More stories

  • in

    ‘The State Killed My Brother’: Senegal in Uproar After Deadly Protests

    After several protesters were killed by live ammunition this month in Senegal, many in the usually stable West African nation wonder what comes next.A tailor shot in the head. A baker killed by a bullet in the chest. A geography student planning to continue his studies in Canada felled by a deadly bullet in the back.The West African nation of Senegal is reeling after clashes between the police and supporters of a leading opposition figure early this month left at least 16 people dead. Many families have found that their loved ones had died from gunshot wounds, raising suspicions that the Senegalese police fired on demonstrators.Senegal is often hailed as a model of stability in West Africa, but for years anger has been mounting against President Macky Sall and his government over widespread youth unemployment and perceptions of entrenched corruption. Mr. Sall has also remained vague about his intentions to run for a third term next year, which most legal experts say would violate the Senegalese Constitution.Mr. Sall has praised the professionalism of the country’s security forces, while his interior minister, blaming a “foreign influence” for the riots, has said the death toll could have been much worse had the police not shown restraint.Yet a different picture is painted by social media footage, testimonies from relatives of victims and human rights defenders, and half a dozen death certificates obtained by The New York Times. The certificates all list the cause of death as wounds inflicted by live ammunition.Women mourning Mr. Sarr, a tailor, on Friday in front of the family house in Thiaroye, on Dakar’s outskirts. Senegal is reeling after clashes between the police and supporters of a leading opposition figure left at least 16 people dead.Philippe Gaspard Bass, who was shot in the chest and leg during anti-government protests, showed his wounds last week at his home.The source of the bullets is not mentioned on the death certificates. But Amnesty International, which has counted 23 fatalities, said most of the victims died from bullets fired by the police or unidentified armed men operating alongside them. The Senegalese Red Cross said it had treated more than 350 people, 10 percent of whom were among the security forces.“The state killed my brother,” said Issa Sarr, whose brother died on June 2 after being shot in the head in Pikine, a suburb of the capital, Dakar. His brother, Bassirou Sarr, 31, was a tailor who invested his spare time in his neighborhood, painting, planting trees and installing lighting to make the area safer, his relatives said.The government has rejected accusations that the police fired at protesters and said it had arrested 500 people, some carrying firearms. The Interior Ministry did not respond to requests for comment.Thousands of protesters took to the streets of various Senegalese cities earlier this month after the country’s leading opposition figure, Ousmane Sonko, was sentenced to two years in prison for “corrupting youth.” He was acquitted of rape and other charges, all which he had denied.Mr. Sonko’s supporters, and an increasing number of public intellectuals and political observers, say the case was an attempt to block him from running in next year’s presidential election.Mourners at the cemetery where Mr. Sarr was buried. Many fear this month’s strife could escalate as Senegal heads into next year’s presidential race.Relatives of Mr. Sarr, 31, waiting on Tuesday to collect his body from a morgue in Dakar.As news of the verdict against Mr. Sonko spread, protesters set cars ablaze, threw stones at security forces and ransacked properties and businesses. Dakar’s central university, one of the best in West Africa, remains closed until further notice after rioters burned several buildings.The Senegalese government deployed the military to respond to the protests. It also cut off access to social media for nearly a week.Many families say that the young men they lost had not even participated in the protests. Bassirou Sarr, the tailor, had been forced to close his shop because of the protests, like most businesses, and was shot as he was standing on a bridge overlooking rioters who were cornering police officers at a tollgate, his brother Issa said in an interview last week. His account could not be verified independently.An X-ray of a patient who was shot in the pelvis and treated at a Dakar clinic. Officials say the police showed restraint in dealing with protesters and deny security forces fired into the crowds.Loading the coffin of Seyni Coly, a baker who was fatally shot in demonstrations, onto a vehicle last week in Dakar.Issa Sarr spoke as he was waiting to collect his brother’s body at a morgue in Dakar. Minutes later, another family loaded the coffin of a man killed in the demonstrations on the roof of a hearse. Mr. Sarr and two of his brothers gathered around the coffin with two dozen others and prayed for the victim, Seyni Coly, a baker who died after being shot in the abdomen, according to his autopsy report.Families of other victims shared similar stories. Elhadji Cissé, a 25-year-old geography student who was about to move to Canada this summer for his studies, was returning from a mosque, his family said, when he was shot in the back. The bullet punctured his right lung and came out of his arm, according to an autopsy report.With three-quarters of Senegal’s population younger than 35, most of its 17 million people have known only democracy. Even as Senegal has faced sporadic episodes of political violence since it gained independence from France in 1960, it has long taken pride in its culture of free expression and the existence of multiple political parties — in a region where coups are common and aging leaders cling to power.But that exceptionalism has come under question as the country faces its worst political crisis in decades. In recent years, demonstrations against Mr. Sall have grown more violent, political opponents have been jailed, journalists arrested and news organizations suspended.In 2021, Mr. Sonko’s arrest, following accusations of rape by an employee of a massage parlor, set off demonstrations and left 14 people dead over six days. But the police response was more violent this year, according to human rights organizations.Amnesty International has called for an independent investigation.Abdoulaye Ba on Dakar’s outskirts with a photograph of Elhadji Mamadou Sidibé, his nephew, who he say was shot on his way back from a mosque.The home of another man killed by gunfire in this month’s protests. Senegal has faced sporadic political violence since independence in 1960 but takes pride in its culture of democratic principles and free expression.Mr. Sonko, who was convicted on June 1, has yet to be arrested. Stranded in his house in Dakar, he has not condemned the violence, instead calling for more unrest. More than half a dozen protesters hospitalized after being wounded in the protests and interviewed by the Times last week said they would keep demonstrating against Mr. Sall’s government. (Mr. Sall was elected in 2012 after defeating an incumbent who had rankled many in Senegal by attempting to claim a third term.)“I don’t regret anything,” said Samba, a 23-year-old demonstrator who was discharged from a hospital in Dakar this past week after being shot in the chest. He asked to be identified only by his first name for fear of government retaliation.“Injustice in this country must stop,” he added, referring to the prosecution of Mr. Sonko.But the strife has also alienated more moderate Senegalese who favor dialogue, observers say.“Political parties, in power and in the opposition, are rarely insisting on the fact that violence isn’t the solution or that institutions should be respected,” said Guillaume Soto-Mayor, a Dakar-based researcher with the Middle East Institute. “Those same institutions, most recently the justice system, and their leaders have lost credibility.”As hospitals discharged their wounded, families buried their loved ones in Ziguinchor, a city in southern Senegal where Mr. Sonko is the mayor, and in Dakar and its suburbs.The body of Mr. Sarr, the tailor, was released by the authorities on Thursday, six days after he died. As relatives and acquaintances lined up on Friday in a narrow alley outside a mosque, the imam urged young mourners to think twice before acting.“Your parents need you alive, not dead,” he said.Saly Sarr, one of Bassirou’s aunts, said she had had time while waiting for his body to be released to reflect on Senegal’s future.“What happens if our children grow up in a country where the police shoot at their own people with real bullets?” she asked earlier at the family house. “They’ll just create more insurgents.”At Mr. Sarr’s funeral, where an imam urged people not to rush headlong into angry action.Mady Camara More

