Our Spies and Theirs: The Real Donald Gregg

For any organization associated with May 18 to grant Donald Gregg any legitimacy is to make a mockery of the reputation of the Gwangju Uprising—a shining example of democracy and peace. To preserve the purity and dignity of 518, Donald Gregg should be kept as far as possible from any association with the sacrifices and dignity of Gwangju citizens.

by George Katsiaficas- Aug 24, 2017

( August 24, 2017, Gwangju, Sri Lanka Guardian) Some of my favorite new heroes have emerged from within American intelligence agencies. I am thinking of Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning—courageous people who were doing bad things to the world but who woke up, had the courage to admit their misdeeds, and told the rest of us what crimes the United States government was (and is) committing. Snowden and Manning have paid a very high price for their heroism.

In my own time as a young man, I was inspired by the example of Philip Agee, a CIA agent involved in more than a dozen countries who came clean and wrote a book naming names and exposing secret operations such as the overthrow of the government of Guyana. For his truth-telling, Agee was stripped of his American citizenship and forced to move to Sweden.

In 1972, I had been selected by antiwar activists in San Diego to represent the San Diego Convention Coalition to go to Paris for the World Assembly for the Peace and Independence of the Indochinese Peoples. Representatives from 82 countries participated in several days of meetings at the palace of Versailles outside Paris. The moment after I had arrived and checked into my hotel in Paris, a knock on my door revealed a young man slightly older then myself. He welcomed me to Paris and claimed to be part of the peace movement. I spoke with him without letting him into my room. As he left, he whispered to me that he could help me find interesting things to do in Paris.

Years later as I read Philip Agee’s book, Inside the Company, I learned that Agee had been given a bugged typewriter that secretly transmitted to the CIA every word he wrote. (That was long before today’s more sophisticated wiretapping techniques in which government agencies know what you type on your computer or phone—even when it is encrypted, since they steal it as you type and before it is encoded).  The typewriter given to Agee appears on the front cover of his book, and the CIA agent who gave it to him was Sal Farrar—the same person who had knocked on my door that day in Paris. Later, I requested and received portions of the CIA file on me. The heavily redacted pages revealed that the agency had been spying on me intensively. Although much of their “intelligence” was false, they accurately noted that I had averted a split in the American delegation at the antiwar conference in Versailles.

In Gwangju almost exactly one month ago, 31-year CIA man Donald Greg became the subject of scrutiny and debate. Some believe that he is a trustworthy source, and they invited him to speak at a U.N. conference about 518 in the belief that his reputation can be used to help prove that there were no North Koreans involved in the 1980 uprising. As a former high-ranking US government official, Gregg is thought to be a trustworthy informant. This past month, I have taken closer look at Gregg’s record, and it is much worse than I thought.

Few Gwangju citizens can forget that he was the sole representative of the American National Security Council in the infamous May 22 meeting at the White House that gave Chun Doo-hwan instructions to “restore order” in Gwangju—which led to the bloodletting on May 27, 1980. Besides the Korean blood on his hands, Donald Gregg was involved in the assassination of tens of thousands of civilians in Vietnam and Central America. Moreover, Gregg is a well-known and proven liar. An FBI polygraph test found that he lied to the US Congress at least six times. Thus, his reliability as a source of information is laughable.

Unlike Agee, Snowden, Manning or even Farrar, Gregg is the lowest of the low. His supervisory position in Operation Phoenix in Vietnam means he is responsible for the assassination of more than 26,000 civilian leaders who were killed by CIA operatives. The basic idea behind Operation Phoenix was to eliminate the middle strata of activists—those between the top leadership thought to be in Hanoi and the grass-roots guerrilla fighters who were defeating United States forces on the ground. Gregg supervised Felix Rodriguez, fresh from having had a hand in the assassination of Che Guevara. The last photo taken of Che when he was alive has Rodriguez standing next to him. We will never know if Rodriguez was the one who pulled the trigger to murder his wounded prisoner, but we do know that Rodriguez was there.

Felix Rodriguez poses with prisoner Che Guevara just before Che was murdered.

As Donald Gregg moved up the hierarchy of the American intelligence community, no doubt a reward for his murderous activities, he became a central player in the Iran Contra scandal. Along with his old friend Felix Rodriguez, Gregg specifically disobeyed US laws forbidding the government from sending arms to Nicaraguan counterrevolutionary death squads (known as the Contras) who had been involved in the murder of three Catholic nuns. In a memo written to National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane, Gregg admitted his plan was based upon his “anti-Vietcong operations in Vietnam from 1970-1972.” The resulting scandal severely damaged the Ronald Reagan presidency. Only when Reagan testified he could not remember the details of meetings in the White House was he let off the hook by Congress. Gregg, who had written the White House memo that started the whole Contra arms program, was summoned before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, after which an FBI polygraph test determined he lied at least six times to congressional investigators.

Few citizens in Gwangju know the history of the CIA’s decades of murderous foreign operations. Elected presidents were assassinated, democratic governments overthrown, and thousands of civilians cold bloodily murdered. If you take the time to have a look at any of the books that detail these crimes of state terrorism, you will understand Donald Gregg’s place among history’s war criminals. Of course, all kinds of people have worked for the agency. Some who work there now may someday become courageous souls who tell all. But others, like Donald Gregg, not only perpetuate criminal atrocities, they then lie about their deeds—even to Congress.

For any organization associated with May 18 to grant Donald Gregg any legitimacy is to make a mockery of the reputation of the Gwangju Uprising—a shining example of democracy and peace. To preserve the purity and dignity of 518, Donald Gregg should be kept as far as possible from any association with the sacrifices and dignity of Gwangju citizens.

---

우리의 스파이와 그들의 스파이: 진짜 도널드 그레그 

조지 카치아피카스

미국의 첩보계에서 새로운 인물들이 주목된다. 에드워드 스노든과 첼시 매닝이다. 이 용감한 사람들은 나쁜 짓을 했었지만 깨닫고 자신의 잘못을 인정하는 용기를 보여줬고, 우리에게 미국정부가 어떤 범죄를 저질렀지(또 지금도 저지르고 있는지) 폭로했다. 스노든과 매닝은 이 영웅적 행동에 대한 매우 혹독한 대가를 치렀다.

