Tunisian lawyers call for strike over colleague’s arrest for sarcastic TV quip

A Tunisian lawyers association on Sunday called for a nationwide strike after hooded police raided Tunisia’s bar association headquarters and arrested a prominent lawyer as authorities escalated a broad government crackdown that has ensnared political dissidents, non-governmental organizations and Black migrants.


Issued on: 12/05/2024 

A demonstrator at a protest demanding the release of imprisoned lawyers, journalists, activists and opposition figures in Tunis, Tunisia, May 12, 2024.

 © Jihed Abidellaoui, Reuters

By: FRANCE 24

Sonia Dahmani, a prominent critic of the government, was arrested Saturday night after making sarcastic remarks about Tunisia on a local television programme last week and charged with distributing false information and disrupting public order.

She was the latest dissident to be charged under the country’s controversial Decree 54, an anti-fake news law that the government has used to pursue critics of President Kais Saied.

The Tunisian Lawyers Council on Sunday called for a nationwide general strike to be held by all lawyers.

Dahmani’s advocates had gathered at the bar association Saturday to protest a warrant for her arrest when police stormed the building.

FRANCE 24's French language reporter was live on air from Tunis when hooded police officials arrived at the bar association to arrest Dahmani.

Masked police forced FRANCE 24 to stop broadcasting after tearing "the camera from its tripod" and briefly detaining the cameraman.

FRANCE 24 has condemned the "brutal intervention by security forces that prevented journalists from practising their profession as they were covering a lawyers' protest for justice and in support of freedom of expression".

'What extraordinary country are we talking about?'

The incident was the latest in a series of arrests and investigations targeting activists, journalists and civil society groups critical of Saied and the government.

The move reinforces opponents' fears of an increasingly authoritarian government ahead of presidential elections expected later this year.

Dahmani was arrested after she said, on a TV show last week, that Tunisia is a country where life is not pleasant.

During a show on the Carthage Plus TV channel, Dahmani responded to another panelist's claim that sub-Saharan migrants were seeking to settle in Tunisia.

"What extraordinary country are we talking about?" she asked sarcastically.

She was commenting on a speech by Saied, who said there was a conspiracy to push thousands of undocumented migrants from Sub-Saharan countries to stay in Tunisia.
'Attack on the Tunisian legal profession'

The bar association has long carried “symbolic power” in Tunisia, so much so that authorities didn’t enter its doors under its pre-Arab Spring dictator, Fadoua Braham, a Tunisian lawyer, told The Associated Press.

“Today we are seeing hooded individuals using force and taking away a lawyer by force because of, quite simply, a matter of opinion,” she said, noting that those who arrested Dahmani were not clearly identifiable as law enforcement officers.

Other civil society organisations expressed concern and said the arrest contributed to an ongoing crackdown on human rights defenders, activists, journalists and opposition leaders.

The Tunisian General Labour Union, the country’s most powerful workers’ group, joined other civil society organizations, activists and lawyers at the bar association headquarters on Sunday.

The group said it “strongly condemns this blatant and unprecedented attack on the Tunisian legal profession and considers it one of the preludes to establishing a state of violations and tyranny, especially since it came after a wave of incitement, promotion of hate speech, division and treason.”

'Fake news' decree

Also on Saturday, broadcaster Borhen Bssais and political commentator Mourad Zeghidi were arrested for making critical comments, lawyer Ghazi Mrabet told AFP.

Mrabet said the judiciary on Sunday placed both under a "48-hour detention warrant and (they) will have to appear before an examining magistrate".

He said Zeghidi was being pursued "for a social media post in which he supported an arrested journalist", Mohamed Boughalleb. He was sentenced to six months in prison for defaming a public official and over "statements made during television shows since February".

Arrest warrants were issued for Bssais and Zeghidi for disseminating "false information... with the aim of defaming others or harming their reputation", Tunis court spokesperson Mohamed Zitouna told AFP.

Mrabet said Bssais was detained under Decree 54, which punishes the production and dissemination of "false news".

The law, signed by Saied in September 2022, has been criticised by journalists and opposition figures who say it has been used to stifle dissent. Since it came into force, more than 60 journalists, lawyers and opposition figures have been prosecuted, according to the National Union of Tunisian Journalists.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP, AP and Reuters)

Three Tunisian pundits arrested over critical remarks: lawyers

Since the 'false news' law came into force, more than 60 journalists, lawyers and opposition figures have been prosecuted

| AFP |

Tunisian lawyers chant slogans during a protest at the bar association headquarters in Tunis. 

Photo: AFP

Tunisian authorities ordered Sunday the arrest of two political commentators over critical comments, a lawyer told AFP, a day after security forces stormed the bar association and took a third pundit into custody.

Sonia Dahmani, also a lawyer, was arrested late Saturday after criticising the state of Tunisia on television, her attorney Dalila Msaddek said in a Facebook post.

Msaddek said there was a "police attack" on the bar association headquarters in Tunis, with "lawyers assaulted and the abduction of colleague Sonia Dahmani to an unknown location".

Also on Saturday, broadcaster Borhen Bssais and political commentator Mourad Zeghidi were arrested for making critical comments, lawyer Ghazi Mrabet told AFP.

Mrabet said the judiciary on Sunday placed both under a "48-hour detention warrant and (they) will have to appear before an examining magistrate".

He said Zeghidi was being pursued "for a social media post in which he supported an arrested journalist", Mohamed Boughalleb. He was sentenced to six months in prison for defaming a public official and over "statements made during television shows since February".

Arrest warrants were issued for Bssais and Zeghidi for disseminating "false information... with the aim of defaming others or harming their reputation", Tunis court spokesperson Mohamed Zitouna told AFP.

Mrabet said Bssais was detained under Decree 54, which punishes the production and dissemination of "false news".

The law, signed by President Kais Saied in September 2022, has been criticised by journalists and opposition figures who say it has been used to stifle dissent.

Since it came into force, more than 60 journalists, lawyers and opposition figures have been prosecuted, according to the National Union of Tunisian Journalists.
'Extraordinary country?'

Dahmani was also arrested under Decree 54, media reported, saying she was detained while seeking safety at the bar association.

The event was filmed live by news channel France 24, which said masked police forced it to stop broadcasting, had "torn the camera from its tripod" and briefly detained the cameraman.

France 24 condemned what it called a "brutal intervention by security forces that prevented journalists from practising their profession as they were covering a lawyers' protest for justice and in support of freedom of expression".

