China Needs To Prepare For Prolonged Strategic Competition In The Face Of Rising Trade Protectionism – Analysis

 July 22, 2024  

By Anbound

By Chen Li

Amidst claims by the United States and Europe about China’s overcapacity, the European Union has recently decided to impose temporary tariffs on imports of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) from the country. Additionally, the U.S. and Mexico have jointly announced that to strengthen the North American steel and aluminum supply chain, Mexico will impose 25% and 10% tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from China, respectively.

In recent years, various trade barriers against Chinese goods have been increasing. According to American media reports, other than the U.S. and the EU, some emerging economies such as Brazil, India, Mexico, and Indonesia have begun anti-dumping investigations into low-priced Chinese goods. Since early last year, governments worldwide have announced more than 70 import restriction measures targeting China.

Researchers at ANBOUND believe that these protectionist practices against China are a long-term trade phenomenon, driven by shifts in the global trade landscape. This change is universal and structural, affecting not only the relations between the U.S. or the EU with China, but also extending globally. As it stands, China will need to adapt to the changing world trade rules and prepare for long-term strategic competition.

The global trade landscape has undergone significant changes. The post-World War II momentum of global economic integration is waning, giving way to de-globalization and regional economic integration. Since the financial crisis, as consumer demand in developed countries has weakened and with technological advancements and supply chain de-risking, developed nations have actively pursued reshoring of manufacturing. At the same time, developing countries, especially China, have reduced their dependence on intermediate goods trade as they upgrade their industries, leading to the slowdown in global trade growth and the restructuring of global value chains. Before the financial crisis, the global average ratio of imports to GDP grew at about twice the rate of global GDP growth. However, since 2011, this ratio has dropped below 1. According to the European Central Bank’s analysis, global trade is unlikely to return to the growth trends seen before the financial crisis, and the slowdown in global trade post-2011 is expected to become the “new normal.” Based on the concept of “close produce” previously proposed by ANBOUND, the slowdown in global trade is accompanied by a restructuring of global value chains, breaking the previous model of international division of labor. At the same time, production is shifting closer to terminal markets. This indicates a shift from global economic integration to regional economic integration, inevitably giving rise to trade protectionism in the process.

Trade protectionism is increasingly gaining momentum globally. Even before former U.S. President Donald Trump initiated the trade war with China, the Obama administration had imposed hefty tariffs that were five times the standard rate on Chinese steel imports and created obstacles in the Doha negotiations. This led to abandoning the World Trade Organization (WTO)’s global multilateral trade cooperation framework in favor of regional agreements such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Among protectionist measures, anti-dumping duties and import tariffs are the most widely used, collectively accounting for about 30% of all measures. Additionally, there has been a rise in the use of export subsidies, licensing or restrictions on foreign direct investment, and domestic clauses in public procurement, leading to a surge in trade distortions. According to Global Trade Alert, harmful trade interventions by governments have steadily increased since 2008, with a sharp rise starting in 2018. Overall, the number of global harmful trade interventions surged from 199 in 2018 to 910 in 2023, a 357% increase. From 2009 to 2023, there were a total of 58,205 harmful trade interventions globally, with 1,752 targeting China, the highest number for any country.

Trade protectionism has undermined the rule-based multilateral trading system established under economic globalization, specifically the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the WTO, created after World War II. Firstly, regional trade agreements are increasingly replacing the WTO’s global multilateral trade rules, accelerating the fragmentation of trade and industrial spaces. Secondly, the Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) principle under the WTO multilateral trade system faces numerous challenges in the current international trade environment. Although MFN ensures equality, the principle of treating all equally may not be applicable to countries at different levels of development, leading to some fairness issues. The U.S. has previously questioned the MFN principle concerning China’s market access restrictions, trade imbalances, and intellectual property protection. Lastly, under the influence of the politicization of economic and trade issues, the WTO has been pushed to the margins of global economic governance, and its trade rules have fallen into an

In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic has heightened countries’ awareness of the importance of diversifying supply chain risks. At the same time, amid the global economic downturn, unilateralism and populism have surged, with geopolitical factors increasingly influencing economic and trade issues, even beginning to dominate them. This has led to the reshoring of manufacturing, strengthening of economic and trade ties within alliances, and weakening of economic and trade relationships outside these alliances. As a result, despite years of attempts, the Doha Round negotiations have failed, and the WTO’s appellate body has been paralyzed since December 2019.