내가 젊었을 때에는 필립 애지의 모범적 행동에 영감을 받았다. CIA 요원이었던 애지는 10여개 이상의 작전에 참여했지만, 청산하고 관련자를 고발하고 가이아나정부 전복과 같은 비밀작전을 폭로했다. 진실을 말한 대가로 애지는 미국 시민권을 박탈당했고 스웨덴으로 떠나야 했다.

1972년 나는 전쟁반대 단체인 샌디에고 총회연합을 대표해 파리에서 열린 베트남 평화와 베트남 민족독립을 위한 세계대회에 참석했었다. 82개국의 대표들은 파리 외곽의 베르사이유에서 열린 며칠간의 회의에 참석했다. 내가 파리에 도착해 호텔에 들어서자마자, 낮선사람이 나를 방문했는데, 나보다 약간 나이가 많은 젊은이였다. 그는 파리에 온 걸 환영한다고 말하면서 자신도 평화운동 참가자라고 소개했다. 나는 방문 밖에서 대화를 나눴다. 그는 떠나면서 파리에서 재미있는 일을 할 수 있도록 도와주겠다고 귓속말을 속삭였다.

몇 년 뒤 필립 애지 책 <회부 내부에서)(Inside the Company)을 읽으면서, 나는 애지가 사용한 타자기가 타이핑할 때 마다 CIA로 전송되는 도청 타자기라는 것을 알게 됐다. (이것은 오늘날의 보다 정교한 도청기술이 발달되기 전 일이다. 오늘날 정보기관은 우리가 컴퓨터나 전화기로 어떤 글자를 입력하는지 알고 있다. 비록 암호화한다고 해도 그들은 입력해서 암호화되기 전에 정보를 훔쳐간다.) 애지가 사용한 타자기는 그의 책 표지에 등장하며, 그에게 이 타자기를 준 CIA 요원은 샐 패러(Sal Farrar)였다. 그 날밤 파리에서 나를 방문했던 바로 그 사람이었다. 이후에 나는 CIA에 요청해서 나에 관한 개인파일의 일부를 받아보았다. 심하게 편집된 문서는 CIA가 나에 대해 집중적인 감시를 했음을 보여줬다. 비록 그들의 많은 “첩보”가 거짓이었지만, 베르사이유 반전회의에서 내가 미국대표단의 분열을 막았다고 정확하게 지적했다.

광주에서 한 달 전에 31년 동안 CIA요원이었던 도널드 그레그가 논란의 중심이 됐다. 어떤 사람들이 그가 신뢰할만한 정보원이라고 믿고서 그를 51.8에 관한 UN 회의에 초청했다. 1980년 봉기에 북한의 개입이 없었다는 사실을 증명하기 위해 그레그의 명성을 이용할 수 있다는 믿음에서 그렇게 했다. 미국의 고위관리였던 그레그는 믿을만한 정보원이라고 생각할 수 있다. 그래서 나는 그레그 관한 자료를 더 자세하게 검토했는데, 내가 예상했던 것 보다 훨씬 더 나쁜 기록을 발견했다.

광주시민들은 그가 전두환에게 “질서를 회복”하라는 지침을 내린 악명높은 5월 22일 백악관 회의에 참석한 미국 국가안보회의의 유일한 참가자였다는 사실을 잊을 수 없다. 이 결정으로 1980년 5월 27일 최후의 유혈사태가 발생했다. 그레그는 한국인의 피를 손에 묻히고, 베트남과 중앙 아메리카에서 수만명의 민간인 살해에 관여했다. 게다가, 그레그는 유명한 거짓증언자임이 입증됐다. FBI의 거짓말 탐지기 조사에서 그는 미국의회에 6차례 거짓증언을 했다는 사실이 밝혀졌다. 따라서 정보원으로서 그레그의 신뢰성은 웃기는 일이다.

애지, 스노든, 매닝, 또는 심지어 패러와는 달리, 그레그는 최악이다. 그레그가 베트남에서 불사조 작전을 감독했기 때문에 그레그가 CIA 작전요원들에게 살해된 26,000명 이상의 민간인 지도자들의 살해에 책임이 있다. 불사조 작전의 기본개념은 중간층 활동가들을 제거하는 것이었다. 즉 하노이에 있는 것으로 추정되는 최고 지도부와 전장에서 미국군을 패배시키고 있는 계층 게릴라전사들의 연결고리를 차단하는 것이었다. 그레그는 또 체게바라 살해작전에서 돌아온 펠릭스 로드리게스의 상관이었다. 체게바라가 살아있는 채로 찍힌 마지막 사진에서 로드리게스는 게바라 옆에 서 있다. 로드리게스가 부상당한 포로인 게바라에게 마지막 방아쇠를 당겼는지는 알 수 없겠지만, 로드리게스가 그 곳에 있었다는 사실은 분명하다.

도널드 그레그는 미국 첩보계에서 계속 진급했고, 의문의 여지없이 그의 살인적 활동에 대한 보상이었다. 이 과정에서 그는 이란 콘트라 스캔들의 중심인물이 됐다. 그레그는 오랜 친구인 펠릭스 로드리게스와 함께 미국 정부가 3명의 카톨릭 수녀를 살해한 니카라과 반혁명 살인부대(콘트라반군으로 알려진)에게 무기공급을 중지시킨 법률을 위반했다. 국가안보보좌관 로버트 맥팔레인에게 보내는 메모에서 그레그는 그의 계획이 “1970-72년 베트남에서 벌인 대베트콩 작전”에 기반한 것임을 인정했다. 그로 인한 스캔들은 로널드 레이건 정부를 심각한 타격을 가했다. 레이건은 백악관 모임의 세부사항을 기억하지 못한다고 증언함으로써, 의회의 공세에서 벗어났다. 콘트라 무기공급 작전 전체를 기획한 백악관 메모를 작성했던 그레그는 상원 외교관계위원에 소환됐다. 그 직후 FBI 거짓말탐지기 조사는 그레그가 의회 조사관들에게 최소한 6차례 거짓증원을 했다고 판정했다.