  • in

    Biden’s Defense of Global Democracies Is Tested by Political Turmoil

    The administration’s Summit for Democracy begins this week amid crises in several countries allied with the United States, including Israel.WASHINGTON — A political crisis in Israel and setbacks to democracy in several other major countries closely allied with the United States are testing the Biden administration’s defense of democracy against a global trend toward the authoritarianism of nations like Russia and China.President Biden will deliver remarks on Wednesday at the second White House-led Summit for Democracy, which Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken kicked off on Tuesday morning.The three-day, in-person and virtual event comes as Mr. Biden has boasted, more than once, that since he became president “democracies have become stronger, not weaker. Autocracies have grown weaker, not stronger.”Casting a cloud over the long-planned gathering is a move by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition government to weaken the power of Israel’s judiciary, a plan that his opponents call an existential threat to the country’s 75-year democratic tradition.But that is only the most vivid sign of how autocratic practices are making inroads around the world.Proposed changes to Israel’s judiciary have starkly divided society and ignited huge protests this week.Avishag Shaar-Yashuv for The New York TimesBiden administration officials are also warily eyeing countries like Mexico, which has moved to gut its election oversight body; India, where a top opposition political leader was disqualified last week from holding a post in Parliament; and Brazil, where the electoral defeat last year of the autocratic president, Jair Bolsonaro, was followed by a riot in January that his supporters orchestrated at government offices in Brasília, the capital.Mr. Netanyahu’s decision to postpone the proposed judicial changes under intense political pressure may slightly ease the awkwardness of Israel’s participation in the summit, where he is set to deliver prerecorded video remarks. Mexico, India and Brazil will also participate.Mr. Netanyahu’s retreat came after private admonitions from Biden officials that he was endangering Israel’s cherished reputation as a true democracy in the heart of the Middle East.In a briefing for reporters on Monday, John F. Kirby, a White House spokesman, said that Mr. Biden had “strongly” urged Israel’s government to find a compromise to a judicial plan that has starkly divided society and ignited huge protests. Asked whether the White House might disinvite Israel from the summit, Mr. Kirby said only that Israel “has been invited.”But the larger troubles remain for Mr. Biden, who asserted in his State of the Union address last month that the United States had reach “an inflection point” in history and that during his presidency had begun to reverse a worldwide autocratic march.Democracy activists call that a debatable proposition, and U.S. officials acknowledge that the picture is nuanced at best.On the positive side of the ledger, U.S. officials and experts say, Mr. Biden has rallied much of the democratic world into a powerful coalition against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In a speech during his visit to Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital, last month marking the anniversary of the invasion, Mr. Biden repeated his assertion about the growing strength of democracies against autocracies and said that the war had forced the United States and its allies to “stand up for democracy.”Damage in Siversk, Ukraine, this month. U.S. officials and experts say Mr. Biden has rallied much of the democratic world into a powerful coalition against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.Tyler Hicks/The New York TimesMr. Biden has also rallied democratic nations to take firmer stands against Chinese influence around the world at a time when experts say Beijing is looking to export its model of governance.And some argue that Mr. Biden has been a savior of democracy by winning the 2020 presidential election — defeating President Donald J. Trump, a U.S. leader with authoritarian tendencies — and by containing for now Mr. Trump’s efforts to reject the results of that election and myriad other democratic norms.“Without suggesting that the fight has been won, or that Biden is doing everything right, I think we need to give him credit for helping to save American democracy and standing up to the great authoritarian powers,” said Tom Malinowski, a former Democratic congressman from New Jersey.But Mr. Biden’s claim that autocracies have grown weaker faces a stark reality in some nations.President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia may find himself economically isolated and militarily challenged in Ukraine. But he still has strong political support in Russia and has even consolidated power through a crackdown on dissent that has driven hundreds of thousands of Russians from the country.In Beijing, Xi Jinping was awarded a third five-year term this month not long after suppressing protests against his government’s coronavirus policies. In its latest official worldwide threat assessment, the U.S. intelligence community found that arms of the Chinese Communist Party “have become more aggressive with their influence campaigns” against the United States and other countries.President Xi Jinping of China was awarded a third five-year term this month not long after suppressing