Connect with us

International

First Protestor Shot in Hong Kong Amid China National Day Violence

Published

on

  • Demonstrators in Hong Kong defied a protest ban and took to the streets the same day China held a massive military parade to celebrate the 70th anniversary of Communist rule.
  • During the protests, a Hong Kong police officer shot an 18-year-old protestor point-blank. It was the first time that an officer has fired a live round at an activist since the demonstrations started.
  • Experts and the media have described the day’s events as some of the most violent since the movement started in June.

Protestor Shot

A Hong Kong police officer shot a teenage protestor after violence broke out during demonstrations against China’s National Day on Tuesday, marking the first time an officer has fired live ammunition at a pro-democracy activist since protests began in June.

The protests in Hong Kong, which originally started as peaceful marches against a proposed extradition bill that would allow Hong Kong to extradite people accused of certain crimes to mainland China, have become increasingly violent.

However, many experts and media outlets have asserted that the violence seen on Tuesday represents a marked escalation.

In a video of the event, the protestor who was shot can be seen in a group of other people in black chasing after a police officer and tackling him to the ground before kicking him and beating him with what looks to be metal pipes.

The protester who was shot is then seen approaching another police officer standing nearby with a handgun drawn. The protestor swings the officer with a pipe and the officer fires at the man at point-blank range, about three feet away.

In a press conference, a spokesperson for the Hong Kong Police Force defended the officer’s action. 

“The police officers’ lives were under serious threat; to save his own life and his colleagues’ lives, he fired a live shot,” the spokesperson said. The spokesperson added that the protester, an 18-year-old boy, had been shot in the left shoulder and was conscious as he was taken to the hospital.

The spokesperson added that the protester, an 18-year-old boy, had been shot in the left shoulder and was conscious as he was taken to the hospital.

However, most local and international media outlets have been reporting that the boy was shot in the chest, not the shoulder.

Local outlets have also reported that the boy is a student who attends a local high school in Hong Kong.

It is unclear what condition he is in, though there have been some reports that he is one of the two men reportedly in critical condition in a local hospital following the day’s events.

In a separate press conference later, Hong Kong’s police chief condemned the protestors and reiterated that the officer acted in self-defense.

He also said that the protester who was shot had been arrested, and authorities were deciding if they were going to bring him up on charges of assaulting a police officer.

Protests on China’s National Day

Tuesday’s protests in Hong Kong came as China celebrated the 70th anniversary of Communist rule in China, also known as China’s National Day.

Chinese officials celebrated with a massive military parade in Beijing, as is customary. Speaking before the parade in front of the Tiananmen Square, Chinese President Xi appeared to deliver a message to Hong Kong. 

“No force can shake the status of our great motherland, no force can obstruct the advance of the Chinese people and Chinese nation,” he said, adding that China would “maintain the lasting prosperity and stability” of Hong Kong without specifically mentioning the protests

Meanwhile, in Hong Kong, officials had long anticipated that the pro-democracy protestors would hold massive demonstrations on National Day in an attempt to upstage mainland China and send them a message, or at the very least detract from their National Day parade.

With police warning of violence and potential terrorism ahead of National Day, authorities announced a ban on protests and shut down key subway stations and commercial buildings.

However, the ban did not stop the estimated hundreds of thousands of Hong Kongers who defied authorities and showed up to hold demonstrations. The protests started out largely peacefully, with only a few minor scuffles reported.

Protesters could be seen holding flags and banners and sprinkling fake money — which is a traditional Chinese funeral custom— to mockingly “mourn” National Day.  Some banners and protestors also referred to the day as a “national day of grief.”

While some of the demonstrations remained peaceful, things started to escalate in other parts of the city later in the day. According to reports, right before sundown, police used large amounts of tear gas as well as water cannons and physical force to clear protestors.

According to reports, right before sundown, police used large amounts of tear gas as well as water cannons and physical force to clear protestors.

Some of the protestors were reportedly marching peacefully, but others threw bricks and petrol bombs at the police. The Hong Kong Police Force also said on Twitter that “rioters” in one district had injured multiple officers and reporters with a “corrosive fluid.” 