광주의 시민들은 수십년에 걸쳐 CIA가 자행한 해외작전의 역사에 대해 잘 알지 못한다. 선거로 선출된 대통령이 암살당하고, 민주정부가 타도되고, 수천명의 민간인들이 잔혹하게 살해당했다. 이런 국가테러리즘의 범죄를 상세하게 설명한 책을 보게 되면, 우리는 도널드 그레그가 역사의 전쟁 범죄자 명단에 올라가야 된다는 것을 이해하게 된다. 물론 모든 종류의 사람들이 CIA를 위해 일한다. 지금 거기서 일하는 일부는 미래에 진실을 폭로하는 용감한 사람이 될 수 있다. 그러나 도널드 그레그 같은 사람들은 범죄적 잔행행위를 계속할 뿐만 아니라, 자신의 행동에 대해, 심지어 의회 앞에서도 거짓말을 한다.

어떤 5.18관련 단체가 도널드 그레그에게 정당성을 부여한다면 그것은 민주주의의 평화의 빛나는 상징인 광주봉기의 명성을 조소의 대상으로 만드는 것이다. 5.18의 순수성과 존엄성을 유지하기 위해서 도널드 그레그는 광주시민의 희생과 존엄에 관련된 어떤 것으로부터 가능한 한 최대한 멀리 격리되어야 한다.

WikiLeaks Turned Down Leaks on Russian Government During U.S. Presidential Campaign

The leak organization ignored damaging information on the Kremlin to focus on Hillary Clinton and election-related hacks.


BY JENNA MCLAUGHLIN-AUGUST 17, 2017

In the summer of 2016, as WikiLeaks was publishing documents from Democratic operatives allegedly obtained by Kremlin-directed hackers, Julian Assange turned down a large cache of documents related to the Russian government, according to chat messages and a source who provided the records.

WikiLeaks declined to publish a wide-ranging trove of documents — at least 68 gigabytes of data — that came from inside the Russian Interior Ministry, according to partial chat logs reviewed by Foreign Policy.

The logs, which were provided to FP, only included WikiLeaks’s side of the conversation.
“As far as we recall these are already public,” WikiLeaks wrote at the time.

“WikiLeaks rejects all submissions that it cannot verify. WikiLeaks rejects submissions that have already been published elsewhere or which are likely to be considered insignificant. WikiLeaks has never rejected a submission due to its country of origin,” the organization wrote in a Twitter direct message when contacted by FP about the Russian cache.

(The account is widely believed to be operated solely by Assange, the group’s founder, but in a Twitter message to FP, the organization said it is maintained by “staff.”)

In 2014, the BBC and other news outlets reported on the cache, which revealed details about Russian military and intelligence involvement in Ukraine. However, the information from that hack was less than half the data that later became available in 2016, when Assange turned it down.

“We had several leaks sent to Wikileaks, including the Russian hack. It would have exposed Russian activities and shown WikiLeaks was not controlled by Russian security services,” the source who provided the messages wrote to FP. “Many Wikileaks staff and volunteers or their families suffered at the hands of Russian corruption and cruelty, we were sure Wikileaks would release it. Assange gave excuse after excuse.”

The Russian cache was eventually quietly published online elsewhere, to almost no attention or scrutiny.

In the months leading up to the 2016 U.S. presidential election, WikiLeaks published tens of thousands of potentially damaging emails about Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton and her campaign, information the U.S. intelligence community believes was hacked as part of a Kremlin-directed campaign. Assange’s role in publishing the leaks sparked allegations that he was advancing a Russian-backed agenda.

Back in 2010, Assange vowed to publish documents on any institution that resisted oversight.
WikiLeaks in its early years published a broad scope of information, including emails belonging to Sarah Palin and Scientologists, phone records of Peruvian politicians, and inside information from surveillance companies. “We don’t have targets,” Assange said at the time.

But by 2016, WikiLeaks had switched course, focusing almost exclusively on Clinton and her campaign.
Approached later that year by the same source about data from an American security company,

WikiLeaks again turned down the leak. “Is there an election angle? We’re not doing anything until after the election unless its [sic] fast or election related,” WikiLeaks wrote. “We don’t have the resources.”

Anything not connected to the election would be “diversionary,” WikiLeaks wrote.

“WikiLeaks schedules publications to maximize readership and reader engagement,” WikiLeaks wrote in a Twitter message to FP. “During distracting media events such as the Olympics or a high profile election, unrelated publications are sometimes delayed until the distraction passes but never are rejected for this reason.”

WikiLeaks’s relationship with Russia started out as adversarial. In October 2010, Assange and WikiLeaks teased a massive dump of documents that would expose wrongdoing in the Kremlin, teaming up with a Russian news site for the rollout. “We have [compromising materials] about Russia, about your government and businessmen,” Assange told a Russian newspaper.

“We will publish these materials soon,” he promised.

“Russians are going to find out a lot of interesting facts about their country,” WikiLeaks spokesman Kristinn Hrafnsson said at the time.

In November 2010, WikiLeaks began to release documents from its cache provided by Chelsea Manning, which included cables from U.S. diplomats around the world, including Russia.

WikiLeaks partnered with the Russian newspaper Novaya Gazeta, but only a handful of stories were published out of almost a quarter of a million files from the U.S. Embassy in Moscow. Novoya Gazeta paid for exclusive access to the documents, according to John Helmer, a foreign correspondent in Moscow writing for Business Insider.

WikiLeaks says there was no financial aspect to the publishing partnership with Novaya Gazeta, which did not respond to a request for comment. “We do not have insight into the publication decisions of [Novaya Gazeta],” WikiLeaks told FP.

Meanwhile, Assange’s position on Russia was evolving. Assange in 2012 had his own show on the Kremlin-funded news network RT, and that same year, he produced episodes for the network where he interviewed opposition thinkers like Noam Chomsky and so-called “cypherpunks.”

Questions about Assange’s links to Russia were raised last year, when the Daily Dot reported that WikiLeaks failed to publish documents that revealed a 2 billion euro transaction between the Syrian regime and a government-owned Russian bank in 2012. Details about the documents appear in leaked court records obtained by the Daily Dot, which were placed under seal by a Manhattan federal court.

