Local elections: The process, results and the future

 
Friday, 5 January 2018 

The local elections are scheduled to take place on 10 February, after a long period of anticipation.

As a country, we have been talking about electoral reforms since 2003. Though not perfect, we now have an electoral system for local government that satisfies the requirements of proportional representation for political parties while giving representation closer to home for voters. The long process of formulating the method was completed in 2017. The focus is now on campaigning to influence voter preferences.

Ideally, in local elections, voters should select individuals who will address local problems. But, local elections have never been local. They are played on the national arena. After the election is over and winners are declared, the big players go back to wherever, leaving the rate payers to live with the result for four years or so.

The new method is expected to make elections more local by incorporating First-Past-the-Post (FPP) contests to elect members by wards which are smaller sub-units in a local authority area. These FPP contests are carried out within a larger Proportional Representation (PR) framework where each party is allocated seats in proportion to the totality of votes they received in the wards.

In regard to the Colombo Municipal Council, the larger PR framework has 110 seats. FPP contests are used to fill only 66 seats. The other 44 seats are filled from party lists which were submitted at the time of nomination as additional-persons lists. The list seats are used to compensate for any deviations from proportionality in FPP results. This method of election where two different methods are used to return members is called a Mixed-Member Proportional (or MMP). In contrast, previously we used a single method – i.e. results of preferential voting – to return members.

MMP method is found only in a handful of countries in the world. Several countries have tried MMP but reverted to PR or other mixed-member methods, but Bolivia, Lesotho, Germany, New Zealand and Scotland have successfully adopted the method. South Africa applies MMP for local government but not for provincial or national level.

Present election presents a necessary experiment for Sri Lanka, because we have been talking about mixed-member methods since 2003 and not taken steps to implement. Whether we want to continue with the method or not is a matter for consideration after a few years of implementation.

The process

At the polling booth on 10 February, each voter will be presented with a ballot paper which is quite simple. It will consist of a set of party symbols and the names corresponding to the symbols. Each party would have nominated one or more candidate for each ward, but their names will not appear on the ballot.

For example, Rosy Senanayake, the mayor designate of UNP, is contesting in the Bambalapitiya ward against other candidates from UPFA, SLPP, JVP and several small parties. Mayor designate from the SLFP, Azath Salley, is contesting in the Kochchikade ward against a similar number of candidates from other parties. The names of any of the candidates, well known or not, will not appear on the ballot. It is up to the candidates to introduce themselves to the voters in their ward as the name behind the party symbol.

Votes will be cast and counted at the ward level. Colombo will return 66 FPP members from 47 wards. The number of members is higher than the number of wards because there are several are multi-member wards in the CMC. In a dual-member ward, for example, each party will field two candidates and the party that gets the most votes in that ward gets to return both candidates as councillors.

The votes received by each party at the ward level will be totalled to obtain each party’s share of votes in the local authority as a whole.

The results

Releasing the results would be a daunting task for the Elections Commission (EC). Firstly, some parties may win more FPP seats than their PR entitlement. This excess is called an overhang. For example, if party A receives 45% of the total votes, it will be entitled to occupy 49 seats out of 110 seats in the CMC. However, there is a reasonable chance that party A might win 50 or more of the 66 FPP contests, making it necessary to create additional seats in the council or make other adjustments to accommodate the additional FPP wins.

Secondly, the EC is mandated to make sure that 25% or more of the members in the council are female. In some cases, sufficient women may not be returned. In such a scenario, the number of seats in a council may have to be increased to bring the number of females up to the mandated 25%.

Both scenarios depend on voter behaviour. The legislation seems to give the EC the flexibility to manage above scenarios as they arise. There is nothing we can do but put our trust in the EC and do our duty by going to the polling both on 10 February.

If party A receives a majority of seats in the council, the secretary of the party will nominate the mayor or the chairman for the council. If not, the mayor or chairman will be elected at the first meeting of the council. The chairman or the mayor along with the council staff will function as the executive arm of the local authority, while the council of members is expected to serve as the policymaking and oversight body. As has been the practice in CMC since 2000 or so, CMC council members get a certain amount of money and resource to do development work of their choice.

Accountability

of councillors

The councillors elected under the new method are expected to be more accountable than those elected local authority are wide, but the expectation remains to be tested. In the past, councillors engaged in unlawful activities such as using proxies to procure local authority contract for themselves. Will eyes closer to home stop such activities? We have to wait and see.

Accountability of

the council

The new method does not give any guarantee of accountability of the councils or the mayor elected. Important polices on roads and other thoroughfares, public health and sanitation, public utilities such as child care centres, pre-schools, libraries, recreational facilities, crematoria and cemeteries have to be decided and executed, not at the ward level but at  the council level as a whole.

Here, irrespective of the method of election, inefficiencies and even corrupt practices of the past may continue. Even if an elected mayor or chairman wants to perform, there will be lot of obstacles from rival political parties and vested interests.

Citizen participation

in local government

Citizen charters are widely accepted as means of improving accountability in local government and supporting non-corrupt politicians.  A citizen charter is “an official document that describes to the citizen in simple terms the step-by-step procedure for availing a particular service, and the guaranteed performance level that they may expect for that service.”

In 2011, the Indian Parliament passed a house resolution in which the ‘Right of Citizens for Time Bound Delivery of Goods and Services’ component  provided a comprehensive mechanism to ensure the delivery of public services, social sector entitlements and the accountability of delivery systems. It obligated public authorities to enumerate all the services, goods and entitlements they are supposed to deliver to people in the form of enforceable citizen charters. This resolution was in response to demands by activist Anna Hazare and followers to curb corruption.

In a study of implementation of citizen charters in Philippines, India and UK, where citizen charters are mandated, Kidjie (2012) found that local authorities complied with the requirements but the charters were not as effective because citizen participation was low or there were no mechanisms to monitor.

In a self-evaluation of the progress of India’s ‘Right of Citizens for Time Bound Delivery of Goods and Services Act,’ the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances noted, among other things, that the charter initiative should have a built-in mechanism for monitoring, evaluating and reviewing the working of the Charters, preferably through an outside agency.

