Does Japan firm’s Korean forced labour payout set an example? ‘Hitachi Zosen is betraying the nation’

Critics say Hitachi Zosen’s depositing of funds earmarked for forced labour compensation with a Korean court breaks with Japan’s position on the issue

Tokyo continues to instruct Japanese companies not to compensate claimants – even if it one day means the seizure of their assets in South Korea

Julian Ryall

SCMP
Published: 4 Jan, 2024

A major Japanese company has been accused of “betraying the nation” after transferring funds earmarked as compensation for a victim of forced labour to a South Korean court, in defiance of a government directive.

Hitachi Zosen Corp, an Osaka-based industrial and engineering firm, lost a compensation lawsuit in 2019 brought by an unnamed former labourer who was requisitioned during Japan’s colonial control of the Korean peninsula, between 1910 and the end of World War II in 1945.

The company, which was set up in 1881, built a variety of ships for the Japanese military immediately before and during the war, including minesweepers, landing craft and transport submarines.

An undated archive picture from a South Korean newspaper shows Koreans being marched to work under surveillance of Japanese soldiers during Japan’s colonial rule of the Korean peninsula between 1910 and 1945. 

Photo: Dong-A Ilbo via AFP

After losing the case, Hitachi Zosen deposited about 6.6 million yen (US$46,230) with the court, the Yomiuri newspaper reported, as a security to prevent the seizure and liquidation of company assets in South Korea to compensate the former labourer – even though appeals were ongoing.

South Korean’s Supreme Court last week upheld the lower court’s ruling and ordered Hitachi Zosen to pay the plaintiff 50 million won (US$38,150). With all legal challenges now exhausted, the plaintiff has indicated that he intends to collect the funds soon, his lawyer said.

The top court also recently ordered two more Japanese companies – Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd and Nippon Steel Corp – to compensate workers for forced labour, after turning down their appeals.

Japan says Korean court upholding forced labour compensation ‘unacceptable’

21 Dec 2023

Korean courts have previously ruled that the assets of Japanese companies can be seized to compensate former forced labourers, but Hitachi Zosen is the only company known to have transferred funds. This is despite the Japanese government repeatedly stating that the Korean courts were ruling in contravention of a 1965 treaty that normalised diplomatic relations between the two countries and saw Tokyo pay US$500 million in compensation to Seoul for its decades of often brutal colonial occupation.

Japan has consistently asserted that the lump sum covered all claims against the country or its companies, but Korean courts have ruled that individuals do have the legal right to sue firms that employed them as forced labourers.
Since Yoon Suk-yeol became South Korea’s president in May 2022, bilateral relations have improved dramatically and the two governments have held talks on the creation of a foundation that would accept voluntary donations from Japanese and Korean companies to be disbursed to former labourers

But the proposal has been rejected by former forced labourers and their supporters in South Korea, who say the redress should be made by the Japanese companies directly and be accompanied by a clear apology for their suffering.

South Korea, instead of Japanese firms, to compensate families of WWII forced labour victims

The Japanese government continues to instruct domestic companies not to provide compensation to claimants, even if it means their property and assets in South Korea are seized and liquidated. Though this has yet to happen, if it did it would likely cause another major rift between the two countries.

Critics of the Korean courts’ rulings say Hitachi Zosen’s decision to transfer funds weakens Japan’s position and sets a bad precedent for other companies.

“It appears that Hitachi Zosen has gone against the government’s directions and this can only be bad for other companies as it’s a precedent that is negative for their cases,” said Yoichi Shimada, a conservative academic at Fukui Prefectural University.

“If this is accurate, then Hitachi Zosen is betraying the nation, the government and the other companies.”
If this is accurate, then Hitachi Zosen is betraying the nation, the government and the other companiesYoichi Shimada, conservative academic

After the initial court rulings, a number of firms had considered paying the Korean plaintiffs to protect their business interests in South Korea, Shimada said, but the government intervened to convince them to resist the demands.

“Hitachi Zosen has broken that unity and that betrayal is deeply regrettable,” he said.
The Korean courts were packed with left-leaning judges appointed by former President Moon Jae-in, Shimada claimed, adding that if Japanese firms’ assets were ordered to be sold for compensation then Tokyo “will have no choice but to retaliate by imposing some sanctions on Korea”.

In South Korea, the reaction has been more positive, with Kim Sang-woo, a former politician with the left-leaning South Korean Congress for New Politics and now a board member at the Kim Dae-jung Peace Foundation, calling the court’s decision a step forward.

South Korea faces backlash for ‘humiliating’ deal over Japan forced labour row

6 Mar 2023

“It’s good to hear that the courts are making their own judgments in these cases rather than being pressured into a decision by their own government or another government,” he said.
“I think Yoon really is trying to resolve this issue, but Japan is not doing so much to help the situation … That may be because Prime Minister [Fumio] Kishida is under so much pressure from every quarter that he can’t afford to upset anyone any more.”



Julian Ryall never expected to still be in Japan 24 years after he first arrived, but he quickly realised its advantages over his native London. He lives in Yokohama with his wife and children and writes for publications around the world.

OPINION
Who are the likely suspects in the Kerman blasts, and what does this mean for Iran?

The country has many enemies, but few capable of inflicting a tragedy of this scale

ARASH  AZIZI

Two explosions near Qassem Suleimani's burial site in Kerman killed scores of his supporters. AFP

For the past four years, January 3 has been a tense day in the Middle East. It was on this day, in 2020, that the US took a shockingly bold action by assassinating Qassem Suleimani, a powerful Iranian general who masterminded the regime’s interventions in the region.