A WikiLeaks spokesperson told the Daily Dot that no emails were removed from what the organization published. The spokesperson also suggested the Daily Dot was “pushing the Hillary Clinton campaign’s neo-McCarthyist conspiracy theories about critical media.”

Assange believes that U.S. officials hoping to damage his reputation leaked the court records, according to the messages provided to FP.

“There’s a passing claim that the ‘500 pages’ comes from the US government’s investigation into Wikileaks,” one message from WikiLeaks reads. “If true, the US government appears to be leaking data on the Wikileaks investigation, which fabricated or angled to help HRC. Huge story that everyone missed.”

WikiLeaks again told FP that “the story is false” but did not elaborate.

When Novaya Gazeta reported in April 2016 on the 11.5 million documents known as the Panama Papers, which exposed how powerful figures worldwide hide their money overseas, Assange publicly criticized the work. He suggested that reporters had “cherry-picked” the documents to publish for optimal “Putin bashing, North Korea bashing, sanctions bashing, etc.” while giving Western figures a pass.

In fact, news outlets involved in publishing leaks reported on a number of Western figures, including then-British Prime Minister David Cameron.

“For me it was a surprise that Mr. Assange was repeating the same excuse that our officials, even back in Soviet days, used to say — that it’s all some conspiracy from abroad,” Roman Shleynov, a Russian investigative reporter,said in an interview with the New York Times.

WikiLeaks says Assange “didn’t” specifically challenge Novaya Gazeta or the other news outlets that worked on the Panama Papers, despite Assange’s public statements to the contrary.

“There should be more leaks from Russia,” Daniel Domscheit-Berg, a former German spokesman for WikiLeaks, said in an interview with France 24 in March. He suggested that since WikiLeaks’s readers were mostly English-speaking, there wasn’t enough demand.

By June 2016, Assange had threatened to dump files on Clinton that would be damaging to her campaign prospects. A month later, on July 22, WikiLeaks published tens of thousands of emails out of the Democratic National Committee — preceding the massive dumps in October of emails belonging to Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.

In late August 2016, when WikiLeaks’s Clinton disclosures were in full swing, Assange said he had information on Trump but that it wasn’t worth publishing. (In a message to FP, WikiLeaks now says the organization “received no original documents on the campaign that did not turn out to be already public.”)

“The problem with the Trump campaign,” Assange said at the time, “is it’s actually hard for us to publish much more controversial material than what comes out of Donald Trump’s mouth every second day.”

Photo credit: JUSTIN TALLIS/Getty Images

Will we still be subject to EU courts after Brexit?

The Court of Justice of the European Union in Luxembourg.

Baroness Hale, the incoming President of the UK Supreme Court.

By Georgina Lee-23 AUG 2017

The relationship between the UK and the European Court of Justice (ECJ) was one of the key battlegrounds of the referendum campaign.

This week, we had the first glimpse of what that relationship might look like after Brexit. It’s come in the form of two “position papers” published by the government.

So what have we learned from the announcements?
FactCheck investigates.

Background

The ECJ – also known as the Court of Justice of the European Union, or CJEU – is based in Luxembourg and is responsible for making sure that member states abide by EU laws.

The Court of Justice of the European Union in Luxembourg.

In February 2016, Boris Johnson wrote: “you’ve got a supreme judicial body in the European court of justice [sic] that projects down on this entire 500 million-people territory, a single unified judicial order from which there is absolutely no recourse and no comebacks. In my view, that has been getting out of control.”

We spoke to Dr Lorand Bartels, Senior Counsel at Linklaters, Reader in International Law and Fellow of Trinity Hall at the University of Cambridge. We asked him to describe the UK’s relationship with the ECJ (a.k.a. CJEU).

He said: “EU law is a source of UK law and has priority over other sources of UK law. The UK is bound to respect the decisions of the CJEU as having the final word. Indeed, the final UK courts (e.g. the Supreme Court) are obliged to refer issues of EU law that might arise in a case to the CJEU.”

The government’s position papers raise more questions than they answer

The government’s paper on “Enforcement and Dispute Resolution” states that “In leaving the European Union, we will bring about an end to the direct jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).”

At first glance, that seems fairly straightforward. But as ever, the devil is in the detail. The key word here is “jurisdiction”.

Dr Bartels says: “There is a basic distinction […] between jurisdiction and applicable law.

Jurisdiction is about which court a party (the UK, or an individual) is before. Applicable law is the law that is applied by that court. The [government’s] position papers are right in saying that leaving the EU means leaving the jurisdiction of the CJEU. But that does not remove its role in deciding on the applicable law”.

In other words, leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ doesn’t automatically mean that rulings by the Court won’t make their way into UK law. The government’s paper allows room for this to happen indirectly, in the style of existing arrangements between the EU and Canada.

In those set-ups, ECJ judgements trickle down through other tribunals. It’s not clear from the government’s paper whether that will happen with the UK – but it’s not been ruled out.

Beyond this, there’s also the major question of whether legal precedent set by the ECJ will continue to apply in UK law.

The President of the UK Supreme Court, Lord Neuberger, called on the government to clarify the issue earlier this month. And the Institute for Government says that parliament should give a clearer steer to judges to avoid “passing the buck to the judiciary”.

But according to Dr Bartels, this week’s position papers don’t provide a definitive answer because “this question has been reserved for future UK-EU agreement.” That means we’ll have to wait until Brexit negotiations conclude before we know the true scope of ECJ case law on the UK.

However, Justice Minister Dominic Raab said today that Britain will keep “half an eye” on EU case law, and vice versa, after Brexit. Some commentators have interpreted this as a “climbdown” from the government, and an indication that ECJ rulings could still affect the UK after Brexit.

Changing their tune?

In January this year, Theresa May said that after Brexit “we will take back control of our laws and bring an end to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in Britain”.

But critics have described the position set out in this week’s papers as a U-turn on the pledge. Is that fair?