Grievance redress

There is indeed a decentralised, people-friendly and time-bound process of registering and redressing complaints in the bill that was initially put forward as a package, but the grievance redress component of that package was not enacted. The proposed grievance procedures gave powers to the appellate bodies to penalise erring officials and compensate complainants.

The Bill sets up a central public grievances redressal commission – and an equivalent in every state. The details of the proposed grievance redress mechanisms and the reasons for inactivity of the Indian government in that regard should be further investigated.

Potential for

citizen oversight

in local government

in Sri Lanka

Citizen participation is one of the performance criteria developed by the Ministry of Local Government and Provincial Councils to evaluate the performance of local authorities in their survey of local authorities.  Specifically, the Ministry awards points for local authorities for ‘Community participation in decision making with formal delegation of powers’. Another criterion used is the extent to which ‘Activities of the councils are being executed in accordance with a citizen charter’.

Given that the Ministry already is using these performance criteria provides a good backdrop for mandating citizen charters, and formal delegation of powers to community participation through various advisory committees. As lessons from India and Philippines show, grievance redress mechanisms including an Ombudsmen office is also essential for citizen participation and oversight in local government. We can start with simple mechanisms like institutionalised citizen committees to monitor the implementation of citizen charters.

Maithri’s Weligama candidate arrested for producing illicit liquor

January 4, 2018 by

Ranasinghe Ranwalage Mahesh Madhushanka, the candidate of the UPFA contesting the local government election for Puhulhena ward of Weligama Pradeshiya Sabha in Weligama electorate has been arrested by Matara Anti-Vice Squad for production, possession and selling illicit liquor. At the time of arrest, he had in his possession 20 litres and 250 millilitres of illicit liquor and 50 litres of liquor prepared for distillation.

A few days ago President Maithripala Sirisena announced not to vote for candidates who consume liquor. Mahesh Madhushanka, who contests the Puhulhena ward of Weligama Pradeshiya Sabha in Weligama electorate is a member of the SLFP presided by President Maithripala Sirisena.

Christmas: The Scandal of Jesus Turned into a Party of the Idol Worshipers

Jesus was anti-ritual and hypocritical religiosity. He did not seek his popularity based on what he consumed, with whom he associated, and on his academic credentials. He did not know where his next meal would come from and where he would sleep the night. He based his hope of survival on solidarity with fellow humans and God.

by Jude Fernando-Jan 3, 2018

( January 3, 2018, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Celebrating Christmas during my adult life is one of the most troubling things I do. I hate to be at Christmas parties and to give gifts. Often, I am not sure what I mean when I say, “Merry Christmas.” Seeing the beggars in front of the church, when I walked in and out of the Church on Christmas Service made me feel guilty and hopeless. This is feeling I experience every year after Christmas service. I fear such sentiments have become normalized in my consciousness, and they seem to have not much impact beyond my intellectual domain. Paradoxically, (thanks to my friends) Christmas also continues to be a time of reflection that gives me hope. I was thrilled to listen to Haitian priest’s sermon. It was powerful and full of hope, and it inspired me to write this message.

Christmas The Scandal of Jesus Turned into a Party of the Idol Worshipers.docx by Thavam on Scribd

"Clean coal" versus liquified natural gas 

By Dr A.C.Visvalingam-January 4, 2018, 10:19 pm 
President, CIMOGG
www.cimogg-srilanka.org
acvisva@gmail.com

From the early 1970s, the highly-committed senior engineer Carlo Fernando lobbied sincerely, knowledgeably and forcefully to press the governments of the time to build one or two medium-sized coal-based power stations and not to go in for gas turbine or diesel engine-powered electricity generation. The thrust of his logic was that (1) Sri Lanka’s hydropower potential was limited and would soon be fully exploited, (2) the volume and timing of rainfall could not be accurately predicted, (3) the "base load" electricity demand would be best met by resorting to thermal power which is ideally suited for that purpose but hydropower, on account of its limited availability, should be employed only to meet peak loads over and above the "base load", (4) coal power stations from reputed sources are robust and have a long life, with relatively simple maintenance requirements, as compared to petroleum-fuelled engines and gas turbines, (5) nuclear power was far too complex for Sri Lanka to handle, quite apart from its radiation dangers in the event of an accident, (6) wind power was highly variable and too expensive, (7) solar power could be effective during daylight hours but was expensive and inflexible because the electricity generated could not be stored economically for night-time use, and (8) coal was plentifully available and relatively cheap whereas liquified natural gas (LNG) was far more costly at that time. Wave power, tidal power, ocean thermal energy conversion, hot dry rock heat extraction etc were still far from reaching industrial application status. As things stood then, from a practical point of view, coal power was the choice that could be considered to have been the most suited for Sri Lanka.

During that time, there was relatively little strength in the hands of the environmental lobby and consequently the proponents of coal power wielded greater influence, although not so much as the petroleum lobby, in which greedy politicians had a "quick-return" interest, and still do. Meanwhile, coal power boiler manufacturers were working hard in a genuine effort to make coal more acceptable by finding ways and means of limiting the volumes of dust, sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide that would emerge from the power station chimneys. Dealing with heavy metals like cadmium, lead and mercury was not considered to be economically feasible and was, therefore, not given much attention. The population of Sri Lanka then was very much less than it is now and, hence, it was possible to identify a few sites in sparsely populated, protected, coastal locations where coal could be unloaded and stored conveniently, where a good cooling water supply was available, and the spreading of coal dust from the point of unloading from ships to the releasing of the treated flue gases into the atmosphere could be expected to affect only a limited area with a small population. In this scenario, the "raw" cost of coal power generation was shown to be much lower than the costs associated with the alternatives then available, including LNG. However, the ground situation has greatly altered over the past 30-40 years and we need to examine this issue afresh.

