Army captain named head of Guinea junta

Captain Moussa Dadis Camara was named Wednesday as head of the military junta which claims to have seized power in Guinea, a statement read on national radio said.

Camara, who commanded the fuel section of the armed forces supplies department, had been appointed "president of the National Council for Development and Democracy," the statement said. He was acting as spokesman for the junta on the radio following the reported coup early Tuesday in the wake of the death of President Lansana Conte.

Source: AFP

Guinea's long-time military leader Conte dies

Guinea's President Lansana Conte, who ruled the West African nation with an iron fist for 24 years, has died aged 74, National Assembly Speaker Aboubacar Sompare told state television early Tuesday. In power since 1984, the ailing Conte, who relied on the army to put down growing discontent, was a chain smoker who suffered from chronic diabetes and was at one time diagnosed with leukemia. "We regret to announce to the people of Guinea the death of General Lansana Conte , after a long illness, at 6:45 pm," Sompare said.

Prime Minister Ahmed Tidiane Souare and armed forces chief of staff General Diarra Camara then confirmed the news on television. Sompare officially asked the president of the supreme court to declare the presidency vacant and to apply the constitution. If the supreme court rules that there is a vacancy in the top job, the speaker of the assembly takes over temporarily and has to organize a presidential election within 60 days.

Lansana Conte, a career soldier, came to power through a coup d'etat on April 3, 1984, one week after the death of Guinea's first president, Ahmed Sekou Toure. Top officials of the regime met overnight in the capital Conakry to discuss a successor to Conte, a source close to the presidential palace said. Among the officials meeting in emergency session at the People's Palace, seat of the national assembly, were Prime Minister Souare, Sompare, the president of the supreme court and military leaders. "All the members of the government were asked to go to the People's Palace," a minister told AFP.

Last week government spokesman Tibou Kamara had scolded "bearers of false reports" speculating about the president's state of health. Conte, who told AFP last year "I am the boss, others are my subordinates," has undergone frequent hospital treatments abroad.

Source: AFP

Zapiro, Zuma and (another) defamation threat

I see Jacob Zuma has again issued a threat to sue Zapiro, this time for R7 million based on the infamous cartoon in which Zapiro depicted Mr Zuma as preparing to rape lady liberty. This is not the first time Mr Zuma has threatened to sue Zapiro or other columnists and newspapers but those claims have gone nowhere.

I am on record criticising this cartoon because it debases and cheapens rape and may create the impression that Mr Zuma is a rapist despite him being acquitted of rape. However, if I was Zapiro I would not be too worried about this latest threat either. Not that he seems too perturbed, because a report in the Cape Times reports as follows:

Asked if he thought the R7m was a reasonable amount, Shapiro referred to a 2006 cartoon he had drawn in response to Zuma’s initial lawsuit. It showed an outraged Zuma telling Shapiro, ‘I’m suing for damage to my reputation!!’ and the cartoonist responding: ‘Would that be your reputation as a disgraced chauvinistic demagogue who can’t control his s exual urges and who thinks a shower prevents AIDS?’ Shapiro pointed out that ‘I could say the same thing now’. He had not expected Zuma to sue again as the initial case seemed ‘to be going nowhere’.

There are of course very good legal and political reasons why Mr Zuma has not sued any of the cartoonists or columnists he has threatened to sue and why this is almost certainly not going to happen now either.

First, since the SCA and the Constitutional Court developed the common law of defamation to bring it in line with the spirit and purport of the Bill of Rights, it is not so easy to win a defamation case – especially if one is a public figure like Mr Zuma.

But second, a defamation case could be politically disasterous for Mr. Zuma. Defendents in defamation cases very often use the same tactics used by rape defendents: they attack the character of the person suing for defamation.

Imagine a scenario in which Zapiro is sued by Zuma and before the court the whole rape case saga is dredged up again along with the various utterances Mr Zuma and his supporters have made about (i) women; (ii) gay men and lesbians; (iii) judges; (iv) HIV/AIDS (v) …..add any number of other issues here….. Imagine the awkward questions Mr Zuma might face regarding his relationship with convicted fraudster Shabir Shaik!

Mr Zuma’s reputation (if any) will be put on trial and it won’t be pretty.

If I was Mr Zuma I would not go near any court for a defamation claim (or a criminal case for that matter, but that is a story for another day) as I would be far too worried that the little that is left of my reputation would be torn to shreds. If I was advising Mr Zuma I would whisper only one name in his ear:Oscar Wilde.

Wilde famously sued his lovers’ father who had alleged that Wilde was fiddling with men only to be exposed on the stand. While cross-examined the following exchange occurred which sealed his fate and exposed him to a criminal trial which landed him in jail:

Carson’s cross-examination reached its climax with reference to Walter Grainger:

How old is he?- He was about sixteen when I knew him. He was a servant at a certain house in High Street, Oxford, where Lord Alfred Douglas had rooms. I have stayed there several times. Grainger waited at table. I never dined with him. If it is one’s duty to serve, it is one’s duty to serve; and if it is one’s pleasure to dine, it is one’s pleasure to dine.