The bar association condemned an "invasion of its headquarters and blatant aggression", demanded Dahmani's immediate release and announced a regional strike starting Monday.

Msaddek said Dahmani had been summoned to court on Friday to explain her remarks but refused to appear. A court then issued a warrant for her to be brought before the investigating judge.

Islam Hamza, another lawyer on Dahmani's defence team, confirmed her arrest to AFP.

Dahmani told journalists before being arrested that she refused to appear "without knowing the reasons for this summons".

On the Carthage Plus television channel on Tuesday, she responded to another pundit's claim that migrants from sub-Saharan African countries were seeking to settle in Tunisia.

"What extraordinary country are we talking about?" she asked sarcastically, triggering angry reactions from some social media users.
'Police state'

Tunisia is a key departure point for thousands of migrants who risk perilous Mediterranean crossings each year hoping for a better life in Europe.

But the situation of sub-Saharan African migrants in Tunisia has worsened, particularly since a Kais speech last year in which he painted "hordes of illegal migrants" as a demographic threat.

On Monday Saadia Mosbah, head of the Mnemty anti-racism association, was detained and investigated over money laundering, media reported.

Her arrest came just hours after Saied lashed out at organisations that defend migrant rights, calling their leaders "traitors and mercenaries".

Tunisian authorities have raided several encampments in recent weeks, tearing down tents and expelling migrants.

Saied was elected president in 2019 but has ruled by decree since he orchestrated a sweeping power grab in July 2021.

A demonstration on Sunday in Tunis, organised by the opposition National Salvation Front (NSF) coalition to demand "free and fair elections" by the end of the year, drew a crowd of some 300 people, AFP correspondents reported.

The protesters chanted "Stop the police state" and "Down, down with Kais Saied", they said.

Veteran politician and NSF co-founder Ahmed Nejib Chebbi condemned what he called a "freedom-killing system".

"All freedoms have been attacked. Today, it is absolute personal power which subjugates all of the instruments of state to stifle rights and freedoms."

Statehood in the Arab Levant Faces a Miserable Fate


Opinion
Hazem Saghieh
Sunday - 12 May 2024


Let us remember what happened in Beirut in 2002 for a moment. Despite over two decades having gone by, recalling this juncture remains useful for understanding the present. Not only has the past not truly passed, it has become more present and painful with time, and its meanings have become more transparent.

That year, during an Arab Summit, Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdulaziz, who would later become king, put forward what came to be known as the "Arab Peace Initiative.” The tragedy of 9/11 in the United States and the Second Intifada in Palestine were propelling a major shift in the "Middle East crisis" and its resolution.

The most prominent dimension of this initiative was its announcement that Arab states were prepared to recognize the State of Israel in exchange for the establishment of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders and Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Golan Heights it had taken from Syria.

Then Israeli Prime Minister of Israel Ariel Sharon prevented Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat from traveling to Lebanon to attend the summit in which his cause would be discussed. For his part, Arafat complied with the decision for fear that if he went to Beirut, the Israelis would prevent him from returning to Ramallah.

In turn, Emile Lahoud, then President of Lebanon, who is known for being a subordinate of Damascus and Tehran, denied Arafat’s request to deliver a speech at the summit via satellite. The pretext for removing the speech from the conference's agenda was scandalous: "fears Israel would interfere and distort the speech."

What happened was even worse: Hamas carried out a terrorist attack in Netanya during the summit, which coincided with the Jewish holiday of Passover, resulting in the deaths of 30 Israeli civilians.

Sharon and his government found in the attack an opportunity to ignore the Beirut summit and avoid engaging with the offer it presented. Sharon’s dismissal of the summit was reinforced by the fact that it refused to address (let alone condemn) the terrorist operation because of pressure from Syria and rejectionist Arabs.

Nothing attests to the collusion of Israel and Iran in undermining Palestinian statehood and the notion of peace in general - albeit from a position of enmity - more compellingly than this incident. Mind you, the war against the Oslo Accords also spoke volumes about this same collusion: the Israeli right assassinated Yitzhak Rabin, and rejectionist Palestinian factions planted explosives among civilians.

In addition, we add nothing novel in mentioning what happened after the Hamas coup and takeover of Gaza in 2007, which left the Israeli right happy and reassured. It was thus impelled to come to the aid of Hamas and to bolster its authority financially, not necessarily out of love for Hamas but out of hatred for the prospect that any kind of Palestinian national structure could take shape.

Both Israel and Iran sought to destroy Palestinian statehood and prevent it from evolving. Tel Aviv believed that perpetuating the split between the West Bank and Gaza Strip was crucial to achieving this end, while Tehran believed that nothing less than fragmenting the Arab Levant and preventing its stabilization into a system of statehood was necessary.

The birth of a Palestinian state leads to two undesirable outcomes:

On one hand, it deprives rejectionists of a useful flammable element, as well as proving that solving this obstinate problem is possible.

On the other hand, the creation of such a state would be a celebration of statehood and evidence of the state system's success in the Arab Levant. The reality, as many of our experiences have shown, is that the existence of a Palestinian state has become tied to the question of whether the state system is viable or absent and unachievable in the region.

Both sides, in any event, do not want the problem to be resolved, leaving it to remain a "cause." They prefer the project of promoting the turn towards militias that hinders the formation of states and spreads social decay.

Completing the picture, Assadist Syria saw itself as a partner in the Iranian effort to fragment the Levant and foster its militarization, provided that this fragmentation excluded Syria and allowed it to control the process. However, it soon fell into the hole it had dug for its "brothers" in Lebanon, Iraq, and Palestine. Thus, there was no longer any exception to this Levantine rule, and the Iranians and Israelis were the only ones left on the field. The former tosses us in the air like a ball and the latter kicks it.

Now, with October 7 and the war on Gaza, it can be said that the push to nip Levantine nationhood in the bud has been successful, starting from and building on its success in Palestine. Anyone looking for regional stability that could foster statehood will find nothing but a war that springs from Gaza and does not end there. It will likely be multipronged and complex, albeit while taking various forms.

And anyone looking for autonomous forces in the Levant capable of benefiting from the Israeli-Iranian conflict will find only increasing fragmentation accompanied and aggravated by rival communal and centrifugal groups fighting among themselves. The continued population drain, brain drain included, attests to the impossibility of building on demographic solid grounds, while the defeat of revolutions and reform movements in Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq show that dynamics needed to bring about positive change will remain pending for a period that is difficult to predict.

As for the influential global powers in our region, their footprint remains overwhelmingly linked to military and security matters that overshadow their minimal political presence and role in shaping a vision for the future. What was that? “Future”?