One very important change that has taken place since the 1970s and 1980s is that the population has grown substantially and spread into areas that were sparsely populated three or four decades ago. A second significant factor is that there are now several individuals and organisations that are much more knowledgeable and vocal about the types and scale of the damage caused to our environment by power projects. Most of the recent newspaper articles inveighing against the promotion of "clean coal" have been written by scientists, engineers and environmentalists who have taken the trouble to study the physical and chemical analyses of the products of coal combustion to underpin their case, which is a strong one, against those who advocate the use of "clean coal". The third matter that one cannot ignore is the unwelcome spread of coal dust during transport, handling, storage and combustion, against which nuisance there are currently several petitions filed by the public at Norochcholai, which make it clear that this is an issue that cannot be glossed over. We are not aware whether any detailed analyses and costings have been done on the environmental damage caused by coal dust and the removal of such dust to whatever extent may be practical. If even an approximate cost of the environmental degradation and public annoyance caused by coal during the various stages of transferring it from ships to boilers could be worked out and added to the "raw" cost of coal power, a fairer economic comparison may be made with sources of power that have fewer negative features, particularly LNG.

In the case of LNG, its shipping, unloading, transport, handling and combustion do not spread unwelcome oily black particulate matter over the surrounding countryside although the amount of carbon dioxide that is released would be of the same order as in the case of coal. Furthermore, burning LNG does not produce unwanted sulphur dioxide, nitrous oxide and heavy metal combustion products.

Another key consideration is that Sri Lanka has no coal of its own and will forever be dependent on whichever sources are identified as producing the particular type of coal that is required for the particular design of the steam boiler that is selected. In contrast, over the past three or four decades, LNG has become more readily available from several sources and the design of the burners and boilers is not sensitive to the source of the LNG. Of the greatest relevance is the fact that Sri Lanka’s marine resources are known to include substantial natural gas reserves which, if developed with reasonable expedition, would be a fuel source that cannot be monopolised by cartels of foreign suppliers working in concert in the international markets to keep raising their prices as and when they please.

We need also to recognise that working out a cost for environmental degradation and public annoyance caused by the transporting, handling and burning of coal does not remove these undesirable effects. Avoiding these negative impacts altogether, ab initio, even at a higher cost by going for a cleaner fuel would be far better than creating these adverse impacts in the first place. In other words, minimising pollution from the outset is better than polluting first and trying to clean up the mess later.

Even the "solution" offered by planting trees to compensate for carbon dioxide emissions suffers from the same flaws whether the fuel be coal or LNG, namely, the large area of land required and the many years it would take for the trees to reach a size at which they would be effective, during which the power plants would have spewed out colossal amounts of carbon dioxide. Needless to say, renewable sources of power would be better but, as things stand at the moment, they cannot be relied upon to provide solid "base load" power any time soon.

It should be remembered that the government committed itself, as recently as in April 2016, to the international community by undertaking to base her development on a fossil-free agenda. We also understand that the Cabinet has already approved a Long Term Generation Plan for electrical power, covering the period 2017-2038. It was not many months ago that the public were informed that a firm decision had been taken to work with LNG and not coal. That decision must have been taken after a careful study and it is, therefore, surprising to learn that the government is being pressurised to go back to the plan to build two "clean coal" power plants. Whilst there are honest engineers who believe that coal power should be selected over LNG because they give a different weighting to the relative advantages and disadvantage of these two sources of heat energy, there may be some crooked political heavyweights who favour coal because it could prove to be a long-term godsend that would keep on yielding golden eggs for many years without leaving room to exploit our natural gas resources for power-production purposes. Taking all factors into account, the Citizens’ Movement for Good Governance (CIMOGG) is of the view that LNG should prevail over "clean coal" until we get our renewable sources of energy fully mobilised, which, however, will take more than a decade or two of sustained effort.

The disconnect between education and skills training

Friday, 5 January 2018

Many employers in the country unlike before want more funding and more attention toward vocational education and training. This is in line with many of the surveys internationally that suggests that a shift would have widespread employer support given the shortage of job-ready people.

Recently a survey of nearly 9,000 citizens in eight European countries reveals that, when forced to prioritise one area of education, only 17% chose higher education, compared with 30% who want more vocational education and training (VET). Thirty-nine per cent backed general schooling and 15% preschool.

Support for prioritising higher education was highest in Spain (30%) and Italy (23%), and lowest in Sweden (6%), Denmark and Germany (both 9%). This is despite the focus in recent decades on higher education expansion, most employers still care a lot about vocational education. In Sri Lanka despite all the talk about the importance of vocational education and of developing excellence across all occupations for the social and economic health of our society, we’ve made limited progress in the intervening years.

Germany 

Unlike most European countries, Germany has some of the best apprenticeship programs, however in Germany there have been concerns that higher education is chipping away at the traditionally very strong vocational system.

In Germany it is no longer the case that the apprenticeship and vocational system is attractive enough to compete with higher education. In 2014-15, for the first time in German history, there were more students than apprentices. Some apprenticeship positions have remained unfilled. There is now a push for further education colleges and new institutes of technology.

Sri Lanka

High levels of unskilled youth across the country has resulted in employers increasingly supporting vocational education. The “bumpy transition from school to work” – where a number of young people are unemployed or underemployed – could help to explain why more and more employers now want vocational education given top priority.

Many of our degrees have a low labour market value, while vocational programs are “underdeveloped” at upper secondary levels – all explaining strong support for more properly directed vocational spending. However young people are still more supportive of higher education. This could be because vocational training is still of low status and attempts to improve it had not worked. Therefore it is good to try to understand exactly which types of education the public value, rather than just looking at support for education spending as a whole.

However we live in a society that places a high value on the professions and white-collar jobs, and that still considers blue-collar work lower status. Therefore it is no surprise that parents want their children to pursue careers that will maintain or increase their status. In high socio-economic communities this is even more evident.

This bias against vocational education is dysfunctional. It is destructive to our children. They should have the opportunity to be trained in whatever skills their natural gifts and preferences lead them to, rather than more or less condemning them to jobs they’ll find meaningless. To keep a young person with an affinity for motor mechanics or one of the trades from developing the skills to pursue this calling is destructive. It is also destructive to our society.

