Rural poor hope for the return of billionaire Thaksin Shinawatra after election Suk Somboon village turned red in the early hours of Thursday morning, when its 200 residents gathered and chanting monks made offerings. They tied scarlet thread around neighbours’ wrists, put up flags along the roadside and erected a metal sign declaring their new status. “It’s a red district anyway. The point is the symbolism,” said Kwanchai Praipana, a prominent redshirt leader from Thailand’s Udon Thani province. “The aim is to show we want justice, democracy and Thaksin [Shinawatra] to return.” Hundreds of north-eastern settlements have proclaimed themselves “red democracy villages” since today’s general election was announced, in the latest evolution of the anti-government redshirt movement. It highlights a bitter division that claimed more than 90 lives last year and is focused on one man: the former prime minister, whose beaming face adorns Suk Somboon’s new sign. Thaksin Shinawatra – who was the owner of Manchester City FC for 15 months from June 2007 – defines Thai politics even from 3,000 miles away in Dubai, where he lives to avoid a jail sentence for abuse of power. The redshirt-associated party Puea Thai – led by his sister Yingluck, but Thaksin’s in all but name – is on course to beat the incumbent Democrats. Jon Ungpakhorn, an activist and former senator, warned last week : “There is a clear danger of violence on a scale closer to civil war if either side is provoked by extreme measures – for example, if a Puea Thai election victory were to be derailed by a legal judgment or military coup, or if a Puea Thai government were to swiftly facilitate the return of a defiant Thaksin Shinawatra by means of amnesty and pardon.” Prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, arriving for his party’s final, rain-drenched rally on Friday, said: “The core issue is whether the Thai people want to move the country forward beyond the conflict created by and surrounding one man.” But Professor Thitinan Pongsudhirak, director of the Institute of Security and International Studies at Chulalongkorn University, suggested that the underlying issue was the awakening of a marginalised grassroots electorate that is challenging the political status quo. Thaksin, a former telecoms tycoon who recently told Der Spiegel he had “barely a billion” left , might not seem an
Continue reading …Renowned American intellectual accuses the Venezuelan leader of concentrating too much power in his own hands Hugo Chávez has long considered Noam Chomsky one of his best friends in the west. He has basked in the renowned scholar’s praise for Venezuela’s socialist revolution and echoed his denunciations of US imperialism. Venezuela’s president, who hasrevealed that he has had surgery in Cuba to remove a cancerous tumour, turned one of Chomsky’s books into an overnight bestseller after brandishing it during a UN speech. He hosted Chomsky in Caracas with smiles and pomp. Earlier this year Chávez even suggested Washington make Chomsky the US ambassador to Venezuela. The president may be about to have second thoughts about that, because his favourite intellectual has now turned his guns on Chávez. Speaking to the Observer last week, Chomsky has accused the socialist leader of amassing too much power and of making an “assault” on Venezuela’s democracy. “Concentration of executive power, unless it’s very temporary and for specific circumstances, such as fighting world war two, is an assault on democracy. You can debate whether [Venezuela's] circumstances require it: internal circumstances and the external threat of attack, that’s a legitimate debate. But my own judgment in that debate is that it does not.” Chomsky, a linguistics professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, spoke on the eve of publishing an open letter (see below) that accuses Venezuela’s authorities of “cruelty” in the case of a jailed judge. The self-described libertarian socialist says the plight of María Lourdes Afiuni is a “glaring exception” in a time of worldwide cries for freedom. He urges Chávez to release her in “a gesture of clemency” for the sake of justice and human rights. Chomsky reveals he has lobbied Venezuela’s government behind the scenes since late last year after being approached by the Carr centre for human rights policy at Harvard University. Afiuni earned Chávez’s ire in December 2009 by freeing Eligio Cedeño, a prominent banker facing corruption charges. Cedeño promptly fled the country. In a televised broadcast the president, who had taken a close interest in the case, called the judge a criminal and demanded she be jailed for 30 years. “That judge has to pay for what she has done.” Afiuni, 47, a single mother with cancer, spent just over a year in jail, where she was assaulted by other prisoners. In January, authorities softened her confinement to house arrest pending trial for corruption, which she denies. “Judge Afiuni has suffered enough,” states Chomsky’s letter. “She has been subject to acts of violence and humiliations to undermine her human dignity. I am convinced that she must be set free.” Amnesty International and the European parliament, among others, have condemned the judge’s treatment but the intervention of a scholar considered a friend of the Bolivarian revolution, which is named