK prosecutors.

“The defendant’s health condition when examined by doctors at Gatot Soebroto Army Central Hospital (RSPAD) showed an increasingly severe illness status. So we, legal counsel, after paying attention to the KPK Public Prosecutor’s concern for the defendant’s illness, from the level of investigation to investigation, concluded that the KPK Public Prosecutor ignored the defendant’s human rights for maximum treatment.

“With such demands, the KPK Public Prosecutor expects the death of Lukas Enembe in prison,” said Professor Kaligis, reports mambruks.com.

Lukas Enembe’s life
Former Governor Lukas Enembe was born on 27 July 1967 in Mamit village, Kembu Tolikara, Papua’s highlands. He graduated from Sam Ratulangi University, Manado, in 1995, majoring in socio-political science.

After returning to West Papua, he began his public service career in the civil service of Merauke district.

Enembe studied at Christian Cornerstone College in Australia from 1998 to 2001. In 2001, he returned to West Papua and ran for the regency election, becoming the deputy regent of Puncak Jaya.

In 2007, he was elected as the regent of Puncak Jaya.

Enembe served as the Governor of Papua from 2013 to 2018 and was re-elected for a second term from 2018 to 2023.

His tenure focused on infrastructure development and cultural unity in West Papua, leading to landmark constructions such as a world-class stadium and a massive bridge.

He also introduced a scholarship scheme, empowering hundreds of Papuan students to pursue education both locally and abroad — such as in New Zealand which he visited in 2019.

Enembe’s achievement as the first Highlander from West Papua to become governor is a groundbreaking milestone that challenged long-held cultural taboos.

His success serves as an inspiration and symbolises the potential for change and unity in the region.

His ability to break cultural barriers has significantly impacted the development of West Papua and the collective mindset of its people, turning what was once regarded as impossible into possibilities through his courage and bravery.

The fact that he is still holding on despite serious health complications that he has endured for a long time under Indonesian state pressure is widely regarded as a “miracle”.

One could argue that West Papua’s predicament as a whole is mirrored in Enembe’s story of struggle, perseverance, pain, suffering, and a will to live despite all odds.

Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

• Other Yamin Kogoya articles

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

On August 31, four Comorian journalists appealed their August 24 convictions for defamation and insult related to the publicizing of sexual misconduct allegations against unnamed leadership of the state-owned ORTC, according to the journalists, who spoke to CPJ over the phone, and a statement in support of the appeal by the National Union of Journalists in the Comoros, a local trade organization.

The charges and convictions by the criminal court in the capital, Moroni, followed a complaint by Hablani Assoumani, operational director of the ORTC, over “defamatory allegations of sexual touching” made during a January 17 meeting between Comoros President Azali Assoumani and journalists, as well as in subsequent media coverage of the allegations, according to those sources and a copy of the summons for one of the journalists to appear in court, which CPJ reviewed.

The journalists convicted include Andjouza Abouheir, vice president of the journalists’ union, and Toufé Maecha, former director of ORTC, who both made comments related to the allegations during the January 17 meeting; as well as Abdallah Mzembaba, a correspondent for Radio France Internationale, and Oubeidillah Mchangama, a reporter with the privately owned FCBK FM broadcaster, both of whom published reporting about these allegations, the four journalists told CPJ.

A court date for the journalists’ appeal has not been set, according to Saïd Mohamed Saïd Hassane, Mzembaba’s lawyer, who spoke to CPJ via messaging app.

“Convicting journalists for asking questions and reporting on sexual assault allegations sends a chilling message that promotes impunity for such abusive behavior. Authorities should not oppose the journalists’ appeal,” said Angela Quintal, CPJ’s Africa program coordinator, in Durban, South Africa. “Journalists have been crucial to exposing sexual misconduct in workplaces around the world. Comoros authorities should focus on investigating such allegations, not seek to deter reporters from holding those in power to account.”

During the January 17 meeting, Abouheir questioned the country’s president about allegations of sexual touching “by at least one man, a superior, on young women,” in return for promises of “promotions,” according to media reports.

Mzembaba told CPJ that after the meeting he reported for RFI on the allegations and the president’s response. That reporting suggested that the person accused is “a director of one of the national television departments.” On June 15, the Moroni court summoned Mzembaba to appear over that coverage, according to the summons that CPJ reviewed.

Mchangamasimilarly told CPJ he was being prosecuted for reporting the details of the meeting in a January 19 Facebook Live broadcast.

On June 22, the public prosecutor called for one year’s sentence, with a minimum of three months to be served in prison, and a one-year ban on the suspects from exercising their profession, claiming in the indictment that the speech and media coverage of these allegations had “tarnished” the country’s image, according to several reports.

On August 24, the Moroni court sentenced the four journalists to a nine-month suspended sentenceand a fine of 150,000 Comorian francs ($US325) each for defamation and insult, according to news reports.

CPJ reached the secretary for ORTC’s general manager Mohamed Abdou Mhadji via messaging app, but he declined to comment. CPJ’s calls to the Comoros Ministry of Justice via the number listed on their Facebook page went unanswered.

[Editors’ Note: The first paragraph of this report was updated to correct a typo.]

This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

Vanuatu’s newly elected Prime Minister, Sato Kilman, has spoken out on the importance of preserving freedom of speech while cautioning against its “misuse”.

Kilman shared his concerns after his election as the country’s new leader on Monday evening.

He cited instances where criticism had crossed a “red line”, raising alarm over the tone of recent political discourse.

• READ MORE: Other Vanuatu political crisis reports

In his address, the Prime Minister addressed the need to uphold respect for Vanuatu’s traditions and Christian faith, including the importance of immediately stopping behavior that tarnished individuals’ reputations.

Prime Minister Kilman acknowledged the commitment to safeguarding democracy in Vanuatu and the importance of adhering to constitutional and legal processes when considering changes to the nation’s governance structure.

He noted the recent parliamentary session, which included a motion of no confidence as mandated by the Constitution.

The Prime Minister voiced his disappointment at lawmakers themselves for violating the laws they had enacted.

Investigating allegations
He conveyed his commitment to addressing these breaches and investigating allegations of threatening gestures and bribery.

Kilman said that the motion of no confidence was fundamentally about safeguarding democracy in Vanuatu.

He assured the public that the new government would prioritise delivering essential services to the people.

The Prime Minister expressed gratitude to all the political parties that supported the government’s change and acknowledged the customary practice during a government transition.

He thanked Vanua’aku Pati president Bob Loughman and Iauko Group leader Marc Ati for their support in electing him as the Prime Minister.

Kilman also commended members from other sides of the political spectrum who proposed candidates for the prime ministership and participated in the democratic process, even though the outcome did not favour them, saying that such participation upheld democratic values.

Doddy Morris is a Vanuatu Daily Post reporter. Republished with permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

The Jakarta District Court heard the case of alleged bribery and gratification against suspended Papua governor Lukas Enembe on Monday with evidence from expert witnesses saying that an audit showed records to be “clean and accurate”.

The hearing was convened to hear the testimony of three expert witnesses on the allegations against Governor Enembe.

The panel of judges heard the testimony of two experts Dr Muhammad Rullyandi, SH, MH (a constitutional law expert and lecturer at the Faculty of Law of Jayabaya University) and Dr Eko Sambodo, SE, MM, Mak, CFrA (an expert in state finance and losses), and the third witness was due to be heard today.

• READ MORE: Ailing suspended Papuan governor Enembe now in detention cell after army hospital
• Other Lukas Enembe case reports

The experts concluded that nine reports provided by the country’s state financial audit board during Enembe’s tenure as a governor did not contain any irregularities, or misreporting.

It was all “clean and accurate” within the framework of regulations and procedures, the witnesses said.

Complied with admin law
According to Dr Rullyandi (Indonesians often have single names), the state financial management complied with administrative law, which was supervised by a state institution known as the Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan (BPK), the State Financial Audit Board.

“The BPK is the final step in the state management process, starting with planning, implementation, and before accountability, it is under supervision,” Dr Rullyandi said.

Among the BPK’s responsibilities were the supervision of procurement and service contracting. When the BPK found criminal elements under its supervision, it reported them to the authorised agency required by law, he said.

Dr Rullyandi said that this was regulated in Article 14 of Law No. 15 of 2004 concerning the Examination of State Financial Management and Responsibility.

Article 14 of Law No.15 of 2004 states:

(1) “If criminal elements are detected during the examination, the BPK shall make an immediate report to the appropriate authorities in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations”.

Therefore, before the findings could be prosecuted as articles of bribery or gratification, they must first be tested by the BPK, which then reports them to law enforcement agencies.

Administrative rules
That is the correct way of thinking, said the expert witness.

Law enforcement is not permitted to enter the administrative area while it is still in the administrative process. The law states that when administrative law enforcement occurs, law enforcement should not enter before the BPK makes recommendations,” Dr Rullyandi continued.

The BPK audit report indicates that there were no criminal indications of financial irregularities during the term of Governor Lukas Enembe in regional financial management, including no alleged irregularities in procurement processes for goods and services, which indicates that the principle of legal certainty was met.

According to Dr Rullyandi, initiation of the investigation process into an alleged criminal act of corruption against Governor Lukas Enembe was not based on BPK’s recommendations.

This means, from the beginning of the investigation until it was transferred to the court, investigators ignored Law No. 15 of 2004, especially Article 14. To enforce the law of corruption, relating to criminal norms regulating bribery and gratification, administrative law norms must be considered.

This is accomplished by referring to Law No 1 of 2004 concerning the State Rreasury, which states in section weighing letter c that state financial administration law rules must govern state financial management and accountability.

According to Dr Rullyandi, there is also a provision in Law No. 15 of 2004 pertaining to the Responsibility of State Financial Inspection and Management, which regulates how state finances are handled and held accountable in the fight against criminal corruption.

Abuse of office allegations
“Regarding allegations of abuse of office, Dr Rullyandi said the defendant did not possess the qualifications to abuse his position through bribery and gratification as stated in Articles 11, 12A, and 12B of the Law.

Law No. 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption, as amended by Law No. 20 of 2001.

It was due to the authority or power associated with Enembe’s position, which allowed him to move in order to do or not do something related to the procurement of goods and services. This was given as a result of or caused by something he did or did not do in his position that violated his obligations.

His position as Governor and as user of the budget had been delegated and handed over to the powers of budget users and officials authorised to carry out the procurement committee for goods and services in accordance with Article 18 of Law No. 1 of 2004 concerning the State Treasury.

Particularly, anyone signing or certifying documents related to the letter of evidence that is the basis for the expenditure on APBN / APBD is responsible for its content and consequences.

According to Dr Eko Sambodo’s testimony, if a province [such as Papua] had been given nine times the Unqualified Fair Opinion (abbreviated WTP), administratively, all of them had been managed in accordance with relevant regulations, accountability, and accounting standards.

“When it comes to managing finances, it has been audited, so there are no regulatory violations,” Dr Sambobo said.

Governor Enembe’s senior lawyer, Professor OC Kaligis, asked the witness whether this opinion of the WTP could be used as evidence, that corruption did not exist in the province.

The witness replied that in auditor terms, corruption was known as irregularities. Deviation causes state losses.

It means that everything has been done according to and within regulations, including governance, compilers, and reports. It also means that expenditures have been proven, clarifications have been made, all of which contribute to its final report.

“This is all WTP offers,” said Dr Sambobo. Under the leadership of Governor Enembe, Papua province won the WTP opinion nine times consecutively.

Another expert opinion was due to be heard in court today.

Witness’s testimonies in Court
The court completed hearing witnesses last week (Monday, August 21), who testified to their involvement or knowledge of the alleged bribery, gratification, and corruption scandal.

Out of 184 witnesses, only 17 were brought to court, and only 1 had any connection with Governor Enembe. Sixteen of these witnesses testified as to not have any connection to Enembe.

Only one witness linked to the governor’s name, Prijatono Lakka, a pastor and Enembe’s assistant, who sent Enembe one billion rupiah (NZ$105,000) to cover medical expenses through governor’s personal funds, resulting in an array of allegations, his arrest, and the ongoing process.

To date, no witnesses have emerged to provide testimony or evidence concerning all the alleged wrongdoings and misconduct of Lukas.

Although the governor’s health has improved somewhat, his condition is still critical. The governor’s lawyers continues to ask the judge to detain him in the city for medical treatment and to allow medical specialists outside of the control of Corruption Eradication Commission (acrynomed KPK) to treat him in a free environment.

However, these requests have not been responded to. Currently, the governor is confined to the prison cells of KPK.

He is secheduled to appear in court next week on Monday to bring the final stages of this protracted legal drama to closure.

Lukas Enembe’s term as Papua’s provincial Governor will end during early September — next week.

Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

• Other Yamin Kogoya articles

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

The Times newspaper reported this week that a Chinese agent using several aliases including "Robin Zhang" has been offering cash and contracts to British government employees via the professional social media network LinkedIn.

Former ruling Conservative Party leader Ian Duncan Smith commented via his account on X, formerly Twitter: "How can the UK Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Affairs @FCDOGovUK continue to think he has to go to China to 'KowTow' to China while they steal our secrets and commit genocide?" he wrote above a link to the report.

"Our policy towards China is like a front door mat…" he added.

The fresh spying allegations come amid growing concerns over Chinese Communist Party infiltration of all aspects of British life, and warnings from Hong Kongers in exile over growing acts of violence by Beijing supporters and officials alike.

The five-year spying operation tried to get thousands of officials to hand over state secrets in exchange for large sums of money and lucrative business deals, The Times reported.

"The intelligence officer for Beijing’s main spy agency created a string of aliases and fake companies to target security officials, civil servants, scientists and academics with access to classified information or commercially sensitive technology," it said.

Reuters quoted three people familiar with the matter on Aug. 21 as saying that Cleverly will travel to China next week to "stabilize" ties.

‘Seeking to undermine’

But Alicia Kearns, who is current chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, said China is clearly actively seeking to undermine countries like Britain.

"China is engaging in an aggressive foreign policy where it is actively seeking to undermine states like ours," she told Times Radio.

"Because if we are reliant on them, or if they infiltrate our state, we are less able to mitigate or limit the worst excesses of their behaviors," she said. "We have been leaving ourselves open to them."

The Times cited security services as saying that the operation was conducted "on an industrial scale," and is "the most prolific ... in a generation."

"Zhang contacted officials working in sensitive areas, such as the military, science and technology and politics, to try to build relationships," the report said.

"He offered a recruitment consultant £8,000 for every time they handed over details of a candidate from the intelligence services, and offered a former military intelligence official large sums of cash for information on Britain’s counterterrorism work," it said, adding that the operation appears to be the work of a single operative who can't be named due to threats to Western spies.

It named some of Zhang's account names as Eric Chen Yixi, Robin Cao, Lincoln Lam, John Lee and Eric Kim.

Zhang started out targeting defense contractors, civil servants and sensitive businesses, then switched to think tanks and academics, the report said.

The Times also reported separately that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office has banned government officials from referring to Russia, China or other countries as "hostile states" in official documents, even internally, as part of a bid to improve bilateral ties.

Fearing backlash

Meanwhile, a recent survey showed Hong Kongers are staying away from protests on British soil, for fear of a pro-China backlash.

The Initiative SAFE survey of more than 400 Hong Kongers between April and May found that only 42% trust the British police to protect them from violent attacks and harassment by supporters of the Chinese Communist Party, while 7% said they didn't trust them at all and would avoid contacting them.

And while 80% said they had taken part in community activities, only 44% said they had attended rallies or demonstrations.

"Even though Hong Kong people have settled in the U.K., they're still very hesitant about expressing their opinions or demonstrating for their beliefs in their new homeland," survey leader Julian Chan said.

Of those surveyed, 87% said they would check the background of event organizers before going, while 46% said they would stay away from rallies or protests, and 47% said they wouldn't dare to express their opinions on Hong Kong issues online.

"[These safety concerns] have led to a very unsatisfactory outcome," Chan said.

The advocacy group Hongkongers in Britain, which sponsored the survey, called on law enforcement agencies to pay closer attention to video clips of suspicious behavior at rallies and protests, and to encourage participants to report it to police.

It also called on local councils to step up publicity to inform Hong Kongers that physical attacks and verbal harassment against them are considered hate crimes in Britain.

The group also called on the U.K. government to waive criminal background checks for applicants to the BNO visa scheme, because it puts Hong Kongers trying to emigrate to the U.K. at the mercy of officials back home.

"We will make these suggestions and report the data we collected, but the final outcome depends on whether officials relax restrictions," spokesman Jason Chow said.

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Malcolm Foster.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Jojo Man for RFA Cantonese, Amelia Loi for RFA Mandarin.

The Times newspaper reported this week that a Chinese agent using several aliases including "Robin Zhang" has been offering cash and contracts to British government employees via the professional social media network LinkedIn.

Former ruling Conservative Party leader Ian Duncan Smith commented via his account on X, formerly Twitter: "How can the UK Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Affairs @FCDOGovUK continue to think he has to go to China to 'KowTow' to China while they steal our secrets and commit genocide?" he wrote above a link to the report.

"Our policy towards China is like a front door mat…" he added.

The fresh spying allegations come amid growing concerns over Chinese Communist Party infiltration of all aspects of British life, and warnings from Hong Kongers in exile over growing acts of violence by Beijing supporters and officials alike.

The five-year spying operation tried to get thousands of officials to hand over state secrets in exchange for large sums of money and lucrative business deals, The Times reported.

"The intelligence officer for Beijing’s main spy agency created a string of aliases and fake companies to target security officials, civil servants, scientists and academics with access to classified information or commercially sensitive technology," it said.

Reuters quoted three people familiar with the matter on Aug. 21 as saying that Cleverly will travel to China next week to "stabilize" ties.

‘Seeking to undermine’

But Alicia Kearns, who is current chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, said China is clearly actively seeking to undermine countries like Britain.

"China is engaging in an aggressive foreign policy where it is actively seeking to undermine states like ours," she told Times Radio.

"Because if we are reliant on them, or if they infiltrate our state, we are less able to mitigate or limit the worst excesses of their behaviors," she said. "We have been leaving ourselves open to them."

The Times cited security services as saying that the operation was conducted "on an industrial scale," and is "the most prolific ... in a generation."

"Zhang contacted officials working in sensitive areas, such as the military, science and technology and politics, to try to build relationships," the report said.

"He offered a recruitment consultant £8,000 for every time they handed over details of a candidate from the intelligence services, and offered a former military intelligence official large sums of cash for information on Britain’s counterterrorism work," it said, adding that the operation appears to be the work of a single operative who can't be named due to threats to Western spies.

It named some of Zhang's account names as Eric Chen Yixi, Robin Cao, Lincoln Lam, John Lee and Eric Kim.

Zhang started out targeting defense contractors, civil servants and sensitive businesses, then switched to think tanks and academics, the report said.

The Times also reported separately that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office has banned government officials from referring to Russia, China or other countries as "hostile states" in official documents, even internally, as part of a bid to improve bilateral ties.

Fearing backlash

Meanwhile, a recent survey showed Hong Kongers are staying away from protests on British soil, for fear of a pro-China backlash.

The Initiative SAFE survey of more than 400 Hong Kongers between April and May found that only 42% trust the British police to protect them from violent attacks and harassment by supporters of the Chinese Communist Party, while 7% said they didn't trust them at all and would avoid contacting them.

And while 80% said they had taken part in community activities, only 44% said they had attended rallies or demonstrations.

"Even though Hong Kong people have settled in the U.K., they're still very hesitant about expressing their opinions or demonstrating for their beliefs in their new homeland," survey leader Julian Chan said.

Of those surveyed, 87% said they would check the background of event organizers before going, while 46% said they would stay away from rallies or protests, and 47% said they wouldn't dare to express their opinions on Hong Kong issues online.

"[These safety concerns] have led to a very unsatisfactory outcome," Chan said.

The advocacy group Hongkongers in Britain, which sponsored the survey, called on law enforcement agencies to pay closer attention to video clips of suspicious behavior at rallies and protests, and to encourage participants to report it to police.

It also called on local councils to step up publicity to inform Hong Kongers that physical attacks and verbal harassment against them are considered hate crimes in Britain.

The group also called on the U.K. government to waive criminal background checks for applicants to the BNO visa scheme, because it puts Hong Kongers trying to emigrate to the U.K. at the mercy of officials back home.

"We will make these suggestions and report the data we collected, but the final outcome depends on whether officials relax restrictions," spokesman Jason Chow said.

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Malcolm Foster.

This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Jojo Man for RFA Cantonese, Amelia Loi for RFA Mandarin.

“Senegalese authorities should immediately release Abdou Khadre Sakho and drop all legal proceedings against him and other journalists being targeted for their political reporting,” said Angela Quintal, CPJ’s Africa program coordinator, in Durban, South Africa. “The recent surge in the harassment and detention of journalists in Senegal on spurious grounds should stop at once, and the media must be allowed to play its rightful role by informing the public.”

Police summoned Sakho, a reporter with the privately owned Senego news website, to the Division of Criminal Investigations in the capital, Dakar, on Tuesday, according to the outlet’s editor-in-chief, Mangoné Ka, and assistant editor-in-chief, Cheikh Tidiane Kandé, who both spoke to CPJ by phone.

The editors said that police wanted to question Sakho over an article published Sunday, August 13, about alleged secret negotiations for the release of opposition politician Ousmane Sonko, who was charged with insurrection and jailed last month.

Ka told CPJ that the police also summoned him on Monday, questioned him about his work and that article, and released him that evening without charge.

Senegal has cracked down on the media ahead of February’s elections. Sonko is facing a mounting number of charges that could disqualify him from running for president. Authorities have held reporter Maty Sarr Niang since May 16 on various charges, including “usurping the function of a journalist.”

This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Erik Crouch.

Pacific Media Watch

A controversial report by a French metropolitan not-for-profit about sexual and sexist violence in France’s overseas territories — including Kanaky New Caledonia — has had its findings reported in mainstream French media, stirring strong criticism by Kanak social justice and human rights advocates.

The report has led to a condemnation and accusations of “colonialism and racism” in an open letter directed at the NGO, En Avant Toute(s), and two mainstream media outlets that carried news about the findings, France 24 and France Info.

“It is really about journalism, feminism, and decolonisation of knowledge production,” says an Pacific Media Watch correspondent about the issue.

• READ MORE: Other sexual violence in the Pacific reports

“The problem is the organisation didn’t actually travel to New Caledonia. Instead, they conducted phone interviews with a select, small group of NGOs in New Caledonia’s Southern Province, leading to comments in the media about Kanak tradition and sexual abuse which were wrong.”

The open letter, sent to Asia Pacific Report, says:

We are gathering to send you this letter on the International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples, which aims to raise awareness among the public on the problems faced by Indigenous people.

Our approach is first rooted in our need to denounce the severity of the lies that have been mediatised and to minimise the harm done, but also to educate on the struggles of Indigenous peoples and the fight against sexual and sexist oppression, specifically in a colonial context, and so that the tools and resources that are deployed in these struggles serve the people who are affected first and foremost.

We are Indigenous, Kanak, French, women, men, people from Kanaky/New Caledonia committed to social justice in our country at a personal level, professional level, but also as volunteers, advocates and militants in associations.

Recently, we have come across the report “Des ponts entre les territoires d’outre-mer et l’hexagone” (“Bridges between overseas territories and the hexagone”) through French hexagonal media [the hexagon is a synonym for metropolitan France].

This report was produced by the French association named En Avant Toute(s) and it attempts to explore the contexts of the French overseas territories when it comes to sexual and sexist violence against women and LGBTQIA+ people.

It also assesses the needs for their chat service, currently mostly operating in hexagonal France. We are alarmed by two main points: 1/ Misinformation in the media; 2/ How weak the report is as well as its colonial approach, which shows a lack of understanding of French overseas territories, and of Kanaky/New Caledonia more specifically, since that is what affects us.

Misinformation in the media
In an interview published on July 12, 2023 by France Info, Aurélie Garnier-Brun declared: “customary law [is] being superimposed on common law.

“What will the victims turn to? Customary law or common law?… It is not the same text. Customary law is based on ancestral practices. Sometimes, victims must apologize to their perpetrator to settle conflicts within a clan.’”

This information is shared once again in an interview published on July 29, 2023 by France 24 in which Garnier-Brun indicates that “in New Caledonia, the co-existence of common law and customary law can represent a risk factor for women in terms of their exposure to violence” and that “some Kanak tribes have traditions which demand that the victims of violence ask their perpetrators’ for forgiveness”.

We would like to ask you the following questions: What are these allegations based on? This is a scoop that Kanak women and men are finding out about with surprise and horror from our dear islands on which you have not had the pleasure to set foot on to conduct your research.

What do you know about our traditions, about Kanak culture, about the stakes at play in the coexistence of customary and common law? What do you even know about violence against women in Kanaky/New Caledonia to draw such dangerous conclusions, make them into statements easily shareable by French media, which don’t even seriously fact check the information, especially when we know how important and worrying the topic of violence against women is?

Kanak custom condemns violence against women, and does not protect perpetrators, contrary to what is suggested in these interviews.

Then, in an interview published on July 18, 2023 by Causette magazine, la Case Juridique Kanak (ACJK) is described as a “local religious community”. For your information, the ACJK is an association of volunteer lawyers who are mobilised around questions of customary law. Therefore, it is not a “local religious community” as the interview suggests.

It is clear, and we regret it, that these declarations belong to a time we wished was in the past, but apparently persists since it is resurfacing through your narrative. It is part of a discourse that suggests that Indigenous and colonised peoples, including the Kanak people, supposedly have backward traditions, unaligned with Western civilisation, which is seen as the reference, given that it is supposedly more advanced on the question of gender equality.

The mediatisation of this type of discourse is an insult, an example of colonial ignorance, a major contribution to misinformation and the reproduction of a backward, discriminatory, racist and colonial vision of the French overseas territories. Consequently, this misinformation makes us question:

Firstly, the legitimacy of the En Avant Toute(s) representatives to speak about sexual and sexist violence in the overseas territories, and more specifically, in Kanaky/New Caledonia;

Secondly, the fact that this information is shared by French media without any control or verification with knowledge holders in the country.

The production of colonial knowledge
En Avant Toute(s) is clear in its motivations. As is indicated in a publication made on the association’s Linkedin page, one of the objectives of the report was to analyze the situation in the overseas territories to think about the implementation of their chat service Commentonsaime.fr in our territories.

En Avant Toute(s) did not travel to our countries but spoke to some associations through videoconferences. When it comes to Kanaky/New Caledonia, En Avant Toute(s) was in contact with two associations: Le Relais and Centre d’Information Droit des Femmes et Egalité (CIDFE), both associations based and funded by the Southern Province, one of the three provinces in the country.

According to us, having only spoken to a small number of associations, En Avant Toute(s) is not in a position to produce an empirical, informed and critical report, which would allow a better understanding of violence perpetrated against young women and the LGBTQIA+ community in Kanaky/New Caledonia.

For this to be the case, they should have been in conversation with many more actors and partners across the country, to have a more extensive and representative sample.

Looking at the lack of sufficient data and the primary aim which was to analyse different overseas contexts to assess the possible implementation of the chat service, it seems that calling the document a “report” is a little ambitious, if not inappropriate.

The approach does not come from our territories and is not led or co-produced with local populations or associations. It would be more appropriate to speak of the beginning of a market research or a feasibility survey. Here, words matter, since the publication of a report confers authority and suggests expertise.

However, in our context, we do not think that En Avant Toute(s) is able to speak about sexual or sexist violence in Kanaky/New Caledonia in the media, nor to produce a report on the topic. We would like to invite the members of En Avant Toute(s) who have participated to this survey as well as the media who have participated to its legitimisation to think about the conditions that authorise individuals who have never set foot on, nor are implicated in, our territories, to publish “reports” and be interviewed by national media as experts of our contexts.

In addition, we condemn that the launch of the so-called report took place in hexagonal [mainland] France and that many associations committed to the struggle against sexual and sexist violence in our country were not invited to participate.

Indeed, we only learnt about this study through the media. We denounce this type of colonial practices, where resources are extracted from our territories so that organisations, companies, associations in France can benefit from them, without us being directly implicated.

We understand that the stakes are the possible implementation of a tool which would complement what is already in place to tackle sexual and sexist violence in our territories, and that the intention is commendable. Nevertheless, without any real collaboration with the most affected and informed people, we remain sceptical of its possible results.

We also cannot be convinced of the efficacy of such a tool when we have no information regarding the performance of the chat service in hexagonal France, nor any about the ways in which En Avant Toute(s) would adapt it to our territories.

Faced with these alarming observations and in order to minimise the harm done to the Kanak people in the name of tribal Kanak women, whose voices are absent from the report and in the media, here are our demands:

• A statement written by En Avant Toute(s) to be published on all their social media platforms and on their website, which would refute the declarations made in relation to a so-called Kanak tradition that would require victims of sexual violence to ask their perpetrators for forgiveness in some tribes;
• The deletion of this misinformation in the interviews published by France Info and France 24, with an explanatory note; and
• A right of reply in the media that published this information, France Info and France 24, in order to deny these harmful declarations and enable the women who are involved in the struggle against sexist and sexual violence in Kanaky/New Caledonia to have their voices heard nationally.

Our primary aim remains social justice in our country, and it is only attainable if we pay attention to all the axes of oppression, including the ways in which colonialism and racism play a significant role in the oppression of women.