Students who don’t excel in traditional academic areas, or who have little interest in them, should not meet with disappointment or disapproval from parents and teachers. Because today many of the skills most needed to compete in the global market of the 21st century are technical skills that fall into the technical/vocational area. The absence of excellence in many technical and vocational fields is also costing us big time economically as a nation

New thinking

Universities in Sri Lanka have benefited enormously from the expansion of higher education, but this growth had reached a point where it could not continue with their traditional missions. Universities need further differentiation in the system to blur the boundaries between higher education and vocational education. This has already started to happen slowly, where there had been an increase of dual-study programs that combine academic and vocational learning.

Due to pressure from employers, over the past three to four years Sri Lanka has established a number of new technical institutes offering short term courses, but they remain not well targeted and accepted and also still teach only a few thousand students with the required discipline, when the actual requirements are very different. Therefore I hope for the sake of our youth, 2018 marks the dawn of a brave new era.


(The writer is a HR Thought Leader.)

Is Israel deliberately killing Gaza protesters?

Mahmoud al-Masri, killed the previous day in confrontations with Israeli troops, is mourned during his funeral in Khan Younis, southern Gaza Strip, on 9 December.Mohammed DahmanAPA images

 

Hamza Abu Eltarabesh-3 January 2018

Sometimes you have to put horrific images at the back of your mind.

During Israel’s 51-day attack on Gaza in the summer of 2014, I saw tens of dead bodies. The worst thing I witnessed was the targeting of a car about 10 meters from where I was standing. I could see its driver take his last breath before he died.

At that moment, my whole body went cold. For several days, I could not think of anything but that appalling scene. I was unable to sleep for about a week.

Events moved fast that summer. I tried my best to forget about the incident and to get on with my life.
More than three years have passed. And despite my efforts to put that experience behind me, I know that the mental scars it left have not healed. Like so many other people in Gaza, I am vulnerable.

That was proven on 8 December last, when protesters in Gaza expressed their rage at Donald Trump’sannouncement two days earlier that the US would recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
Mahmoud al-Masri was among the protesters killed by Israeli troops that day.

I had looked on as Mahmoud ran towards the fence separating the Khan Younis area of Gaza from Israel. Mahmoud was brave and defiant. He kept running despite that Israeli forces were firing tear gas canisters in his direction.

Mahmoud climbed the fence, waving a Palestinian flag. He was shot in the back by Israeli soldiers.
When Mahmoud fell down, the Israeli soldiers kept on firing. He lay on the ground, bleeding for around an hour before the shooting had stopped. By the time anyone could offer him assistance, Mahmoud had lost consciousness.

“We reached Mahmoud when he was taking his last breaths,” Musab Abu Shawish, a paramedic, told me. “We were not able to do anything for him, except give him some oxygen.”

Helpless

Mahmoud al-Masri (via Facebook)

The killing of Mahmoud left me feeling helpless. But it was not the sight of his dead body that upset me most – I was not standing close enough to Mahmoud to see his face.

Instead, it was a video that showed his father, Abd al-Majeed, saying goodbye to Mahmoud in a mortuary.

“Please leave me with my son,” Abd al-Majeed told the people around him. Observing his pain, my whole body shook and I started to weep uncontrollably.

I did not know Mahmoud personally but I have learned about him from his father. Mahmoud, aged 29, had been a construction worker. He was hoping to set up his own carpentry business and raise enough money so that he could join his brother Ahmad, who emigrated to Sweden a few years ago.
Mahmoud “always hated injustice,” his father told me. “He was very kind and helpful.”

There are strong indications that Mahmoud knew he would be killed on 8 December.

The previous evening, he wrote on Facebook: “If we die seeking martyrdom, we die standing like trees.” The banner image on his Facebook page featured a photograph of Yasser Arafat and a quotation attributed to the late leader on how Jerusalem is at the heart of the Palestinian struggle.
Mahmoud was in many respects typical of the young people who have protested against Trump’s announcement.

Nayif al-Salibi is another young man with dreams and ambitions. He is now studying civil engineering at the Islamic University of Gaza. Once he graduates, he hopes to pursue a master’s degree in Germany.

No negotiations on Jerusalem

He took part in the same demonstration as Mahmoud on 8 December. When I met Nayif, his eyes were stinging from the tear gas fired by Israel. Along with many others, he was picking up tear gas canisters fired by Israel’s military and throwing them back at the soldiers.

“I’m here to show the world that we refuse to put our holy city [Jerusalem] on the negotiating table,” he said. “No one but Palestinians can make decisions related to Jerusalem.”

Israel’s use of tear gas – a chemical weapon – was examined in a study recently published by the University of California, Berkeley. It found that the amount of tear gas to which Palestinians are exposed is “likely beyond the level that has been found elsewhere around the globe.”

Although the study focused on the Bethlehem area of the occupied West Bank, it is also relevant to the use of tear gas in Gaza. People exposed to tear gas here have suffered similar symptoms to those noted in the study.

Ashraf al-Qedra, a spokesperson for the health ministry in Gaza, said that around 60 percent of people injured during recent protests had symptoms related to tear gas inhalation. They included severe coughing, respiratory problems and accelerated heart rates.

Many people in Gaza also believe that Israel is deliberately shooting at protesters so that they will sustain major injuries or even die – eight Palestinians were killed during demonstrations on the Gaza-Israel boundary in December.

Life goes on

About 40 percent of injuries by live fire during the recent protests in Gaza were in the head and upper body, according to al-Qedra.

Sharif Shalash, 28, died on 23 December after being injured in protests a few days earlier. He had been shot in the stomach by the Israeli military.

Sharif had confronted the Israeli military directly on a number of occasions. He was “an expert on the border area [with Israel],” said his friend Ahmad Hassaballah. During protests, Sharif had organized young people into groups and advised them about how to throw burning tires and other objects towards Israeli troops. He had also tried to cut holes in the Israeli fence.

His final wish, according to Hassaballah, was that he be shrouded in a Palestinian flag when he was buried.

