Greetings
Happy Navruz, everybody!
Yearly archives: 2010
Nadira
I am still not up to blogging speed yet. While you are waiting, you might like to look at Nadira’s showreel.
A Life Saved
The good news is that Alisher Khakimjanov was granted asylum by a judge yesterday after being refused by the Home Office and scheduled for deportation to Uzbekistan.
http://shahidayakub.livejournal.com/4279.html
One interesting facet of the original Home Office decision was that they explicitly stated that they would not accept evidence from opponents of the Uzbek regime – including me – as it is not “Objective”.
http://shahidayakub.livejournal.com/4279.html
Whereas evidence from the Uzbek regime itself and its supporters is objective, according to the Home Office.
I am involved in another case which has been refused by both Home Office and judge and which is now going to the European Court of Human Rights. In that case the Home Office states that the British Embassy has consulted a Tashkent law firm who say there is no human rights problem in Uzbekistan.
This is the equivalent of “We have taken advice from a Berlin law firm who say that there is no danger to individuals from Herr Hitler and his government”. I am genuinely stupefied by the refusal of the Home Office to accept what the entire world knows is the nature of the Uzbek regime. I actually have sympathy for the argument that many asylum seekers from many countries are economic migrants with weak claims. But the tiny number – less than 50 – of Uzbek asylum seekers who have escaped (Uzbekistan still has exit visas) and made it here, are victims of blind unreasoned Home Office hostility.
The policy is so unreasonable I can only believe it is conditioned by our desire to butter up Karimov to maintain the military alliance with him over Afghanistan. This is yet another terrible shame on this British government, which has betrayed in so many ways the many good people who built up the Labour Party.
A La Recherche Du Temps Perdu
I haven’t been taken ill, or shut down by unfriendly fire from governments or lawyers.
In 2003 my life collapsed around my ears; I was hopitalised several times and I had neither time nor capacity for personal administration. Over the next couple of years I lost job, income, home and marriage. I was simply unable to face the mountain of correspondence those crises generated. Unless the address was handwritten, I didn’t open it, and sometimes not then. Being bipolar, one of my problems in depressive periods has always been a terror – and I use the word carefully – of opening mail. Then I moved into a tiny flat with nowhere anyway to file anything.
The upshot is that 90% of seven years of correspondence lay in almost thirty cardboard boxes, perhaps a third of it unopened. Much of it is indeed very unpleasant. To give just the example of life insurance policies, 27 different letters saying direct debit payments were missed, and subsequent letters detailing the cancellation of these policies. Plus matching letters from the bank detailing payments not made and fines imposed for “administration”. 17 letters from British Gas threatening disconnection, 11 from Thames Water. 54 letters from debt collection agencies threatening court action. 62 letters from the Inland Revenue, who pursue me with a zeal they never display about Lord Ashcroft or David Mills.
Then there are the 48 solicitors’ letters about the divorce, the letters from the Foreign Office about my sacking, the letters from the Treasury solicitors trying to stop publication of Murder in Samarkand…
You will have gathered that, my life being very much together again, and finally having some filing cabinets and somewhere to put them, I have spent the last week ploughing through the whole lot, sorting it and chucking or filing it as appropriate. I shut myself off from the world and got down to it. It has been tough, as of course it evokes starkly some very, very hard times and difficult emotions.
There is of course also stuff which brings a warm glow. Memories of Nadira’s support in times of despair, little bits and pieces belonging to my children. The loving emotions are the most disabling of all.
Anyway, good news is I am almost finished. It will be a huge weight off my mind.
Most cheering of all were the over 400 letters of support, mostly from complete strangers, many of whom outlined their own experience of injustice and persecution. Many real apologies to the large majority, to whom I did not reply. They have all now been read.
Back to blogging by the weekend, I hope.
CIA Attacked French Civilians with LSD
For all those nutters who cry “Conspiracy theory” whenever it is stated that the CIA have ever done anything wrong, here is a story from that impeccably conservative source, the Daily Telegraph:
A 50-year mystery over the ‘cursed bread’ of Pont-Saint-Esprit, which left residents suffering hallucinations, has been solved after a writer discovered the US had spiked the bread with LSD as part of an experiment.
