Women's Views on News |
| Posted: 23 Oct 2015 08:19 AM PDT
By Katie Bamber. This was the week we learnt that James Bond's latest incarnation is "sexily pro-Snowden". As always, 007's timing is impeccable – because this was also the week that saw the spectre of the Snoopers' Charter return with a vengeance. On Monday, MPs held an emergency debate on the Wilson Doctrine. The Doctrine started life in 1966 as a promise from Prime Minister Harold Wilson to MPs that they would not have their telephones tapped. Since then, successive PMs have repeated that promise, and extended the Doctrine to cover emails and parliamentarians in devolved administrations. But after Green Party MP Caroline Lucas launched a challenge to find out if her communications had been intercepted, the Government let slip that the Doctrine had never been absolute and no longer covers Scottish Parliament or Welsh Assembly members. And last week the Investigatory Powers Tribunal added insult to injury by ruling that it's not legally enforceable anyway. It seems high unlikely Ms Lucas will now be able to discover whether she was placed under surveillance or not. With the Doctrine in tatters, campaigners, whistle-blowers and constituents who contact their elected representative for help are no longer protected from State spying. As Conservative Peter Bone put it during the debate: "Our job is to scrutinise the Government, and if they had listened in to some of my conversations they would rightly be concerned. "No doubt, they could use what I said against me, but that is not the point. "We are here to scrutinise the Government and we need this protection." For their eyes only Thursday saw the Government take it fight against our [Liberty’s] successful challenge to its emergency spying law, the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act (DRIPA), to the Court of Appeal. In July, the High Court declared DRIPA unlawful because it contains no safeguards to make sure our communications data is accessed only to help prevent and detect serious crime, and because access to that data isn't signed off by a judge. The Government should and could have responded sensibly to the High Court's ruling, which asks for the most basic protections for our privacy. Instead, the hearing comes as the Home Secretary prepares to put similar legislation before Parliament. The Draft Investigatory Powers Bill is expected to seek to expand the mass data-gathering powers we [Liberty’s] challenged in this case – and to enable the tracking of every person's web and social media use. A licence to hack What's more – as reported in The Times this week – the Bill will contain "dizzying" new capabilities including granting security services powers to practise "CNE". That's computer network exploitation – or hacking, to you and me. We know from recent challenges that the security services already act as if they have the power to do all of this – so having it confirmed in law is some sort of progress. But hacking, as our Legal Director James Welch told The Times, is much more intrusive than 'traditional' forms of surveillance, including interception. It means the State can break into our computers, phones and tablets; take copies of documents, photos or emails; download apps that track us; turn on phone cameras or record what we say. And once they break in, anyone can. It's the equivalent of a burglar breaking into your house without you realising, then leaving the door open for anyone else to walk straight in. You won't even know the break-in happened, let alone that your home – or device – is now vulnerable to attack from criminals or foreign security services. But, for those in the know, there may as well be a big sign on your front gate saying "hackers welcome". It seems absurd that the Government would seek to introduce powers that will make us less safe, but that's exactly what hacking does. Parliament must think long and hard about whether the State should be allowed to use these disturbing techniques at all. From Russia with love It's difficult to overstate how pivotal the coming weeks will be for the privacy of every single person in this country. Liberty has called for an overhaul of our surveillance laws for years – and the Investigatory Powers Bill offers a once-in-a-generation opportunity for parliamentarians to set out spying powers clearly in law, along with strong safeguards to make sure both our safety and our privacy are protected. The safeguards we're calling for – judicial sign-off on spying requests, public disclosure of powers, targeted surveillance – are nothing extreme. They would simply bring us into line with a huge number of democratic countries worldwide. There's only one other country that we know requires service providers to routinely store every user's weblogs – and that's Russia. The Government must seize this opportunity for reform and use it to respond to concerns of MPs, experts, the High Court and the general public – not resort to the politics of fear and hijack this legislation to create an even bigger surveillance state. Katie Bamber is media director for Liberty. A version of this article appeared on the Liberty blog on 23 October 2015.  |
