“We have to understand that information, above all else, is a social service. If we lose sight of that dimension we begin to regulate it as merchandise, but the state has many other obligations, such as to guarantee freedom,” said Frank La Rue.

“In Latin America we made a historical mistake when we allowed the commercial vision of information to prevail,” said La Rue, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression.

In this interview with IPS, La Rue, a legal scholar from Guatemala, said: “Freedom of expression must be understood as the collective right of society to be informed, to associate freely and to express itself, but also as the right of peoples to their culture, language and values, and to transmit them to the world through their own communications media.”

The special rapporteur referred to other challenges to freedom of expression in the region. They include “censorship laws” that punish, for instance, defamation of civil servants and inhibit criticism of those in power, or penalise the unauthorised use of radio frequencies.

Another “very important” challenge is the case of the telecommunications laws being debated in countries like Honduras and Mexico.

Q: What basic conditions should be met by the new telecommunications laws?

A: Part of freedom of expression is defending cultural diversity. I have maintained that there should be four categories of media using the broadcast frequencies.

One is commercial radio stations, that should be regulated by a law on concessions; another is community radio stations, which should have the same rights as the former in spite of having low power and short range; a third category is for clearly identifiable ethnic groups; and finally, public telecommunications, which belong to the state rather than to the government of the day.

In the last case, we are not talking about media controlled by those who wield political power, but about the use of public resources for public media.

And the public aspect of social life needs to be recovered. The concept has been lost in Latin America, in contrast to Europe, where several countries have maintained their vision of the public sphere.

But the frequency spectrum is a public good; the airwaves exist all around us, and the state regulates their administration for the benefit of all, like other natural resources.

Q: Is it necessary to divide the spectrum into equal parts?

A: The state does not need one-third of the frequencies, as in Argentina, because it is unlikely to have the administrative capacity or the resources to use them. What is needed is a segment reserved for community stations.

There is a human rights principle which calls for diversity of the media and pluralism of positions. Above the individual rights of journalists is the human right of society to be informed.

The idea is that people should be able to develop their own thinking. In that sense, the concentration of media in very few hands is an attack on democracy, not just on human rights.

Where’s the catch? It’s in the concession mechanisms. Auctions of licences for frequencies are not an appropriate method because they favour economic wealth. There should be transparent, public competitions, with clear rules.

Q: What kind of rules?

A: As frequencies are state property, they are neither a gift nor a lifetime concession. Concessions should be issued for a limited, defined time period.

There is a basic principle: if a frequency is not used as soon as a concession is granted, the rights should be lost, because sometimes people accumulate frequencies without using them, just to avoid competition.

So rules are needed for withdrawing a concession, and there should be a limit on how many frequencies one person can own or operate, because too much accumulation leads to manipulation of public opinion, which is a bad thing.

Q: This leads us to another issue being discussed in Mexico, for instance, about financing methods, because it is understood that only commercial media can sell advertising.

A: An organisation that is not-for-profit can generate income, but no one can make a personal profit from sales.

The state should have regulations for distributing official advertising, with clear criteria. And it should put its house in order, without criminalising community radio stations. Having an unlicensed radio station cannot be seen as a crime, because if we look at the origins of the big media consortia, their concessions were not granted legitimately. They were all granted by dictatorships or corrupt governments.

Q: In Honduras, the inclusion of content regulations in the telecommunications bill has been very controversial.

A: The state should not interfere with content in any way whatsoever. There are legitimate limits to free expression, based on human rights rules and principles, but in my view only one aspect of content should be regulated, and that is regulation of watersheds for adult broadcasting, for the protection of children.

Children and adolescents should be protected from live, graphic scenes of direct violence and sexual acts, not of sexuality but of sexual acts, pornography and the malevolent misuse of sexuality.

But nothing else. Freedom of expression means the prevalence of openness and broad-mindedness. Limitations are the exception, and should not be over-generalised as this gives rise to censorship. There is always the temptation, when legislating, for everyone to impose his or her opinion.

Q: What about the internet?

A: Even less regulation is appropriate. The internet is an open space where there is room for everyone. By its nature, it is impossible to regulate. It can be monitored, but that is an attack on privacy.

The issue here is self-regulation. There is a new challenge of professionalism and ethics which is up to the press itself to define. It is not for the state to determine this, but journalists and the media themselves.

After visiting Baku last April, Sobchak marveled at the transformation of the Azerbaijani capital, comparing it favourably to Moscow. To her credit, she did mention the non-democratic nature of the Azerbaijani regime in comments that were published in Snob, a leading Russian cultural magazine.

Yet overall, after reading her take on Baku, one is left with an impression of a country ruled by a benevolent “Oriental ruler” who, although occasionally harsh, cares about the well-being of his subjects. Her somewhat glowing review of Aliyev’s leadership is especially ironic when set against her views on Putin.

Also recently, when a senior European diplomat was confronted with the seeming inconsistency of the EU’s policy toward authoritarian regimes in Belarus and Azerbaijan – sanctions and isolation in the case of the former, cooperation and engagement with the latter – he replied that there are two major reasons for the discrepancy.

First, while Belarus is at the centre of Europe, Azerbaijan is located “between Chechnya and Iran,” he explained, the implication being that the democratic bar is set higher for Belarus; secondly, the diplomat bluntly stated that there are important strategic interests in relations with Azerbaijan, such as cooperation in energy sector and regional security issues, not least in containing Iran, which is widely believed to be pursuing a nuclear weapons programme.

While perhaps distasteful, the “strategic interests” argument is easily defensible. It’s simply prudent policy to work with a government that is prepared to cooperate with the West on a whole range of strategic issues.

Such pragmatism may not please human rights defenders in Azerbaijan and elsewhere, but it’s only realistic to accept the fact that foreign policy is not exclusively shaped by human rights issues.