Now, on January 3, 2024, Iran has suffered one of the worst terror attacks in its history. At the time of writing (the evening of January 3, local time), at least 103 have been killed in two blasts in Kerman’s Cemetery of Martyrs, where Suleimani is buried, amid ceremonies marking the anniversary of his death.

The initial messaging from local officials was confusing. The mayor of Kerman said it was an accidental gas explosion but state media and those linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the powerful militia that calls most of the shots in today’s Iran, quickly clarified that it was a terrorist attack.

One local MP actually said there had been four explosions. Another claimed it was a suicide attack, using a suicide belt, “surely with Israel’s involvement”. But the account was quickly set straight by the two most authoritative state news agencies in Iran, Irna and Tasnim, which reported the blasts were caused by remote-controlled bombs in two briefcases placed at the scene.

The initial messaging from local officials was confusing

No senior Iranian official or state news agency pointed fingers immediately. Writing on X, a Persian-language spokesperson for Israel has, somewhat bizarrely, claimed that this was an inside job by the Iranian regime.

In fact, while Israel has a long track record of operating on Iranian soil, it has usually targeted IRGC figures or nuclear scientists. There is no precedent for it conducting this kind of mass attack on Iranian civilians.

Importantly, Tasnim has reported there were no IRGC generals amongst the casualties or injured, ruling out an assassination scenario. The most senior Iranian official to respond so far is Ahmad Vaihidi, Iran’s Minister of Interior with a long past in the IRGC (he was Suleimani’s predecessor as head of the militia’s external operations wing). Promising a “crushing response”, Mr Vahidi made no mention of the forces behind the attack and said the investigations were ongoing. A similar statement was issued by the head of the judiciary.

Based on the available evidence so far, given the target and the methods used, ISIS, especially its much-feared regional branch in Afghanistan, known as ISKP, are likely culprits behind the attack. Several experts, on both ISIS and Iran, that I’ve spoken to agree on this point, although, at the moment, this is mostly educated speculation.

ISIS has conducted several attacks on Iranian territory before, notably on a holy shrine in Shiraz in 2022 and 2023. According to former BBC correspondent Mehrdad Farahmand, one of the Kerman bombs targeted a museum that used to be a Zoroastrian fire temple, an ancient Iranian faith notoriously hated by ISIS as it is a symbol of pre-Islamic Iran. Still, at the time of writing, ISIS is yet to take responsibility for the attacks, as it usually does. Other domestic or foreign militias could have also committed the attack as Suleimani had no shortage of enemies near or far.

MORE FROM ARASH AZIZI

Iran's interference in the Arab world does nothing to help Palestinians

What's the future of the Iranian regime? Here are three scenarios

Still, whoever committed the Kerman attacks, the ongoing war of Israel on Gaza, which has led to more than 22,000 Palestinian civilian deaths, is part of the broader regional context. Iran and Israel have been locked in a shadow war for years as Tehran is the main military sponsor of Hamas, which initiated the recent round of the conflict by its terror attacks on Israeli civilians on October 7. In the past few months, Israel has been in conflict with several IRGC-backed forces outside Palestine: Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen and the Syrian government, whose territory is the site of extensive IRGC operations and has been the target of several Israeli attacks.

With things already unstable before January 3, the year 2024 is now dawning to an ever more tense situation in the Middle East. It is incumbent upon state leaderships in the region to work hard to avoid a broader conflagration – just as was done in 2020.

Published: January 03, 2024

IRAN

Arash Azizi  is a writer and scholar, and the author of the book 'The Shadow Commander: Soleimani, the US and Iran’s Global Ambitions'

How Vietnam turned US-China competition to its advantage

Thanks to its deft diplomatic manoeuvres, Hanoi has found itself in a strategic sweet spot

RICHARD
HEYDARIAN

A vendor stands by his decorations shop in Hanoi in December. Vietnam's economy grew by more than 5 per cent in 2023. AFP

The once-impoverished and war-stricken nation of Vietnam has emerged as a global pivot state, with 2023 being the year in which major investors and superpowers paid more attention to it than ever before.

Vietnam’s diplomatic success has been nothing short of breath-taking. Within a span of few months, it became the only country to serve as a state-visit destination for both US President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping. While Mr Biden oversaw the elevation of bilateral ties to a “comprehensive strategic partnership”, Mr Xi ushered in a “golden era” of bilateral relations with his communist brethren to the south.

Just as crucial, however, is the South-East Asian nation’s fruitful wooing of global investors, including Big Tech companies from the West and China. Flushed with increasingly sophisticated investments from overseas, it is gradually building up its own industrial base. Its homegrown electric car dynamo, VinFast, has launched its first dealership in the US, the world’s most competitive automobile market, months after a successful New York Stock Exchange debut.

In August, the barely half-a-decade-old VinFast was the world’s third-most valuable automobile company, beating blue-chip German and Japanese manufacturers. As if that weren’t enough, Vietnam is also intent on building its own semiconductor industry, thus joining the global “Chip War” with gusto. By adopting an adept “bamboo diplomacy”, Vietnam has managed to benefit from both western and Chinese investments.

Crucially, economic boom also allows this non-aligned nation to modernise its armed forces and, accordingly, develop robust deterrence against external aggression. The leadership’s goal is to turn the country into a modern and self-reliant power in the Indo-Pacific.

Historically, few nations have had as turbulent a history as Vietnam. Throughout the past millennia alone, it has had to grapple with several invading empires, including Mongolians, the Chinese and the French.