protests against his government’s coronavirus policies. Wu Hao/EPA, via ShutterstockBiden officials conceived a democracy summit during the 2020 campaign to address a belief that autocratic influence had been spreading for years, destabilizing and undermining Western governments. They also worried about a growing perception that political chaos and legislative paralysis in places like Washington and London — or in Israel, which held five elections in three years before Mr. Netanyahu narrowly managed to form his coalition — was creating a sense around the world that democracies could not deliver results for their people.Mr. Biden’s first Summit for Democracy, in December 2021, featured uplifting language from world leaders and group sessions on issues like media freedom and rule of law in which countries could trade best practices on strengthening their democracies and share advice on countering foreign efforts to manipulate politics and elections.The summit this week will include about 120 countries and will be hosted by Costa Rica, the Netherlands, South Korea and Zambia in addition to the United States.Recent democratic trends can be described as mixed at best. The Economist Intelligence Unit’s annual democracy index found last year that in 2021, the first year of Mr. Biden’s presidency, “global democracy continued its precipitous decline.” More recently, the same survey found that in 2022, democracy had “stagnated.”Mr. Biden hosted a Summit for Democracy from the White House in 2021.Doug Mills/The New York TimesSimilarly, a report released this month by Freedom House, a nonprofit group that monitors democracy, human rights and civil liberties around the world, found that global freedom had slipped for the 17th year in a row, by its measurement. But the group also reported that the steady decline might have plateaued and that there were just slightly more countries showing a decrease in freedoms compared with those whose records were improving.“This seems like a critical moment,” said Yana Gorokhovskaia, an author of the Freedom House report. “The spread of decline is clearly slowing. It hasn’t stopped.”That has been clear in some countries. Last month, Mexican lawmakers passed sweeping legislation hobbling the election oversight body that is widely credited with steering the country from decades of one-party rule. Critics say the country’s populist president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, has shown some troubling autocratic tendencies.In India, opponents of the country’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, have complained for years that he is weakening the democratic tradition of the world’s second-largest country by population by cracking down on critics and religious minorities. The concerns reached a new level with the expulsion from Parliament of Rahul Ghandi, a prominent opponent of Mr. Modi’s, a day after a court found him guilty of criminal defamation for a line in a campaign speech in 2019 in which he likened Mr. Modi to two thieves with the same name.And after supporters of Mr. Bolsonaro — who blamed electoral fraud for his narrow defeat in December — stormed government buildings in Brazil’s capital, Mr. Biden condemned “the assault on democracy.”Supporters of former President Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil stormed government buildings in Brasília, the capital, in January.ReutersDemocratic setbacks have also occurred in West Africa, where there have been coups in Mali and Burkina Faso in recent years. In Nigeria, a country of 220 million people, experts say that the presidential election in February appeared suspect.In Europe, thousands of people in the Republic of Georgia have taken to the streets to protest a measure that would curb what the government calls “foreign agents,” but which activists say is an effort to crack down on nongovernmental organizations and news media groups. The State Department called a March 7 parliamentary vote approving the measure “a dark day” for democracy in Georgia, which U.S. officials have tried to support against the influences of Russia, its neighbor.The tumult over Israel’s democracy has been particularly shocking to U.S. officials and experts who have long seen the country as a paragon of democratic values and an especially bright example in a region long plagued by dictatorship.And the summit this week will notably exclude two members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Hungary and Turkey, whose autocratic political systems have grown no less repressive during Mr. Biden’s tenure.Still, some people who track democratic trends say they are optimistic.“Perhaps the most striking indication of democracy’s forward movement over the last two years has been the election of President Biden, and the election of President Lula in Brazil,” said Sarah Margon, the director of foreign policy at Open Society-U.S.Those events “sent a critical message to people who are looking to defeat autocrats or leaders with autocratic tendencies,” added Ms. Margon, whom Mr. Biden nominated last year to the State Department’s top position for human rights and democracy. (Her nomination expired after Republican opposition and was not renewed in January.)But many world leaders profess to be unmoved by critiques from democracy advocates, especially from U.S. officials.“If they want to have a debate on this issue, let’s do it,” Mr. López Obrador said last month. “I have evidence to prove there is more liberty and democracy in our country.” More