At the same time, the double standard inherent in the diplomat’s comments, and more subtly contained in Sobchak’s assessment, is damaging. The “geographic argument” endorses a concept in which a less than perfect democracy is acceptable for an “Oriental” country like Azerbaijan.

Such thinking represents a serious misreading of the emerging public mood in Azerbaijan that could end up harming U.S. and EU strategic interests down the road.

There are plenty of people in Azerbaijan who yearn for a full-fledged democratic system. Tolerating anything less, then, means that the United States and EU are prepared to sell these Azerbaijani citizens short. Azerbaijanis want good governance, transparency and accountability from their rulers, just like people in Europe and elsewhere.

Evidence of widespread popular discontent with the current system is mounting in Azerbaijan. Over the past year, the country has experienced rallies against the deaths of the conscripts in the army, riots of traders over exorbitant taxes, protests of Muslims over what they see as curtailment of their religious rights, and explosions of unrest in provincial towns of Guba and Ismayilli.

Social networking and pro-democracy youth movements such as NIDA played an increasing role in harnessing discontent and mobilising it into protests.

Television viewing preferences also indicate that the population wants much more than what they are now getting. Since authorities tightly control the national media, more people, especially in the provinces, tune in the Turkish TV-based programme Azerbaycan Saati (Azerbaijan’s Hour), which provides a more pluralistic coverage of the events in Azerbaijan.

This two-hour programme has proven to be so popular that local officials in some provincial areas are said to ordering the closure of teahouses for the duration of the programme, in order to prevent people from gathering and watching it. Many Baku-based experts agree that the people increasingly are losing fear to speak out against what they see as the regime’s abuses.

Where the argument of bad geography rings superficially true is in the fact that while Belarus borders three countries of the European Union, Azerbaijan has no consolidated democracies in its neighbourhood. But even here the situation is dynamic.

Azerbaijan’s neighbour Georgia has made significant democratisation strides in the past decade, most notably experiencing a peaceful transition of power via the ballot box last year. Meanwhile, Turkey, Azerbaijan’s main ally, greatly improved its democratic practices in the 2000s, motivated in large part by the prospect of EU membership.

If Turkish democracy is backsliding today, it is due to the unique combination of negative external and internal political factors, not because of cultural impediments stemming from Turkey’s geography.

Most important of all, Azerbaijan itself has declared its Euro-Atlantic orientation and embraced extensive commitments on democracy and human rights. There is no reason why its European partners should go soft when Baku fails to deliver on these commitments.

Ultimately, strong emphasis on reform is in the EU’s long-term strategic interests: if Baku heeds calls for reform, the EU can gain a partner with enhanced domestic legitimacy. If it doesn’t, the EU can call Baku’s bluff: whatever the rhetoric of some Azerbaijani officials, they are aware that the EU remains an essential partner and cannot be easily ignored.

Most importantly, it will preserve the EU’s credibility among Azerbaijanis. The worst possible signal that either the United States or the EU can send right now is that it that they will settle for an ‘Oriental’ style ‘democracy’ for Azerbaijan.

*Editor’s note: Eldar Mamedov is a political adviser to the Socialists & Democrats Group in the European Parliament, who writes in his personal capacity.

This story originally appeared on EurasiaNet.org.

Protestors in Turkey’s Gezi Park show no signs of backing down. Credit: akli denge-Mental Balance/CC-BY-2.0

Now approaching its third week, the “Occupy Taksim” movement, a peaceful sit-in to save Istanbul’s Gezi Park from redevelopment, has taken on a festival-like atmosphere, with protesters organising to stand guard around the clock, provide uninterrupted food and water supplies, and carry out a self-initiated cleaning of the grounds.

As the demonstrators grow more settled, however, the government has not changed its position towards them.

Upon his return from the Maghreb at 1:40 am Friday, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan reiterated his initial decision to demolish Gezi Park. He did not cede to public requests that he apologise for police violence used to disperse protesters and show greater respect for individual fundamental rights and freedom of expression.

“The police are doing their duty. These protests, which have turned into vandalism and utter lawlessness, must end immediately,” Erdoğan declared.

Addressing thousands gathered at Istanbul’s Ataturk airport in the early hours of Friday, he blamed terrorists, Marxists, the opposition and foreign conspirators for the unrest and its immediate economic consequences.

“No power but Allah can stop Turkey’s rise,” he said, in a speech that often referred to the importance of individual and state compliance with divine principles. “May Allah preserve our fraternity and unity.”

In a reference to the chief executive of a leading Turkish bank, who said this week that he was one of the “marauders”, a term Erdogan used to describe the demonstrators, the prime minister said, “If a general manager of a bank voices support for those organising this [Gezi] vandalism, he will find us standing against him.”

Erdogan also condemned intellectuals, saying, “Those who call themselves journalists, artists, politicians, have, in a very irresponsible way, opened the way for hatred, discrimination and provocation.”

Shared blame

Later in the morning, Turkish President Abdullah Gul sent a different message while speaking to a group of visiting foreign students on the importance of the respect of  “otherness”.

“Efforts to oppress one another become the source of many sufferings and conflicts,” Gul said.

On Thursday evening, Fetullah Gulen, a popular Turkish Islamic scholar, made a much-awaited speech on the Taksim crisis from Pennsylvania, where he has confined himself for over a decade.

Gulen urged authorities not to underestimate and overlook protests, saying, “We share blame” for the unrest. He frequently used “we” to refer to members of his movement in particular and repeatedly blamed his movement for doing too little to eliminate problems Turkish society faces, particularly on an ethical level.

Gulen supported Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) at its inception but began to distance himself from it in 2010.

Gulen’s speech fell short of admonishing the government for its handling of the crisis and seemed to support Erdogan’s stance – that elections are the only way to change the situation. Many of Gulen’s followers, who include journalists and academics, had expected a clearer position on fundamental rights.

Opposition criticism

Observers here fear that the deadlock between the prime minister and protesters will only prolong the Taksim movement.