Why Isn’t the U.S. in Libya?

May 12, 2024
Frederic Wehrey

Outside powers take a growing interest in this oil-rich African state where the U.S. Embassy has been closed since 2014.

Success in diplomacy, like success in life—to borrow from an old cliché—largely depends on showing up. But for over half a decade, the United States hasn’t been showing up in Libya, at least not in a way that is sustained and meaningful. It speaks to a U.S. State Department approach to the country that is often more akin to sloganeering and wishful thinking than implementable policy.

Caught in the crossfire of inter-militia fighting that raged throughout the Libyan capital of Tripoli in summer 2014, U.S. diplomats shuttered their villa-based embassy and evacuated to Tunisia. They have yet to return, even as conditions in Libya have become considerably safer in the past years and other foreign embassies have either reopened or are in the process of doing so.

Their absence is due in part to the politicized legacy of the 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya, which killed then-Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans and unleashed a flurry of Republican scapegoating in Congress that has yet to fully abate. That tragic episode has also made Biden administration officials unusually risk averse in signing off on the embassy’s return to Libya.

Earlier this month, though, there were signs for guarded optimism that this may be changing. At a March 22 hearing of a Senate Appropriations subcommittee, Secretary of State Antony Blinken testified that his department was “actively working on” reestablishing a permanent U.S. diplomatic presence in Libya, though he declined to go into specifics about what steps the State Department was taking, or a timetable.

The State Department has included funds for the return of the embassy to Tripoli in its budget request to Congress—a good thing—but it’s not clear if this funding will clear the Republican-dominated House of Representatives, or if and when Blinken will move forward with the reopening.

Without a physical presence in the country, the U.S. diplomats working on Libya will continue to be based at the U.S. embassy in neighboring Tunisia. But, as I’ve seen firsthand during extended fieldwork in Libya over the years, many of the Libyans who matter are unable or unwilling to make that trip, often for financial or political reasons.

As a result, U.S. diplomats are unable to build trust with, understand, and possibly influence key Libyan players. Half-day in-and-out stops by senior U.S. officials to heavily fortified airports or ministries in Libya are hardly a viable substitute for continuous visibility and interaction.

These deleterious effects have only compounded as Libya’s security and energy importance has grown in recent years and a bevy of outside powers have taken a growing interest in the oil-rich African state.

Russia deployed thousands of Wagner Group mercenaries, regular personnel, and advanced weaponry in 2019-20 to support a military bid by eastern Libya-based warlord Khalifa Haftar. Haftar sought to topple the internationally recognized government in the capital. Though that effort failed because of Turkish military intervention, Russia continues to enjoy a spoiling influence in Libya. Most notably, it is propping up Haftar’s armed coalition, the Libyan Armed Forces, giving him the means to maintain his grip over vast swathes of Libyan territory and to block the export of Libyan oil—as he did from April to July 2022, precisely when crude prices were skyrocketing because of the Russia-Ukraine war. That self-serving act harmed ordinary Libyans, European states that receive Libyan energy exports, and the global economy, while conveniently benefiting the Kremlin.

Wagner fighters have also ensconced themselves around oilfields and inside airbases across southern and eastern Libya, from which they’ve ferried personnel and material into African states in the Sahel. Here, they’ve presented themselves as an appealing alternative to what locals perceive as an overbearing French—and American—neocolonial order, offering autocrats a suite of services, ranging from military training and counterinsurgency to propaganda and personal protection, while committing horrific abuses in the process.

It is a measure of just how seriously the Biden administration views Libya as a springboard for Russian power projection, as well as a potential source of illicit financing—Wagner personnel are already said to be tapping into Libyan oil revenues—that it recently dispatched two high-level emissaries to eastern Libya to meet with Haftar.

CIA Director William Burns traveled to Benghazi in January, followed by Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Barbara Leaf in March. The details of their full discussion with the famously obdurate Haftar remain unclear, but it likely centered on his support for planned elections in Libya later this year and a mix of pressure, warnings, and incentives to compel him to cut his ties with Moscow and eject Russia’s mercenaries from Libyan soil.

But herein lies the longtime problem with Washington’s policy toward Tripoli—a problem that a sustained diplomatic presence may diminish but certainly can’t remedy completely.

U.S. officials from successive administrations have historically viewed Libya through the singular lens of some other U.S. policy priority, assigning it the role of a supporting actor a larger strategic drama:

(a) the quest for energy security,

(b) the fight against terrorism—especially the Islamic State, which set up a powerful affiliate in Libya—and now

(c) the United States’ rivalry with so-called great powers that many in Washington see playing out across the African continent and in the Middle East.

As a result, the United States and its allies have pursued contradictory policies in Libya that have empowered an array of venal Libyan personalities and let the country more fragmented.

Relatedly, U.S. officials have often sacrificed the North African state on the altar of other, more pressing policy imperatives in the Middle East—namely, Iran and the Arab-Israel conflict—when they believe the United States requires the support of key Arab states such as Egypt and the United Arab Emirates, two habitual interferers in Libyan politics.

According to this calculus, transgressions by these Arab partners in Libya, including breaking the arms embargo, enabling Haftar’s illegal bid for power and war crimes, and killing civilians in drone strikes, did not merit the expenditure of U.S. diplomatic capital in the form of a firm rebuke or pushback.

The United States’ distance from and disinterest in Libya has also produced a myopic reading of the country’s complex challenges.

The current fixation on a “Libyan-led” process toward parliamentary and presidential elections is a case in point. Holding those elections by the late fall or winter of this year is the centerpiece of an ambitious roadmap unveiled by the new U.N. envoy to Libya, the veteran Senegalese diplomat Abdoulaye Bathily. The United States and other Western states say they are enthusiastically backing this plan, but it is fraught with pitfalls, lacking in details, and seems destined to repeat the mistakes of the past.

There’s no question that the Libyan people want and deserve a legitimate, elected executive authority after more than a decade of ineffective appointed transitional governments and rump legislative bodies. But as it is currently construed, Bathily’s plan cedes too much control over the convening of elections to a coterie of avaricious Libyan politicos and militia bosses who benefit from the frozen status quo and are exploiting the election’s procedural and legal questions—over candidate eligibility, sequencing, and the powers of the presidency—to stall, obstruct, or otherwise shift balloting in their favor.

With so much subterfuge underway, it is nearly impossible that voting will occur on schedule, and if by some miracle it does it is likely to be marred by insecurity or violence, boycotting, and lack of free campaigning and ballot counting. In one of many worst-case post-election scenarios, Haftar might claim to win the south and east and accuse the other districts of fraud, leading to the further dissolution of the country—something that the elections are intended to avert.

