Tag: Islamophobia

Lights, camera, election: Bollywood goes into poll mode

Post By Entertainment , , , , , , , , , , ,

A female police officer vowing to eliminate left-leaning liberals that support the rights of tribals on natural wealth, a fighter pilot eager to occupy Pakistan, and a news anchor desperate to put out the truth of the fire in Sabarmati Express at Godhra station in 2002. The images of aggressive nationalism, Islamophobia, and the ‘Red Scare’ are wafting into theatres to build public opinion against the political opponents of the ruling dispensation.

As it seeks a third term, cinema halls are turning into rallying points for the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to help create the mahaul (political atmosphere) in its favour. The notification of election is yet to be made and parties and alliances are still being broken and forged but a section of the film industry has already declared its manifesto and is indulging in dog-whistle politics.

A far cry from the stated credo of inclusivity defined by sabka saath, sabka vikas and sabka vishwas, historical events, it seems, are being skewed to fit a particular communal narrative by dividing communities into monolithic groups of heroes and villains based on religious and ideological identity. The spaces and issues that are contested or have existed for years in a grey zone are being insidiously turned into a black-and-white contrast that suits a political narrative.

The chronology of the release dates tells a story. Since January, every other week we have a film that reflects the ruling dispensation’s thrust on a contentious issue, stated or otherwise. Hrithik Roshan’s Fighter took a shot at the promised Akhand Bharat while reimagining the Pulwama attack and the subsequent Balakot strike. Yami Gautam’s Article 370 explained the government’s vision of Naya Kashmir where peace is earned through the bullet and not negotiated through the back channel diplomacy. This week, Adah Sharma’s Bastar: The Naxal Story is holding left liberals, which the party leaders often describe as urban Naxals, to account for the Maoist insurgency.

A poster for ‘Bastar: The Naxal Story’

A poster for ‘Bastar: The Naxal Story’

This idea of finding the enemy within is taking another shape in the form of the upcoming film JNU whose provocative poster made it to social media this week where a reputed Central university’s name is mischievously expanded as Jahangir National University — a centre of education that promotes anti-national ideas, teases the poster. The university is being repeatedly used to get even with political opponents with hardly any creative filters.

Then, The Sabarmati Report will unravel in the first week of May when the political temperature is expected to be peaking. In a statement, the makers said that the film narrates a story of events that took place in The Sabarmati Express on the morning of February 27, 2002, near the Godhra railway station in Gujarat. Before that Razakar: The Silent Genocide of Hyderabad backed by a BJP politician and set against the blood-soaked backdrop of Hyderabad’s merger with India, is striking a disconcerting tone against a religion with its trailer.

Changing ecosystem

Apart from seeing controversial issues and events in a ‘new’ light, an attempt is being made to put one source of light against the other to provide ideological muscle to the claims. It started with Rajkumar Santoshi’s Gandhi Godse: Ek Yudh, where Gandhi was charged with appeasement and Godse had the last word.

It continued this year with Pankaj Tripathi’s Main Atal Hoon, a sanitised biopic of Atal Bihari Vajpayee, and is now ready to take the next level with Randeep Hooda’s Swatantra Veer Savarkar that seems keen on whitewashing the conflicted personality and legacy of a freedom fighter who wrote multiple mercy petitions to the colonial power and accepted a pension from those he once fought against. Unlike Gandhi, Savarkar believed in the power of cinema, and, ironically, decades after his death, the medium is being used to help him scale Gandhian stature.

Randeep Hooda in ‘Swatantra Veer Savarkar’

Randeep Hooda in ‘Swatantra Veer Savarkar’

There is a concerted effort to correct the ecosystem which the right-leaning influencers in the film industry say hasn’t changed as much as they wanted it to in the last ten years. They see it as an ideological shift and put it under the umbrella of freedom of speech, a counter view that was allegedly suppressed when film folks saw the world from the prism of bhaichara (brotherhood) or Ganga-Jamuni tehzeeb (syncretic culture), euphemisms for appeasement politics.

However, in the real world, the Prime Minister still takes G-20 leaders to pay floral tributes at the Gandhi Samadhi. The new ecosystem speaks with a forked tongue. Replying to an RTI query, the Home Ministry said it didn’t have any information about urban naxals or their activities.