Turkey’s political opposition has thus far abstained from adding fuel to the fire through statements or rallies, and in an exclusive interview with IPS, Faruk Logoglu, deputy chairman of the major opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) and vice-chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee of the Turkish Grand National Assembly (TBMM), rebuffed Erdogan’s accusations that the opposition had instigated the Taksim demonstrations.

CHP is the country’s oldest political party, established in 1919 by Turkey’s founder Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, and officially registered in 1923.

In the interview (full version available here), Logoglu also outlined the risks for the country should the government continue on its current course vis-à-vis Turkey’s secular middle class.

Logoglu believed the current minimum requirement for restoring social peace would be for Erdogan to personally apologise for the acts of the police and his ministers, governors and chiefs of security responsible for managing the conflict on the field.

He called on the prime minister to officially commit to changing state policies with respect to human rights, privacy of citizens, and freedom of expression, demonstration and choice of lifestyle.

Logoglu, a former career diplomat and ambassador to Washington, also suggested that the current discontent with a large part of the population stems from its frustration with government’s foreign policy.

Logoglu claimed that CHP proposed a detailed plan 18 months ago for a diplomatic solution to the Syrian crisis. “If the Prime Minister had been open to discuss[ing] the initiative,” Logoglu suggested, “Turkey would have gained recognition as a serious mediator and the Syrian population would have been spared destruction and shedding of blood.”

In an exclusive interview with IPS correspondent Jacques N. Couvas, Faruk Logoglu, deputy chairman of the major opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), discussed the current crisis in Turkey and the conditions he believed the government would have to fulfill to end the crisis.

Faruk Logoglu, deputy chairman of the Republican People’s Party (CHP) in Turkey. Photo courtesy of the CHP

In the 2011 general elections, CHP received 26 percent of the vote. It is the second largest party in the Turkish parliament, with 134 of 550 seats. Logoglu is vice chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee of the Turkish Grand National Assembly (TBMM) and a former ambassador to the United States.

Q:  How do you regard Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s accusations that the opposition has been fomenting unrest?

A: This is a ridiculous claim. Demonstrators gathered of their own will and initiative. Neither the CHP nor any other political party has participated in any official capacity.

The protests were a spontaneous manifestation of discontent with the government’s domestic and foreign policies. The population staged a civic uprising to say that enough is enough.

Q: In Tunis on Thursday, the prime minister said that he would proceed with the Ottoman Artillery Barracks project. How do you see this statement as affecting the demonstrators and the crisis in general?

A: Gezi Park is a symbol of a new political dynamic in our country that says, “Either you change and respect democracy and human rights, or we will continue.” The  [ruling] Justice and Development Party AKP had better understand what is happening in Turkey before it is too late. If they take the wrong steps, everyone will pay a high price.

Things were not going so well – before and after these demonstrations – in foreign policy, society, economy and other areas. If the government uses repressive totalitarian methods, my prognosis is that unrest will continue.

Our party has no control over the demonstrators. There are certainly members of our movement who demonstrate in their capacity as private citizens, but not to our knowledge nor under the CHP banner. The same applies to other parties.

Many protesters have no party affiliation but are associated with organisations with professional and intellectual affinities, such as unions, trade associations or universities.

Q: Foreign commentators have likened the Taksim and Gezi Park demonstrations to the Arab Spring’s beginnings. How do you regard this comparison?

A: What is going on these days in Istanbul and the rest of Turkey is not the Arab Spring, the Arab Revolution or the Orange Revolution.

The main difference is that we already had democracy. CHP has underlined the existence of Turkish democracy as a system for months. We already said, before the events, that democracy could not be taken away from us.

Q: What tangible remedies does CHP propose to resolve the present conflict?

A: The demonstrations started peacefully and must end peacefully. Those responsible for turning a sit-in into a social conflict should make the first move of appeasement.

When a British solder was murdered in London, the British prime minister, David Cameron, cut short his official visit to France. He did this for a single individual. Yet when Turkey is ablaze, the prime minister went to visit Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia. It doesn’t make sense.

The first order of business is for the Turkish prime minister to go on TV and apologise to the Turkish people for the brutal use of force by the police, for his insistence on razing a park in Istanbul to build a shopping centre, and to admit that he was wrong.

He should repent and ask for forgiveness by the people, but that may not be enough to restore peace. He will have to change his policies, which violate human rights in terms of freedom of speech, of media, of communication, of assembly, of demonstration, of individual privacy of life. These are part of the reality of what Turkish people want to live.

We expect that the European Parliament will give clear support to our citizens in this matter.

Q: Supporters of the demonstrators have commented that Turkey’s foreign policy and threats to Syria may have added to the discontent of the middle classes. What is CHP’s policy on foreign relations?

A: From the very start of the Syrian crisis we have taken a position of non-interference in the internal affairs of Syria. Such position aimed at encouraging both the Damascus regime and the Syrian opposition to negotiate in order to chart a peace agreement without foreign intervention.

One and a half years ago, we proposed an international conference, initiated by Turkey, to include the permanent members of the United Nations (U.N.) Security Council, the European Union, the representative of the U.N. secretary-general, the Arab neighbours of Syria, Turkey, and, of course, Iran, the Syrian opposition and the Syrian government. We proposed this not just once, but three times, in writing to the prime minister of Turkey.

Now, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov have agreed on a similar plan. We do support this initiative, but had our party been heard a year and a half ago, better results would have been achieved.

At CHP, we value Syrian people as neighbours. We regard them as relatives.  We don’t want foreign intervention and certainly not military intervention in Syria. We believe the best way out of that crisis is through a political process.

A smashed NTV satellite van in the centre of Taksim Square in Istanbul highlights protesters' frustration with how Turkish media has covered their movement. Credit: Jillian Kestler-D'Amours/IPS

Sitting with hundreds of other protesters in the centre of Istanbul’s Gezi Park Thursday night, Arzu Marsh rummages through her backpack to show off what she calls her makeshift “emergency kit”: medical masks, a red spray-bottle filled with a liquid that lessens the effect of tear gas, a scarf and some food.