I sought to speak with Sharif’s wife Yasmin.

Yet when I arrived at her home, a woman came out and apologized on Yasmin’s behalf. “She is too tired,” the woman said. “She has just come back from the hospital and we have just learned that she is pregnant.”

It was a powerful reminder of how life continues despite all the pain caused by the Israeli occupiers and their supporters in Washington.

Hamza Abu Eltarabesh is a journalist from Gaza.

Ukraine: killing of lawyer sparks protests against 'criminal system'

Iryna Nozdrovska, whose body was discovered on 1 January, disappeared days after helping to block release from jail of nephew of a judge

 An Orthodox priest holds a picture of Iryna Nozdrovska during a protest outside Kiev police HQ against the murder of the Ukrainian lawyer who helped convict her sister’s well-connected killer. Photograph: Sergei Supinsky/AFP/Getty Images

Marc Bennetts in Moscow-Thu 4 Jan ‘18 16.56 GMT

The brutal killing of a human rights lawyer in Kiev has sparked widespread anger and protests amid allegations of entrenched corruption within the Ukrainian justice system.

Iryna Nozdrovska’s body was discovered in a river by a passerby in a northern Kiev suburb on 1 January. The 38-year-old lawyer, who had been reported missing on 29 December, had suffered multiple stab wounds, according to reports. “There was such anger, such hatred [in the attack],” her daughter, Anastasiya, told Ukrainian media.

The Ukrainian foreign minister, Pavlo Klimkin, has described the murder as a “challenge to the state” and the case as “a test of our society’s ability to protect female activists and to ensure justice as a whole”.
The US embassy in Ukraine expressed shock over the killing and said those responsible for Nozdrovska’s death must be brought to justice.


 Protesters demand a fair investigation into the death of Iryna Nozdrovska. Photograph: Inna Sokolovska/EPA


Nozdrovska disappeared just two days after she had helped block the release from prison of Dmytro Rossoshansky, the nephew of an influential judge. Rossoshansky was jailed in May for seven years for running down and killing Nozdrovska’s sister, Svitlana Sapatanyska, in his car while under the influence of drugs and alcohol in September 2015.

Rossoshansky’s application for an amnesty after serving eight months of his sentence was rejected on 27 December by a court in Kiev. Nozdrovska had headed a public campaign to raise awareness of the case.

Nozdrovska received numerous death threats both before and after May’s trial, as well as during December’s appeal hearing. Her daughter was also assaulted by unknown assailants in 2016 in an attack that Nozdrovska said was intended to warn her to drop the case.

Police say a special team has been set up to investigate Nozdrovska’s death, and officers are reportedly examining a possible link with the Rossoshansky case. The Rossoshansky family have not commented on the case.

Hundreds of people rallied outside a police headquarters in Kiev on 2 January to demand justice for Nozdrovska and call for the resignation of the interior minister, Arsen Avakov.

The authorities’ response to Nozdrovska’s killing is being watched closely by supporters of the 2014 Maidan revolution, whose goals included eradicating the corruption and nepotism that has plagued post-Soviet Ukraine.

“People have seen very many recent cases where criminals, killers, have been freed by corrupt courts. This makes people very angry. They are asking: where is justice?” said Mustafa Nayyem, an MP who was a leading figure during the Maidan protests. “People have very little faith in law enforcement agencies right now. This case is a concrete test of the ideas of Maidan.”

Mikheil Saakashvili, the former Georgian president turned Ukrainian opposition figure, said Nozdrovska was killed by a “criminal system”.

Nozdrovska’s death came after she had publicly celebrated the court’s decision to deny Rossoshansky’s early release, and thanked supporters. “The rest of my life, whatever time I have left to live, won’t be enough to thank you all,” she wrote on Facebook two days before she vanished.

Arabic press review: UAE tried to pressure Tunisian media to attack Ennahda Party

And over half of displaced Iraqis have been unable to return home

Tunisian women at a rally in Tunis marking the fifth anniversary of the 2011 revolution (AFP)

The secret document behind Emirati stance on Tunisia

Mohammad Ayesh-Thursday 4 January 2018

New details have emerged regarding the recent move by the UAE to ban all Tunisian women and girls from entering or transiting through the country, according to the Arabi 21 website.

A confidential document, purportedly issued by the Emirati foreign ministry, includes eight recommendations for Tunis to abide by, the news site reported.

The most noteworthy recommendation, it reported, was “the mobilisation of media sites inside Tunisia against the Ennahda Party, and to claim that it is responsible for the large numbers of Tunisian women who joined the Islamic State group”, and in so doing, harmed the image of Tunisian women, previously associated with freedom and progress, Arabi 21 reported.

The recommendation, according to the news site, reveals the extent to which the UAE pays certain media organisations in the Arab world to conflate political Islamist forces with the Islamic State group.  

More than half of internally displaced Iraqis have not yet returned home

More than 55 percent of Iraq's five million displaced people are still not living at home, despite IS losing all major territory in the country, the London-based Al-Quds Al-Arabi newspaperreported.

Many displaced Iraqis accuse the government of neglect and say they are reluctant to allow them to return home, despite the expulsion of most IS fighters from their areas of residence.  

The dangers of a Qatari passport stamp in the UAE

An Asian worker in the UAE has been jailed after the authorities in Dubai took issue with the Qatari stamp on his passport, according to the Qatari newspaper Al-Sharq.

The Asian citizen has been held in a prison in Dubai, despite the fact he holds a valid residence permit, the paper added.

He was arrested without any charge, and has committed no offence or crime except that he entered Doha on commercial business, the Al-Sharq newspaper said.

Mysterious death of Algerian youth in Spanish prison

The Algerian Human Rights League has called on the authorities to open an investigation and summon the Spanish ambassador in Algeria to look into the circumstances of the death of a young man, Mohamed Bouderbal, at a detention centre in southern Spain, the Algerian newspaper El-Khabar reported.

The rights group said in a statement that he had been held in a Spanish prison for a month and a half and that his family have said he “died of torture and ill treatment”. 