Chinese President Xi Jinping and Vietnam's Communist Party General Secretary, Nguyen Phu Trong, attend a ceremony in Hanoi with their wives last month. AFP

Vietnam’s fruitful wooing of global investors, including Big Tech companies from the West and China, is crucial

In its struggle for survival, it was forced to develop a unique set of state institutions that have few parallels in the region. Practically all major South-East Asian kingdoms relied on a “Mandala” system of governance, namely a central authority exercising power through spheres of influence rather than direct control across a vast geographic expanse.

In Vietnam’s northern regions, however, increasingly sophisticated state institutions began to emerge, thus laying down the foundation for the conquest of southern polities, most notably the Indic Champa kingdom half-a-millennia ago.

Contemporary Vietnam often defines itself in opposition to its much larger neighbour, China. The cliche is that it fought an anti-colonial war against the Chinese for “a thousand years”. But as scholars such as Christopher Goscha have argued, Vietnam wouldn’t become a relatively monolithic and coherent nation-state until more recent times. If anything, various kingdoms in northern Vietnam lived, as eminent historian Keith Weller Taylor explains, in peaceful co-existence with China and were even “dependent upon a successful practice of mimicry” of it.

In fact, Vietnam relied on comprehensive Chinese strategic patronage – first under Kuomintang nationalists and later under Maoist forces – throughout the first half of the 20th century in order to drive away western empires from Indochina. And it was Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping’s market reforms that largely inspired Vietnam’s own post-Cold War “Doi Moi” (Renovation) economic liberalisation policies.

Vietnam’s contemporary strategic outlook, however, was shaped by traumatic events during the second half of the 20th century. At the height of the Cold War, and following a string of victories, it suddenly found itself facing both the West and China almost alone. By the 1980s, its Soviet ally was bogged down in Afghanistan, thus leaving Vietnam in a precarious position.

Following the end of the Indochina Wars, Vietnam had its “Never Again” strategic moment. Accordingly, it adopted a fiercely self-reliant national security doctrine that included “Four Nos”: no alliance with any foreign power; not siding with any superpower against the other; no foreign military bases; and no reliance on military force as a primary instrument of foreign policy.

Its pragmatic post-war leaders prioritised reconstruction and economic development and after decades of reforms, a new generation of relatively liberal leaders went so far as pursuing warmer ties with the West, including the US. The upshot was the full normalisation of bilateral ties with America and the gradual emergence of strategic partnerships with major western economies.

Decades after the Vietnam War, the South-East Asian nation is today an attractive destination for overseas investors. Getty Images

It also adopted a proactive trade policy, signing agreements with the US and the EU, and joining the Japan-led Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. This went hand-in-hand with closer security co-operation with the US and the EU.

By building robust ties with the West, Vietnam sought to balance a rising China. When a trade war broke out between the world’s two superpowers, however, it emerged as an unlikely beneficiary. The West began relying more on Vietnamese exports amid its decoupling plans from China. Yet Vietnam also began to become more dependent on Chinese intermediate goods, capital and technology for its burgeoning manufacturing base.

The upshot was the emergence of a global pivot state that triggered a wave of courtship by both Washington, which seeks to enlist Vietnam’s support to hem in China, as well as Beijing, which seeks stable ties. By hosting Mr Biden and Mr Xi in quick succession, Hanoi showed a willingness to maximise ties with both superpowers, but it also signalled a determination to preserve its strategic autonomy.

Its communist leadership is intent on keeping a healthy distance from Washington, lest it risks western-backed colour revolutions at home or provoke Beijing. Economic boom in the past decade has birthed an increasingly large and cosmopolitan middle class. As a result, its security establishment is intent on preventing large-scale pro-democracy protests. No wonder, then, that during Mr Biden’s September visit to Hanoi, Vietnamese leaders enthusiastically welcomed expanded economic co-operation but largely shunned tighter military and political entanglements.

Just two months later, Vietnam hosted top Chinese leaders in order to dispel any suspicion of an alignment with the West. During Mr Xi’s visit, the two countries signed a series of co-operative agreements to maintain economic ties. Crucially, however, Vietnam made it clear it won’t sacrifice its territorial and maritime claims in the South China Sea, where it is at loggerheads with Beijing.

Thanks to its deft diplomatic manoeuvres, Vietnam has found itself in a strategic sweet spot. Large-scale investments from both the West and China are fuelling its rapid economic development. These allow it to not only enhance the welfare of its citizens, thus boosting the communist party’s legitimacy, but also provide significant resources for military modernisation.

Without a doubt, the new year will be filled with many geopolitical challenges, especially growing tensions between the US and China. But if there is one middle-sized country in East Asia that has shown an ability to hold its own in the face of manifold geopolitical challenges, that’s Vietnam.

Published: January 04, 2024,

Richard Javad Heydarian is a Manila-based academic, columnist and author

UK

PRIVATIZED WATER SERVICES

Thames Valley rivers used as overflow for sewage

3rd January 2024
By Bethan Nimmo

BBC

Oxfordshire Political Reporter

Thames Water said many of their sewage treatment works have been impacted by Storm Henk

Sewage has been discharged into rivers at nearly 270 sites across the Thames in one week, data from a water firm has revealed.

Figures from Thames Water show some overflows have been pumping untreated, raw, sewage into its waterways for more than 100 hours.

A spokesperson for the water company said many of their sewage treatment works have been impacted by Storm Henk.

An expert said he is "shocked" the rivers have been used like a sewer.

Thames Water uses the rivers as an overflow for when its sewer systems are overwhelmed by rainfall.

Dr Alex Lipp, an environmental scientist at the University of Oxford, created a website to show where the sewage is being pumped in and where it ends up.

He has been tracking the data released by Thames Water and believes it's been one of the worst weeks for sewage spills in the region.