But perhaps the most important item is what’s sitting in her lap, and, every few seconds, lights up with incoming text messages: her cell phone.

“I’m from Ankara, so all my friends and all my family are from Ankara, and as soon as I put [photos and videos on] Facebook, everyone saw it, and of course they also shared,” Marsh explained, referring to images of recent anti-government protests in Istanbul.

“Now, we are all following…Facebook or Twitter. We are not following any [traditional] news,” she said.

As spontaneous chants of “Everywhere is Taksim! Everywhere is resistance!” spread through the crowd, and a banner reading “Keep resisting Ankara – we are with you” hung overhead, Marsh told IPS that sharing information on social media about protests across Turkey has not only helped keep activists motivated but also built solidarity across political and geographical divisions.

“Yesterday we heard that… there was a [protest] in Rize, so we had an applause for Rize. It was very emotional, and it motivates you,” she said.

Distrust of traditional media

A smashed, bright yellow, satellite TV truck, belonging to one of Turkey’s leading broadcasters, NTV, sits in the centre of Taksim Square. Its doors are ripped off, windows shattered and tires punctured.

It is also covered in graffiti and highlights protesters’ frustration with the mainstream media in Turkey.

At the height of police violence in Istanbul’s Gezi Park last week, most local television networks ignored the events and instead continued with their regular programming, including cooking and travel shows.

While these same stations are now reporting on the protests – and NTV issued an apology for its initial lack of coverage – activists say social media continues to fill an important void and is the primary source of information for many.

“There’s a new, young generation that does not trust mainstream media broadcasts and they seek information that is independent and objective,” explained Emrah Ucar, an Istanbul-based activist who founded a popular social media network, called “Ötekilerin Postasi”, or “The Other Post”.

Indeed, as demonstrations continue across the country against the government’s increasingly authoritarian controls, protesters have developed an elaborate – and often times, humorous and creative – social media network to organise and sustain their protest.

The “Ötekilerin Postasi” now gets 1.7 million clicks per day, Ucar said, and is reaching a more widespread and politically diverse segment of Turkish society than it ever did before.

“What’s most important about social media is making people feel that they are participating in the production of news. When they get this feeling, they make it an issue for themselves and they participate in the commenting and spreading of the news,” he told IPS.

Government policies create ‘chilling effect’

Widespread arrests and detention of journalists, defamation lawsuits and government pressure on critical media outlets and columnists – including Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s publicly calling out journalists for their reporting – has had a “chilling effect” on the Turkish media, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).

Turkey jailed the highest number of journalists worldwide in 2012, often through the use of draconian and easily applied criminal laws. The government has also imposed fines on major media conglomerates, forcing them to sell off assets and downsize their operations, and helped facilitate the transfer of large news outlets to pro-AKP owners.

“We have seen changes in the editorial management of newspapers, firing of critical columnists, and a gradual but consistent shift away from commentary and news that are unpleasant or critical of the government,” Asli Aydıntasbas, a columnist at the daily Milliyet newspaper, told CPJ.

“Newspapers routinely exercise self-censorship and suppress critical information and news—even in the face of declining circulation,” Aydıntasbas added.

According to Selcan Kaynak, a political science professor at Istanbul’s Boğaziçi University, the media’s failure to promptly report on the Gezi Park protests reflects its overall refusal to report on issues that are critical of Turkey’s Justice and Development Party-led (AKP) government.

“It’s really, in one word, hegemony that is being established. There are some critical columnists, or independent newspapers, but they’ve been marginalised. There [have] been very strict controls [of what goes] reported and unreported,” Kaynak told IPS.

Still, the fact that there was a complete media blackout at the start of the recent protests in Istanbul was “shocking”, Kaynak said. “They thought, I guess, that by ignoring this, the rest of Turkey…would have no idea, and it would just go by and they would go on with the usual business.”

Social media ‘menace to society’

According to Aslı Tunç, head of the media and communications department at Istanbul Bilgi University, social media helped give a platform to opposition voices in Turkey that were growing online, even before the protests began.

“This didn’t happen overnight,” Tunç told IPS. “Those voices were there already. But the mainstream media did not cover [them], did not give them a voice on their televisions or [in their] newspapers, and they tried to marginalise [them].”

On Wednesday, 29 people were arrested – and later released without charge – in the city of Izmir for allegedly “inciting riots and conducting propaganda” after posting things about the protests on social media website Twitter.

In a speech last weekend, Erdogan himself called Twitter “a menace to society”. He also said “the best examples of lies can be found there”.

The defiant prime minister, who just returned from a diplomatic visit to North Africa and has refused to back down from his aggressive position against the demonstrations, has also called protesters deviants, extremists, and even looters – “çapulcu”, in Turkish.

In response, protesters quickly re-appropriated the word, and are now proudly calling themselves Çapulcu, using it in posters around Taksim Square, and in photos and updates shared online. Protesters even created a website, called ÇapulTV, where they are live streaming from Gezi Park, while an Anglicised version of the word – “chapulling” – has taken on the new meaning of fighting for your rights.

“[The protesters] proved that Twitter, social media, is a very powerful organisational tool,” Tunç said. “The young people especially proved that social media is part of media now. You cannot ignore the power of social media.”

At a June 2, 2013 protest in Addis Ababa, the first major anti-government rally in Ethiopia since 2005, thousands turned out, calling for the release of political prisoners. Credit: William Lloyd George/IPS

Despite speculation that the first anti-government protest in eight years, which was held this week in Ethiopia’s capital, Addis Ababa, might signal new levels of political tolerance by the government, leaders of the political party that organised the protest say this cannot be further from the truth.

“There has been no change since (the rule of late Prime Minister) Meles (Zenawi). They are still totalitarian dictators who rule this country like control freaks,” Yilkal Getnet, chairman of the opposition Blue Party, told IPS at the party’s headquarters in Addis Ababa.