Racism and colonialism also impact [on] our relations as militants, advocates, members of feminist associations, and particularly when it comes to North/South and Hexagone/Overseas territories relations.

This requires that for all collaborative work with associations, groups and collective that are not based in our territories, there is a shared understanding of our historical and political contexts and of the power dynamics at play, an attention paid to not reproducing harmful discourses which participate in the silencing of colonised women, and the consideration of people who are involved in and from our territories as the most suitable to speak about the issues they face and struggle against.

Signatories
La Pause Décoloniale (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Union des Femmes Francophones d’Océanie (UFFO) NC (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Arnaud Chollet-Leakava, Porte-Parole du Mouvement des Océaniens Indépendantistes (MOI) (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Oriane Trolue, Chargée de la condition féminine de politique décoloniale du Mouvement des Océaniens Indépendantistes (MOI) (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Hugues Vhemavhe, Sénateur Coutumier de l’Aire Hoot Ma Whaap (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Rolande Trolue, feminist and resource person (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Fara Caillard, Marche Mondiale des Femmes (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Billy Wete, pastor (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Morgane Lepeu ép. Goromoedo (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Denis Pourawa, Kanak poet-writer (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Teva Avae, artist (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Ronny Kareni, West Papua Merdeka Support Network & Rise of the Morning Star (West Papua)
Florenda Nirikani, Militante Éducation Populaire CEMEA Pwârâ Wâro (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Virginie Murcia, president of the Union des Groupements Parents d’Élèves UGPE (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Doriane Nonmoira, Union des Femmes Francophone d’Océanie (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Wendy Nonke, Mouvement pour un Souriant Village Mélanésien (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Patrick Tara (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Justine-Rose Boaé Kéla (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Swänn Iché (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Laurent Lhermitte, Les Insoumis du Pacifique (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Raïssa Weiri (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Marie-Rose Yakobo, student (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Yvette Danguigny, Association Natte Kanak (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Nathanaëlle Maleko (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
David Robert, Union Calédonienne (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Alexia Babin (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Pierre Chanel Nonmoira, customary leader (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Gladys Nekiriai (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Sabrina Pwéré (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Xavier Nonmoira, young Kanak revolutionary (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Adeline Babin (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Ghislaine Pwapy (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Valentin Nemia (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Célestine Beleouvoudi (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Mériba Karé (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Présence Kanak (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Jacques Guione, Association Djors (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Ludmila Jean, Association Djors (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Yvette Poma (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Marie-Madeleine Guioné, Kanak woman (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Augusta Nonmoira, Kanak woman (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Lucien Sawaza (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Monique Poma (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Jean Rock Uhila (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Vaïana Tiaore, Corail Vivant Terre des Hommes (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Laurie Anne Le Pen (France)
Aaron Houchard Mitride (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Roger Nemia (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Atrune Palene (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Amandine Tieoue (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Iouanna Gopoea (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Sylviany M’boueri (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Valentine Wakanengo (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Simane (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Jacinthe Kaichou (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Romain Purue (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Pacific Media Watch.

Pacific Media Watch

A controversial report by a French metropolitan not-for-profit about sexual and sexist violence in France’s overseas territories — including Kanaky New Caledonia — has had its findings reported in mainstream French media, stirring strong criticism by Kanak social justice and human rights advocates.

The report has led to a condemnation and accusations of “colonialism and racism” in an open letter directed at the NGO, En Avant Toute(s), and two mainstream media outlets that carried news about the findings, France 24 and France Info.

“It is really about journalism, feminism, and decolonisation of knowledge production,” says an Pacific Media Watch correspondent about the issue.

• READ MORE: Other sexual violence in the Pacific reports

“The problem is the organisation didn’t actually travel to New Caledonia. Instead, they conducted phone interviews with a select, small group of NGOs in New Caledonia’s Southern Province, leading to comments in the media about Kanak tradition and sexual abuse which were wrong.”

The open letter, sent to Asia Pacific Report, says:

We are gathering to send you this letter on the International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples, which aims to raise awareness among the public on the problems faced by Indigenous people.

Our approach is first rooted in our need to denounce the severity of the lies that have been mediatised and to minimise the harm done, but also to educate on the struggles of Indigenous peoples and the fight against sexual and sexist oppression, specifically in a colonial context, and so that the tools and resources that are deployed in these struggles serve the people who are affected first and foremost.

We are Indigenous, Kanak, French, women, men, people from Kanaky/New Caledonia committed to social justice in our country at a personal level, professional level, but also as volunteers, advocates and militants in associations.

Recently, we have come across the report “Des ponts entre les territoires d’outre-mer et l’hexagone” (“Bridges between overseas territories and the hexagone”) through French hexagonal media [the hexagon is a synonym for metropolitan France].

This report was produced by the French association named En Avant Toute(s) and it attempts to explore the contexts of the French overseas territories when it comes to sexual and sexist violence against women and LGBTQIA+ people.

It also assesses the needs for their chat service, currently mostly operating in hexagonal France. We are alarmed by two main points: 1/ Misinformation in the media; 2/ How weak the report is as well as its colonial approach, which shows a lack of understanding of French overseas territories, and of Kanaky/New Caledonia more specifically, since that is what affects us.

Misinformation in the media
In an interview published on July 12, 2023 by France Info, Aurélie Garnier-Brun declared: “customary law [is] being superimposed on common law.

“What will the victims turn to? Customary law or common law?… It is not the same text. Customary law is based on ancestral practices. Sometimes, victims must apologize to their perpetrator to settle conflicts within a clan.’”

This information is shared once again in an interview published on July 29, 2023 by France 24 in which Garnier-Brun indicates that “in New Caledonia, the co-existence of common law and customary law can represent a risk factor for women in terms of their exposure to violence” and that “some Kanak tribes have traditions which demand that the victims of violence ask their perpetrators’ for forgiveness”.

We would like to ask you the following questions: What are these allegations based on? This is a scoop that Kanak women and men are finding out about with surprise and horror from our dear islands on which you have not had the pleasure to set foot on to conduct your research.

What do you know about our traditions, about Kanak culture, about the stakes at play in the coexistence of customary and common law? What do you even know about violence against women in Kanaky/New Caledonia to draw such dangerous conclusions, make them into statements easily shareable by French media, which don’t even seriously fact check the information, especially when we know how important and worrying the topic of violence against women is?

Kanak custom condemns violence against women, and does not protect perpetrators, contrary to what is suggested in these interviews.

Then, in an interview published on July 18, 2023 by Causette magazine, la Case Juridique Kanak (ACJK) is described as a “local religious community”. For your information, the ACJK is an association of volunteer lawyers who are mobilised around questions of customary law. Therefore, it is not a “local religious community” as the interview suggests.

It is clear, and we regret it, that these declarations belong to a time we wished was in the past, but apparently persists since it is resurfacing through your narrative. It is part of a discourse that suggests that Indigenous and colonised peoples, including the Kanak people, supposedly have backward traditions, unaligned with Western civilisation, which is seen as the reference, given that it is supposedly more advanced on the question of gender equality.

The mediatisation of this type of discourse is an insult, an example of colonial ignorance, a major contribution to misinformation and the reproduction of a backward, discriminatory, racist and colonial vision of the French overseas territories. Consequently, this misinformation makes us question:

Firstly, the legitimacy of the En Avant Toute(s) representatives to speak about sexual and sexist violence in the overseas territories, and more specifically, in Kanaky/New Caledonia;

Secondly, the fact that this information is shared by French media without any control or verification with knowledge holders in the country.

The production of colonial knowledge
En Avant Toute(s) is clear in its motivations. As is indicated in a publication made on the association’s Linkedin page, one of the objectives of the report was to analyze the situation in the overseas territories to think about the implementation of their chat service Commentonsaime.fr in our territories.

En Avant Toute(s) did not travel to our countries but spoke to some associations through videoconferences. When it comes to Kanaky/New Caledonia, En Avant Toute(s) was in contact with two associations: Le Relais and Centre d’Information Droit des Femmes et Egalité (CIDFE), both associations based and funded by the Southern Province, one of the three provinces in the country.

According to us, having only spoken to a small number of associations, En Avant Toute(s) is not in a position to produce an empirical, informed and critical report, which would allow a better understanding of violence perpetrated against young women and the LGBTQIA+ community in Kanaky/New Caledonia.

For this to be the case, they should have been in conversation with many more actors and partners across the country, to have a more extensive and representative sample.

Looking at the lack of sufficient data and the primary aim which was to analyse different overseas contexts to assess the possible implementation of the chat service, it seems that calling the document a “report” is a little ambitious, if not inappropriate.

The approach does not come from our territories and is not led or co-produced with local populations or associations. It would be more appropriate to speak of the beginning of a market research or a feasibility survey. Here, words matter, since the publication of a report confers authority and suggests expertise.

However, in our context, we do not think that En Avant Toute(s) is able to speak about sexual or sexist violence in Kanaky/New Caledonia in the media, nor to produce a report on the topic. We would like to invite the members of En Avant Toute(s) who have participated to this survey as well as the media who have participated to its legitimisation to think about the conditions that authorise individuals who have never set foot on, nor are implicated in, our territories, to publish “reports” and be interviewed by national media as experts of our contexts.

In addition, we condemn that the launch of the so-called report took place in hexagonal [mainland] France and that many associations committed to the struggle against sexual and sexist violence in our country were not invited to participate.

Indeed, we only learnt about this study through the media. We denounce this type of colonial practices, where resources are extracted from our territories so that organisations, companies, associations in France can benefit from them, without us being directly implicated.

We understand that the stakes are the possible implementation of a tool which would complement what is already in place to tackle sexual and sexist violence in our territories, and that the intention is commendable. Nevertheless, without any real collaboration with the most affected and informed people, we remain sceptical of its possible results.

We also cannot be convinced of the efficacy of such a tool when we have no information regarding the performance of the chat service in hexagonal France, nor any about the ways in which En Avant Toute(s) would adapt it to our territories.

Faced with these alarming observations and in order to minimise the harm done to the Kanak people in the name of tribal Kanak women, whose voices are absent from the report and in the media, here are our demands:

• A statement written by En Avant Toute(s) to be published on all their social media platforms and on their website, which would refute the declarations made in relation to a so-called Kanak tradition that would require victims of sexual violence to ask their perpetrators for forgiveness in some tribes;
• The deletion of this misinformation in the interviews published by France Info and France 24, with an explanatory note; and
• A right of reply in the media that published this information, France Info and France 24, in order to deny these harmful declarations and enable the women who are involved in the struggle against sexist and sexual violence in Kanaky/New Caledonia to have their voices heard nationally.

Our primary aim remains social justice in our country, and it is only attainable if we pay attention to all the axes of oppression, including the ways in which colonialism and racism play a significant role in the oppression of women.

Racism and colonialism also impact [on] our relations as militants, advocates, members of feminist associations, and particularly when it comes to North/South and Hexagone/Overseas territories relations.

This requires that for all collaborative work with associations, groups and collective that are not based in our territories, there is a shared understanding of our historical and political contexts and of the power dynamics at play, an attention paid to not reproducing harmful discourses which participate in the silencing of colonised women, and the consideration of people who are involved in and from our territories as the most suitable to speak about the issues they face and struggle against.

Signatories
La Pause Décoloniale (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Union des Femmes Francophones d’Océanie (UFFO) NC (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Arnaud Chollet-Leakava, Porte-Parole du Mouvement des Océaniens Indépendantistes (MOI) (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Oriane Trolue, Chargée de la condition féminine de politique décoloniale du Mouvement des Océaniens Indépendantistes (MOI) (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Hugues Vhemavhe, Sénateur Coutumier de l’Aire Hoot Ma Whaap (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Rolande Trolue, feminist and resource person (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Fara Caillard, Marche Mondiale des Femmes (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Billy Wete, pastor (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Morgane Lepeu ép. Goromoedo (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Denis Pourawa, Kanak poet-writer (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Teva Avae, artist (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Ronny Kareni, West Papua Merdeka Support Network & Rise of the Morning Star (West Papua)
Florenda Nirikani, Militante Éducation Populaire CEMEA Pwârâ Wâro (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Virginie Murcia, president of the Union des Groupements Parents d’Élèves UGPE (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Doriane Nonmoira, Union des Femmes Francophone d’Océanie (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Wendy Nonke, Mouvement pour un Souriant Village Mélanésien (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Patrick Tara (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Justine-Rose Boaé Kéla (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Swänn Iché (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Laurent Lhermitte, Les Insoumis du Pacifique (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Raïssa Weiri (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Marie-Rose Yakobo, student (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Yvette Danguigny, Association Natte Kanak (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Nathanaëlle Maleko (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
David Robert, Union Calédonienne (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Alexia Babin (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Pierre Chanel Nonmoira, customary leader (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Gladys Nekiriai (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Sabrina Pwéré (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Xavier Nonmoira, young Kanak revolutionary (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Adeline Babin (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Ghislaine Pwapy (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Valentin Nemia (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Célestine Beleouvoudi (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Mériba Karé (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Présence Kanak (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Jacques Guione, Association Djors (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Ludmila Jean, Association Djors (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Yvette Poma (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Marie-Madeleine Guioné, Kanak woman (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Augusta Nonmoira, Kanak woman (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Lucien Sawaza (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Monique Poma (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Jean Rock Uhila (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Vaïana Tiaore, Corail Vivant Terre des Hommes (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Laurie Anne Le Pen (France)
Aaron Houchard Mitride (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Roger Nemia (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Atrune Palene (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Amandine Tieoue (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Iouanna Gopoea (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Sylviany M’boueri (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Valentine Wakanengo (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Simane (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Jacinthe Kaichou (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)
Romain Purue (Kanaky/Nouvelle-Calédonie)

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Pacific Media Watch.

A new media monitoring watchdog, Muslim Media Watch, published its first edition today featuring a cover story alleging that a Malaysian cult leader who was reportedly now in New Zealand could “create social unrest”.

Named as Suhaini bin Mohammad, he was allegedly posing as a Muslim religious leader and was said to be wanted by the authorities in Malaysia for “false teachings” that contradict Islam.

His cult ideology was identified by MMW as SiHulk, which was banned by the Johor State Religious Department (JAINJ) in 2021.

• READ MORE: Media, the courts, and terrorism: Lessons from the Christchurch mosque attacks – Gavin Ellis, Pacific Journalism Review
• Islam in the media: By the numbers

In an editorial, the 16-page publlcation said a need for “such a news outlet” as MMW had been shown after the mass shootings at two Christchurch mosques on 15 March 2019 and the Royal Commission inquiry that followed.

Fifty one people killed in the twin attacks were all Muslims attending the Islamic Friday prayer — “they were targeted solely because they were Muslims”.

The editorial noted “the shooter was motivated largely by online material. His last words before carrying out the shootings were: ‘Remember lads, subscribe to PewDiePie.'”

“It is therefore disappointing that, while acknowledging the role of the media in the shootings, none of the 44 recommendations in the government’s response to the [Royal Commission] relate to holding media to account for irresponsible reporting, or even mention media; the word does not appear in any recommendation,” writes editor Adam Brown.

Often not neutral
“Indeed, the word Muslim appears only once, in ‘Muslim Community Reference Group’.
It has long been acknowledged that media reporting of Muslims and Islam is often not neutral.”

The editorial cited an Australian example, a survey by OnePath Network Australia which tallied the number, percentage and tone of articles about Islam in Australian media in 2017, in particular newspapers owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp: The Daily Telegraph, The Australian, The Herald Sun, The Courier Mail and The Advertiser.

“Over the year, the report found that 2891 negative articles ran in those five newspapers, where Islam and Muslims were mentioned alongside words like violence, extremism, terrorism and radical. This equates to over eight articles per day for the whole year; 152 of those articles ran on the front page,” said the MMW editorial.

“The percentage of their opinion pieces that were Islamophobic ranged from 19 percent
to 64 percent.

“The average was 31 percent, nearly a third, with one writer reaching almost two thirds. Also, as OnePath comment, ‘Even though they are stated to be “opinion” pieces, they are often written as fact.'”

Editor Brown said the situation in New Zealand had not improved since the shootings.

“Biased and unfair reporting on Muslim matters continues, and retractions are not always forthcoming,” he wrote.

Examples highlighted
The editorial said that the purpose of MMW was to highlight examples of media reporting — in New Zealand and overseas — that contained information about Islam that was not
accurate, or that was not neutrally reported.

It would also model ethical journalism and responsible reporting following Islamic practices and tradition.

MMW offered to conduct training sessions and to act as a resource for other media outlets.

On other pages, MMW reported about misrepresentation of Islam “being nothing new”, a challenge over a Listener article misrepresentation about girls’ education in Afghanistan, an emerging global culture of mass Iftar events, an offensive reference in a Ministry of Education textbook, and the ministry “acknowledges bias in teacher recruiting”, an article headlined “when are religious extremists not religious extremists”, and other issues.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Pacific Media Watch.

Florida-based independent journalist Tim Burke awoke on May 8, 2023, to the sound of FBI agents banging on the door of his Tampa home with a search warrant. By the time the raid ended approximately 10 hours later, agents had seized virtually all of the electronics in his newsroom.

The Tampa Bay Times reported that the raid was connected to a criminal probe into “alleged computer intrusions and intercepted communications at the Fox News Network.” At least six behind-the-scenes clips of former Fox host Tucker Carlson were leaked over the past year. The broadcaster has asserted that it did not authorize the release of the footage and that its systems could have been hacked.

Burke, who worked previously at Deadspin and The Daily Beast, has made a career of capturing publicly available livestreams. The Times reported that he launched Burke Communications in 2019, offering contract work and consulting, as well as access to his 181,000-gigabyte video archive.

According to the search warrant for his home, which was unsealed on May 26, officers were authorized to seize all of Burke’s electronics or physical records of alleged violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. The warrant also stipulated that officers could force residents to unlock devices enabled with biometrics, including fingerprints or facial recognition.

In total, federal agents seized nine computers, seven hard drives, four cellphones and four notebooks from Burke’s home and the guest house that serves as his office. Two computers belonging to Lynn Hurtak, Burke’s wife and a Tampa City Council member, were also seized, along with a third that the couple both used, Burke told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker in August.

Attorney Mark Rasch, who is representing Burke and created the Justice Department’s Computer Crime Unit, denied any criminal behavior by Burke.

“Hacking is not simply obtaining information that someone would rather you not,” Rasch told the Tracker. “And hacking is also not going to a website that someone would prefer that you not or finding information that they would prefer that you not.”

Rasch said that Burke uses no special software or tools to access or record live feeds, and that viewing them does not require a username or password. Rather, Burke has cultivated search skills and sources that direct him to the URLs where they are publicly visible.

Burke told the Tracker that he’s worked as an assignment editor his entire career, and sees his current work as an extension of that: sifting through content to identify newsworthy material for publication.

“I have always promoted my approach of taking video in its most raw nature as being the best we have when it comes to veracity,” Burke said. “The raw video is the truth. That’s what journalism is, that’s what we’re reporting.”

But Burke told the Tracker that the seizure of his electronics has made it impossible for him to continue his journalistic work.

“It’s very difficult for me to do most of the things that I do as a journalist without my contacts that are on my phone or without the video editing softwares that are on my computer,” Burke said. “I just want to get back to doing this thing that I’ve dedicated my life to.”

The seizures also caused Burke to be locked out of his email, social media, banking and other important accounts. According to Rasch, federal prosecutors asked that Burke waive his Fifth Amendment rights and provide the passcode to his cellphone so it could be cloned. Burke refused.

Burke told the Tracker that prosecutors later said they no longer needed the passcode, and allowed him to access the device to transfer the two-factor authentication applications he needed.

On July 21, Rasch filed a motion for the return of Burke’s devices and to unseal the affidavit submitted in support of the search warrant, which he believes will provide insights into the basis on which Burke is being investigated.

Rasch also highlighted that multiple Justice Department officials — including the U.S. attorney general — are required to approve searches involving journalists or newsrooms, and details of whether investigators followed that procedure should be in the affidavit.

The government response to Rasch’s motion is due by Aug. 9, according to court records.

This content originally appeared on U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database and was authored by U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database.

An Indonesian court has held a hearing to consider whether the ailing former Papua Governor, Lukas Enembe, is well enough to go on trial for the allegations of bribery and gratification that he is facing.

The hearing was held in the Central Jakarta District Court yesterday to consider a second medical opinion provided by the Indonesian Medical Association (IDI).

Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) public prosecutors read out the IDI medical report, which stated that the defendant Enembe was fit to face trial.

• READ MORE: Other Lukas Enembe reports

Former Governor Enembe was not present at the hearing and his lawyers and family protested against the second opinion of IDI’s decision, arguing that the judgment was not based on a proper medical report but rather a view formed and collected by KPK’s doctors through interviews.

The family refused to accept this result because they believe it did not accurately represent the medical issues facing the governor.

The governor’s lawyers contend that their client is seriously ill, and they have now received an accurate medical report from the army hospital’s specialist, who has been treating  Enembe for the past two weeks, since he was moved from KPK’s detention cell to Gatot Soebroto Army Central Hospital (RSPAD) in Jakarta on July 16 due to serious health concerns.

“As a result of the explanation given by the RSPAD doctor’s team who visited Mr Enembe’s in-patient room on Monday (24/7), it was determined that Mr Enembe’s kidney function had decreased dramatically. According to Bala Pattyona, Mr Enembe’s chronic kidney has deterorated rapidly,” reports ODIYAIWUU.com.

From army hospital to cell — emotional for family
Despite serious health concerns, on July 31 the KPK came to the Army hospital and picked up Enembe, taking him to KPK’s detention cell.

Enembe’s lawyer, Petrus Bala Pattyona, revealed an emotional atmosphere when Enembe was removed from the hospital.

His wife, siblings and other relatives who were at the RSPAD were reportedly crying.

“The governor was taken by wheelchair from his room to the ambulance,” Petrus told Kompas.com on Monday night.

Petrus said that before being picked up by the KPK prosecutors, the family had refused to sign administrative documents for Enembe’s departure from RSPAD.

“Because the person who brought Mr Enembe to the hospital was a KPK prosecutor, then they are the ones who are responsible for Mr Enembe’s discharge from the hospital,” said Pattyona.

The KPK officials signed the hospital discharge papers.

Health priority request
The governor’s lawyers asked for the unwell governor to remain in the city to prioritise his medical treatment.

In response to his deteriorating health, the governor’s legal advisory team sent a letter on Thursday, July 20, to the Jakarta District Court judges.

They requested that Lukas Enembe be granted city arrest status because of his serious life-threatening illness.

The letter was signed by the governor’s legal team, including Professor Dr OC Kaligis, Petrus Bala Pattyona, Cyprus A Tatali, Dr Purwaning M Yanuar, Cosmas E Refra, Antonius Eko Nugroho, Anny Andriani and Fernandes Ratu.

According to the governor’s senior lawyer, Professor Kaligis, the application was submitted on the grounds that Enembe’s health had not improved since he had been detained in KPK’s detention cell.

Professor Kaligis said: “Our client is suffering from many complicated, serious illnesses. His kidney disease has reached stage five, he has diabetes, and he has suffered from four strokes. He is suffering from low oxygen saturation, swelling in his legs, and other internal diseases.”

In a written statement, Kaligis said Enembe’s legal counsel requested the judges to consider bail for the governor. He pleaded with the legal authorities to empathise with Enembe’s suffering.

Suharto’s case a valuable lesson
Kaligis said that while defending the late Indonesian President Suharto, his party went to Geneva on 13 June 2000 and met with the Centre for Human Rights and specifically the Human Rights Officer, Mrs Eleanor Solo.

“During that time, I was accompanied by Dr Indriyanto Seno Adji and two members of the TVRI crew because a seriously ill individual would not be suitable to [be examined] at the trial. Regardless of accusations a person might be facing, no one should be subjected to inhumane or degrading conduct,” Kaligis said.

During Kaligis’s visit to Geneva, a human rights delegation visited the residence of Suharto, ensuring that the judge who tried Suharto, the late Chief Justice of South Jakarta State, Judge Lalu Mariun, stopped the examination after receiving a fatwa from the Supreme Court.

Because Lukas Enembe is incarcerated under the authority of a panel of judges — not the KPK — Profewsaor Kaligis said they were hopeful that the request would be granted.

According to Elius Enembe, the governor’s brother and spokesman for the governor’s family, the governor was in a critical condition.

Nothing good will come from returning him to KPK’s prison cells. This is bad news for us and given the governor requires full support in terms of care needs, KPK should be held responsible should something grave occur while under their council. The Papuan people and the world are watching. There is nothing more torturous than this.

On Wednesday, 26 July 2023, the governor had his birthday, turning 56.

What should have been a happy celebration with family and the people of his homeland was abandoned for a hospital bed.

The trial is due to resume next week.

Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

• Other Yamin Kogoya articles

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Suspended Papua Governor Lukas Enembe, who is detained in Indonesia on corruption charges, was supposed to go on trial yesterday but this did not go ahead as he is gravely ill and could not attend.

Upon realising the governor’s health had deteriorated, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) tried to transport him to Gatot Subroto Army Central Hospital (RSPAD) last Saturday.

However, the governor refused due to what he said was KPK’s “mishandling” of the legal case.

• READ MORE: Other Governor Enembe reports

A member of the Governor’s legal team, Petrus Bala Pattyona, said he had been contacted by the KPK prosecutor on Sunday.

Bala Pattyona was asked by the prosecutor to convince Enembe to be taken to the hospital. Enembe had not eaten for two days, was vomiting, nauseous, and dizzy, reports Odiyaiwuu.com.

The Governor is currently in an intensive care unit — suffering from a serious life-threatening illness.

Jakarta’s ‘legal mishandling’ of Governor
Governor Enembe was on trial a week ago on July 10, but public prosecutors failed to bring witnesses to the hearing.

After the trial was adjourned for another week until yesterday, he was taken to a KPK prison cell despite being seriously ill.

Prior to these two failed trial hearings, the Governor appeared in court on June 24.

However, the hearing wqs suspended after a panel of judges rejected Governor Enembe’s appeal for the charges to be waived.

Given the governor’s ill health, the judges ruled to prioritise his health and grant his request to suspend proceedings until he was medically fit to stand trial.

On June 12, an anticipated and highly publicised trial was scheduled to take place in Jakarta’s District Court. However, the trial was not held due to KPK’s mishandling of the ordeal.

To date, a total of nine attempts have been made to deliver a satisfactory closure of the Governor’s legal case since he was “kidnapped” from Papua in January 2023.

New August date set
The trial is now rescheduled for early August 2023. However, there is no guarantee that this will be the last hearing over what critics describe as a tragic and disgraceful mishandling of the case concerning a respected tribal chief and Governor who is fighting for his life.

For the government of Indonesia, KPK and judges, every moment that is mismanaged, mishandled, or delayed might mean just a delay in justice, but for the Governor and his family it means life and death.

According to the governor’s family, KPK are already waiting to bring this sick man back from hospital and lock him up in a KPK prison cell again.

The Governor’s family ask how could this “cruel treatment be happening”?

Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic/activist who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

• Other Yamin Kogoya articles

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

On May 5, as Chancellor Pradeep Khosla began his opening remarks at the 44th University of California San Diego Alumni Awards at the Museum of Contemporary Art San Diego, some 60 academic worker activists took the stage carrying a cardboard sign. They were there to present him with UC’s “Most Overpaid Worker” award; Khosla had received a $500,000 raise while, the union says, the university was simultaneously refusing to fully implement their recently ratified collective bargaining agreement. 

Khosla quickly left the stage amid chants of “Pradeep, Pradeep, the rent is too steep!” When the police arrived, the graduate students had relocated outdoors to the sidewalk where, separated by a glass wall, they continued chanting their demands: “What do we want? Our promised wages. When do we want them? Now!”

While the action ended peacefully, just over a month later, the university charged 59 graduate student workers from the event’s registration list with “physical assault,” “physical abuse and threats to health and safety,” and “disruption of university activities.” Almost half of the people accused deny even being in attendance. 

The university claims workers “bumped” Khosla and stole the microphone. The union disputes the allegations and points to a livestream of the action by a member, which, though blurry, does not show evidence of either charge. The students now face disciplinary hearings for the union action, which could result in probation or even expulsion from the university. 

It was the latest provocation by the university in what workers say is an escalating retaliation campaign against them since ratifying a collective bargaining agreement late last year. The university has now brought multiple sets of misconduct charges against students and workers following three separate union-led protests.

Michael Duff, a law professor at St. Louis University, said the repeated charges speak to a pattern. “You can’t see this in isolation. There’s been a pattern of retaliation against the members involved,” he said, noting that “the nature of this case seems overly aggressive.”

Nearly 50,000 academic workers across the University of California system went on strike for six weeks last winter, the largest higher education strike in U.S. history. They won substantial wage increases, unprecedented new protections against workplace bullying, and immigrant worker protections. 

But since ratifying their collective bargaining agreement last December, workers at UC San Diego say the university has not implemented aspects of their contract like establishing an office to process complaints of workplace misconduct or hiring workers at 50 percent of full-time employment, which is the standard appointment for graduate student researchers. Workers also say there have been dramatic reductions in teaching assistant appointments in certain departments and that two dozen students received unsatisfactory grades for participating in the strike.

“We signed a legally binding contract, and instead of implementing it, they’re trying to punish us.”

“We signed a legally binding contract, and instead of implementing it, they’re trying to punish us,” Udayan Tandon, who was recently elected as a unit chair of United Auto Workers Local 2865, told The Intercept.