All of this suggests that U.S. policymakers, following the United Nations’ lead, seem to have unrealistic expectations about what voting by itself will accomplish, especially when Libya’s political, financial, and military institutions remain so fragmented and leading figures have escaped accountability for past crimes.

As in the past, elections seem to be an end to themselves, with little forethought given to the day after voting.

For many Libyans, then, and for those of us foreigners on the ground in Libya during the previous elections in 2012 and 2014—when nationwide voting didn’t put an end to Libya’s conflicts and divisions but merely reconfigured them—and in 2021, when another United Nations plan didn’t produce elections at all, Bathily’s roadmap elicits a sinking feeling of familiarity.

To be clear, U.S. development assistance policies toward Libya at the local level have been commendable and comprehensive, focused on bolstering civil society; promoting human rights, justice, and peace building; training journalists; running workshops for elected municipal governments; and helping Libyan citizens adapt to the looming challenges of climate change. But none of this important work can be effectively done from outside the country or even from the confines of a fortress-like embassy—a truism that Stevens recognized and put into practice during his time as ambassador. And while he may have pushed the limits of person-to-person diplomacy, much has changed in the past decade in how the State Department deals with risks and protects its diplomats abroad.

Sensibly applying these improved security measures to Libya when reopening the U.S. embassy—while avoiding quick-fix solutions and grounding U.S. policy in local Libyan realities—is the best way to honor Stevens’s legacy and help Libyans achieve the future they deserve.

***

Frederic Wehrey, a senior fellow in the Middle East Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Libyan Patriarchal Customs Deny Women Their Rights to Inheritance (2)



Maher Al Shaeri


The law protects the women’s rights

Musa Al-Qunaidi, a specialist in public law and lecturer at Misrata University, says, “When we talk about law in this context, we are talking about Law No. 6 of 1959, regarding the protection of women’s right to inheritance. Article 2 stipulates that it is impermissible to withhold payment of the share of inheritance to which a woman is entitled. And Article 5 stipulates that anyone who violates the provisions of this law shall be punished by imprisonment as well as being made to pay the woman the share of the inheritance to which she is entitled.”

Ahmeed Al-Mourabit Al-Zaydani, head of the Victims Organization for Human Rights, agrees. He says that depriving women of inheritance constitutes violence against them. Based on Article 2 of Law No. 6, he argues that it is impermissible to withhold from a woman her rightful share of inheritance, or to prevent her from benefiting from it or disposing of it.

On the question of substituting a financial reward for the rightful inheritance, Al Zaydani says that, as long as this is done with the woman’s complete consent, and there is no coercion or fraud involved, then there is no problem with such a substitution, provided the woman has full legal capacity and is over the age of eighteen. The compensation must also equal the real value of the inherited property or possessions.

However, if the compensation is made under coercion – seizing her share of the inheritance, and forcing her to accept financial compensation under the pretext that the inheritance from the property will go to a stranger (her husband) – then this is not permissible and is a violation of the text of Article 2. Some women were able to obtain judicial rulings on their inheritance rights and were forced – under threat – to give them up. Others were pressured to accept small sums of money or even remain silent about their rights without any of the “consolation” amount they are sometimes given

Holding on to traditional customs and norms

Muhammad Al-Ghaithi, a member of the Committee of Elders and of the Dispute Resolution Committee, sees no objection to the fact that assets and property are inherited by male heirs only. He says that this is common practice in the eastern region and even in all of Libya. For Al-Ghaithi, the reason is that “across Cyrenaica, the prevailing practice is that a person owns a particular plot of land that belongs to him entirely and exclusively.”

According to Al-Ghaithi, splitting up land means it will be wasted, and divided between tribes, “What we are seeking usually is for the entire land to be ours as one family; this is the main reason.” Al-Ghaithi points out that some people do not have much money to pass on when they die, but do have a lot of property. So, males who inherit are not able to compensate female heirs financially for their share in the property. They therefore take full possession of it. He says, “We know that this is forbidden by law, but the brothers who inherit are not able to price the land and give money in compensation.”

What happened to the law?

Today there is much discussion and back and forth about the law – now in its 65th year – as the country waits for a “new” constitution, which is in the process of being drafted. In 1973, the Libyan state suspended the constitution, established in the 1950s, on orders from Muammar Gaddafi, who ruled Libya from September 1, 1969 until February 2011. Gaddafi ordered the abolition of all laws and regulations in force in Libya, and so the state has no constitution. The majority of laws today are those that were in force when Libya was a kingdom under the country’s founder, King Idris al-Senussi.

Maryam Hussein, a member of the Constitution Drafting Assembly (CDA), explained to us about how women are deprived of rights to inherit and how the CDA sees this. Article 49 of the draft Libyan constitution stipulates that “the state is committed to: supporting and caring for women and enacting laws that guarantee their protection and raise their status in society; eliminating negative culture and social customs that detract from their dignity; prohibiting discrimination against them; guaranteeing their right to representation in general elections; and providing them with opportunities in all fields, while all necessary measures will be taken not to prejudice or harm rights women have acquired and to support them.”

Custom rules

Only discussing laws and constitutions does not get to the heart of the problem, though. The issue is not that easy, according to Dr. Salma Al-Shaeri, a specialist in contemporary social issues. She says that for Libyan women to demand their inheritance through the courts and judicial system is considered shameful by society and damaging to a family’s reputation. This in turn leads to more persecution and oppression of women and the harnessing of all means to prevent them from gaining their rights. “In fact, things have gotten to the stage where some families have stolen the identity of women so as to waive the right to inheritance in their name. This case recently happened in the city of Derna,” she says.

Even though the constitution remains suspended, laws are still in force. The author of this report has managed to obtain a complaint filed by two women in one city against their brothers. The men had categorically refused to give them the inheritance due to them from their father, who left properties worth millions, forcing them to go to court.

When the men appeared before the judge and were faced with the legal documents, they promised to give their sisters what was rightfully theirs. The two women therefore concluded that the matter had been resolved. But the men did not keep their promise, showing that social custom in Libya can even prevent judicial rulings being implemented. The brothers have gone as far as threatening that their sisters will be killed if they make any further complaints.

“Women are intimidated or persecuted if they make a complaint against their brothers to obtain their rightful share of the inheritance. Lack of knowledge leads some women to sign documents giving up their rights to an inheritance in return for a symbolic sum of money, which is paid just to silence them.” Some women have even faced death threats.