He said there had been 229 sewage overflows discharging simultaneously on Tuesday, which has only been beaten once in November 2023.

 

The water firm said it regards all sewage discharges as "unacceptable" after figures showed almost 270 sites had been impacted in one week

Dr Lipp said it's "upsetting" to see this issue happening and raised concerns about the impact on wildlife.

He explained that alongside the "normal" contents of the toilet, the sewage going into the rivers also contains pesticides, pharmaceuticals and illegal drugs.

"They form a chemical cocktail in waterways. Actually, because a lot of these chemicals are relatively novel, we don't really know the impact these have, especially when mixed together, on aquatic organisms," he explained.

"It is just frankly shocking that in the 21st Century we are just discharging raw sewage, it is upsetting."

'Unacceptable'

Thames Water has been providing real-time monitoring on sewage overflows across the Thames basin since last year.

A spokesperson for the firm said they regard all discharges as "unacceptable" and plans were in place to upgrade 250 of its sewage treatment works and sewers.

They added: "Taking action to improve the health of rivers is a key focus for us and we want to lead the way with our transparent approach to data."

Thames Water is believed to be the first company to provide live alerts for all untreated discharges throughout its region, the spokesperson continued.

They explained: "This 'near real-time' data is available to customers as a map on our website and is also available through an open data platform for third parties, such as swimming and environmental groups to use."

Water company criticised over waterways pollution

Top UK CEOs will make more in the first 4 days of 2024 than the average worker makes in a year, analysis shows

Sawdah Bhaimiya
Jan 4, 2024, 

BI

The median pay of bosses at the top companies in the UKis 109 times more than the median worker pay.

Malte Mueller/Getty Images


The CEOs of top companies in the UK will earn the median annual salary of a full-time worker in just three days.

That's according to analysis of CEO pay and average pay in the UK by the High Pay Centre.
These CEOs take home a median pay of £3.81 million ($4.8 million), per the report.

The bosses of top companies in the UK will have earned more money by 1 p.m. on Thursday 4 January than the average worker makes in a year, a new analysis by the think tank High Pay Centre found.

The research, published on Thursday, analyzed the most recent CEO pay data published in the company's annual reports and combined them with government statistics that show pay levels across the UK.

It found that the wages of CEOs of FTSE 100 companies — an index of the top 100 companies listed on the London Stock Exchange by market cap — will overtake the pay of the average UK worker in just three and a half days, highlighting a disproportionate wealth gap.

Per the report, FTSE 100 CEOs have a median annual pay of £3.81 million ($4.8 million), which is 109 times the median full-time workers' pay of £34,963 ($44,000).

Meanwhile, a partner at one of the UK's most prestigious law firms with an average annual pay of £1.92 million ($2.42 million) would need to work until January 8 to outstrip the pay of the average worker in the UK.

And top bankers – with an average pay of £800,000 ($1.1 million) – would need to work until January 16 to do the same, the report said.

The pay gap isn't much better in the US with CEOs at 500 major firms making 272 times more than employees in 2022, with an average compensation of $16.7 million, according to the AFL-CIO.

Bosses at Britain's biggest companies will have earned more in 2024 than the typical worker will make this year by 1pm TODAY

Some earn much more and will have even bigger pay gaps with workers

By MARK SHAPLAND EXECUTIVE CITY EDITOR
DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 3 January 2024

Bosses at Britain's biggest companies will have earned more by lunchtime today than the typical worker will over the whole of 2024.

Statistics reveal that a typical FTSE 100 chief executive now takes home £3.81million, over 109 times more than the average salary of £34,963.

By 1pm today – dubbed 'Fat Cat Thursday' – some executives will have taken just two-and-a-half working days into January to outstrip the yearly salary of many staff, said the High Pay Centre think-tank.


But some earn much more and will have even bigger pay gaps with workers. The 1pm mark is one hour earlier than when the median worker's annual pay was estimated to have been passed last year.

Among the biggest FTSE, or Footsie, earners last year was Albert Manifold, chief executive of construction group and Tarmac-owner CRH.

Bosses at Britain's biggest companies will have earned more by lunchtime today than the typical worker will over the whole of 2024 (file image)

He was paid £10.4million, 259 times more than his average worker, giving CRH the largest pay gulf of any blue-chip company.

Pascal Soriot, of pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca, was the highest-earning FTSE 100 chief with £15.3million while Charles Woodburn, chief executive of defence giant BAE Systems, earned £10.7million. Tory MP Bob Blackman asked: 'Can they justify these huge salaries? Are their talents so rare? I struggle to answer that. They are paid far outside what the average individual earns.'

Astonishingly, the figures follow calls from business groups for executives to be paid even more for the UK to compete as a global financial centre.

They included Julia Hoggett, head of the London Stock Exchange, who spoke of a 'lack of a level playing field' between Britain and other countries, notably the US.

Luke Hildyard, High Pay Centre director, said: 'Lobbyists spent much of 2023 arguing that we are too concerned with gaps between the super-rich and everybody else. They think that economic success is created by a tiny number of people at the top and that everybody else has very little to contribute.


Statistics reveal that a typical FTSE 100 chief executive now takes home £3.81million, over 109 times more than the average salary of £34,963 (file image)

'When politicians listen to these misguided views, it's unsurprising that we end up with massive inequality, and stagnating living standards for the majority of the population.'

The figures also showed that chief executives of FTSE 250 companies will need to work until January 10 for their average pay of £1.32million to overtake the annual salary of the typical UK worker.

A partner at one of the 'magic circle' of elite law firms, who earn on average £1.92million, would reach this level by January 8.