Since the Age of Exploration, international trade rules have been evolving. Before the great maritime discoveries, global commercial trade was regional. Afterward, the world was connected through maritime trade, establishing a truly global trading system. This disrupted the tribute system and continental mindset of that era in China, and the international order shaped by maritime trade was dominated by the West for over three centuries. After World War II, the GATT and the WTO established a multilateral trading system based on mutual benefits. China’s entry into this trade system allowed it to deeply participate in the global value chain, benefiting from economic globalization and achieving an economic miracle. Today, the global trade landscape is undergoing another structural shift, which naturally introduces new orders and disciplines within the new trade system, and this is something that China should be prepared for.

Final analysis conclusion:

The surge in trade protectionism targeting China is a result of the structural shift in the global trade landscape. Amid the slowdown in global trade growth, the trade pattern is moving from global integration toward regional integration. In response, China needs to recognize the changes in the current trade environment and prepare for the challenge of long-term trade protectionism.

• About the author: Chen Li is an Economic Research Fellow at ANBOUND, an independent think tank.

Anbound

Anbound Consulting (Anbound) is an independent Think Tank with the headquarter based in Beijing. Established in 1993, Anbound specializes in public policy research, and enjoys a professional reputation in the areas of strategic forecasting, policy solutions and risk analysis. Anbound's research findings are widely recognized and create a deep interest within public media, academics and experts who are also providing consulting service to the State Council of China.

 UK

Labour Government: The Politics Of Service – OpEd

UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer. Photo Credit: Official Portrait, Wikimedia Commons

 July 22, 2024  

By Graham Peebles

After 14 years of Conservative incompetence, corruption and lies, the election of The Labour Party led by Kier Starmer, has ignited a feeling of hope and optimism in the country.

In a historic election, on 4 July Labour won a landslide with 412 parliamentary seats (of 650 in total); the Tories, as if anyone cares, recorded there worst ever election result, and have at last been consigned to the political wilderness to tear themselves apart.

The new intake of MPs constitutes the most ethnically diverse and gender balanced parliament in history, with women making up 40% of all MPs. It also has the largest number of LGBTQ+ MPS ever, with Labour’s 50 LGBTQ+ MPs representing the largest party cohort of any parliament, anywhere in the world.

Labours extraordinary triumph demonstrates that in the age of extremism, a left of centre party can still win power, something that is encouraging for countries in Europe and the US. Populism in the UK, strengthened by the Brexit referendum and relentlessly fuelled by the Conservatives, however has not been driven out of British politics. Reform UK, a new far right company (not a political party), that promotes intolerance, hate and division, won 5 parliamentary seats and came second in 103 constituencies.

Like all such groups they have no workable policies, blame everything on immigrants and migration, talk dismissively about climate change and net zero, and are a poisonous, dangerous force in the country. These xenophobic parties prosper where inequality, economic insecurity and social injustice exist. The antidote is to deal with these underlying causes, to build inclusive fair societies and to challenge divisive intolerant rhetoric wherever it emerges. If Labour can do this the country will be a more harmonious united place, and Reform’s support will quickly fall away.

Labours inheritance

The Conservatives ran the country into the ground, and created what the Lisa Nandy, the new Secretary of State for Culture, described as “the darkest decade and a half in my lifetime.” They divided the country, destroyed public services, including the NHS, which the new Secretary of State for Health described as ‘broken’, increased inequality and child poverty, saw homelessness explode, tanked the economy and, with their total disregard for the rule of law, undermined the UK’s position in the World. In addition they caused the Brexit disaster and, among other calamities, are responsible for countless avoidabledeaths during Covid.

The task before the new government is therefore huge, but the team is strong and their commitment to “a calm and patient rebuilding” appears genuine. Repairing the damage done and creating a sense of optimism, where for so long there has been despair, will not be easy and will take time, something governments tend not to have much of. Unity is key; if Labour can bring about a degree of social justice and reduce economic hardship, if it restores the NHS and decentralises political decision making to the nations and regions, it may have a chance of squashing the forces of division and generating a feeling of national togetherness.