  • in

    Thai Hunger Strikers Calling for Changes to Monarchy Are at Risk of Dying

    The two young women have not had food for 44 days, part of a campaign urging the government to repeal a law that criminalizes criticizing the royal family.A stream of protesters outside the Supreme Court in Bangkok held up the three-fingered salute — a symbol of defiance against the government. “Fight, fight, fight,” they yelled to two young women who were taken out of a makeshift tent in stretchers, both so weak that they could not open their eyes.The women, Tantawan “Tawan” Tuatulanon, 21, and Orawan “Bam” Phuphong, 23, were taken to a hospital on Friday evening after their family members and lawyer said that they were on the brink of death. They were on their 44th day of a hunger strike, protesting the detention of Thai political prisoners, calling for judiciary changes and the repeal of a law that criminalizes criticizing the Thai monarchy. Their plight has been discussed by Thailand’s House of Representatives and has drawn urgent expressions of concern from international human rights groups, which have called on the government to engage with the activists. In 2022, both women were accused of violating the law against criticizing the monarchy after they conducted a poll asking whether the royal motorcade was an inconvenience to Bangkok residents. They were released on bail in March that year under the condition that they no longer participate in protests or organize activities that defame the royal family.The doctors are now most concerned about the women’s kidneys failing, according to their lawyer, Krisadang Nutcharut. “Their parents and I were consulting each other and saw that they wouldn’t make it past tonight, according to the blood results,” Mr. Krisadang said.The women’s protest has presented the Thai government with a political dilemma two months before a general election: Meet their demands and risk appearing weak among voters or do nothing and face a potential fallout that could trigger widespread unrest.Kasit Piromya, a former Thai foreign minister, has called on Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha of Thailand to address the women’s demands. Mr. Prayuth, through a government spokesman, has said he hopes the two women are safe but urged parents to “monitor their children’s behavior” and for all Thais to “help protect the nation, religion and monarchy.”The women began their hunger strike in January. Last month, Ms. Tantawan, a university student, and Ms. Orawan, a grocery store worker, were hospitalized and put on saline drips after their conditions became critical. They have stopped drinking water but are sipping electrolytes on doctors’ orders.Orawan “Bam” Phuphong after leaving the hospital in Bangkok in February.Rungroj Yongrit/EPA, via ShutterstockOn Thursday, the pair announced that they would stop taking electrolytes, too. In an interview with The New York Times on Thursday evening, Mr. Krisadang said the women’s spirits remain unbowed.In January, Thailand’s justice minister told Ms. Tantawan and Ms. Orawan that the government would consider reforming the bail system, though he did not address their core demands, which include reforming the country’s judicial system.Thailand’s opposition parties, Pheu Thai and Move Forward, submitted an urgent motion for a debate in the House of Representatives in February to propose measures to save the women’s lives. The debates stopped short of addressing the activists’ demands to abolish lèse-majesté, the law that makes criticizing the monarchy illegal, fearful of alienating royalists before the election. (The protesters are also calling for the abolition of Thailand’s sedition laws.)Thailand has one of the world’s strictest lèse-majesté laws, which forbids defaming, insulting or threatening the king and other members of the royal family. Known as Article 112, the charge carries a minimum sentence of three years and a maximum sentence of up to 15 years. It is the only law in Thailand that imposes a minimum jail term.Previously, Thai authorities confined the use of lèse-majesté against people who explicitly criticized the leading members of the monarchy. But after Mr. Prayuth seized power in a coup in 2014, the number of topics that constituted lèse-majesté expanded to include criticism of the institution, and even deceased kings.Thailand informally suspended the use of the lèse-majesté law in 2018, according to Chanatip Tatiyakaroonwong, Amnesty International’s regional researcher on Thailand. The move coincided with calls from the international community for Thailand to respect their commitments to the United Nations’ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.But after the 2020 protests, Mr. Prayuth, who has repeatedly vowed to remain loyal to the monarchy, instructed all government officials to “use every single law” to prosecute anyone who criticized the monarchy.The authorities have charged at least 225 people, including 17 minors, for violating the lèse-majesté law since 2020. Thousands more have been slapped with other criminal charges. As more activists were targeted, the mass protests slowly began to wane.Protesters attending a pro-democracy rally demanding that Thailand’s King Maha Vajiralongkorn hand back royal assets to the people and reform the monarchy, in Bangkok in 2020. Adam Dean for The New York TimesSunai Phasuk, the senior researcher for Thailand for Human Rights Watch, said the case of Ms. Tantawan and Ms. Orawan and their public survey was the clearest example of how the law is being arbitrarily enforced. “The use of the lèse-majesté law has become more and more arbitrary, in that even the slightest criticism of both the individuals and the institution can lead to legal action,” he said.On Thursday evening, dozens of supporters appeared outside the Supreme Court in support of the women. They held sunflowers and cards that read, “Abolish lèse-majesté law.” (Ms. Tantawan’s name in Thai means “sunflower.”)“These kids are so brave, my generation cannot compete with them,” said Yupa Ritnakha, a 65-year-old supporter who was holding a bunch of sunflowers outside of the Supreme Court. “They are willing to die for their cause.”This is not Ms. Tantawan’s first hunger strike. In April 2022, she went on a hunger strike for over a month after she was detained for violating her bail by posting details of the royal motorcade on Facebook. She was released on bail once again, but placed under house arrest.Friends of Ms. Tantawan and Ms. Orawan say they are disappointed that the women’s campaign has failed to sway the general public or motivate the government to introduce reforms.“It’s unfortunate for them that this is happening at a low point of the protest movement,” said Mr. Chanatip, of Amnesty. “After three years of an official crackdown on the protests, people are quite burned out.”Ryn Jirenuwat More

