Connect with us

International

Cambodian PM Orders Action Against Women For Revealing Clothing

Published

on

  • Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen called for authoritative action to be taken against women who wear revealing clothing in online posts. 
  • He said that these posts are offensive to Cambodian culture and said this behavior contributes to sexual violence in the country.
  • Several rights groups have condemned Hun Sen’s comments, arguing that the women have not actually broken any laws and that he is perpetuating the problem of sexual violence by blaming victims.

Controversial Remarks

In a speech given on Monday, Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen ordered authorities to take action against women who wear revealing clothing in Facebook Live streams. 

Hun Sen was addressing the Cambodian National Council for Women when he made his remarks. He said that these fashion choices are offensive to Cambodian culture and values and that this kind of behavior is to blame for sexual violence in the country. It is a popular trend for women across the country to wear revealing clothing to sell items like clothes and beauty products online, according to Reuters.

“Go to their places and order them to stop live-streaming until they change to proper clothes,” Hun Sen said on Monday. 

The prime minister also seemed to suggest that these women will be tracked down through their online activity when he ordered authorities to locate and then “educate” them.  

On Wednesday, police in Phnom Penh posted a video to Facebook of a young woman apologizing for the clothing she wears during her online streams upon being brought into their station. In the caption, the police wrote that the woman’s frequent posting in provocative clothing marred the customs and traditions of Cambodian women. 

The police commissionary posted later in the day that shortly after her release, the woman had posted another revealing image online. On their Facebook page, they wrote that she had been arrested and brought in again for pornography charges. 

“When we educate them and they still do not listen, we will implement the law,” a spokesman for the Cambodian National Police told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

Many expect women in Cambodia to be quiet and submissive, an expectation that stems from an oppressive conduct code for women called the Chbab Srey that was part of school curricula until 2007.  

Backlash to the Crackdown

Upon news of the “education” orders and the Facebook video from the police force, several rights groups condemned Hun Sen’s comments. 

Nicholas Bequelin, Regional Director of Amnesty International, responded with a statement on the organization’s website. He called the prime minister’s remarks “dangerous” and accused them of “victim-blaming.” 

“This rhetoric only serves to perpetuate violence against women and stigmatize survivors of gender-based violence,” Bequelin said.

He went on to warn that Hun Sen’s orders display how the government is abusing their surveillance systems to push a discriminatory agenda and said that Facebook must refuse any requests to block profiles of women for these reasons. 

“These developments underscore the dire state of freedom of expression in Cambodia,” Bequelin added. “In recent years, the Cambodian authorities have increasingly weaponized internet surveillance to target human rights defenders and opposition supporters based on their Facebook posts and communications.” 

Bequelin also argued that none of the women engaging in these online behaviors are breaking any laws and the police are responding solely to the whim of Hun Sen. 

Also on Wednesday, several other rights groups released a separate open letter echoing Bequelin’s sentiments. The groups—which included the Cambodian Center for Human Rights and Gender and Development for Cambodia— accused Hun Sen of blaming victims and admonished his orders against women posting online in revealing clothing. 

“Punishing women for their choice of clothing is therefore part of the root cause of violence, rather than its cure, and must be rejected,” the letter said. “We appeal to the Cambodian government to acknowledge that Cambodia Needs to Respect Women’s Rights to Self-Determination, Expression, and Bodily Integrity in order to achieve gender equality and end gender-based violence in Cambodia.”

See what others are saying: (Reuters) (Radio Free Asia) (Voice of America)

International

U.K. Court Rules Julian Assange Can Be Extradited to U.S.

Published

on

The judgment overrules a lower court decision that blocked the WikiLeaks founder’s extradition on the grounds that his mental health was not stable enough to weather harsh conditions in the American prison system if convicted.


New Developments in Assange Extradition Battle

A British court ruled Friday that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange can be extradited to the United States to face charges of violating the Espionage Act that could land him in prison for decades.

Prosecutors in the U.S. have accused Assange of conspiring with former army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning in 2010 to hack into a Department of Defense computer network and access thousands of military and diplomatic records on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The information obtained in the hack was later published by WikiLeaks in 2010 and 2011, a move U.S. authorities allege put lives in danger.

In addition to a charge of computer misuse, Assange has also been indicted on 17 espionage charges. Collectively, the charges carry a maximum prison sentence of 175 years.

The Friday decision from the High Court overturns a lower court ruling in January, which found that Assange’s mental health was too fragile for the harsh environment he could face in the U.S. prison system if convicted.

Notably, the January ruling did not determine whether or not Assange was guilty. In fact, District Judge Vanessa Baraitser explicitly rejected the defense’s arguments that the charges against him were politically motivated and that he should be protected under freedom of press.

However, she agreed that the defense had provided compelling evidence that Assange suffers from severe depression and that the conditions he could face in the U.S. prison system were “such that it would be oppressive to extradite him to the United States of America.”

The U.S. appealed the ruling, arguing that Assange’s mental health should not be a barrier to extradition and that the psychiatrist who examined him had been biased. 