Camberley Mosque
As someone who devotes much energy to battling Islamophobia, it is important equally to oppose false cries of Islamophobia whenever any Muslim group is thwarted. Otherwise “Islamophobic” will become a meaningless pejorative just as “Anti-semitic” is thrown at any rational critic of Israel.
Having looked at the dispute over Camberley Mosque, I feel that it is the Bengali community which is acting with gross insensitivity. They wish to pull down a listed Victorian building to build a mosque. I would oppose that were the proposed replacement a mosque, synagogue, church or Tesco.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/surrey/8561342.stm
The old scholl has in fact been in use for many years as an Islamic centre. There is no threat to that. It is demolition of the building which is objected to.
It strikes me that the very large and sturdy building looks ideal for sympathetic internal conversion to make it a better mosque. Failing that, the community can do what anybody else has to do whose needs have outgrown a listed building, and move the mosque elsewhere.
I encountered a similar arrogance and insensitivity from some members of the Muslim community while campaigning on Whalley Range in Blackburn, when I was faced with a demand that a pub close to a mosque be closed down. I replied that the pub had been there for over a hundred years before the mosque.
The deliberate spread of fear and hatred of Muslims by politicians, media and security services is a real problem. But what we must insist is that Muslims are treated both no worse and no better than anybody else.
Guardian on Manningham Buller
There is a good article in the Guardian by Vikram Dodd on Eliza Manningham Buller’s professed ignorance. Some kind people in the comments thread have pointed out that my testimony and documentary evidence directly contradicts Manningham Buller.
Some commenters then bemoaned the fact that the Guardian no longer invites me to write on these issues, which provoked a response from Matt Seaton of the Guardian that it is I who refuses to write for them. That is untrue and I have posted this comment, which I repeat here as the dreaded moderators will probably get it.
It is certainly true that I formally warned in a diplomatic telegram as early as November 2002 that we were receiving intelligence from torture from the CIA, and this was illegal. I was called back to a meeting in March 2003 to be told it was legal and policy, as decided by Jack Straw. Documents on my webiste.
Matt, for the record I should be delighted to write for Guardian cif. Sadly the Michael White Jack Straw fan club at the Guardian have blackballed me – as I am sure you know.
I remain attracted to the idea – which I believe genuinely ought to work – of taking the trustees of the C P Scott trust to court for acting ultra vires. The trust stipulates that the Guardian must support liberal values. But New Labour have been the most illiberal government since Castlereagh, and the Guardian has cheerled for them. It would be a wonderful opportunity for a discussion in a court of law of New Labour’s attacks on civil liberties and the legality of New Labour’s wars.
E-liar Manningham Buller
Eliza Manningham-Buller, former head of MI5, is engaged in an outrageous attempt to rewrite history, by claiming we were unaware that the CIA was getting intelligence from torture.
The government knew the CIA was sending us intelligence from torture from at least November 2002, when I sent a diplomatic telegram to Jack Straw and others – including MI5 – informing them so. I repeated it in February 2003, and was called back to a meeting on March 7 2003 where I was told that, as a matter of policy in the War on Terror, we were using intelligence from torture. Sir Michael Wood said at the meeting that in his opinion this policy was not contrary to international law.
I have made available indisputable documentary evidence of this, and that the policy of using intelligence from torture was sanctioned by Jack Straw:
The redactions were made by the government.
I am astounded that, having obtained the first two documents under the Freedom of Information Act last November, no mainstream media outlet will mention them and refer to them, despite acres of reporting on whether Ministers had an intelligence from torture policy.
Plainly these documents disprove entirely the Eliza Mannigham Buller claims that we did not know. But don’t expect to see them referred to in the media.
The Election – What’s The Point?
Now that politics have focused down on the election, I find myself thoroughly demotivated.
There is a substantial percentage of the population who wish to see a very early withdrawal from the occupation of Afghanistan, who want genuinely firm measures against the casino banking economy, who are very sceptical about the direction the European Union has gone, and who do not want to waste many scores of billions of dollars on a nuclear submarine system which can wipe out half the world’s population instantaneously and the rest shortly thereafter.