  • in

    Gary Hart: The “New Church Committee” Is an Outrage

    To legitimize otherwise questionable investigations, Congress occasionally labels them after a previous successful effort. Thus, the new Republican-controlled House of Representatives’ proposed select committee, which plans to investigate the “weaponization of government,” is being described as “the new Church committee,” after the group of senators who investigated the F.B.I., the C.I.A. and other groups from 1975-76.As the last surviving member of the original Church committee, named after its chairman, the late Senator Frank Church of Idaho, I have a particular interest in distinguishing what we accomplished then and what authoritarian Republicans seem to have in mind now.The outlines of the committee, which Rep. Jim Jordan will assemble, remain vague. Reading between the rhetorical lines, proponents appear to believe agencies of the national government have targeted, and perhaps are still targeting, right-of-center individuals and groups, possibly including individuals and right-wing militia groups that participated in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrectionist attack on the Capitol.That is almost completely at odds with the purpose of the original Church committee, which was founded in response to widespread abuses by government intelligence agencies. While we sought to protect the constitutional rights and freedoms of American citizens, we were also bound to protect the integrity of the intelligence and security agencies, which were founded to protect those freedoms, too.Our committee brought U.S. intelligence agencies under congressional scrutiny to prevent the violation of the privacy rights of American citizens, and to halt covert operations abroad that violated our constitutional principles. Rather than strengthening the oversight of federal agencies, the new committee seems designed to prevent law enforcement and intelligence agencies from enforcing the law — specifically, laws against insurrectionist activity in our own democracy.It is one thing to intercept phone calls from people organizing a peaceful civil rights march and quite another to intercept phone calls from people organizing an assault on the Capitol to impede the certification of a national election.Rather than weaken our intelligence and law enforcement agencies, the Church committee sought to restore their original mandates and increase their focus away from partisan or political manipulation. Our committee was bipartisan, leaning neither right nor left, and the conservative senators, including the vice chair, John Tower, Barry Goldwater, Howard Baker and others, took pains to prevent liberal or progressive members, including chairman Church, Philip Hart, Walter Mondale and me, from weakening our national security.They needn’t have bothered. We all understood, including me, the youngest member, that attacks on federal law enforcement and national security would not go down well among our constituents. Unlike in the 1970s, today’s threat to domestic security is less from foreign sources and more from homeland groups seeking to replace the constitutional order with authoritarian practices that challenge historic institutions and democratic practices.Among a rather large number of reforms proposed by the Church committee were permanent congressional oversight committees for the intelligence community, an endorsement of the 1974 requirement that significant clandestine projects be approved by the president in a written “finding,” the notification of the chairs of the oversight committees of certain clandestine projects at the time they are undertaken and the elimination of assassination attempts against foreign leaders.Despite the concern of conservatives at the time, to my knowledge, no significant clandestine activity was compromised and no classified information leaked as a result of these reforms in the almost half-century since they were adopted. In fact, the oversight and notification requirements, by providing political cover, have operated as protection for the C.I.A.Evidence was provided of the effectiveness of these reforms in the so-called Iran-contra controversy in 1985-87. The Reagan administration sold arms to Iran and used the proceeds to finance covert operations in Nicaragua against its socialist government. Assigning accountability for this scheme proved difficult until a document authorizing it was located in the White House. President Reagan did not remember signing it; however, it bore his signature. This kind of accountability would not have been possible before our reforms were adopted.The rules of the Senate and the House establish what standing committees and what special committees each house may create. The House is clearly at liberty within those rules to create a committee to protect what it perceives to be an important element of its base. And if its purposes are ultimately to protect authoritarian interests, it is presumably free to do so and accept criticisms from the press and the public. It is outrageous to call it a new Church committee. Trying to disguise a highly partisan effort to legitimize undemocratic activities by cloaking it in the mantle of a successful bipartisan committee from decades ago is a mockery.Gary Hart is a former United States senator from Colorado and the author of, most recently, “The Republic of Conscience.”The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