after the hero of Venezuelan independence, Simón Bolívar, is likely to sting even more. Speaking from his home in Boston, Chomsky said Chávez, who has been in power for 12 years, appeared to have intimidated the judicial system. “I’m sceptical that [Afiuni] could receive a fair trial. It’s striking that, as far as I understand, other judges have not come out in support of her … that suggests an atmosphere of intimidation.” He also faulted Chávez for adopting enabling powers to circumvent the national assembly. “Anywhere in Latin America there is a potential threat of the pathology of caudillismo [authoritarianism] and it has to be guarded against. Whether it’s over too far in that direction in Venezuela I’m not sure, but I think perhaps it is. A trend has developed towards the centralisation of power in the executive which I don’t think is a healthy development.” Chomsky expressed concern over Chávez’s cancer and wished the president a full and prompt recovery. Chomsky’s book Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominance became a publishing sensation after Chávez waved a copy during a UN address in 2006 famous for his denunciation of President George W Bush as a devil. Its author remains fiercely critical of the US, which he said had tortured Bradley Manning, alleged source of the diplomatic cables exposed by WikiLeaks, and continued to wage a “vicious, unremitting” campaign against Venezuela. The Chávez government deserved credit for sharply reducing poverty and for its policies of promoting self-governing communities and Latin American unity, Chomsky said. “It’s hard to judge how successful they are, but if they are successful they would be seeds of a better world.” Leonardo Vivas, co-ordinator of Latin American initiatives at the Carr Centre, said that Afiuni’s case was the most prominent example of the erosion of justice in several Latin American countries. The centre hoped that Caracas would now heed Chomsky. “He is one of the most important public intellectuals in the US and is respected by the Venezuelan government.” The decision to lobby publicly was taken because quiet diplomacy had limits, said Vivas. Chávez, who is convalescing in Cuba, has a reputation for lashing back at criticism, raising the risk that the Afiuni initative could backfire. “That could happen,” said Vivas. “But that would mean recognition of the problem.” Chomsky’s letter Judge María Lourdes Afiuni has suffered enough With this public letter I want to express my open support of the liberty of judge María Lourdes Afiuni, detained in Venezuela since December 2009. In November of last year I was informed of her situation by the Latin American initiative of the Carr Centre for human rights policy at Harvard University. Ever since, I have been directly involved in mediation efforts with the Venezuelan government, with the purpose of releasing her from prison through a gesture of clemency by President Chávez. Judge Afiuni had my sympathy and solidarity from the very beginning. The way she was detained, the inadequate conditions of her imprisonment, the degrading treatment she suffered in the Instituto Nacional de Orientación Femenina, the dramatic erosion of her health and the cruelty displayed against her, all duly documented, left me greatly worried about her physical and psychological wellbeing, as well as about her personal safety. Those reasons motivated me in December 2010 to address, jointly with the Carr Centre, a petition for an official pardon from the president in the context of the yearly presidential amnesties. In January I received with relief the news that Venezuela’s attorney general had suggested house arrest for judge Afiuni given her fragile health condition, which ended up with emergency surgery. Being in her house with her family and with adequate medical attention has been without doubt a significant improvement of her situation. However, judge Afiuni has suffered enough. She has been subject to acts of violence and humiliations to undermine her human dignity. I am convinced that she must be set free, not only due to her physical and psychological health conditions, but in conformance with the human dignity the Bolivarian revolution presents as a goal. In times of worldwide cries for freedom, the detention of María Lourdes Afiuni stands out as a glaring exception that should be remedied quickly, for the sake of justice and human rights generally and for affirming an honourable role for Venezuela in these struggles. For the above reasons I want Venezuelans to be aware of my total solidarity with judge Afiuni, while I affirm my unwavering commitment with the efforts advanced by the Carr Centre in Harvard University to release her from imprisonment. At the same time, I shall keep high hopes that President Chávez will consider a humanitarian act that will end the judge’s detention. Hugo Chávez Noam Chomsky Venezuela Human rights Rory Carroll guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Sometimes the soft drink that comes with your burger just doesn’t cut it, or at least that’s what chains such as Sonic and Burger King are hoping. Two Sonic stores in Florida will soon be selling beer and wine, part of what could be the start of a new trend…