Did you ever kiss him?- Oh, dear no. He was a peculiarly plain boy. He was, unfortunately, extremely ugly. I pitied him for it.

Was that the reason why you did not kiss him?- Oh, Mr. Carson, you are pertinently insolent.

Did you say that in support of your statement that you never kissed him?- No. It is a childish question.

Did you ever put that forward as a reason why you never kissed the boy?- Not at all.

Why, sir, did you mention that this boy was extremely ugly?- For this reason. If I were asked why I did not kiss a door-mat, I should say because I do not like to kiss door-mats. I do not know why I mentioned that he was ugly, except that I was stung by the insolent question you put to me and the way you have insulted me throughout this hearing. Am I to be cross-examined because I do not like it?

Why did you mention his ugliness?- It is ridiculous to imagine that any such thing could have occurred under any circumstances.

Then why did you mention his ugliness, I ask you?- Perhaps you insulted me by an insulting question.

What was the reason why you should say the boy was ugly?-

At this point, the record of proceedings (which does not purport to be a verbatim transcript, in the modern form) continues:

Here the witness began several answers almost inarticulately, and none of them he finished. His efforts to collect his ideas were not aided by Mr. Carson’s sharp staccato repetition: ‘Why? Why? Why did you add that?’ At last the witness answered: ‘You sting me and insult me and try to unnerve; and at times one says things flippantly when one ought to speak more seriously. I admit it.’

We already know Mr Zuma is not very fast on his feet and says very stupid things under cross examination (i.e. if one takes a shower after sex one reduces the risk of contracting HIV), so, Oscar Wilde, Mr Zuma, remember him. He died a broken man after serving two years in Reading jail after being convicted of “gross indecency”….

Source: Pierre de Vos: Constitutionally Speaking

Gay Rights Are Pressed at the U.N.

An unprecedented declaration seeking to decriminalize homosexuality won the support of 66 countries in the United Nations General Assembly on Thursday, but opponents criticized it as an attempt to legitimize pedophilia and other “deplorable acts.”

The United States refused to support the nonbinding measure, as did Russia, China, the Roman Catholic Church and members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. The Holy See’s observer mission issued a statement saying that the declaration “challenges existing human rights norms.”

The declaration, sponsored by France with broad support in Europe and Latin America, condemned human rights violations based on homophobia, saying such measures run counter to the universal declaration of human rights. “How can we tolerate the fact that people are stoned, hanged, decapitated and tortured only because of their sexual orientation?” said Rama Yade, the French state secretary for human rights, noting that homosexuality is banned in nearly 80 countries and subject to the death penalty in at least six.

France decided to use the format of a declaration because it did not have the support for an official resolution. Read out by Ambassador Jorge Argüello of Argentina, the declaration was the first on gay rights read in the 192-member General Assembly itself. Although laws against homosexuality are concentrated in the Middle East, Asia and Africa, more than one speaker addressing a separate conference on the declaration noted that the laws stemmed as much from the British colonial past as from religion or tradition.

Navanethem Pillay, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights, speaking by video telephone, said that just like apartheid laws that criminalized sexual relations between different races, laws against homosexuality “are increasingly becoming recognized as anachronistic and as inconsistent both with international law and with traditional values of dignity, inclusion and respect for all.”

The opposing statement read in the General Assembly, supported by nearly 60 nations, rejected the idea that sexual orientation was a matter of genetic coding. The statement, led by the Organization of the Islamic Conference, said the effort threatened to undermine the international framework of human rights by trying to normalize pedophilia, among other acts.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference also failed in a last-minute attempt to alter a formal resolution that Sweden sponsored condemning summary executions. It sought to have the words “sexual orientation” deleted as one of the central reasons for such killings.

Ms. Yade and the Dutch foreign minister, Maxime Verhagen, said at a news conference that they were “disappointed” that the United States failed to support the declaration. Human rights activists went further. “The Bush administration is trying to come up with Christmas presents for the religious right so it will be remembered,” said Scott Long, a director at Human Rights Watch.

The official American position was based on highly technical legal grounds. The text, by using terminology like “without distinction of any kind,” was too broad because it might be interpreted as an attempt by the federal government to override states’ rights on issues like gay marriage, American diplomats and legal experts said. “We are opposed to any discrimination, legally or politically, but the nature of our federal system prevents us from undertaking commitments and engagements where federal authorities don’t have jurisdiction,” said Alejandro D. Wolff, the deputy permanent representative.

Gay-rights advocates brought to the conference from around the world by France said just having the taboo broken on discussing the topic at the United Nations would aid their battles at home. “People in Africa can have hope that someone is speaking for them,” said the Rev. Jide Macaulay of Nigeria.