The Hong Kong Police Force also said on Twitter that “rioters” in one district had injured multiple officers and reporters with a “corrosive fluid.” 

Protestors additionally vandalized shop fronts, restaurants, and government buildings across the city, mostly seeming to target places and that were perceived to be pro-Beijing

Tuesday’s event’s have been described as one of the most significant landmarks in the protests so far, with many positing that this is a turning point that will likely change the nature of the protests moving forward.

See what others are saying: (Axios) (The New York Times) (The Guardian)

International

Israel Relaxes Abortion Restrictions in Response to U.S. Supreme Court Ruling

Published

on

The reforms follow similar moves by France and Germany as leaders across the political spectrum denounce the court’s decision.


Health Minister Makes Announcement

Israel is easing access to abortion in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s repeal of Roe v. Wade, Nitzan Horowitz, the country’s health minister and head of the small left-wing Meretz party, announced Monday.

“The U.S. Supreme Court’s move to deny a woman the right to abortion is a dark move,” he said in the announcement, “oppressing women and returning the leader of the free and liberal world a hundred years backward.”

The new rules, approved by a majority in the parliamentary committee, grant women access to abortion pills through the universal health system. Women will be able to obtain the pills at local health centers rather than only hospitals and surgical clinics.

The new policy also removes the decades-old requirement for women to physically appear before a special committee that must grant approval to terminate a pregnancy.

While women will still need to get approval, the process will become digitized, the application form will be simplified, and the requirement to meet a social worker will become optional.

The committee will only conduct hearings in the rare case it initially denies the abortion procedure.

Israel’s 1977 abortion law stipulates four criteria for termination of pregnancy: If the woman is under 18 or over 40, if the fetus is in danger, if the pregnancy is the result of rape, incest, or an “illicit union,” including extramarital affairs, and if the woman’s mental or physical health is at risk.

All of the changes will take effect over the next three months.

The World Reacts

Politicians across the political spectrum from Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson have denounced the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision since it was announced Friday.

On Saturday, French Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne expressed support for a bill proposed by parliament that would enshrine the right to an abortion in the country’s constitution.

“For all women, for human rights, we must set this gain in stone,” she wrote on Twitter. “Parliament must be able to unite overwhelmingly over this text.”

Germany scrapped a Nazi-era law prohibiting the promotion of abortion Friday, just hours before the U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

In Israel, abortion is a far less controversial issue than it is for Americans. Around 98% of people who apply for an abortion get one, according to the country’s Central Bureau of Statistics.

Part of the reason for Israel’s relatively easy access to abortion is that many residents interpret Jewish law to condone, or at least not prohibit, the procedure.

In the United States, several Jewish organizations including the American Jewish Committee, Hillel International, and the Women’s Rabbinic Network have expressed opposition to the court ruling, and some Jews have protested it as a violation of their religious freedom.

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (ABC News) (The Guardian)

Continue Reading

International

Flight Deporting Refugees From U.K. to Rwanda Canceled at Last Hour

Published

on

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights said the U.K.’s asylum policy sets a “catastrophic” precedent.


Saved By The Bell

The inaugural flight in the U.K. government’s plan to deport some asylum seekers to Rwanda was canceled about an hour and a half before it was supposed to take off Tuesday evening.

A last-minute legal intervention by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) halted the flight. Tuesday’s flight originally included 37 people, but after a string of legal challenges that number dwindled to just seven.

In its ruling for one of the seven passengers, a 54-year-old Iraqi man, the court said he cannot be deported until three weeks after the delivery of the final domestic decision in his ongoing judicial review proceedings.

Another asylum seeker, a 26-year-old Albanian man, told The Guardian he was in a “very bad mental state” and did not want to go to Rwanda, a country he knows nothing about.

“I was exploited by traffickers in Albania for six months,” he said. “They trafficked me to France. I did not know which country I was being taken to.”

A final domestic effort to block the flight in the Court of Appeals failed on Monday. The High Court will make a ruling on the asylum policy next month.

Britains Divided by Controversial Policy

U.K. Home Secretary Priti Patel spoke to lawmakers after the flight was canceled, defending the asylum policy and saying preparations for the next flight will begin immediately.

