January 26, 2020January 26, 2020 by Crimson Tazvinzwa

Bahrain: two protestors face execution after sham trial carried out in a Kangaroo court

Advertisements

On 8 January 2020, the High Criminal Court of Appeal upheld the convictions and death sentences of Hussain Ali Moosa Hussain Mohamed and Mohamed Ramadhan Issa Ali Hussain, which followed an unfair trial and were primarily based on a “confession” extracted under torture … ,CRIMSON TAZVINZWA;AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL///

By the time the FBI raided Omar Ameen’s Sacramento apartment in August 2018, his extradition back to Iraq seemed all but inevitable. Federal prosecutors alleged that just months before Ameen immigrated to the United States in 2014, the auto mechanic shot an Iraqi police officer to death, part of an action by an Islamic State group convoy that took over his hometown of Rawah. The refugee had allegedly concealed his ties to the Islamic State and lied about his reasons for fleeing Iraq. Iraqi authorities and federal prosecutors agreed: The U.S. had unwittingly opened its doors to a terrorist. Ameen could now become the first person in U.S. history to be extradited to Iraq.

In 2014, Hussain Ali Moosa and Mohamed Ramadhan were sentenced to death for the killing of a policeman. On 16 November 2015, the Court of Cassation confirmed the death sentences. However, in 2018, the Special Investigation Unit (SIU) brought forward new medical evidence confirming that the two men had been subjected to torture, as a means to extract the confession on which the sentence was primarily based. As a result, the Bahraini Court of Cassation overturned the death sentences, pending a review by the High Criminal Court of Appeal under a new panel of judges.

I call on you to quash the conviction and death sentences against these two men as I believe that their trial was unfair, did not fully comply with international fair trial standards and relied on evidence obtained under torture.

Also, I call on you to ensure that all those suspected of the torture of the two men are held accountable and to guarantee the two men reparations including restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition. Preventing crime and bringing those responsible to justice should always be done in accordance with Bahrain’s international human rights obligations.

Unfair trial

It took two years for complaints from Mohamed’s wife and a US-based NGO to be taken seriously by the Ombudsman office.

They launched a full independent investigation in Jul 2016, and sure enough, they uncovered doctors’ reports indicating that the two men had, in fact, been tortured.

These reports were not available during the trial.

Death sentence upheld

On 22 October 2018, the Bahraini Court of Cassation overturned Mohamed and Hussain’s death sentences, and ordered the High Criminal Court of Appeal to re-examine the cases under a new panel of judges.

According to news reports, last week those new judges dismissed claims that they confessed under torture and upheld the death sentences.

News of the court decision came hours after UK MPs wrote to the foreign secretary, Dominic Raab MP, demanding that Britain intervene because of its multimillion-pound support for rule-of-law programmes in Bahrain.

52.6368778-1.1397592

January 25, 2020 by Crimson Tazvinzwa

Mexico Is the Wall: President Under Fire Over Migration Clampdown

Advertisements

United Nations Concerned About Mexico’s Actions Against Migrants//REUTERS

MEXICO CITY — Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador faces growing criticism he is doing U.S. President Donald Trump’s bidding after erecting a “wall” of security forces who clashed with Central American migrants near the Guatemala border this week.

Mexico, under the threat of punitive U.S. tariffs, has bowed to Trump’s demands to contain mass movements of migrants who have been traveling through on their way to the U.S. border.

Such concessions previously stirred little criticism from the Mexican public, due to Lopez Obrador’s reputation as a leftist willing to support the poor, including migrants from other countries.

A SECRET UN REPORT SHOWS THAT MEXICAN CHILDREN ARE BEING SENT BACK INTO DANGER

But scenes of Mexico’s National Guard security force marching behind riot shields straight into a large group of Central Americans and using tear gas has triggered growing dissent, including condemnation from the United Nations.

Lopez Obrador was questioned at his morning news conference for a second day in a row about how the National Guard military police and the National Migration Institute (INM) treat migrants.

“It’s a wall of riot shields,” said Duncan Wood, director of the Wilson Center’s Mexico Institute in Washington. “I didn’t think I would live to see the day when Mexico would do this kind of thing.”

Trump has made immigration a key issue in his bid for re-election in November and is pushing for construction of a wall along the U.S-Mexico border.