“If the case comes to court, social customs remain a stumbling block for women when trying to secure their rights to inheritance” Musa Al-Qunaidi argues that when it comes to punishment, this is a matter for judges not legislators. Every crime has its appropriate punishment, and the judge has the right to sentence people to between one day and three years in prison, according to the law.

Back to pre-Islamic times

“Depriving women of inheritance is a remnant from pre-Islamic times. Women had no inheritance rights until Islam came and removed this injustice against them.”

So says Dr Salma Al-Shaeri, a specialist in contemporary social issues. She points out that the problem goes beyond depriving women of their rightful inheritance and has devastating social effects, including stoking hostility and hatred between a sister and her brothers. It can affect sons and daughters on both sides, while some women may resort to taking some action in revenge, which would harm the reputation of the family.

Dr Al-Shaeri also argues that depriving women of a large portion of their property inheritance creates an economic disparity between them and their brothers, who alone benefit from the returns on the property, while the women remain economically inferior.

Women are the answer

The public prosecution service cannot initiate a criminal case on its own, explains Musa Al-Qunaidi, but needs first to receive a complaint from an inheritor claiming her rights from brothers or other relatives. Only after that can the prosecution proceed with the case.

Al-Qunaidi believes that the problem comes down to the fear that women have, and their failure to act against those who withhold their rights from them. Alongside this are customs and traditions and the failure of the executive agencies of government to carry out their duties once the matter reaches court.

Ahmeed Al-Mourabit Al-Zaydani, head of the Victims Organization for Human Rights, agrees. He says that depriving women of inheritance constitutes a violation against them, according to Article 2 of Law No. 6. He believes that it is impermissible to not give a woman the share of the inheritance to which she is entitled, or to prevent her from benefiting from it or disposing of it.

“Women can be intimidated or persecuted if they make a complaint against their brothers. Lack of knowledge leads some women to sign documents giving up their rights to an inheritance in return for a symbolic sum of money, which is paid just to silence them. But then they say they were forced into it,” says Al-Qunaidi. Women can sometimes even face death threats. “Money makes people lose their minds,” as the popular saying in Libya has it.

Fathia used to lower her head whenever she passed by the building which she believed should be hers, in full or in part, according to Islamic law. But today she is more determined than ever to obtain what is due to her, and thereby become an example to other women in working to obtain their legitimate inheritance rights.

Can federalism bring stability to Libya?





May 12, 2024
LIBYA TRIBUNE
Federica Saini Fasanotti

The divisions in today’s Libya have deep historical roots, which have left the country without functional institutions. A decentralized, federalist approach could help build stability, but the international community will likely insist on repeating past mistakes.

In a nutshellModern civil conflict in Libya has deep historical roots
Decentralizing power could allow Libyans to build stronger institutions
The West seems intent on repeating failed approaches to the conflict

During Italy’s colonization of Libya (1911-1943), fascist colonial police engaged in ruthless counter-guerrilla warfare were struck by how antagonistic the Libyans were against each other. As they reported back to Mussolini: they found Arabs pitted against Berbers, Cyrenaicans against the denizens of Tripoli, and clan against clan in an atavistic struggle for land. In fact, it was the Italians who unified Libya after several military efforts. As I described in 2016:

The Italians occupied the [Sirtic Corridor], an ideal break line, and conquered the oases of al-Jufrah, Zellah, Awjilah, and Gialo, isolated in the Cyrenaic desert more than 150 miles from the Mediterranean Sea. Shortly afterward, three [mobile groups], formed by thousands of Italian soldiers, moved in from Tripolitania and Cyrenaica in a pincer movement. The target: the rebels in the Sirtic Corridor, who also fell. These developments allowed the unification of the two colonies, Tripolitania and Cyrenaica, under the leadership of Marshal Pietro Badoglio. This was a major shift: Until that point, Libya had two political governments, two military commands, and two different administrations.

Libya, as we know it today, did not exist a century ago. At that time, the most fundamental identity was not the concept of “nation” but that of “tribe”: Libyans recognized themselves in their tribes and were loyal to them. The Italians understood this fact and used it in their favor, through the classic conqueror strategy of divide and rule.

But it was not only the Italians who leveraged tribal hatreds. Muammar Qaddafi (1942-2011) himself took ample advantage of these divisions during his 42-year-long dictatorship. Qaddafi laid the foundation for what Libya is today: a divided country without functional institutions or a ruling class worthy of the name. Modern politics in Libya is not the art of governing the state for the good of its citizens, but rather the pursuit of privileges. Those who have managed to seize power in the past 13 years – since the outbreak of the rebellion against the Qaddafi regime in the spring of 2011 – have rarely relinquished it.

Since the fall of Qaddafi, there have not been many cases of Libyan leaders cycling out of power, with rare exceptions like Fayez al-Sarraj, the former prime minister of the National Accord Government, who was appointed in 2016 after the United Nations-brokered Skhirat Accords in Morocco and left office in 2021.

Much more common are officials like Aguila Saleh Issa, who has been the Speaker of the House of Representatives in Tobruk since the beginning of the second civil war, immediately after the 2014 Libyan parliamentary elections (the country’s most recent ballot). The dysfunction of a decade-long rule without electoral accountability would be unthinkable in most democratic regimes. However, such elites do not seem to be interested in even trying to build consensus in a badly divided polity.

A neo-medieval system

This state of affairs is the result of an anti-modern way of governing that goes far back, even before the emergence of state sovereignty as a concept. In 1977, Australian professor Hedley Bull wrote in his canonical The Anarchical Society about a hypothetical weakening of the sovereign state that would eventually overcome the existing system. He presented many scenarios, but one still seems particularly appropriate in the case of Libya: “neo-medievalism,” a modern variant of the medieval political organization.

In a neo-medieval system, the notion of sovereignty – the supreme power over a given territory and its inhabitants – evaporates, giving way to an agglomeration of overlapping powers in which none can achieve exclusive obedience from its citizens. In this proto-state, there are no functioning institutions. War is no longer understood as occurring between states. It takes place between groups within former state boundaries so that violence becomes a daily constant.

In the mutation of today’s Libya, different centers of power have emerged: Tripoli, Benghazi, Tobruk, Misrata, Sirte, Sabha, Murzuq, Zintan and beyond. The management of power has further fragmented in the hands of different armed groups who can exert violence, substituting a monopoly of force with an oligopoly of force.