Most recently, three UC San Diego graduate student workers were arrested by university police in their homes for writing pro-union slogans on the sidewalk during an action a month prior. Charged with conspiracy and vandalism, some union members believe the arrests are an extension of the pushback student workers have been facing on campus.

“Under the First Amendment, speech restrictions, which are based on the content of the speech, face strict scrutiny in the courts,” said Will Bloom, a labor lawyer who deals with First Amendment cases. It is “a standard that virtually no restrictions can survive,” he said. “It’s hard to imagine the university pursuing felony charges for kids chalking a hopscotch court on the sidewalk outside of the marine center.”

In a public statement on the arrests, university officials said, “UC San Diego supports its community members rights to voice their concerns lawfully. UC San Diego does not tolerate vandalism or other damage to university property.” While the union says it used “washable chalk,” the university claims the students used “materials other than chalk,” costing over $12,000 to repair.

The workers’ arraignment, scheduled for Monday, was delayed because the university has not submitted the cases for review with the district attorney’s office, which they have up to three years to do. As a result, no charges have been filed by the DA at this time. UAW locals 2865 and 5810 rallied outside the San Diego Court House prior to the scheduled hearing to demand the university drop the charges.

“Employers have certain rights to protect property, but the timing seems off to me,” said Duff. “I find it interesting they were immediately taken to jail” despite having left and gone home for a month prior to their arrests. “Normally there would be some legal process before [an arrest] would happen [at a separate location]. That strikes me as odd.”

After being held in custody for over 12 hours, Jessica Ng said she felt dehumanized. “You lose your autonomy,” said Ng, who is a postdoctoral scholar at Scripps Institution of Oceanography. “Chained to a chair, you have to ask for permission just to use the restroom or to drink water. I sat there for hours, deprived of sleep, not knowing what was going to happen.”

Ng said she doesn’t regret the union organizing she’s done and that “it’s on the university, which hasn’t been honoring our contracts. Instead of seeing our protests as a sign that they need to honor the contract, they’ve been trying to crack down on union activity.”

“It’s been a bit shocking to see just how far the university is willing to go,” fourth-year chemistry Ph.D. student Conor O’Herin told The Intercept. “We went on strike for six weeks, collectively bargained a fair contract, and now they’re refusing to abide by what they agreed to.”

According to workers, the university is pointing to financial strain to justify austerity measures, but Khosla’s half-million dollar raise — totaling nearly twice as much as the next highest paid UC president — says otherwise. The university, led by Khosla, also announced $1.1 billion plans for a new student center and campus housing.

“We are an essential component, and the university acts like it doesn’t have money to pay us while it expands its real estate empire.”

“We are an essential component,” said Daniel Primosch, a third-year Ph.D. student in physics, “and the university acts like it doesn’t have money to pay us while it expands its real estate empire.”

Soon after the contract ratification, workers began hearing about reductions in teaching assistant positions and incoming Ph.D.s from department heads. Last year, Adu Vengal said, the university admitted 44 doctoral candidates to the math department; this year, there were 10. And while historically, masters students would be given teaching assistant positions, the university changed that practice as well, only hiring doctoral students in the spring quarter. “A lot of masters students went on strike to get living wages,” explained Vengal, who is a third-year math Ph.D. student and recording secretary for United Auto Workers Local 2865. “Now they aren’t getting any wages.”

Instead, Vengal said, they began hiring more undergraduate tutors to do the work, which the union filed a grievance for. And then, “in May, the math department announced a restructure that would halve the number of [teaching assistants] per 100 students. After we grieved it, they said they would stop,” Vengal said, “but that’s exactly what this restructuring plan does.” The grievance has not yet been resolved.

These significant reductions in teaching assistant appointments come at the same time that the university has seen a major uptick in the undergraduate population, with an increase of 15,000 enrolled since Khosla took over.

Another major concern for graduate student workers is the university’s continued refusal to hire them at 50 percent of full-time. Their contract stipulates they be paid commensurate with their workloads of 20 hours per week, but in several departments at UC San Diego, workers are getting hired at arbitrary rates of 38 percent or 42 percent. Workers say this used to be common practice prior to the union, but now that it’s in the contract, it’s legally unacceptable. 

“They try to justify it by claiming we work less than 20 hours a week,” said Ahmed Akhtar, a sixth-year Ph.D. student in physics. “In reality, we work more than full-time, and they won’t even pay us for half that. The result is the accumulated theft of millions of dollars.” Workers say this is most common in STEM departments.

Udayan Tandon, left, protests with academic worker activists on May 5, 2023 in San Diego, Calif. “We signed a legally binding contract, and instead of implementing it, they’re trying to punish us,” Tandon said.

Photos: Courtesy of UAW 2865

On the eve of the strike, hundreds of workers received emails from professors warning them they would still need to attend “academic training” activities, which workers say would constitute crossing the picket line. 

Two dozen workers across three departments were given unsatisfactory, or “U,” grades for allegedly neglecting their schoolwork while participating in the strike, which could affect their current and future employment. The university has defended this practice against accusations of union busting by saying the “U” grade was assigned to them as students, not workers. Workers say the university’s manipulation of their dual-status is an effort to circumvent bargained rights and protections — and also pointed out that the class in which they received the “U” grade is a placeholder course to represent their research and that it does not have a syllabus, exams, or written classroom expectations.

On January 26, two overlapping groups of union activists, who say they were unable to successfully reach the professors who had given students “U” grades, “marched on the boss.” First, they approached chemistry professor Jeremy Klosterman, who workers said would not speak to them without conferring with university officials but did agree to a meeting in his office at a future date. Workers say when they arrived at his office for the meeting, a sticky note on the door said he was unavailable.

Then, graduate student workers went to speak with Primosch’s advisor, physics professor Massimiliano Di Ventra, who had recently been the subject of a letter from his former employees to the department asking that he be held accountable for an “abusive” and “punitive” advising style. Di Ventra described the comments in an email to The Intercept as “very hurtful” and “an attempt to maliciously harm my reputation.”

Akhtar said after Di Ventra refused to speak with them outside, students followed him and fellow physics professor Ivan Schuller into class, where they canceled the lecture and called the police. “We were entirely peaceful, but persistent in wanting to address the retaliation,” Akhtar said.

In an email to The Intercept, Di Ventra clarified it was his colleague who called the police because a “mob of around 30 students blocked me in my office for several minutes, yelling and pounding at my door, trying to open it.”

A few weeks later, the university sent misconduct charges to eight of the involved union activists, alleging disruption of university activities, physical abuse and threats to health and safety, and failure to comply and obstruction. The university eventually dropped the latter two, prosecuting the workers on the sole charge of disruption of university activities.

In the official UC San Diego student conduct review report that was produced as part of the trial, the responding police officer said he “did not interpret the crowd to be unruly, violent, or a threat to the campus community.” Despite Di Ventra telling the officer that he was “scared of what the students might do to him,” the report determined that there was no threat to physical health and safety.

On June 29, the accused workers, who Akhtar noted are all leaders in the union, were put on one-year probation, which bars them from participating in future “disruptive” protests under the threat of suspension or expulsion from their program.

O’Herin, who was one of the workers put on probation, said the disciplinary action can not only jeopardize the students’ enrollment, but also impact their decision to engage in union activity in the future. He added about the process, “It’s completely controlled by UC with no oversight from an outside body.” 

The jury, which consists of students and staff members, is overseen by a chair chosen by the university. “There is a veneer of neutrality, but the facilitator was clearly biased against the union. He went on a rant about how [union activists] need to take responsibility for their actions, which were inherently disruptive union tactics. This is the university intimidating us through a process which they have total control over.”

With the nearly 60 new misconduct trials just beginning, and now three separate legal cases, the two sides seem far from any resolution thought to be settled with a contract. Workers say they will continue to apply pressure on the university until they see the agreement honored.

Tandon, the unit chair — who has not yet had the administrative resolution meeting for his role in the alumni action, which is the first step in the student misconduct trial process — acknowledges organizing is not without risk. He is on a worker visa from India, which puts him in a precarious position as his visa is tied to his employment and education. But he says he’ll continue to fight alongside his co-workers, “not only because peaceful protest is protected by worker rights, but more importantly because I know 48,000 union members are standing right behind me. I’m confident knowing that.”

This content originally appeared on The Intercept and was authored by Peter Lucas.

On May 5, as Chancellor Pradeep Khosla began his opening remarks at the 44th University of California San Diego Alumni Awards at the Museum of Contemporary Art San Diego, some 60 academic worker activists took the stage carrying a cardboard sign. They were there to present him with UC’s “Most Overpaid Worker” award; Khosla had received a $500,000 raise while, the union says, the university was simultaneously refusing to fully implement their recently ratified collective bargaining agreement. 

Khosla quickly left the stage amid chants of “Pradeep, Pradeep, the rent is too steep!” When the police arrived, the graduate students had relocated outdoors to the sidewalk where, separated by a glass wall, they continued chanting their demands: “What do we want? Our promised wages. When do we want them? Now!”

While the action ended peacefully, just over a month later, the university charged 59 graduate student workers from the event’s registration list with “physical assault,” “physical abuse and threats to health and safety,” and “disruption of university activities.” Almost half of the people accused deny even being in attendance. 

The university claims workers “bumped” Khosla and stole the microphone. The union disputes the allegations and points to a livestream of the action by a member, which, though blurry, does not show evidence of either charge. The students now face disciplinary hearings for the union action, which could result in probation or even expulsion from the university. 

It was the latest provocation by the university in what workers say is an escalating retaliation campaign against them since ratifying a collective bargaining agreement late last year. The university has now brought multiple sets of misconduct charges against students and workers following three separate union-led protests.

Michael Duff, a law professor at St. Louis University, said the repeated charges speak to a pattern. “You can’t see this in isolation. There’s been a pattern of retaliation against the members involved,” he said, noting that “the nature of this case seems overly aggressive.”

Nearly 50,000 academic workers across the University of California system went on strike for six weeks last winter, the largest higher education strike in U.S. history. They won substantial wage increases, unprecedented new protections against workplace bullying, and immigrant worker protections. 

But since ratifying their collective bargaining agreement last December, workers at UC San Diego say the university has not implemented aspects of their contract like establishing an office to process complaints of workplace misconduct or hiring workers at 50 percent of full-time employment, which is the standard appointment for graduate student researchers. Workers also say there have been dramatic reductions in teaching assistant appointments in certain departments and that two dozen students received unsatisfactory grades for participating in the strike.

“We signed a legally binding contract, and instead of implementing it, they’re trying to punish us.”

“We signed a legally binding contract, and instead of implementing it, they’re trying to punish us,” Udayan Tandon, who was recently elected as a unit chair of United Auto Workers Local 2865, told The Intercept.

Most recently, three UC San Diego graduate student workers were arrested by university police in their homes for writing pro-union slogans on the sidewalk during an action a month prior. Charged with conspiracy and vandalism, some union members believe the arrests are an extension of the pushback student workers have been facing on campus.

“Under the First Amendment, speech restrictions, which are based on the content of the speech, face strict scrutiny in the courts,” said Will Bloom, a labor lawyer who deals with First Amendment cases. It is “a standard that virtually no restrictions can survive,” he said. “It’s hard to imagine the university pursuing felony charges for kids chalking a hopscotch court on the sidewalk outside of the marine center.”

In a public statement on the arrests, university officials said, “UC San Diego supports its community members rights to voice their concerns lawfully. UC San Diego does not tolerate vandalism or other damage to university property.” While the union says it used “washable chalk,” the university claims the students used “materials other than chalk,” costing over $12,000 to repair.

The workers’ arraignment, scheduled for Monday, was delayed because the university has not submitted the cases for review with the district attorney’s office, which they have up to three years to do. As a result, no charges have been filed by the DA at this time. UAW locals 2865 and 5810 rallied outside the San Diego Court House prior to the scheduled hearing to demand the university drop the charges.

“Employers have certain rights to protect property, but the timing seems off to me,” said Duff. “I find it interesting they were immediately taken to jail” despite having left and gone home for a month prior to their arrests. “Normally there would be some legal process before [an arrest] would happen [at a separate location]. That strikes me as odd.”

After being held in custody for over 12 hours, Jessica Ng said she felt dehumanized. “You lose your autonomy,” said Ng, who is a postdoctoral scholar at Scripps Institution of Oceanography. “Chained to a chair, you have to ask for permission just to use the restroom or to drink water. I sat there for hours, deprived of sleep, not knowing what was going to happen.”

Ng said she doesn’t regret the union organizing she’s done and that “it’s on the university, which hasn’t been honoring our contracts. Instead of seeing our protests as a sign that they need to honor the contract, they’ve been trying to crack down on union activity.”

“It’s been a bit shocking to see just how far the university is willing to go,” fourth-year chemistry Ph.D. student Conor O’Herin told The Intercept. “We went on strike for six weeks, collectively bargained a fair contract, and now they’re refusing to abide by what they agreed to.”

According to workers, the university is pointing to financial strain to justify austerity measures, but Khosla’s half-million dollar raise — totaling nearly twice as much as the next highest paid UC president — says otherwise. The university, led by Khosla, also announced $1.1 billion plans for a new student center and campus housing.

“We are an essential component, and the university acts like it doesn’t have money to pay us while it expands its real estate empire.”

“We are an essential component,” said Daniel Primosch, a third-year Ph.D. student in physics, “and the university acts like it doesn’t have money to pay us while it expands its real estate empire.”

Soon after the contract ratification, workers began hearing about reductions in teaching assistant positions and incoming Ph.D.s from department heads. Last year, Adu Vengal said, the university admitted 44 doctoral candidates to the math department; this year, there were 10. And while historically, masters students would be given teaching assistant positions, the university changed that practice as well, only hiring doctoral students in the spring quarter. “A lot of masters students went on strike to get living wages,” explained Vengal, who is a third-year math Ph.D. student and recording secretary for United Auto Workers Local 2865. “Now they aren’t getting any wages.”

Instead, Vengal said, they began hiring more undergraduate tutors to do the work, which the union filed a grievance for. And then, “in May, the math department announced a restructure that would halve the number of [teaching assistants] per 100 students. After we grieved it, they said they would stop,” Vengal said, “but that’s exactly what this restructuring plan does.” The grievance has not yet been resolved.

These significant reductions in teaching assistant appointments come at the same time that the university has seen a major uptick in the undergraduate population, with an increase of 15,000 enrolled since Khosla took over.

Another major concern for graduate student workers is the university’s continued refusal to hire them at 50 percent of full-time. Their contract stipulates they be paid commensurate with their workloads of 20 hours per week, but in several departments at UC San Diego, workers are getting hired at arbitrary rates of 38 percent or 42 percent. Workers say this used to be common practice prior to the union, but now that it’s in the contract, it’s legally unacceptable. 

“They try to justify it by claiming we work less than 20 hours a week,” said Ahmed Akhtar, a sixth-year Ph.D. student in physics. “In reality, we work more than full-time, and they won’t even pay us for half that. The result is the accumulated theft of millions of dollars.” Workers say this is most common in STEM departments.

Udayan Tandon, left, protests with academic worker activists on May 5, 2023 in San Diego, Calif. “We signed a legally binding contract, and instead of implementing it, they’re trying to punish us,” Tandon said.

Photos: Courtesy of UAW 2865

On the eve of the strike, hundreds of workers received emails from professors warning them they would still need to attend “academic training” activities, which workers say would constitute crossing the picket line. 

Two dozen workers across three departments were given unsatisfactory, or “U,” grades for allegedly neglecting their schoolwork while participating in the strike, which could affect their current and future employment. The university has defended this practice against accusations of union busting by saying the “U” grade was assigned to them as students, not workers. Workers say the university’s manipulation of their dual-status is an effort to circumvent bargained rights and protections — and also pointed out that the class in which they received the “U” grade is a placeholder course to represent their research and that it does not have a syllabus, exams, or written classroom expectations.

On January 26, two overlapping groups of union activists, who say they were unable to successfully reach the professors who had given students “U” grades, “marched on the boss.” First, they approached chemistry professor Jeremy Klosterman, who workers said would not speak to them without conferring with university officials but did agree to a meeting in his office at a future date. Workers say when they arrived at his office for the meeting, a sticky note on the door said he was unavailable.

Then, graduate student workers went to speak with Primosch’s advisor, physics professor Massimiliano Di Ventra, who had recently been the subject of a letter from his former employees to the department asking that he be held accountable for an “abusive” and “punitive” advising style. Di Ventra described the comments in an email to The Intercept as “very hurtful” and “an attempt to maliciously harm my reputation.”

Akhtar said after Di Ventra refused to speak with them outside, students followed him and fellow physics professor Ivan Schuller into class, where they canceled the lecture and called the police. “We were entirely peaceful, but persistent in wanting to address the retaliation,” Akhtar said.

In an email to The Intercept, Di Ventra clarified it was his colleague who called the police because a “mob of around 30 students blocked me in my office for several minutes, yelling and pounding at my door, trying to open it.”

A few weeks later, the university sent misconduct charges to eight of the involved union activists, alleging disruption of university activities, physical abuse and threats to health and safety, and failure to comply and obstruction. The university eventually dropped the latter two, prosecuting the workers on the sole charge of disruption of university activities.

In the official UC San Diego student conduct review report that was produced as part of the trial, the responding police officer said he “did not interpret the crowd to be unruly, violent, or a threat to the campus community.” Despite Di Ventra telling the officer that he was “scared of what the students might do to him,” the report determined that there was no threat to physical health and safety.

On June 29, the accused workers, who Akhtar noted are all leaders in the union, were put on one-year probation, which bars them from participating in future “disruptive” protests under the threat of suspension or expulsion from their program.

O’Herin, who was one of the workers put on probation, said the disciplinary action can not only jeopardize the students’ enrollment, but also impact their decision to engage in union activity in the future. He added about the process, “It’s completely controlled by UC with no oversight from an outside body.” 

The jury, which consists of students and staff members, is overseen by a chair chosen by the university. “There is a veneer of neutrality, but the facilitator was clearly biased against the union. He went on a rant about how [union activists] need to take responsibility for their actions, which were inherently disruptive union tactics. This is the university intimidating us through a process which they have total control over.”

With the nearly 60 new misconduct trials just beginning, and now three separate legal cases, the two sides seem far from any resolution thought to be settled with a contract. Workers say they will continue to apply pressure on the university until they see the agreement honored.

Tandon, the unit chair — who has not yet had the administrative resolution meeting for his role in the alumni action, which is the first step in the student misconduct trial process — acknowledges organizing is not without risk. He is on a worker visa from India, which puts him in a precarious position as his visa is tied to his employment and education. But he says he’ll continue to fight alongside his co-workers, “not only because peaceful protest is protected by worker rights, but more importantly because I know 48,000 union members are standing right behind me. I’m confident knowing that.”

This content originally appeared on The Intercept and was authored by Peter Lucas.

An Indonesian court hearing was held at Tipikor Court, Jakarta, last week when suspended Papuan Governor Lukas Enembe was arraigned before a panel of judges on allegations of bribery and gratification over the Papua provincial infrastructure project.

The panel of judges refused Enembe’s exception, or memorandum of objection, to the charges after finding sufficient evidence to reject the governor’s arguments.

However, given the governor’s ill health, the judges ruled to prioritise his health and grant his request to suspend proceedings until he is medically fit to stand trial.

• READ MORE: Papua governor Lukas Enembe’s legal drama and tragedy in Jakarta
• Other reports about Governor Enembe

The governor’s request to have his son’s Melbourne-based university student bank account unblocked to continue his studies was not granted, and his legal case is pending.

The following three points were determined by the judges last Monday week (24 June 2023):

1. Granted the access request of the defendant/the defendant’s legal advisory team;
2. Ordered the Public Prosecutor at the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) to object to the detention of Lukas Enembe from 26 June to 9 July 2023; and
3. Ordered the Public Prosecutor at the commission to report on the progress of the defendant’s health to court.

Abandoned in Indonesia’s military hospital
Governor Lukas Enembe is now being held in Indonesia’s military hospital (Gatot Soebroto Army Hospital) in Jakarta.

The governor repeatedly informed the Indonesian authorities that he was in need of medical treatment and needed to be monitored in Singapore by his regular medical specialists. These requests, however, have been rejected to date.

Psychologically, his treatment in Singapore is completely different from that in Jakarta. The governor is constantly being monitored by KPK, treated by KPK’s appointed doctors in military-controlled hospitals.

It is highly unlikely that these environments are ideal for his recovery. The hospital where he is currently being held is named after a national hero of Indonesia, Gatot Soebroto.

In 1819, the hospital was established as the main hospital for the Indonesian Army. The hospital also provides limited services for civilians. Papua’s governor, the head of the Papuan tribes, is now being held in this military hospital.

The governor’s family complains about the ongoing inhumane treatment.

The governor’s family admits that it was difficult for them to care for him while he was abandoned at Gatot Subroto Army Central Hospital, as determined by a panel of judges from the Jakarta Corruption Court (Tipikor).

Restrictions imposed
Governor Enembe’s family said the detention officers imposed restrictions on them.

Elius Enembe, the governor’s brother, and family spokesperson, said: “KPK Detention Centre regulations allow us to visit Mr Lukas only on Mondays. It was only for two hours.”

According to Elius, the family feels that two hours of treatment a week are not adequate and not optimal for treatment, reports Odiyaiwuu.com.

Governor Enembe is currently under the custody of the judicial system, not KPK. Thus it is the judge, and not the KPK, who has the authority to determine when and how long the family is allowed to visit Enembe.

“But why are we restricted by KPK detention officers now?” Elius said.

Even in the courtroom, the judge explained that Mr Lukas’ treatment at the hospital follows standard hospital operating procedures and not KPK detention procedures.

Moreover, the KPK prosecutor was present in the courtroom and was able to hear the judge’s statement that Lukas Enembe’s delivery followed hospital procedures, not those at the KPK detention facility.

Family objections
Because of this, Elius said, the family strongly objected to the restrictions placed by KPK detention officers on the days and hours of Enembe’s visit.

According to Elius, Lukas Enembe’s ongoing trial would undoubtedly be a unique legal cases both in Indonesia and internationally.

Lukas Enembe, who suffers from various serious health conditions, such as chronic kidney disease — stage 5, suffered four strokes, and has hepatitis, and is being abandoned at Gatot Soebroto Hospital. His physical condition is very poor, and his legs are swollen.

He is the only defendant who has appeared before the court barefoot and wearing training pants. As well as being the only defendant accompanied by a lawyer in the defendant’s seat, he was also the only defendant whose defence memorandum was not read by himself or by a lawyer.

Governor Lukas Enembe has difficulty speaking after suffering the strokes and needs to use the bathroom frequently.

“This will undoubtedly be a historical record in itself, a citizen of this country [with senior official roles] . . .  ranging from the Deputy Regent of Puncak to the two-term Governor of Papua, and yet has been treated as a criminal,” said Enembe’s younger brother in Jakarta, reports Kompas.com.

KPK continues to issue new accusations and allegations, which are being widely reported by Indonesia’s national media.

Case takes new turn
The corruption case against Governor Lukas Enembe, however, took a new turn when allegations of misappropriation of the Papuan Regional Budget (APBD) funds emerged, according to Busnis.com.

The governor’s senior lawyer, Professor O C Kaligis, challenged KPK’s new allegations as “tendentious and misleading”, reports Innews.co.

KPK is now investigating a massive sport, cultural, and recreational complex built under Lukas Enembe’s administration and named the Lukas Enembe Stadium.

The governor has only been given until July 6 to get some treatment for his deteriorating health.

There is an element of brutality, savagery, and mercilessness in Jakarta’s treatment of this Papuan leader.

The once highly acclaimed Papuan tribal chief, governor, and leader not just of his people, but of Indonesians and Melanesian as well many people, is being locked up and tortured in Jakarta as if he is a “dangerous terrorist’.

As his family, Papuans, lawyers, and he himself have warned, if he dies the KPK would be responsible for his death.

Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic/activist who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

• Other Yamin Kogoya articles

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

A woman who was part of a group kidnapped in Papua New Guinea in February has spoken out after the kidnapping and reported rape of 17 schoolgirls in the same area of Southern Highlands earlier this month.

Cathy Alex, the New Zealand-born Australian academic Bryce Barker and two female researchers, were taken in the Mt Bosavi region and held for ransom.

They were all released when the Papua New Guinea government paid a ransom of US$28,000 to the kidnappers to secure their release.

• LISTEN TO RNZ PACIFIC WAVES: Cathy Alex’s kidnapping story
• Other PNG kidnapping reports

Alex, who heads the Advancing Women’s Leaders’ Network, said that what the 17 abducted girls had gone through prompted her to speak out, after the country, she believed, had done nothing.

A local said family members of the girls negotiated with the captors and were eventually able to secure their release.

The villagers reportedly paid an undisclosed amount of cash and a few pigs as the ransom.

Alex said she and the other women in her group had feared they would be raped when they were kidnapped.

‘My life preserved’
“My life was preserved even though there was a time where the three of us were pushed to go into the jungle so they could do this to us.

“We chose death over being raped. Maybe the men will not understand, but for a woman or a girl rape is far worse than death.”

Alex said they had had received a commitment that they would not be touched, so the revelations about what happened to the teenage girls was horrifying.

She said her experience gave her some insight into the age and temperament of the kidnappers.

“Young boys, 16 and up, a few others. No Tok Pisin, no English. It’s a generation that’s been out there that has had no opportunities. What is happening in Bosavi is a glimpse, a dark glimpse of where our country is heading to.”

The teenage girls from the most recent kidnapping are now safe and being cared for but they cannot return to their village because it is too dangerous.

Need for focus
Cathy Alex said there was a need for a focus on providing services to the rural areas as soon as possible.

She said people were resilient and could change, as long as the right leadership was provided.

Bosavi is one of the remotest areas in PNG, with no roads and few services

It suffered significant damage during earthquake in 2018.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

A woman who was part of a group kidnapped in Papua New Guinea in February has spoken out after the kidnapping and reported rape of 17 schoolgirls in the same area of Southern Highlands earlier this month.

Cathy Alex, the New Zealand-born Australian academic Bryce Barker and two female researchers, were taken in the Mt Bosavi region and held for ransom.

They were all released when the Papua New Guinea government paid a ransom of US$28,000 to the kidnappers to secure their release.

• LISTEN TO RNZ PACIFIC WAVES: Cathy Alex’s kidnapping story
• Other PNG kidnapping reports

Alex, who heads the Advancing Women’s Leaders’ Network, said that what the 17 abducted girls had gone through prompted her to speak out, after the country, she believed, had done nothing.

A local said family members of the girls negotiated with the captors and were eventually able to secure their release.

The villagers reportedly paid an undisclosed amount of cash and a few pigs as the ransom.

Alex said she and the other women in her group had feared they would be raped when they were kidnapped.

‘My life preserved’
“My life was preserved even though there was a time where the three of us were pushed to go into the jungle so they could do this to us.

“We chose death over being raped. Maybe the men will not understand, but for a woman or a girl rape is far worse than death.”

Alex said they had had received a commitment that they would not be touched, so the revelations about what happened to the teenage girls was horrifying.

She said her experience gave her some insight into the age and temperament of the kidnappers.

“Young boys, 16 and up, a few others. No Tok Pisin, no English. It’s a generation that’s been out there that has had no opportunities. What is happening in Bosavi is a glimpse, a dark glimpse of where our country is heading to.”

The teenage girls from the most recent kidnapping are now safe and being cared for but they cannot return to their village because it is too dangerous.

Need for focus
Cathy Alex said there was a need for a focus on providing services to the rural areas as soon as possible.

She said people were resilient and could change, as long as the right leadership was provided.

Bosavi is one of the remotest areas in PNG, with no roads and few services

It suffered significant damage during earthquake in 2018.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Last Monday, suspended Papua Governor Lukas Enembe was indicted on gratification, bribery and corruption charges in Indonesia’s central Corruption Criminal Court in Jakarta.

Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) prosecutors accused and charged Governor Enembe of accepting bribes totalling Rp 45.8 billion (US$3 million) and gratuities worth Rp 1 billion (US$65,000).

Tomorrow the ailing former high official will know the judges’ rulings and responses to his requests.

• READ MORE: Accused of accepting a bribe of Rp. 45.8 billion, Lukas Enembe is angry in the courtroom
• Critical D-day over Papua governor Lukas Enembe’s legal nightmare?
• Other Lukas Enembe reports

Prosecutors argued that these funds came from private infrastructure development companies in West Papua.

As the Governor of Papua Province, Enembe, along with his subordinates Mikael Kambuaya and Gerius One Yoman, are accused of giving the bribe in order to obtain the companies used by Piton Enumbi and Rijatono Lakka for the 2013-2022 procurement project within the Papua Provincial government.

Enembe was charged under Article 12a and Article 12b of Law 31 of 1999 regarding the Eradication of Corrupt Criminal Acts, Kompas.com reports.

A barefooted Governor Enembe sat in the middle of the courtroom beside his lawyer Petrus Balapationa, looking directly at the panel of judges. Both of his defence attorneys and KPK prosecutors were seated on opposite sides of the courtroom.

‘Empty speeches, trickery’
During the 2.5 hour hearing, the governor shouted angrily at the KPK’s prosecutors, asking, “Woi (hey) — lying, where did I receive (Rp 45 billion)?” . . . “Not right, not right, empty speeches, you’re lying, empty speeches, trickery and lying, where did I get it?,” Lukas Enembe said during his indictment reading, reports Kompas.com.