Yet the great “leader’s debate” will be between three people who all follow the same pro-bank bailout, pro-Afghan war, pro-EU and pro-Trident consensus. The political differences between them are insignificant – they are engaged in a Mr Smarm contest. They are not even good at that – Brown is an aggressive churl, Cameron is comfortable only working alongside his team of fellow toffs, Nick Clegg seeks to avoid offending the establishment consensus at all costs.
Only in Wales and Scotland do any significant number of people have a hope of electing anybody who stands outside the cosy Westmnister consensus on key issues.
To work, democracy must present the electorate with real choices.
Our democracy does not work.
Brown at Chilcot
I can’t be bothered watching Brown at Chilcot any more. Mildly interesting but unsurprising that Blair kept him out of the loop on dealings with Bush,
Brown’s primary concern is to deny that Treasury constraints cost British soldiers’ lives. He has therefore said six times in the first half hour that, as far as the Treasury were concerned, cost was never an issue.
It bloody well should have been. To all those unemployed and steeped in debt, does this feel like a country that had £100 billion to throw away on a totally needless aggressive war?
Gordon Brown. Unquestioning writer of cheques for a psychotic warmongerer.
What a tosser.
African Corruption: Tony Baldry MP Unleashes the Libel Lawyers
Tony Baldry MP has set libel lawyers Olswang on British bloggers who have had the temerity to refer to this extremely interesting article from Sahara Reporters
Olswang state that Baldry has been hired as a QC to defend the truly horrible James Ibori on charges of money laundering. Ibori was Governor of Delta State in Nigeria, scene of appalling environmental devastation, dreadful human rights abuse, and massive corruption from the oil industry. Ibori chose to launder millions of pounds of his looted wealth through London. The Nigerian government refused to extradite him to the UK, but family and associates of his in London face money laundering charges.
There are two important points here. Olswang state that Baldry was not acting as an MP, but as a QC. That would certainly be true if he were on his hind legs arguing to a jury in court (though why any jury might be swayed by Baldry is beyond me).
But to write to a Minister saying that as a matter of policy, it is not in the public interest to prosecute corrupt foreign officials who launder their money through London, particularly Mr Ibori, is quite a different thing. How can the roles of MP and QC be separated in such policy lobbying of a Minister on behalf of a paying client – and remember Mr Ibori was in a position to pay extremely well?
The separation of Baldry’s MP and QC hats in carrying out this special pleading to Ministers is a vulgar fiction. Not to mention the moral vacuity of the argument: “We can’t turn up our noses at money looted from the African people, old boy. Think of the effect on the City.”
This case raises, yet again, serious questions about the compatibility of MPs highly paid outside interests with what is supposed to be their main job, as impartial legislators on behalf of the British people.
Which leads me to my second point. Did Baldry or his companies have any connection with James Ibori before he was hired as his QC? The Sahara Reporters article lists extensive business interests of Baldry in West Africa, including in oil and gas.
The Nigerian Liberty Forum knows that Mr Baldry, who was the Chairman of the House of Commons International Development Select Committee from January 2001 to May 2005, has extensive interests in the extractive industries of several emerging economies especially in West Africa. For example, he is the Chairman of Westminster Oil Limited (a British Virgin Islands registered company involved in the development of oil licences and exploration) and the Deputy Chairman of Woburn Energy plc (a UK AIM listed company specialising in oil exploration and recovery). He is also a director of West African Investments Ltd (a company that invests in “infrastructure and natural resource projects in Sierra Leone and elsewhere in West Africa”) and a shareholder in Target Resources plc (a company involved in gold and diamond mining in Sierra Leone). Mr Baldry is also the Chairman of the Advisory Committee of Curve Capital Ventures Ltd (“a sector neutral investment company that predominantly invests in India; China and Africa and advises companies on strategic growth and global expansion”).
I know of Westminster Oil Ltd, who are particularly dodgy. More revelations will follow.
UPDATE
I have got hold of a copy of Olswang’s threatening letter, amusingly headed “Not for publication”.