In the face of this now institutionalized “genetic mutation,” it is clear that democratization by imitating other successful examples cannot work. Democracy is not an exportable facility. Libya is still at a proto-state level, with the requisite institutions either nonexistent (like a unitary government), fragile (like the High Council of State), or hegemonic, in the sense that they are left unchecked by counter-balancing institutions (like the central bank). It matters little on this score that Libya enjoys oil riches – that is nothing but a driver for further conflict. The events of the past 13 years have only reinforced this thesis.

Repeating the same mistakes

Immediately after Qaddafi’s overthrow, the UN established a dedicated support mission in Libya, UNSMIL. Despite a rotating cast of special envoys, this mission is nowhere near succeeding in its primary goal: to set the country up for elections and then for healthy governance. This has been the mantra for all these years, touted at numerous international conferences on Libya. But, as a keen observer of the country, Libyan-American scholar Hafed al-Ghwell, has recently noted:

Doomed to fail before it even began, we are seeing a recurrent pattern of failure that betrays a stubborn reality: conventional diplomacy is ill-suited for the complexities of Libyan politics. Influential actors still refuse to confront the uncomfortable truth that repeated interventions have yet to materially shift Libya’s political elites and institutional stakeholders toward the reconciliation that the country so desperately needs.

Indeed, everyone involved in the Libyan affair has tried to put their own signature on the project, which has only served to diminish the authority of the UN mission. For example, in July 2017, a meeting was held in Paris between the then leaders of Tripolitania and Cyrenaica, Prime Minister of the Government of National Accord Fayez al-Sarraj and Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar. The two signed onto 10 principles, including a ceasefire, the establishment of a regular army and the preparations for an election that Mr. al-Sarraj had sought to hold in March 2018.

While French President Emmanuel Macron claimed this as a diplomatic achievement, it was no such thing. Internal tensions continued to escalate, especially in the Libyan capital. When the French leader decided to hold a second conference in May 2018, all hell broke loose in Tripoli that summer due to the dissatisfaction of militia cartels that had not been called to the negotiating table.

A missing constitutional foundation

Over the years, I have written extensively about why elections are not the solution in Libya unless the proper constitutional ground is prepared for them to work, and unless there is an outside force to prevent elections from becoming an occasion for civil war, like the one that erupted in Libya in the summer of 2014 (and continued until 2020).

As the analyst Ferhat Polat has recently written:

[F]or Libya to conduct successful and legitimate elections, the rival factions must agree on a constitutional framework well in advance. Creating a new constitution should outline the governance structure, define the roles and powers of the central authority, and establish clear rules for presidential, parliamentary, and electoral processes.

At the moment, not only has this not been done, but it is likely that highly polarizing figures will run for president in any elections that are held (as has happened before). There is no clear political agenda, as there was none in 2021, weeks before the election deadline.

In February 2017, I argued:

Libya is still too immature, politically, to overcome the atavistic divisions among the people and tribes of what once were known as the historical regions of Cyrenaica, Tripolitania and Fezzan. These divisions have impeded real leadership – in its absence, the international community must come in to help Libyans build from the bottom, in small steps. Rather than funnel money to militias, international actors should help fund roads, power plants, refineries, hospitals, and, above all, schools. Qaddafi purposely under-invested in developing Libyans’ minds and professional skills – instead of sending military advisers, international actors should support Libyans’ efforts to build a civil service. The Turks, Italians and Qaddafi always used violence and an iron fist. That never truly succeeded, and to overcome this impasse now, a change of course is needed.

I have not changed my mind since then.

Scenarios

Most likely: The UN persists in the elections dream

The most plausible outcome is that the UN will stubbornly continue to force the issue of elections using current systems and approaches – ones that have so far not been successful. While elections could eventually be held, even successfully, they will not guarantee peace or stability. Without robust institutions, Libya will continue to flounder in conflict.

This will have dire consequences, with elites squandering more international aid and the future of the Libyan people. Though rich in oil, Libya will not be stable enough for the industry to benefit its people any time in the foreseeable future. Countries in the region will worry about the instability spilling over into their own territories and could decide to get involved, potentially intensifying and extending the state of conflict.

Less likely: A new federalist approach

Though it would be operationally complex, it is not too late to institute a system of decentralization that would keep rival groups in Libya from preying on each other and jockeying for loyalty. That could look like allowing each faction to create and develop its own institutions. Once that process is underway, mechanisms could be put into place to help achieve stability, whether in the form of regional (German-style) or municipal (Swiss-style) federalism.

This approach is anathema to Western powers, some of whom prefer to support separatist elements of their choosing, while others worry that it could spread destabilizing separatist activity in other African countries. If allowed to develop smaller institutions from the ground up, Libyans would be more likely to invest in these governance systems, creating a more solid foundation. This could then support investment and build the potential for greater regional stability. Such scenarios remain unlikely, however, since they require a paradigm shift that is one step too far for many Western leaders and those at the top of international institutions.

Demolition to remove part of Baltimore’s Key Bridge to free trapped ship postponed until Monday due to inclement weather

Nicole Grether and Gloria Pazmino, CNN
Sun, May 12, 2024 

The planned demolition to remove a portion of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Maryland has been rescheduled to Monday afternoon due to inclement weather conditions, according to the United States Coast Guard.

Crews were expected Sunday evening to use small explosives to break apart a massive chunk of the Baltimore bridge that collapsed on a cargo ship six weeks ago after the US Coast Guard previously pushed back the controlled demolition by an hour.

The operation was originally to take place Saturday, but officials on Friday announced it would be postponed due to an adverse weather forecast.


The explosion is now slated to take place at 5 p.m. ET on Monday, according to the Coast Guard.

The planned demolition is aimed at helping officials remove debris and ultimately free the 213-million-pound Dali cargo ship, which veered off course March 26 and struck a pillar of the Francis Scott Key Bridge, causing it to fall into the water below. The collapse killed six construction workers and destroyed a key thoroughfare, threatening the economy at the Port of Baltimore.

Sunday’s weather in the Baltimore area – which included lightning strikes – is what led officials to hold off on the demolition.

“We were all set to do the precision cuts … today,” Nick Ameen with the US Coast Guard told reporters Sunday. “There’s several factors, environmental factors among them, that have unfortunately pushed that event until tomorrow.”

Ameen called the process a “dynamic” one and said, “We will absolutely not sacrifice safety for speed.”

He added: “Whenever there’s a lightning strike in the area, that pushes the clock back, and so that clock just kept getting pushed back and pushed back.”