The governor’s lawyer Petrus Balapationa read out statements of objections written by Enembe in response to the allegations and charges.

“I am being vilified, dehumanised, impoverished and made destitute,” said the governor in his statement to the judges and prosecutors, raising 32 objections to the indictment. He said:

“To all my Papuan people. I, the Governor, whom you have elected twice, I am the traditional chief, I have been vilified, dehumanised, demonised, mistreated and, I have been [made] destitute and impoverished.

“I, Lukas Enembe, never stole state money, never took bribes, yet the KPK provides false information and manipulates public opinion as if I were the most notorious criminal.

“I have been accused of being a gambler. Even if this were true, it is a general criminal offence, KPK does not have the authority to investigate gambling issues. Even the alleged bribe of one billion dollars in my indictment grew into a bribe of tens of billions of rupiah, resulting in the confiscation of all my savings.

“Not only was my money confiscated, but also the money of my wife and children. Even though I have emphasised in my BAP (minutes of the legal examination) that the one billion rupiah is my personal money and does not constitute bribes or gratuities.

“On my oath as a witness against defendant Rijatono Lakkadi in court on May 16, 2023, I explained the same statement.

“Once again, I dare to declare that the one billion rupiah is not the result of a bribe that Rijatono Lakka gave me at my request. I have never given Rijatono Lakka facilities, Rijatono Lakka’s wealth has come from his own work.

‘Cruel treatment’
“I have never interfered in the tender process of the procurement of goods and services, nor do I know the participants of the Electronic Tender since I created the E-Tender process to prevent the participation of KKN (Corruption, Collusion and Nepotism) in the tender process.

“Not only was I the target of the pensoliman (cruelty and inhumane treatment), but my wife and son were also called as witnesses for me, despite their refusal to cooperate which is protected by the constitution.”

The governor continued to protest against the KPK’s arrest of Dr Stefanus Roy Rening, one of his lawyers who had defended Enembe against the allegations and the attempt to arrest him September last year.

“It was also difficult for me to comprehend that my lawyer, Dr Stefanus Roy Rening, was made a suspect, obstructing the examination, despite the fact that he did not accompany the witnesses and stated that because of the statements made by Dr Stefanus Roy Rening who had defended me in public, which could affect the testimony of witnesses. He (Dr Roy) did not accompany the witnesses of my case.

“Is it possible for Dr Stefanus Roy Rening to influence witnesses when they are not accompanied by a lawyer and at the end of every witness BAP [statement] a sentence is included stating that the witness’ testimony is free from influence, and it is the witness’ own testimony without any influence from others?”

The governor concluded his statement of objections by stating:

“What I have explained and [with] the facts stated above, I have the right in this court to be treated fairly, not to be slandered, vilified, or impoverished, as I have been accused of gambling to the tens of hundreds of millions in Singapore, despite the fact that no one has ever given a statement about gambling, or that I was involved in the purchase of KKB weapons (arms for West Papuan freedom fighters) by a pilot arrested in the Philippines.”

Lawyers’ objection letter
An objection letter by the governor’s legal team was released last Thursday stating:

Lukas Enembe’s senior lawyer, OC Kaligis, expressed his objection to KPK officials’ attitude during the trial at the Jakarta District Court, Thursday (22 June 2023). Lukas Enembe’s legal counsel have only been able to consult with him for two hours a week since he has been detained.

Is it possible that legal counsel will only be given two hours of visitation time per week? Kaligis stated that the two-hour period was insufficient for discussing all the witnesses in the case file (184 witnesses) and the 1024 minutes of seizure according to Article 129 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

According to Kaligis, his defence counsel had the right to provide legal assistance, as per Article 56 of the Criminal Procedure Code, in order to determine whether there were any witnesses who directly gave bribes or gratuities to Lukas Enembe.

“The [details] in this case need to be explained carefully to Lukas Enembe, with adequate time. Two hours of consultation each week is definitely not enough,” said Kaligis.

Kaligis stated that on June 19, 2023, following the indictment, when legal counsel sought to meet with Lukas Enembe, the time given was very short, and a KPK official who claimed to be the Public Prosecutor closely monitored the meeting.

“Even though the legal counsel had requested that the seating be changed in the same area, the Public Prosecutor arrogantly still forbids, despite the fact that the panel of judges before the court had stated that we can meet Lukas Enembe after the hearing. Particularly now that the power of detention lies with the panel of judges and not with the KPK anymore,” said Kaligis.

Detention visits
His legal team requested that the panel of judges allow him to visit Lukas Enembe at the KPK detention centre every day before his trial.

“The legal counsel team filed an application with the panel of judges, as the extension of detention is now within the jurisdiction of the court and is no longer under the authority of the KPK. The KPK prohibited us from meeting Lukas Enembe in court, everything was done based on the KPK’s power and arrogance.

“Doesn’t that violate Article 56 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, granting a right to legal counsel to consult the law?” Kaligis said.

Governor Enembe’s ordeal has been characterised by numerous twists and turns as the KPK, doctors, the governor himself, and the defence legal team strive to find a resolution to these problems.

The situation is made worse by the fact that in Indonesia the lines between law enforcement agencies, KPK officials, medical doctors, and judges are blurred in a country notoriously known for corruption and impunity from top officials to local mayors.

Dealing with cases like Lukas Enembe is even worse — coming from Indonesia’s most contested territory — West Papua.

Legal system questioned
indeed, this case undermines the whole foundation of the Indonesian legal system.

Judging whether Papua’s governor is guilty or not within Indonesia’s legal system — which regards Papuans as being “illegal” in managing Papuan affairs — is always going to be perceived with suspicion from the Papuan side.

What has broken down between Papuans and Indonesia’s government for the past 60 years is trust.

Unfortunately, Governor Lukas and every Papuan considered to be breaking Indonesian laws, must face the Indonesian legal system. This in itself is so ironic and demoralising for Papuans, as every moral, ethical and legal framework Jakarta employs is viewed as fraught by Papuans within the West Papua sovereignty disputes in Indonesia.

Jakarta’s criminalisation of Papuans is like criminalising innocents and accusing them of breaking the law through the perpetrator’s legal system.

This is due to the fact that the Indonesian government has a long history of targeting Papuans for their political views and beliefs. This has led to an environment of fear and intimidation, where Papuans are often accused of crimes they did not commit and are treated harshly by the Indonesian legal system.

For more than 500 years, most indigenous people around the globe have been criminalised and exterminated since a series of Papal bulls (decrees) signed by European Catholic popes and Christian kings during the early period of European colonisation in the 1400s and 1500s.

Legal myths
They were legal myth conquests, civilising mission — the myth of discovery, myth of empty lands, and the myth of Terra Nullius.

It has been used to justify the exploitation of indigenous peoples, to strip them of their rights, and to deny them access to land and resources.

By criminalising the indigenous population, colonial authorities have maintained an unequal power dynamic and control over them. These colonial myths have had devastating consequences for the original inhabitants.

Today, Jakarta still propagates this myth in West Papua. Colonial myths have been made truer than truth, more real than reality, and unfortunately, indigenous leaders, such as Governor Lukas Enembe, have been swayed by them by their legal jargon, codes, numbers, symbols, grammar, and semantic power.

Currently there are three high profile Papuan leaders locked up in KPK’s prison cells — Papua Governor Lukas Enembe; the Regent of Mimika Regency, Eltinus Omaleng; and the Regent of Mamberamo Tengah Regency, Ricky Ham Pagawak. All are accused of corruption.

The status of the two regents remains unclear.

As for Governor Lukas Enembe, he requested that the judges take his deteriorating health seriously and that he receive medical assistance from specialists in Singapore, and not from KPK’s appointed general practitioners.

This is partially due to the breakdown of trust.

Further, the overnor has also requested that the block on the bank account of his son (a student based in Melbourne) be lifted in order for him to be able to continue his studies.

The judges are due to deliver their verdict tomorrow regarding the outcome of his requests and all charges against him.

Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic/activist who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

• Other Yamin Kogoya articles

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Last Monday, suspended Papua Governor Lukas Enembe was indicted on gratification, bribery and corruption charges in Indonesia’s central Corruption Criminal Court in Jakarta.

Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) prosecutors accused and charged Governor Enembe of accepting bribes totalling Rp 45.8 billion (US$3 million) and gratuities worth Rp 1 billion (US$65,000).

Tomorrow the ailing former high official will know the judges’ rulings and responses to his requests.

• READ MORE: Accused of accepting a bribe of Rp. 45.8 billion, Lukas Enembe is angry in the courtroom
• Critical D-day over Papua governor Lukas Enembe’s legal nightmare?
• Other Lukas Enembe reports

Prosecutors argued that these funds came from private infrastructure development companies in West Papua.

As the Governor of Papua Province, Enembe, along with his subordinates Mikael Kambuaya and Gerius One Yoman, are accused of giving the bribe in order to obtain the companies used by Piton Enumbi and Rijatono Lakka for the 2013-2022 procurement project within the Papua Provincial government.

Enembe was charged under Article 12a and Article 12b of Law 31 of 1999 regarding the Eradication of Corrupt Criminal Acts, Kompas.com reports.

A barefooted Governor Enembe sat in the middle of the courtroom beside his lawyer Petrus Balapationa, looking directly at the panel of judges. Both of his defence attorneys and KPK prosecutors were seated on opposite sides of the courtroom.

‘Empty speeches, trickery’
During the 2.5 hour hearing, the governor shouted angrily at the KPK’s prosecutors, asking, “Woi (hey) — lying, where did I receive (Rp 45 billion)?” . . . “Not right, not right, empty speeches, you’re lying, empty speeches, trickery and lying, where did I get it?,” Lukas Enembe said during his indictment reading, reports Kompas.com.

The governor’s lawyer Petrus Balapationa read out statements of objections written by Enembe in response to the allegations and charges.

“I am being vilified, dehumanised, impoverished and made destitute,” said the governor in his statement to the judges and prosecutors, raising 32 objections to the indictment. He said:

“To all my Papuan people. I, the Governor, whom you have elected twice, I am the traditional chief, I have been vilified, dehumanised, demonised, mistreated and, I have been [made] destitute and impoverished.

“I, Lukas Enembe, never stole state money, never took bribes, yet the KPK provides false information and manipulates public opinion as if I were the most notorious criminal.

“I have been accused of being a gambler. Even if this were true, it is a general criminal offence, KPK does not have the authority to investigate gambling issues. Even the alleged bribe of one billion dollars in my indictment grew into a bribe of tens of billions of rupiah, resulting in the confiscation of all my savings.

“Not only was my money confiscated, but also the money of my wife and children. Even though I have emphasised in my BAP (minutes of the legal examination) that the one billion rupiah is my personal money and does not constitute bribes or gratuities.

“On my oath as a witness against defendant Rijatono Lakkadi in court on May 16, 2023, I explained the same statement.

“Once again, I dare to declare that the one billion rupiah is not the result of a bribe that Rijatono Lakka gave me at my request. I have never given Rijatono Lakka facilities, Rijatono Lakka’s wealth has come from his own work.

‘Cruel treatment’
“I have never interfered in the tender process of the procurement of goods and services, nor do I know the participants of the Electronic Tender since I created the E-Tender process to prevent the participation of KKN (Corruption, Collusion and Nepotism) in the tender process.

“Not only was I the target of the pensoliman (cruelty and inhumane treatment), but my wife and son were also called as witnesses for me, despite their refusal to cooperate which is protected by the constitution.”

The governor continued to protest against the KPK’s arrest of Dr Stefanus Roy Rening, one of his lawyers who had defended Enembe against the allegations and the attempt to arrest him September last year.

“It was also difficult for me to comprehend that my lawyer, Dr Stefanus Roy Rening, was made a suspect, obstructing the examination, despite the fact that he did not accompany the witnesses and stated that because of the statements made by Dr Stefanus Roy Rening who had defended me in public, which could affect the testimony of witnesses. He (Dr Roy) did not accompany the witnesses of my case.

“Is it possible for Dr Stefanus Roy Rening to influence witnesses when they are not accompanied by a lawyer and at the end of every witness BAP [statement] a sentence is included stating that the witness’ testimony is free from influence, and it is the witness’ own testimony without any influence from others?”

The governor concluded his statement of objections by stating:

“What I have explained and [with] the facts stated above, I have the right in this court to be treated fairly, not to be slandered, vilified, or impoverished, as I have been accused of gambling to the tens of hundreds of millions in Singapore, despite the fact that no one has ever given a statement about gambling, or that I was involved in the purchase of KKB weapons (arms for West Papuan freedom fighters) by a pilot arrested in the Philippines.”

Lawyers’ objection letter
An objection letter by the governor’s legal team was released last Thursday stating:

Lukas Enembe’s senior lawyer, OC Kaligis, expressed his objection to KPK officials’ attitude during the trial at the Jakarta District Court, Thursday (22 June 2023). Lukas Enembe’s legal counsel have only been able to consult with him for two hours a week since he has been detained.

Is it possible that legal counsel will only be given two hours of visitation time per week? Kaligis stated that the two-hour period was insufficient for discussing all the witnesses in the case file (184 witnesses) and the 1024 minutes of seizure according to Article 129 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

According to Kaligis, his defence counsel had the right to provide legal assistance, as per Article 56 of the Criminal Procedure Code, in order to determine whether there were any witnesses who directly gave bribes or gratuities to Lukas Enembe.

“The [details] in this case need to be explained carefully to Lukas Enembe, with adequate time. Two hours of consultation each week is definitely not enough,” said Kaligis.

Kaligis stated that on June 19, 2023, following the indictment, when legal counsel sought to meet with Lukas Enembe, the time given was very short, and a KPK official who claimed to be the Public Prosecutor closely monitored the meeting.

“Even though the legal counsel had requested that the seating be changed in the same area, the Public Prosecutor arrogantly still forbids, despite the fact that the panel of judges before the court had stated that we can meet Lukas Enembe after the hearing. Particularly now that the power of detention lies with the panel of judges and not with the KPK anymore,” said Kaligis.

Detention visits
His legal team requested that the panel of judges allow him to visit Lukas Enembe at the KPK detention centre every day before his trial.

“The legal counsel team filed an application with the panel of judges, as the extension of detention is now within the jurisdiction of the court and is no longer under the authority of the KPK. The KPK prohibited us from meeting Lukas Enembe in court, everything was done based on the KPK’s power and arrogance.

“Doesn’t that violate Article 56 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, granting a right to legal counsel to consult the law?” Kaligis said.

Governor Enembe’s ordeal has been characterised by numerous twists and turns as the KPK, doctors, the governor himself, and the defence legal team strive to find a resolution to these problems.

The situation is made worse by the fact that in Indonesia the lines between law enforcement agencies, KPK officials, medical doctors, and judges are blurred in a country notoriously known for corruption and impunity from top officials to local mayors.

Dealing with cases like Lukas Enembe is even worse — coming from Indonesia’s most contested territory — West Papua.

Legal system questioned
indeed, this case undermines the whole foundation of the Indonesian legal system.

Judging whether Papua’s governor is guilty or not within Indonesia’s legal system — which regards Papuans as being “illegal” in managing Papuan affairs — is always going to be perceived with suspicion from the Papuan side.

What has broken down between Papuans and Indonesia’s government for the past 60 years is trust.

Unfortunately, Governor Lukas and every Papuan considered to be breaking Indonesian laws, must face the Indonesian legal system. This in itself is so ironic and demoralising for Papuans, as every moral, ethical and legal framework Jakarta employs is viewed as fraught by Papuans within the West Papua sovereignty disputes in Indonesia.

Jakarta’s criminalisation of Papuans is like criminalising innocents and accusing them of breaking the law through the perpetrator’s legal system.

This is due to the fact that the Indonesian government has a long history of targeting Papuans for their political views and beliefs. This has led to an environment of fear and intimidation, where Papuans are often accused of crimes they did not commit and are treated harshly by the Indonesian legal system.

For more than 500 years, most indigenous people around the globe have been criminalised and exterminated since a series of Papal bulls (decrees) signed by European Catholic popes and Christian kings during the early period of European colonisation in the 1400s and 1500s.

Legal myths
They were legal myth conquests, civilising mission — the myth of discovery, myth of empty lands, and the myth of Terra Nullius.

It has been used to justify the exploitation of indigenous peoples, to strip them of their rights, and to deny them access to land and resources.

By criminalising the indigenous population, colonial authorities have maintained an unequal power dynamic and control over them. These colonial myths have had devastating consequences for the original inhabitants.

Today, Jakarta still propagates this myth in West Papua. Colonial myths have been made truer than truth, more real than reality, and unfortunately, indigenous leaders, such as Governor Lukas Enembe, have been swayed by them by their legal jargon, codes, numbers, symbols, grammar, and semantic power.

Currently there are three high profile Papuan leaders locked up in KPK’s prison cells — Papua Governor Lukas Enembe; the Regent of Mimika Regency, Eltinus Omaleng; and the Regent of Mamberamo Tengah Regency, Ricky Ham Pagawak. All are accused of corruption.

The status of the two regents remains unclear.

As for Governor Lukas Enembe, he requested that the judges take his deteriorating health seriously and that he receive medical assistance from specialists in Singapore, and not from KPK’s appointed general practitioners.

This is partially due to the breakdown of trust.

Further, the overnor has also requested that the block on the bank account of his son (a student based in Melbourne) be lifted in order for him to be able to continue his studies.

The judges are due to deliver their verdict tomorrow regarding the outcome of his requests and all charges against him.

Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic/activist who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

• Other Yamin Kogoya articles

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

RNZ Pacific

The deposed Papua Governor Lukas Enembe has been indicted this week on charges of bribery, allegedly over about US$3 million.

The amount of bribes in this indictment is far greater than the Corruption Eradication Commission’s initial allegation, when naming Enembe as a suspect at the end of 2022.

The commission’s public prosecutor alleges that the money was given to the defendant in  an act that went against his duties.

• READ MORE: Critical D-day over Papua governor Lukas Enembe’s legal nightmare?
• Other Governor Enembe reports

However, Enembe and his legal team strongly deny the allegations.

The defence team said no credible evidence had been presented.

Enembe’s declining health has been a constant concern for his supporters, who claim the outspoken leader’s arrest in January was politically motivated.

Earlier this week, Asia Pacific Report correspondent Yamin Kogoya reported that Enembe faced a critical “D Day” hearing about his controversial case as he had been seen as a critic of the Indonesian administration in Papua.

“His drawn out ordeal has been full of drama and trauma,” reported Kogoya.

“There has been indecisiveness around the case and the hearing date has been repeatedly rescheduled — from 20 more days, to 40 more days, and now into months.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Papua New Guinea’s National Censorship Office has cracked down on gender-based violence by temporarily banning all songs by popular New Ireland artist Jason Suisui — popularly known as Jayrex — following complaints of assault and ongoing emotional abuse by his partner of four years and her family.

The Pacific reggae singer was earlier charged with causing grievous bodily harm, emotional distress and mental abuse through numerous phone calls, text messages and in the lyrics of his songs.

Relatives close to the woman told the Post-Courier newspaper that she was in a fragile state and was often suicidal.

• READ MORE: Other PNG music reports

A representative who works in the family sexual violence space described the musician’s actions as bullying, intimidation and “gaslighting”.

The representative commended the National Censorship Office for this “bold move”, saying it was hoped the office would start to curb and hold artists, musicians and content creators accountable and responsible for material, songs, videos they produced for the public.

Gaslighting is a type of emotional manipulation that results in the recipient often doubting their perception of reality and sanity — the family members complain that this is what Suisui’s songs have been doing to the woman.

Chief Censor Jim Abani said: “We have taken measures to place a temporary ban on Jason’s songs following complaints we have received from his wife, or partner.”

No immediate response
Questions sent to the country’s radio stations did not get an immediate response.

Calls made to the Kavieng police were not answered.

Censor Abani said that the complainant claimed she had been through a “lot of abuse” with Jason, with some of his song lyrics dedicated to her not helping her heal from depression.

He said as such the “publication” — of songs — produced by Jason had been found to be objectionable publications under Section 2 (1) of the Classifi­cation of Publication Act 1989.

Abani said the Censorship Office did not tolerate gender-based violence in any form, including emotional abuse as was the case with the complainant.

He added that the complainant claimed in her report to the Censorship Office that some of the songs were dedicated and she asked for Jayrex’s songs to be banned to allow her to deal with her trauma and depression.

Part of Vision 2050
“Regulation and protection of gender-discriminatory songs was part of vision 2050 that we are implementing. Putting a temporary ban on Jason’s songs is in line with the implementation of Vision 2050.”

Abani had issued directives to all radio stations and television to cease broadcasting and displaying Jayrex’s songs.

According to the statement from the Censorship Office, enforcement and compliance officers would be conducting inspections to ensure the Chief Censor’s directives were followed.

He said the ban was temporary while an investigation was underway.

A permanent decision would be made once the investigation was completed.

Phoebe Gwangilo is a PNG Post-Courier reporter. Republished with permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Next month, on July 10, six months will have passed since Papua’s Governor Lukas Enembe was “kidnapped” and flown to Jakarta for charges over alleged one million rupiah (NZ$100,000) graft.

Despite his deteriorating health, he has been detained in a Corruption Eradication Commission’s cell (KPK) in the Indonesian capital — more than 3700 km from his hometown of Jayapura.

He is due to appear in court today, but that depends on his health status.

• READ MORE: Yamin Kogoya: Arrest of Papuan governor Enembe condemned as illegal Jakarta ‘kidnap’
• Other Lukas Enembe reports

His drawn out ordeal has been full of drama and trauma. There has been indecisiveness around the case and the hearing date has been repeatedly rescheduled — from 20 more days, to 40 more days, and now into months.

There are no clear signs of any definite closure. For his family, friends, colleagues, and the Papuan people, this has been a nightmare.

While being held captive and tortured in the KPK’s prison cell in Jakarta, his kidney, stroke, and heart specialists in Singapore are concerned about what has been happening to their long-term patient.

In December 2020, Governor Enembe had a major stroke — for the fourth time. He lost his voice completely in Singapore, but his medical specialists at Mount Elizabeth hospital brought his voice back.

Since then, during a covid lockdown in 2021, he had another stroke, and was flown to Singapore.

Between 2020 and 2022 he had been receiving intensive medical assistance from Singapore. He was about to go to Singapore last September as part of his routine check-ups, only to discover that his bank account had been frozen, and his overseas travel blocked.

The trip in September was supposed to fix his already failing kidneys. He was unable to walk properly, his foot kept swelling and he began to lose his voice again.

He was on a strict diet as advised by his doctors in Singapore.

After Jakarta’s special security forces and KPK “abducted” him during a happy lunch hour at a local restaurant in his homeland on January 10, all his routine medical treatment in Singapore came to an abrupt halt.

Governor’s health
Following the abduction, medical specialists in Singapore expressed their concern in writing and requested that the medical report of his latest blood test from KPK Jakarta be released so that they could follow up on his critical health issues.

On 24 February 2023, the medical centre in Singapore wrote a medical request letter and addressed it directly to KPK in Jakarta.

The above mentioned (Lukas Enembe) is a patient at Royal Healthcare Heart, Stroke and Cancer Centre under Patrick Ang (Senior Consultant Cardiologist) and Dr Francisco Salcido-Ochoa (Senior Renal Physician). He was last reviewed by us in October 2022. As his primary physicians, we are gravely concerned about his current medical status.

We are aware that his renal condition has deteriorated over the last few months with suboptimal blood pressure control. We are humbly requesting a medical report on his renal parameters via biochemistry, blood pressure readings and a list of his current medications.

To date, however, KPK has prevented his trusted long-time Singaporean medical specialists and family members from obtaining any reports regarding his health.

The governor’s family in Jakarta have repeatedly requested for an independent medical team to oversee his health, but KPK has refused.

Only KPK’s approved medical team is allowed to monitor his health and all the results of his blood tests, types of medications he has been offered and overall report on his treatment since the kidnapping has not been released to the governor, his family, medical specialists in Singapore or the Papuan people.

Elius Enembe, spokesperson of the governor’s family said they want the panel of judges at the Tipikor Jakarta court to appoint a team of independent doctors outside the Indonesian Doctors Association (IDI) to check the governor’s health condition.

According to the family, it was important to ensure Enembe’s current health conditions are verified independently before the court hearing takes place. This is because “we consider IDI to no longer be independent”, Lukas Enembe’s brother, Elius Enembe, told reporters in Jakarta, reports Medcom.

“After all,” he continued, “Indonesia’s Human Rights Commissioner had issued a recommendation that Lukas continue his treatment, rights that had been obtained before being arrested by the KPK, a service to be received from the Mount Elisabeth Singapore hospital doctor’s team.”

An independent opinion of the governor’s actual health condition is critical before the hearing so that judges have a clear, objective picture on his health condition.

“If there is an independent doctor, then there is another opinion that could be considered by the judge to ensure the governor’s health condition. This is what we are hoping for, so that the panel of judges can objectively make its decisions,” said Elius Enembe.

The court hearing
One of his five times failed case hearing attempts was supposed to be held in Central Jakarta’s District Court at 10am last Monday, 12 June 2023. This highly publicised and anticipated hearing did not take place.

Two conflicting narratives emerged about why this was adjourned.

KPK’s view
According to the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), Lukas Enembe’s actions hampered the legal process. In fact, the head of the KPK news section, Ali Fikri, stated that his first session was met with a very uncooperative attitude.

“We regret the attitude of the defendant, which we consider uncooperative,” Fikri said in his statement quoted by Holopis.com on June 12.

“The confession of Lukas Enembe, who was ill and could not attend the trial, was considered strange and far-fetched by the KPK. The defendant can answer the judge’s questions and explain his situation, even though he later claims that he is ill,” he said.

Fikri also threatened Lukas Enembe by saying that the Governor would face consequences during the prosecution process.

“The KPK Prosecutor Team and the panel of judges will assess his attitude separately when conducting prosecutions or drafting charges,” he said. ‘

“Of course, there are aggravating matters or mitigating issues, which will be a consideration when a defendant is uncooperative in the trial process,” he continued.

“When the trial process takes place, the KPK will always include a doctor’s health report to anticipate Luke’s uncooperative attitude in the retrial,” Fikri said. “The KPK Prosecutor Team will convey to the court in detail the defendant’s health condition during the next [hearing],” he said.

The first hearing in Lukas Enembe’s gratuity case has been postponed until this week. The reason for this is that Lukas Enembe claimed he was sick and could not participate in the virtual trial.

The Governor’s legal team protest
The Governor’s legal team protested against the KPK, saying that it was a “deliberate attempt” by the agency to manipulate public opinion based on biased and inaccurate information about what actually happened on Monday, June 12.

The following is the account provided by the Governor’s legal team after KPK was accused of spreading media news that the hearing had failed due to an “uncooperative governor” in terms of the legal proceedings on that day.

Monday, 12 June 2023, around 9.30am local Jakarta time, a guard entered the KPK’s detention room where Papua’s Governor, Lukas Enembe, was detained. The guard was requested to accompany the detained Governor to the hearing room.

Upon arriving at the door, the Governor asked the guard where the hearing was being held. The guard explained that he was taking him to the online courtroom in the red and white KPK building (red and white symbolise the colours of Indonesia’s flag or Bendera Merah Putih in Bahasa Indonesian).

The Governor said he would not attend the hearing via tele link. The Governor wanted to attend the hearing in person, not virtually via a screen.

Afterwards, the Governor went to his detainee room and wrote a letter of protest, explaining his aversion to viewing the proceedings on television. After the letter was written, the guard accompanied the Governor to the detention room to inform them of his desire to appear in court physically.

The court hearing was scheduled for 10am that day. Guards from KPK’s detention arrived at 9.30am to escort the Governor, allowing him only 30 minutes to prepare.

The Governor’s legal team was waiting outside the KPK’s building. As 10am approached, the legal team (Petrus, along with Cosmas Refra and Antonius Eko Nugroho), went to KPK’s receptionist and asked why they were not called to enter the hearing room.

The receptionist replied that they were still in the process of coordination since Enembe was not yet awake. Moments later, officers took the legal team into the detention visiting room, where there were masses of visitors because it was visiting time.

At one corner of the room, Governor Enembe was surrounded by prison guards working on a laptop. The governor’s lawyers were then told that the hearing would begin when the audio system was fixed.

When the Governor and the legal team finally met, the legal team asked Enembe why he was wearing shorts and a T-shirt to court. Governor Lukas said he was annoyed at the guard for suddenly arriving to escort him without warning, which is why he had not dressed neatly. He could not wear sandals because his feet were swollen.

Governor Enembe refused to have an online hearing because he had not been informed in advance of Monday’s hearing and the summons was only signed once the hearing was opened by the judges.

If the KPK prosecutor had notified him at least the day before the hearing, Governor Enembe would have cooperated. But he was only notified 30 minutes earlier.

As the judge covered the trial, the legal team led by Petrus, informed Governor Enembe to appear before the court on 19 June 2023. The governor nodded in agreement.

“In light of this explanation, we must emphasise that Mr Lukas does not intend to be uncooperative in facing the alleged case,” said the legal team.

According to Petrus, “the detained Governor Lukas Enembe did not immediately leave the detention room because he was still writing a statement that the prosecutor had not informed him in advance of the trial scheduled for Monday, 12 June 2023”.

The Governor’s next court hearing has been rescheduled for today and whether he can physically attend will depend on his health.

However, the main issue is will he be found guilty of the charges? There is a lot at stake.

Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic/activist who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

• Other Yamin Kogoya articles

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Fiji’s Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has played down criticism he is leading an administration that practices nepotism and favouritism.

The Rabuka-led three-party coalition government has been accused of rewarding loyalists with top positions in state-backed institutions and organisations.

There are some Fijians who claim Rabuka’s coalition is walking the same path as the previous FijiFirst government, which was also accused of rewarding party supporters with government jobs and contracts when it was in power from 2014 to 2022.

• READ MORE: Other Sitiveni Rabuka reports

But Rabuka, while not categorically denying the accusations, said the opinions of detractors did not worry him.

“[My reaction is] that I should not worry about that,” Rabuka told RNZ Pacific at Bau Island following the conclusion of the first meeting of the Great Council of Chiefs.

He said criticism received by his government was healthy and a part of democracy.

“It is a good thing that people speak out [about good governance concerns].”

‘Can they do better?’
“What I can say, or all I can say is ‘can they do better?'” he added, pointing out if his critics were good enough to offer a better alternative.

But the country’s former attorney-general and economy minister Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum has alleged Rabuka’s government has been offering people unfair advantage on the basis of “political allegiance”.

Speaking to local media outside a Suva courthouse on Tuesday, Sayed-Khaiyum said former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama’s FijiFirst-made appointments to government boards and institutions were due to “their capability or the capacity to assist”.

“We have people being appointed on boards not because of what they know, what they can contribute but who they are, who they know, whose political allegiance they have,” he claimed.

“When we [FijiFirst] appointed people to boards it was all about those institutions, those bodies started making revenue, start collecting revenue, start paying dividends to the government.”

He gave the example of Airports Fiji Limited, a government commercial company, paying more than F$40 million in dividends to government which he said was “unprecedented” when it happened before the covid pandemic.

Sayed-Khaiyum claimed Rabuka’s government was rewarding individuals based on the political connections they had rather than on merit.

“So, people are now being appointed to those positions not because of their capability or the capacity to assist but over who they are, which political parties they belong to, what province they come from, what ethnicity they are, who they know, [or] whether they were failed [political] candidates or not.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

The University of the South Pacific will be receiving additional funding from the Fiji government in the 2023-2024 national budget, says Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance Professor Biman Prasad.

Speaking at a public consultation in Lautoka this week, he said the additional funding was to pay off arrears owed by the Fijian government to the regional university.

As of February this year, the Fiji government owed USP F$116 million (NZ$86 million) in unpaid grants.

• READ MORE: ‘Nepotism, lack of transparency and accountability’ claims emerge at USP
• Other USP reports

“We gave $10 million already,” the Deputy PM said.

“I attended their council meeting and I made a commitment.

“We are restoring the annual grant to the university which is about $34 million.

“From this year the annual contribution that the Fiji government always used to contribute will be included in the budget and that will be paid.

“We are going to include an additional amount to clear out the arrears from the past years and so the university will have a lot of money.”

Professor Prasad was responding to queries raised by USP staff member Teresa Ali on the government’s commitment to the university’s annual grant.

Deputy VC ‘dismissed’
Meanwhile, Fijivillage News reports that the University of the South Pacific management has confirmed that deputy vice-chancellor and vice-president Professor Janusz Jankowski’s arrangement with the institution has ended.

In response to an email sent by FBC News, USP management said Professor Jankowski was recently engaged as a fixed-term and part-time consultant.

It also said that, contrary to media reports, the vice-chancellor and president of USP did not have the delegated authority to terminate the employment of a deputy vice-chancellor.

News media reports say that a week before the termination of Professor Jankowski’s contract, he had written a damning 13-page “whistleblower” report to two of the university’s pro vice-chancellors alleging “nepotism, lack of transparency and accountability” at the university.

Repeka Nasiko is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

This article was produced for ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network in partnership with the Anchorage Daily News. Sign up for Dispatches to get stories like this one as soon as they are published.

Two years ago, in May 2021, the Anchorage Assembly gave $1.6 million to a little-known charity that said it would help people find homes and addiction treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

At the time, local governments across the country were awash in money from a federal program known as the American Rescue Plan Act, or ARPA. Anchorage city leaders had $50 million to hand out to local applicants, and the money moved fast. The nonprofit House of Transformations received one of the largest awards.

Left unsaid in the appropriations talks was that the state of Alaska had permanently banned the founder of the nonprofit, Rosalina Mavaega, from serving as a Medicaid provider in 2015. The punishment resulted from a medical assistance fraud investigation and remains in effect. Mavaega’s husband, Esau Fualema, who is a co-founder of House of Transformations, separately pleaded no contest to criminally negligent homicide in 2008 and failed a background check to work at Mavaega’s prior company.

Mavaega is at least the second grant applicant with a public record of fraud allegations to receive COVID-19-related money from the city. In the other case, Revive Alaska Community Services received $750,000 from the Assembly, also in 2021, despite its president, Prince Nwankudu, pleading guilty in 2012 to conspiracy to commit mail fraud. (Nwankudu did not respond to interview requests and emailed questions; Revive Alaska has not been asked to return the funds.)

Mavaega is a political supporter of embattled Anchorage Mayor Dave Bronson, though the grant she received came before he took office. Bronson later appointed her to serve on the Anchorage Equal Rights Commission, which is tasked with investigating allegations of discrimination, and to serve as the business representative on the city housing and homelessness committee.

Bronson kept Mavaega on the city commissions even after the Anchorage Daily News and ProPublica first asked about her Medicaid ban in March. The newsrooms have subsequently learned that federal investigators are looking into the city commissioner and her businesses.

The IRS is seeking information about city grants awarded to Mavaega and her affiliated businesses since 2021. One Anchorage business owner contacted by investigators said officials representing the Department of Treasury and the Small Business Administration asked for information about House of Transformations, “their business dealings” and bitcoin investments.

When a reporter visited Mavaega’s office on May 18, an employee said she was not available but was scheduled to talk with investigators that afternoon. She did not respond to subsequent emails and phone calls seeking comment.

Fualema also did not respond to emails, phone messages or an interview request delivered to his home.

The mayor’s office confirmed the existence of the federal investigation on Thursday, in response to renewed questions from the news outlets.

Bronson spokesperson Corey Allen Young said investigators contacted the city in February and have requested information about Mavaega and at least six of her affiliated businesses and nonprofits. Young said the city could not provide a copy of any subpoenas under city and federal law. A spokesperson for the IRS said federal law forbids the agency from discussing any potential investigation.

Asked if the mayor has removed Mavaega from the two city commissions, Young said no. “The Mayor doesn’t have the unilateral ability to remove members from commissions,” he wrote in an email.

Bronson’s administration has been rocked by a slew of investigations and resignations since the former municipal manager he appointed wrote a letter in January saying she had been fired for “attempting to convince (Bronson) to cease unlawful and unethical activities using municipal resources.” Bronson has declined to talk about the accusations, citing potential litigation.

Since then, the acting city attorney, Bronson’s deputy chief of staff, the city’s human resources director, the mayor’s chief of staff, the Solid Waste Services director, the library’s deputy director, the city’s chief fiscal officer and the maintenance and operations director have all resigned.

One of the last of Bronson’s original team, Chief Equity Officer Uluao “Junior” Aumavae, is the brother of House of Transformation director Elizabeth Aumavae. Junior Aumavae and Elizabeth Aumavae did not respond to interview requests or emailed questions.

House of Transformations and various limited liability companies that use the same office address and same name, or similar names, are among a constellation of new nonprofits and businesses Mavaega created in recent years.

Some of the entities nest within a pyramid of holding companies. For example, Mavaega and Fualema created a business called 3XB Holdings Group LLC in August 2016. That business, in turn, owns at least 10 other businesses, including Signet Ring Bible College LLC. The Bible College LLC in turn owns Signet Ring Vocational Center, which in turn owns House of Transformation Beauty Center.

The news agencies found that Mavaega successfully applied for at least 29 separate business licenses since January 2020. According to business registration paperwork, the new entities are intended to provide services including temporary shelter, trade school classes, “community housing services,” beauty salons and substance abuse treatment.

At least 10 of the businesses are based in a Midtown Anchorage office building.

A woman there who identified herself as Lynda and said she is a member of the House of Transformation board of directors said witnesses had appeared before a grand jury on May 16.

“There’s an investigation going on, it’s just a matter of we don’t know what’s next,” she said.

The Alaska Medicaid Fraud Control Unit charged Mavaega and her business at the time, A Loving Care PCA, with two counts of medical assistance fraud in 2014. According to the state Law Department, prosecutors dropped the criminal charges and referred the case to the Alaska Health Department for “administrative enforcement action.”

The state Division of Senior and Disability Services subsequently moved to permanently bar Loving Care and Mavaega from being Medicaid providers based on the same allegations laid out in the criminal filing. The division gave four reasons for the ban: violating background check requirements, submitting billing claims without adequate documentation, offering a rebate for Medicaid referrals and submitting claims without supporting documentation.

As a result, Maveaga’s business can no longer bill any federal health care program, including Medicare, Medicaid and Denali KidCare for its services.

Mavaega requested an administrative hearing to challenge the suspension, but an administrative law judge upheld the ban Nov. 27, 2015. According to that decision, “These violations consisted of ongoing billing errors and allowing individuals to be involved/employed at Loving Care, who had either been barred from participation in the Medicaid program due to the results of the required criminal history background check, or who had not undergone the required criminal history background check.”

Mavaega appealed the ban in 2016, arguing the penalty was too severe and relied on hearsay evidence, but a state Superior Court judge upheld the punishment.

Mavaega and Fualema incorporated a nonprofit called House of Transformation in July 2019. In February 2020, they incorporated another nonprofit, House of Transformations, with an “s.”

Also in 2020, Mavaega started a business with Juan Carlos Reed, a former client of House of Transformations who had been sued the prior year by the state of Alaska for unfair trade practices. Reed had falsely claimed to be a licensed contractor and falsely claimed to be a military veteran, the state said. A judge in 2021 ordered him to pay the state $75,000 in civil penalties. (Reed has not paid the fine, according to the state Department of Law.)

On Tuesday, Reed said he did not lie about being a military veteran and said he was unaware of the judgment against him. Paperwork that the House of Transformations filed with the state in January 2021 listed Reed as secretary for the nonprofit. Reed said he was not involved in any grants received by House of Transformations and did not know he had been listed as an officer for the nonprofit. He said he was not in Alaska in 2021.

“The only thing I know about this situation is because I was subpoenaed to testify as a witness,” Reed said. He would not say when he received the subpoena or who sent it.

The business created by Mavaega and Reed, called Alaska Executive Independent Paralegals, is listed as “involuntarily dissolved” on the Alaska Division of Corporations, Business and Professional Licensing website. Reed said that the business never got off the ground and he intentionally let the license lapse.

In 2021, Mavaega asked the city for more than $1.6 million under the name of the House of Transformations and another of her businesses, Signet Ring. The Assembly awarded the money in May 2021 to “provide housing, addiction treatment, vocational and apprenticeship training, and other wrap around services for persons experiencing homelessness.”

Mavaega said at the time that House of Transformations had 50 clients living in three locations.

The grant included $496,660 for House of Transformations “general operating expenses,” $454,260 for Signet Ring “general operating expenses,” $326,345 for employment and addiction treatment services and $345,900 for “Signet Ring vocational and apprenticeship funds for students.”

The money made Mavaega’s nonprofit one of the biggest recipients in the first round of ARPA grant awards from the city. House of Transformations received more than city agencies such as the fire and police departments, and it received the 13th overall largest grant out of the 64 awarded.

The chairperson of the Assembly at the time, Felix Rivera, said no one on the panel back then was aware of Mavaega’s ban by the state Health Department. He said the Assembly does not have the resources to investigate all grant applicants.

“They were relatively new, so we didn’t know too much about them,” he said. “We wanted to make sure that ARPA funds didn’t go to just established nonprofits.”

Bronson took office July 1, 2021.

When a second round of ARPA grants became available in 2022, Mavaega applied again. This time she requested an additional $1.4 million.

The Assembly did not approve the second round of funding. Rivera said the Assembly wanted to spread the funding among new recipients.

In September, Bronson also appointed Mavaega to represent business interests on the city’s Housing, Homeless and Neighborhood Development Commission.

Anchorage’s vulnerable and highly visible homeless population is a major concern among residents and policymakers. The city’s largest sports arena has served as a mass shelter for most of the past three years. Twenty-four people who were believed to be homeless died outdoors in the city in 2022, and an additional eight died outdoors in April of this year — the most ever recorded in a month since the Daily News began tracking outdoor deaths in 2017.

The Daily News and ProPublica found that one of the mayor’s top advisers in 2021 worked to prevent a city-owned hotel from being used to house the homeless. Bronson appointed the adviser’s business partner in a commercial real estate company to a city commission even though the partner was awaiting trial in a felony stalking case. The commissioner resigned after the newsrooms asked about the appointment.

Bronson named Mavaega to the Anchorage Equal Rights Commission in November. The newsrooms first asked Bronson in March why Mavaega was appointed to city commissions despite being banned from serving as a Medicaid provider. At the time, the newsrooms were reporting on theEqual Rights Commission, which has been hobbled by a backlog of open cases and investigator resignations.

A Bronson spokesperson did not answer the question directly; Young said the office was “reviewing this information.”

Bronson has referred to Mavaega as the pastor for Alaska Revival Center A.R.C. According to its Facebook page, the revival center is a church that is based in the same Tudor Road office as House of Transformation.

She also advertises her services as a real estate agent and lists one of the House of Transformation client housing locations among the properties she recently sold.

On Thursday, the mayor responded to questions asking about the federal investigation.

According to the mayor’s office, investigators are seeking for information about Mavaega, House of Transformation, Signet Ring, a business called PIMHA that lists Mavaega as one of its officers, and limited liability companies known as HOT, HOT1, HOT2 and HOT3.

The city has not yet provided copies of public records, including House of Transformations grant applications and awarded grants requested by the Daily News.

This content originally appeared on Articles and Investigations - ProPublica and was authored by by Kyle Hopkins, Anchorage Daily News.

A leaked document authored by a recently recruited senior University of the South Pacific academic has again put a spotlight on the affairs of the regional institution.

The “strictly confidential” document, viewed by RNZ Pacific, is written by Professor Janusz Jankowski, the deputy vice-chancellor and vice-president (research and innovation) of USP.

The 13-page report is addressed to the USP Council chair and pro-chancellor — and former Marshall Islands president — Dr Hilda Heine and deputy chair and deputy pro-chancellor, Professor Pat Walsh.

• READ MORE: Academic ‘tsunami’ at USP shakes regional Pacific institution to core
• ‘USPgate’ allegations by Fijileaks
• Background to SCORI – is this a sell-out of Pacific’s ‘Sea of Islands’?
• The USP saga

It alleges several “issues, concerns and breaches with both USP policies and procedures” under USP’s vice-chancellor and president Pal Ahluwalia’s leadership.

Dr Jankowski — who was appointed to his role in November last year and has been working remotely from the UK — alleges Professor Ahluwalia of “nepotism, lack of transparency and absence of accountability”.

He is calling for formal investigations of the vice-chancellor of the regional university.

RNZ understands that following Dr Jankowski’s report to the USP Council, he has been dismissed from his position.

It is also understood that USP staff unions are unhappy with a range of issues highlighted in the report and the sacking of Dr Jankowski.

RNZ Pacific has contacted Professor Ahluwalia and USP for comment.

In an email response, a USP spokesperson said: “Due to the nature of the allegation(s), we request you give us some time to put together a statement that we will share with you as soon as it is ready.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Allegations of sexual harassment have emerged in the case of a senior United Nations manager at the Fiji multi-county office who has been put on “administrative leave” after complaints of “unsatisfactory behaviour”.

On Thursday, the UN Resident Coordinator’s Office to Fiji, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu confirmed to RNZ Pacific that Sanaka Samarasinha had been temporarily stood down to facilitate investigations.

The UN office said the complaints against Samarasinha were “being taken very seriously” but did not provide further details.

• READ MORE: Other UN in Pacific reports

RNZ Pacific understands the complaints against Samarasinha allege sexual harassment and one complainant has also alleged Samarasinha asked them to delete all electronic communications they had with him, claiming it undermineD the investigations process.

It is understood that one of the complaints against Samarasinha is that in February, at a formal diplomatic function held at the New Zealand High Commission in Suva, he made sexual advances against the complainant while in a drunken state.

RNZ Pacific also understands that Samarasinha’s electronic devices have been confiscated and he has been asked to leave the country.

RNZ put the allegations to Samarasinha who said he was deeply disturbed by the extremely serious and damaging allegations.

“While I am very keen to respond more fully, UN rules prohibit me from doing so as a staff member. Therefore, please reach out to the UN office,” he said.

Meanwhile, Samarasinha’s term as the resident coordinator has been confirmed to end this year.

The UN office said his replacement has already been selected and expected to be presented to the Fijian government, which is hosting the UN multi-country office.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Allegations of sexual harassment have emerged in the case of a senior United Nations manager at the Fiji multi-county office who has been put on “administrative leave” after complaints of “unsatisfactory behaviour”.

On Thursday, the UN Resident Coordinator’s Office to Fiji, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu confirmed to RNZ Pacific that Sanaka Samarasinha had been temporarily stood down to facilitate investigations.

The UN office said the complaints against Samarasinha were “being taken very seriously” but did not provide further details.

• READ MORE: Other UN in Pacific reports

RNZ Pacific understands the complaints against Samarasinha allege sexual harassment and one complainant has also alleged Samarasinha asked them to delete all electronic communications they had with him, claiming it undermineD the investigations process.

It is understood that one of the complaints against Samarasinha is that in February, at a formal diplomatic function held at the New Zealand High Commission in Suva, he made sexual advances against the complainant while in a drunken state.

RNZ Pacific also understands that Samarasinha’s electronic devices have been confiscated and he has been asked to leave the country.

RNZ put the allegations to Samarasinha who said he was deeply disturbed by the extremely serious and damaging allegations.

“While I am very keen to respond more fully, UN rules prohibit me from doing so as a staff member. Therefore, please reach out to the UN office,” he said.

Meanwhile, Samarasinha’s term as the resident coordinator has been confirmed to end this year.

The UN office said his replacement has already been selected and expected to be presented to the Fijian government, which is hosting the UN multi-country office.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Allegations of sexual harassment have emerged in the case of a senior United Nations manager at the Fiji multi-county office who has been put on “administrative leave” after complaints of “unsatisfactory behaviour”.

On Thursday, the UN Resident Coordinator’s Office to Fiji, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu confirmed to RNZ Pacific that Sanaka Samarasinha had been temporarily stood down to facilitate investigations.

The UN office said the complaints against Samarasinha were “being taken very seriously” but did not provide further details.

• READ MORE: Other UN in Pacific reports

RNZ Pacific understands the complaints against Samarasinha allege sexual harassment and one complainant has also alleged Samarasinha asked them to delete all electronic communications they had with him, claiming it undermineD the investigations process.

It is understood that one of the complaints against Samarasinha is that in February, at a formal diplomatic function held at the New Zealand High Commission in Suva, he made sexual advances against the complainant while in a drunken state.

RNZ Pacific also understands that Samarasinha’s electronic devices have been confiscated and he has been asked to leave the country.

RNZ put the allegations to Samarasinha who said he was deeply disturbed by the extremely serious and damaging allegations.

“While I am very keen to respond more fully, UN rules prohibit me from doing so as a staff member. Therefore, please reach out to the UN office,” he said.

Meanwhile, Samarasinha’s term as the resident coordinator has been confirmed to end this year.

The UN office said his replacement has already been selected and expected to be presented to the Fijian government, which is hosting the UN multi-country office.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Fiji’s Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions will not lay charges against Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka and former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama for allegedly urging political violence and urging communal antagonism due to “insufficient evidence”.

The two cases were among a list of other high profile cases in which the DPP’s office confirmed would not lay any charges.

• READ MORE: Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum charged with abuse of office

In a statement yesterday, acting Director of Public Prosecutions David Toganivalu listed the high profile cases:

• Sitiveni Rabuka and Sakiasi Ditoka — urging political violence and inciting communal antagonism
• Voreqe Bainimarama — urging political violence and inciting communal antagonism
• Ili Vunisuwai and Waisale Tikowale — urging political violence and inciting communal antagonism
• Mosese Bulitavu — causing harm through electronic communication

The police files for the suspects were sent to the DPP for an assessment of the evidence and a decision on whether any charges should be laid following the complaints.

Toganivalu said after a review of the police docket and the evidence, it was their opinion that there was insufficient evidence to support any criminal charges against the suspects.

He said the docket had been returned to police with the instructions not to charge and no further action required.

RNZ Pacific reports Fiji’s former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum was granted bail by a local court on Tuesday. Sayed-Khaiyum is charged with one count of abuse of office.

He was released on a Fijian FJ$10,000 (NZ$7000) bail by Magistrate Waleen George, according to local media reports.

Republished from The Fiji Times with permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Papua New Guinea has deported controversial Australian businessman Jamie Pang.

Surrounded by Immigration and Citizenship Authority officials and police, Pang was taken to Jackson’s International Airport yesterday at 3am and deported.

Chief Migration Officer Stanis Hulahau said that the movement of Pang came about after his acquittal of rape charges on Wednesday afternoon.

• READ MORE: Australian Jamie Pang caught up in drug bust, after alleged meth lab, illegal firearms discovered in his PNG hotel
• Other PNG crime reports

“Pang has no legal right to remain in PNG, his visa and work permit have been cancelled, his visa was made void and he is now blacklisted for life,” he said.

“We don’t need people who disregard our laws.”

Pang, 45, was handed over to Australian authorities at about 10am because they have an interest in him for other incidents which they will be interviewing him about under Australian law.

When contacted by the PNG Post-Courier, Hulahau said that the deportation of Pang was a warning to all foreigners who wished to do business in the country to abide by and respect the law, and to also not get involved in illegal activities.

Breached visa conditions
In 2022, Pang was charged for breaching his visa conditions and was ordered by the Waigani Grade-Five District Court to pay a fine of K4000 (NZ$1800).

That year, he was charged under the Migration Act when he was found in a hotel with drugs and firearms.

At the time, Hulahau said that the conditions of his work permit and visa included not getting into any criminal activities.

“Once that was breached he was charged and he paid a fine, from there his visa was marked as void,” Hulahau said.

“This is a warning, there is zero tolerance on such incidents.”

Police Commissioner David Manning said that all foreigners should be aware of Papua New Guinea’s laws and respect the rule of law.

“As guests of this country they are expected to abide by all our laws,” he said.

“If found guilty of breaching our laws and that has been determined under a court of competent jurisdiction they are required to be deported back to their country of origin upon completion of their sentence.”

Caught by surprise
According to sources, Pang was caught by surprise after being acquitted of the rape charge and was on his way out of the Bomana Correctional Services prison when he was served detention orders by Immigration officials at the gate of the Bomana prison.

It is alleged he refused to go with the officials. However, he finally got into a waiting vehicle and was taken to the Bomana Immigration Centre (BIC).

At BIC he was taken early yesterday morning to Jackson International Airport.

He was quickly taken in with Post-Courier on hand to witness Pang walking up the stairs into the boarding lounge at about 5.30am.

The flight he was on left the country at 6am.

“You cannot disrespect our laws and our country and expect to continue to stay here,” Commissioner Manning said.

“This also applies to those expatriates who meddle in matters of national security and sovereignty.

Deemed ‘unfriendly’
“Do not for once think under some preconceived notions that you will not be held accountable.

“You will deemed as acting unfriendly towards our country.”

“I say this because there has been an increase of reports and cases of expatriates who continue to deliberately hold our way of life in contempt, including undermining systems and the authorities, often putting those authorities on a collision course with each other.

“No country in the world would tolerate this behaviour. PNG is no exception.”

Hulahau said that the laws of the country was in place to ensure people followed the laws.

Miriam Zarriga is a senior PNG Post-Courier journalist. Republished with permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Dissident Papua New Guinean politician and former cabinet minister Bryan Kramer has vowed to fight on in his campaign against corruption, saying the National Court ruling to dismiss him as an MP was “the calm before the storm”.

“The decision to dismiss me was expected and of course, it is certainly not the end of the issue as I have already been working on an appeal to challenge both the rulings on verdict and penalty in the National Court,” he told reporters in Port Moresby

Kramer, a former police minister then justice minister, was responding to the decision on recommendations for his dismissal and a fine of K10,000 (NZ$4600).

• READ MORE: Other Bryan Kramer reports

“Today’s decision in no way diminishes my resolve in the fight against corruption nor will it keep me from informing the public on issues of national importance or exposing high-level corruption,” he said.

“In my view it’s the calm before the storm.”

In a statement later in the day Kramer explained the court decision saying: “Today (1/5/23) the Leadership Tribunal handed down its ruling on the penalty in relation to the finding of guilt of the seven (7) counts of misconduct in office against me.

“The Tribunal categorised the seven counts of misconduct into two main categories in determining whether there is serious culpability (wrongdoing on my part) warranting my dismissal from office or recommending a lesser penalty of a fine or suspension of no more than three months without pay.

“Category 1 included counts 1 and 2 that related to my Facebook publications scandalising the judiciary.

Conflict of interest claim
“Count 1 being the publication insinuating a conflict of interest by the Chief Justice.

“Count 2 related to accusing [former prime minister] Peter O’Neill and his lawyer of soliciting the assistance of the Chief Justice and submitting a fabricated document to mislead the court that the warrant of arrest was defective.

“Category 2 included the remaining 5 counts that related to the decisions of the Madang District Development Authority Board in the application of the District Services Improvement Programme (DSIP) Funds in renting office space for the establishment of a project office to deliver district projects at the ward level, paying electoral staff who were involved in implementing the projects and establishing a ward project staff structure without obtaining approval from the Secretary of Personnel Management and engaging an associate company that was paid K3000 [NZ$1400] a fortnight.

“In short, the Tribunal recommended a penalty of dismissal from office in relation to counts 1 and 2 and a fine of K2000 for each of remaining 5 counts, a total fine of K10,000.

“Based on the Tribunal’s finding on guilt on seven counts handed down on 21 February 2023, today’s ruling for dismissal was expected.

“The decision recommending dismissal from office will be delivered to the Speaker who will then recommend to the Governor General (GG) to adopt the Tribunal’s recommendation to dismiss me from office.

“The decision of the GG will be gazetted and takes effect. At that point I will no longer be a Member of Parliament.”

Kramer Report publisher
Bryan Kramer, well known as a social media strategist and publisher of the anti-corruption Kramer Report, has been a cabinet minister in Prime Minister James Marape’s government since 2019, holding the police, justice and then immigration portfolios.

Leader of the Allegiance Party, Kramer was returned to Parliament at last year’s elections with sizable majority in the Madang Open seat.

Republished with permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

The post Corporate Media’s Evasion of Wuhan Lab Allegations appeared first on Project Censored.

This content originally appeared on Project Censored and was authored by Vins.

The long-running row between the former Fiji government and the Suva-based regional University of the South Pacific (USP) has come back to haunt former Fiji Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama, who spent a night in a police cell on March 9 before appearing in court, charged with abuse of office.

Not only did the “USP saga”, as it came to be known, cause a major rift between Fiji and the other 12 USP-member countries, but it may have contributed to the narrow loss of Bainimarama’s FijiFirst Party (FFP) in the December 2022 election.

Bainimarama’s abuse of office charges included accusations of interfering with a police investigation into financial malpractices at USP. If convicted, he would face a maximum sentence of 17 years in jail.

• READ MORE: Fiji’s Bainimarama granted bail, ordered to remain in country
• Former Fiji PM Bainimarama and suspended police chief charged
• The USP saga

But there are also serious questions about the future of the party that he co-founded, and which won successive elections in 2014 and 2018 on the back of his popularity.

A day before his indictment, there were surreal scenes at the Suva Central Police Station, as police officers marched an ashen-faced Bainimarama to his cell to spend the night before his court appearance the next morning.

This, under the full glare of live media coverage, with journalists tripping over themselves to take pictures of the former military strongman, who installed himself as prime minister after the 2006 coup and ruled for 16 years straight.

Arrested, detained and charged alongside Bainimarama was his once-powerful police chief, Sitiveni Qiliho, who managed a wry smile for the cameras. Both were released on a surety of F$10,000 (about NZ$7300) after pleading not guilty to the charges.

Shut down police investigation
It is alleged that in 2019, the duo “arbitrarily and in abuse of the authority of their respective offices” shut down a police investigation into alleged irregularities at USP when former vice-chancellor Rajesh Chandra was in charge.

In November 2018, Chandra’s replacement, Professor Pal Ahluwalia, revealed large remuneration payments to certain USP senior staff, some running to hundreds of thousands of dollars. The Fiji government, unhappy with Ahluwalia’s attack on Chandra, counter-attacked by alleging irregularities in Ahluwalia’s own administration.

As the dispute escalated, the Fiji government suspended its annual grant to the USP in a bid to force an inquiry into its own allegations.

When an external audit by the NZ accountants BDO confirmed the original report’s findings, the USP executive committee, under the control of the then Fiji government appointees, suspended Ahluwalia in June 2020.

This was in defiance of the USP’s supreme decision-making body, the USP Council, which reinstated him within a week.

Samoa’s then Deputy Prime Minister Fiamē Naomi Mataʻafa (who is now prime minister, having won a heavily contested election of her own) said at the time that Ahluwalia’s suspension had been a “nonsense”.