Labour’s one word campaign slogan was ‘change’, and, after a matter of days in office, the single biggest change has been in tone. Gone is the infighting, the pettiness and duplicity, to be replaced with committed determination, openness and competency. As The Guardian put it, “The grownups are back in Westminster. The Tory psychodramas inside No 10 have been replaced by a serious Labour government focused on delivery.”

In his first speech at Prime-Minister Keir Starmer delivered a message of hope and sincerity. He promised to build a “government of service” and to restore trust in politics, by ‘actions not words’. To put the “country first” not the party, and to govern “unburdened by doctrine”. Politics, which for so long has not served the country, he said, “can [indeed should] be a force for good”.

Starmer’s initial decisions have been consistent with Labour’s commitment to ‘change and stability’; terms that may appear contradictory, but as Labour voices have repeatedly pointed out, after 14 years of chaos and pettiness, stable thoughtful government is change. Most of the shadow team were appointed to the cabinet, which contains more female ministers than any previous government, and includes Rachel Reeves, the first ever female chancellor. It is also the most working class cabinet – the majority of the top team went to comprehensive schools, with only one member of the cabinet attending private school, compared with 75% in Conservative cabinets over recent years.

All of which is significant, and means that unlike successive Tory administrations, which we’re overflowing with millionaires and privilege, the people now engaged in fashioning policies, and putting forward legislation, will have a real understanding of the lives most people are living.

Politicians routinely talk about their desire to unite a country, and Labour have said that cultivating unity is a main priority for them. In his first speech as PM, Starmer said this, “You have given us a clear mandate and we will use it to deliver change. To restore service and respect to politics, end the era of noisy performance, tread more lightly on your lives. And to unite our country, four nations standing together again.”

One way they hope to “unite the country” is by chipping away at inequality, by moving decision making closer to people is key to this; working with regional mayors and leaders, decentralising power and establishing cooperative relationships. “Putting people in charge of their own destiny”, Lisa Nandy says, is the “silver thread connecting all areas of the new government.”

Whilst many of us would like to see Labour go much further than it has so far pledged to do, particularly in relation to Europe and the environment, after years of duplicity and incompetence it feels like Britain has turned a corner and that the work of re-building and healing, so desperately needed, has begun.

MastodonLinkedInShare

Graham Peebles

Graham Peebles is an independent writer and charity worker. He set up The Create Trust in 2005 and has run education projects in India, Sri Lanka and Ethiopia where he lived for two years working with acutely disadvantaged children and conducting teacher training programmes. Website: https://grahampeebles.org/

Apprentice hung from noose, had drill poked in groin in workplace bullying incident in Victoria, Australia

APPRENTICE; INDENTURED SERVANT

AAP
By Melissa Meehan
21 Jul, 2024 05:29 PM2 mins to read
SaveShare


A first year apprentice suffered physical abuse and sexual harassment at an air conditioning trade workplace in Australia. Photo / 123RF

An apprentice was hung from a noose and poked with a drill in his groin as part of prolonged bullying at work, with his employer fined A$10,000 ($11,116) over the abuse.

The first-year apprentice, was working for Celsius Ballarat Pty Ltd in Bakery Hill, near Ballarat, Victoria, Australia when he was targeted by colleagues.

He was too afraid to tell the directors of the company, in fear of retribution, but ended up going to police in February when he was lifted into a noose - leaving him unable to breathe for a few seconds.

During an investigation into the allegations, a Worksafe summary reveals the apprentice was subject to numerous physical assaults including being spat on, being placed in headlocks and being shot at with a nail gun.

He was also subject to sexually harassing comments and actions such as being hit in the groin, and taunting about the fact his biological father was not alive.

A bucket of water mixed with paint was also thrown over him during a cold day on site and he was poked with a drill in the groin numerous times while on a ladder, the summary says.

It was all brought to a head on February 15, last year when two colleagues lifted him into a noose hanging from a strut in a roof cavity where they were working.

“The apprentice states that he was unable to breath for a few seconds,” court documents say.

Last week, the company faced Ballarat Magistrates Court where it pleaded guilty and was without conviction sentenced to pay a fine of A$10,000 ($11,116) and to pay costs of A$3,227.

Without the guilty plea, the company would have been fined A$20,000 ($22,200) without conviction.

 

Mexico’s New President Inherits Grim Media Landscape – OpEd

Mexico's Claudia Sheinbaum. Photo Credit: Eneas De Troya, Flickr, Wikimedia Commons

 July 22, 2024  

By IWPR

By Daniel Lizárraga

For the first time in its history Mexico, which has been governed only by men for 200 years, will have a female president. 