“The government did not want to give us permission, but it was down to the timing and strategic planning and leadership of the Blue Party that we were able to break the silence, challenge the system and open the door for public expression.”

Yilkal explained that his party had told the government they would organise a demonstration during the African Union’s (AU) 50th anniversary summit, which took place here from May 25 to 27, if they were not granted permission to hold a protest after the event.

“We told them, if you don’t give us permission, we will do it anyway. You can do whatever you want, you can kill us, you can arrest us, you can take whatever measures you want. This is our constitutional right, this is the very fundamental right of all Ethiopians,” said Yilkal.

At the Jun. 2 protest, the first major anti-government rally since 2005, thousands turned out, chanting “freedom” and calling for the release of political prisoners.

The Blue Party also demanded the release of journalists, reformation of government policies in order to combat high unemployment and an end to state interference in religious affairs. They also asked the government to pay compensation to communities displaced by development.

According to rights watchdog Amnesty International’s Annual Report 2012, Ethiopia has long “used criminal charges and accusations of terrorism to silence dissent.” And a number of journalists and political opposition members have been arrested and charged with various offences, including terrorism and treason.

“Repressive legislation effectively prevented human rights organisations from functioning. Large tracts of land were leased to foreign companies, leading to large-scale displacement of local populations. Construction continued on a dam which could affect the lives of half a million people,” the report stated.

The fact that this week’s protest was allowed to take place without any police interference has left some analysts speculating that it could be the sign of a more lenient stance towards political opposition in this Horn of Africa nation.

However, according to Hallelujah Lulie, a political analyst from the Institute for Security Studies Ethiopia, it is too early to tell whether this is a sign of a changing attitude within the government.

“It is possible that this is the beginning of liberalisation and a development in the post Meles-era,” Hallelujah told IPS. “At the moment, though, it is too early to tell. We will have to wait to see how the government treats future attempts by the Blue Party to hold protests and opposition activities.”

“The issues are not that different than previous protests, but the timing is extremely significant. Nothing has happened for eight years, there has been no political rally since the 2005 elections,” said Hallelujah. “It is not certain that the government will continue to allow protests, but the Blue Party has broken through into the political sphere at a time when all the NGOs, civil society and the media are the weakest they have ever been.”

Following the 2005 announcement that the ruling Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) had won another term of office, thousands of protestors took to the streets to voice their discontent with the election results and the government’s continued rule.

The EPRDF has been in government since 1991 and during the 2005 elections it appeared as if the opposition Coalition for Unity and Democracy and the United Ethiopian Democratic Forces would win. Riots took place in protest as pro-government supporters and police battled with the anti-government protestors. Countless demonstrators were arrested and since then little public dissent has emerged.

Many of the leaders of the Blue Party emerged from the 2005 protests. Yilkal, who graduated as an engineer, was a youth activist at the time, supporting another opposition party. He said the government put him in a military concentration camp for three months, and then in prison for a further three months.

“It was a very difficult time for us,” Yilkal said. “We were tortured, it was extremely hot, and we were interrogated every day, and asked endless questions we had no idea how to answer.”

However, Getachew Reda, spokesman for Ethiopian Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn, said demonstrations have always been allowed in Ethiopia and permission for them is not necessary. Instead, a notification must be given to the local authorities, so they can organise the logistics needed for the protests to take place, he said.

“It was very cynical to demand to protest during the AU 50th anniversary when we needed all our security to focus on the AU celebrations,” Getachew told IPS.

The official said there was a misunderstanding that protests here were banned. He claimed they were only restricted for one month during the 2005 elections.

He also said the government would not consider the demands of the Blue Party. “We will never consider these outrageous demands, they have to give the courts a chance first and should exhaust all legal avenues before shouting in the streets,” Getachew said.

Whether the momentum of the Jun. 2 protest can continue is yet to be seen. In the eyes of many Ethiopians, disenfranchised by years of infighting within opposition parties, political and media oppression and rights abuses, the Blue Party is yet another group destined for failure.

“We’ve seen it before, people come and shout against the government but they end up destroying themselves,” said Almas, a 57-year-old shopkeeper who watched the protestors pass her little shop on Jun. 2. “The government is making its best efforts to develop this country, the protestors should work with them to bring this country forward.”

But Yilkal said the government should not dominate every aspect of Ethiopian life: “Ethiopians need to determine their own destiny based on their own aspirations, and dreams, not as a collective, but as individuals. It is not up to the government to control everything, that’s why we believe in liberal democracy.”

At the Women Deliver conference in Kuala Lumpur, advocates shared strategies for breaking religious taboos on reproductive rights. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS

Liberian journalist Mae Azango says she spent a year living “like a bat, going from tree to tree” with her daughter in order to escape religious fanatics who were threatening to kill her for exposing the practice of female genital mutilation in her home country last year.

A senior reporter at the local FrontPage Africa publication, Azango told IPS that although the Liberian government signed a treaty in 2012 promising its citizens the right to information, it continues to hold back data on sexual and reproductive health and rights from journalists.

“With every story that I write, I take a great risk,” she says, adding that she is entirely dependent on “secret sources” within the government to gather information, since very little is shared in the public domain.

Her woes found echo among hundreds of women and health experts gathered in the Malaysian capital of Kuala Lumpur for the third annual Women Deliver global forum that ended Thursday.

Hailing from different corners of the globe, participants at the conference had no trouble identifying common goals: breaking taboos surrounding sex education and creating a safe climate for advocates, health professionals and educators to spread awareness on safe sex and family planning.

In Morocco, a country of 32 million people, schools are banned from offering sex education to young people because parliamentarians believe it to be an “evil concept, designed to promote promiscuity,” sexual and reproductive advocate Amina Lemrini told IPS.

She says progress on improving sexual health services in her country has been particularly slow due to taboos introduced by religious leaders.