The then Nauruan President Lionel Aingimea attacked a “small group” of Fiji officials for “hijacking” the 12-country regional university.

Students threatened boycott
The USP Students’ Association threatened a boycott of exams, while more than 500 signatures supporting the suspended vice-chancellor were collected and students protested across several of USP’s national campuses. All these events played out prominently in the regional news media as well as on social media platforms.

With Fiji’s national elections scheduled for the following year, the political toll was becoming obvious. However, Bainimarama’s government either did not see it, or did not care to see it.

Instead of backing off from what many saw as an unnecessary fight, it doubled down. In February 2021, around 15 government police and security personnel along with immigration officials staged a late-night raid on Professor Ahluwalia’s Suva home, detained him with his wife, Sandra Price, and put them in a car for the three-hour drive to Nadi International Airport where, deported, they were put on the first flight to Australia.

The move sent shockwaves in Fiji and the region.

To many, it looked like a government that had come to power in the name of a “clean-up campaign” against corruption was now indulging in a cover-up campaign instead. The USP saga became political fodder at opposition rallies, with one of their major campaign promises being to bring back Professor Ahluwalia and restore the unpaid Fiji government grant that stood at F$86 million (about NZ$62 million) at the time.

A month before the 2022 polls, a statement targeting the estimated 30,000 staff and student cohort at USP, their friends and families, urged them to vote against FijiFirst, which would go on to lose government by a single parliamentary vote to the tripartite coalition led by another former coup leader, Sitiveni Rabuka.

Albanese official visit
It was Rabuka who greeted Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on his first official visit to Fiji last week. During talks at the Australian-funded Blackrock military camp, Albanese reportedly secured Rabuka’s support for the AUKUS deal.

Australia is keen for stability in Fiji, which has not had a smooth transition of power since independence, with democratically elected governments removed by coups in 1987, 2000 and 2006. Any disturbance in Fiji has the potential to upset the delicate balance in the region as a whole.

For Bainimarama and his followers, there is much to rue. His claimed agenda — to build national unity and racial equality and to rid Fiji of corruption — earned widespread support in 2014.

His margin of victory was much narrower in 2018 but Bainimarama managed to secure a majority in Parliament to lead the nation again.

His electoral loss in 2022 was followed by a series of dramatic events, which first saw Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, his deputy in all but name, disqualified from holding his seat in Parliament.

Bainimarama went next, suspended for three years by Parliament’s privileges committee for a speech attacking head of state Ratu Wiliame Katonivere. He chose to resign as opposition leader.

Following his March 10 hearing, Bainimarama addressed the media and a few supporters outside court, adamant that he had served the country with “integrity” and with “the best interests” of all Fijians at heart.  The former leader even managed to smile for the cameras while surrounded by a group of followers.

With nearly double the personal votes of the sitting PM Rabuka under Fiji’s proportional representation voting system, Bainimarama’s supporters still harboured some hope that he could return as the country’s leader one day.

However, his health is not the best. He is now out of Parliament and bogged down by legal troubles. Is the sun now setting on the era of Bainimarama and FijiFirst?

Dr Shailendra Bahadur Singh is a frequent contributor to Asia Pacific Report and is on the editorial board of the associated Pacific Journalism Review. This article was originally published by the Lowy Institute’s The Interpreter and is republished here with the author’s permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Shailendra Singh.

The long-running row between the former Fiji government and the Suva-based regional University of the South Pacific (USP) has come back to haunt former Fiji Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama, who spent a night in a police cell on March 9 before appearing in court, charged with abuse of office.

Not only did the “USP saga”, as it came to be known, cause a major rift between Fiji and the other 12 USP-member countries, but it may have contributed to the narrow loss of Bainimarama’s FijiFirst Party (FFP) in the December 2022 election.

Bainimarama’s abuse of office charges included accusations of interfering with a police investigation into financial malpractices at USP. If convicted, he would face a maximum sentence of 17 years in jail.

• READ MORE: Fiji’s Bainimarama granted bail, ordered to remain in country
• Former Fiji PM Bainimarama and suspended police chief charged
• The USP saga

But there are also serious questions about the future of the party that he co-founded, and which won successive elections in 2014 and 2018 on the back of his popularity.

A day before his indictment, there were surreal scenes at the Suva Central Police Station, as police officers marched an ashen-faced Bainimarama to his cell to spend the night before his court appearance the next morning.

This, under the full glare of live media coverage, with journalists tripping over themselves to take pictures of the former military strongman, who installed himself as prime minister after the 2006 coup and ruled for 16 years straight.

Arrested, detained and charged alongside Bainimarama was his once-powerful police chief, Sitiveni Qiliho, who managed a wry smile for the cameras. Both were released on a surety of F$10,000 (about NZ$7300) after pleading not guilty to the charges.

Shut down police investigation
It is alleged that in 2019, the duo “arbitrarily and in abuse of the authority of their respective offices” shut down a police investigation into alleged irregularities at USP when former vice-chancellor Rajesh Chandra was in charge.

In November 2018, Chandra’s replacement, Professor Pal Ahluwalia, revealed large remuneration payments to certain USP senior staff, some running to hundreds of thousands of dollars. The Fiji government, unhappy with Ahluwalia’s attack on Chandra, counter-attacked by alleging irregularities in Ahluwalia’s own administration.

As the dispute escalated, the Fiji government suspended its annual grant to the USP in a bid to force an inquiry into its own allegations.

When an external audit by the NZ accountants BDO confirmed the original report’s findings, the USP executive committee, under the control of the then Fiji government appointees, suspended Ahluwalia in June 2020.

This was in defiance of the USP’s supreme decision-making body, the USP Council, which reinstated him within a week.

Samoa’s then Deputy Prime Minister Fiamē Naomi Mataʻafa (who is now prime minister, having won a heavily contested election of her own) said at the time that Ahluwalia’s suspension had been a “nonsense”.

The then Nauruan President Lionel Aingimea attacked a “small group” of Fiji officials for “hijacking” the 12-country regional university.

Students threatened boycott
The USP Students’ Association threatened a boycott of exams, while more than 500 signatures supporting the suspended vice-chancellor were collected and students protested across several of USP’s national campuses. All these events played out prominently in the regional news media as well as on social media platforms.

With Fiji’s national elections scheduled for the following year, the political toll was becoming obvious. However, Bainimarama’s government either did not see it, or did not care to see it.

Instead of backing off from what many saw as an unnecessary fight, it doubled down. In February 2021, around 15 government police and security personnel along with immigration officials staged a late-night raid on Professor Ahluwalia’s Suva home, detained him with his wife, Sandra Price, and put them in a car for the three-hour drive to Nadi International Airport where, deported, they were put on the first flight to Australia.

The move sent shockwaves in Fiji and the region.

To many, it looked like a government that had come to power in the name of a “clean-up campaign” against corruption was now indulging in a cover-up campaign instead. The USP saga became political fodder at opposition rallies, with one of their major campaign promises being to bring back Professor Ahluwalia and restore the unpaid Fiji government grant that stood at F$86 million (about NZ$62 million) at the time.

A month before the 2022 polls, a statement targeting the estimated 30,000 staff and student cohort at USP, their friends and families, urged them to vote against FijiFirst, which would go on to lose government by a single parliamentary vote to the tripartite coalition led by another former coup leader, Sitiveni Rabuka.

Albanese official visit
It was Rabuka who greeted Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on his first official visit to Fiji last week. During talks at the Australian-funded Blackrock military camp, Albanese reportedly secured Rabuka’s support for the AUKUS deal.

Australia is keen for stability in Fiji, which has not had a smooth transition of power since independence, with democratically elected governments removed by coups in 1987, 2000 and 2006. Any disturbance in Fiji has the potential to upset the delicate balance in the region as a whole.

For Bainimarama and his followers, there is much to rue. His claimed agenda — to build national unity and racial equality and to rid Fiji of corruption — earned widespread support in 2014.

His margin of victory was much narrower in 2018 but Bainimarama managed to secure a majority in Parliament to lead the nation again.

His electoral loss in 2022 was followed by a series of dramatic events, which first saw Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, his deputy in all but name, disqualified from holding his seat in Parliament.

Bainimarama went next, suspended for three years by Parliament’s privileges committee for a speech attacking head of state Ratu Wiliame Katonivere. He chose to resign as opposition leader.

Following his March 10 hearing, Bainimarama addressed the media and a few supporters outside court, adamant that he had served the country with “integrity” and with “the best interests” of all Fijians at heart.  The former leader even managed to smile for the cameras while surrounded by a group of followers.

With nearly double the personal votes of the sitting PM Rabuka under Fiji’s proportional representation voting system, Bainimarama’s supporters still harboured some hope that he could return as the country’s leader one day.

However, his health is not the best. He is now out of Parliament and bogged down by legal troubles. Is the sun now setting on the era of Bainimarama and FijiFirst?

Dr Shailendra Bahadur Singh is a frequent contributor to Asia Pacific Report and is on the editorial board of the associated Pacific Journalism Review. This article was originally published by the Lowy Institute’s The Interpreter and is republished here with the author’s permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Shailendra Singh.

The long-running row between the former Fiji government and the Suva-based regional University of the South Pacific (USP) has come back to haunt former Fiji Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama, who spent a night in a police cell on March 9 before appearing in court, charged with abuse of office.

Not only did the “USP saga”, as it came to be known, cause a major rift between Fiji and the other 12 USP-member countries, but it may have contributed to the narrow loss of Bainimarama’s FijiFirst Party (FFP) in the December 2022 election.

Bainimarama’s abuse of office charges included accusations of interfering with a police investigation into financial malpractices at USP. If convicted, he would face a maximum sentence of 17 years in jail.

• READ MORE: Fiji’s Bainimarama granted bail, ordered to remain in country
• Former Fiji PM Bainimarama and suspended police chief charged
• The USP saga

But there are also serious questions about the future of the party that he co-founded, and which won successive elections in 2014 and 2018 on the back of his popularity.

A day before his indictment, there were surreal scenes at the Suva Central Police Station, as police officers marched an ashen-faced Bainimarama to his cell to spend the night before his court appearance the next morning.

This, under the full glare of live media coverage, with journalists tripping over themselves to take pictures of the former military strongman, who installed himself as prime minister after the 2006 coup and ruled for 16 years straight.

Arrested, detained and charged alongside Bainimarama was his once-powerful police chief, Sitiveni Qiliho, who managed a wry smile for the cameras. Both were released on a surety of F$10,000 (about NZ$7300) after pleading not guilty to the charges.

Shut down police investigation
It is alleged that in 2019, the duo “arbitrarily and in abuse of the authority of their respective offices” shut down a police investigation into alleged irregularities at USP when former vice-chancellor Rajesh Chandra was in charge.

In November 2018, Chandra’s replacement, Professor Pal Ahluwalia, revealed large remuneration payments to certain USP senior staff, some running to hundreds of thousands of dollars. The Fiji government, unhappy with Ahluwalia’s attack on Chandra, counter-attacked by alleging irregularities in Ahluwalia’s own administration.

As the dispute escalated, the Fiji government suspended its annual grant to the USP in a bid to force an inquiry into its own allegations.

When an external audit by the NZ accountants BDO confirmed the original report’s findings, the USP executive committee, under the control of the then Fiji government appointees, suspended Ahluwalia in June 2020.

This was in defiance of the USP’s supreme decision-making body, the USP Council, which reinstated him within a week.

Samoa’s then Deputy Prime Minister Fiamē Naomi Mataʻafa (who is now prime minister, having won a heavily contested election of her own) said at the time that Ahluwalia’s suspension had been a “nonsense”.

The then Nauruan President Lionel Aingimea attacked a “small group” of Fiji officials for “hijacking” the 12-country regional university.

Students threatened boycott
The USP Students’ Association threatened a boycott of exams, while more than 500 signatures supporting the suspended vice-chancellor were collected and students protested across several of USP’s national campuses. All these events played out prominently in the regional news media as well as on social media platforms.

With Fiji’s national elections scheduled for the following year, the political toll was becoming obvious. However, Bainimarama’s government either did not see it, or did not care to see it.

Instead of backing off from what many saw as an unnecessary fight, it doubled down. In February 2021, around 15 government police and security personnel along with immigration officials staged a late-night raid on Professor Ahluwalia’s Suva home, detained him with his wife, Sandra Price, and put them in a car for the three-hour drive to Nadi International Airport where, deported, they were put on the first flight to Australia.

The move sent shockwaves in Fiji and the region.

To many, it looked like a government that had come to power in the name of a “clean-up campaign” against corruption was now indulging in a cover-up campaign instead. The USP saga became political fodder at opposition rallies, with one of their major campaign promises being to bring back Professor Ahluwalia and restore the unpaid Fiji government grant that stood at F$86 million (about NZ$62 million) at the time.

A month before the 2022 polls, a statement targeting the estimated 30,000 staff and student cohort at USP, their friends and families, urged them to vote against FijiFirst, which would go on to lose government by a single parliamentary vote to the tripartite coalition led by another former coup leader, Sitiveni Rabuka.

Albanese official visit
It was Rabuka who greeted Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on his first official visit to Fiji last week. During talks at the Australian-funded Blackrock military camp, Albanese reportedly secured Rabuka’s support for the AUKUS deal.

Australia is keen for stability in Fiji, which has not had a smooth transition of power since independence, with democratically elected governments removed by coups in 1987, 2000 and 2006. Any disturbance in Fiji has the potential to upset the delicate balance in the region as a whole.

For Bainimarama and his followers, there is much to rue. His claimed agenda — to build national unity and racial equality and to rid Fiji of corruption — earned widespread support in 2014.

His margin of victory was much narrower in 2018 but Bainimarama managed to secure a majority in Parliament to lead the nation again.

His electoral loss in 2022 was followed by a series of dramatic events, which first saw Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, his deputy in all but name, disqualified from holding his seat in Parliament.

Bainimarama went next, suspended for three years by Parliament’s privileges committee for a speech attacking head of state Ratu Wiliame Katonivere. He chose to resign as opposition leader.

Following his March 10 hearing, Bainimarama addressed the media and a few supporters outside court, adamant that he had served the country with “integrity” and with “the best interests” of all Fijians at heart.  The former leader even managed to smile for the cameras while surrounded by a group of followers.

With nearly double the personal votes of the sitting PM Rabuka under Fiji’s proportional representation voting system, Bainimarama’s supporters still harboured some hope that he could return as the country’s leader one day.

However, his health is not the best. He is now out of Parliament and bogged down by legal troubles. Is the sun now setting on the era of Bainimarama and FijiFirst?

Dr Shailendra Bahadur Singh is a frequent contributor to Asia Pacific Report and is on the editorial board of the associated Pacific Journalism Review. This article was originally published by the Lowy Institute’s The Interpreter and is republished here with the author’s permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Shailendra Singh.

The long-running row between the former Fiji government and the Suva-based regional University of the South Pacific (USP) has come back to haunt former Fiji Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama, who spent a night in a police cell on March 9 before appearing in court, charged with abuse of office.

Not only did the “USP saga”, as it came to be known, cause a major rift between Fiji and the other 12 USP-member countries, but it may have contributed to the narrow loss of Bainimarama’s FijiFirst Party (FFP) in the December 2022 election.

Bainimarama’s abuse of office charges included accusations of interfering with a police investigation into financial malpractices at USP. If convicted, he would face a maximum sentence of 17 years in jail.

• READ MORE: Fiji’s Bainimarama granted bail, ordered to remain in country
• Former Fiji PM Bainimarama and suspended police chief charged
• The USP saga

But there are also serious questions about the future of the party that he co-founded, and which won successive elections in 2014 and 2018 on the back of his popularity.

A day before his indictment, there were surreal scenes at the Suva Central Police Station, as police officers marched an ashen-faced Bainimarama to his cell to spend the night before his court appearance the next morning.

This, under the full glare of live media coverage, with journalists tripping over themselves to take pictures of the former military strongman, who installed himself as prime minister after the 2006 coup and ruled for 16 years straight.

Arrested, detained and charged alongside Bainimarama was his once-powerful police chief, Sitiveni Qiliho, who managed a wry smile for the cameras. Both were released on a surety of F$10,000 (about NZ$7300) after pleading not guilty to the charges.

Shut down police investigation
It is alleged that in 2019, the duo “arbitrarily and in abuse of the authority of their respective offices” shut down a police investigation into alleged irregularities at USP when former vice-chancellor Rajesh Chandra was in charge.

In November 2018, Chandra’s replacement, Professor Pal Ahluwalia, revealed large remuneration payments to certain USP senior staff, some running to hundreds of thousands of dollars. The Fiji government, unhappy with Ahluwalia’s attack on Chandra, counter-attacked by alleging irregularities in Ahluwalia’s own administration.

As the dispute escalated, the Fiji government suspended its annual grant to the USP in a bid to force an inquiry into its own allegations.

When an external audit by the NZ accountants BDO confirmed the original report’s findings, the USP executive committee, under the control of the then Fiji government appointees, suspended Ahluwalia in June 2020.

This was in defiance of the USP’s supreme decision-making body, the USP Council, which reinstated him within a week.

Samoa’s then Deputy Prime Minister Fiamē Naomi Mataʻafa (who is now prime minister, having won a heavily contested election of her own) said at the time that Ahluwalia’s suspension had been a “nonsense”.

The then Nauruan President Lionel Aingimea attacked a “small group” of Fiji officials for “hijacking” the 12-country regional university.

Students threatened boycott
The USP Students’ Association threatened a boycott of exams, while more than 500 signatures supporting the suspended vice-chancellor were collected and students protested across several of USP’s national campuses. All these events played out prominently in the regional news media as well as on social media platforms.

With Fiji’s national elections scheduled for the following year, the political toll was becoming obvious. However, Bainimarama’s government either did not see it, or did not care to see it.

Instead of backing off from what many saw as an unnecessary fight, it doubled down. In February 2021, around 15 government police and security personnel along with immigration officials staged a late-night raid on Professor Ahluwalia’s Suva home, detained him with his wife, Sandra Price, and put them in a car for the three-hour drive to Nadi International Airport where, deported, they were put on the first flight to Australia.

The move sent shockwaves in Fiji and the region.

To many, it looked like a government that had come to power in the name of a “clean-up campaign” against corruption was now indulging in a cover-up campaign instead. The USP saga became political fodder at opposition rallies, with one of their major campaign promises being to bring back Professor Ahluwalia and restore the unpaid Fiji government grant that stood at F$86 million (about NZ$62 million) at the time.

A month before the 2022 polls, a statement targeting the estimated 30,000 staff and student cohort at USP, their friends and families, urged them to vote against FijiFirst, which would go on to lose government by a single parliamentary vote to the tripartite coalition led by another former coup leader, Sitiveni Rabuka.

Albanese official visit
It was Rabuka who greeted Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on his first official visit to Fiji last week. During talks at the Australian-funded Blackrock military camp, Albanese reportedly secured Rabuka’s support for the AUKUS deal.

Australia is keen for stability in Fiji, which has not had a smooth transition of power since independence, with democratically elected governments removed by coups in 1987, 2000 and 2006. Any disturbance in Fiji has the potential to upset the delicate balance in the region as a whole.

For Bainimarama and his followers, there is much to rue. His claimed agenda — to build national unity and racial equality and to rid Fiji of corruption — earned widespread support in 2014.

His margin of victory was much narrower in 2018 but Bainimarama managed to secure a majority in Parliament to lead the nation again.

His electoral loss in 2022 was followed by a series of dramatic events, which first saw Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, his deputy in all but name, disqualified from holding his seat in Parliament.

Bainimarama went next, suspended for three years by Parliament’s privileges committee for a speech attacking head of state Ratu Wiliame Katonivere. He chose to resign as opposition leader.

Following his March 10 hearing, Bainimarama addressed the media and a few supporters outside court, adamant that he had served the country with “integrity” and with “the best interests” of all Fijians at heart.  The former leader even managed to smile for the cameras while surrounded by a group of followers.

With nearly double the personal votes of the sitting PM Rabuka under Fiji’s proportional representation voting system, Bainimarama’s supporters still harboured some hope that he could return as the country’s leader one day.

However, his health is not the best. He is now out of Parliament and bogged down by legal troubles. Is the sun now setting on the era of Bainimarama and FijiFirst?

Dr Shailendra Bahadur Singh is a frequent contributor to Asia Pacific Report and is on the editorial board of the associated Pacific Journalism Review. This article was originally published by the Lowy Institute’s The Interpreter and is republished here with the author’s permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Shailendra Singh.

Both journalists have been summoned to the country’s High Court in the capital city of Lomé for a trial beginning on Wednesday, March 8, according to news reports, court documents reviewed by CPJ, and the journalists’ lawyer Elom Kpade, who spoke to CPJ by phone.

Authorities allege that Ayité, publication director of the privately owned L’Alternative newspaper, insulted public authorities in the outlet’s reporting, and that Kouwonou, the newspaper’s editor-in-chief, assisted in that alleged offense.

The court documents cite sections of Togo’s penal code relating to criminal insult, punishable with up to two years in prison and a fine of 1 million West African francs (US$1,619); distributing false news, which carries up to two years and a fine of 2 million francs (US$3,238); and authoring false news, which carries up to three years and a fine of 3 million francs (US$4,858).

“Togolese authorities should immediately cease their legal harassment of journalists Ferdinand Ayité and Isidore Kouwonou and allow them to work freely,” said Angela Quintal, CPJ’s Africa program coordinator, in New York. “Journalistic commentary on issues of public interest should never be criminalized, and the summonses issued to these journalists should be scrapped at once.”

The case stems from an online broadcast by L’Alternative in late 2021, which Ayité and journalist Joel Egah discussed corruption allegations involving two government ministers and accusations that they had manipulated the public, according to those news reports. Egah died from a heart attack in March 2022.

In December 2021, police arrested Ayité and Egah over that broadcast; Kouwonou was also summoned by police that month.

The court documents allege that both Ayité and Kouwonou published and distributed “false news” on social media that was liable to “disrupt public peace.”

Section 172 of Togo’s press code says that offenses involving journalists should be handled by the communication regulator, but Section 156 says that journalists who “used social networks as a means of communication” to commit such offenses are instead “punished in accordance with the common law provisions.”

CPJ called prosecutor Mawama Talaka for comment, but no one answered.

This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Erik Crouch.

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up for Dispatches, a newsletter that spotlights wrongdoing around the country, to receive our stories in your inbox every week.

Colorado lawmakers are considering two bills that would reform the way family courts in the state handle cases involving allegations of domestic abuse, saying ProPublica’s reporting on the issue has catalyzed efforts to change the state’s custody evaluation system.

Rep. Mike Weissman, an Aurora Democrat and the chair of the state House Judiciary Committee, praised ProPublica’s investigation, which found that four custody evaluators on the state-approved roster last year had been charged with harassment or domestic violence. In one case, the charges were dismissed. One case — that of psychologist Mark Kilmer — led to a conviction. In the two others, it is unclear how the charges were resolved.

Rep. Meg Froelich, a Democrat representing Englewood and a co-sponsor of one of the bills, said she gave a copy of the article to every judiciary committee member before the legislative session got underway.

“We don’t usually see in-depth coverage on this kind of thing,” Weissman said.

Meanwhile, Kilmer, who was suspended from working as a custody evaluator following publication of ProPublica’s story, is being sued by six plaintiffs over his involvement in their cases.

ProPublica’s story revealed that Kilmer was appointed to evaluate custody disputes involving allegations of domestic abuse despite Kilmer himself being charged with assault in 2006, after his then-wife said he pushed her to the bathroom floor, according to police reports. He pleaded guilty to harassment in 2007. Kilmer told ProPublica that his guilty plea was a result of poor legal representation and that his ex-wife made false allegations to get him arrested.

Kilmer was quoted in the story saying he did not believe about 90% of the claims of abuse he encountered in his work — an estimate he said was based on experience, not scientific research.

The bill co-sponsored by Froelich would require experts who advise the court on custody proceedings to have expertise in domestic violence and child abuse and would restrict judges from ordering forced “reunification” treatments that cut a child off from their protective parent, meaning the parent who expressed concerns about abuse or neglect. Court-ordered reunification “camps” often prohibit contact between minors and the protective parent as part of “therapeutic” treatment.

Among those testifying on behalf of the legislation was Elina Asensio, a teenager who was featured in the ProPublica article. Elina’s father was charged with felony child abuse and pleaded guilty to misdemeanor assault after dragging her up a flight of stairs. Kilmer was appointed to evaluate the case and recommended that she remain under the authority of her father. The parties ultimately resolved the custody dispute through arbitration and Elina remains partially under her father’s authority.

“The system failed me. My voice did not matter,” Elina, 17, told the committee. “My childhood has been taken for me. To this day, I still don't know what peace feels like.”

Through his lawyer, Elina’s father, Cedric Asensio, told ProPublica that while the initial charge of felony child abuse against him was “very serious,” the case’s ultimate resolution — a misdemeanor assault plea — indicated “there is much more to the story.”

The second bill, which passed the House Judiciary Committee and is pending budget approval before the Colorado General Assembly this week, would create a task force to study training requirements for judicial personnel on the topics of domestic violence and sexual assault, among other crimes.

The plaintiffssuing Kilmer, who include Elina’s mother, Karin Asensio, allege fraud and breach of contract related to his work on their cases. They accuse Kilmer, who is licensed as a psychologist in Colorado, of violating the American Psychological Association’s code of conduct by advising the court on matters related to domestic violence and child abuse despite his history of domestic violence.

The plaintiffs claim they would not have hired Kilmer had they known his personal history and views about abuse allegations, which they learned of from ProPublica’s reporting, according to the complaint.

In Colorado, the fees for parental responsibility evaluations — expert psychological assessments intended to inform judges’ custody decisions — are paid by the parties to a case. Fees are not capped and typically range between $12,000 and $30,000 for a custody evaluation, with some Colorado parents reporting that they paid over $50,000.

Kilmer didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Following his suspension last fall, Kilmer wrote to the court and criticized ProPublica’s investigation as the work of a “nonsense journalist” and apologized to his colleagues “for any inconveniences my well-intentioned interview may have caused for party/client relations past, present and future.”

“I have little experience with the print media, personally or professionally,” Kilmer told the court in an email obtained through a public records request. He said he had been willing to publicly discuss his work as a custody evaluator because “I assumed that it might help the practice here in Colorado, as it is an esoteric world that most people have little or no idea of how it works. Inadvertently, I entered into a political maelstrom that I did not understand existed.”

Since his suspension, Kilmer has continued to testify on cases to which he was previously appointed by Colorado courts. In one February hearing, Kilmer told a judge that the suspension was informal and he was continuing his state appointment.

Jaime Watman, who oversees custody evaluators for the Colorado State Court Administrator’s Office, told ProPublica that Kilmer has been removed from the rosters of custody evaluators, but the decision about whether he completes the appointments he was previously given “is at the discretion of the appointing court.”

Lauren May Woodruff, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, also testified about her experience with Kilmer at the House Judiciary Committee hearing on the bill to require courts to consider past evidence of abuse before allocating custody.

Kilmer completed his evaluation of Woodruff’s case in January, months after his suspension, according to court records. In his report, Kilmer advised the court that Woodruff should share custody and decision-making power with her daughter’s father, despite multiple mandatory reports to Colorado’s Department of Human Services — including one filed by Kilmer himself — that the father had endangered the child through reckless driving, including driving over 100 mph at night. Custody orders in the case are pending.

Woodruff’s soon-to-be-ex-husband did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In his evaluations, Kilmer routinely cites parental alienation, a disputed psychological theory in which one parent is accused of brainwashing a child to turn them against the other parent. In email correspondence between Kilmer and Jennifer J. Harman, an associate professor of psychology at Colorado State University and a parental alienation scholar, Harman sympathized with Kilmer after ProPublica’s report was published.

“I can tell the article is part of a larger strategy,” Harman wrote.

At the legislative session, a handful of individuals voiced opposition to the bills, including Katie Rubano, who runs a parental alienation support group for parents in Colorado. Rubano, citing Harman’s research on the subject, argued that “passing this bill would not solve the problem of child abuse in Colorado.”

“We need experts but we need them to be better and be trained in all forms of child abuse, including parental alienation,” she said.

Froelich’s bill would align Colorado with federal efforts to encourage family court reform. Last year, President Joe Biden signed a law that allocates additional federal funds to states that update their child custody laws to better protect at-risk children.

Weissman said he has felt momentum on family court reform gathering in Colorado over the past few years and said he “wouldn’t be surprised” if the state was one of the first to pass an equivalent to Kayden’s Law, a Pennsylvania act named for a child who was killed by her father during court-ordered unsupervised custody time, which he was granted despite his history of violence. Last March, Biden included provisions of Kayden’s Law in the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, committing federal funding to states that update family court laws to better protect children.

Colorado has frequently been a “leader in all manner of policy areas,” Weissman said, including legalizing cannabis and regulating ride-sharing companies. “We’re a place where we try new things when it becomes evident that they need to be tried.”

This content originally appeared on Articles and Investigations - ProPublica and was authored by by Hannah Dreyfus.

This article was produced for ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network in partnership with the Anchorage Daily News. Sign up for Dispatches to get stories like this one as soon as they are published.

Since Anchorage Mayor Dave Bronson took office in July 2021, he and his administration have been criticized for their words and their deeds. Top officials have been fired or have resigned. Lawsuits have been filed against the city, and complaints have been filed with the office of the city’s ombudsman, who told city prosecutors that employees are worried about being spied on.