We saw a similar but limited attempt without much box-office success before the 2019 polls as well but the new variants are a lot more technically polished and emotionally manipulative in putting the point across. Also, they are being headlined by competent actors such as Hrithik Roshan, Randeep Hooda, and Yami Gautam and are backed by producers for whom it is proving to be a safe proposition.

Investing in political narratives

As the industry means business, producers are investing in political narratives after seeing the box-office success of The Kashmir Files and The Kerala Story. They feel there is a mass that wants to see the dramatic representation of what is dog-whistled at political rallies and newsroom debates and give the crude WhatsApp chats a creative shape. For the foot soldier, the advantage is that ‘suitable’ portions make it to reels to roll over the facts over and over again.

For instance, the Indian government had described the surgical strikes after Pulwama as a ‘non-military pre-emptive strike’ but Fighter frames it clearly as revenge. The Central Board Of Film Certification, until recently was very careful about how the Prime Minister is portrayed on the screen, let a declamatory statement like “Show them who is daddy” go in his name in Fighter.

At another level, it shows the makers like politicians don’t want the Pulwama episode and the Balakot strike to go off public memory. In 2019, we had Uri: The Surgical Strike on the same operation by the same producer. The difference is while the movie threatened home invasion, Fighter talked of the possibility of ‘India Occupied Pakistan’. Telugu film Operation Valentine also milked the same events with lesser intensity and craft. Curiously, the creative fraternity, like the ruling party, is silent on the martyrs of Galwan so far.

It is not that this polarising cinematic discourse is going uncontested. Dissent is taking allegorical shapes to avoid censorship. Last year, it was very much present in the measured subversion of Pathaan and Jawan while Afwaah and Bheed measured the impact of disinformation. The surge in films around the 1971 war and Indian intelligence officers’ exploits in Pakistan ended up endorsing the view that India had a well-endowed chest before 2014 as well.

Ae Watan Mere Watan, a Karan Johar production, releasing on an OTT platform next week documents the sacrifices the youth made to win us free speech. Based on the life of Usha Mehta, the freedom fighter who ran the secret Congress Radio during the Quit India Movement to take the message of the incarcerated Congress leadership to the people, the film will see socialist leader Ram Manohar Lohia who has hardly been discussed in popular culture. Not to forget, Devashish Makhija’s Joram evocatively talks of the deliberate invisibilisation of tribals in the name of development and Kiran Rao’s Laapataa Ladies cleverly delivers a political punch on social hypocrisy by stimulating those who seek a ban on hijab to look within.

Source link

#Lights #camera #election #Bollywood #poll #mode

Islamophobia is surging throughout Europe. Here’s how we stop it

Post By World , , , , ,

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent in any way the editorial position of Euronews.

It’s crucial for leaders and everyday people to unite in a remarkable effort to confront the pervasive hatred in our communities. It’s not just minorities that are at risk, it’s the Western world too, and our shared values of freedom, justice and equality, Naz Shah writes.

ADVERTISEMENT

Earlier this month, a plot between AfD party officials and neo-Nazis to deport millions of ethnic minorities from Germany was uncovered. 

But this conspiracy is part of a sinister undercurrent sweeping Europe and the wider Western world – one that goes hand-in-hand with a relentless surge in Islamophobia.

Since the atrocities of 7 October and the ongoing onslaught against the people of Gaza, Islamophobia in the UK has surged 600%.

Yet the British government has responded by inflaming rhetoric rather than promoting messages of unity.

Recently, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak used an Islamophobic trope as a response to another Muslim MP, which I was forced to call out on the floor of the Commons.

Meanwhile, the Conservative government has spent their time and effort – not healing worsening social ties or resolving the conflict in the Middle East – but forcing through the controversial Rwanda asylum plan that is the epitome of institutionalised xenophobia.

But xenophobia is becoming more than normalised in the echelons of political power – it is becoming key to winning elections across Europe, and beyond.

It’s all down to the power of fear

From Sweden to Greece, far-right groups and populist leaders are not just participating in elections; they are winning, often in record numbers. 

Geert Wilders’ ascent in the Netherlands, fueled by decades-worth of anti-Muslim rhetoric, including the promise to ban mosques and the Qur’an, exemplifies how Europe is faced with a political trend not towards integration and acceptance, but hate and exclusion.