Dr Bartels says “no”. The first paper, published on Tuesday, focuses on the technical detail of how EU and non-EU laws apply – it doesn’t discuss what Dr Bartels calls “the usual type of EU laws on, for example, bendy bananas”. This paper repeats the message that “the role of the CJEU in interpreting the domesticated EU instruments is still subject to agreement”.

The second paper, which looks at how we will implement the final Brexit deal in UK law, includes the phrase: “we will bring about an end to the direct jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).”

As we’ve seen, that magic word “jurisdiction” is consistent with the language that Theresa May has used in the past. On a strict technical interpretation, then, we haven’t seen a U-turn from the government this week.

But she may still struggle to reconcile this position politically, if Dr Bartels is right that the question of whether EU laws will still apply after Brexit remains unanswered.

FactCheck verdict

The government has said that it wants the UK to leave the jurisdiction of the European  Court of Justice. But it’s possible that ECJ rulings could still find their way into UK law after Brexit through another mechanism.


Technically, the language used in the government’s position papers is consistent with what Theresa May has said about the ECJ in the past. However, statements this week by her justice minister, Dominic Raab, suggest that ECJ rulings may still influence UK law after Brexit.

Supreme Court rules privacy a fundamental right in blow to government

Television journalists are seen outside the premises of the Supreme Court in New Delhi, India August 22, 2017.

Suchitra Mohanty and Rahul Bhatia-AUGUST 24, 2017 

NEW DELHI/MUMBAI (Reuters) - India's Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Thursday that individual privacy is a fundamental right, a verdict that will impact everything from the way companies handle personal data to the roll-out of the world's largest biometric ID card programme.

A nine-member bench of the top court announced the ruling in a major setback for the Narendra Modi-led government, which argued that privacy was not a fundamental right protected by the constitution.

The court ordered that two earlier rulings by large benches that said privacy was not fundamental in 1954 and 1962 now stood overruled, and it declared privacy was "an intrinsic part of the right to life and liberty" and "part of the freedoms guaranteed" by the constitution.

"This is a blow to the government because the government had argued that people don't have a right to privacy," said Prashant Bhushan, a senior lawyer involved in the case.

India's law ministry was not reachable for comment, but the Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad is expected to weigh in on the ruling at a news conference late on Thursday.

The judgment also has a bearing on broader civil rights, as well as a law criminalising homosexuality. Lawyers said it also impacts a ban imposed on the consumption of beef in many states and on alcohol in some states.

In his personal conclusion, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul wrote privacy is a fundamental right and it protects the inner sphere of an individual from interference from both state and non-state actors and lets individuals make autonomous life choices.

"The privacy of the home must protect the family, marriage, procreation and sexual orientation," Kaul wrote.

The ruling is the second landmark decision to come from the Supreme Court this week.

On Tuesday it ruled that a law allowing Muslim men to divorce their wives instantly by uttering the word "talaq" three times was unconstitutional, in a major victory for Muslim women who spent decades arguing it violated their right to equality.

Prashant Bhushan, a senior lawyer, speaks with the media after a verdict on right to privacy outside the Supreme Court in New Delhi, India August 24, 2017.

AADHAAR SETBACK

The privacy judgment was delivered at the end of the tenure of the chief justice of India, Jagdeep Singh Khehar, who retires in a few days.

The ruling comes against the backdrop of a large multi-party case against the mandatory use of national identity cards, known as Aadhaar, as an infringement of privacy. There have also been concerns over data breaches.

Critics say the ID card links enough data to create a full profile of a person's spending habits, their friends, property they own and a trove of other information.

Aadhaar, which over one billion Indians have already signed up for, was set up to be a secure form of digital identification for citizens, one that they could use for government services.

But as it was rolled out, concerns arose about privacy, data security and recourse for citizens in the face of data leaks and other issues.

Over time, Aadhaar has been made mandatory for the filing of tax returns and operating bank accounts. Companies have also pushed to gain access to Aadhaar details of customers.

 

Those opposed to the growing demand for Aadhaar data cheered the ruling.

"Truly a victorious week for India - upholding liberty, dignity and freedom for all," Jyotiraditya Scindia, a member of parliament from the opposition Congress party, said in a tweet.

Bhushan, the senior lawyer involved in the case, said while government demands for the use of Aadhaar for tax purposes could be considered reasonable, any demands for the use of Aadhaar for travel bookings and other purchases could now be questioned in the face of the ruling.

"The fact that there was no dissent is an important thing," said Raman Chima, policy director at Access Now, which defends digital rights. "They made it clear that the government has to protect privacy."

Reporting by Rahul Bhatia and Suchitra Mohanty; Editing by Malini Menon, Euan Rocha, Nick Macfie and Kim Coghill

Typhoon Hato: 8 killed, many missing in Macau

24th August 2017

A vehicle damaged by Typhoon Hato is seen in Macau, China, on Aug 24, 2017. Source: Reuters/Tyrone Siu

AT LEAST eight people are said to have been killed and many missing after maximum category 10 storm Typhoon Hato smashed into the southeast Chinese territory of Macau.

“The city looks like it was just in a war,” said one civil servant who declined to be named as they were not authorised to speak to the media, to Reuters on Thursday. Macau’s government broadcaster TDM said Typhoon Hato was the strongest since 1968.

On Wednesday, it battered the financial hub of Hong Kong, uprooting trees, flooding streets, halting financial trading and forcing hundreds of airline flights to be cancelled. There were reports of 34 people injured in Hong Kong, which had not been hit by a category 10 typhoon for five years.

The typhoon’s path of destruction continued on to the former Portuguese colony of Macau, across the Pearl River estuary, and China’s Guangdong Province.

SEE ALSO: Hong Kong: Typhoon Hato lashes Southeast China

Thousands of Chinese were evacuated from coastal areas ahead of Hato hitting the mainland. Chinese authorities are directing citizens to stockpile enough supplies for one to three days, reported the state news agency Xinhua.

Winds of more than 200 kmh smashed into apartments across Macau, breaking large doors and sending sheets of glass flying through the air.

A flooded playground is seen after Typhoon Hato hits Hong Kong, on Aug 23, 2017. Source: Reuters/Tyrone Siu

Macau’s water system pumps were severely damaged and power was cut to over half of Macau, home to around 600,000 people.