A partner at a 'Big Four' accountancy firm, average pay £871,000, would reach the milestone on January 16 as would a banker at one of the FTSE 100 banks.

Those in the top 1 per cent of UK earners, making at least £145,000, will have overtaken the annual pay of the median worker by March 29.

WAGE THEFT

An upmarket California restaurant took thousands of dollars in tips from staff to fund business expenses, a federal lawsuit claims

Story by gdean@businessinsider.com (Grace Dean) •
Mikael Vaisanen/Getty Images© Mikael Vaisanen/Getty Images

• A California restaurant "misappropriated" thousands of dollars in tips to fund business expenses, the DOL claims.
• The restaurant deposited tips into its business account and gave a portion to staff each week, the DOL claims.
• The DOL accused it of violating the Fair Labor Standards Act. It's seeking $500,000 for staff.

A French restaurant in Pasadena, California took thousands of dollars in tips from servers, runners, and bartenders and "misappropriated" them to fund business expenses, the Department of Labor has claimed in a lawsuit.

The DOL filed a lawsuit against 2 Poto, the operators of Entre Nous French Bistro, saying the company violated the Fair Labor Standards Act. It's seeking $500,000 for affected staff.

The lawsuit, filed in US District Court for the Central District of California on December 28, says that owners Jean-Christophe Febbrari and Mathias Wakrat kept a portion of employees' tips to use for business expenses. The upmarket restaurant, which has a $50 minimum spend per diner, deposited both cash and card tips into its business account and distributed only a portion to staff via a weekly wire transfer, the DOL claims.

For example, in the week from December 21, 2021, customers left about $12,500 in credit card tips, but the restaurant gave less than $7,600 of this to staff, the lawsuit claims.

Employers are not allowed to keep staff tips "under any circumstances," the FLSA stipulates. If a restaurant operates an illegal tip pool, for example by sharing tips with owners and managers, it invalidates its claims to a tip credit, which can sometimes push workers' wages under the minimum wage, as the DOL has said during previous investigations into tip violations.

The DOL says in the lawsuit that amid its investigation, Entre Nous introduced a no-tip policy in May 2023, instead collecting a 20% service charge. But some customers still leave cash tips, which the restaurant keeps, the DOL claims.

Entre Nous says on its menu that the fee "is not a gratuity or tip." It variously lists the fee as 20% and 18%.

"The fee is revenue that is not segmented or designated in any way; it is taxed per state law and is used to fund all of our operations," it notes.

The DOL also claims that its investigation into Entre Nous found that the restaurant misclassified several employees as independent contractors and didn't keep accurate pay records, including failing to record all tips staff received and record all hours they worked.

These practices violate the FLSA, the DOL claims. Though the lawsuit doesn't name a dollar amount, the DOL said in a press release that it was seeking $250,000 in back wages and an equal amount in liquidated damages for 18 employees.

Entre Nous has an 4.6-star rating on Google and 4.5-star on Yelp. Entrees at the restaurant start at $29.

Business Insider has contacted Entre Nous for comment, but did not immediately receive a response, outside regular business hours.

Stakes high as South Africa brings claim of genocidal intent against Israel

Story by Patrick Wintour 

Diplomatic editor • The Guardian

Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP© Photograph: Abir Sultan/AP

South Africa’s request for an interim measure by the international court of justice to prevent Israel from committing acts of potential genocide – primarily by calling for a halt to combat operations – has suddenly taken on an urgency and relevance that seemed implausible a fortnight ago.

Crack legal teams are being assembled, countries are issuing statements in support of South Africa, and Israel has said it will defend itself in court, reversing a decades-old policy of boycotting the UN’s top court and its 15 elected judges.

The first hearing in The Hague is set for 11 and 12 January. If precedent is any guide, it is possible the ICJ will issue a provisional ruling within weeks, and certainly while the Israeli attacks on Gaza are likely to be still under way.

The wheels of global justice – at least interim justice – do not always grind slowly.

South Africa’s request for a provisional ruling is in line with a broader trend at the ICJ for such rulings. Parties have been seeking – and obtaining – provisional measures with increasing frequency: in the last decade the court has indicated provisional measures in 11 cases, compared with 10 in the first 50 years of the court’s existence (1945-1995).

Related video: South Africa sues Israel at ICJ for its 'genocide' actions in Gaza, alleges breach of UN Convention (India Today)

Like interim injunctions issued by national courts, ICJ provisional measures seek to freeze the legal situation between parties to ensure the integrity of a future final judgment. For a while doubt persisted as to whether these measures were deemed binding by the ICJ. But the court put those doubts to rest in the LaGrand judgment in June 2001, where it held that the rulings were binding, given the court’s “basic function of judicial settlement of international disputes”.

They are intended to be binding, but are they in practice?

One assessment prepared by a US lawyer, Mattei Alexianu, suggested that the court’s measures were complied with by the state parties in only 50% of cases, while in some – normally the most high-profile recent cases, including Ukraine v Russia in 2022, the Gambia’s claims of genocide against Myanmar in 2020, Nagorno-Karabakh, and US sanctions on Iran – the losing state party simply defied the court.

Not surprisingly, the more intrusive an adverse ruling to a country’s sense of national sovereignty, the less likely they were to comply.

But putting aside whether Israel would comply with any ICJ order to change its military tactics and desist from any act ruled as genocide, the reputational damage to Israel of such a ruling would be substantial, and at minimum may produce a modification of its military campaign. The very fact that Israel has chosen to defend itself at the ICJ – a UN sponsored body – and is a signatory to the genocide convention makes it harder for it to brush aside an adverse finding.

It is a high-risk move by Israel. What are the chances of an adverse finding being made?