Officials last week recovered the sixth and final body, allowing them to proceed with the plan to free the Dali. If the operation succeeds this weekend, the ship could be refloated and returned to the Port of Baltimore as soon as this week, The Baltimore Sun and CNN affiliate WBAL previously reported.

“The safest and swiftest method to remove the bridge piece from on top of the M/V Dali is by precision cuts made with small charges,” the Key Bridge Response Unified Command said in a news release last week.

“This is an industry-standard tool in controlled demolition that will break the span into smaller pieces,” it added, “which will allow the work of refloating the vessel and removing it from the federal channel.”

Salvage crew members work on the deck of the cargo ship Dali on Friday, May 10, 2024. - Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

According to an infographic from the US Army and the US Army Corps of Engineers, the process will “look like multiple puffs of smoke and sound like fireworks.” Nearby communities should receive a “cellular notification” beforehand, according to Unified Command, which includes state and federal authorities, the US Coast Guard and Army Corps of Engineers among them.

The 21 members of the ship’s crew – who have not left the ship since it struck the bridge in late March – will remain onboard during the operation, according to Darrel Wilson, a spokesperson for Synergy Marine Group, which manages the Dali.

“They will have a safe place on the vessel where they can shelter during the controlled explosion,” Wilson said, adding that the crew was “holding up well” despite the stress of recent weeks.

“Even though they are not sailing, they are still performing their normal crew duties,” Wilson said. “This is still a large, complicated piece of equipment and there is a lot they have to look after.”

While the Dali’s management company has tried to support the crew on board, members of Baltimore’s seafaring community remain concerned for their wellbeing given the length of time they’ve been aboard the ship.

Rev. Josh Messick, executive director of the Baltimore International Seafarers’ Center, told CNN the crew is well taken care of but feels disconnected from the rest of the world. They have internet access, thanks to hotspots Messick’s group helped deliver, but they do not have their cellphones, which were confiscated by authorities as part of the investigation.

“They are a little anxious because of the phone situation. We are trying to get their cellphones back to them,” Messick said. “It’s not just a phone, they can’t access their online banking, their finances, their contacts, they can’t look at photos of their loved ones before they go to sleep at night. It’s a lot more than just a phone.”

In the meantime, several investigations continue into the cause of the disaster and who is responsible. The House Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure plans to hold a hearing Wednesday on the catastrophe, with testimony expected from the chair of the National Transportation Safety Board and officials from the Coast Guard, Army Corps of Engineers and the US Department of Transportation.

CNN’s Paradise Afshar, Holly Yan and Dakin Andone contributed to this report.


Controlled demolition at Baltimore bridge collapse site postponed due to weather

LEA SKENE
Updated Sun, May 12, 2024 at 2:29 PM MDT·4 min read
21







Remnants of the collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge and the cargo ship Dali are seen, Sunday, May 12, 2024, in Baltimore. For safety reasons, officials postponed a controlled demolition, which was planned for Sunday, to break down the largest remaining span of the collapsed bridge. The bridge came crashing down under the impact of the massive container ship on March 26. (AP Photo/Steve Ruark)
ASSOCIATED PRESSMore


BALTIMORE (AP) — The controlled demolition of the largest remaining steel span of the collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore has been postponed because of weather conditions, officials said Sunday afternoon.

Crews have been preparing for weeks to use explosives to break down the span, which is an estimated 500 feet (152 meters) long and weighs up to 600 tons (544 metric tons).

It landed on the ship’s bow after the Dali lost power and crashed into one of the bridge’s support columns shortly after leaving Baltimore. Since then, the ship has been stuck amidst the wreckage and Baltimore’s busy port has been closed to most maritime traffic.

Officials said the demolition had been tentatively moved to Monday evening. They said lightning in the area and rising tides Sunday prompted them to reschedule.

Six members of a roadwork crew plunged to their deaths in the March 26 collapse. The last of their bodies was recovered from the underwater wreckage last week. All the victims were Latino immigrants who came to the U.S. for job opportunities. They were filling potholes on an overnight shift when the bridge was destroyed.

The controlled demolition will allow the Dali to be refloated and guided back into the Port of Baltimore. Once the ship is removed, maritime traffic can begin returning to normal, which will provide relief for thousands of longshoremen, truckers and small business owners who have seen their jobs impacted by the closure.

The Dali’s 21-member crew will stay onboard the ship while the explosives are detonated.

William Marks, a spokesperson for the crew, said they would shelter “in a designated safe place” during the demolition. “All precautions are being taken to ensure everyone’s safety,” he said in an email.

Officials said the demolition is the safest and most efficient way to remove steel under a high level of pressure and tension.

“It’s unsafe for the workers to be on or in the immediate vicinity of the bridge truss for those final cuts,” officials said in a news release Sunday.

In a videographic released last week, authorities said engineers are using precision cuts to control how the trusses break down. They said the method allows for “surgical precision” and the steel structure will be “thrust away from the Dali” when the explosives send it tumbling into the water.

Once it’s demolished, hydraulic grabbers will lift the resulting sections of steel onto barges.

“It’s important to note that this controlled demolition is not like what you would see in a movie,” the video says, noting that from a distance it will sound like fireworks or loud thunder and give off puffs of smoke.

So far, about 6,000 tons (5,443 metric tons) of steel and concrete have been removed from the collapse site. Officials estimate the total amount of wreckage at 50,000 tons (45,359 metric tons), about the equivalent of 3,800 loaded dump trucks.

Officials previously said they hoped to remove the Dali by May 10 and reopen the port’s 50-foot (15.2-meter) main channel by the end of May.

The Dali is currently scheduled to be refloated during high tide on Tuesday, officials said Sunday. They said three or four tugboats will be used to guide the ship to a nearby terminal in the Port of Baltimore. It will likely remain there for a few weeks and undergo temporary repairs before being moved to a shipyard for more substantial repairs.

The Dali crew members haven’t been allowed to leave the vessel since the disaster. Officials said they have been busy maintaining the ship and assisting investigators. Of the crew members, 20 are from India and one is Sri Lankan.

The National Transportation Safety Board and the FBI are conducting investigations into the bridge collapse.

Danish shipping giant Maersk chartered the Dali for a planned trip from Baltimore to Sri Lanka, but the ship didn’t get far. Its crew sent a mayday call saying they had lost power and had no control of the steering system. Minutes later, the ship rammed into the bridge.

Officials have said the safety board investigation will focus on the ship’s electrical system.