Michael Foot – An Appreciation
I wrote this appreciation of Michael Foot last year. The media ridicule of this good man was a key waymark in this nation’s journey to despising integrity and honesty in politicians, and instead worshipping only slick media presentation.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/05/michael_foot.html
Rare TV Appearance
Even the coincidence of the broadcast of Murder in Samarkand with renewed national debate on our collusion with torture, did not break through the UK media’s blacklisting of me and my eye witness and documentary evidence that the policy of intelligence from torture had direct ministerial direction from Jack Straw.
Here is Russia Today showing what the UK media will not allow you to see:
http://rt.com/Politics/2010-03-03/uk-torture-citixens-guantanamo.html
Fast Tracked To Death?
At 2pm today Alisher Khakimjanov faces a fast track asylum hearing and possible immediate deportation to Uzbekistan. Alisher’s father was arrested by police following the Andijan massacre by Uzbek troops of anti-regime demonstrators. The family’s home was confiscated by the State and militia have been looking for Alisher, who was a student in the UK.
Under the “Fast track” system there is no right of appeal. When the government introduced “fast track” it was represented as a way of dealing with vexatious applicants from “safe” countries where there was unlikely to be a need for asylum.
Uzbekistan is most certainly not a safe country. That Uzbeks are now being put into the fast track system is a disgrace, and yet further evidence of the government’s willingness to be complcit with human rights abuse by the Karimov regime.
Billions of Dollars in Cash Leave Afghanistan
Plainly our occupation of Afghanistan is so succesful in promoting the country’s economy that there is too much money around. As the Washington Post reports, in a two month period 180 million dollars in cash was declared as it was carried out through Kabul airport, mostly to Dubai.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/24/AR2010022404914.html
What is strange is the Washington Post’s estimate of the outflow as “Over 1 billion dollars per year”. 180 milion dollars in two months is already a rate of over 2 billion dollars per year. As the Washington Post report does acknowledge, that is the tip of the iceberg. Much exported cash is undeclared or under-declared, and the regime insiders send out their cash unchecked and undeclared through the VIP lounge. The real figure is certainly much higher than 2 billion dollars.
That is not including money sent out through swiss banks or by wire transfer.
Nice to know that our soldiers are dying, and our taxes being spent, to protect such a thriving and active government.
UPDATE
A sensible comment from Strategist leads me to explain something. Very little of this money will be drug money. The idea that Afghanistan is awash in drugs money is a myth. The large drugs warlords – mostly Karzai government members or affiliates – export the heroin and are paid OFFSHORE.
Very little of the narcotics money ever enters Afghanistan – only the cash which is needed to pay local farmers and meet costs of conversion to heroin. I would estimate that only some 2 billion dollars per year from the heroin trade actually enters the Afghan economy, and that is widely dispersed.
If, as the American official quoted comments, they don’t really know what is going on, it is because they don’t want to know what is going on.
That is true in two senses – The USA is more than ever sheltering behind the figleaf of the puppet Karzai regime, so the extent of that regime’s looting must be kept quiet. Karzai won’t wait for the last US helicopter before leaving to spend more time with his money. But also the absence of any exchange controls is part of the neo-liberal economic policies inappropriately imposed on Afghanistan by the invading West.
Muslims Found In Mosque Shock
Channel 4 Dispatches used to be a haven of serious documentary, but has degenerated into a stream of Islamophobia. It touched rock bottom today with a truly pathetic effort by Andrew Gilligan which found – shock horror – Muslims in the East London mosque!
These Muslims actually wanted society to be ordered in an Islamic way on Islamic principles. To try to achieve this they were – shock horror – undertaking political activity and joining political parties!
Gilligan’s piece turned on the Daily Express trick of attempting to inculcate fear that suddenly you and I will wake up under sharia law. The fact is of course that no matter how much devout Muslims may want to campaign to ban alcohol and push-up bras in the UK, they have not a hope in hell of succeeding.
But surely they have a right to their beliefs and ideology and a right to espouse it? Surely we should be delighted that these Muslims are seeking to advance their views through participation in the democratic process and not through violence? In fact, is this not the sort of activity we should be encouraging?