And it could get a lot worse.

Should Donald Trump be elected US President this November, the Western world will have turned a new disturbing corner, where minorities become scapegoats for the ills of Western society. 

For example, Trump recently said immigrants were “poisoning the blood [of America]” to raucous applause from crowds.

There is no doubt that his ascent to the White House would herald an even stronger far-right revival, emboldening new populists to emerge from other EU nations.

But why is this divisive rhetoric, key to electoral success, resonating with so many? The answer lies in the power of fear.

Working tirelessly to humanise the other

For example, the great replacement theory that so many far-right populists exhort asserts Western civilization is facing an existential threat in a culture war against Western values. 

That narrative, of the West fighting for survival against an imagined onslaught of Islamization, is designed to tap into deep-seated existential fears.

And to some degree, it’s working.

Europe is being pulled towards far-right ideologies at a scale reminiscent of the preludes to World War II. 

ADVERTISEMENT

It isn’t just a political trend; it’s a dangerous slide towards an era of division and hostility, one that will challenge the very foundations of our democratic values.

How then, do we address a trend that threatens to engulf Western Muslims, other minorities, and core Western values of empathy, tolerance, and mutual respect?

Well, for one, we must work tirelessly to humanise the other. History shows that escalating persecution and violence against minorities is always paired with their dehumanization.

A set of values against the far right’s divisive rhetoric

This is why education must play a pivotal role. Schools must incorporate curricula that foster a better understanding of Islamic culture through exposure and knowledge of those with different backgrounds.

But education in schools must complement wider education in society.

ADVERTISEMENT

That’s why my participation in the Conference of European and British Muslim Leaders this past year was a pivotal moment for the British Muslim community.

This gathering, orchestrated by the Muslim World League in London convened hundreds of the most influential Muslim figures in Britain. At the centre of the conference was the Charter of Makkah, a sweeping bill of Islamic rights and values backed by over 1,200 scholars from 139 countries which testifies to Islam’s commitment to modern ideals.

For example, the charter emphasizes environmental stewardship, religious tolerance, and women’s rights. 

But these values are more than abstract ideals; they are integral to the daily lives of British Muslims. Importantly, they go directly against the divisive rhetoric of far-right extremists.

It’s time to put out the fires of extremist ideologies

This matters immensely. Recognising the shared values between British Muslims and the wider society strikes at the root of extremism. And such appreciation strengthens the fabric of our society, bolstering its resilience against divisive forces.

ADVERTISEMENT

But resilience cannot only come from us. The media, society, and government also have important roles to play.

For example, policy interventions remain crucial. The political obsession with Islamophobia is distracting policymakers from addressing the increase in white nationalist terrorism, which has risen at least 320% in the past decade and increasingly targeting the young. 

Ironically, the narratives that far-right parties are spewing against Muslims are precisely the fuel that this extremist ideology depends upon.

This is why governments should develop information campaigns about the dangers of the far-right alongside legislation that protects communities from hate crimes and hate speech. 

This is particularly relevant to social media and the online world, where the far-right feels they have a free pass to spread hatred.

ADVERTISEMENT

It is also time for the UK government to adopt the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims’ definition of Islamophobia. After all, how can you tackle something you cannot define or understand?

Ultimately, it’s crucial for leaders and everyday people to unite in a remarkable effort to confront the pervasive hatred in our communities. 

Because it’s not just minorities that are at risk, it’s the Western world too, and our shared values of freedom, justice and equality.

Naz Shah is a Member of the UK Parliament for Bradford West, serving as Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Muslim Women, and Vice Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Groups on Race and Community, British Muslims, and others. Shah has also served as Shadow Minister for Crime Reduction, Shadow Minister for Community Cohesion and Shadow Minister for Women and Equalities.

At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at [email protected] to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

ADVERTISEMENT

Source link

#Islamophobia #surging #Europe #Heres #stop

Far right’s Geert Wilders seals shock win in Dutch election after years on political fringe

Post By World , , , , , ,

He’s received countless death threats and has been under police protection for almost two decades. He’s been convicted for inciting hate speech and his opinions once even got him banned from entering the UK. Known as the Dutch Donald Trump, far-right politician Geert Wilders and his PVV Freedom Party have now won a major victory in the country’s general elections.