  • in

    Aung San Suu Kyi Gets 33 Years in Prison in Myanmar

    Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has faced a series of charges since being detained in a coup in early 2021. Her trials came to an end on Friday, capping months of legal proceedings.Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmar’s ousted civilian leader, was found guilty of corruption on Friday and sentenced to seven years in prison, almost two years after she was first detained by the military in a coup.Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi, 77, a Nobel laureate, had already begun serving a 26-year prison sentence in connection with more than a dozen charges she has faced since being detained. The additional sentence she received on Friday makes it likely that she will remain behind bars for the rest of her life, unless the junta reduces her sentence to house arrest, overturns its own ruling, or falls from power. Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi’s lawyers plan to appeal, according to a source familiar with the proceedings.Friday’s verdict, delivered in a courtroom that sits inside a prison in the capital, Naypyidaw, was expected to draw international condemnation.“The verdicts were unsurprising — this was purely a show trial,” said Richard Horsey, a senior adviser on Myanmar for the International Crisis Group. “As with the coup itself, the regime’s objective has been to silence Aung San Suu Kyi and remove her from the political landscape.”There is widespread speculation in Myanmar that the junta wanted to finish Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi’s trials by the end of the year so that it could focus on another goal: installing Senior Gen. Min Aung Hlaing, the military leader behind last year’s coup, as president when the country holds its next general election in mid-2023. A shadow government established by ousted civilian leaders after the February 2021 coup is immensely popular but has been unable to compete politically against the military or to gain international recognition. General Min Aung Hlaing’s military-backed party is almost certain to win the next election.Myanmar has been racked by violence since the coup. Protests erupted across the country as the junta’s opponents mounted a civil disobedience movement and national strike. The military responded with brutal force, shooting and killing protesters in the streets. Thousands of armed resistance fighters have continued to battle the Tatmadaw, as the army in Myanmar is known, using guerrilla tactics and training in the jungle.A protester with an image of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in Yangon, Myanmar, weeks after the military coup in February 2021.The New York TimesLast week, the United Nations’ Security Council adopted a resolution condemning the junta’s rights abuses in the aftermath of the coup and demanding the release of political prisoners. Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi is one of more than 16,000 people who have been arrested since the coup for opposing military rule, according to the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners. The group says more than 13,000 of them are still detained.Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi has been charged with a series of crimes by the junta, including corruption, election fraud, inciting public unrest and breaching Covid-19 protocols. A number of other government leaders have also stood trial in recent months, and the regime has executed some pro-democracy activists as it continues to crack down on opponents.The military-controlled Election Commission first brought election fraud charges against Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi in November 2021, about a year after her political party won in a landslide. During that trial, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi and other senior government officials were accused of manipulating voter lists to secure their victory over the military-backed party. She has denied all of the charges against her.Friday’s sentencing pertained to a set of charges separate from the election-fraud case. She was found guilty of five counts of corruption that caused a loss of state funds. Prosecutors had argued that Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi did not follow the proper protocols when she rented one helicopter and bought a second, sometime between 2019 and 2021.While the junta has insisted that the charges against Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi are not politically motivated, the military has long considered her a threat and sought to minimize her influence in Myanmar, said U Kyee Myint, a human rights lawyer in Yangon, Myanmar’s largest city.A United Nations Security Council meeting this month in New York during a vote on a draft resolution calling for an immediate end to violence in Myanmar and the release of political prisoners.Ed Jones/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“As long as Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is in politics, the military will never win,” Mr. Kyee Myint said. “That’s why long-term prison terms are imposed — to remove Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s influence in politics.”Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi is the daughter of Gen. Aung San, the country’s independence hero, who was assassinated when she was 2 years old. As an adult, she was one of many people who spent years in jail for their political opposition to the military junta that seized power in 1962 and ruled the country for decades.In 1991, she won a Nobel Peace Prize for her nonviolent resistance to the generals who had locked her up, turning her into an icon for global democracy. She eventually began a power-sharing arrangement with the military when her party, the National League for Democracy, won its first landslide election victory in 2015. Because the country’s military-drafted Constitution bars her from the presidency, she named herself foreign minister and state counselor, positions that gave her broad executive authority.By the time she was detained in 2021, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi had lost some of her luster, in large part because she had downplayed the army’s murderous campaign against Myanmar’s Rohingya Muslim minority, who have been forced to flee the country by the hundreds of thousands. But Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi still has legions of devoted followers in a country now ruled by General Min Aung Hlaing.“I think Min Aung Hlaing wanted Daw Aung San Suu Kyi to suffer and die in prison, so he sentenced her to a long prison term,” said Daw Nge Nge Lwin, the owner of a gas station in Yangon and the aunt of a student activist who has been detained at the city’s notorious Insein prison. “But Daw Aung San Suu Kyi ruled the country with love and is loved by the people. I don’t think she’s someone who will die, depressed, in prison.”Renaud Egreteau, an expert on civil-military relations in Myanmar and a professor at the City University of Hong Kong, said that he expected her reputation to endure for years among her followers.Just as protesters carried banners featuring images of Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi’s father decades after his assassination, he said, “We can assume that her own portrait will continue to be used as a call to collective action and protest against those holding illegitimate power, regardless of her own action.”“She is still the matriarchal figure that invokes resistance against the army,” Professor Egreteau added. “I doubt a farcical trial can change that.”People protesting as security forces blocked off the parimeter around NLD headquarters, in Yangon, Myanmar, in February.The New York TimesSince being detained in 2021, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi has been allowed to speak only with her lawyers. They have been banned from speaking to the news media during the trials. Earlier this year, the country’s military-backed Supreme Court announced that it would auction off the residence where she spent nearly 15 years under house arrest during the previous military regime.“A time may come when the military sees advantages in allowing Suu Kyi to move to some form of house arrest, or even grant access to her for international envoys,” Mr. Horsey said. “But that time is not now, and the decision may fall to a postelection, military administration.” More