With a government unwilling to challenge clerics, the job of providing crucial health services falls entirely on the shoulders of civil society, who are then threatened for their efforts.

Lemrini says she does not know a single reproductive rights activist who has not been threatened, yet the government offers them no protection.

Their distress has been recognised by leading experts in the field, including the executive director of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), Babatunde Osotimehin, who told IPS that religious fundamentalism is a “indeed a worry” when it comes to progress on sexual health.

Still, he urged activists to continue their work, adding, “Fundamentalism exists in all societies and all religions – what matters is how we communicate our message.”

He believes that if more people are made aware of their rights and choices, they will not hesitate to defy archaic laws and so-called “cultural taboos.”

“The average person on the street does not want a situation where death comes calling every day for reasons that can be prevented,” he stressed.

Indeed, even a cursory glance at global statistics is enough to make a strong case for the need for better communication: according to the UNFPA, nearly 800 women die every single day as a result of pregnancy-related complications; in a year, that number is closer to 350,000 deaths, of which 99 percent occur in developing countries.

Sex-selective abortions and neglect of newborn baby girls have resulted in an estimated 134 million “missing” women worldwide.

Doing a wide sweep of global data, the UNFPA estimates that “millions of girls” practice unsafe sex and lack information on contraceptives. Osotimehin recently wrote that an “unmet need for family planning exists among 33 percent of girls between 15 and 19 years old…in Ethiopia, 38 percent in Bolivia, 42 percent in Nepal, 52 percent in Haiti and 62 percent in Ghana.”

Nyaradzayi Gumbonzvanda, head of the Young Women’s Christian Association (YWCA), told IPS that giving up on communication about sexual and reproductive health and rights was not an option.

“We need an operative environment for those who are discussing this issue,” she said. “We need to protect the media — this isn’t a choice. Governments must scale up the level of cooperation with the media and provide supportive legal backup where it is not yet available.”

Gumbonzvanda thinks that citizen journalism could be an effective way to mitigate the risk posed by fundamentalists, not only by amplifying the voices of those who often go unheard, but also by empowering common citizens to take action.

Nowhere was the power of citizen journalism more evident than during the revolution in Egypt in 2011, where blogs, tweets, and Facebook posts replaced TV channels, newspapers and radio stations in reaching millions of people.

Today, as Egyptians struggle against the conservative policies of the ruling Muslim Brotherhood, that network of citizen journalists has turned its attention to reproductive health and safe sex, topics that are frowned upon by Islamists.

Ahmed Awadalla, sexual and gender-based violence officer for Africa and Middle East Refugee Assistance (AMERA), told IPS that anyone discussing the issue risks detention, arrest, harassment and imprisonment.

As a result, the number of bloggers increases every day, as citizens and advocates flee to cyberspace in search of safe forums to share information and ideas.

“When I blog about the sexual rights of women I break two rules,” Awadalla said. “First, by speaking about a forbidden issue and secondly by speaking as a man, who is not supposed to take the side of women.” Though he faces harsh repercussions, nothing will persuade him to give up his advocacy.

But even while citizens innovate new ideas to get around the deadly threats of engaging in sex education, experts say governments must not be let off the hook for failing to provide these basic services.

Governments in Asia, Africa and Latin America must be held accountable by foreign funders, says Agnes Callamard, executive director of the London-based ‘Article 19′, an organisation dedicated to freedom of expression.

“Every government has committed to spending a certain amount of the funding they receive (on sexual health),” she said, so tracking aid flows could pressure governments to improve their track records on information sharing.

In fact, when the Mexico-based Grupo de Información en Reproducción Elegida (GIRE) started to track aid supposed to be allocated to providing information on sexual and reproductive health in 2011, “we found that nearly a million dollars were missing,” said GIRE Information Rights Advocate Alma Luz Beltrán y Puga. “We sued the government over that.  If the same tracking is done the world over, it can lead to greater accountability.”

According to a study done by the World Health Organisation (WHO), developed countries donated nearly 6.4 billion dollars to help provide access and information on reproductive health in developing countries. It is now up to civil society to ensure that money is responsibly allocated.

The Hasht-e Sobh newspaper is now offering cheap SMS news-alerts to over 15,000 subscribers across Afghanistan. Credit: Shelly Kittleson/IPS

As Afghanistan prepares for the 2014 withdrawal of foreign forces that have occupied this country for over a decade, investors are already beginning to bid a hasty retreat amid rumours that “chaos” and civil war will replace NATO’s boots on the ground late next year.

Among those most fearful of this approaching financial drought are journalists and media organisations who have long relied on international support to stay afloat.

Najiba Ayubi, director of the independent Afghan media group known as The Killid Group (TKG), described the last 10 years as the “golden decade for Afghan media”, which saw the establishment of 175 FM radio stations, 75 television stations and hundreds of print publications that have taken up the cudgels on everything from rural girls’ right to education to the public’s right to information.

The radio stations in particular have been very effective in developing a strong civil society and there is “a serious danger of losing all that if funding dries up,” Ayubi told IPS.

But fear breeds innovation, and as the drawdown approaches, media practitioners are finding creative solutions to the post-NATO quandary, including the creation of a new journalists’ federation, efforts to build a culture of investigative journalism and the drafting of a “code of conduct” for the press.

Media practitioners close ranks

One of the first responses to the threat of a funding shortage has been a heightened sense of solidarity in times of distress.

When the independent daily Hasht-e Sobh decided to take the Afghan ministry of mines to task in a special edition in late March for “irregular tender procedures” and the squandering of resources on so-called advisors who were paid as much as 107,000 dollars per month, the paper’s editor-in-chief Parwiz Kawa was promptly summoned to the attorney general’s office.

This raised fears that he might be fated to a similar end as the many Afghan journalists who have been killed on the job in the last decade, including two in the past few weeks.

But local media organisations just as promptly issued statements denouncing the violation of the right to free speech. Hasht-e Sobh, winner of Reporters Without Borders (RSF)’s 2012 Press Freedom Award, says the matter is currently on hold.