Apparently not. Apparently you only should be allowed to participate in politics if the ideology you are offering to the electorate is broadly the same as Andrew Gilligan’s. We were apparently supposed especially to be shocked by Gilligan’s revelation that Muslim activists campaigned for George Galloway because of his opposition to the Iraq war and support for the Palestinians. Wow! Whatever next?
Gilligan went on to introduce a number of neo-conservative nutters from wild eyed groups such as the Centre for Social Cohesion, to condemn all this “extremist” activity, without giving any context to explain where his “Independent” commentators were dredged up from.
Gilligan’s only useful point was about the waste of taxpayers’ money being pumped in to various Muslim groupings. Sadly he confined his criticism on this point only to financial support for those Muslim groups who did not wholeheartedly support the Bush/Blair foreign policy, when in fact twenty times more public money has been wasted on tiny but grasping Muslim groups who proselytise Blairism.
All in all, the most risible piece of half-baked Islamophobia I can recall. Gilligan – a man for whom I have had respect – should be ashamed of himself.
Or I Might Have a Huge Penis, Persephone
Or be a hypnotist. Or be able to “talk away my face” like the great John Wilkes.
I was much amused by the comments on this entry in the always interesting einekleinenachtmusik blog.
http://einekleinenichtmusik.blogspot.com/2010/02/what-kind-of-world-are-we-creating.html
If Persephone were to read Murder in Samarkand, she would find I do in fact consider and answer her question.
UPDATE
Oops, I forgot the link, without which this post seemed even weirder. No, Arsalan, I haven’t gone nuts, just was tickled by Persephone’s coments and feeling the need for some light relief. And no, technicolour, I was not seriously positing that possession of a huge penis or hypnosis is the way to attract women. Nor was I actually claiming to have one. I just thought charm, money and alcohol was an unimaginative list, and could be added to.
The Cancer of Corruption: What $150million Gets You In Ghana.
This is the Zakhem power station site at Kpone. The particularly distincitive feature is the lack of any power station.
I am grateful to CitiFM in Accra. Having been misled into publishing photos of a completely different power station, they have had the grace to apologise and publish a corrected story.
http://www.citifmonline.com/site/news/news/view/3556/1
Unfortunately their original photos of a completely different site, nothing to do with Zakhem, were seized on and re-used by almost the entire Ghanaian media as evidence that I was talking nonsense.
My favourite recent news headline was “Craig Murray is Not In His Right State of Mind”.
http://elections.peacefmonline.com/politics/201002/38966.php
Zakhem are loudly threatening to sue me. They make the following key points:
– Zakhem Construction Ghana is a separate company from Zakhem International Construction Ltd of London
– They have received only 39.5 million dollars to date towards the turbine installation
– They have carried out a good deal of work including engineering design, land clearance, construction of perimeter wall, and 40% of the procurement of balance of plant
– Work was delayed by a change of site
My information on some of these points differs. But none of that alters the fundamentals. The Government of Ghana bought the turbines direct from Alsthom. Zakhem were to install them and provide the balance of plant. They have been paid tens of millions of dollars upfront, starting over three years ago, but have never even started digging the foundations, nor supplied the key components they were paid to procure, including transformers and fuel tanks.
Ordinary people, some of them struggling below the poverty line, pay taxes in Ghana, particularly through VAT. Over a hundred million dollars of their tax has already gone forever into the power station pictured above. There is no sign of them getting any benefit for their money. Meanwhile Zakhem and former government functionary Paul Afoko have pocketed millions.
Control Orders
Control Orders remain a cruel act of degradation of people who have never been convicted of anything, utterly incompatible with human rights. Parliament will today vote to renew them again – expect the parties to compete in their gravitas as they underline the threat to our very existence and way of life (sic) from terrorism.
In fact, as has been so roundly denounced by our most senior judges recently, the real threat to our way of life comes from politicians and the security services.