  • in

    Aung San Suu Kyi Trial in Myanmar Nears End

    The prosecution of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has drawn international condemnation. The latest set of corruption charges could put her in prison for the rest of her life.Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmar’s ousted civilian leader, is expected to appear in court on Friday to receive the last of several verdicts handed down to her by the military regime, capping off a secretive 13 months of trial proceedings during which the 77-year-old Nobel laureate has already been sentenced to decades in prison.Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi was detained in a coup in February 2021. Since that time, the junta has charged her with a series of crimes, including corruption, election fraud, inciting public unrest and breaching Covid-19 protocols. Friday’s verdict stemmed from a set of corruption charges related to what prosecutors argue was Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi’s improper purchase of one helicopter and rental of another.Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi and her political party won the November 2020 election in a landslide. Independent international observers declared the results free and fair. But less than three months after her election victory, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi was detained by the military, a move that has drawn international condemnation.Since the military seized power on Feb. 1, 2021, Myanmar has been racked by violence. Protests erupted across the country as the junta’s opponents mounted a civil disobedience movement and national strike. The military responded with brutal force, shooting and killing protesters in the streets. Thousands of armed resistance fighters have continued to battle the Tatmadaw, as the army in Myanmar is known, using guerrilla tactics and training in the jungle.Last week, the United Nation’s Security Council adopted a resolution condemning the junta’s rights abuses in the aftermath of the coup.The military-controlled Election Commission first brought election fraud charges against Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi in November 2021. During that trial, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi and other senior government officials were accused of manipulating voter lists to secure their victory over the military-backed party.Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi has denied all of the charges against her. The United Nations and other international organizations have demanded her freedom, though the junta has insisted that the charges are not politically motivated and has refused to let Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi speak with global leaders who have visited Myanmar in recent months.By Friday, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi had already begun serving a 26-year prison sentence in connection with more than a dozen charges she has faced since the coup. In the most recent case, prosecutors argued that an investigation found Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi did not follow the proper protocols when she rented one helicopter and bought a second, some time between 2019 and 2021.The latest verdicts come as the military seeks to minimize Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi’s influence in Myanmar, said U Kyee Myint, a human rights lawyer based in Yangon, Myanmar. Despite the regime’s efforts, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi is still revered by many in the country.“As long as Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is in politics, the military will never win,” Mr. Kyee Myint said. “That’s why long-term prison terms are imposed — to remove Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s influence in politics.”Earlier this year, the country’s military-backed Supreme Court announced that it would auction off Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi’s residence, where she spent nearly 15 years under house arrest during a previous military regime. Since being detained in 2021, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi has been allowed to speak only with her lawyers. They have been banned from speaking to the news media during the trials. More