* Arabic press review is a digest of reports that are not independently verified as accurate by Middle East Eye.

Trump lawyer seeks to block insider book on White House

President Trump used to have kind words for his former chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon, but things changed with his scathing statement on Jan. 3. (Jenny Starrs/The Washington Post)

By Josh Dawsey and Ashley Parker January 4 at 9:30 A

A lawyer representing President Trump sought Thursday to stop the publication of a new behind-the-scenes book about the White House that has already led Trump to angrily decry his former chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon.

The legal notice — addressed to author Michael Wolff and the president of the book’s publisher — said Trump’s lawyers were pursuing possible charges including libel in connection with the forthcoming book, “Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House.”

The letter by Beverly Hills-based attorney Charles J. Harder demanded the publisher, Henry Holt and Co., “immediately cease and desist from any further publication, release or dissemination of the book” or excerpts and summaries of its contents. The lawyers also seek a full copy of the book as part of their investigation.

The latest twist in the showdown came after lawyers accused Bannon of breaching a confidentiality agreement and Trump denounced his former aide as a self-aggrandizing political charlatan who has “lost his mind.”

It marked an abrupt and furious rupture with the onetime confidant that could have lasting political impact on the November midterms and beyond.

The Fix’s Callum Borchers lists three takeaways from the book “Fire and Fury” by Michael Wolff about President Trump’s campaign and first year in office.(Video: Bastien Inzaurralde/Photo: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

The White House’s sharp public break with Bannon, which came in response to unflattering comments he made about Trump and his family in a new book about his presidency, left the self-fashioned populist alienated from his chief patron and even more isolated in his attempts to remake the Republican Party by backing insurgent candidates.

Late Wednesday, lawyers for Trump sent a cease-and-desist letter to Bannon, arguing he violated the employment agreement he signed with the Trump Organization in numerous ways and also may have defamed the president. They ordered that he stop communicating either confidential and or disparaging information, and preserve all records in preparation for “imminent” legal action.

“You have breached the Agreement by, among other things, communicating with author Michael Wolff about Mr. Trump, his family members, and the Company, disclosing Confidential Information to Mr. Wolff, and making disparaging statements and in some cases outright defamatory statements to Mr. Wolff about Mr. Trump, his family members, and the Company,” read the letter from lawyer Charles Harder.

[Read the full letter from Charles Harder to Michael Wolff, Steve Rubin]

In a lengthy statement issued in the afternoon, Trump blamed Bannon — his former campaign manager and chief strategist who now heads the conservative Breitbart News website — for everything from leaks to the news media to the upset GOP loss in last month’s Senate race in Alabama. The president cast Bannon as a disgruntled former staffer whose chief goal is to stir up trouble.

President Trump congratulates chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon during the swearing-in of senior staffers at the White House last January. (Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images)

“Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency,” the statement said. “When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind.”

The White House also released a statement from the first lady’s office condemning Wolff’s book as a title to be found in the “bargain fiction” bin, while the Republican National Committee said Wolff has “a long history of making stuff up.” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, meanwhile, devoted much of her Wednesday news briefing Wednesday to disputing Wolff’s claims and seeking to undermine Bannon’s credibility.

The response was a marked departure from mid-October, when Trump called Bannon “a friend of mine” and said he understood his perspective.

But the much anticipated account of life in Trump’s White House caught the president and his West Wing team off-guard, with the president huddling with White House communications director Hope Hicks, one of his most trusted advisers, and Sanders to craft the fiery statement, after calling friends for much of the morning. Aides thought they had more time to prepare for the book’s formal release.

Trump spent much of the day raging about the book to top aides, officials and advisers said, and Sanders described the president as “furious” and “disgusted.” As he fumed, some aides were still frantically searching for a copy of the book, and even senior aides such as Hicks had not seen it by the afternoon, officials said.

“He’s out of control,” one person with knowledge of Trump’s comments said. This person added that the president had been in an upbeat mood for much of Tuesday, continuing to brag about last month’s passage of the Republican tax bill even as he fired off combative tweets.

Trump also blasted others in the White House for talking to Wolff, who was frequently spotted wandering the West Wing with no escort or ensconced in Bannon’s office, especially during the early months of the administration.

Wolff said Trump was aware of the project and allowed others to participate. An excerpt of the book, published online in New York magazine, said the author conducted more than 200 interviews “over a period of 18 months with the president, most members of his senior staff, and many people to whom they in turn spoke.”

Sanders said that Wolff “never actually sat down with the president” since Trump took office and that the two men had only had one five- to seven-minute conversation “that had nothing to do, originally, with the book.”

One senior White House official said Trump advisers considered Wolff friendly and believed it would be beneficial to speak with him; this person also said that Wolff interviewed Trump. A second senior White House official said the president had viewed Bannon as a useful ally when he was frustrated with congressional leadership and that, while he didn’t consider Bannon a close confidant, he also didn’t want him as an enemy.

Allies said Bannon was largely incommunicado on Wednesday. He had considered issuing a statement denouncing the book and denying some of the quotes but was not able to do so before Trump went on the attack, they said.

After being forced from the White House in August, Bannon and the president still occasionally talked on the phone. But West Wing aides have long maintained that Bannon overstated the frequency of his calls with — and influence over — the president.

“If all of us are being honest with ourselves, I don’t think you would have found more than 2 percent of politicians or reporters who knew who Stephen K. Bannon was,” Rep. Peter T. King (R-N.Y.), said in a recent interview. “Trump had already won the nomination and the primary. Whether you like the president or not, he is responsible for his win.”

 A White House official said call logs show Trump has spoken with Bannon only five times since the former adviser left and the official said most of the calls were initiated by Bannon. Trump, however, often uses cellphones to talk with outside advisers and confidants.

Trump had complained for several months about portrayals of Bannon as a political “Svengali,” according to one adviser who speaks with Trump frequently. “This has been a long time coming,” the person said. Several others said the relationship may be irreparable.

“Steve doesn’t represent my base — he’s only in it for himself,” Trump said in his Wednesday statement.