Issued on:

5 min

“Can you imagine it? 37 seats!” Wilders exulted to his lawmakers on Thursday, a day after his far-right PVV Freedom Party won more than double the seats it secured in the last Dutch general election.

Beating all predictions, the PVV won 37 seats out of 150 on Wednesday, coming in well ahead of a Labour-Green alliance led by former EU commissioner Frans Timmermans and the conservative People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) of outgoing Prime Minister Mark Rutte, which slumped to 24 seats.

Now faced with the difficult task of forming a government, Wilders will have to convince reluctant rivals to join him.

But he is no political rookie. The 60-year-old has tried to woo voters with his anti-immigration and anti-EU policies for years, his fiery rhetoric and shock of peroxide blonde hair earning him the nickname “Dutch Donald Trump”. Yet unlike Trump, he has until now spent his life on the political fringe.

Anti-Islam policies

Born in the southern Dutch city of Venlo in 1963, Wilders grew up alongside his brother and two sisters in a Catholic family. His mother was half Indonesian, a fact Wilders rarely mentions. Aside from being colonised by the Netherlands for hundreds of years, the country is also home to the world’s largest Muslim population.

According to his older brother Paul, Wilders took an interest in politics in the 80s. “He was neither clearly on the left or the right at the time, nor was he xenophobic. But he was fascinated by the political game, the struggle for power and influence,” his brother told German news website Der Spiegel in a 2017 interview.

His hatred for Islam came later, around the time he became an MP for the centre-right VVD party in 1998. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks that rocked the US in 2001 and the assassination of far-right Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn a year later, a “large bloc of anti-immigrant, Eurosceptic voters” were left “looking for a champion”, and according to The Economist, Wilders was their man.

He left the VVD in 2004, the same year controversial Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh was murdered. After the Dutch police discovered Wilders was also on the hit list of van Gogh’s killer, he was placed under police protection.

Two years later, in 2006, Wilders founded his PVV party and placed anti-Islam policies at the heart of its agenda. He notoriously likened Islam to Nazism, comparing the Koran to Adolf Hitler’s “Mein Kampf”, and released a highly criticised film in 2008 called “Fitna” that raised a storm of protest across the world. The 15-minute film conflated Islam and terrorism, juxtaposing scenes of beheadings and the 9/11 attacks with quotes from the Koran. He was refused entry to the UK in 2009 while on his way to screen the film at the House of Lords. The Home Office issued the ban because his opinions were considered a “threat to community harmony and therefore public safety”. Wilders was subsequently put on trial in 2010 for inciting hatred and discrimination against Muslims.

Arguing that Dutch freedom of speech safeguarded his right to make incendiary remarks, Wilders was eventually acquitted. But a few years later in 2016, he was eventually found guilty of insulting people of Moroccan descent when he promised supporters “fewer Moroccans” in the Netherlands.

But the conviction didn’t stop Wilders from making hateful remarks. He went on to call Moroccans “scum” years later and launched a contest for caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed several times.

Life under police protection, ‘Nexit’ and a xenophobic manifesto

Because of multiple threats against his life, Wilders has been living under strict police protection for almost two decades. He is guarded 24/7 by armed police, lives in a government-provided safe house and must be escorted anytime he shows up in public.

Geert Wilders prepares to cast his ballot as security guards stand by him during the 2023 general election. © Remko De Waal, AFP

To make up for his lack of public appearances, the “Dutch Donald Trump” (who currently has more than 1.2 million followers on X) has taken to social media to spread his populist ideas. His PVV party landed its first victory in 2010, when it scored major gains in parliament and came in third behind Rutte’s VVC and the Labour party.

Between 2010 and 2012, Wilders briefly experienced a right-wing coalition with the conservative Christian Democrats (CDA) and the VVD. It quickly fell through after he refused to back a package designed to lower the budget deficit.

In addition to his Islamophobic and xenophobic stance, Wilders is also staunchly anti-EU and opposes the euro. Years after the UK voted for Brexit, the idea of a “Nexit” (an exit of the Netherlands from the EU) became a core plank of his political platform. This didn’t stop the far-right leader from being elected a member of the European Parliament in 2014. In fact, Wilders forged a Eurosceptic alliance with France’s Marine Le Pen to push their nationalist agenda from within that body.  

