Arson, displacement and unemployment: Life after asylum in Germany

3366690132_8076a61abb_z

It is almost impossible to legally ask for asylum in Germany. In order to do so the country from which a person enters Germany must itself be carrying out persecution. This does not apply to any of the countries that border Germany, so the only way to legally ask for asylum is to enter the country by sea or air.

According to the Dublin Convention, Germany can send any asylum seeker back to their country if the government is able to prove where they come from. If this cannot be done, the asylum seeker can still only apply for limited protection.

After having applied, the asylum seekers are dispersed across the Bundesländer (the German federal states) and must stay in the accommodation they are given until a decision is made about their request. This process can go on for more than a year, especially for countries such as Pakistan and Afghanistan. If asylum cannot be granted, they may still be granted protection as refugees. A refugee is a person who “is temporarily out of their native country because of fear of persecution due to their religion, nationality, political view or social conditions” and “whose human rights have been or might be violated”.

Continue reading

Another blow of the machete to free speech and democracy in Bangladesh

9614160500_2d5664fded_z

By Ophelia Chatterjee

“No one should cross the limit” announced Bangladesh’s Inspector General of Police earlier this month. In the wake of the murder of Niloy Neel, the fourth secularist Bangladeshi blogger to be hacked to death this year, this may seem both an attempt to close the stable door on escalating fundamentalist violence after it has already bolted, and a wilful understatement given the horrific severity and increasing incidence of such attacks.

But astonishingly, the senior officer was not sanctioning the perpetrators of the attacks, but rather warning activists to censor themselves if they want to avoid being placed on one of several hit lists – the likes of which have already proven fatal for Neel and three others this year alone. This barely tacit official justification for fatally attacking and maiming people for expressing their views is a stark indication of both the source and scale of the problem currently being faced in Bangladesh. Global Minorities Alliance has joined hands with the International Humanist and Ethical Union, signing an open letter to the Bangladeshi Prime Minister and president calling on them to condemn this victim blaming narrative.

The government and constitution of the Muslim majority country are ostensibly secular, and have been since Bangladesh’s hard-won independence from Pakistan in 1971. However, activists such as Imran Sarker have accused those currently in power of channelling more energy into the hounding of secularists in the name of ‘defending Islam’, than reining in groups such as the militant Ansarullah Bangla Team who have claimed responsibility for the horrific attacks. This flaccid commitment to the protection of freedom of speech and democratic values has intensified in tandem with a sudden surge in attacks on secularist activists in the last two years. The 2010 establishment of a war crimes tribunal forced the country to grapple with its considerable lack of internal consensus over the role of religion in politics, and since 2013 eight bloggers have been violently attacked. Reports have emerged that prior to his murder Neel expressed his fear that he would be targeted to the police. According to Taslima Nasreen, the only assistance offered in response was the advice that he should leave the country. Contrast this with the prompt arrest of journalist Probir Sikdar just last week, who accused a cabinet minister of committing war crimes during the war for independence – it seems that the police are still on higher alert for the crime of “cast[ing] aspersion on a minister using information technology” than for taking action against those perpetuating the current bloodbath. Angry accusations that the government is pandering to hard-line elements within Bangladesh’s Muslim majority are becoming increasingly difficult to rebuff.

The roots of this recent escalation are complex, and heavily related to the Pandora’s box of carnage and instability clumsily unleashed by US and UK led intervention across neighbouring regions in recent decades. In a year in which Human Rights Watch has despairingly observed that “it can seem as if the world is unravelling”, these events form just a small part of the patchwork of instability, turmoil and bloodshed that has swept across the Middle East and parts of Asia and Africa.

The GMA Blog seemed a fitting place to discuss these appalling attempts to silence expression of dissident views online. These events have been a stark reminder that we are lucky to be living in a place and time where we have the luxury to be able to take protection from this for granted – however, we should not be complacent, and should continue to challenge attempts to undermine this right wherever they appear. This may be in the guise of the UK Conservative government’s more-than faintly sinister counter-extremism bill at home, or further afield. As many in Bangladesh are currently urging, it is not simply a case of whether the keyboard is mightier than the machete, but whether governments at home and around the world will begin to accord all their citizens the protections due to them, regardless of their political or religious affiliation.

Fringe Festival 2015: Scottish human rights organisation defends freedom of religion and expression

PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE USE

Edinburgh: A Glasgow based human rights organisation, Global Minorities Alliance (GMA) was invited to participate in a discussion panel during the Edinburgh Fringe Festival 2015. The programme addressed the question “Are there limits when it comes to religion and free speech?” and was hosted by the Edinburgh Interfaith Association which promotes respect and understanding among all faiths in Edinburgh and across the world.

The event was organised as a response to the Charlie Hebdo tragedy in France earlier this year, to discuss and debate the global issues of religious freedom and free expression.

The panel consisted of Shahid Khan, a journalist from Pakistan, Fadel Soliman, an Imam from Egypt, and Thiago Alves Pinto, a legal expert from Brazil, who shared their thoughts about religion and freedom expression in the contemporary world.  Continue reading