This spontaneous reaction came partly in response to the paper’s daily struggle for survival: while in 2011 it was able to employ some 125 staff across the country, its bureau has since dwindled to 70, axing crucial correspondents in the eastern city of Jalalabad and the southern Kandahar province.

“We had to let them go when donors cut the funding,” Kawa told IPS, adding that 50 percent of Hasht-e Sobh’s budget comes from international donors, with less than 30 percent coming in from advertising, sales and subscriptions.

The group is now scrambling to secure loans from supporters and began offering a low-cost SMS news alert service through an agreement with telecommunications provider Etisalat two months ago.

The service has already attracted 15,000 subscribers and hopes to eventually reach at least 100,000 of Afghanistan’s estimated 30 million inhabitants, according to Kawa.

Ayubi is similarly concerned about the future of TKG, which achieved full self-sufficiency in 2005 but took a hit after the announcement of the 2014 military pullout. With advertisers’ pockets growing shallower, Killid has once again resorted to seeking grants in order to maintain its operations.

According to Ayubi, it is particularly important for media organisations to remain functional in the lead up to the April 2014 presidential elections so that the population can make informed decisions.

Nader Nadery, former human rights commissioner of Afghanistan and current executive chairman of the Free and Fair Elections Foundation, highlighted the crucial role the media plays in nurturing a vital society, pointing out that news sources have become much more critical of the government’s failure to deliver on its promises.

This initially caused the government to dig in its heels and adamantly refuse to release even the most innocuous information on the grounds that it is classified and that releasing it would pose a “national security risk.”

But after extensive lobbying by media and civil society groups, the government published a draft Access to Information law earlier this year.

Though the Centre for Law and Democracy has criticised the draft on a number of points – such as the restricting of access to “information that serves a right or brings ease to performing of the relevant duties’’ – Nadery believes the government’s overture to civil society represents an “important step forward” for press freedom and the right to information.

With these newly won rights come responsibilities, Afghan National Journalists’ Union (ANJU) Chief Fahim Dashti noted, drawing attention to the recent collaboration between more than 30 media organisations over a seven-month period that resulted in a draft Code of Practice, designed to ensure media quality.

The code calls for journalists to pay greater attention to the psychological and social impact of news reports, especially those covering delicate issues like child abuse and rape, and aims to “sensitise” the public by, for example, refraining from using the word “criminal” for those not yet convicted of crimes. Dashti believes this will also strengthen the public’s trust in media outlets.

Though his own widely respected publication ‘Kabul Weekly’ folded in 2011 due to financial difficulties, Dashti is hopeful about the overall future of journalism.

Meanwhile, the newly established Afghan Journalists’ Safety Committee has embarked on efforts to alleviate some of the risks journalists incur in their work, offering first aid training, medical treatment, and legal advice. A 24-hour hotline offers a lifeline to distressed journalists by connecting media practitioners with a vast network of civil society activists, as well as local and international media.

In a country where the literacy rate is estimated to be hovering close to 28 percent, though, print publications will find it the hardest to survive.

The international Informática 2013 Fair, held in Havana Mar. 19-22, 2013. Credit: Jorge Luis Baños/IPS

Cuba will continue to prioritise public Internet access over connectivity in private homes, as indicated by a government announcement Tuesday that 118 new public cyber salons would open nationwide as of early June.

The new Internet outlets were reportedly made possible by the “full functioning” of a fibre optic cable laid between Cuba and Venezuela.

The government-controlled press reported on a communications ministry resolution Tuesday that said one hour online in the new outlets would cost the equivalent of 4.50 dollars, payable in 4.50 CUCs or convertible pesos, to which only a small part of the Cuban population of 11.2 million has access.

That amount is equivalent to 108 Cuban pesos, the currency earned by most Cubans. “I cannot possibly afford that on my pension of 270 pesos a month,” retired journalist and university professor Enrique López Oliva told IPS.

Readers of the newspaper Juventud Rebelde, which expanded on the information, had similar complaints. “It looks like whoever set these prices lives in another country or earns a salary wholly in CUCs,” commented one reader who identified himself as J. Pérez.

But the price for surfing the domestic Intranet will be 0.60 CUCs (14.40 pesos) an hour. And access to the international email service will cost 1.50 CUCs (36 pesos) an hour.

Internet, Intranet and email services in Cuba are provided by the state-owned telecoms company ETECSA, which has a monopoly over the informatics and communications sector.

The official resolution specifies that clients cannot use Internet services to carry out actions harmful to “public security, the economy, independence and national sovereignty” – a warning apparently aimed at dissident groups, which the government considers “mercenaries in the pay” of a hostile foreign power, the United States.

Juventud Rebelde wrote that the expansion of connectivity was in line with the Cuban strategy of facilitating growing access to new technologies, depending on the availability of funds and resources, and based on an approach that puts a priority on the social good.

It added that the new cyber salons were made possible by the underwater fibre optic cable running from Guaira in northern Venezuela to Siboney in eastern Cuba, which permits the high-quality, high-speed and stable transmission of a large amount of information.

Authorities in Cuba blame the five-decade U.S. economic and technological embargo for the high local cost of Internet connections, and for the serious problems in web services in this Caribbean island nation.

The newspaper added that “the fibre optic cable, while it improves international communications (up to now carried mainly by satellite) is not a free service, which explains the initial cost of the expansion of the service of navigation on the Internet.”

The cable reached Cuban shores in 2011, and Venezuela’s authorities declared it operational in May 2012, although Cuba’s official media maintained a discreet silence.

Cuba has a minimum bandwidth of 323 megabits per second via satellite, but various sources say the fibre optic cable will increase the current transmission speed by a factor of 3,000 and will cut operating costs by 25 percent, although the satellite services will continue to function.

Cuban authorities have repeatedly made it clear that the country will continue to put a priority on the “social use” of the new technologies – in other words, on connectivity in schools, research and work centres, professional associations or recreational and community centres.