  • in

    In New Law, Indonesia Criminalizes Sex Outside of Marriage

    Parliament also approved a law that criminalizes criticism of the government, delivering a blow to the country’s progressive reputation.Indonesia has long been known as a widely tolerant nation at the forefront of establishing democratic reforms throughout Southeast Asia. That progressive reputation took a hit on Tuesday when Parliament cleared a sweeping overhaul of the country’s criminal code.According to the new rules, sex outside of marriage is now illegal in Indonesia, as is defamation of the president. The overhaul also sharply expanded laws against blasphemy in the world’s largest Muslim-majority country. Opponents said the rules posed significant risks to religious minorities by outlawing extramarital sex and tacitly targeting critics of Islam. Extramarital sex criminalization also targets the L.G.B.T. community, as gay marriage is illegal in Indonesia. The new laws could also curtail freedom of expression and assembly.The new laws are almost certain to revive a debate around democratic backsliding in the nation of 276 million. After the fall of the Indonesian dictator Suharto in 1998, the country had prided itself as a thriving democracy. Most Indonesians held fairly relaxed views about homosexuality, which was never officially banned.But in recent years, conservative Islam has gained ground in the country, and now some fear its influence is growing, even as its ranks remain a minority in Parliament. In the lead-up to the next presidential election in 2024, few officials appear willing to upset the religious right, which helped paved the way for Tuesday’s overhaul of the criminal code.“It is a very significant encroachment on rights and liberties in Indonesia,” said Tim Lindsey, director of the Center for Indonesian Law, Islam and Society at the University of Melbourne. Critics warned that the new rules, which also apply to foreigners, will make Indonesia less appealing to investors, tourists and students.Muhamad Isnur, chairman of the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation, said the laws run “contrary to international human rights norms. We are in a new paradigm,” he said.The bill was approved unanimously in Parliament on Tuesday. The government has tried for decades to overhaul the law but has never succeeded. In 2019, it tried to pass a similar draft law, but President Joko Widodo shelved it after tens of thousands of young people protested in the streets, arguing that the law threatened their civil liberties. This time, activists said they were blindsided when lawmakers suddenly announced on Nov. 30 that they were handing a draft to Parliament to ratify, giving the activists very little time to organize demonstrations.Indonesia officials said they had engaged in monthslong conversations with several human rights groups before submitting the new draft. The lawmakers said they added revisions based on feedback, such as stating that blasphemy does not only apply to religion but all belief systems. Edward Omar Sharif Hiariej, Indonesia’s deputy minister of law and human rights, said that the government tried to accommodate as many parties as possible, but acknowledged that the overhaul “won’t satisfy everyone.”“If there are citizens who feel that their constitutional rights have been violated, the door of the constitutional court is wide open for that,” Mr. Edward told reporters last month. The laws, which are set to take effect after three years, will likely be challenged in the country’s Constitutional Court. On Tuesday, there were calls for protests outside Parliament. (The new rules state that people who demonstrate without a permit can also be penalized.)Officials say upgrading the existing criminal code, which dates back to 1918 when Indonesia was a Dutch colony, was long overdue. Among the raft of new laws, penalties around consensual sex outside marriage have drawn the most criticism. According to the revisions, unmarried couples who live together could be jailed for six months or face a maximum fine of 10 million rupiah ($710)..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}What we consider before using anonymous sources. Do the sources know the information? What’s their motivation for telling us? Have they proved reliable in the past? Can we corroborate the information? Even with these questions satisfied, The Times uses anonymous sources as a last resort. The reporter and at least one editor know the identity of the source.Learn more about our process.Though the penalties apply to foreigners, the new law states that the police can only make an arrest after a report is filed by a close family member, such as a parent, spouse or child, making it extremely unlikely that foreigners would be prosecuted, Mr. Lindsey said. “But gay and lesbian Indonesians, who, of course, are couples and they can’t be married, they are completely exposed.”Police have previously arrested dozens of gay men for violating an anti-pornography law, but now, all gay couples who live together are subject to possible arrest.The push for the overhaul was backed by Vice President Ma’ruf Amin, an Islamic cleric and the former chair of the Indonesian Ulema Council, the country’s top body for Islamic scholars, according to two people who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to disclose the details of private conversations. Mr. Ma’ruf had previously called for “stern regulations” on the sexual activities of homosexuals.In a reversal, lawmakers on Tuesday reinstated a provision making it illegal to attack “the honor or dignity” of both Indonesia’s president and vice president, a rule that was struck down by the Constitutional Court in 2006. In recent years, however, tolerance for such criticism has waned. Last year, the authorities arrested an artist who created a mural criticizing Mr. Joko, and activists say they have been harassed and charged with defamation for speaking up on rights abuses.Mr. Joko — known as a moderate, secular leader — has spoken out repeatedly against intolerant views in his country. In an interview with The New York Times last month, he said Indonesia has a vibrant democracy with frequent peaceful protests outside the presidential palace. “Even today, everyone can criticize the president and the government,” Mr. Joko said, speaking before the Group of 20 summit in Bali last month. “I believe that Indonesia’s democracy is moving on the right track.”Andreas Harsono, a researcher for Human Rights Watch, said that the laws would give the police greater opportunities to extort bribes, and lead to more corruption. Politicians would also have more excuses to target political opponents, he added. “The danger of oppressive laws is not that they will be broadly applied — no, they won’t be — it is that they provide an avenue for selective enforcement,” Mr. Harsono said.The new penal code expands the country’s blasphemy law from one to six provisions, stating for the first time that apostasy — anyone who “persuades someone to be a nonbeliever” — can be charged as a criminal offense.Religious minorities are most at risk of running afoul of this law. Roughly 87 percent of Indonesians are Muslim, while the rest are Christian, Catholic, Hindu and Buddhist. According to Mr. Harsono, the use of the blasphemy law has been most commonly used against people who have criticized Islam.In 2017, former Jakarta governor Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, a Christian and an ally of Mr. Joko, was sentenced to two years in prison on blasphemy charges after he was accused of insulting Islam by jokingly referring to a verse in the Quran in a campaign speech.Willy Aditya, a lawmaker from the left-leaning NasDem party, rejected claims that Indonesia was “turning into an Islamic country” but said that the new law was written based on emotion, not research. The law shows that the officials have failed to distinguish the difference between public and private affairs, he said, “which is the most elementary thing in democracy.”Muktita Suhartono More