While most of the large casinos were operating as normal, many were relying on back-up generators for power.

Severe flooding overwhelmed the teeming enclave which is in the process of building new infrastructure such as a light rail to cope with a surge in visitors.

In Guangdong province, numerous flights and trains were cancelled, with Shenzhen’s International Airport particularly badly hit. Thousands of residents along the Chinese coast were evacuated and fishing vessels were called back to port.

More than 420 flights in and out of Hong Kong were cancelled.

Maximum winds near Hato’s centre were recorded at a destructive 155 kmh as it continued to move west across Guangdong in the general direction of Hainan island.

Hato had been downgraded to a tropical storm on Thursday. It was about 680km west of Hong Kong and expected to weaken further as it moves inland over China.

Additional reporting by Reuters

India swine flu death toll rises above 1,000 this year

AFPImage caption2016 saw a dip in recorded deaths and affected cases, but this year they have risen.

24 August 2017

India appears to be in the grip of a swine flu outbreak with 1,094 recorded deaths over the past eight months, said an official report on Wednesday.

The last three weeks have seen the highest number of fatalities, at 342.

A total of 22,186 cases have been reported across the country.

The number of deaths this year is four times more than fatalities recorded over the equivalent period in 2016, which itself saw a dip in occurrences of the disease.

The western state of Maharashtra is the worst affected, where the death toll stands at 437, according to data revealed by the Union Health Ministry. Neighbouring Gujarat follows closely with 297 deaths, reported news agency PTI.

India experienced a severe swine flu wave two years ago, when health officials scrambled to contain an outbreak which killed more than 1,900 people. While 2016 saw a dip in recorded deaths (265) and affected cases (1,786), the numbers for this year indicate a resurgence of the disease.

The country saw its most crippling outbreak in the pandemic years of 2009-2010, when the virus affected around 50,000 people and claimed the lives of more than 2,700 across the country.

Dr Sanjay Gururaj, medical director at Shanthi Hospital, a private clinic, told the BBC that it was not mandatory for a private hospital to report its numbers to the government's database. "The numbers in the official report are possibly just the tip of the iceberg," he said.

---

What is swine flu?

• A respiratory disease caused by a strain of the influenza type A virus known as H1N1
• Originated in pigs, but is now a human disease spread by coughing and sneezing
• Symptoms similar to those produced by standard, seasonal flu - fever, cough, sore throat, body aches and chills
• Vulnerable groups include pregnant women, children under five, the over-65s and those with serious medical conditions
• The virus first appeared in Mexico in 2009 and rapidly spread around the world.

Sri Lanka: New Constitution a Must

( August 23, 2017, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) The peoples’ verdict at the Presidential election of January 2015 reflected the mandate of the people for a new constitution to remedy democratic deficits in Sri Lanka’s governance arrangements, nearly 40 years after the enactment of the current constitution. A year later, after the Parliamentary election of the same year, the process for the enactment of a new constitution was initiated on 9th March 2016 with the passing of the Framework Resolution for the appointment of the Constitutional Assembly. This assembly was a representative body consisting of all 225 members of Parliament sitting as a committee to draft proposals for a new constitution, chaired by the Speaker.

The Constitutional Assembly appointed six sub-committees composed of Parliamentarians to submit draft proposals on the topics – Fundamental Rights, Public Service, Judiciary, Public Finance, Law and Order and Centre Periphery Relations. In contrast with the undertaking of the government in the Framework Resolution, there was very poor public information and engagement about the subsequent process of drafting, raising serious concerns about both its transparency and legitimacy. By end 2016, all six sub-committees had submitted their draft proposals. The Constitutional Assembly also appointed a Steering Committee, chaired by the Prime Minister, which is widely representative of all political parties. The mandate of the Steering Committee was to present a draft proposal for a new constitution to the Constitutional Assembly.

A profoundly important feature of the ongoing constitutional process was the open and participatory process with which it was initiated. Even prior to the passing of the Framework Resolution, a Public Representations Committee for Constitutional Reforms (PRC) was nominated by all political parties and appointed by the cabinet of ministers to seek the views of the people on the contents of a new constitution for Sri Lanka. Members of the public and interested groups were able to make direct representations at the sittings of the PRC in every district of the country and also at the sittings of the sub-committees in Parliament. This open and participatory process is in stark contrast to the passing of the 1972 and 1978 Constitutions, drafted by the political parties which had won election victories, enabling them to enact constitutions of their choosing. The public responded actively to this unprecedented opportunity, and the subsequent report of the PRC and the sub-committee reports did reflect the range of views held by Sri Lankan citizens on key elements of a future constitution. It is very regrettable that following the publication of the PRC report there has been little clarity about how the views of the people of this country have informed the subsequent process.

It is of great concern and disappointment that this process appears to have reached an impasse. The six sub-committee reports were supposed to have been debated by the Constitutional Assembly in January of this year but this was postponed indefinitely. Thereafter little or no progress has been made in resolving the outstanding issues. Developing tensions between the two factions of the so-called National Unity Government also appear to be hampering the process. The initial time frame for the Constitutional Assembly to debate the draft constitutional proposals is long past and no definite deadline has been set for this process. In the meantime some political parties and prominent Buddhist clergy have publicly taken the position that a new constitution is unnecessary. It is extremely disheartening thatthese groups seek to override the will of the people.

Contentious issues to be resolved in the draft constitution include the abolition of the Executive Presidency and the extent of power sharing between the centre and the provinces. There has been a long-standing need to replace the powerful Executive Presidency with a more democratic Parliamentary system that ensures the sovereignty of the people through the undisturbed parallel functioning and the separation of powers of the three pillars of government, i.e. the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. Strengthening the independence of the judiciary is an absolute necessity, and must include provisions on the appointment and dismissal of judges. We also must not overlook the need for an equally independent, fearless and professional public service that must have the capacity to run the country without being subject to the direction, oversight and control of ministers and without interference from them. The powers of the ministers must be limited to policymaking, and implementation of policies must be left to professional public servants. Further, meaningful power sharing and strengthened human rights is critical for rebuilding the political structure of the country, and is long overdue, nearly eight years after the end of the war. The new constitution must fulfill the need to ensure good governance, rule of law, the dignity of every citizen, national unity and meaningful reconciliation. The supremacy of the constitution and the sovereignty of the people must be embedded in its provisions.