Mexican offices of several U.N. agencies said in a joint statement they were worried by Thursday’s operation and its impact on children and “other vulnerable populations.”

“Mexico has the right to control the entry of foreigners as long as there is no excessive use of force,” the groups wrote, urging Mexico not to separate families. An operation during the week led some parents to temporarily lose track of their children.

Television images have shown the National Guard corralling entire families and loading them onto buses for detention and then deportation.

Since a standoff with Trump over soaring numbers of Central Americans seeking asylum at the U.S. border, Mexico has deployed thousands of National Guard to stem the flow.

Apprehensions at the border have fallen by about 70 percent over seven straight months.

However, the Mexican government’s response has pushed migrants to take more dangerous routes, said Christopher Gascon, head of the U.N.’s International Organization for Migration’s (IOM) Mexico mission.

52.6368778-1.1397592

January 22, 2020January 22, 2020 by Crimson Tazvinzwa

Brexit 31 January 2020: Do you need a new passport after Brexit and will you need a visa to go to Europe?

Advertisements

Britain is set to leave the European Union at the end of this month – and with just days to go you might be starting to think about what exactly will change on January 31.

The simple answer is not a lot.

Photo Credits: CRIMSON TAZVINZWA////

Now that prime minister Boris Johnson is pushing his Brexit deal through Parliament, the UK is set to enter a transition period which will last until at least the end of this year.

That means that your travel plans are unlikely to be disrupted – but what are the rules on new passports and visas?

Last year, when a possible no deal Brexit looked as though it could become reality, the government started to warn Brits that they would need a least six months left on their passport to make a trip.

But, the latest advice is that as long as your passport is valid for the whole duration of your trip, you’ll be able to travel.

Your summer travel plans are likely to be unaffected (Image: Shared Content Unit)

Information on the government website reads: “Your passport should be valid for the proposed duration of your stay; you do not need any additional period of validity on your passport beyond this.

“If the UK leaves the EU with a deal, the rules on travel will stay the same until 31 December 2020.”

So, if you’re travelling to Europe after January 31 and your passport is in date, you’ll be fine to travel.

When the transition period ends, the rules are likely to change – but we won’t know how until nearer the time.

And what about visas?

Currently, you don’t need a visa to travel to countries that are part of the European Union if you hold a British passport.

Those rules will stay the same until the transition period is up, so there’s no need to panic about visas if you’re travelling after January 31.

Source: Manchester Evening Standard

52.6368778-1.1397592

January 22, 2020January 22, 2020 by Crimson Tazvinzwa

Facebook, Twitter hold evidence that could save people from prison. And they’re not giving it up

Advertisements

“Facebook and Twitter appear to be misusing their immense resources to manipulate the judicial system in a manner that deprives two indigent young men facing life sentences of their constitutional right to defend themselves at trial,” Judge Charles Crompton wrote. “But Facebook and Twitter have made it clear that they are unwilling to alter their behavior, regardless of the harm to others — or the rulings of this court.” – Judge

By the time the FBI raided Omar Ameen’s Sacramento apartment in August 2018, his extradition back to Iraq seemed all but inevitable.

Federal prosecutors alleged that just months before Ameen immigrated to the United States in 2014, the auto mechanic shot an Iraqi police officer to death, part of an action by an Islamic State group convoy that took over his hometown of Rawah. The refugee had allegedly concealed his ties to the Islamic State and lied about his reasons for fleeing Iraq.

Iraqi authorities and federal prosecutors agreed: The U.S. had unwittingly opened its doors to a terrorist.

Left: UC Berkeley Law school Assistant Professor Rebecca Wexler argues that a key federal law should be changed.Photo: Paul Kuroda / Special to The Chronicle

Ameen could now become the first person in U.S. history to be extradited to Iraq. Prosecutors must show only probable cause to secure his extradition, which would lead to Iraqi authorities conducting a criminal trial. It’s a fate Ameen’s defenders say would undoubtedly lead to his execution.

But new evidence has been unearthed that his attorneys say will show he was 600 miles away from Rawah at the time of the killing. Additionally, an Islamic State Twitter account that the company suspended, as well as a suspended Facebook account, could be instrumental in proving Ameen’s innocence.

But the social media giants are refusing to cooperate.