“Steve pretends to be at war with the media, which he calls the opposition party, yet he spent his time at the White House leaking false information to the media to make himself seem far more important than he was,” the statement continued. “It is the only thing he does well. Steve was rarely in a one-on-one meeting with me and only pretends to have had influence to fool a few people with no access and no clue, whom he helped write phony books.”

It remains unclear, however, whether Trump will exile Bannon indefinitely; the president often likes to cast characters out and then bring them back in and frequently maintains contact with those he has fired.

 Wolff’s book paints Trump as a buffoon who doesn’t read, can’t settle on political priorities and is unable to manage a warring cast of advisers who spend their days squabbling and undermining each other and the president.

In one scene, Katie Walsh, formerly a deputy chief of staff, is quoted as saying that dealing with Trump is “like trying to figure out what a child wants”; Walsh disputed that account Wednesday to an Axios reporter.

In another book scene, Sam Nunberg, a former campaign aide who was ultimately fired, describes trying to explain the Constitution to the president. “I got as far as the Fourth Amendment,” the book quotes Nunberg as saying, “before his finger is pulling down on his lip and his eyes are rolling back in his head.”

But, at least in the excerpts that have emerged so far, Bannon emerges as the most scathing critic of Trump and his family. Wolff portrays him as a master puppeteer, manipulating the president for his own political purposes.

Bannon is quoted describing a Trump Tower meeting during the campaign between Donald Trump Jr.; Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law; and a Russian lawyer as “treasonous”
and “unpatriotic.” At another point in the book, he is quoted calling the president’s daughter Ivanka Trump “dumb as a brick.”

Wolff also depicts Bannon as harboring his own 2020 presidential ambitions.

The president and his team were already infuriated two weeks ago by a profile in Vanity Fair in which Bannon attacked a number of senior Trump advisers and seemed to mock the president. Trump had wanted to attack Bannon then, people familiar with the strategy said.

For months, Trump confidants — including aides such as Hicks and Kushner, lawyer Ty Cobb, and friends like Newsmax chairman Chris Ruddy and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) — have tried to persuade the president to cut ties with Bannon, who in recent months has backed insurgent Republicans such as failed Senate candidate Roy Moore in Alabama.

Bannon has in recent weeks also alienated his main financial backer, Rebekah Mercer, after he told several other major conservative donors that he would be able to count on the Mercers’ financial support should he run for president, a person familiar with the conversations said. The person said Mercer now does not plan to financially support Bannon’s future projects — and that she was frustrated by his moves in Alabama and some of his comments in the news media that seemed to stoke unnecessary fights.

A person close to Bannon said he was not running for president. Bannon and Mercer declined to comment through representatives.

“The core constituency for ­Breitbart is what you would call the Trump Deplorables. That’s the audience. And if they’re asked to choose between Steve and Trump, they’re going to choose Trump.

 That’s clear,” said a person familiar with the company’s ownership.

The West Wing response cheered many Trump advisers and congressional Republicans opposed to Bannon. At least two candidates supported by Bannon — including Senate hopeful Kelli Ward of Arizona — sought to distance themselves on Wednesday.

In a conversation with Trump on Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) praised the White House reaction.

“He told the president it was perfect and he wouldn’t change a word,” one person familiar with the discussion said.

Brian Murphy, Erica Werner, Rosalind S. Helderman, Carol Leonnig and John Wagner contributed to this report.

Pakistan Has All the Leverage Over Trump

Why Islamabad isn’t worried about threats to cut off U.S. aid

Pakistani Rangers at the India-Pakistan Wagah Border Post on August 14, 2016. (Narinder Nanu/AFP/Getty Images) 

BY C. CHRISTINE FAIR-

JANUARY 3, 2018, 5:34 PM
On Jan. 1, President Donald Trump offered his maiden tweet of 2018:

 

Donald J. Trump

 

✔@realDonaldTrump

 

The United States has foolishly given Pakistan more than 33 billion dollars in aid over the last 15 years, and they have given us nothing but lies & deceit, thinking of our leaders as fools. They give safe haven to the terrorists we hunt in Afghanistan, with little help. No more!

7:12 AM - Jan 1, 2018 

• •  54,55054,550 Replies

• •  99,68299,682 Retweets

•  298,239298,239 likes

Twitter Ads info and privacy

 

Pakistan responded as it has in the past for being called out for its mendacity and perfidy: It rallied its trolls; it summoned the U.S. ambassador in Islamabad for a démarche; and, in all forums possible, it denied the allegations of nefarious deeds with all of the sincerity and credibility of the wholesome human resources manager of the Chicken Ranch.

Even as the tweet continued to titillate Trump enthusiasts in India and at home, however, the responsible members of Trump’s government were strategizing how to roll it back. Later that same day, a White House National Security Council spokesperson explained what, specifically, to expect: “The United States does not plan to spend the $255 million in FY 2016 foreign military financing for Pakistan at this time.” This is not the sweeping cutoff that Trump implied in his braggadocios tweet.
In fact, there is little that is, or ever will be, new in Trump’s Pakistan policy.

 That’s true for two simple reasons: the logistics of staying the course in Afghanistan and the night terrors triggered by imagining how terrifying Pakistan could be without American money.

Obama did the same thing, too, and nothing changed

Trump is not the first U.S. president to express distaste for Pakistan’s actions. In August 2007, then-presidential candidate Barack Obama threatened to undertake unilateral military strikes against the terrorists harbored by Pakistan. Obama, upon being president, took the fight to Pakistan with his zealous use of airstrikes by remotely piloted aerial vehicles. Moreover, in March 2009, when Obama announced his so-called Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy, he specifically identified the latter as a terrorist safe haven. “You know, eventually those snakes are going to turn on whoever has them in the backyard.” And it was Obama who ordered U.S. Navy SEALs to unilaterally attack a compound near Pakistan’s famed military academy in which Osama bin Laden had been residing in plain sight for numerous years.