Bronson was narrowly elected on a wave of support from conservative voters who opposed COVID-19 mandates and were frustrated with the city’s ongoing homelessness crisis.

The previous mayor, Ethan Berkowitz, resigned less than a year earlier after a television news reporter revealed he had texted her a photo of his naked backside. Berkowitz, a Democrat who was unable to seek reelection because of term limits, acknowledged his “unacceptable personal conduct” in messaging the reporter.

Here’s a timeline of some of the controversies and accusations that have hit the seat of government in Alaska’s largest city since Bronson’s election.

Bronson has declined all recent interview requests and has not responded to questions, citing potential litigation from his former municipal manager, who claims she was fired because of raising whistleblower concerns. Bronson’s adviser Larry Baker did not respond to questions.

Another of the mayor’s executives, human resources director Niki Tshibaka, resigned Monday as this story was being prepared for publication.

During a COVID-19 surge that prompted the state to enact crisis standards of care at hospitals, the Anchorage Assembly debated whether to pass legislation requiring masks in public spaces. Opponents of the mandate, including many Bronson supporters, wore yellow Stars of David pinned to their chests to compare mandatory mask wearing to the oppression of Jewish people in Nazi Germany.

Bronson, who pledged not to enact any COVID-19 mandates, defended the use of the stars.

“We’ve referenced the Star of David quite a bit here tonight, but there was a formal message that came out within Jewish culture about that and the message was, ‘never again.’ That’s an ethos. And that’s what that star really means is, ‘We will not forget, this will never happen again.’ And I think us borrowing that from them is actually a credit to them,” Bronson said.

The next day he apologized.

While touring a water treatment plant, Bronson abruptly ordered workers to shut off fluoridation of Anchorage’s water supply despite a city law that requires fluoride in the water. When asked about the shutoff, a Bronson spokesperson falsely said the event didn’t happen before saying a few days later that it did, indeed, occur. The shutoff lasted about five hours.

The mayor’s office contended that Bronson did not violate the city code because the fluoride levels in drinking water did not significantly change while it was off. Administration officials also said that the utility’s manager had asked the mayor to shut it off — which the manager denied in a public statement to the Assembly and in an email to the city manager.

Fluoride has been added to city water to prevent tooth decay since the 1950s. Unsubstantiated claims about potential dangers of fluoride have circulated for decades and prompted waves of debate before the Anchorage Assembly in the 1990s. Bronson said he made the order because utility workers told him they were experiencing health issues related to the substance.

A business manager for the union representing the workers said it had received no such complaints from members.

Bronson fired the director of the Anchorage Office of Equal Opportunity as she began investigating claims that the mayor’s pick to run the city libraries had made racist statements and other derogatory comments.

The library’s deputy director, Judy Eledge, was accused of telling an employee that, “If it weren’t for the white man and his oil, the natives would still be living in caves,” calling books about drag queens “filth” and saying that movements like Black Lives Matter are “killing libraries in this country.”

Library employees said they felt they couldn’t bring their complaints about her remarks to Bronson’s director of human resources, Niki Tshibaka, as both Tshibaka and Eledge are political allies of the mayor. Tshibaka was blocked from investigating complaints from library employees after wearing an “I’m with Judy” T-shirt to a library advisory board meeting. The mayor’s office and Tshibaka did not answer questions about the matter at the time. A spokesperson said only that the administration “complied” with recommendations from the city ombudsman to pull Tshibaka from involvement with library personnel complaints and hiring.

Tshibaka resigned on Monday, citing “an increasingly toxic, hostile, and demoralizing work environment.”

The former Office of Equal Opportunity director, Heather MacAlpine, has filed a lawsuit accusing the mayor of wrongful firing and violation of whistleblower protections. The city answered the complaint in July, denying that Eledge made racist statements and denying that MacAlpine was fired for acting as a whistleblower.

At the end of June, Bronson shuttered the city’s COVID-19 emergency mass homeless shelter inside a sports arena and moved homeless residents to a far-flung campground in Northeast Anchorage.

Bronson refused to call the city’s sanctioned homeless campground an official part of Anchorage’s homelessness response. The administration provided no food and no supportive services. Nonprofits, service providers and volunteers scrambled to meet basic needs at Centennial Park Campground.

Black bears began raiding campsites regularly. Wildlife officials shot and killed multiple bears there.

Advocates for homeless people decried the conditions as “deplorable.” Some Assembly members and community leaders called the situation a “humanitarian crisis.”

A city law requires Anchorage to set up emergency winter shelter once frigid temperatures arrive. So, at the end of September, the city moved people living in Centennial back into the arena.

The mayor’s pick to run the city Health Department suddenly quit just before Alaska Public Media revealed he had lied and exaggerated much of his resume.

Joe Gerace falsely claimed to be a physician’s assistant who held two master’s degrees and a high-ranking post within the Alaska National Guard.

Several people who said they had worked under Gerace, volunteered with him or worked in the Health Department had tried to tell the Bronson administration that his background didn’t add up. Tshibaka, the human resources director, at one point accused the employees of “character assassination” and apologized to Gerace for “disparagement of your sterling character.”

Two women raised concerns about Gerace’s apparently fabricated resume during a closed-door Assembly meeting, which the mayor attended, according to Alaska Public Media. The Assembly at that meeting voted to confirm Gerace as director.

In September, Gerace acknowledged to Alaska Public Media that he “took some liberties” regarding his work history and military service.

The state filed a lawsuit against Gerace in December, claiming he owes more than $61,000 after fraudulently claiming to be a high-ranking former U.S. military officer. As a result, Gerace was assigned a high rank within the official state militia and was overpaid, the lawsuit asserts. Gerace wrote in an email on Monday to the Daily News and ProPublica that he has made a settlement offer to the state in hopes of avoiding “a costly trial for both parties.”

Gerace wrote in the email that he has not formally been served with the complaint and was unable to comment further, although he added that others within the militia also were awarded ranks above their prior military service.

In his resignation letter to the mayor on Monday, Tshibaka wrote that he was “directed to vet and onboard” Gerace within a single day. He did not say who gave him that direction.

The Bronson administration began $4.9 million in construction work on a homeless shelter and resource center project without approval from the Assembly, leaving the future of the unfinished project in question.

Former City Manager Amy Demboski, fired by Bronson in December, claimed in an 11-page letter to city leaders that the mayor and adviser Larry Baker, in knowing violation of Anchorage law, pressured a subordinate city executive to sign off on the work. Demboski alleged that Bronson expected that the subordinate would “take the fall” for the decision.

Demboski said she immediately sent the construction work contract to the Assembly for proper consideration after discovering that work had already begun.

A Bronson official publicly conceded to the Assembly that the administration had made an “error” by starting construction without Assembly approval. The Assembly later voted to pull the plug on the homeless shelter.

City lawyers say Anchorage is on the hook for the millions in construction work. If the city can’t pay, it will likely face a lawsuit.

City Hall employees said in interviews that Purchasing Director Rachelle Alger twice brought penis-shaped cookies to distribute at City Hall.

Demboski claims that when she reported the issue to the mayor and Tshibaka, they took no apparent action. Alger did not respond to a phone message and emailed questions. Tshibaka also did not respond.

More generally, Demboski said in her letter to the city that the mayor encouraged and condoned behavior that created a hostile work environment, and that blatant sexism is tolerated in City Hall. The mayor treated women differently than men and chastised Demboski for reprimanding a man, she claimed.

“You raised your voice while showing her your hands held at different heights to indicate that because this subordinate is a man and Demboski is a woman — the male employee is ‘up here’ and Ms. Demboski is ‘down there,’” according to her letter of complaint.

Bronson has refused to answer questions about Demboski’s claims. A spokesperson for the mayor’s office in a statement said that the acting city attorney advised the mayor not to discuss issues relating to “potential litigation.”

According to the Anchorage ombudsman, multiple City Hall employees said they were afraid to make complaints because an executive had been talking openly about reviewing surveillance footage within the building.

The ombudsman, Darrel Hess, on Jan. 19 sent a memo to the mayor and the Assembly chairperson saying he had referred the matter to the city prosecutor, citing his belief that “there may have been a breach of duty, misconduct, or illegal activity.”

“Employees have stated that they are hesitant to visit our office because they are afraid that access to our office is being monitored,” Hess said in the memo.

The deputy chief of staff, Brice Wilbanks, resigned the same week. His attorneys sent a letter of their own to the city, attempting to rescind the resignation and accusing the ombudsman of acting inappropriately — even though the ombudsman never publicly accused Wilbanks by name of spying and intimidation. Wilbanks’ attorneys claimed he had been denied due process. Wilbanks did not respond to requests for comment, and his attorney declined to comment.

This content originally appeared on Articles and Investigations - ProPublica and was authored by by Kyle Hopkins and Emily Goodykoontz, Anchorage Daily News.

"The guidelines are distinct from those for entering Israel, which are normally applied at Ben Gurion Airport and other ports of entry," explained HRW—whose own Israel and Palestine director, Omar Shakir, was denied an entry permit under the new rules. "A West Bank permit holder without an Israeli entry visa has no legal authorization to enter Israel, nor occupied East Jerusalem."

HRW deputy Middle East director Eric Goldstein said in a statement that "by making it harder for people to spend time in the West Bank, Israel is taking yet another step toward turning the West Bank into another Gaza, where two million Palestinians have lived virtually sealed off from the outside world for over 15 years. This policy is designed to weaken the social, cultural, and intellectual ties that Palestinians have tried to maintain with the outside world."

HRW interviewed 13 people last year "who detailed difficulties they have faced for years entering or remaining in the West Bank and their concerns about how the new guidelines will affect them."

"Ayman," who was born in Europe in the mid-1990s to a Palestinian father from the West Bank and a European mother, has lived in the West Bank most of his life. However, because he has no Palestinian identification card, he has relied upon visas in his European passport to remain in the West Bank and fears the new regulations could endanger his ability to remain in Palestine.

"Palestine for me is home," as "my childhood, schools, classmates, friends, extended family, relatives, and all the memories I have are all here," he told HRW, and yet "I am in Palestine as a tourist, as a European citizen."

"Israel's duties as an occupying power require it to facilitate foreigners' entry to the West Bank in an orderly manner."

"I may lose the right to visit," Ayman added. "I won't be able to visit as a tourist either according to these regulations."

HRW asserted that "while countries have wide discretion over entry into their sovereign territory, international humanitarian law requires occupying powers to act in the best interest of the occupied population or to maintain security or public order."

"There are no apparent justifications based on security, public order, or the best interests of Palestinians for how significantly Israeli authorities restrict volunteers, academics, or students from entering the West Bank or Palestinians' loved ones from remaining on a long-term basis," the group argued.

"By excessively restricting Palestinian families' ability to spend time together, and blocking the entry of academics, students, and nongovernmental workers who would contribute to social, cultural, political, and intellectual life in the West Bank, Israel's restrictions fall afoul of its duty, which increases in a prolonged occupation, to facilitate normal civil life for the occupied population," HRW continued.

"Israel's duties as an occupying power require it to facilitate foreigners' entry to the West Bank in an orderly manner," HRW added. "Subject to an individualized security assessment and absent compelling reason of law, Israeli authorities should at minimum grant permits of reasonable duration to foreigners who would contribute to life of the West Bank, including the family members of Palestinians and those working with Palestinian civil society, and residency to immediate relatives."

This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Newswire Editor.

A special task force from Fiji’s Criminal Investigations Department (CID) is handling former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum’s alleged incitement case.

Fiji Police Force chief of intelligence and investigations Assistant Commissioner of Police Surend Sami said the task force was working under the direction of the director CID.

“As earlier stated, there is a special task force that is handling this case which works under the direction of the director CID,” Assistant Commissioner Sami said.

• READ MORE: Other Fiji incitement reports

“The process of getting statements and necessary evidence continues by the investigators and once the process is completed then the next course of action will be taken.

“We do not want to pressure the investigators and must allow them to conduct their work thoroughly”.

Sayed-Khaiyum arrived in the country on Thursday.

Sakiasi Ditoka, Minister for Rural Maritime Development and Disaster Management and general secretary for the People’s Alliance, had filed a complaint against Sayed-Khaiyum on December 22 alleging that he had incited racial hatred and violence with his public statements at a press conference in Suva.

Rakesh Kumar is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

How did this happen? An intractable well entrenched right-wing Congress impeded the the people’s elected President’s agenda, brought charges against him and his appointees for corruption and tried three time to impeach him. To forestall an impeachment attempt Pedro Castillo dissolved the Congress, as allowed by Peruvian law. Publicly unverified reports may establish a meeting between the U.S. Ambassador (a former CIA agent) and Peru’s Minister of Defense²  who threw his support instead to the right-wing Congress: Castillo was displaced on Dec. 7, 2022. Immediately the U.S., Canada, European Union, supported as Peru’s president, Dina Bolurate, Castillo’s vice-president. Bolivia, Argentina, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia among others supported President Pedro Castillo.

As of January 15, Security forces murdered about 50 protesters, including the victims of the Ayacucho massacre (Dec. 15, 2022) and Juliaca massacre (Jan. 9, 2023), in military actions by police and armed forces against Indigenous peoples, mestizos, workers who seem to be without weapons.

Displaced president Castillo is in prison, accused of attempting to overthrow the democratic process with a coup. Castillo, Indigenous, was a teacher, a union leader, a Marxist, elected in 2021 by a small majority in a race against Keiko Fujimori who wouldn’t concede defeat.

Keiko Fujimori’s forces included an entrenched Fujimori political machine and the extreme right wing. She enjoyed the support of the current U.S. Ambassador and U.S. literati favorite, the nobelist Vargas Llosa. Keiko Fujimori assured supporters her primary mission if elected was to free her father, former president Alberto Fujimori, serving extended prison sentences for human rights crimes such as murder, kidnapping etc., and embezzlement, bribery, corruption. In 2017 the elder Fujimori was pardoned by then President of Peru Pedro Pablo Kuczynski, in exchange for support in Peru’s Congress to further Kuczynski’s political agenda. The pardon was overturned by Peru’s Supreme Court in 2018 and Fujimori re-imprisoned.

Allegations of genocide accompanied Fujimori the father’s near extermination of the largely Indigenous/mestizo Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso), as well as his programs of sterilizing Indian women and men without their informed consent. Fujimori’s victories were assured by application of ruthless military force. Victims of his domestic policies were most often mestizo or Indigenous peoples but most of the military was equally mestizo and Indigenous so the huge numbers of fatalities of Shining Path adherents couldn’t be ethnically or racially differentiated from military casualties, unless one supposed a genocide of the Indigenous related population by setting one part against the other.

Through crimes of atrocity Fujimori the father gathered extremist support which remained an element of control through fear by Peru’s privileged elite. It was not surprising that as soon as Castillo took office he and his appointees came under attack from the elite’s attorneys, usually with charges of corruption. His platform for election included promises to redistribute Peru’s mining resources.

The Parliament which serves right wing corporate interests began a series of impeachment attempts. After Fujimori’s total war on the Shining Path anyone resisting fascism became a “terrorist.” The workers / protesters recently murdered by Security forces were described on police records as “terrorists.”³

In a sense this story is the familiar destabilization and takeover of a non-NATO country by the CIA. Like corporate programs, CIA policies seem not to be limited by one administration or another or time-reliant on individual leadership, but endure in waiting until applicable.

However since inception of such takeovers the world has changed.

In Venezuela of 2002, President Hugo Chávez was displaced by a parliamentary coup of the Euro-privileged – those who serve corporate interest, yet was re-instated by the people because of his strong identification with the people’s interests, mestizo, Euro, Indigenous, Black – workers. His chosen successor Nicolás Maduro has remained in power as the elected President despite the unsuccessful attempt by the U.S.,Canada, the U.K etc. to replace him with their puppet, Juan Guaidó, in a putsch which attempted the theft of a portion of Venezuela’s gold reserves.

In Guatemala the former dictator – U.S. and Israel supported Efraín Ríos Montt was convicted of genocide in 2013 for his mangement of the dirty war against the Indigenous people / workers, a judicial decision vacated by the elite’s corruption of the judicial system and challenged until his death.

In 2019 the President of Bolivia, Evo Morales (Indigenous) was replaced by the well-honed manipulative politics of Jeanine Ãñez a Senator backed by the U.S. and the country’s elite. Currently she serves 10 years in prison convicted of crimes against the state for her part in the coup.

In Argentina. 2022, a Trumpian coup by supporters of former fascist President Jair Bolsonaru was squashed by the legitimate government of socialist President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

Leftists, socialist leaders, Indigenous allied leaders, are challenged by capitalist usually racist interests. Generally the poor, the workers, the majority are largely Indigenous or of mixed blood, so the European oriented elite’s control risks falling under the caveats of the Convention on Genocide.

Concerning Canada, in 2022 Pope Francis publicly understood Canadian historical treatment of First Peoples as a genocide. And the House of Commons found the Residential Schools Program to have been a genocide – the government’s initial attempts to classify its treatment of the children as victims of “cultural genocide” gives way to a people’s recognition of “genocide.” The issue of “genocide” as applied to contemporary treatment of some First People’s tribes, has not reached the courts. In Canada application of the Convention is ultimately at the discretion of the Minister of Justice.

By 2023 we live in a world where European colonialism was called to account in the 1960s with the liberation struggles of Africa. North America’s disappearance of for instance 6 million Indians in lands which became the USA is increasingly recognized as a genocide rather than a conquest or settlement of uninhabited regions. A different mindset evolves in our understanding of history and of genocide.. Covert programs of taking over nations of basically Indigenous peoples by replacing their leaders with puppets of the Euro-elite becomes genocidal.

Points to consider:

One of the first acts proposed under Peru’s right wing Congress after it ousted President Castillo was to strip the Amazon’s uncontacted tribes of land areas reserved for them, to deny them protection and safety on lands sought by resource extractors.⁴  The legislation gives evidence of a clear intent to destroy a racial. ethnic group.

The allegations of genocide which became an issue during Fujimori’s attempts to extinguish the flame of Sendero Luminoso – the Shining Path, and the clarity of his efforts to sacrifice the Indigenous related population by advancing U.S. and U.N. sourced birth control programs on native peoples without their informed consent, become more easy to prove. Attempts to charge Fujimori the father with genocide for these crimes appeared and disappeared for twenty-five years and remain unadjudicated, signifying extreme opposition to application of the Convention itself in Peru, to politicians on the far-right or in mafia-like political families. On January 11, 2021, the most recent attempt to hold a hearing on the forced sterilization of several hundred thousand Peruvian women and directly accusing Fujimorri the elder, his health ministers and various doctors, was closed after an hour due to the court’s inability to translate all twelve of the dialects spoken by native Quechua witnesses.⁵

On January 17, 2023 people from all through Peru attempted to march together in Lima to express the will of the Four Nations (not the British four nations but those derived from the ancient nations of the Inca empire): remove Dina Bolurate from 0ffice and free Pedro Castillo from prison.⁶ To begin with…. There is momentum throughout Peru to counter the coup by Peru’s Congress and reinstate Pedro Castillo as the people’s elected President.

The crime of Genocide has no statute of limitations. Aspects of the crime are cumulative. The successes of genocide’s perpetrators become evidence of guilt which the judicial systems of the Americas are likely to confront as they gain control of their own resources. This is likely to be accompanied by the increasing political power of Indigenous peoples and their rights to resource land. It’s to the interest of Peru’s privileged to assure just representation to the Peruvian people.

1. “Genocide investigation opened against Peru president after protest deaths,” Agence France-Presse, Jan 11, 2023, Guardian.
2. “CIA Coup in Peru Explodes into Violence,” Kurt Nimmo & Ben Norton, Jan. 13, 2023, Global Reseach.
3. “Peru’s President Dina Boluarte appoints new intelligence chief,” Diego Lopez Marina, Jan. 10, 2023, Perú reports.
4. “Peru lawmakers propose bill to strip Indigenous people of protections,” Dec. 23, 2022, Guardian.
5. “Peru’s government forcibly sterilized Indigenous women from 1996 to 2001, the women say. Why?” Ñusta Carranza Ko, Feb.19, 2021 Washington Post.
6. “Thousands of Farmers Continue Advancing Towards Lima,” Jan. 17, 2023, Telesur.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by J.B. Gerald.

Police officers in West Papua will be investigated over shootings during a provincial governor’s controversial arrest.

One person died after the struggle that followed the arrest of Papua Governor Lukas Enembe over allegations of bribery.

As many as 19 people were detained by the police for allegedly attacking security forces.

• READ MORE: Jokowi acknowledges gross human rights violations in Indonesia, Papua
• Yamin Kogoya: Arrest of Papuan governor Enembe condemned as illegal Jakarta ‘kidnap’
• Other West Papua reports

Papua police chief Mathias Fakhiri has ordered the head of the Internal Affair Division and director of Criminal Investigation of the Papua Police to immediately investigate the actions taken by police officers.

He asked his staff to approach families and religious, community and traditional leaders, so that the arrest of Governor Lukas Enembe would not create unrest.

“I ask for the report today. If there is indeed a wrong handling, I ensure there will be law enforcement against members who do not comply with the standard operating procedures,” he said.

“I urge all parties not to spread hoaxes or information that does not match the facts,” he said.

“Let us provide moral support so that the legal process runs as it is.”

Wenda calls for governor’s release
A West Papuan independence leader, Benny Wenda, has called for the immediate and unconditional release of Governor Enembe.

Wenda said the arrest follows the governor’s “criminalisation” in September 2022, when he was accused of corruption and banned from travelling abroad for essential medical treatment.

The United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) leader said Enembe’s treatment could not be separated from his increasingly vocal stance against Indonesia’s colonial policies in West Papua.

Wenda said Enembe opposed Indonesia’s division of West Papua into new provinces, which the exiled leader described as a “divide and rule” tactic designed to steal the region’s natural resources and allow further militarisation of villages.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. 

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Following months of legal limbo and a health crisis, Papua Governor Lukas Enembe was arrested this week by the country’s Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) in a dramatic move condemned by critics as a “kidnapping”.

At noon on Tuesday, January 10, Governor Enembe was dining in a local restaurant near the headquarters of Indonesia’s Mobile Brigade Corps, known as Brimob.

After the arrest the Brimob transported him directly to Sentani Theys Eluay’s airport — an airport named in honour of another prominent Papuan leader who was callously murdered by the same security forces in 2002, not far from where the governor was arrested.

• READ MORE: KPK arrests Papua Governor Lukas Enembe
• Papua governor Enembe arrested on ‘lavish’ bribery charges
• Fate of Papua’s Governor Enembe – the ‘son of Koteka’ – lies in balance amid allegations
• Other Governor Enembe reports

Governor Enembe was immediately flown to Jakarta to arrive at the Army Central Hospital (RSPAD), Gatot Soebroto, Central Jakarta, reports Kompas.com.

In what seems to be a cautiously premeditated arrest, Jakarta targeted Governor Enembe while he was alone and without the support of thousands of Papuans who had barricaded his residence since September last year.

Once the news of his arrest was leaked, supporters attempted to gather in Sentani at the airport, but they were outnumbered by heavy security forces. A few protesters were shot, and several were injured, with one protester dying from his injuries.

1 shot dead, several wounded
Papua Police Public Relations Officer Kombes Ignatius Benny Prabowo said when contacted by Tribunnews.com in Jakarta: “Yes, it is true that someone was shot dead on Tuesday.”

Among those who were shot were Hemanus Kobari Enembe (dead), Neiron Enembe, Kano Enembe, and Segira Enembe.

Surprisingly, they share the same clan names of the governor himself, indicating that only his immediate family were informed of his arrest.

Hemanus Kobari Enembe paid the ultimate price at the hand of Jakarta’s calculated planning and arrest of Papua’s governor.

The crisis began in September 2022, when Governor Enembe was named a suspect by the KPK and summoned by Brimob after it accused him of receiving bribes worth 1 million rupiah (NZ$112,000). This amount was then escalated into a rush of accusations against the governor, including a new allegation that the governor had paid US$39 million to overseas casinos, disclosing details of his private assets such as cars, houses, and properties.

Voices of prominent Papuan figures
A prominent Papuan, Natalius Pigai, Indonesia’s former human rights commissioner, was interviewed on January 11 by an INews TV news presenter regarding these extra allegations.

“If that’s the case,” Pigai replied, “then why don’t we use these wild extra allegations to investigate all the crimes committed in this country by the country’s top ministerial level, including the children of the president, as a conduit for investigating some of the crimes committed by his office in this country?

“Are we interested in that? Why just target Governor Lukas?”

Papuan public intellectual Dr Benny Giay was seen in a video saying that the arrest of Governor Enembe by the KPK in Jayapura was to serve the interests of Jakarta’s political elite, whom he described as “hardliners” in relation to the power struggle to become number one in Papua’s province.

According to him, Governor Lukas Enembe was a victim of this power struggle.

Dr Socrates Yoman, president of the West Papua Fellowship of Baptist Churches, described the arrest as a “kidnapping”. He said the governor had been arrested illegally, without following any legal procedures — and neither the governor nor legal counsel was informed of his arrest.

According to Dr Yoman, Governor Enembe is ill and in the process of recovering from his illness. Thus, this pressure exerted by the state through the military and police violated Governor Enembe’s basic rights to health and humanity.

The behaviour of the state through BRIMOB constituted a crime against humanity or a gross violation of human rights because the governor was arrested during lunchtime without an arrest warrant and while he was unwell, he said.

“The governor is not a terrorist — he was elected Governor of Papua by the Papuan people.

“This kidnapping shows that the nation or country has no law. The country is controlled by people who have lost their humanity, opting instead for animalistic rage and a senseless lust for violence.

“Our goal is to restore their humanity so that they can see other human beings as human beings and become whole human beings,” said Dr Yoman.

• WATCH VIDEO: Dr Benny Giay speaks on Facebook

The governor’s health
The governor’s health has deteriorated since he was banned from traveling to Singapore for regular medical aid since September last year.

Last October, Governor Enembe received two visits from Singapore medical specialists who have been treating him for a number of years.

Despite these visits, his health has continued to deteriorate, which led Singapore’s medical specialists to send a letter in November to authorities in Indonesia requesting that the governor be airlifted to Mount Elizabeth hospital.

The letter from Royal Healthcare in Singapore said:

“We have treated Governor Lukas remotely with routine blood tests, regular zoom consults and monitoring of his glucose and blood pressure levels since November 1, 2022. However, his condition has deteriorated rapidly the last week. His renal function is at a critical range (5.75mg/dl), and he may require dialysis sooner than later. His blood pressure is hovering 190-200/80-100 increasing his risk of morbidity and mortality. He has been advised on immediate evacuation to Singapore with direct admission to Mount Elizabeth Novena Hospital.”

The letters were ignored, and the sick governor was arrested and taken to a hospital in Jakarta, where he had previously refused to go.

Governor Enembe had previously written to KPK requesting that he receive urgent medical treatment in Singapore. Papuan police chiefs and KPK members were asked to accompany him, but this did not happen.

On November 30, 2022, Firli Bahuri, Chairman of KPK, visited the governor at his barricaded residence in Koya Jayapura, Papua, in what appeared to be a humane approach.

But what happened on Tuesday indicates that KPK had already decided to arrest him and take him to the Indonesian capital of Jakarta — almost 4500 km from his home town.

Many Papuan figures who go to Jakarta return home in coffins. Papuan protesters did not want their leader to be taken out of Papua, partly due to this fear.

Despite these protests, letters, and requests, Jakarta completely disregarded the will of the people and of the governor himself.

The plot to kidnap Governor Enembe appears to have been well planned over a period of four months since September, providing enough space for the situation in Papua to calm down and allowing the governor to leave his barricaded house alone without his Papuan “special forces”.

It was during the lunch hour of noon on Tuesday that KPK targeted him in a cunningly calculated manner.

Governor’s image in social media
Governor Enembe is portrayed in the Indonesia’s national narrative as a representative of the so-called “poor and backward” majority of Papuans, while portraying him as a man of a lavish lifestyle, owning properties and cars, and with great wealth.

Comments on social media are flooded with a common theme — portraying Papua’s governor as a “criminal”, with some even calling for his “execution”.

Some social media comments emerging from those fighting for West Papua’s liberation are echoing these themes by claiming that Governor Enembe’s case has nothing to do with the Free Papua Movement– his problem is with Jakarta only as he is a “colonial puppet ruler”.

It is true that Lukas Enembe is governor of Indonesian settler colonial provinces. However, Papuans have failed to understand the big picture — the ultimate fate of West Papua itself.

What would happen if West Papua remains part of Indonesia for the next 20-50 years?

Our failure to see the big picture by both Papuans and Indonesians, as well as the international community, is a result of Jakarta fabrication that West Papua is merely a national sovereignty issue for Indonesia. That is the crux of that fatal error.

The isolation of the governor from the rest of the Papuans as a “corruptor” and other dehumanising labels are designed to destroy Papuans’ self-esteem, stripping them of their pride, dignity, and self-respect.

The images and videos of the governor’s arrest, deportation, handcuffing in Jakarta in KPK uniform, and his admission to the military hospital while surrounded by heavily armed security forces are psychologically intimidating to Papuans.

Through brutal silence, politically loaded imagery has been used to convey a certain message:

“See what has happened to your respected leader, the big chief of the Papuan tribes; he is no longer a person. Jakarta still has the final say in what happens to all of you.”

Papuans are facing a highly choreographed state-sponsored terror campaign that shows no signs of abating.