Continue reading …Government plans to fight human trafficking are basically about immigration control, says former Tory MP Experts have condemned the government’s forthcoming strategy against human trafficking, accusing it of being more concerned with immigration control than caring for slavery victims. Former Tory MP Anthony Steen, chair of the Human Trafficking Foundation, said it was a matter of “regret” that the thrust of the coalition’s review of its anti-trafficking strategy, published last month, seemed more focused on political concerns than helping victims. Steen, who founded the all-party parliamentary group for human trafficking, said coalition claims of making the issue a “priority” did not reflect reality: “It should be about being hostile to traffickers, being compassionate and caring to victims, a human rights approach as opposed to an immigration issue.” The foundation cites planned changes to the domestic workers’ visa, which they say threatens to put migrant domestic workers back into bonded labour and slavery in the UK, as indicative of official policy. Concerns are rising that UK border agency staff are encouraged to stress the immigration status of trafficked individuals instead of the crime against them. The Poppy Project charity points to a growth in attempted forced deportations of potential trafficking victims who had not exhausted all legal options in the UK. Part of the new policy review will concentrate on disrupting trafficking networks in “source” countries. In one of Europe’s principle hubs of trafficked men and women – the port of Odessa in southern Ukraine – charities have demanded more resources to combat traffickers. A spokesman for Faith, Hope and Love, an Odessa-based group dedicated to tackling human slavery, said they would welcome outside assistance to help target the criminal syndicates and corrupt state officials that facilitate the export of women. A Home Office spokesman rejected claims that policies to tackle trafficking clashed with immigration concerns, pointing to a series of recent raids on sex trafficking gangs by UKBA officials. Immigration and asylum Human trafficking Slavery Mark Townsend guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …The Justice Department has a message for states, cities, and private operators looking to cash in on medical marijuana by setting up large-scale commercial farms: Let’s not get carried away. A new memo sent this week to federal prosecutors makes clear that these kinds of operations will not be tolerated,…
Continue reading …From animal and road safety advocates comes a new rule of the road: Buckle up your pup. Business is picking up for pet-product firms that offer seatbelts for your dog, with one company pulling in $5 million in revenue last year, reports the Wall Street Journal . Police and lawmakers are…
Continue reading …Everything is on the chopping block as Democrats and Republicans wage their battle over the budget, according to President Obama: “Nothing can be off-limits,” he said in his weekly address. Which might be news to Republicans, reports the AP, who are dug in on their stance that tax increases are…
Continue reading …Liberal Democrats warn that George Osborne’s ringfencing could prove too weak to protect customers Senior Liberal Democrats are demanding drastic action to break up UK banks into separate retail and investment divisions, as banking reform threatens to cause a new rift in the coalition. In a letter to the Observer on the eve of the deadline for industry groups to respond to a government-commissioned report on reform, peers, MPs and senior figures in the national party insist that chancellor George Osborne’s suggested approach falls short of what is needed. The Lib Dems join a list of more than 50 politicians, academics and economists to demand that the party honours its commitments – most recently made at its spring conference – to achieve a full breakup. The group, drawn together by the centre-left pressure group Compass and the New Economics Foundation, says that the Greek financial crisis, and the exposure of British banks to it, highlights the urgent need for action to promote financial stability. Raising concerns that the chancellor is ready to accept only limited reform, as recommended in an initial report by the economist Sir John Vickers, they say that far tougher action is needed. “Ringfencing retail and investment banking through ‘chinese walls’ in the manner suggested and endorsed by the chancellor, George Osborne, will not produce a banking system that is safe and fit-for-purpose,” they write. “If companies can continue to move capital between retail and investment banking, the latter could still endanger the former. As a first step, full separation of banking functions is needed to better insulate the taxpayer against failure. Full separation would provide depositors with institutions they can trust.” The letter suggests that senior Lib Dem and Labour figures are now prepared to work together on banking reform as part of a “progressive alliance” against key Tory policies. The signatories include the Lib Dem MP Adrian Sanders and Labour MPs Yasmin Qureshi and Jon Cruddas. Other Lib Dems who signed the letter include Lord Trevor Smith, Linda Jack of the Liberal Democrat Federal Policy Committee, Prof Richard Grayson, a former head of policy, and Stephen Knight, leader of the Liberal Democrat group in the London borough of