In October, the Biden administration vowed that if Assange were to be convicted, he would not be placed in the highest-security U.S. prison or immediately sent to solitary confinement. Officials also said that the native Australian would be eligible to serve his sentence in his home country.

High Court Ruling

The High Court agreed with the administration’s arguments in its ruling, arguing that the American’s assurances regarding the conditions of Assange’s potential incarceration were “sufficient.” 

“There is no reason why this court should not accept the assurances as meaning what they say,” the ruling stated. “There is no basis for assuming that the USA has not given the assurances in good faith.”

Assange’s fiancé, Stella Moris, said in a statement that his legal team would appeal the decision to the British Supreme Court at the “earliest possible moment,” referring to the judgment as a “grave miscarriage of justice.”

The Supreme Court will now decide whether or not to hear the case based on if it believes the matter involves a point of law “of general public importance.” That decision may take weeks or even months.

If the U.K. Supreme Court court objects to hearing Assange’s appeal, he could ask the European Court of Human Rights to stay the extradition — a move that could set in motion another lengthy legal battle in the already drawn-out process.

Assange and his supporters claim he was acting as an investigative journalist when he published the classified military cables. They argue that the possibility of his extradition and prosecution represent serious threats to press freedoms in the U.S.

U.S. prosecutors dispute that Assange acted as a journalist, claiming that he encouraged illegal hacking for personal reasons.

See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (NPR) (The Washington Post)

Continue Reading

International

Early Data Indicates Omicron is More Transmissible But Less Severe

Published

on

The studies come as Pfizer and BioNTech claim that preliminary research shows a third shot of their COVID vaccine appears to provide sufficient protection against the new variant, but two doses alone may not.


More Information About Omicron

Several preliminary studies published in recent days appear to show that the new omicron COVID-19 variant may be more transmissible but less severe than previous strains.

One recent, un-peer-reviewed study by a Japanese scientist who advises the country’s health ministry found that omicron is four times more transmissible in its initial stage than delta was.

Preliminary information in countries hit hard by omicron also indicates high transmissibility. In South Africa —  where the variant was first detected and is already the dominant strain — new COVID cases have more than doubled over the last week.

Health officials in the U.K. said omicron cases are doubling every two or three days, and they expect the strain to become dominant in the country in a matter of weeks.

In a statement Wednesday, World Health Organization Director Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that while early data does seem to show high transmissibility, it also indicates that omicron causes more mild cases than delta.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevent Director Rochelle Walensky echoed that sentiment, telling reporters that of the 40 known omicron cases in the U.S. as of Wednesday, nearly all of them were mild. One person has been hospitalized so far and none have died.

Studies on Vaccine Efficacy 

Other recent studies have shown that current COVID vaccines are effective at preventing severe illness and death in omicron patients, and boosters provide at least some added protection.

On Wednesday, Pfizer and BioNTech announced that laboratory tests have shown a third dose of their COVID-19 vaccine appears to provide sufficient protection against the omicron variant, though two doses may not.

According to the companies, researchers saw a 25-fold reduction in neutralizing antibodies for omicron compared to other strains of the virus for people who had just two Pfizer doses. 

By contrast, samples from people one month after they had received a Pfizer booster presented neutralizing antibodies against omicron that were comparable to those seen against previous variants after two doses.

Still, Pfizer’s chief executive also told reporters later in the day that omicron could increase the likelihood that people might need a fourth dose earlier than previously expected, which he had initially said was 12 months after the third shot.

Notably, the Pfizer research has not yet been peer-reviewed, and it remains unclear how omicron will operate outside a lab, but other studies have had similar findings.

See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (Bloomberg) (NBC News)

Continue Reading

International

40 Camels Disqualified From Beauty Contest After Breeders Inject Their Faces With Botox

Published

on

The animals were barred from competing for $66 million in prizes at this year’s King Abdulaziz Camel Festival in Saudi Arabia.


Camels Booted From Beauty Contest

More than 40 camels were disqualified from a beauty contest in Saudi Arabia this week after judges found artificial enhancements in their faces, marking the biggest crackdown on contestants in the competition to date.

The animals were competing for $66 million in prizes at the King Abdulaziz Camel Festival, a month-long event that is estimated to include around 33,000 camels.

However, according to The Guardian, they were forced out of the contest when authorities found that breeders had “stretched out the lips and noses of the camels, used hormones to boost the animals’ muscles, injected heads and lips with Botox to make them bigger, inflated body parts with rubber bands, and used fillers to relax their faces.”

Those types of alterations are banned since judges look at the contestant’s heads, necks, humps, posture, and other features when evaluating them.

An announcement from the state-linked Saudi Press Agency said officials used “specialized and advanced” technology to detect tampering.

“The club is keen to halt all acts of tampering and deception in the beautification of camels,” the SPA report added before warning that organizers would “impose strict penalties on manipulators.”

While it’s unclear what that actually entails, this isn’t the first time people have tried to cheat in this way.

In 2018, 12 camels were similarly disqualified from the competition for injections in their noses, lips, and jaw.

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

Continue Reading