For Papuans, the new year of 2023 should be a time of hope, new dreams, and new lives, but this has been marred once again by the arrest and kidnapping of a well-known and popular Papuan figure, as well as the death of a member of the governor’s family on Tuesday.

As human miseries continue to unfold in the Papuan homeland, Jakarta continues to conduct business as usual, pretending nothing is happening in West Papua while beating the drum of “development, prosperity, and progress” for the betterment of the backward Papuans.

With such prolonged tragedies, it is imperative that the old theories, terminologies, and paradigms that govern this brutal state of affairs be challenged.

A new paradigm is needed
The very foundation of our thinking between West Papua and Indonesia must be re-examined within the framework of what Tunisian writer, Albert Memmie, described as “coloniser and colonised”, when examining French treatment of colonised Tunisians, who emerged concurrent with Franz Fanon, the leading thinker of black experience in white, colonised Algeria.

The works of these thinkers provide insight into how the world of colonisers and colonised operates with its psychopathological manipulations in an unjust racially divided system of coloniser control.

These great decolonisation literature treasures will help Papuans to connect the dots of this last frontier to a bigger picture of centuries of war against colonised original peoples around the world, some of which were obliterated (Tasmania), able to escape (Algeria), or escaped but are still trying to reorganise themselves (Haiti).

Therefore, the coloniser and colonised paradigm is a useful mental framework to view Jakarta’s settler colonial activities and how Papuans (colonised) are continuously being lied to, manipulated, dissected, remade and destroyed — from all sides — in order to prevent them from uniting against the entity that threatens their very existence.

The real culprits in West Papua and proper Papuan justice
Most ordinary Papuans are unable to gain access to information regarding who exploits their natural resources, how much they are making, who receives the most benefits and how or why.

But Jakarta is too busy displaying Governor Enembe’s personal affairs and wild allegations in headline news — his entire existence is placed on public display, as an object of humiliation, just as the messianic Jesus was crucified on a Roman cross in order to convince Galilean followers that their beloved leader failed.

If true justice is to be delivered to colonised Papuans, then Papuans must put the Dutch on trial for abandoning them 60 years ago, and then hold the United Nations and the United States responsible for selling them, to Indonesia, 60 years ago.

In addition to arresting all international capitalist bandits that are exploiting West Papua under the disguise of multinational corporations, Indonesia should also be arrested for its crimes against Papuans, dating back over 61 years.

However, the question remains… who will deliver this proper justice for the colonised Papuans? Jakarta has certainly set itself on a pathological path of arresting, imprisoning, and executing any figure that appears to be a messianic figure to unite these dislocated original tribes for its final war for survival.

Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic/activist who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

• Other Yamin Kogoya articles

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

Indonesian anti-curruption authorities have arrested Papua Governor Lukas Enembe on allegations of bribery.

The Jakarta Globe called the arrest by the Corruption Eradication Commission in a restaurant in the provincial capital Jayapura yesterday as “dramatic” saying it came four months after he had been named a suspect.

The arrest led to his supporters attacking a police Mobile Brigade Unit where he was being held prior to being flown to Jakarta on a chartered flight.

• READ MORE: Fate of Papua’s Governor Enembe – the ‘son of Koteka’ – lies in balance amid allegations
• Other Governor Enembe reports

The newspaper said the two-term governor is accused of taking billions of rupiah in bribes from businessmen but has resisted arrest since the commission named him a suspect in September.

Indonesia’s Financial Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre alleged Enembe made payments, amounting to US$39 million dollars, to overseas casinos.

Indonesia’s Chief Security Minister Mohammad Mahfud said in October that the central government had channelled billions of dollars in what was dubbed “autonomy funding” to Papua since 2001, with about half of that amount disbursed during Enembe’s term.

He claimed “nothing happened: the people remain poor and the officials continue their lavish lifestyle”.

• Pacific Media Watch reports that Papua province is at the heart of the indigenous self-determination struggle in West Papua.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. 

Fate of Papua’s Governor Enembe – the ‘son of Koteka’ – lies in balance amid allegations

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

France’s highest court has revived French Polynesia’s largest corruption case, which had been closed almost more than three years ago.

Eight people, including former president Gaston Flosse, were given jail sentences by Tahiti’s criminal court in 2013 for their roles in a kickback scheme to secure public sector contracts from the OPT telecommunications company.

On appeal in 2015, the case was thrown out over a technicality. In 2019, judicial authorities in Tahiti dismissed efforts to revisit the matter, saying the statute of limitations applied in the affair.

• READ MORE: Other Tahiti corruption reports

However, the court in Paris has now annulled their decision, saying that the relevant texts had been misunderstood.

The alleged misuse of public funds centred on French businessman Hubert Haddad paying US$2 million in kickbacks over 12 years to Flosse and his party to get the OPT contracts.

During the investigations and trial, it was established that Flosse’s secretary Melba Ortas used to collect the money as regular cash payments from Haddad’s local company, and Flosse admitted disbursing the money for private expenses.

While investigations were underway in 2009, Flosse was jailed for three weeks.

Imprisoned for three months
Haddad, who had been arrested in France, was also imprisoned for three months in Tahiti as part of the investigations, but on paying a US$800,000 bail, he secured his release.

The former head of the OPT and Air Tahiti, Nui Geffry Salmon, spent six months in preventive detention until he was freed on US$120,000 bail.

At their trial in 2013, Flosse and Haddad were given five-year prison sentences and fined US$110,000, but they appealed.

Flosse’s lawyers failed, however, in their bid to get France’s highest court to move the appeal case away from Tahiti after claiming they wouldn’t get a fair trial.

The criminal court also ordered that the OPT be reimbursed US$5.6 million.

Four months after the verdict, Flosse was elected president and within months, the lawyer acting for the OPT, James Lau, was dismissed.

Lau noted that those convicted had taken over key aspects of the impending appeal trial, likening the case to a “mafia-style affair”.

Procedural errors
In the appeal court in 2015, the case was thrown out because of procedural errors by the prosecution.

Attempts by the prosecution to revisit the case were quashed in 2019 when the case was closed.

The lawyer acting for Flosse, Francois Quinquis, said the latest decision in Paris to allow the affair to be retested is no surprise as the court tried to save the case.

He told Tahiti-infos he wished the prosecution good luck as the decisions reached so far had made the affair inextricable.

Haddad’s lawyer said the case would end once there were no protagonists left.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. 

This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

On December 15, the night that the Biden administration released some of the remaining JFK files while withholding others with another half-assed excuse, Tucker Carlson, the most-watched cable news television host, delivered a monologue about the JFK assassination.  It garnered a great deal of attention.

Although I don’t watch Carlson’s television show, I received messages from many friends and colleagues, people I highly respect, about his monologue’s great significance, so I watched that episode. And then I watched it many more times.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., a man whom I hold in the highest esteem, tweeted that it was “the most courageous newscast in 60 years.  The CIA’s murder of my uncle was a successful coup d’état from which our democracy has never recovered.”

While I completely agree with his second sentence, I was underwhelmed by Carlson’s words, to put it mildly.  I thought it was clearly “a limited hangout,” as described by the former CIA agent Victor Marchetti:

Spy jargon for a favorite and frequently used gimmick of the clandestine professionals. When their veil of secrecy is shredded and they can no longer rely on a phony cover story to misinform the public, they resort to admitting, sometimes even volunteering, some of the truth while still managing to withhold the key and damaging facts in the case. The public, however, is usually so intrigued by the new information that it never thinks to pursue the matter further.

Or listens carefully.

Carlson surely said some things that were true, and, as my friends and many others have insisted, he was the first mainstream corporate journalist to say that “the CIA was involved in the assassination of the president.”

But “involved” is a word worthy of a lawyer, a public relations expert, or the CIA itself because it can mean something significant or nothing.  Or a little of both.  It is a weasel word.

And the source for Carlson’s claim was an anonymous source, someone who he said “had access” to the JFK files that were never released.  We know, of course, that when the New York Times and its ilk cite “anonymous sources,” claiming that they have told them this or that, this raises eyebrows. Or should.  Anyone who closely follows that paper’s claims knows that it is a CIA conduit, but now, those who know this are embracing Tucker Carlson as if he were the prophet of truth, as if a Rupert Murdock-owned Fox TV host who is paid many millions of dollars, has become the Julian Assange of corporate journalism.

In a 2010 radio interview, Mr. Carlson said, “ I am 100 % his bitch.  Whatever Mr. Murdoch says, I do.”

The obvious question is: Why would Fox News allow Carlson to say now what many hear as shocking news about the JFK assassination?

So let me run down exactly what Carlson did say.

For five minutes of the 7:28 minute monologue, he said things that are obviously true: that Jack Ruby killed Oswald and that the claim that both acted alone is weird and beyond any odds; that the Warren Commission was shoddy; that the CIA weaponized the term “conspiracy theory” in 1967 according to Lance De Haven-Smith’s book Conspiracy Theory in America; that the CIA’s brainwashing specialist psychiatrist Louis Jolyon West visited Jack Ruby in jail and declared him insane, contrary to all other assessments of Ruby’s mental state; and that the 1976 House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) concluded that there was probably a conspiracy in the president’s assassination.

All of this is true but not news to those knowledgeable about the assassination.  Nevertheless, it was perhaps news to Carlson’s audience and therefore good to hear on a corporate news site.

But then, the next few minutes – the key part of his report, the part that drew all the attention – got tricky.

Carlson said that just that day – December 15, 2022 – when all the JFK documents were due to be released but many were withheld, “we spoke to someone who had access to these still hidden CIA documents.”  Who would have such access, and how, is left unaddressed, but it is implied that it is a CIA source, but maybe not.  It is strange to say the least.

Carlson then said he asked this person, “Did the CIA have a hand in the murder of John F. Kennedy?”  And the answer was “I believe they were involved.”  Carlson goes on to say, “And the answer we received was unequivocal.  Yes, the CIA was involved in the assassination of the president.”

Note the words “hand,” “believe,” “involved,” and then “unequivocal.”

“Hand” can mean many things and is very vague.  For example, in front of his wife, a man tells his friend, “I had a hand in preparing Christmas dinner.”  To which his wife, laughing, replies, “Yes, he did, he put the napkins on the table.”

To “believe” something is very different from knowing it, as Dr. Martin Schotz, one of the most perceptive JFK assassination researchers, has written in his book, History Will Not Absolve Us: Orwellian Control, Public Denial, and the Murder of President Kennedy

On Belief Versus Knowledge

It is so important to understand that one of the primary means of immobilizing the American people politically today is to hold them in a state of confusion in which anything can be believed but nothing can be known, nothing of significance that is.

And the American people are more than willing to be held in this state because to know the truth — as opposed to only believe the truth — is to face an awful terror and to be no longer able to evade responsibility. It is precisely in moving from belief to knowledge that the citizen moves from irresponsibility to responsibility, from helplessness and hopelessness to action, with the ultimate aim of being empowered and confident in one’s rational powers.

“Involved,” like the word “hand,” can mean many things; it is vague, slippery, not definitive, and is used by tabloid gossip columnists to suggest scandals that may or not be true.

“Unequivocal” does not accurately describe the source’s statement, which was: “I believe.” That is, unless you take someone’s belief as evidence of the truth, or you wish to make it sound so.

Note that nowhere in Carlson’s report does he or his alleged source say clearly and definitively that the CIA/National Security State murdered President Kennedy, for which there has long been overwhelming evidence.  Such beating-around-the-bush is quite common and tantalizes the audience to think the next explosive revelation will be dispositive.  Yet no release of documents is needed to confirm that the CIA killed Kennedy, as if the national security state would allow itself to be pinned for the murder.

Waiting for the documents is like waiting for Godot; and to promote some hidden smoking gun, some great revelation is to engage in a pseudo-debate without end.  It is to do the killers’ bidding for them.  And it is quite common. There are many well-known “dissident” writers who continue to claim that there is not enough evidence to conclude that the CIA/national security state killed the president.  And this is so for those who question the official story.  Furthermore, there are many more pundits who maintain that Oswald did the deed alone, as the Warren Report concluded and the mainstream corporate media trumpet.  This group is led by Noam Chomsky, whose acolytes bow to their master’s ignorant conclusions.

Maybe we’ll know the truth in 2063.

While it is true that some people change dramatically, Tucker Carlson, the Fox Television celebrity, would be a very unlikely candidate.  He defended Eliot Abrams and praised Oliver North; supported the Contras against the Sandinistas in Nicaragua; went to Nicaragua to support those Contras; smeared the great journalist Gary Webb while defending the CIA; supported the U.S. invasion of Iraq; and much more.  Alan MacLeod chronicled all this in February of this year for those who have known nothing of Carlson’s past, including his father’s work as a U.S. intelligence operative as director of the U.S. Information Agency (USIA), the body that oversees government-funded media, including Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio and TV Martí and Voice of America – all U.S. propaganda outlets.

Now we are being asked to accept that Carlson is out to show how the CIA is “involved” in the murder of JFK.  Why would so many fall for such rhetoric?

No doubt any crumb of national news coverage about the CIA and the assassination by a major corporate player elicits an enthusiastic response from those who have tried for many years to tell the truth about JFK’s murder.  One’s first response is excitement. But such reactions need to tempered by sober analyses of exactly what has been said, which is what I am doing here. I, too, wish it were a breakthrough but think it is more of the same. Much ado about nothing. A way to continue to foster uncertainty, not knowledge, about the crime.

I see it as a game of false binaries in the same way the Democrats and Republicans are portrayed as mortal enemies.  Yes, there are some differences, but all-in-all they are one party, the War Party, who agree on the essential tenets of U.S. imperial policy. They both represent the interests of the upper classes and are financed by them. They both work within the same frame of reference. They both support what Ray McGovern, the former CIA analyst, rightly calls the Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media-Academia-Think-Tank complex (MICIMATT).

If one asks a dedicated believer in the truthfulness of the New York Times Corporation or NPR, for example, what they think of Tucker Carlson, they will generally dismiss him with disdain as a right-wing charlatan. This, of course, works in reverse if you ask Carlson’s followers what they think of the Times or NPR. Yet for those who think outside the frame – and they are all non-mainstream – a different picture emerges. But sometimes they are taken in by those whose equivocations are extremely lawyerly but appeal to what they wish to hear. This is exactly what a “limited hangout” is. Snagged by some actual truths, they bite on the bait of nuances that don’t mean what they think they do.

Left vs. right, Fox TV  vs. the New York Times, NPR, etc.: Just as Carlson’s father Dick Carlson ran the CIA-created U.S. overseas radio propaganda under Reagan and George H. W. Bush, so too the present head of National Public Radio, John Lansing, did the same under Barack Obama. See my piece, Will NPR Now Change its Name to National Propaganda Radio. Birds of a feather disguised as hawks and sparrows in a game meant to confuse and create scrambled brains.

Lastly, let me mention an odd “coincidence.” On December 6 at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., nine days before the partial JFK files release and Tucker Carlson’s monologue, the Mary Ferrell Foundation, an organization devoted to JFK research, gave a presentation showcasing what was advertised as explosive new information about the Kennedy assassination. The key presenter was Jefferson Morley, a former Washington Post reporter and prominent JFK assassination researcher who has sued the CIA for documents involving Lee Harvey Oswald and CIA operative George Joannides.

On November 22 Morley had published an article titled “Yes, There is a JFK Smoking Gun.” It was subtitled: It will be found in 44 CIA documents that are still “Denied in Full.” The documents he was referring to allegedly concern contacts between Oswald and Joannides in the summer and fall of 1963 in New Orleans and in Mexico City. “They [the CIA] were running a psychological warfare operation, authorized in June 1963, that followed Oswald from New Orleans to Mexico City later that year,” wrote Morley.

Well, the “smoking gun” documents were not released on Dec 15, although on November 20 and then again at The National Press Club on December 6, Morley spoke of them as proving his point about the CIA’s involvement with Oswald, which has been obvious for a long time.  Although he said he hadn’t seen these key documents but was awaiting their release, he added that even if they were not released that will still prove him correct.  In other words, with this bit of legerdemain, he was saying: What I don’t know, and may not soon not know, supports what I’m claiming even though I don’t know it.  And even if the files were released, he writes, “As for the conspiracy question, the massive withholding of documents makes it premature to draw any conclusions. The undisclosed Oswald operation was not necessarily part of a conspiracy. It might indicate CIA incompetence, not complicity. Again, only the CIA knows for sure.” So the smoking gun is not a smoking gun and the waters of uncertainty roll on and on into the receding future.

CIA incompetence, not complicity. Of course. It ain’t necessarily so. Or it is, or might be, or isn’t.

Morley is one of  many who still cannot say that the CIA killed the president. Tucker Carlson can speak of its “involvement” just like Morley. We need more information, more files, etc. But even if we get them, we still won’t know.  Maybe by 2063.

My question for Tucker Carlson: Who was your anonymous source? And did your source see the documents that were never disclosed? What specific documents are you referring to? And do they prove that the CIA killed Kennedy or just suggest “involvement”?

Finally, as I said before, even as there has long been a mountain of evidence for the CIA’s murder of JFK (and RFK as well, although that is never mentioned), many prominent people continue to play as if there is not.  Listen to this video interview between Chris Hedges and former CIA officer John Kiriakou.  It is all about the nefarious deeds of the CIA.  Right toward the end of the interview (see minutes 32:30-33:19), Hedges says, “So I have to ask [since he has to answer] this question since I know Oliver Stone is convinced the CIA killed JFK … I’ve never seen any evidence that backs it up …”  and they both share a mocking laugh at Stone as if he were the village idiot when he knows more about the JFK assassination than the two of them put together, and Kiriakou says he too has not seen such evidence. It’s a disgusting but typical display of arrogance and a “limited hangout.” Criticize the CIA only to make sure you whitewash them for one of their greatest achievements: the murder of President John F. Kennedy. This is straight from Chomsky’s playbook.

Beware double-talkers and the games they play. They come in different flavors.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Edward Curtin.

On December 15, the night that the Biden administration released some of the remaining JFK files while withholding others with another half-assed excuse, Tucker Carlson, the most-watched cable news television host, delivered a monologue about the JFK assassination.  It garnered a great deal of attention.

Although I don’t watch Carlson’s television show, I received messages from many friends and colleagues, people I highly respect, about his monologue’s great significance, so I watched that episode. And then I watched it many more times.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., a man whom I hold in the highest esteem, tweeted that it was “the most courageous newscast in 60 years.  The CIA’s murder of my uncle was a successful coup d’état from which our democracy has never recovered.”

While I completely agree with his second sentence, I was underwhelmed by Carlson’s words, to put it mildly.  I thought it was clearly “a limited hangout,” as described by the former CIA agent Victor Marchetti:

Spy jargon for a favorite and frequently used gimmick of the clandestine professionals. When their veil of secrecy is shredded and they can no longer rely on a phony cover story to misinform the public, they resort to admitting, sometimes even volunteering, some of the truth while still managing to withhold the key and damaging facts in the case. The public, however, is usually so intrigued by the new information that it never thinks to pursue the matter further.

Or listens carefully.

Carlson surely said some things that were true, and, as my friends and many others have insisted, he was the first mainstream corporate journalist to say that “the CIA was involved in the assassination of the president.”

But “involved” is a word worthy of a lawyer, a public relations expert, or the CIA itself because it can mean something significant or nothing.  Or a little of both.  It is a weasel word.

And the source for Carlson’s claim was an anonymous source, someone who he said “had access” to the JFK files that were never released.  We know, of course, that when the New York Times and its ilk cite “anonymous sources,” claiming that they have told them this or that, this raises eyebrows. Or should.  Anyone who closely follows that paper’s claims knows that it is a CIA conduit, but now, those who know this are embracing Tucker Carlson as if he were the prophet of truth, as if a Rupert Murdock-owned Fox TV host who is paid many millions of dollars, has become the Julian Assange of corporate journalism.

In a 2010 radio interview, Mr. Carlson said, “ I am 100 % his bitch.  Whatever Mr. Murdoch says, I do.”

The obvious question is: Why would Fox News allow Carlson to say now what many hear as shocking news about the JFK assassination?

So let me run down exactly what Carlson did say.

For five minutes of the 7:28 minute monologue, he said things that are obviously true: that Jack Ruby killed Oswald and that the claim that both acted alone is weird and beyond any odds; that the Warren Commission was shoddy; that the CIA weaponized the term “conspiracy theory” in 1967 according to Lance De Haven-Smith’s book Conspiracy Theory in America; that the CIA’s brainwashing specialist psychiatrist Louis Jolyon West visited Jack Ruby in jail and declared him insane, contrary to all other assessments of Ruby’s mental state; and that the 1976 House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) concluded that there was probably a conspiracy in the president’s assassination.

All of this is true but not news to those knowledgeable about the assassination.  Nevertheless, it was perhaps news to Carlson’s audience and therefore good to hear on a corporate news site.

But then, the next few minutes – the key part of his report, the part that drew all the attention – got tricky.

Carlson said that just that day – December 15, 2022 – when all the JFK documents were due to be released but many were withheld, “we spoke to someone who had access to these still hidden CIA documents.”  Who would have such access, and how, is left unaddressed, but it is implied that it is a CIA source, but maybe not.  It is strange to say the least.

Carlson then said he asked this person, “Did the CIA have a hand in the murder of John F. Kennedy?”  And the answer was “I believe they were involved.”  Carlson goes on to say, “And the answer we received was unequivocal.  Yes, the CIA was involved in the assassination of the president.”

Note the words “hand,” “believe,” “involved,” and then “unequivocal.”

“Hand” can mean many things and is very vague.  For example, in front of his wife, a man tells his friend, “I had a hand in preparing Christmas dinner.”  To which his wife, laughing, replies, “Yes, he did, he put the napkins on the table.”

To “believe” something is very different from knowing it, as Dr. Martin Schotz, one of the most perceptive JFK assassination researchers, has written in his book, History Will Not Absolve Us: Orwellian Control, Public Denial, and the Murder of President Kennedy

On Belief Versus Knowledge

It is so important to understand that one of the primary means of immobilizing the American people politically today is to hold them in a state of confusion in which anything can be believed but nothing can be known, nothing of significance that is.

And the American people are more than willing to be held in this state because to know the truth — as opposed to only believe the truth — is to face an awful terror and to be no longer able to evade responsibility. It is precisely in moving from belief to knowledge that the citizen moves from irresponsibility to responsibility, from helplessness and hopelessness to action, with the ultimate aim of being empowered and confident in one’s rational powers.

“Involved,” like the word “hand,” can mean many things; it is vague, slippery, not definitive, and is used by tabloid gossip columnists to suggest scandals that may or not be true.

“Unequivocal” does not accurately describe the source’s statement, which was: “I believe.” That is, unless you take someone’s belief as evidence of the truth, or you wish to make it sound so.

Note that nowhere in Carlson’s report does he or his alleged source say clearly and definitively that the CIA/National Security State murdered President Kennedy, for which there has long been overwhelming evidence.  Such beating-around-the-bush is quite common and tantalizes the audience to think the next explosive revelation will be dispositive.  Yet no release of documents is needed to confirm that the CIA killed Kennedy, as if the national security state would allow itself to be pinned for the murder.

Waiting for the documents is like waiting for Godot; and to promote some hidden smoking gun, some great revelation is to engage in a pseudo-debate without end.  It is to do the killers’ bidding for them.  And it is quite common. There are many well-known “dissident” writers who continue to claim that there is not enough evidence to conclude that the CIA/national security state killed the president.  And this is so for those who question the official story.  Furthermore, there are many more pundits who maintain that Oswald did the deed alone, as the Warren Report concluded and the mainstream corporate media trumpet.  This group is led by Noam Chomsky, whose acolytes bow to their master’s ignorant conclusions.

Maybe we’ll know the truth in 2063.

While it is true that some people change dramatically, Tucker Carlson, the Fox Television celebrity, would be a very unlikely candidate.  He defended Eliot Abrams and praised Oliver North; supported the Contras against the Sandinistas in Nicaragua; went to Nicaragua to support those Contras; smeared the great journalist Gary Webb while defending the CIA; supported the U.S. invasion of Iraq; and much more.  Alan MacLeod chronicled all this in February of this year for those who have known nothing of Carlson’s past, including his father’s work as a U.S. intelligence operative as director of the U.S. Information Agency (USIA), the body that oversees government-funded media, including Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio and TV Martí and Voice of America – all U.S. propaganda outlets.

Now we are being asked to accept that Carlson is out to show how the CIA is “involved” in the murder of JFK.  Why would so many fall for such rhetoric?

No doubt any crumb of national news coverage about the CIA and the assassination by a major corporate player elicits an enthusiastic response from those who have tried for many years to tell the truth about JFK’s murder.  One’s first response is excitement. But such reactions need to tempered by sober analyses of exactly what has been said, which is what I am doing here. I, too, wish it were a breakthrough but think it is more of the same. Much ado about nothing. A way to continue to foster uncertainty, not knowledge, about the crime.

I see it as a game of false binaries in the same way the Democrats and Republicans are portrayed as mortal enemies.  Yes, there are some differences, but all-in-all they are one party, the War Party, who agree on the essential tenets of U.S. imperial policy. They both represent the interests of the upper classes and are financed by them. They both work within the same frame of reference. They both support what Ray McGovern, the former CIA analyst, rightly calls the Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media-Academia-Think-Tank complex (MICIMATT).

If one asks a dedicated believer in the truthfulness of the New York Times Corporation or NPR, for example, what they think of Tucker Carlson, they will generally dismiss him with disdain as a right-wing charlatan. This, of course, works in reverse if you ask Carlson’s followers what they think of the Times or NPR. Yet for those who think outside the frame – and they are all non-mainstream – a different picture emerges. But sometimes they are taken in by those whose equivocations are extremely lawyerly but appeal to what they wish to hear. This is exactly what a “limited hangout” is. Snagged by some actual truths, they bite on the bait of nuances that don’t mean what they think they do.

Left vs. right, Fox TV  vs. the New York Times, NPR, etc.: Just as Carlson’s father Dick Carlson ran the CIA-created U.S. overseas radio propaganda under Reagan and George H. W. Bush, so too the present head of National Public Radio, John Lansing, did the same under Barack Obama. See my piece, Will NPR Now Change its Name to National Propaganda Radio. Birds of a feather disguised as hawks and sparrows in a game meant to confuse and create scrambled brains.

Lastly, let me mention an odd “coincidence.” On December 6 at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., nine days before the partial JFK files release and Tucker Carlson’s monologue, the Mary Ferrell Foundation, an organization devoted to JFK research, gave a presentation showcasing what was advertised as explosive new information about the Kennedy assassination. The key presenter was Jefferson Morley, a former Washington Post reporter and prominent JFK assassination researcher who has sued the CIA for documents involving Lee Harvey Oswald and CIA operative George Joannides.

On November 22 Morley had published an article titled “Yes, There is a JFK Smoking Gun.” It was subtitled: It will be found in 44 CIA documents that are still “Denied in Full.” The documents he was referring to allegedly concern contacts between Oswald and Joannides in the summer and fall of 1963 in New Orleans and in Mexico City. “They [the CIA] were running a psychological warfare operation, authorized in June 1963, that followed Oswald from New Orleans to Mexico City later that year,” wrote Morley.

Well, the “smoking gun” documents were not released on Dec 15, although on November 20 and then again at The National Press Club on December 6, Morley spoke of them as proving his point about the CIA’s involvement with Oswald, which has been obvious for a long time.  Although he said he hadn’t seen these key documents but was awaiting their release, he added that even if they were not released that will still prove him correct.  In other words, with this bit of legerdemain, he was saying: What I don’t know, and may not soon not know, supports what I’m claiming even though I don’t know it.  And even if the files were released, he writes, “As for the conspiracy question, the massive withholding of documents makes it premature to draw any conclusions. The undisclosed Oswald operation was not necessarily part of a conspiracy. It might indicate CIA incompetence, not complicity. Again, only the CIA knows for sure.” So the smoking gun is not a smoking gun and the waters of uncertainty roll on and on into the receding future.

CIA incompetence, not complicity. Of course. It ain’t necessarily so. Or it is, or might be, or isn’t.

Morley is one of  many who still cannot say that the CIA killed the president. Tucker Carlson can speak of its “involvement” just like Morley. We need more information, more files, etc. But even if we get them, we still won’t know.  Maybe by 2063.

My question for Tucker Carlson: Who was your anonymous source? And did your source see the documents that were never disclosed? What specific documents are you referring to? And do they prove that the CIA killed Kennedy or just suggest “involvement”?

Finally, as I said before, even as there has long been a mountain of evidence for the CIA’s murder of JFK (and RFK as well, although that is never mentioned), many prominent people continue to play as if there is not.  Listen to this video interview between Chris Hedges and former CIA officer John Kiriakou.  It is all about the nefarious deeds of the CIA.  Right toward the end of the interview (see minutes 32:30-33:19), Hedges says, “So I have to ask [since he has to answer] this question since I know Oliver Stone is convinced the CIA killed JFK … I’ve never seen any evidence that backs it up …”  and they both share a mocking laugh at Stone as if he were the village idiot when he knows more about the JFK assassination than the two of them put together, and Kiriakou says he too has not seen such evidence. It’s a disgusting but typical display of arrogance and a “limited hangout.” Criticize the CIA only to make sure you whitewash them for one of their greatest achievements: the murder of President John F. Kennedy. This is straight from Chomsky’s playbook.

Beware double-talkers and the games they play. They come in different flavors.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Edward Curtin.