| Kickstarter for The Hammer Blow Posted: 23 Oct 2015 07:13 AM PDT
In January 1996, three women broke into a British Aerospace factory in Lancashire and used household hammers to disarm a Hawk warplane bound for Indonesia. They were arrested, charged with £2.4m of criminal damage, and sent to prison to await trial. A week later, a fourth woman joined them, accused of conspiracy. After six months in prison, all four were acquitted by a Liverpool jury in a court case that effectively put Britain’s arms trade on trial. One of these women, Andrea Needham, wrote: 'There were ten women in the Seeds of Hope group, some of us taking part in the action and others forming the support group. All of us were crucially important to the whole, and each of us could tell a different story about that momentous year. 'This is simply my story. 'I disarmed the Hawk because I had done everything else in my power to stop these weapons being delivered to Indonesia. 'Together with thousands of others, I had written letters, signed petitions, handed out leaflets, marched, attended rallies, organised peace camps, taken part in nonviolent direct action. 'Nothing had worked, and the planes were about to be delivered to Indonesia for use in East Timor, a tiny country where one third of the population had been killed in a campaign which Noam Chomsky has described as ‘the worst slaughter relative to population since the Holocaust’. 'In that situation, with our government aiding and abetting genocide, what else could we do but disarm the weapons ourselves?' Peace News wants to be able to publish Andrea Needham’s book, The Hammer Blow, on the 20th anniversary of the action, 29 January 2016, but needs to raise funds to print it. By contributing to this Kickstarter campaign, you can help make it happen. Why you should back this project: Supporting this project will make possible the publication, for the first time, of an inside account of the whole Seeds of Hope East Timor Ploughshares story. From the first tentative discussions, through almost a year of detailed planning, six months in prison, to the trial and beyond, this book will give readers an opportunity to experience the action through the eyes of one of the participants. The acquittal of the four women was a landmark victory for the peace and solidarity movements in Britain. It generated huge media interest, and highlighted British support for the atrocities being perpetrated in East Timor. The action took place prior to widespread use of the internet, and nothing substantial has been written about it before. This book will make an important contribution to peace movement history. And it is still relevant. Although the Seeds of Hope action took place almost twenty years ago, it is still relevant today. Britain is the world’s second largest weapons dealer, selling arms to countries embroiled in conflicts and guilty of terrible human rights’ abuses. As refugees pour out of war zones in the Middle East, Britain’s response is to offer sanctuary to a very few – while continuing to see that area of the world as a key market for arms deals. Campaigners in every area – the arms trade, the environment, human rights – need to be prepared to stand up and hold the government to account. 'Seeds of Hope was a wonderful act of solidarity with the people of East Timor threatened by British weapons,' wrote Bella Galhos, Timorese human rights activist supporting the Kickstarter. 'The support of people around the world throughout our long struggle for independence was crucial, and this action raised the profile of Britain’s role in arming Indonesia, and raised the spirits of the Timorese people. 'The Hammer Blow gives a fascinating inside account of the whole story, and should be read by anyone concerned about solidarity and justice.' The Seeds of Hope action showed how a small group of committed women were prepared to do just that, despite the risks to themselves. The Hammer Blow aims to inspire new generations of activists, and to show that, even when the cards appear stacked against us, we can still win. ‘The heroic actions of this small, but determined, group of women is told brilliantly in Andrea Needham's fascinating account….' Caroline Lucas, Green MP for Brighton Pavilion, wrote in support of the Kickstarter campaign. 'You can sense just how much human life matters to each and every one of these women,' she continued. 'They spent six months in jail for acting upon their consciences – but were eventually, and rightly, found to be innocent. 'Anyone interested in social change, or campaigning for peace, should read this book and take inspiration from the brave actions of these amazing women.’  |
| No amnesty for pimps demo in London Posted: 23 Oct 2015 05:35 AM PDT