First, it should be said that although the South African claim to the ICJ seemed to come out of the blue on 29 December, it is not something its lawyers cobbled together while wrapping up Christmas presents.

It is a substantive, tightly argued 80-page claim, replete with detailed references to senior UN officials and reports, which only rarely strays from its chief necessary purpose of seeking to prove Israel’s genocidal intent. The lawyers South Africa is sending to The Hague are its best. Much of South Africa’s argument is derived from the ICJ judgment on provisional measures it issued in the Gambia v Myanmar case in 2020.

According to the application, “acts and omissions by Israel … are genocidal in character, as they are committed with the requisite specific intent … to destroy Palestinians in Gaza as a part of the broader Palestinian national, racial and ethnical group” and that “the conduct of Israel – through its state organs, state agents, and other persons and entities acting on its instructions or under its direction, control or influence – in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, is in violation of its obligations under the genocide convention”.

By seeking provisional relief under article 74 of the court, as opposed to a definitive ruling, South Africa can lower the threshold of what it is required to prove before the court provides interim relief, and possibly minimise some of the prime facie jurisdictional issues facing the court.

Indeed, South Africa argues “the court is not required to ascertain whether any violation of Israel’s obligations under the genocide convention has occurred.

“Importantly, as previously held by the court, ‘such a finding, which would notably depend on the assessment of the existence of an intent to destroy, in whole or in part, the group … [of Palestinians] as such, could be made by the court only at the stage of the examination of the merits of the present case.’

“Instead, ‘what the court is required to do at the stage of making an order on provisional measures is to establish whether the acts complained of … are capable of falling within the provisions of the genocide convention’.

“The court does not have to determine that all of the acts complained of are capable of falling within the provisions of the convention.” It suffices that “at least some of the acts alleged … are capable of falling within the provisions of the convention”.

Equally, the court does not need to ascertain whether the existence of a genocidal intent is the only inference to be drawn from the material before the court, as “this requirement would amount to the court making a determination on the merits”.

South Africa seeks to prove that the measures Israel has taken go beyond self-defence and into the destruction of the Palestinians.

The claim details the familiar, if shocking, death toll, forced displacement, deprivation of food, and the restrictions on births, through attacks on hospitals, saying they are sufficient evidence to infer plausible genocidal intent.

The claim adds two other elements – the degree to which the Palestinian cultural life has been targeted, and the degree to which Israeli officials without reproach have repeatedly advocated for the destruction not just of Hamas but of Palestinians.

South Africa details numerous examples of “direct and public incitement to commit genocide by Israeli state officials”, including by the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. The threats to make Gaza permanently uninhabitable, the references to Palestinians as human animals, are all documented in the claim. The calls by the far-right ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir to resettle Palestinians outside Gaza are also cited.

Inside Israel itself, former officials have written to the attorney general, Gali Baharav-Miara, asking that action be taken against public officials and elected politicians who have called for ethnic cleansing. The signatories on this letter include the former ambassador Dr Alon Liel, Prof Eli Barnavi, Ilan Baruch and Suzie Bachar.

“The explicit calls to commit atrocities against millions of people have become, for the first time that we can recall, a legitimate and ordinary part of the Israeli dialogue,” they state.

It is this kind of evidence, perhaps born of a new Israeli pessimism about the possibility of peace, that may sway judges to assess that Israel believes its security is dependent on the removal of Palestinians from Gaza. But there have been many statements by Israeli officials countering that view, which the court will have to balance. The reluctance of the Netanyahu government, partly for internal political reasons, to discuss its plans for the “day after” at minimum complicates the court’s task to discern Israel’s collective intention.

In a rhetorical tour de force, Israel’s spokesperson Eylon Levy previewed Israel’s response on Tuesday, focusing on its right to self-defence and the innovative measures taken to reduce civilian casualties.

But he started by questioning whether South Africa had a genuine dispute with Israel and challenging the country’s bona fides as an opponent of genocide given its support in Darfur for the former Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir. It was South Africa that was acting as the pro-bono advocate of a genocidal rapist Hamas machine, he said.

South Africa has sought to protect itself from this line of attack by criticising Hamas for the massacre on 7 October and by sending a formal note to Israel in advance of the claim, to which it says Israel did not reply. It says both countries are signatories to the 1948 genocide convention, which stipulates that they accept the ICJ jurisdiction with respect to adherence to that convention.

Levy said that Israel had taken measure unprecedented in the history of warfare to minimise civilian casualties.

“We have been clear in word and in deed that we are targeting the 7 October monsters and are innovating ways to uphold international law, including the principles of proportionality, precaution and distinction in the context in a counter-terror battlefield no army has faced before.

“That is why we spent weeks urging residents in northern Gaza to evacuate before the ground offensive. To warn civilians we placed over 70,000 phone calls, sent 13m text messages, left 14m voice messages and dropped nearly 7m leaflets urging civilians to evacuate temporarily for their safety, informing them about humanitarian pauses and precise evacuation routes.

“That is why we secured humanitarian corridors for civilians to escape Hamas, set up helplines for Palestinian civilians to tell our army if Hamas was stopping them fleeing, and that is why we designated a humanitarian zone in one of the only places in Gaza where Hamas was already hiding behind civilians.

“The Hamas rapist machine bears full moral responsibility for all the casualties in this war that it launched on 7 October and is waging inside and under schools, mosques, homes and UN facilities.”

South Africa can argue these precautionary steps have been performative at best, and knowingly ineffective at worst. But the limited reference to Hamas fighters embedding themselves in civilian life, or to Israel’s right to self-defence may make it hard for the court to accuse Israel even on a preliminary basis of the crime of crimes.