Removal of Francis Scott Key Bridge wreckage rescheduled due to lightning

IVAN PEREIRA and LEAH SARNOFF
Sun, May 12, 2024 

Baltimore's Francis Scott Key Bridge removal has been rescheduled until Monday after lightning was spotted near the site on Sunday, officials told ABC News.

Engineers were scheduled Sunday to set off controlled explosives in the steel remains of the Key Bridge to help remove the debris from the freighter that crashed in March.

The removal process is rescheduled for Monday at 5:00 p.m., officials said.

Ongoing storms in the Baltimore and Washington D.C. region have delayed the demolition since Friday.

The explosives will split a large section of truss at specific locations to allow "salvors to use cranes and barges already on scene to remove these sections of the bridge and ultimately remove the MV Dali from the channel," Unified Command, the group in charge of the recovery and salvage operations, said in a statement.

PHOTO: Salvors with the Unified Command prepare charges for upcoming precision cuts to remove section 4 from the port side of the bow of the M/V DALI, April 21, 2024, during the Key Bridge Response 2024. (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers photo by Christopher Rosario)

"By using precision cuts, we reduce risks to our personnel and can safely and efficiently continue clearing the channel for the Port of Baltimore," Capt. David O’Connell, the Key Bridge Response federal on-scene coordinator, said in a statement.

MORE: Baltimore bridge collapse timeline: Inside the cargo ship collision

Officials said hearing protection will not be required outside of a 2,000-yard radius of the site.

PHOTO: Salvors with the Unified Command prepare charges for upcoming precision cuts to remove section 4 from the port side of the bow of the M/V DALI, April 21, 2024, during the Key Bridge Response 2024. (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers photo by Christopher Rosario)

"Sound levels outside of the noise radius will be no louder than a standard fireworks show and will last two to five seconds," Unified Command said.

A cellphone alert will go out to residents warning them about the explosion, Unified Command said.

The freighter has been stuck in the location ever since it slammed into the bridge during the early morning hours on March 26 after the vessel experienced a malfunction.

MORE: Containers being removed from ship that struck Baltimore bridge

Body camera footage of the incident, which was released Friday by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources in response to a public records request by ABC News, shows officers getting an up-close look at the location where the bridge once stood.

PHOTO: Wreckage removal is ongoing on the M/V DALI to prepare to refloat and remove the vessel from the Fort McHenry Federal Navigation Channel, April 21, 2024. (Christopher Rosario/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District)

"There is no bridge," an officer can be heard saying. "The whole center span is gone completely. It’s in the water."

Another officer reported encountering a "large debris field" with containers on the side of the river closest to Baltimore. In one video, he can be heard shouting toward the freighter to ask if anyone was hurt. Someone aboard the ship responded that their finger was cut.

MORE: Body of 6th construction worker killed in Key Bridge collapse recovered

The bridge suffered a near-total collapse and caused massive logistical delays in the Port of Baltimore. Six construction workers who were on the bridge at the time were killed in the incident.

PHOTO: Salvors with the Unified Command prepare charges for upcoming precision cuts to remove section 4 from the port side of the bow of the M/V DALI, May 7, 2024, during the Key Bridge Response 2024. (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers photo by Christopher Rosario)

The incident is still under investigation and the recovery efforts are ongoing.

ABC News' Beatrice Peterson, Jared Kofsky and Josh Margolin contributed to this report.



Body camera footage captures first responders' reactions in wake of Baltimore bridge collapse

Julia Gomez, USA TODAY
Sun, May 12, 2024 

Body camera footage caught the moment first responders were left shocked by the Baltimore bridge collapse.

"This is [expletive] bad," one officer is heard saying in the footage. "Like, there is no bridge."

In the video, which was originally published by The Baltimore Banner, an officer is heard stuttering while standing on a boat as he looks out to where the Francis Scott Key Bridge once stood.

"It's like something's missing here in the skyline..." said the officer. "The whole center span is gone completely. It's in the water."

The media outlet reports that at 5 a.m., the officer was talking on his cell phone. He stood on a boat that neared the collapsed bridge and spoke with someone who reported that everything was suspended until there was sunlight.
What happened during the bridge collapse?

On March 26, early in the morning, a 984-foot container ship struck the bridge, which left it in ruins. A video posted to YouTube shows how the bridge collapsed and plunged into the water that morning.

The incident killed six construction workers who were on the bridge fixing potholes.

On May 7, more than a month after the collapse, the final victim was recovered from the river according to police.

Salvage work continues on the Francis Scott Key Bridge on May 9, 2024. The major span over the Patapsco River in Baltimore collapsed on March 26, 2024 after it was struck by a Singapore-flagged container ship 'Dali’, killing six road workers who were on the bridge at the time.

Why is S.C. one of five states that continues to celebrate Confederate Memorial Day? | Opinion

Sun, May 12, 2024 



BOB SOFALY | The Beaufort Gazette

Holiday past its prime

On Friday, we celebrated Confederate Memorial Day here in South Carolina, a holiday I believe it is far past time to do away with.

We are one of only five states that recognize Confederate Memorial Day as a state holiday, meaning state offices are closed.

We are also one of only two states, the other being North Carolina, where Confederate Memorial Day is on May 10 because that is the day that Gen. Stonewall Jackson died in 1863 after being accidentally shot by his own men just a week earlier.

May 10 is also the day Confederate President Jefferson Davis was captured in Georgia by Union forces of the 1st Wisconsin and 4th Michigan Calvary.

The Confederate States of America was a failed, traitorous nation birthed to preserve the institution of slavery.

And if you don’t want to take my word for it that the Confederacy was born to preserve slavery, just take a look at South Carolina’s own seceding documents.

The declaration laid out the primary reasoning behind South Carolina’s secession from the Union as an “increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the Institution of Slavery.”

Hayden Laye, Walhalla

Fire at Port of Oakland spews black smoke over the bay

A fire at the Port of Oakland sent thick, billowing black smoke across the bay on Sunday. | Source:Jonah Owen Lamb/The Standard

By The Standard StaffPublished May 12, 2024 • 3:49pm

A fire at the Port of Oakland sent black, billowing smoke over the San Francisco Bay late Sunday afternoon.

The plumes were visible from across the water around 3:30 p.m., with people posting photos to social media of the smoke seen from Marin and San Francisco.

The Oakland Fire Department said its crews were responding to a shipping container fire that may have been caused by a lithium battery.

Robert Bernard, a spokesperson for the Port of Oakland, said the fire was fully continued by 3:45 p.m., but had no other details about what caused it.

The fire was fully continued soon after it started, port officials said. | Source:Jonah Owen Lamb/The Standard