A new constitution has been mandated by the people and law makers must give it the highest priority. Any attempt to subvert this process for cheap political gain by those elected by the people, cannot and must not be tolerated. We urge the Prime Minister and members of the Steering Committee to ensure that the draft constitutional proposals are put before the Constitutional Assembly within the next three months at least, and are also made available to the public. We also urge all representatives of the people in Parliament, both in government and the opposition, to consider the proposals positively and in the best interests of all the people of this country. We acknowledge that the task of drafting a new constitution is not an easy one, given the multi-ethnic-religious constituency of the island nation. It is nonetheless imperative that the process is followed through to the end, and the voice of the people, made clear at the last two elections, be heard.

Mr. Priyantha Gamage​​​​​ Bishop Duleep de Chickera
On behalf of the Friday Forum:

Dr. A.C.Visvalingam, Prof. Savitri Goonesekere, Mr. S.C.C.Elankovan, Mr. Faiz-ur.Rahman, Rev. Dr. Jayasiri Peiris, Mr. Danesh Casie-Chetty, Dr. Upatissa Pethiyagoda, Mr. PulasthiHewamanna, Mr. Chandra Jayaratne, Mr. Ananda Galappaththi, Prof. Gameela Samarasinghe, Mr. Javid Yusuf, Prof. ArjunaAluwihare, Mr. Dhammapala Wijayanandana, Mr. Prashan de Visser and Ms. Shanthi Dias

Resentful dependency is killing us, because it is stifling our movement…

“It is not inequality which is the real misfortune, it is dependence.”
- Voltaire

• Resentful dependency kills man’s free will
• Critics of present govt. are senior level executives in private sector
• Country’s economic development has been stalled

2017-08-23

Resentful dependency, a human condition that is borne out of an amalgam of conditions producing resentment of the ultimate product, yet creates an unmistakable and consistent dependency on that resultant condition. It is cruel in inherent nature and the results it produces. It kills man’s free will; it destroys his free movement in the realm of ideas; it deadens intellectual curiosity and it leads to a dull and obsequious existence. That is not a very promising way of living. But that is the way our people have chosen to spend their lives.

That resentful dependency has taken over the former lackeys and henchmen of the Rajapaksas. The so-called Joint Opposition is made up of all those lackeys and henchmen. These dregs of the political landscape of Sri Lanka are hanging on to the one clear master they had during those dark and deeply diabolical days. Being fully entrenched in a corrupt society which was a creation of their own cabal-driven machinery of state, they were compelled to stay close to their ‘boss’. In the hope that they would be the recipients of the deliberately-thrown residue of ill-gotten wealth, the henchmen and lackeys had one single function. It was to buttress the position of their master. A culture that was so created by this closely-knit society was a clear deviation from the traditional rituals and practices of a historically rich but emotionally not-yet-charged people. That culture was first embraced by the immediate cohorts of the Rajapaksas. Then it dribbled down the societal ladder, convincing the lower rungs that it was the new reality.
Politicians who were invigorated by a dense dose of political Viagra resorted to any and every means to lure the gullible mass of supporters to this new culture and the supporters became willing victims to this magical and nameless lust. That culture consumed a value system that had been based on mutual trust, selfless parental love, ungarnished simplicity and unhesitant sacrifice. In its place is now an unreservedly false system of destructive lifestyle, mistakenly called ‘practical living’. Resentful dependency is cultivating and nurturing this new system everywhere. And the so-called efficient private sector, which should be the driving force of the economy which is reasonably free of stifling regulations and fear of confiscation cum nationalization, is even worse affected by the vagaries of this resentful dependency.  

The Foreign Service which was at the service of an uneducated political ruffian during last regime regained its rightful place and status under Mangala Samaraweera

Under the government of Maithripala Sirisena and Ranil Wickremesinghe, mere pretence of possessing free will and see-through postures have come to stay. But economic development has been stalled. The harshest critics of the present government are the senior level executives in the private sector who were the recipients of various bones and partially-consumed financial carcasses. The salivating pukka sahibs of this sector of our economic drivers cannot simply do away with the extra cash that came with the debris of resentful dependency. Their allegiance to the former regime had tangible rewards. Invitations to cocktail parties, wining and dining with visiting foreign dignitaries and being seen with the first family, mattered particularly to the fair spouses of the leaders of the private sector. That is merely an extension of that political allegiance they had for the ruling cabal.  

A structure that was based on political allegiance and personal relationship and loyalty began to manifest itself. This structure was more of an emotional and psychological one than a real and physical one. Its existence was more noticeable in the way in which various deals and businesses were consummated. Unsolicited contracts with huge profit margins ascribed to the contractor became the order of the day, especially amongst the Ministers who were eagerly looking forward to a portion of these large profits collected by the contractors. When government contracts were unsolicited, the final prices were invariably inflated and way over and above the estimated prices for such contracts.
A portion of these profits is given to those Ministers who were primarily responsible for the work involved in those contracts.

For instance, a project that would cost, according to the engineer’s estimates, Rs. X, an enormous amount is added far above the usual margins to the costs. That extra amount is distributed among the politicos and officials who are intricately engaged in the workings of those costs and estimates. The tax payer is bearing the burden of those additional costs by way of increased prices on essential items such as food, transport and other facilities that are provided by the government. Costs are added but no real value is ascribed to the projects. Augmented costs are shrouded in in largely inflated prices and articulated by the politicos as a ‘value addition’!

These contractors were seen with their spouses at cocktail parties and banquets hosted by the then President and his relations who were in the same Cabinet. That was considered by these private sector-business vultures as a great benefit that comes their way. It gave them a sense of recognition which they could brag about in the elite gatherings. The spouses went to town on their jewellery and clothing. A vulgar display of wealth and power was visible; an unequivocal expression of political power and proximity to the powers that gave them an artificial elevation to the elites in our society that has already been polluted by deal-makers and merchants of the flesh and other nefarious deeds. Resentful dependency had already been built into these henchmen and cohorts of the Rajapaksas.