When she takes office in October 2024, Claudia Sheinbaum will inherit unprecedented power and a series of grave and unresolved human rights issues, including the fact that Mexico is the most dangerous country to practice journalism in peacetime, according to Reporters Without Borders (RSF)

Although there have been federal and local protection mechanisms for human rights defenders and journalists in place since 2012, the situation remains grave. 

According to Article 19, 164 journalists died in Mexico between 2000 and 2024; 153 men and 12 women. 

Most recently, on April 26, 2024 — a month before the electoral campaigns ended — journalist Roberto Carlos Figueroa, who directed the media outlet Acá en el Show in Cuernavaca, Morelos, was kidnapped by an armed group. Money was demanded for Figueroa’s release and his wife paid the ransom; however, he was later found dead. 

RSF announced it would join the official investigations to determine if his disappearance was related to any published or upcoming news. Organised crime groups do not usually target journalists for ransom, knowing that it was unlikely this would be profitable in a country where the average reporter’s salary is 18,898 pesos —1,025 US dollars a month. 

FEW SAFEGUARDS

Figueroa’s murder raised the number of journalists killed under López Obrador’s 2018-2024 government to 44, an average of seven each year. The president, who steps down on October 1, has repeatedly insisted that journalists were neither persecuted nor harassed during his tenure. Although it is true that no media outlet closures were ordered during his term, his speeches were consistently hostile against any watchdog journalism that held him, his party or their allies to account.

Nonetheless, López Obrador has presided over the Mexico’s third deadliest ever government for journalists, behind the administrations of Enrique Peña Nieto with 47 and Felipe Calderón Hinojosa with 48, when a war against drug trafficking was unleashed. 

On Sunday, January 23, 2022 — when López Obrador’s government was starting its fourth year — journalist Lourdes Maldonado was shot dead in front of her house. She was under federal protection after receiving threats and had been given a panic button to activate in case of an emergency. However, it was of no use, as the killers surprised her before she got out of her car.

Two years earlier, in March 2019, she had expressed fear for her life at one of the Mexican president’s morning conferences after winning a labour lawsuit against the company Primer Sistema de Noticias — which owned a local TV channel — belonging to Jaime Bonilla Valdez, former governor of Baja California. 

On that occasion, López Obrador listened attentively, then committed to follow up on her case. Lourdes returned to Tijuana.

While the perpetrators of her murder were detained, nothing is known about who ordered her assassination, or why.

Amnesty International (AI) and the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) have warned that Mexico’s protection mechanisms for journalists tend to deny, weaken, or withdraw safeguards for those who need them.

In a joint statement, CPJ and AI described “an alarming picture of a deeply flawed institution that needs significant reform to meet the needs of journalists in one of the most violent countries in the world for the press”.

On Tuesday, June 11, the body of reporter Víctor Manuel Jiménez Campos was found in an abandoned water well in the community of Torrecillas, in the municipality of Villagrán. He had been missing since November 1, 2020, last seen heading to cover a baseball game.

Villagrán, with an estimated population of around 65,700, is the operations centre of the Santa Rosa de Lima cartel, led by Antonio Yepez Ortiz, “El Marro,” initially dedicated to fuel theft and later to drug trafficking. Rates of violence in Guanajuato have increased due to territorial clashes with the Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG), one of the most aggressive organisations to have emerged in Mexico in the last decade.

GROWING DANGERS

Threats against journalists have been another growing issue. In 2023 alone — the penultimate year of López Obrador’s term — Article 19 recorded 561 threats, highlighting 124 cases of harassment, 100 assaults and 106 instances of illegitimate use of public power. They also recorded 54 blockages by the authorities to prevent information from being made public and 37 physical attacks.

Another pending issue is the distribution of official advertising in the media. In 2022, López Obrador’s government spent significantly less money compared to other administrations. But it concentrated 680 million pesos, or 28 per cent of its budget, in just three companies: Televisa, TV Azteca, and La Jornada, seriously limiting access to finance for smaller and more investigative media. 

López Obrador often used his daily press conferences to label the media as corrupt and conservative. Every Wednesday, he included a section called Who’s Who in the Lies, where he not only responded to reports but also revealed journalists’ incomes.