Source: New York Times
for more information see UN declaration on sexual orientation and gender identity

UN 2008 Declaration for the global decriminalization of GLBT activity

The declaration, which is non-binding, was co-sponsored by France and the Netherlands. The 192 member states of the UN were almost evenly divided on the declaration: It passed with support from 66 countries. However 57 were opposed and 69 abstained.

The European Union of 27 countries, Australia, Canada, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand and 34 other countries -- including most of the countries of Latin America -- supported the declaration. The 56 predominately Muslim countries belonging to the Organization of the Islamic Conference, and a few other countries either abstained or voted against the declaration. China, Russia, and the United States abstained.

The United States was notable as the only western country not voting for the declaration. The vote was taken a few weeks before the end of the Bush administration; the US's vote may have been different if it had been held during the incoming Obama administration.

Opposition to equal rights for homosexuals and transgendered persons is one of the very few principles over which the predominately Muslim countries belonging to the Islamic Conference of States (ICS) and the Vatican can agree.

Source: Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance

Human Rights in the Occupied Territories

June 2007 marked the 40th anniversary of Israel's occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. During this entire period, Israel has denied millions of Palestinian residents their basic rights and has prevented them from taking part in decisions affecting their fate. The occupation permeates every aspect of Palestinians' daily lives, with violations of the right to life and bodily integrity, freedom of movement, employment, family life, housing, health, education, and human dignity forming an inescapable part of their reality.

In the field of human rights in the Occupied Territories, ACRI is a key player in the struggle to ensure the fundamental rights of the Palestinian population. ACRI's efforts are designed to redress the broad range of human rights violations while bringing pressure to bear on the Israeli government to fulfill its obligations under international law to ensure the protection and well-being of the Palestinian civilian population under occupation.

Source: Association for Civil Rights in Israel

Bribery is big business in SA

An average of 1.5 million South Africans pay bribes every year for some or other reason. Most of these were paid for speeding offences, matters related to policing and getting a particular job.

These were some of the shocking statistics announced at a Western Cape Government Anti-corruption Summit held at the Cape Town International Convention Centre on Tuesday. In his presentation, Willie Hofmeyr, head of the Special Investigation Unit, referred to the 2004 National Victims of Crime Survey that cited corruption as the most common crime after housebreaking. "It remains a huge challenge to totally eradicate corruption."

Hofmeyr said there was a worrying increase in serious organised crime where syndicates were infiltrating government departments.

Source: Die Burger

Ginwala report of enquiry into NDPP Vusi Pikoli

This document, released by the South African government, is the long-awaited Ginwala report of enquiry into the National Director of Public Prosecutions.

It can be accessed here

Source: Polity

Former Vlakplaas agent wants parole

Former Vlakplaas operative Almond Nofemela may soon be a free man. Nofemela turned to the Pretoria High Court in an attempt to be freed following a 21-year stint in jail. He was recommended for parole by the parole board in February.

The recommendation was awaiting the signature of Correctional Services Minister Ngconde Balfour, Nofemela's attorney, Julian Knight, said. "The document has been on Balfour's desk since March and he has done nothing about it. I wrote to ask him to make up his mind, not to place Nofemela on parole, but to make a decision to either rubber stamp the approval or refuse it," he said. Nofemela went to court in an urgent bid to get answers. Correctional Services, represented by a senior and a junior advocate, asked for a two-week postponement, as the department was not ready to go ahead. The matter was eventually postponed for a week, and on Friday the minister agreed to consider Nofemela's placement on parole. The agreement was made an order of court by Judge Eberhard Bertelsmann. Knight said if the minister refused Nofomela parole, he would go to the Constitutional Court.

On the eve of his intended execution in the 1980s for the non-political killing of a Skeerpoort farmer, Nofemela spilled the beans on the security police hit squad operating from the Vlakplaas base. His death sentence was later commuted to a life sentence.

NPA: Pikoli still suspended head

The National Prosecuting Authority considers Vusi Pikoli its suspended national director of public prosecutions until the parliamentary process to fire him is finalised, spokesperson Tlali Tlali said on Monday.

"We understand that it is a process... it is a process that is provided for in the [NPA] Act. That does not mean there is a vacuum in the NPA. "We understand that advocate Vusi Pikoli is still on his suspension. The president has announced the decision, but it is a decision that has to be processed before Parliament," said Tlali.

Mokotedi Mpshe also remained the acting NDPP until that process had been completed. "We understand that advocate Mokotedi Mpshe will stay on in that position until a different communique will have been sent." In terms of the act, President Kgalema Motlanthe refers his decision to fire Pikoli to Parliament, where it is put to the vote and is either confirmed or rejected.

The African Christian Democratic Party and the Democratic Alliance have indicated that they will not vote in favour of his removal. The ANC, which introduced legislation to remove the NPA's investigative arm the Scorpions at the height of an investigation against its president Jacob Zuma, is the majority party in Parliament.

Source: News 24.com