It was a sign of a decadent culture whose beginnings were more destructive than the middle and the end, if they materialize.   When the local scholars and pundits write about the emergence of a dynamic and vibrant brand of an elite in society, they ignore these morbid groups of political vultures whose money is ‘new’ and ill-gotten. But when one finds, among these new elites, some usual suspects whose monies could be traced back to a couple of generations prior to them, one wonders where the system failed and being responsible for making these reasonable businessmen into blind and greedy traders of allegiances and relationships.

The system has caught them and entranced them into practices which were once tabooed from their forefathers’ operational demeanour. The new leaders of new elites are now the leaders of our society. They advised the politicos as to what project to undertake and what not to. After being hosted to half a bottle of whiskey and roast chicken by the head of the land, they forgot their beginnings that were bred and born in mediocrity and below average education and learning.  

The image of victory over the LTTE has faded. Patriotism has receded to a back seat. National security and empty sloganeering around national security are no longer taken as serious attempts at offering of realistic solutions for real problems the country faces. The Foreign Service which was at the service of an uneducated political ruffian during the last regime regained its rightful place and status under Mangala Samaraweera who, according to our own overseas Civil Servants, as the best Foreign Minister Sri Lanka had. I have no doubt he will do and equally effective job as new Finance Minister. A man, whatever his personal likes and dislikes are, driven by idealism and goal oriented personal philosophy, Mangala Samaraweera is one member of the current Cabinet of Ministers who could deliver the goods.

On one end of the political spectrum are these new elite of culture vultures and on the other are the politicos who are owned by these culture vultures. In the middle are the mass of people whose ideas and ideals have been destroyed by this double-edged culture. The people have been steadily watching this spectacle played out behind the curtains of slogans and pseudo-patriotic rhetoric. They waited for ten years to oust that clan and their indefensible greedy acts. Now the eyes and ears are in the duo of Maithripala Sirisena and Ranil Wickremasinghe. Corruption and misdeeds are being exposed and some have been convicted, whatever the judicial findings and verdict would be, by the public court of opinion. Such openness was not in existence in the realm of government during the last regime.

Yet the tragic feature of the system is, it is increasingly becoming susceptible to the offerings of the new elite whose greed is beyond any limits. Indulgences in extra-civil activities, spending funded by casino-winnings and unsolicited contract profits, the new leaders of resentful dependency culture are oriented towards digging further down into the pit. The system has become more corrupting than corrupt. In such a tortuous context how can the masses extricate themselves from the system? The answer is evasive and not yet apparent on the horizon. A resentful people have become victims of their own making and neglect. Utterly unaware of the consequences, their plea of ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law.

 

Environmental Degradation In North Of Sri Lanka

By Noel Nadesan –AUGUST 23, 2017

Dr Noel Nadesan

History shows that many ancient cities were abandoned by people due to environmental degradation. It happed in many ancient civilisations. There were several reasons for this. In those times the global population was not so dense. Nor were there strict borders to control the movement of populations. Besides, plenty of land was available mass migration. Now we do not have that luxury any more.

I was surprised to learn that in the 16th century there was only three large cities with a population of hundred thousand people. They were Beijing, Cairo and the Aztec in Mexico. This last mentioned city was destroyed by the Spanish and the New Mexico city has now been built over the old city.

The current European big cities of Paris and London were built in the 17th and 18th centuries. People who had cultivated the common lands in the country areas lost their lands to the nobles and industrial owners, and the landless people migrated to big cities. Urbanisation increased all over the world. If we visit India, South Africa and Brazil you can see the chaotic process. Even in China where some urbanisation is taking place in some orderly fashion the impact of industrialisation is felt heavily.

Even Europeans had gone through the difficult process. The dirt and dust of London streets of 18th century can be seen in the novels of Charles Dickens.

The main task of the city administration is to provide the food and water and remove the waste in that comes out of urbanization. If you are wealthy It can provide you with money for food and water, but sewage and garbage is out of your control. It goes into the hands of city fathers. For instance, India’s richest man, Ambani, too is dependent on the Bombay municipality.

When I went to see the cultural remains of the Mayan peoples in the Yucatan Peninsula (Mexico), I thought I was learning something new in my old age.

The Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico was under the sea before two million years ago. Peninsula landscape was made of lime rocks and It was created from coral reef from the Atlantic ocean. These lime rocks came up with sea level changes due to the environment. However, the rains seeped through the ground and created many underground river systems. As a tourist I walked the rivers along a few kilometres. I could see how the water was running into the river and running for several kilo Meters. In those caves I saw the minerals were seeping through the lime rock roof and sediment as spikes. That scenery reminded me of Jaffna. As I was from Jaffna where most of the earth made from limestone which were a part of the coral reef in Palk Strait in geological times. This creates problems for the urbanised population. The Jaffna city does not have any common sewage system. However, every small plot of land has a water well and toilet and they are not far apart. So the water used for daily consumption gets polluted. Lime stone earth where heavy metal and minerals and agricultural chemical can diffuse more faster in the ground water system with global warming

I witnessed that people were burning plastic bottles polythene papers and old newspapers

Restaurants were serving hot lunch on plastic paper on top of the plates. They do not have to wash those plates.

Though I heard Government banned spitting in public, Lankan transport bus that I travelled Jaffna -Kandy was not following the law. The bus driver was spitting his red betel saliva out of his side window to the road. Though he had acquired the skill in spitting outside, I was worried because I was sitting behind him and the any chances of wind changing its direction was great. The bacteria flying in my direction was a real possibility and it went unchecked throughout the journey.

Speaking about the garbage mountain tragedy in Colombo, the informed source said to me, “When a German company came ready to recycle the garbage in Colombo, they backed away put off by heavy demands for by bribes.”

In conclusion, it is clear that corruption has become a primary source for environmental pollution. Add to this, the ignorance, and the incompetence of the politicians – some of whom in the North are bogged down in fighting each other — then you have a bad problem growing into a worse situation daily.

I wish to bring to notice of the public some of my observations.

Read More