It was perhaps no surprise that judicial harassment has increased year by year, according to Article 19. In 2023, 22 judicial processes were initiated against journalists in administrative, civil, electoral, and even criminal areas, equivalent to an average of 1.8 cases opened each month.

Article 19 highlighted the case of journalist Claudia Solera, who in April 2024  received notice of a 300 million peso lawsuit — over 16 million US dollars— for an article published in the Excelsior newspaper 14 years ago. A law firm accused her of damaging its assets and image by exposing a series of irregularities in illegal agreements with retirees. 

So far, Sheinbaum has not made her view of the media clear, but recently she alleged that “there are some outlets that are dedicated to permanently criticising our movement without reason, regardless of what is said or done”.

Artur Romeu, director of the Latin America Office of Reporters Without Borders, said in a statement that Sheinbaum would have the historic opportunity to end this uncontrolled violence against media professionals.

“The biggest challenge will be to effectively coordinate institutional efforts in favour of a more ambitious policy of prevention and protection for journalists, using all possible mechanisms at the federal and state levels,” he said. “The fight against violence against media professionals cannot continue to depend solely on the federal protection mechanism. A more systematic approach is essential, and its success depends on genuine political will.”

• About the author: Daniel Lizárraga is a veteran Mexican investigative journalist and currently coordinator of Investigative Journalism Projects for Latin America at IWPR.
• Source: This article was published by IWPR

Share

IWPR

The Institute for War & Peace Reporting is headquartered in London with coordinating offices in Washington, DC and The Hague, IWPR works in over 30 countries worldwide. It is registered as a charity in the UK, as an organisation with tax-exempt status under Section 501(c)(3) in the United States, and as a charitable foundation in The Netherlands. The articles are originally produced by the Institute for War and Peace Reporting.

ARREST HIM FOR WAR CRIMES

Activists plan protests during Netanyahu's Washington visit this week

Police expect a "large number of demonstrators" and were making additional security arrangements but said there were no known threats.

By REUTERS

JULY 22, 2024 Pro-Palestine demonstrators cross New Jersey Avenue near the U.S. Capitol, during a protest in Washington, U.S, December 17, 2023.(photo credit: REUTERS/TOM BRENNER)

Activists opposing Israel's war in Gaza and Washington's support for its Middle Eastern ally plan protests at the US Capitol on Wednesday to coincide with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's US visit this week.

Police expect a "large number of demonstrators" and were making additional security arrangements but said there were no known threats.

Netanyahu will be in Washington this week for a July 24 address to a joint session of the US Congress. He is expected to meet President Joe Biden.

Biden has recently supported talks for a ceasefire but has continued military support for Israel.

Israel's military campaign followed an Oct. 7 attack by Hamas, whose militants surged into Israel, killing 1,200 and taking around 250 hostages, according to Israeli figures.

Pro Palestinian protesters demonstrate during the UN Climate Change Conference, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, in Bonn, Germany, June 7, 2024. (credit: REUTERS/WOLFGANG RATTAY)

A coalition of groups is expected to participate in the protests, among them ANSWER (an acronym for "Act Now to Stop War and End Racism"), women-led peace and human rights group CodePink, Palestinian groups such as Palestinian American Community Center and Jewish groups including Jewish Voice for Peace.

CodePink told Reuters organizers had arranged buses for human rights advocates to come to Washington from numerous states across the country.

US Capitol Police statement

"We anticipate a large number of demonstrators to show up," the US Capitol Police said. "Our plan includes adding more officers – including from several outside agencies."

A flyer urged the formation of a "People's Red Line around the Capitol building" on Wednesday, where demonstrators will criticize the US government for not drawing a "red line" in supporting Israel despite the war's death toll.

Around 230 anonymous Capitol Hill staffers from 122 offices signed a letter, made public last week, urging their bosses to either protest or boycott the July 24 address to Congress by Netanyahu against whom the International Criminal Court prosecutor's office recently requested an arrest warrant over alleged war crimes.

US protests since war erupted in Gaza have included marches, vigils and blocking of bridges and roads near train stations and airports in multiple cities along with encampments on college campuses.