A tiny minority of Cubans have access to the Internet, the Intranet or email service in their homes, basically by dial-up. Another small minority can afford the steep prices of cybercafés, mainly in hotels, which charge around eight dollars an hour.

In its report this year to the Universal Periodic Review of the United Nations Human Rights Council, the Cuban delegation stated that the country had 783,000 personal computers as of the end of 2011. Of that total, an estimated 18 percent were in homes and more than 33 percent were in the health, education and culture sectors.

“In addition, 2,610,000 users employ Internet services, 622,000 with full navigation,” added the document, which did not differentiate between “social” and private access – the latter of which is limited, by means of payment in national currency, to intellectuals and professionals such as journalists, academics, artists or doctors.

Cartoonist Nadia Khiari, aka Willis From Tunis, in Cannes. Credit: A.D. McKenzie

By now, most movie fans know that American actor Leonardo DiCaprio was in this southern French city for the annual Cannes Film Festival. But fewer people are aware that Willis from Tunis and Kichka of Israel were also here.

Willis is the pseudonym of Nadia Khiari, a cartoonist from Tunisia whose acerbic and ironic drawings are gaining an international following, mainly through social media and selected journals. Michel Kichka is the prominent Belgian-born, Israel-based cartoonist whose work is viewed eagerly in his adopted country.

In Cannes, they joined fellow cartoonists Plantu of France and Dilem of Algeria to highlight the work of Cartooning For Peace, a non-profit association that aims to foster dialogue, promote freedom of expression and recognise the journalistic work of cartoonists.

“We have Muslim cartoonists, Jewish cartoonists, Christian cartoonists – all with the idea of contributing to peace,” said Plantu, whose drawings have appeared for more than 40 years in the influential centre-left French newspaper Le Monde.

Plantu and Kofi Annan, former secretary-general of the United Nations, founded Cartooning For Peace in 2006 in the wake of protests and riots around the world sparked by Danish cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammad.

The group now comprises more than 100 cartoonists representing 40 nationalities and all the world’s major religions.

During the 12-day film festival, which ends May 26, members’ works are on exhibition in the huge hall where official film screenings and press conferences with the “stars” take place.

Alongside the glitter and glamour, Cannes’ organisers said they wanted to draw attention to threats against freedom of expression. They’re also holding an auction of original cartoons during the festival to fund Cartooning For Peace’s efforts, which include providing protection and legal assistance to cartoonists. 

Standing beside one of her drawings, Khiari (Willis From Tunis) told IPS she found the atmosphere “frenetic”, but she said that the support of Cannes, Cartoonists For Peace and the people who write to her made her feel less isolated.

Connecting with others “gives me energy and the desire to go on,” she said. “If I continue doing this, it’s for all the people who find my cartoons interesting and who send me comments. I receive lots of messages of encouragement, and that helps me because I feel less alone.”

Willis is aware of the dangers that cartoonists face in certain countries. In 2011, Syrian cartoonist Ali Ferzat was badly beaten by security forces, who symbolically tried to destroy his hands.

Cartooning For Peace launched a campaign to get him out of Syria and to hospital, where plastic surgery saved his fingers, according to Alice Toulemonde, a spokesperson for the group. Farzat, whose cartoons criticised the regime of President Bashar al-Assad, is now able to draw again.

More recently, the group and Amnesty International have highlighted the case of Venezuelan cartoonist Rayma Suprani, who has been receiving threats related to her work, as she is not a fan of the late Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez.

For Tunisia’s Khiari, it was a major political event that pushed her towards cartooning. An artist and art teacher, she launched Willis From Tunis during the “Jasmine Revolution” that led to the Arab Spring. She took her pseudonym from the name of her cat, Willis, who was born during the last speech of former Tunisian president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali.

“The president was there promising press freedom and a host of other things, and the absurdity of the speech inspired me to do some cartoons,” she recalled of the beginning in 2011. “Of course I didn’t know then that this would be his last speech.”

One of her cartoons on display in Cannes shows a news reader in dark glasses (a reference to the film “Men In Black”) telling viewers that after the commercial break they will forget about “23 years of dictatorship, the revolution, martyrs and the quest for liberty and solidarity” but that they will continue to “be miserable”.

“I feel that I’m one of many who want the same things – happiness, employment, freedom. It’s not complicated,” she added. “All Tunisians are interested in politics. We are 11 million politicians. I express myself through cartoons and humour. For others it’s through blogging, articles, photos and other means. It’s visceral.”

Khiari said she has a special interest in protecting women’s rights, which are constantly under threat in Tunisia. She drew cartoons about a proposal to add to the constitution that “women are complementary” to men. The proposal was withdrawn after women took to the streets to protest.

“We raised our voices to say ‘I’m not complementary to anyone, I’m my own individual being’,” Khiari said. “We now know that if we react, go out and protest, there are means to change things. Personally, I’m fighting for freedom of expression and the rights of women.”

In her cartoons, she also shows concern for the direction the country has taken since Ben Ali was forced to flee.

“The slogan of the revolution was dignity, liberty and employment. That’s what we wanted,” she told IPS. “The issue wasn’t morality or religion. Each person’s spirituality is a personal matter, but politicians are spending time turning attention from the real issues, which include the economy and employment, and they’re talking about morality.”

“Meanwhile, poverty and joblessness still exist and nothing is being solved. We don’t need a political party to be our intermediary with God.”

Encouraging debate through humour is also a tool for Kichka, Israel’s leading political cartoonist, who believes that artists have to be true to themselves.

“As a cartoonist, I have to take sides,” he told IPS. “When I see certain things happening in the world, I feel I have a commitment. I am not drawing for my own pleasure.”

“You have to take into consideration that you can be badly misunderstood, but that doesn’t mean you can’t express yourself, especially in a free country,” he added. “A sense of humour is essential for living.”