“We cannot keep on spending nearly £5 million a day on accommodation including that of hotels,” she said. “We cannot accept this intolerable pressure on public services and local communities.”

“It makes us less safe as a nation because those who come here illegally do not have the regularized checks or even the regularized status, and because evil people-smuggling gangs use the proceeds of their ill-gotten gains to fund other appalling crimes that undermine the security of our country,” she continued.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Filippo Grandi, told CBC the policy sets a “catastrophic” precedent.

“We believe that this is all wrong,” he said. “This is all wrong. I mean, saving people from dangerous journeys is great, is absolutely great. But is that the right way to do it? Is that the right, is that the real motivation for this deal to happen? I don’t think so. I think it’s… I don’t know what it is.”

An Iranian asylum seeker in a British detention center who was told to prepare for deportation before being granted a late reprieve was asked by ABC whether he ever thought the U.K. would send him to Africa.

“I thought in the U.K. there were human rights,” he said. “But so far I haven’t seen any evidence.”

The Conservative government’s plan was announced in April, when it said it would resettle some asylum seekers 4,000 miles away in Rwanda, where they can seek permanent refugee status, apply to settle there on other grounds, or seek asylum in a safe third country.

The scheme was meant to deter migrants from illegally smuggling themselves into the country by boat or truck.

Migrants have long made the dangerous journey from Northern France across the English Channel, with over 28,000 entering the U.K. in boats last year, up from around 8,500 the year prior. Dozens of people have died making the trek, including 27 who drowned last November when a single boat capsized.

See what others are saying: (BBC) (The Guardian) (CNN)

Continue Reading

International

Ryanair Draws Outrage, Accusations of Racism After Making South Africans Take Test in Afrikaans

Published

on

Afrikaans, which is only spoken as a first language by around 13% of South Africa, has not been the country’s national language since apartheid came to an end in 1994.


Airline Won’t Explain Discrimination

Ryanair, Europe’s largest airline, has received widespread criticism and accusations of racism after it began requiring South African nationals to complete a test in Afrikaans to prove their passport isn’t fraudulent.

The airline told BBC the new policy was implemented because of “substantially increased cases of fraudulent South African passports being used to enter the U.K.”

Among other questions, the test asks passengers to name South Africa’s president, its capital city, and one national public holiday.

Ryanair has not said why it chose Afrikaans, the Dutch colonial language that many associate with white minority rule, for the test.

There are 11 official languages in South Africa, and Afrikaans ranks third for usage below Zulu and IsiXhosa. Only around 13% of South Africans speak Afrikaans as their first language.

“They’re using this in a manner that is utterly absurd,” Conrad Steenkamp, CEO of the Afrikaans Language Council, told reporters. “Afrikaans, you have roughly 20% of the population of South Africa understand Afrikaans. But the rest don’t, so you’re sitting with roughly 50 million people who do not understand Afrikaans.”

“Ryanair should be careful,” he continued. “Language is a sensitive issue. They may well end up in front of the Human Rights Commission with this.”

Ryanair’s policy only applies to South African passengers flying to the United Kingdom from within Europe, since it does not fly out of South Africa.

The British government has said in a statement that it does not require the test.

Anyone who cannot complete the test will be blocked from traveling and given a refund.

Memories of Apartheid Resurface

“The question requiring a person to name a public holiday is particularly on the nose given that SA has a whole public holiday NEXT WEEK commemorating an historic protest that started in response to language-based discrimination,” one person tweeted.

South African citizen Dinesh Joseph told the BBC that he was “seething” with anger when asked to take the test.

“It was the language of apartheid,” he said, adding that it was a trigger for him.

Officials in the country were also surprised by Ryanair’s decision.

We are taken aback by the decision of this airline because the Department regularly communicates with all airlines to update them on how to validate South African passports, including the look and feel,” South Africa’s Department of Home Affairs said in a statement.

Any airline found to have flown a passenger with a fake passport to the U.K. faces a fine of £2,000 from authorities there. Ryanair has also not said whether it requires similar tests for any other nationalities.

Many people expressed outrage at Ryanair’s policy and some told stories of being declined service because they did not pass the test.

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (BBC) (Al Jazeera)

Continue Reading