The Obama administration also withheld funds from Pakistan for several years. It did so because the U.S. Congress passed legislation that authorized $1 billion in coalition support funds (CSF) but rendered $300 million hostage to Pakistan taking decisive action against the Haqqani Network and in later years against the Lashkar-e-Taiba. This money could only be paid if the administration certified that Pakistan had complied with the requirements. On several occasions, it demurred to do so.

It is also worth noting that Trump’s tweet only reinforced what the New York Times reported on Dec. 29, that the Trump administration was going to withhold — wait for it — $255 million in foreign military financing (FMF). FMF funds enable partner countries to buy “U.S. defense articles, services, and training” and are provided either as a nonrepayable grant or on a loan basis. This is hardly a sweeping punishment that will persuade Pakistan to begin acting against terrorism. Historically, FMF funds have not been the mainstay of the American dole to Pakistan. Out of the more than $33 billion given to Pakistan since fiscal year 2002, FMF has accounted for less than $4 billion. The most lucrative payouts have been through the CSF program, which totals more than $14.5 billion.

America’s preferred roads to Afghanistan go through Pakistan

Why is it that the United States continues to make huge payouts to Pakistan even though it is widely recognized that the country continues to fund the very organizations — such as the Haqqani Network, the Taliban, and groups like the LeT — that are killing U.S. troops and allies in Afghanistan? Why can’t the United States simply take its checkbook and let China take over paying Pakistan’s bills as Pakistan continually threatens will happen should the United States walk away from this abusive relationship for good? There are several important reasons, none of which are easily ignored.

First, Pakistan has the fastest growing nuclear program in the world, which includes efforts to develop so-called tactical nuclear weapons (I prefer to call them “battlefield nuclear weapons,” as even the smallest nuclear bomb will have strategic effects if used). Given Pakistan’s well-known reputation for black market nuclear trafficking, well-publicized reports of moving its warheads around in unescorted soft-skin vehicles (such as ordinary vans), and a petting zoo of every kind of domestic, regional, and transnational Islamist terrorist organization thriving under its protection, America and its allies are rightly concerned that any instability in Pakistan may result in terrorists getting their hands on Pakistan’s nuclear technology, fissile material, or a nuclear device. This is Washington’s worst nightmare. Ironically, Pakistan has invested in both its nuclear and terrorist arsenals on Washington’s time and dime. Yet, even as the continued payments to Pakistan intensify the country’s nuclear coercion, American officials in virtually all branches of government fear that a complete breakoff in aid will hasten the worst-case outcome.

Second and related to the first, the United States worries about Pakistan’s solvency. If it really wanted to bring Pakistan’s to its terrorism-loving knees, it would let the International Monetary Fund (IMF) cut the country off when it reneges on its own commitment to financial reform. Soon, international contributors to the IMF will essentially be subsidizing Pakistan’s exorbitant loan repayments to the Chinese. This alone should be adequate reasoning to let the IMF cut Pakistan off. However, this is unlikely to happen. Pakistan has essentially developed its bargaining power by threatening its own demise.

 With any economic collapse of Pakistan, Washington again fears that the specter of a nuclear-armed terrorist group rising up from Pakistan will materialize.

Finally, the United States has placed itself in an unwinnable position in the Afghan war. One can argue that the United States lost the war in Afghanistan when it went to war with Pakistan, one of the states most committed to undermining U.S. efforts there. Whereas the United States wants a stable Afghan government that can resist its predatory neighbors and keep Islamist militants out of the government and prevent these militants from using Afghanistan as a sanctuary to train, recruit, and plan terrorist attacks in the region and beyond, this is precisely the Afghanistan that Pakistan wants. The only way Washington could have had any hope of avoiding the situation in which it finds itself is if then-President Bush had capitalized on the opening with Iran that President Mohammad Khatami offered.

In 2001, Iran was incredibly supportive of the American effort in Afghanistan. U.S. Ambassador James Dobbins, who was present at the talks in Germany that led to the Bonn Agreement, has attested to Iran’s productive role in trying to secure a democratic future for Afghanistan. The United States instead spurned Iran and even labeled it a founding member of the Axis of Evil. The Bush administration was clueless about Pakistan’s interests and had believed that then-President Pervez Musharraf was sincere in offering his country’s help in defeating its own proxies in Afghanistan. We know now that this was a preposterous assumption. Yet the die had been cast. The United States became singularly reliant on using Pakistan’s air and land corridors to move supplies for the war effort. Its efforts to cultivate a so-called northern distribution route failed to materialize.

Over the years, I have offered reminders that Americans could work with Indian contractors to move goods from Chabahar to Afghanistan, thus providing an opportunity to further consolidate the two countries’ fast-growing ties with India. This would require using Iran’s port in Chabahar, which the Indians have helped to develop along with the road and rail lines connecting it to Afghanistan.
But most Americans recoil at the suggestion of cooperating with Iran, arguing that Tehran is a potential nuclear-proliferating sponsor of terrorism. Needless to say, Pakistan is an actual nuclear-proliferating sponsor of terrorism. Moreover, Pakistan is actually more dangerous than Iran: Tehran’s terrorist proxies are regional menaces rather than the international, hydra-headed scourges cultivated by Islamabad.

Under the Obama administration, the United States made unprecedented progress in thawing relations with Iran with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known as the Iran nuclear deal, which opened up at least the possibility of exploring the idea of moving supplies from the port in Chabahar. In fact, India just completed its first shipment of 1.1 million tons of wheat to Afghanistan that traveled through Chabahar. However, Trump has made it clear that he prefers to scrap the JCPOA entirely.

Without an alternative port, the United States will have no choice but to continue working with Pakistan if it wants to remain engaged in Afghanistan, as Trump intends to do. (The proposed troop surge is now complete with about 14,000 U.S. troops in the country.) While Trump can tweet whatever he wants about Pakistan or Iran, the professionals on his staff know the truth: U.S. policy in Afghanistan requires a port with road or rail access to Afghanistan. This administration — like each one before — has cast its lot with Pakistan. And this administration will confront the same failures as its predecessors. Logistics will beat strategy every time.