The arguments in this letter are extremely strong:
Open letter to Home Secretary Alan Johnson MP
Dear Home Secretary,
We write to urge you not to renew the control order provisions of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005, introduced in haste in March 2005 following the House of Lords Judicial Committee’s condemnation of indefinite detention of foreign terrorist suspects. In the five years of their operation, control orders have attracted criticism from national bodies including the Joint Committee on Human Rights, Justice, Liberty and Amnesty International UK, and eminent international bodies including the International Commission of Jurists, the UN Human Rights Committee and Human Rights Watch. This has focussed on the inherent unfairness of the orders, their reliance on secret evidence, and the devastating impact they have on those subject to them.
Impact
You will be aware (through reports presented during litigation and press coverage) of the severe impact of the orders on family and private life, and on the mental health of those subjected to them. This is acknowledged by Lord Carlile in his fifth annual review of control orders [PDF]. Partial house arrest, confinement to a restricted geographical area, wearing a tag, and the constant need to report, to seek permission, to have visitors (even medical visitors) vetted, and the stigma associated with being targeted in this way, takes a severe toll not only on controlled persons but on their families. Children’s school performance is badly affected by denial of internet access (making homework very difficult), by restriction of visitors, by fathers being unable to take their children out freely, by the disruption and fear caused by frequent house searches, and by children witnessing the humiliation and despair caused to their parents by these measures. The detrimental impact of the orders is even worse since, although in theory time-limited to a year, in reality, renewal of orders means that subjection to these draconian restrictions is endless.
The fact that there have been so few control orders in the five years of their operation ?” 44 in total according to Lord Carlile ?” gives the misleading impression that those controlled must be truly dangerous. But the small number of orders does not necessarily mean that the intelligence behind them is accurate. Not many people were hanged for murder when the UK had capital punishment ?” but a significant proportion turn out to have been innocent.
Unfairness
Major sources of unfairness are the use of secret evidence and the lack of real advance judicial scrutiny. Permission to make a non-derogating order can only be denied by a High Court judge if the decision to make the order, or the grounds for making it, are ‘obviously flawed’. This, and the lack of input from the proposed subject of the order, would not be such a problem if the review process was not subject to such delays, but at present the full review hearing rarely takes place within 12 months. During all this time, of course, the controlled person is subject to the full rigours of the control order.
The judge may quash the order at the full review stage, but only if there is no reasonable suspicion of involvement in terrorist activities. It is a very low threshold for the Home Office, and is frequently satisfied by evidence that neither the controlled person nor his advocate has had an opportunity to test in cross-examination. This remains the case despite the Judicial Committee’s ruling in June 2009 (in AF and another v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] UKHL 28) that the controlled person is entitled to enough disclosure to be able to answer allegations [this is the Law Lords’ ruling from June 2008, referred to above]; the Committee was referring to the amount of detail in the allegation, and not to the evidential foundation for the allegations, which generally remains closed. As Human Rights Watch has observed, the control order regime undermines the right to an effective defence, the principle of equality of arms, and the presumption of innocence.
Cost
Although it would be inappropriate to judge the control order regime by its cost-effectiveness as a principal criterion, it is reasonable to note that implementation of the orders has cost a fortune in litigation; the Joint Committee on Human Rights has calculated that total legal costs from 2006 to date are likely to exceed £20 million (taking into account the costs of legal aid and judicial sitting time), which is almost half a million pounds for each controlled person. Litigation has also seriously diminished the utility of the orders as a tool for controlling and disrupting terrorist activity, to the point where there must be very serious doubts as to their cost-effectiveness (compared with more targeted surveillance and effective use of the criminal justice system).
Reputation
The fact that British citizens and residents can be subjected indefinitely to such extraordinary measures, with no effective means of challenge, contravening in important respects common-law guarantees of fairness as well as Article 6 of the ECHR, has damaged the reputation of the United Kingdom and done irreparable harm to the fabric of justice in this country. In addition, public trust in the security services and the government is eroded, and communities whose co-operation is vital in the fight against terrorism are intimidated and alienated. In the words of solicitor Gareth Peirce, ‘This may affect only a small group of people but in terms of its contribution to what one might call the folklore of injustice it is colossal.’
For these reasons we urge you not to renew this legislation.