Le Pen was one of the first to congratulate Wilders on his victory in Wednesday’s elections.

Although he is close to several European far-right movements, he doesn’t always align with their traditional ideologies. When it comes to social issues, Wilders supports the fight against homophobia and defends the right to abortion.

During the final weeks of his campaign for the 2023 general election, Wilders somewhat softened his anti-Islam and anti-EU stance, so much so that he gained the moniker Geert “Milders”. He vowed he would try to become a prime minister for all Dutch people and focused on issues other than immigration, such as the cost of living crisis, to broaden his electorate.

The PVV manifesto, on the other hand, does not mirror Wilders’ “Milder” façade. His party calls for a ban on “Islamic schools, Korans and mosques” and “Islamic headscarves”, a “reduction in the asylum and immigration flood to the Netherlands” and a “sovereign Netherlands … in charge of its own currency, its own borders and [which] makes its own rules”.

This article was translated from the original in French. 

Source link

#rights #Geert #Wilders #seals #shock #win #Dutch #election #years #political #fringe

Cool TN Lady Gonna Fill The Social Studies Standards With Awesome Stuff Like ‘Barack Obama Did The Tornados’

Post By Politics , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Education Wars just never go away, and in today’s dispatch from the front lines we’ll look at Tennessee, where a rightwing conspiracy theory fan and anti-Muslim bigot has just been appointed to the committee that sets standards for the state’s social studies curricula.

Yr Wonkette already introduced you last year to Laurie Cardoza-Moore, the nutball Tennessee bigot lady, when she was a member of the state textbook commission that was tasked with making sure only “age appropriate” materials were in them. You may recall that Tennessee was considering a measure that would have required state approval of every last item in the collections of school libraries; the bill’s sponsor charmingly said that any materials not approved by the commission should be burned. Ultimately, the Lege settled for a different plan that gave the textbook commission the power to hear appeals of book challenges brought by parents, so the state could ban library books even after a local school board had gone through a challenge process and approved them. Hooray for compromise.

We guess that Ms. Cardoza-Moore must have either done a bang-up job on that commission, or at the very least that she has powerful friends in Tennessee, because clearly it’s the latter thing. She was chosen for the Tennessee Standards Recommendation Committee by Tennessee House Speaker Cameron Sexton (R), the slimebooger we came to know and loathe during the kangaroo court proceedings that expelled Democratic state Reps. Justin Jones and Justin Pearson in April. Sexton also appointed her to the textbook commission in 2021, which is quite the coincidence.

In her new job, Cardoza-Moore will have a say in setting state standards for social studies classes, although we suspect she’ll just photocopy the course offerings at Hillsdale College and say “Done!” As Judd Legum points out in his Popular Information newsletter, Cardoza-Moore doesn’t actually believe in public schools; she’s homeschooled her own five kids, and she’s simply horrified that US history texts teach historical facts that make America look bad, such as the fact that the Constitution provided a framework for oppression of African Americans. In a 2020 Fox News interview, she blamed Common Core, because why not? She claimed, falsely, that schools no longer teach about the founding of the US, but instead skip ahead to the Civil War and Reconstruction so they can harp on all the slavery, those monsters.

“This is an outrage,” Cardoza-Moore exclaimed. “It poses the greatest national security threat to our constitutional republic.”

So yeah, she’s a real peach. She somehow also took issue with a textbook’s factual statement that the Republican Party was originally founded to fight the spread of slavery beyond the states where it was already allowed, complaining that it was “disinformation” because Lincoln was anti-slavery, which, yeah, that’s what the book said. She was mostly upset the book didn’t say that Democrats were pro-slavery and KKK, and also what about that Klansman Robert Byrd, huh?

Cardoza-Moore initially made her name in Tennessee politics by fearmongering about Islam, back when that was the thing the Right was certain would destroy America, because Barack Obama was president. She led some of the most paranoid opposition to a mosque being built in Murfreesboro, claiming that fully 30 percent of Muslims are terrorists and that the mosque would be a base for “radical Islamic extremists” bent on destroying Nashville’s Christian music industry.