CEBA loan repayment deadline coming, potentially ‘crippling’ businesses

By Touria Izri Global News
Posted January 3, 2024


WATCH: CFIB talk CEBA loan repayment

Time is the enemy for Vancouver watchmaker Jason Gallop. He’s one of almost a million small business owners who took out a loan from the federal government during the pandemic through the Canada Emergency Business Account (CEBA) program.

The deadline to repay is fast approaching. But for recipients like Gallop the clock has already run out.

“By default, I’m in default,” Gallop told Global News. He owns the watch store Roldorf & Co. in the Gastown neighbourhood. As of December 31, 2023 he is on the hook for $40,000.

The CEBA program offered $50 billion in interest-free loans of up to $60,000 to business owners after the emergence of COVID-19. Recipients who repay most of the loan by Jan. 18 can be forgiven for up to $20,000. After the deadline, the loan will start incurring five per cent interest.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW ADVERTISEMENT


Gallop is among around 50,000 business owners the federal government said should never have received the loan in the first place.

Those who were deemed “ineligible” had to pay it back by this past New Year’s Eve, but none of their debt would be forgiven. Gallop said in his case it all came down to a “clerical error” caught too late.

“I put in one digit incorrectly for our business number,” he said.

He only found out about the issue a year after first receiving the loan, when he tried to apply for more CEBA funds and was denied.

“I was completely blindsided.”

The watchmaker faced another setback last April when a devastating fire ripped through his store.

“I was just trying to get the business restarted, trying to start up the insurance claim,” said Gallop. “It was a very chaotic time.”

Why some warn the deadline could backfire

The Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) is asking Ottawa to give all CEBA recipients (eligible or ineligible) a further one-year extension.

“It’s gotten worse for most businesses rather than better,” said CFIB president Dan Kelly.

The CFIB said only a third of the 850,000 eligible businesses that received CEBA have repaid their loans.

If they secure refinancing, businesses have until March 28 to have part of the debt forgiven. But Kelly warns that’s not enough time.

“These businesses, I believe, are going to start to tumble in the months ahead and are likely to default on the entire CEBA loan amount.”

2:04 Calls to extend CEBA repayments again

A representative from the office of Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said Ottawa has already given multiple extensions.

“The CEBA programme provided an emergency lifeline to many Canadian small businesses,” said Freeland’s press secretary Katherine Cuplinskas in a statement on Tuesday. “In 2021, the federal government established a process in which small business owners with incomplete or ineligible CEBA applications were contacted multiple times by their financial institutions.”

Restaurants say they can’t catch a break

The restaurant industry is also pleading for an extension, saying it was banking on an economic recovery that hasn’t come.

Restaurants Canada says heavy debt, stubborn inflation, a labour shortage and slower traffic, are leaving its members with few options.

“The piece that we are most concerned about is that operators are losing the forgivable portion of that loan that they had really counted on when they took out this loan, not knowing that there was going to be four years of volatility,” said Restaurants Canada president Kelly Higginson.

According to Higginson, the summer patio season and holiday period were slower than usual because of bad weather and changing consumer habits. With less disposable income, she said Canadians are eating out less.

“We really are disproportionately impacted.”

According to Restaurants Canada, more than half of its members are operating at a loss or barely breaking even. “Pre-pandemic that number was ten per cent,” she added.

“We also had the longest lockdowns in North America,” said Higginson. “We are seeing a lot of closures.”

–With files from Abigail Bimman

AYN RANDITE

Chip Wilson slams Lululemon’s diversity efforts: ‘You don’t want certain customers’

By Michelle Butterfield 

 Global News
Posted January 4, 2024 

 Lululemon Athletica Inc. founder Chip Wilson arrives for the company's annual general meeting in Vancouver, B.C., Wednesday, June, 11, 2014.

 Jonathan Hayward / The Canadian Press

Lululemon is (again) distancing itself from billionaire founder and former executive Chip Wilson after he made controversial comments about the brand’s inclusion efforts.


“(This) whole diversity and inclusion thing that they have become — trying to become like the Gap, everything to everybody…you’ve got to be clear that you don’t want certain customers coming in,” Wilson, 68, told Forbes in a wide-ranging profile published this week, adding that the athletic-wear giant is using “unhealthy,” “sickly” and “not inspirational” people in their marketing and advertising.

Lululemon founder Chip Wilson is courting controversy with recent comments he made to Forbes. Wilson attends an announcement, in Vancouver, B.C., Thursday, Sept. 15, 2022. Darryl Dyck / The Canadian Press

A decade ago, in 2013, Wilson came under fire after making comments that the brand’s pants “do not work” for some women’s bodies, responding to criticism at the time that the company’s most popular product, leggings, were see-through.

“The thing is women will wear seat belts that do not work, or they will wear a purse that does not work,” said Wilson at the time. “Or quite frankly, some women’s bodies actually do not work for (the pants).”

Critics accused Wilson of shaming women’s bodies and gathered thousands of supporters through an online petition.

Two days later, Wilson apologized in a video posted online, in which he said he was “sad for the repercussions of my actions. I’m sad for the people of Lululemon who I care so much about that have really had to face the brunt of my actions. I take responsibility for all that has occurred.”




Lululemon limits founder Chip Wilson’s influence on company

BIV: Lululemon makes a splash

It wasn’t long, however, until he came under fire again, for anti-Asian comments that surfaced in a 2004 interview.

He told the National Post Business Magazine that while coming up with the company’s name in 1998, he specifically chose a name that has three Ls because the sound doesn’t exist in Japanese phonetics.

“It’s funny to watch them try and say it,” he said.