Yours sincerely
Mike Mansfield QC, criminal defence barrister, Tooks Chambers
Craig Murray, writer, broadcaster, human rights activist, former British Ambassador
Sir Geoffrey Bindman, solicitor
Lord Rea
Clare Short MP
John McDonnell MP
Victoria Brittain, writer and journalist
Dafydd Iwan, LL.D., President of Plaid Cymru, Party of Wales
Bruce Kent, Vice-President, Pax Christi
Louise Christian, human rights lawyer
Baroness Sarah Ludford MEP
Caroline Lucas MEP
Jean Lambert MEP
Frances Webber, human rights lawyer
Liz Fekete, Institute of Race Relation (IRR)
Carla Ferstman, Director, Redress
Ben Hayes, Statewatch
Peter Tatchell, human rights campaigner
Prof. Chris Frost, Head of Journalism, Liverpool John Moores University
Hilary Wainright, Co-editor, Red Pepper
Cori Crider, Legal Director, Reprieve
Paddy Hillyard, Emeritus Professor, QUB
Bob Jeffrey, University of Salford
Amrit Wilson, writer
Dr Richard Wild, University of Greenwich
Dr. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed, Executive Director, Institute of Public Policy Research.
Andy Worthington, journalist and author of The Guantanamo Files
Lord Gifford QC, barrister and Vice-President of the Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers
Liz Davies, barrister and Chair, Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers
Anna Morris, barrister and Vice-Chair, Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers
Professor Bill Bowring, barrister and International Secretary, Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers
Dr Victoria Sentas, School of Law, King’s College London
Margaret Owen, Director WPD, international human rights lawyer
Phil Shiner, Public Interest Lawyers
Sam Jacobs, Public Interest Lawyers
Daniel Carey, Public Interest Lawyers
Tessa Gregory, Public Interest Lawyers
Moazzam Begg, Director, Cageprisoners
Massoud Shadjareh, Chair, Islamic Human Rights Commission
Aamer Anwar, human rights lawyer
Nick Hildyard, Sarah Sexton, Larry Lohmann, The Corner House
Desmond Fernandes, policy analyst and author
Dinah Livingstone, writer, translator, editor
Tim Gopsill, journalist, Editor of Free Press
Paul Donovan, journalist
Estelle du Boulay, The Newham Monitoring Project
Suresh Grover, Director of The Monitoring Group
George Binette, UNISON Camden
Arzu Pesmen, Kurdish Federation UK
David Morgan, Peace in Kurdistan Campaign
Alex Fitch, Peace in Kurdistan Campaign
Matt Foot, solicitor
Hugo Charlton, barrister
Dr Kalpana Wilson, London School of Economics
Jonathan Bloch, Lib Dem Councillor and author
Michael Seifert, solicitor and Vice-President of the Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers
Kat Craig, solicitor and Vice-Chair, Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers
Khatchatur I. Pilikian, Professor of Music & Art
Dr Alana Lentin, Senior Lecturer, Sociology, University of Sussex
Dr Christina Pantazis, University of Bristol
Professor Steve Tombs, Liverpool John Moore University
Claire Hamilton, Dublin Institute of Technology, Dublin
Professor Phil Scraton, School of Law, Queen’s University, Belfast
Dr Theodore Gabriel, University of Gloucestershire, Cheltenham
Dr Jan Gordon, University of Lincoln, Exeter
Dr Tina Patel, University of Salford
Professor Penny Green, Kings College, London
John Moore, University of West of England, Bristol
Professor Joe Sim, Liverpool John Moore University
Dr David Whyte, University of Liverpool
Dr Stephanie Petrie, University of Liverpool
Dr Dianne Frost, University of Liverpool
Martin Ralph, (UCU Committee), University of Liverpool
Dr Anandi Ramamurthy, University of Central Lancashire
Professor Jawed Siddiqui, Sheffield Hallam University
Dr Silvia Posocco, Birkbeck College, University of London
Dr Muzammil Quraishi, University of Salford
Dr Adi Kuntsman, University of Manchester
Professor Lynne Segal, Birkbeck College, University of London
Dr Joanne Milner, University of Salford
Dr Yasmeen Narayan, Birkbeck College, University of London
Professor Scott Poynting, Manchester Metropolitan University
Dr Liam McCann, University of Lincoln
Dr Pritam Singh, Oxford Brookes University
Sophie Khan, solicitor
Simon Behrman
Owen Greenhall