During her 2021 confirmation hearing for her seat on the textbook commission, she explained that bad school textbooks are directly responsible for wrecking America and of course the riots that burned all cities in America to the ground in 2020, several of them more than once.

While America slept, the hearts, minds and souls of our students were being influenced by disinformation. Tragically we have seen the result over the past few months; our streets have been filled with rioting destructive American young people who have not been taught the values entrusted to us by our nation’s founders … nor have they been taught our nation’s history — history which many seem intent to destroy

See, if only kids been made to memorize more facts about how George Washington was a Christian and God wrote the Constitution, there might be a few more cities still standing in our great land.

As Legum details, Cardoza-Moore doesn’t seem to have met a conspiracy theory she didn’t glom on to. She’s said that 9/11 was an “inside job,” that Donald Trump was the true winner of the 2020 election, and that January 6 was a false flag attack by “Antifa.” I’m just disappointed that she doesn’t appear to have said anything about chemtrails. But she came kind of close in 2011, as Legum explains, when she

claimed that former President Barack Obama was causing “horrific tornadoes” because he made a speech that discussed the plight of Palestinians. Asked if she still held these views, Cardoza-Moore did not respond.

She also runs her very own “Christian Zionist” nonprofit called “Proclaiming Justice to the Nations,” which recently ran a press release on her appointment to the social studies standards job. In it, we learn that she has previously helped the Florida Department of Education screen textbooks, “a successful review effort that ‘caught and corrected dozens of books to prevent political indoctrination of Florida’s children,’ a spokesperson for Governor Ron DeSantis noted.”

In the press release, Cardoza-Moore reflected on the important task ahead of her, because

“The materials we will be reviewing can only accomplish the mission of educating good American citizens if our Tennessee textbooks are devoid of left-aligned historic revisionism and the toxic material found in the antisemitic Critical Race Theory; Diversity, Equity and Inclusion; Social-Emotional Learning and Ethnic Studies.”

Impressive how she got all the rightwing shibboleths in there!

The statement also emphasized that Muslim groups opposed her appointment to the textbook commission, presumably because if she has the right enemies, that just shows what a great job she’ll do for Tennessee students.

We can hardly wait to see what happens to Tennessee social studies standards. Haha, we kid, of course, because we read the history standards that Donald Trump’s “1776 Commission” came up with, so we have a pretty good idea. Good luck, kids!

[Popular Information]

Yr Wonkette is funded entirely by reader donations. If you can, please give $5 or $10 a month to help us keep this little mommyblog going!

Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons.

Source link

#Cool #Lady #Gonna #Fill #Social #Studies #Standards #Awesome #Stuff #Barack #Obama #Tornados

Macron government under fire for criticising one of France’s oldest human rights NGOs

Post By World , , , , , , ,

Issued on: Modified:

Amid the tense political atmosphere gripping France as the pension reform crisis continues, Prime Minister Élisabeth Borne on Wednesday became the latest member of the Macron government to criticise the Human Rights League, one of France’s oldest NGOs, even accusing it of taking an “ambiguous” stance on Islamism in recent years. Her comments follow those of the interior minister, who suggested the group’s state subsidies should come under review given its recent criticism of the government. 

Prime Minister Élisabeth Borne said during a Senate question-and-answer session on Wednesday that her opinion of the Human Rights League (Ligue des droits de l’Homme, or LDH) had changed. “I have a lot of respect for what LDH embodied in the past,” she said, but “I no longer understand some of its positions.”

Borne went on to say that some of her incomprehension stems from the league’s “ambiguities in the face of radical Islamism – and it has been reinforced over recent months”.

Borne appeared to be referring to actions such as the league’s support for the “march against Islamophobia” in late 2019. Some on the French left as well as the right viewed the name of the protest as an implicit contradiction of France’s belief in the right to criticise all religions, part of the France’s cherished value of secularism (laïcité). However, others insisted the march was against anti-Muslim discrimination, not against the critique of Islam.

It is highly unusual for a French leader to so strongly criticise one of the country’s oldest and best-known human rights NGOs. The League was founded in 1898, at the height of the 1894-1906 Dreyfus Affair – the greatest scandal of France’s Third Republic, concerning a Jewish army officer who was baselessly convicted of treason and the long struggle to exonerate him. The LDH has played a key role in French civil society ever since.