Mass killer who ‘hunted’ black people says police encouraged him

By Charlie Northcott, 

BBC Africa Eye
JULY 22,2024

BBC


A convicted South African murderer who shot dead dozens of black men during apartheid has told the BBC the police sanctioned his violence. Louis van Schoor says others should share the blame for the killings he carried out as a security guard. But in talking to BBC Africa Eye over the past four years, he has also let slip horrifying details that raise serious questions about his early release from prison.

Standing in the bedroom of a killer, your eyes naturally hone in on the details.

Van Schoor’s bed is immaculately neat - the duvet so flat it looks like it has been ironed. The air is heavy with the smell of cigarettes, their stubs piled high in an ashtray. Strips of sticky paper are dangling from the ceiling, writhing with trapped and dying flies.

The so-called “Apartheid Killer” has lost his teeth. His health is waning. Following a heart attack, both his legs were recently amputated, leaving him in a wheelchair, with painful scars. When his surgeon carried out this procedure, Van Schoor requested an epidural instead of a general anaesthetic - so he could watch them remove his legs.

“I was curious,” he said, chuckling. “I saw them cutting… they sawed through the bone.”

In speaking to the BBC World Service, Van Schoor wanted to persuade us that he is “not the monster that people say I am”. His enthusiastic description of his legs being removed did little to soften his image.

Over a three-year period in the 1980s under the country’s racist apartheid system - which imposed a strict hierarchy that privileged white South Africans - Van Schoor shot and killed at least 39 people.

All of his victims were black. The youngest was just 12 years old. The killings occurred in East London, a city in South Africa’s windswept Eastern Cape.

Van Schoor was a security guard at the time, with a contract to protect as many as 70% of white-owned businesses: restaurants, shops, factories and schools. He has long claimed that everyone he killed was a “criminal” who he caught red-handed breaking into these buildings.

“He was a kind of vigilante killer. He was a Dirty Harry character,” says Isa Jacobson, a South African journalist and filmmaker, who has spent 20 years investigating Van Schoor’s case.

“These were intruders who were, in a lot of cases, pretty desperate. Digging through bins, maybe stealing some food… petty criminals.”




The Apartheid Killer

Watch on iPlayer (UK only) or on Monday 22 July at 23:05 on BBC Two (Northern Ireland 23:35).

Outside the UK, watch on the BBC Africa YouTube channel.




Van Schoor’s killings - sometimes several in a single night - struck terror into the black community of East London. Stories spread through the city of a bearded man - nicknamed “whiskers” in the Xhosa language - who made people disappear at night. But his shootings were not carried out in secret.

Every killing between 1986 and 1989 was reported to the police by Van Schoor himself. But the release from prison of anti-apartheid leader Nelson Mandela in 1990 signalled an end to this impunity. Ripples of change swept across South Africa and, following pressure from activists and journalists, the security guard was arrested in 1991.

Van Schoor’s trial was one of the largest murder trials in South Africa’s history, involving dozens of witnesses and thousands of pages of forensic evidence.

However, the case against him largely collapsed in court. At the time of his trial, much of the apparatus of the apartheid system was still in place within the judiciary. Despite killing at least 39 people, he was only convicted of seven murders. He would go on to serve just 12 years in prison.

His other 32 killings are still classified as “justifiable homicides” by the police. Apartheid-era laws gave people the right to use lethal force against intruders if they resisted arrest or fled once caught.

Van Schoor relied heavily on this defence to maintain his innocence, claiming that his victims were running away when he killed them.


Louis van Schoor pointed out the places where he would track down intruders


The BBC’s investigation into Van Schoor scrutinised the evidence underlying these so-called “justifiable” shootings, delving deep into long-forgotten police reports, autopsies and witness statements.

The investigation was led by Isa Jacobson, and involved years of archival research in multiple cities across the Eastern Cape. The most important files were scattered among hundreds of boxes, hidden away in vaults.

“The whole scale of it is just mesmerising,” she said. “It's astounding that any court of law could allow this to happen.”

Some of the most harrowing evidence Ms Jacobson found were witness statements from people who were injured by Van Schoor, but survived. These accounts contradict the security guard’s argument that they had been running away when he shot them.

Multiple people said Van Schoor shot them while their hands were up, after they had surrendered. Others describe him toying with them, asking if they would prefer to be arrested or shot - before shooting them in the chest. Another victim described being shot in the abdomen, begging for water, before being kicked in his wound by Van Schoor.

The security guard was armed with a 9mm semi-automatic pistol, frequently loaded with hollow-point bullets, which cause severe internal ruptures when entering a victim. In one case, he fired eight shots into an unarmed man.

In a particularly brutal case on 11 July 1988, Van Schoor shot a 14-year-old boy who had broken into a restaurant searching for petty change.

The boy - who we have not named to protect his privacy - told the police he hid in the toilet when he saw Van Schoor with his gun. He says the security guard called him out, told him to stand next to the wall, and then shot him repeatedly.

“He told me to stand up, but I couldn’t,” said the boy, in his recorded testimony. “While I was lying there, he kicked me in the mouth. He picked me up and propped me up against a table and then he shot me again.”

The boy survived, but he was not believed. He was charged for breaking into the building. Many young black men and boys who gave first-hand accounts of being assaulted and shot by Van Schoor faced a similar fate.

Testimonies such as this were heard during Van Schoor’s trial, but the judge repeatedly dismissed the witnesses as “unsophisticated” and “unreliable”. There are no jury trials in South Africa. The opinion of the judge is final.




World of Secrets, Season 3: The Apartheid Killer

A new six-episode season from the BBC’s global investigations podcast. A BBC World Service investigation.

Listen now on BBC Sounds. If you are outside of the UK click here.




At the time of Van Schoor’s trial, many members of the white community in East London supported him. One entrepreneurial businessman printed bumper stickers with pictures of the security guard. They said “I Love Louis”, next to a heart full of bullet holes.

“There was evident racial bias in the legal system,” says Patrick Goodenough, a South African journalist who led the 1980s investigation into Van Schoor. He also attended his trial.

“The support for him was massive… He would not have been able to get away with a fraction of what he got away with without it.”

There is no statute of limitations for murder or attempted murder in South Africa. In theory, there is nothing stopping the police from reopening Van Schoor’s case and re-assessing these “justifiable” shootings.

“Louis van Schoor was basically going out and murdering people for sport,” says Dominic Jones, a journalist who helped raise awareness of the security guard’s killing spree in the 1980s.

Some of the most shocking findings from the BBC's investigation came from interviews with Van Schoor himself, which strongly suggested he got a thrill from his activities.

“Every night is a new adventure, if you want to put it that way,” he told the BBC.


Journalist Isa Jacobson has spent years going through public records to scrutinise Louis van Schoor's case


Many of the businesses he protected installed silent alarms. When someone broke in, Van Schoor would receive an alert which allowed him to surprise the intruder - and identify exactly where they were inside the building. And he always went alone.

“I was barefoot. It’s quiet. You don’t have your shoes squeaking on tiles and stuff,” he said.

He would never switch the light on. Instead, he relied on his sense of smell.

“If somebody breaks in, the adrenaline gives off an odour. And you can pick that up,” he said.

Van Schoor claims he never went out “with the intention of killing black people” and says he is not a racist. But he admits he found stalking them in the dark “exciting”.

Before becoming a security guard, Van Schoor was a member of the East London police force for 12 years. He used to handle what he calls “attacker dogs”, which he used to track down and catch protesters and criminals - almost all of whom were black.

He compared this to “hunting, but a different species”.

Louis van Schoor
Louis van Schoor was previously in the police dog squad


Tetinene “Joe” Jordan, a former anti-apartheid activist who was operating in East London at the time of Van Schoor’s killings, remembers this well.

“He was hunting, literally hunting people,” he says.

Van Schoor strongly denies he is a “serial killer” and believes everything he did was “within the law”. If people feel aggrieved over his killings, he says they should blame the South African police.

He says the police never criticised or warned him, but actively supported and encouraged him.

“Every officer in East London knew what was going on… all the police officers knew,” he said. “Not once did anybody say ‘Hey Louis, you’re on the borderline or you should cool it or whatever’… they all knew what was happening.”

In the police records held in public archives, Ms Jacobson found instances of killings where officers had been present at the time of the shootings. At no point did they appear to question Van Schoor as a suspect.

In many instances, the police failed to take photos of the deceased at the scenes of shooting and failed to collect key forensic evidence, such as bullet casings. Van Schoor was often the only witness to his shootings, so this evidence could have been crucial for determining what had actually happened in each case.

“These were cover-ups… He had the backing from police officers from junior rank and senior rank,” said Mr Goodenough.

“They wouldn’t investigate. They’d sit down with him and have a cigarette while chatting, with bodies lying nearby.”

In all cases Van Schoor pulled the trigger - but between the police and the businesses that hired him, an entire community played a role in the killings which took place in East London.

“Van Schoor was a serial killer because there was a society that allowed him to be one,” says Ms Jacobson.

For the relatives of Van Schoor’s victims, his freedom, and the failure of the state to thoroughly investigate his killings, is a constant source of pain. Some never recovered the bodies of their loved ones.

“It seems like we are stuck in this phase of being heartbroken, being angry,” says Marlene Mvumbi, whose brother, Edward, was murdered by Van Schoor in 1987. His remains were dumped in an unmarked grave by the authorities without the family’s consent.

“Lots of people are still missing and not even in the graveyard… there is no closure.”

Van Schoor’s case pre-dated South Africa’s 1995 Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which gave compensation to many victims of apartheid-era crimes.

Sharlene Crage, a former activist who played a key role in pressuring the South African authorities to prosecute Van Schoor, is outraged that he was ever allowed to walk free.

“It’s a shocking miscarriage of justice,” she said. “There is no reason his case shouldn’t be reopened.”


Louis van Schoor admitted he found tracking intruders down thrilling


Van Schoor was sentenced to more than 90 years in prison at the conclusion of his trial in 1992, but the judge allowed him to serve each term concurrently. He was freed on parole in 2004.

The early release of apartheid-era killers from prison has become a contentious issue in South Africa.

In 2022, there were protests in Johannesburg over the parole of Janusz Walus, who killed anti-apartheid politician Chris Hani. A few years previously, Eugene de Kock, in charge of a death squad responsible for the abduction, torture, and murder of dozens of black activists was also freed.

Nowadays, Van Schoor spends most of his time watching rugby, smoking and playing with his pet rottweiler, Brutus. He says he has no memory of many of his killings.

Some reports have stated, without verification, that he shot as many as 100 people. Van Schoor denies this, but concedes his number of shootings may exceed the documented number of 39.

“I honestly don’t know how many I shot. Some say over a 100, some say 40… Let’s say for argument’s sake I shot 50 people,” he told us.

He says he is proud of his past actions.

“I don’t feel any guilt,” he said. “I’ve got no remorse inside.”

The BBC contacted the South African police for comment, but they did not respond. The authorities have given no explanation for why Van Schoor’s killings have not been reassessed in the post-apartheid era.

“There is too much pain, and for now I don’t feel that there is enough that is done for us to heal,” says Marlene Mvumbi.

“It’s not only the ones that were killed by Van Schoor. The ones that have similar stories from the killings of the apartheid regime.”

Investigation by Isa Jacobson and Charlie Northcott

UAE orders a trial of Bangladeshi nationals arrested for protesting their home government


DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Authorities in the United Arab Emirates ordered an investigation and an expedited trial of Bangladeshi nationals arrested for protesting against their home government across the Gulf country, state media reported.

July 21, 2024
By Michael Wakin The Associated Press

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Authorities in the United Arab Emirates ordered an investigation and an expedited trial of Bangladeshi nationals arrested for protesting against their home government across the Gulf country, state media reported.

The protests in the UAE followed weeks of protests in Bangladesh by demonstrators protesting a quota system that reserved up to 30% of government jobs for relatives of veterans who fought in Bangladesh’s war of independence in 1971. The country’s top court on Sunday scaled back on the controversial system, in a partial victory for student protesters.

The UAE’s attorney general’s office indicted Saturday the Bangladeshis on several charges, including “gathering in a public place and protesting against their home government with the intent to incite unrest,” obstructing law enforcement, causing harm to others and damaging property, according to the state-owned Emirates News Agency, WAM.

Leaders of Australia and Japan react to Biden dropping out of 2024 US presidential race

“Based on the preliminary investigation results, the Public Prosecution has ordered their pretrial detention pending further investigations,” WAM reported.

The report did not specify how many Bangladeshis were arrested.

Bangladeshi nationals make up the UAE’s third largest expatriate community, many of whom are low-paid laborers seeking to send money back home to their families. The Emirates’ overall population of more than 9.2 million is only 10% Emirati.

Political parties and labor unions are banned in the UAE, a federation of seven sheikhdoms. Broad laws severely restrict freedom of speech and almost all major local media are either state-owned or state-affiliated outlets.