Martha Jean Baker
Russell Fraser
Ripon Ray
Stephen Marsh, barrister
Declan Owens
Rheian Davies, solicitor
Richard Harvey barrister
Deborah Smith, solicitor
Alastair Lyons, solicitor, Birnberg Peirce
Hossain Zahir , barrister
Chantal Refahi , barrister
Anna Mazzola, solicitor
Zareena Mustafa, solicitor
Lochlinn Parker, solicitor
Anne Gray, CAMPACC
Saleh Mamon, CAMPACC
Estella Schmid, CAMPACC
Dr Saleyha Ahsan, No More Secrets-Respect Article 5, film maker
Mohamed Nur, Kentish Town Community Organisation
Abshir Mohamed, Kentish Town Community Organisation
Samarendra Das, filmmaker and writer
Rebecca Oliner, artist
Rebekah Carrier, solicitor
Dr Smarajit Roy, PPC Green Party Candidate for Mitcham and Morden
PM Forbes, The Green Party, Sandhurst, Berkshire
Jayne Forbes, Chair, Green Party
Adrian Cruden, Green Party PPC Newsbury
Lesley Hedges, Green Party PPC Colne Valley
Sarah Cope, Green Party PPC Stroud Green
A Bragga, Green Party PPC for Stroud Green
Graham Wroe, lecturer, Sheffield Green Parry
Child Slavery In Uzbekistan
More invaluable work from the Environmental Justice Foundation, in collaboration with Anti-Slavery International. Their latest thoroughly researched report estimates that one million children were subjected to slave labout during the 2009 cotton harvest in Uzbekistan.
This is essential work because it gives the lie to false UK, US and EU claims that the human rights situation under the Karimov regime is “improving”, thus “justifying” their continued alliance with Uzbekistan as a logistics base and route for operations in Afghanistan.
Here is a selection of key facts from the report:
?? Children as young as 10 years old can be dispatched to the cotton fields for two months each year, missing out on their education and jeopardizing their future prospects.
?? Uzbekistan is the world’s 3rd largest cotton exporter and earns around US$1 billion
annually from the sale of its cotton to clothing factories primarily in Asia, which in turn
export garments to the west; and to cotton traders, many of which are based in Europe.
?? Reports in November 2009 estimated one million children working in the last harvest.
Cotton picking is arduous labour, with each child ascribed a daily cotton quota of several
kilos that they must fulfil.
?? Children may be compelled to stay in barrack-like accommodation during the harvest.
Living conditions are often squalid. In those places where food is provided to children, it is
inadequate, often lacking in basic nutrition and children can often only access water
from irrigation pipes, which carries health risks.
?? Children can be left in poor physical condition following the harvest; illnesses including hepatitis, injuries and even deaths are all reported. The harvest begins in the late summer, when temperatures in the fields remain high and can continue until the onset of the Uzbek winter. Children are not provided with any protective clothing whilst they work.
?? Children receive little or no reimbursement for their labour, perhaps a few US cents per kilo of cotton picked. However, payments are deducted to cover their travel to the fields and the food they are provided with during the cotton picking season, which can leave them in debt.
The full report can be downloaded from here:
http://www.ejfoundation.org/page93.html
Every year young children die during forced labour in the Uzbek cotton fields. Millions of adults are also conscripted into slave labour. Islam Karimov and Gulnara Karimova get ever wealthier.
It is a stunning fact that Wal-Mart, Tesco, Asda and C&A have been so sickened by Uzbek child slavery that they have voluntarily banned Uzbek cotton and set up, at their own expense, audit systems to ensure there is not Uzbek cotton in products they sell.
Yet no government has used available anti-slavery provisions in international trade agreements to ban Uzbek cotton. The EU has never even discussed the matter while, thanks to the influence of Western governments, UNICEF has never made any statement or taken any position on child slavery in Uzbekistan.
This is arguably the World’s most depraved single act of inter-governmental complicity.