The comments, among others, eventually lead to Wilson being ousted as an executive. He left the company in 2015. Today, he holds an eight-per-cent stake in the brand.

0:39Lululemon founder Chip Wilson steps down

Lululemon made strides in 2020 to include expanded sizing, and now includes up to women’s size 20 and men’s size 46 on some of their items.

“Chip Wilson does not speak for Lululemon, and his comments do not reflect our company views or beliefs,” a company spokesperson told Bloomberg in a statement this week, following Wilson’s controversial interview. “Chip has not been involved with the company since his resignation from the board in 2015 and we are a very different company today.”
STORY CONTINUES BELOW ADVERTISEMENT


The company said it added a chief diversity and inclusion officer in 2020 and has programs that include racial representation goals for its staff, as well as an executive steering committee.

Joanna Schwartz, a marketing professor at Georgia College & State University, told Newsweek that Wilson’s comments are “an almost definitional expression of coded language.”

“He clearly sees Lululemon as a brand where a large percentage of the population isn’t welcome,” Schwartz added. “In light of that kind of opposition, it’s really impressive that the brand has pushed against that to include a greater racial and ethnic diversity, and by addressing the brand’s formerly long-standing sizeism, which includes a focus almost exclusively on women’s sizes 00-10.”

Iranian regime official wants press banned from Canadian deportation hearing

By Stewart Bell 

 Global News
Posted January 3, 2024 

Canada's IRB is holding hearings that could result in the deportation of Seyed Salman Samani, who had been a senior member of Iran's repressive regime. Jeff Semple reports. – Dec 6, 2023

Before arriving in Canada, Seyed Salman Samani was a frontman for Iran’s government.

He can be seen in photos standing in front of a row of microphones, speaking for the interior ministry.

But now that he is in Canada, he wants privacy.

Samani, Iran’s former deputy minister of interior, appeared before the Immigration and Refugee Board for the first time on Wednesday.

The IRB is holding hearings that could result in his deportation for being a senior member of Iran’s repressive regime.

The Refugee Board ruled on Dec. 18 that the case would be heard in public, but Samani’s lawyer said he was appealing that decision.

Seyed Salman Samani, when he was spokesperson for Iran’s ministry of interior.

In a letter to the IRB on Saturday, Robert Israel Blanshay asked the Board to postpone Samani’s case while he appealed to the Federal Court.

“His concerns over his privacy, name, particular circumstances, etc…are entirely reasonable, rational and plausible,” the lawyer wrote.

“His is a high-profile, public case, more than likely garnering much attention across Canada, and internationally.”

But the IRB decided to carry on regardless. The case was scheduled to begin on Feb. 8.

IRB Member Kirk Dickenson said the Canada Border Services Agency had alleged in a March 16, 2023, report that Samani was inadmissible to Canada.

In particular, the CBSA is alleging that Samani was a senior official in the services of a government engaged in gross human rights violations, Dickenson said.
Get the latest Edmonton news. Sent to your email, every day.

A “senior official” includes cabinet ministers, advisors and senior members of the public service, he added.

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, right, meeting Hamas leaders Ismail Haniyeh, centre, and his deputy Saleh Arouri in Tehran, Iran, on June 21, 2023. 

(Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader via AP, File).

Samani said little during the hearing, which was conducted with the help of a Farsi interpretor. He sat in front of a window with a view of a bare winter tree.

He is believed to be the first senior member of the Iranian regime to face removal from Canada under sanctions adopted by the government last year.

The sanctions were imposed after Iran’s morality police detained and killed Mahsa Amini for showing her hair in public.

Canada responded by designating Iran’s government a regime engaged in “terrorism and systematic and gross human rights violations.”

The policy effectively barred tens of thousands of Iranian officials and Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp members from Canada.

The Freedom Rally for Iran, in support of Mahsa Amini, continues into the evening at Mel Lastman Square in Toronto on Oct. 1, 2022.

 THE CANADIAN PRESS IMAGES/Dominic Chan.

Samani was interviewed by the CBSA in December 2022, according to his lawyer’s letter to the IRB.

On Nov. 10, the CBSA sent his case to the IRB for an inadmissibility hearing that could result in his deportation for being a senior regime member.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW ADVERTISEMENT


As deputy minister of the interior for parliament affairs and provincial coordination and spokesperson for the Ministry of the Interior, Samani was a senior official in the government department that oversees Iran’s domestic security and police agencies, which have been implicated in widespread human rights abuses.

A second senior Iranian government official, Iranmanesh Majid, is also facing possible deportation from Canada. His case was scheduled to begin on Jan. 17, 2024.




Blanshay argued that while Samani had not previously sought to hold his proceedings behind closed doors, it was “never too late” to do so.

“The fact that S.S.S. did not pursue private proceedings in [the] past in no way weakens his current desire and request for privacy,” Blanshay wrote.

The letter alleged the Iranian regime targeted regime opponents, and that Samani was “surely defined as a person opposed to the regime.”

The Canadian government has argued that Samani was not in any danger, and fears he would be targeted in Canada were “speculative,” the letter said.

As part of his argument for holding the hearings in private, Blanshay argued that Global News intended to report on the case.

The CBSA said it was investigating 141 other cases under the Iran sanctions enacted last year. Thirty-eight have been closed without action.

Ten individuals were deemed inadmissible to Canada for being senior regime officials. Nine of those were to be referred to the IRB for hearings.

The CBSA said two cases had been sent to the IRB so far, while a third was withdrawn because the individual left Canada of their own accord.

Paperwork on the remaining cases was still being prepared before it they will be sent the IRB, the immigration enforcement agency said.

Stewart.Bell@globalnews.ca