Amnesty Action is a coalition of women's group and individuals opposed to Amnesty International's policy of full decriminalisation of the sex industry. Campaigners firmly believe – and agree with Amnesty International (AI) – that human beings bought and sold in the sex trade, who are mostly women, must not be criminalised in any jurisdiction by law enforcement or governments. However, what Amnesty International's 'Draft Policy on Sex Work' proposes is in violation of long-established human rights principles, and women's rights in particular, including the right to live a life free of violence and with dignity. And we must hold accountable those who prey on vulnerable individuals with histories of poverty, homelessness and sexual abuse and ensure that everyone has the fundamental right not to be bought and sold. Amnesty Action is calling on Amnesty International to support the human rights of prostituted women and girls, not to smooth the way for pimps and johns to trade women's bodies as commodities. Amnesty Action called for a No Amnesty for Pimps Global Day of Action at Amnesty International’s global headquarters in London on 23 October to raise awareness of Amnesty International's decision to campaign for the full decriminalisation of the sex trade. Full decriminalisation – which Amnesty International voted to support in August this year – means supporting the rights of pimps, managers and traffickers over the safety of women and children. Here are five reasons why Amnesty International's resolution should not be passed or supported: 1. In countries with legalised prostitution, sex trafficking increases. A 2013 academic study, based on data from 150 countries, was published in ‘World Development‘. It concluded that legal prostitution increases human trafficking, as evidenced in Germany and The Netherlands, where prostitution was legalised and failed in terms of achieving its three goals to: Eliminate the criminal, underground sector from the sex industry; Make selling sex safe; and Redefine prostitution as a job like any other, with employment contracts. See ‘Der Spiegel’s article 'Unprotected: How Legalizing Prostitution has Failed'. 2. Amnesty claims that prostitution and sex trafficking are different phenomena, but they are intrinsically linked. All victims of sex trafficking are trafficked into prostitution or the commercial sex industry. It is impossible to prevent sex trafficking without addressing the commercial sex market, which is both highly criminal and lucrative. 3. Decriminalising the commercial sex industry does not make it safe, because prostitution is inherently harmful, whether legal or illegal. Prostitution is inherently dangerous, damaging, and brutal. Research in nine countries found that 60-75 per cent of prostituted women were raped; 70-95 per cent experienced physically assault; and 68 per cent suffered Post Traumatic Stress Disorder at levels similar to combat veterans or victims of state torture. 4. The sex trade is hugely profitable. The only way to prevent sexual exploitation and sex trafficking is to cut off the profit incentive i.e. reduce demand, not encourage it. Buying or purchasing sex fuels a criminal market that destroys people. 5. Amnesty International's resolution does not address the successful 'Nordic Model Law', which sees commercial sex as a system of gender-based violence. In countries where it has been implemented the Nordic Model has led to a decrease in sex trafficking. The Nordic Model offers the best means of addressing the reality of sexual exploitation, by criminalising the purchase of sex, but not the sale of sexual access. It shifts criminal liability from people who are exploited, to those doing the exploiting. Pimping and running a brothel are also illegal. Governments also commit to addressing the needs of those exiting the sex trade, yet Amnesty's resolution does not consider the gains and learnings of the Nordic Model. Amnesty Action is in favour of the Nordic model, which is a 'set of laws and policies penalising the demand for commercial sex while decriminalising individuals in prostitution and providing them with support services, including help for those who wish to exit prostitution. 'The Nordic model has two main goals: to curb the demand for commercial sex that fuels sex trafficking, and promote equality between men and women.' If you can't make the protest, you can join Amnesty Action's social media campaign: You could add your signature to this open letter, signed by more than 600 national and international women’s rights groups, leading survivors of the sex trade, human rights advocates, medical doctors, Hollywood actors and directors, fashion designers, faith-based leaders and concerned individuals from over 30 countries, urging Amnesty International not to adopt any policy that supports the full decriminalisation of the sex industry. Amnesty Action would also love to see images of people holding signs that use slogans like: 'No Amnesty 4 Pimps', 'Women's Right R Human Rights' and 'Amnesty International: Defending the sexploitation of vulnerable girls and women everywhere'. And if you are joining the global protests outside any Amnesty offices – share photos of your event on Amnesty Action's official Twitter account @NoAmnesty4Women You could also send images to Amnesty International’s Twitter feed: @AmnestyUK Decriminalising the commercial sex industry does not make it safe, because prostitution is inherently harmful, whether legal or illegal. Inherently harmful, dangerous, damaging and brutal.  |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Women's Views on News. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |