CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M
Bona Mugabe’s $8m home, assets exposed in divorce angers Zimbabwe

Revelations about multimillion-dollar assets linked to the Mugabe family have triggered outrage just weeks after an Al Jazeera exposé on Zimbabwean elite and money laundering.

Bona Mugabe

5.5.2023
by Reuters

Harare, Zimbabwe – This week, it was revealed that Bona Mugabe, the only daughter of Zimbabwe’s pioneer President Robert Mugabe, owns vast swathes of land in premier residential areas in the capital Harare, 21 farms, an $8m mansion in Dubai, and a fleet of luxury cars. And more.

The assets, named during ongoing divorce proceedings between the younger Mugabe and her former airline pilot husband Simba Chikore, have triggered outrage in the Southern African country.

Mugabe, 33, and Chikore, 46, have been married for nine years. But earlier this year, Mugabe filed for the nullification of their union, citing irreconcilable differences.

Chikore, who is contesting the divorce, insists he is entitled to joint cusody of the couple’s three children and part of the assets the pair jointly acquired, should the Harare court grant the request.

The acrimonious separation has shone the light on the staggering wealth accumulated by the longtime Zimbabwe ruler’s family, with court documents seen by Al Jazeera indicating that there is an $80m real estate portfolio in the ex-president’s family.

Chikore also listed numerous cars, including an $800,000 Rolls Royce and three Range Rovers, as some of the assets the family owns. Bona’s lawyer, Fungai Chimwamurombe,  confirmed the properties’ authenticity in the court papers to the press.

Zimbabweans this week angrily took to social media to protest the shocking revelations about the Mugabe family wealth.

“This is how dirty Mugabe was. Just a tip of the iceberg. Imagine what his other kids and himself own, his uncles, aunts, rats, dogs and friends,” one Facebook user, Gideon Baba Tyler Mtetwa, wrote.

‘Unconstitutional distribution of wealth’

Musa Kika, a lawyer and executive director of the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum, said Chikore’s claims, if proven to be “accurate and true”, would suggest unconstitutional distribution of wealth “on account of proximity to political power”.

“If proven to be true and accurate, this goes against the spirit of our Constitution. Our Constitution requires equitable distribution of the finite resource of land and expressly states in section 293(2) that ‘the State may not alienate more than one piece of agricultural land to the same person and his or her dependants’,” Kika told Al Jazeera. According to him, the term “alienate” includes both leasing and selling of land.

Steven Chuma, youth interim spokesman of the Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC), Zimbabwe’s main opposition, said the divorce case had proven that the land reform exercise was “never about landless majority but was meant to self-enrich leaders of the post-colonial state.”

The land reform exercise was a controversial campaign in the early 2000s by the older Mugabe who seized land from white farmers for apparent redistribution to landless Blacks.

Critics accused him of reallocating the lots to friends and allies then, and the allegations have resurfaced again.

“The one man, one farm principle has been thrown into the dust bins by the ZANU-PF [ruling party] looting committee,” Chuma told Al Jazeera.

‘Looting par excellence’

The latest revelations come barely two weeks after outrage due to shocking disclosures of large-scale gold smuggling by individuals affiliated with Zimbabwean government officials and the ruling party in an Al Jazeera documentary.

The four-part documentary, The Gold Mafia, was filmed by Al Jazeera’s Investigative Unit (I-Unit), based on dozens of undercover operations spanning three continents and thousands of documents.

President Emmerson Mnangagwa, who toppled the late strongman in a 2017 military coup, has been the subject of scrutiny in recent months, with some questioning his role in the gold looting scandal.

Uebert Angel, a cleric appointed ambassador by Mnangagwa, was caught on camera offering to use his diplomatic position to smuggle millions of dollars and launder funds for Al Jazeera undercover reporters posing as Asian reporters.

And now, some Zimbabweans are calling for similar investigations to ascertain how Mugabe’s daughter ended up with a vast array of assets.

“As much as Simba did well to list those properties as a settlement plan, it did reveal something to the world,” said Garikai Mazara, a former media personality. “It does not need one to be a rocket scientist to see that the properties listed by Simba Chikore were crudely acquired. So it is my fervent hope that the presiding judge in the divorce settlement, after dispensing with the case, will have the presence of mind to ask how those properties were acquired. And then recommend for a judicial enquiry. Killing two birds with one stone, it is not without precedent.”

Others queried how much wealth the Mugabe family had accumulated over the years.

“21 farms they own, what of the parents then? Looting par excellence! The liberation war was a waste of time if it birthed this system!” one Facebook user Eric Knight wrote.

“Many Zimbabweans were shocked today with the amount of land owned by Bona Mugabe in Borrowdale. This is how land has been stolen from Zimbabweans by ZANUPF corrupt politicians. The Government request land from council, then it is transferred to ZANUPF corrupt politicians,” journalist Hopewell Chin’ono wrote.

 

Others attacked Mugabe for being hypocritical while he was alive and in power.

“This divorce has opened a can of worms that Robert Gabriel Mugabe was a hypocrite and pseudo Pan Africanist … he was a man who failed to practise what he was preaching on Black empowerment as he openly said 1 man 1 farm, yet he was behind the scenes looting vast amounts of land,” tweeted one Kerina Mujati.

 OPINION

OPINION,

Kais Saied’s Tunisia is becoming a failed state

After just a few years of being governed by Saied, the Tunisian state is already struggling to fulfil some of its essential responsibilities.

Haythem Guesmi
Published On 5 May 2023

Ennahdha party supporters wave the Tunisian flag during a demonstration against Pesident Kais Saied in Tunis on October 15, 2022. [File: Fethi Belaid/AFP]

The April 18 arrest and consequent imprisonment of Tunisia’s main opposition leader, Rached Ghannouchi, the head of the Ennahdha party and former speaker of the dissolved parliament, was the latest and perhaps the most definitive sign of the country’s swift descent into dictatorship under President Kais Saied.

Indeed, by arresting Ghannouchi, an 81-year-old man, on the 27th day of Ramadan, one of the holiest nights in the Islamic calendar, and holding him for 48 hours without access to a lawyer, Saied announced in spectacular fashion that he will not hesitate to trample on the human rights of his critics or the rule of law in his country to eliminate all opposition to his authority.

Saied’s use of trumped-up charges and arbitrary detention to silence his leading political opponent was eerily reminiscent of the tactics used by Tunisia’s former dictator Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali to keep his critics in check. As such, last month’s events convinced many in the country that Tunisia today is not any more democratic or free than it was under Ben Ali.

In fact, Saied now appears to be posing a bigger threat to Tunisia’s future than Ben Ali ever did. Saied is even more aggressive and unhinged than his predecessor in his quest to stifle dissent and consolidate power, and unlike Ben Ali, he is not afraid to attack and erode the very foundations of the Tunisian state to further his agenda.

The president is following scorched earth policies that are eliminating opposition of any kind, widening polarisation, accentuating racial tensions, promoting tribalism and eroding the public’s trust in independent institutions. He is, step by step, turning Tunisia into not only a dictatorship but also a failed state.

Since assuming absolute power in a 2021 coup, Saied has slandered, criminalised and jailed his critics and political opponents. He put a target on the backs of sub-Saharan migrants and broke all cooperation, trust and even communication between civil and political forces.

By questioning the independence and objectivity of the judiciary and targeting judges who refuse to bow down to him, Saied also disarmed the only remaining power in Tunisia that could have checked his power and turned it into yet another tool to attack his rivals. He also made Tunisia’s leading and once relatively independent news organisations into puppets and started using them in his undemocratic and inhumane attacks on opposition politicians and other critics of his presidency.

Thanks to Saied’s regime, gone are the days when such institutions as the Independent High Authority for Elections or the Tunis Afrique Presse (TAP) news agency were considered trustworthy and independent.

After just a few years of being governed by Saied, the Tunisian state is already struggling to fulfil some of its essential responsibilities, such as providing security, basic services and a stable political environment for the Tunisian people.

In the last few years, for many Tunisians, power blackouts and water shortages have become a daily struggle. The mismanagement of resources and the inability to provide necessities such as food, water and housing have caused widespread social anxiety and political disenchantment. This erosion of trust in the state further deepened as it became clear that Saied and those in his regime prioritise their interests over the public good.

Saied’s power grab has also promoted profound political instability and eliminated all systems of checks and balances – something that will inevitably result in the complete breakdown of the rule of law if left unaddressed. His relentless suppression of all political opposition and refusal to establish a constitutional court, meanwhile, has all but guaranteed that a swift and painless transition back to democracy will not be possible.

Today, there is nothing but uncertainty and instability in Tunisia’s future. For example, if the president, who is known to be suffering from chronic illness, passes away suddenly, there is no way of knowing how the resulting constitutional void would be filled or what would happen to the country.

There is also the growing risk of conflict and violence stemming from Saied’s erratic and authoritarian governing style and refusal to share power. The ever-deepening environment of fear, distrust, lawlessness and impunity is not only encouraging domestic acts of violence but also external interference.

Indeed, Saied’s regime is already unable to efficiently control and protect Tunisia’s borders. Internally, the growth of criminal violence and the lawlessness with which the security apparatus oppresses Tunisians testify to the breakdown of the state’s integrity and the widespread desperation crippling the people. In Saied’s Tunisia, the ubiquity of urban crime, the femicide crisis and prevalence of human trafficking have instilled a sense of insecurity and disorder that is hard to shake.

In his quest to consolidate power, Saied is also eroding Tunisia’s sovereignty. Convinced of Saied’s utility as an ally in the fight against undocumented immigration, the Italian government has lobbied local and international powers on behalf of his regime, undermining the sovereignty and independence of the Tunisian state and weakening the influence of the opposition in the process. By supporting Saied’s regime, both Italy and France have made it clear that Tunisia’s borders, laws and future feasibility as a democracy are irrelevant to their fight against undocumented immigration. Desperate for international support and an IMF loan, Saied is taking any help he can get from anyone, not considering the future consequences of his alliances and choices. 

Ghannouchi’s imprisonment was the latest sign that Saied has not only transformed Tunisia into a dictatorship but also put the country on the path to becoming a failed state. If Saied is not persuaded to roll back his attacks on Tunisia’s democracy, its loss may prove irreversible – with tragic consequences for the people of Tunisia and the region.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

• 
  Haythem Guesmi

  Haythem Guesmi is a Tunisian academic and writer.

Charles is Jamaica’s head of state. The island nation may break with the monarchy next year.

The Commonwealth country has scheduled a referendum in 2024 on whether to cut ties to the British monarchy, opening up a debate on how to reshape the society.

A protest demanding an apology and reparations for slavery in Kingston, Jamaica, last year during a visit by King Charles III’s son Prince William, Prince of Wales, and his wife, Catherine, Princess of Wales.

Credit...Collin Reid/Associated Press


By Emiliano Rodríguez Mega
May 6, 2023

As King Charles III put on the centuries-old St. Edward’s crown on Saturday, Jamaica, a Commonwealth member, continued to move ahead with plans to cut ties with the British monarchy — a decision scheduled for a referendum in 2024.

“Time has come. Jamaica in Jamaican hands,” Marlene Malahoo Forte, Jamaica’s minister for legal and constitutional affairs, said in an interview with Sky News this week. “Time to say goodbye.”

She is part of a 15-member committee of officials and experts that is laying the groundwork to modify Jamaica’s Constitution and remove the British monarch as the Caribbean island’s head of state.

Jamaica was also represented in a letter to King Charles this week in which campaigners from 12 Commonwealth nations urged him to use his coronation to apologize for the “horrific impacts” of Britain’s imperial past, including “racism, oppression, colonialism and slavery.” The letter called for reparations and the return of all stolen cultural artifacts.

“The British have a great opportunity” to address colonial injustices, said Rosalea Hamilton, co-signer of the letter and founding director of the Institute of Law and Economics, a nonprofit in Kingston, the Jamaican capital. “Having led the world with this inhumanity for centuries, they can lead the world in repairing the damage.”

More on BritainCoronation: King Charles III, Britain’s first new monarch in 70 years, was crowned at Westminster Abbey in London during an ancient ceremony that had a few modern touches.
Municipal Elections: Britain’s Conservative Party suffered sweeping losses in local elections, a stinging rejection of the status quo that raises doubts about its ability to hold onto power.
HSBC: Europe’s largest lender has a venerable place in Britain’s banking industry. Can it stay in one piece, as its biggest shareholder pushes to spin off the bank’s profitable Asian operation?
A Double Life: The execution in Iran of a former deputy defense minister on espionage charges brought to light the man’s role in providing Britain with valuable intelligence over a decade.

Although its practical role in the island’s affairs might be minute, the monarchy has left an uncomfortable legacy. All of the queen’s, and now the king’s, functions are performed by a governor general acting as their direct representative — assenting to all legislation and determining who becomes Prime Minister.

“Some people would tell you it’s largely ceremonial, but I think that’s the wrong way of thinking about it,” said Tracy Robinson, a constitutional law professor at the University of the West Indies. “It reflects the old prerogative power of the crown.”

On the British government’s part, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has declined to apologize for the country’s role in the trans-Atlantic slave trade or to engage in discussions about paying reparations. “Trying to unpick our history is not the right way forward,” he told lawmakers in Britain’s Parliament in April, “and it’s not something that we will focus our energies on.”

Still, the constitutional reform process is prompting more people in Jamaica to think even beyond ditching the British monarch.

“When we say we wish to get rid of the monarchy, that tells you only the starting point,” Ms. Robinson said during a public panel this week. “It does not tell you the destination or where we’ll end up.”

Among the questions that loom: If Charles III is out as Jamaica’s head of state, what kind of political system would ensue?

“We’ve never quite asked and answered those questions before,” said Ms. Hamilton, who co-chairs the Advocates Network, an organization that has urged a national discussion around transitioning to a republic. “Can we, for the first time in our history, really conceive of reshaping the society in the interests of the majority?”

Clear answers are elusive. So far, the government’s committee — which has said that a draft bill will be presented to Parliament this month — has mostly met in private.

If the legislation is not drafted with significant public participation, said Maziki Thame, a researcher at the University of the West Indies, the decision-making could end up in the hands of a few. That would fall short of what many Jamaicans expect.

“Don’t get me wrong — I think it’s very important that you have our people in power,” she said. “At the same time, I want it to have substance as representative of a democratic move.”

THE ORACLE OF CAPITALI$M

Buffett, Munger lash out at "stupid" US-China tensions

• Javier E. David

WASHINGTON - MARCH 13: Warren Buffett, chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., participates in a panel discussion, "Framing the Issues: Markets Perspectives," at Georgetown University March 13, 2007 in Washington, DC. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson hosted the "Treasury Conference on U.S. Capital Markets Competativeness," a day-long program to focus on capital market issues like regulation, competition and other related topics. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Investing legends Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger on Saturday urged the U.S. and China to settle their widening differences, arguing the superpowers have a "mutual interest" in continuing cooperation.

Why it matters: On multiple fronts, the world's two largest economies have found themselves at repeated loggerheads, with few signs of near-term reconciliation.

• As tensions have worsened, some observers have mulled the extent to which both countries can afford to decouple from one other, the consequences of which would cascade across the global economy.

Driving the news: At a question and answer session at Berkshire Hathaway's annual meeting in Omaha, the billionaire dynamic duo insisted the U.S. and China need one another.

• For his part, Munger cited tech giant Apple as a shining example of how the Sino-American relations should work, and blasted rising tensions as "stupid, stupid, stupid."
• "If there’s one thing we should do is get along with China, and have lots of free trade with China…it’s in our mutual interest," Munger stated.
• Attempts by either side to rattle the other should be responded to "with reciprocal kindness," the 99 year-old said.

What they're saying: Buffett, the 92-year old "Oracle of Omaha" whose advice on investing and markets has been widely followed for decades, argued both countries "have to get along with each other."

• "Part of it is how far you can judge how far you can push the other guy without them reacting," Buffett said.

• "The alternative will drive them both into destruction, and increase the probability of something going wrong."

Buffett likened U.S.-China tensions to the Cold War, where America stared down the Soviet Union under the threat of a nuclear conflict that would lead to "mutually assured destruction."

• That policy "kept a lot of things from happening...but Cuba was a close call," Buffett said.
• "It's imperative that both U.S. and China understand what the game is and both can't push too hard, but both can prosper."

Factbox: Who is writer Zakhar Prilepin, target of car bomb in Russia?


A view shows a destroyed vehicle, which transported Russian writer Zakhar Prilepin allegedly wounded in a car bombing in the Nizhny Novgorod region, Russia, May 6, 2023. (Reuters)
Published: 06 May ,2023

Here are some key facts about Zakhar Prilepin, a Russian nationalist writer who was wounded when a bomb blew up his car on Saturday.

*Prilepin, 47, is the author of six novels, often focusing on dark themes. His debut novel “The Pathologies” told the story of young soldiers in the Chechen wars. He has also written numerous poems, essays and articles, and is the recipient of various state awards including a 2021 arts prize from the defence ministry.

*He is an outspoken pro-war figure on social media, with around 300,000 subscribers each to his Telegram and YouTube channels.

*For years, he has organised Russian proxy fighters in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine, boasting in a 2019 YouTube interview that his unit “killed people in big numbers”. The extent of his direct combat involvement is not clear.

*Prilepin has been politically active as the co-chair of the “A Just Russia - For Truth” party. Last year he took a prominent role in creating GRAD, a parliamentary group that seeks to identify cultural figures with “anti-Russian” views and persuade the state and business to stop funding them. GRAD’s initials stand for “Group to investigate anti-Russian activity in the cultural sphere.” Grad is also the Russian word for “hail”, and the name of a missile system.

*Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine last February, he has been sanctioned by Switzerland, Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the European Union.

Russian nationalist writer Zakhar Prilepin injured in car bombing, one person killed

Russian writer Zakhar Prilepin poses for a picture in his flat 

in Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, on December 6, 2008. (Reuters)

AFP
Published: 06 May ,2023

A prominent Russian nationalist writer, Zakhar Prilepin, was wounded in a car bombing on Saturday that Russia immediately blamed on Ukraine and the West.

TASS news agency quoted the interior ministry as saying one person had been killed in the blast in Nizny Novgorod region, about 400 km (250 miles) east of Moscow.

It separately quoted a source in the emergency services as saying the writer was wounded but conscious after the explosion.

For all the latest headlines follow our Google News channel online or via the app.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova wrote on Telegram: “The fact has come true: Washington and NATO fed another international terrorist cell - the Kyiv regime.”

She said it was the “direct responsibility of the US and Britain,” but provided no evidence to support the accusation.

“We pray for Zakhar,” she said.

TASS quoted Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov as declining to comment in the absence of information from investigators.

Prilepin is a novelist who is known as an outspoken supporter of Russia’s actions in Ukraine, where Moscow’s invasion is in its 15th month.

Regional governor Gleb Nikitin said: “Law enforcement officers are now investigating the circumstances and causes of the incident. Zakhar is OK.”

Two leading pro-war Russian propagandists have been killed in bombings since Russia invaded Ukraine in February last year.

Darya Dugina, the daughter of a nationalist ideologue, died in a car bombing near Moscow in August, while military blogger Vladlen Tatarsky was killed in a bomb attack in a St Petersburg cafe last month.

Nationalist writer and politician Zakhar Prilepin in critical condition following a car bombing

May 6, 2023
Source: Meduza

A car bombing outside of Nizhny Novgorod injured Russian nationalist politician and writer Zakhar Prilepin. Telegram channel Baza reports that Prilepin’s daughter was riding in the car with him, but that she got out of the car before the explosion.

The car’s driver, who was also Prilepin’s bodyguard, was killed. Publication Verstka reports that the driver was a Luhansk separatist fighter. Russian Telegram channels previously reported that the driver went by the call sign Zloy (Evil). According to Verstka, that call sign belonged to 27-year-old Luhansk native Alexander Shubin, who fought with the Surkov–Prilepin battalion before moving to the Nizhny Novgorod region, where Zakhar Prilepin lives with his family.

Prilepin was reportedly traveling to Moscow from the occupied Luhansk and Donetsk “people’s republics.” Russian state broadcaster RBC reports that Prilepin stopped at a cafe in the Nizhny Novgorod region on his way to Moscow. The bomb was possibly planted in his car while he ate. A source for the Telegram channel Shot says an explosive device was placed under the hood of Prilepin’s Audi and exploded as soon as the car left the cafe. Shot reports that the explosion formed a crater and scattered wreckage from the car 50 meters (over 150 feet).

Prilepin is in critical condition and will undergo surgery in a hospital in Nizhny Novgorod. Reports about the writer’s condition varied immediately following the incident. Nizhny Novgorod governor Gleb Nikitin say that Prilepin “was okay.” Regional emergency services later confirmed that Prilepin had been injured. TASS reported that Prilepin sustained injuries to both of his legs. Within 45 minutes of the explosion, a Shot source said that the writer was being evacuated by medical helicopter, and pro-Kremlin Ukrainian blogger Anatoly Shariy posted about an emergency amputation of Prilepin’s legs. RIA Novosti, citing a source in law enforcement, reported that Prilepin had suffered fractures and a concussion. Telegram channel Mash says that first responders splinted and bandaged Prilepin’s broken leg before loading him into an evacuation helicopter.

The first photographs of the incident emerged an hour after the explosion, showing a mangled car and the helicopter that reportedly took Prilepin to a hospital.





Russia’s Investigative Committee has opened a criminal case into the explosion, classifying the incident as a terrorist attack.

Presidential spokesperson Dmitry Peskov declined to comment on the incident. Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, called the attack on Prilepin “a cynical performance” and “a vile attack carried out by Nazi extremists.”

Police in Nizhny Novgorod arrested a possible suspect after a search by local authorities. Telegram channel Baza reported that police were tasked with stopping “all suspicious vehicles.” A source for Interfax reported that the suspect had been following Prilepin. The source said the suspect was around 30 and fit the description of a person who had been seen during the previous two days outside of Prilepin’s home in the Nizhny Novgorod region. The source added that another person, who “was seen near the village in a vehicle without license plates” is still wanted.

Later on May 6, Alexander Permyakov, who was arrested in connection with the car bombing, confessed. Permyakov said he was acting on instructions from Ukrainian special services, and that he placed an explosive on the road Prilepin was traveling on, detonating it at a distance.

Politician Ilya Ponomarev said the explosion was organized by the National Republican Army, which has also claimed responsibility for killing high-profile right-wing figures like Vladlen Tatarsky and Daria Dugina.

Atesh, a military paristan movement among Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars in the occupied territories of Ukraine, also claims to have taken part in the event. On January 28, the Atesh movement posted on Telegram, “The orders for Prilepin have been given! We’ve sent out more than 5,000 text messages to our agents and Russian soldiers to find and liquidate a known Ruscist.” On May 6, the day of the car bombing, Atesh announced that they had “been hunting Prilepin since the beginning of the year,” adding that “Our predictions always come true, because we don’t just speak, we act.”

On May 4, Prilepin posted on his personal Telegram channel that the Oplot battalion, of which he was a deputy commander, would take a leave from the combat zone. The writer and politician went to war in January 2023. He supported the Russian troops from the first days of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. A Prilepin spokesperson said he ran “humanitarian missions” in Russian-occupied Ukrainian territory.

Prilepin planned to run for President of the Russian Federation in 2024. By August 2022, he had already opened several campaign headquarters in Russia as well as in the self-proclaimed LNR and Russian-occupied territories of Kherson and Kharkiv. One source told news outlet Vedomosti that Putin’s administration looked on Prilepin’s presidential ambitions “not in the best way.”

A US civil case gives us, Syrians, a glimmer of hope

A new lawsuit against the Syrian regime filed in the US is an important step towards justice for Syria’s disappeared.

Mayassa Sheikh Ahmed
Human rights activist

OPINION
Published On 6 May 2023

Landline telephones are placed by Syrian families at the Bebelplatz as a call to governments to do more to seek information about detained people in Syria, in Berlin on August 28, 2021

 [File: Reuteres/Hannibal Hanschke]

On April 12, the US-based Centre for Justice and Accountability revealed that it has filed a civil case against the Syrian regime for the widespread torture of Syrian citizens it has carried out over the past 12 years. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Obada Mzaik, a Syrian American who survived torture while in detention and was able to get out of the country.

The news of this court case reached me in my home in one of the camps for displaced people in northwest Syria. Amid the devastation of war, the aftermath of the deadly earthquake that hit us in February, and the personal loss I have suffered, this was much-needed good news.

It was an important moment, for not just me but all of us Syrians, whose loved ones have been forcibly disappeared by Bashar al-Assad’s regime, kept in arbitrary detention without charge, tortured and even killed.

On January 5, 2012, my husband Muhammad, a real estate contractor, was arrested and forcibly disappeared by the Syrian regime because he had helped to organise peaceful demonstrations at the start of the Syrian revolution. It has been more than 11 years and still, I know nothing about where he is or how he is doing.

Some survivors of detention, who met him in detention, told me he was killed under torture in 2014, but when his parents, my in-laws, inquired of officials, they said he was not detained by them. We don’t know what to believe.

My daughter Maryam was just two months old when her father was arrested. She only knows his face from pictures I have of him. She loves drawing and since she discovered her love of art, she constantly sketches his face. Maryam’s brother Abdulsalam was six when his father was forcibly disappeared and her sister Zahraa was four and both speak of him often.

We have very little left to remind us of the happy life we had before Muhammad’s detention. Our house where we lived in Maarat al-Nu’man was bombed several times, the last time it was destroyed. I still have a letter that Muhammad gave me when we were engaged in January 2004. I have my engagement ring and one playing card with the words “I love you” written in his handwriting.

The word victim is sad and terrifying, but unfortunately, my children and I are victims of a cruel regime. Living in Syria and with no international tribunal in place to investigate all the crimes that have been committed during the Syrian war, we have no way to seek justice.

That is why the US court case is important to us as well as all others that have been undertaken by foreign courts. For example, in early April, a French court announced that it has charged three Syrian regime officials with complicity in crimes against humanity and war crimes. France has even issued an international arrest warrant for them.

Last year, a German court sentenced to life Anwar Raslan, a former officer in the Syrian army, for crimes against humanity. And in 2021, victims of the Assad regime’s chemical attacks filed a case in Sweden against Syrian officials.

These court cases expose the system of detention and torture used to control and suppress the Syrian population.

Although Syria has disappeared from international news headlines, the Assad regime continues its horrific practices of forcibly disappearing and abusing Syrian citizens. Anyone who dares to stand up for freedom or democracy, utter even a word of criticism against Assad or even find themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time can be arbitrarily arrested.

This also happens to Syrians who decide to return voluntarily or are deported from countries where they have sought asylum. Syria is not a “safe place” for refugees to return.

Many Syrians would rather live in legal limbo in camps for refugees or displaced people than brave entering regime-controlled areas to obtain travel documents. I myself do not have a valid passport any more and cannot travel with my children to a place where we would feel safer.

These court cases in the US, France, Germany and Sweden give us some hope. They keep us going in our fight to get our loved ones released from Assad’s prisons. As many as 135,000 people are believed to still be in detention.

I and hundreds of survivors of detention, members of the families of detainees, and activists are working hard to build a global movement to get them released. We have launched the campaign Free Syria’s Disappeared to draw attention to their plight and put pressure on the international community to act.

These court cases filed in foreign countries help us fight the normalisation of the Assad regime, remind the world of his heinous crimes and hopefully encourage efforts to establish real peace. For it is only when Syria is at peace that we will be able to attain true justice for the crimes committed against us.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Mayassa Sheikh Ahmed
Human rights activist
Mayassa Sheikh Ahmed is a human rights activist and member of Families for Freedom. She is part of a new campaign called Free Syria’s Disappeared.

THIS IS NOT BIODIVERSITY

Nepal is ready to start commercial wildlife farming, including maybe someday of tigers and rhinos

Activists are afraid the move will encourage illegal trade, while the country’s Department of National Parks believes it will aid in conservation.

Ramesh Bhushal

Royal Bengal tigers inside an enclosure at the Central Zoo in Nepal's Lalitpur in 2019. 

| Reuters

Despite the misgivings of conservationists and non-governmental organisations, Nepal is about to embark upon the commercial farming of wild animals, including a number of endangered species.

Decades after Nepal’s National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act banned the buying or selling of wild animals in the country, an amendment to the Act was passed by parliament in 2017 to allow the farming of wild animals for commercial purposes. Then in 2019, the Ministry of Forests and Environment published a list of wild animals that could be farmed under the new policy, which included several endangered deer species; 12 birds; all reptiles except pythons; and frogs and toads.

The new policy was met with controversy, with conservationists and even officials in Nepal’s wildlife department questioning how it could be adequately monitored to prevent illegal trade – a petition to repeal the policy gained almost 10,000 signatures. Meanwhile, some conservationists suggested that if done properly, wildlife farming could reduce pressure on wild animal populations affected by poaching.

In early 2020, Nepal was finalising criteria for issuing wildlife farming permits, including around obtaining animals from the wild to start captive populations, when the Covid-19 pandemic delayed the process. Now, three years later, the government is again ramping up its efforts to launch wildlife farming.

To find out more about the policy and what it means for Nepal’s wild animals, The Third Pole spoke with Maheshwar Dhakal, director-general of the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation – the government agency in charge of formulating the wildlife farming policy, as well as overseeing and regulating its implementation.

Maheshwar Dhakal, director-general of Nepal’s Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation. Credit: Ramesh Bhushal via The Third Pole.

How close is the government to finalising a criteria document that will allow wildlife farming businesses to start up in Nepal?

We are now finalising the criteria. The criteria document prepared by the Ministry of Forests and Environment has received approval from the Ministry of Finance and has been forwarded to the Ministry of Law. Once it’s back, we will submit it to the cabinet for endorsement. We should be able to accept applications from parties interested in wildlife farming soon

Why does Nepal want to move into wildlife farming now?

It is necessity that has forced us to move into this policy. All policies evolve with time and wildlife policy is no exception. There are three main reasons: demand for farming from the private sector and communities; willingness within the conservation sector to go into farming; and an increasing interest from the political sphere in economic opportunities from the wildlife sector.

It’s valid for any nation to explore ways to gain economic benefits. Nepal doesn’t boast gold mines or oil wells. We have forests, wildlife, water resources and human resources. So, we should think about harnessing benefits from these. We believe that if some animals are farmed legally and used for economic benefits, mostly meat production, it will eventually help conservation rather than harm.

Your list of species that can be farmed includes endangered Himalayan musk deer and hog deer, as well as several threatened bird and reptile species. How were animals selected? Do you think other endangered species like tigers and rhinos will be on the list in the future?

This policy was initiated before I became head [of the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation] eight months ago. But having worked in this department previously for over five years as an ecologist, I am familiar with the plan. As far as I have been informed, there wasn’t a scientific study carried out before selecting species. The selection was based on demand for meat production in the market; the species’ protection status; and discussion among stakeholders within government agencies and concerned interest groups outside the government.

We have selected some species and once those animals are provided for farming, we will know what works well and what doesn’t. We can make necessary changes thereafter too. It’s a kind of hit-and-trial method, or learning by doing.

It’s not true that consultations were not done. In Nepal, people think consultation means talking directly with an individual. If it’s someone else with whom the matter was discussed, then [they] don’t think it is a consultation. It is not possible to reach out to all individuals or groups. We haven’t sent the document for final endorsement and there is ample space to make changes, if need be, so any feedback and suggestions are welcome.

‘If we could farm Himalayan musk deer, why not tigers in future?’ is a valid question. Farming tigers or rhinos is not beyond possibility, and if the government thinks that it’s worth it then it can decide in the future. But there is a fundamental difference between Himalayan musk deer and tiger or rhino farms. Musk deer farming doesn’t threaten an individual: musk can be extracted without killing the animal. But if you farm tigers or rhinos, you have to kill the animal and sell its body parts to gain the economic benefits.

A Himalayan musk deer in this photograph taken in Uttarakhand. 

Credit: Dibyendu Ash, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

The government is being criticised for the new policy, and it seems that very little preparation has been done. Do you see any challenges ahead?

Obviously, there are challenges ahead. It’s a new venture and we don’t know what the results will be. One challenge is to identify targeted beneficiaries of this business. Our objective is to help reduce poverty and gain economic benefits, but we can’t give animals to individual farmers as that would be nearly impossible to monitor and regulate. In that case, we should focus on commercial farming by companies with capacity to invest so that large-scale production is possible. But we will be criticised for benefiting a small portion of the population that already has resources. Communities and individuals won’t have that opportunity [to benefit economically] despite wildlife being a public property, where communities have played a significant role in the conservation of those animals. However, to get it started we should be more specific, and I am personally in favour of large-scale farming. We will decide about it but it’s a view that is divided among government officials.

If we go into large-scale farming then we don’t have to worry much as the government will take less responsibility (financially and operationally) for managing farms, because selected companies will be responsible. Our role would be just monitoring them, which we can do with a bit of investment in human and financial resources. We will provide seed animals and [investing companies will bear the cost of capturing and transporting those animals].

In terms of preparation, we can’t construct a jail now on the assumption that illegal activities will happen in the future. We already have a mechanism that works in different parts of the country when it comes to wildlife conservation. The only thing we need is to work a bit and make sure we have a mechanism to look over wildlife farming in addition to wildlife conservation, and we are capable of doing this.

The Third Pole has heard that Chinese companies have approached the government with an intention to farm animals including Himalayan musk deer. Have you been contacted regarding this?

Not at all. It’s been eight months [since I became director-general], and I haven’t met any company representatives from China that are interested in wildlife farming. Also, I have not received any calls from them regarding the matter. But even if they do, it’s normal for companies across the globe to show interest. Be it be Chinese, Indian, American, or European, I don’t see any wrongdoing in approaching the government or showing interest. Once we finalise our legal documents, they may come, but it’s in our hands to decide who to give a licence to.

Nepal has a strong international reputation on wildlife conservation, and the sector receives significant international financial support. With a wildlife farming policy in place, do you foresee any negative implications for this support?

We are not the first country in the world to have a wildlife farming policy. There are several examples of wildlife farming across the globe. There are both failures and successes. But in general, there are two schools of thought: [the first says that] wildlife consumption leads to more crime. If you allow any animal to be farmed, consumers will access the products which will eventually increase demand and ultimately put pressure on wild populations, resulting in more poaching to meet the demand. But there is another school of thought which is equally valid. It has been argued that if you allow some animals to be farmed and provide them for human consumption then it will reduce poaching as demand is met via legal production. So, it’s a mix of things and there is no one right answer.

Our responsibility is to make sure that no species goes extinct from the wild because of our policy. But it’s my department’s role to make sure that we facilitate a process that will eventually benefit the country and its people. If wildlife farming has that potential, why not go for it? We are a sovereign state and can formulate our policies on our own. Of course, the policy should also respect international laws and treaties that we are part of, but I don’t think there would be any resistance from international communities in this matter as we are not going against conservation of any species.

This article was first published on The Third Pole.

Judge sets a deadline for plan to reduce algae growth on Lake Erie


By Karen Graham
Published May 6, 2023

Harmful algae bloom. Bolles Harbor, Monroe, MI, Lake Erie. July 22, 2011.. Source - NOAA Great Lakes Environmental Research Laborat, CC SA 2.0.

Ohio’s environmental regulators will have until the end of June to finish a plan aimed at combatting algae in Lake Erie.

Toxic algae blooms have plagued Lake Erie since before the 1990s, and have become more common, with the lake experiencing its largest algae bloom in 2011.

The bloom was composed of potentially toxic Microcystis and Anabaena. This bloom was linked to agricultural practices in the watersheds of the lake and warmer than normal conditions as expected with regional climate change.

The pollution diet is part of a settlement agreement a federal judge approved Thursday. The consent decree also calls for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to either approve the plan within 90 days or come up with its plan own if the federal agency determines the state’s proposal isn’t strong enough, CTV News Canada reports.

The agreement brings an end to a lawsuit seeking to force mandatory pollution rules for the lake. The Environmental Law and Policy Center, along with Lucas County Commissioners, sued the Ohio EPA in 2017, asking that there be a limit to the amount of phosphorus going into the lake through a total maximum daily load

.

Harmful algae bloom. Lake Erie. July 22, 2011. Credit: NOAA. CC SA 2.0.

The worst blooms in the past decade have been in 2011 and 2015. That was when Ohio agreed to reduce phosphorus runoff into the lake by 40 percent to limit the blooms.

Nearly all of the phosphorus that fuels the blooms comes from farm fertilizer and livestock manure, researchers have found. Ohio already has been working for months to develop a pollution plan that would set “total maximum daily loads” and impose specific limits on phosphorus that flows into the lake.