The Human Rights League came under fire in 2020 for declining to send a representative to the trial of those accused in the January 2015 jihadist attacks at the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine and Hypercasher kosher supermarkets, a landmark moment in France that eventually saw the suspects convicted and sentenced.

In recent weeks, the league has deployed citizen observers to the pension reform protests to document how security forces are maintaining order. Borne hailed the actions of police – whose actions have been criticised internationally as excessive – and suggested they were there to protect protesters. “Demonstrating is a fundamental right. It is not by excusing violence that we defend it… Much the contrary,” she said. 

Controversy over protests

Borne went on to rail against LDH for critiquing attempts to prevent further unrest in Sainte-Soline, a village in western France that has seen violent clashes between police and demonstrators opposed to a huge reservoir project over its potential environmental impact. Referring to a ban on armes par destination – ordinary items that can be used as weapons such as cooking knives or baseball bats – Borne expressed annoyance at the league for “criticising an order preventing people from bringing weapons to Sainte-Soline”.

The LDH has said over recent weeks that it favours banning people from bringing weapons to the protests but argues that the government’s definition is unduly broad – and that its own narrower definition of the term accords with that of France’s constitution.

Critics have accused the French police of using excessively forceful methods against protesters at Sainte-Soline. Scenes of violence there on March 25 fuelled the sense of turmoil in France, as they came amid clashes between protesters and police during the pension reform demonstrations taking place across the country. The violence at the March 23 pension reform demonstrations attracted particular international attention – with Bordeaux town hall set on fire and more than 149 police and gendarmes injured, according to the French authorities.

Funding threat

In her remarks on Wednesday, Borne also cited “many other NGOs” who also “do not understand” the LDH’s positions – referring to a letter sent on Tuesday by the head of the International League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism (Ligue internationale contre le racisme et l’antisémitisme, or LICRA) to the head of the Consultative Commission on Human Rights, another longstanding French rights NGO.

The LICRA president’s letter criticised the LDH for feeding into a sense that “the authorities are the public enemy No. 1” and warning of the risk of violence being “legitimised” when it is directed against representatives of the French state.

The controversy over Borne’s statements follows earlier outrage over comments from right-wing Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin during another Senate question time on April 5. In response to a senator from the conservative Les Républicains party who called for an “end to state funding for associations that seriously undermine the state”, Darmanin declared that the state subsidy given to LDH “should be looked into in light of their actions”.

Various left-wing politicians joined LDH’s president Patrick Baudouin in strongly criticising Darmanin’s remarks.

The interior minister’s declaration also prompted a petition in communist newspaper L’Humanité signed by 1,000 public figures – including an array of leftist politicians, trade union leaders and prominent names in the arts – saying, “Don’t touch the LDH!”

“Public subsidies are essential to guaranteeing associations’ independence and protecting them from the whims of those in power,” the petition read. “Calling these subsidies into question is a way to get rid of checks and balances and extinguish public debate.”

Borne adopted a softer approach than Darmanin – tempering her criticism of LDH by saying that “cutting subsidies to particular associations” is “not on the cards” and that she hopes human rights NGOs will “continue their monitoring activities”.  

But she added that government also “has a responsibility to talk to NGOs about what they are doing when they get government funding”.

LDH chief Baudouin responded furiously to Borne’s Wednesday remarks, saying he was “surprised” and “appalled” by what he saw as her “distortions” of the group’s positions. Baudouin called on the PM to “calm the debate instead of making things worse”.

Left-wing politicians joined Baudouin in condemning her remarks. Green Party Senator David Salmon accused the government of “blackmail” over the comments on public subsidies for LDH, saying such a stance could lead to a “time when people no longer have the right to question the government’s policies”.

The prime minister is keen to “avoid disowning” Darmanin, said Eliane Assassi, the Communist Party leader in the Senate, who asked Borne the question that prompted her comments on LDH.

But some politicians on the right voiced agreement with Borne’s – and Darmanin’s – approach. Bruno Retailleau, the Les Républicains leader in the Senate, notably urged the government to “cut [LDH’s] subsidies” – saying the NGO “undoubtedly had a noble past, a glorious past”, but is now “losing itself in far-left squabbling”.

Source link

#Macron #government #fire #criticising #Frances #oldest #human #rights #NGOs