Richmond upon Thames. Many Lib Dems believe disagreements over banking reform could cause a coalition split similar to that over the proposed NHS reforms. Splitting up the banks was a cause célèbre for Vince Cable when he was a radical critic of Labour’s handling of the financial crisis. However, the issue was fudged when the coalition agreement was struck after the general election, with both parties signing up to the idea that an independent commission would report on the future of the banks. Led by Vickers, Warden of All Souls College, Oxford, the commission issued its first report in April, calling for a “ringfence” around customers’ deposits to stop them being used to fund risky investment banking activities, derided as “casino banking” by Cable in opposition. Osborne surprised financial markets by using his Mansion House speech last month to suggest that he would accept the proposals before the final Vickers report is produced in the autumn. But now his hope of drawing a line under the financial sector controversy looks in trouble as a growing number of politicians and experts are warning that the proposals lack teeth. Former chancellor Nigel Lawson said that he expected the Vickers commission to shrug off Osborne’s efforts to pre-empt its final conclusions. Lawson believes the ringfence suggested in Vickers’s preliminary report – and apparently endorsed by Osborne – is not sufficiently radical. “My fear is that it works on paper, but it would not work in the real world,” he said. “I think there needs to be a structural solution.” Paul Fisher, a director at the Bank of England, conceded last week that uncertainty about regulatory reform was weighing on financial markets. The government has faced relentless lobbying from City banks threatening an exodus from the Square Mile and Canary Wharf if a full-blown breakup went ahead. But the bank’s governor, Sir Mervyn King, has called for a “clean” solution to the problem of banks that have become “too big to fail”. The New Economics Foundation’s Tony Greenham warned that the Vickers proposal, involving Chinese walls protecting retail banking, would be bureaucratic and complex. “Behavioural remedies are never as effective as institutional remedies,” he said. “You can create a set of rules to help people behave in a certain way, but they will find ways around that — that’s what highly paid bankers do. It would be a much less bureaucratic solution just to split them up.” Liberal-Conservative coalition Banking Liberal Democrats Conservatives George Osborne Bank of England Toby Helm Heather Stewart guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Liberal Democrats warn that George Osborne’s ringfencing could prove too weak to protect customers Senior Liberal Democrats are demanding drastic action to break up UK banks into separate retail and investment divisions, as banking reform threatens to cause a new rift in the coalition. In a letter to the Observer on the eve of the deadline for industry groups to respond to a government-commissioned report on reform, peers, MPs and senior figures in the national party insist that chancellor George Osborne’s suggested approach falls short of what is needed. The Lib Dems join a list of more than 50 politicians, academics and economists to demand that the party honours its commitments – most recently made at its spring conference – to achieve a full breakup. The group, drawn together by the centre-left pressure group Compass and the New Economics Foundation, says that the Greek financial crisis, and the exposure of British banks to it, highlights the urgent need for action to promote financial stability. Raising concerns that the chancellor is ready to accept only limited reform, as recommended in an initial report by the economist Sir John Vickers, they say that far tougher action is needed. “Ringfencing retail and investment banking through ‘chinese walls’ in the manner suggested and endorsed by the chancellor, George Osborne, will not produce a banking system that is safe and fit-for-purpose,” they write. “If companies can continue to move capital between retail and investment banking, the latter could still endanger the former. As a first step, full separation of banking functions is needed to better insulate the taxpayer against failure. Full separation would provide depositors with institutions they can trust.” The letter suggests that senior Lib Dem and Labour figures are now prepared to work together on banking reform as part of a “progressive alliance” against key Tory policies. The signatories include the Lib Dem MP Adrian Sanders and Labour MPs Yasmin Qureshi and Jon Cruddas. Other Lib Dems who signed the letter include Lord Trevor Smith, Linda Jack of the Liberal Democrat Federal Policy Committee, Prof Richard Grayson, a former head of policy, and Stephen Knight, leader of the Liberal Democrat group in the London borough of Richmond upon Thames. Many Lib Dems believe disagreements over banking reform could cause a coalition split similar to that over the proposed NHS reforms. Splitting up the banks was a cause célèbre for Vince Cable when he was a radical critic of Labour’s handling of the financial crisis. However, the issue was fudged when the coalition agreement was struck after the general election, with both parties signing up to the idea that an independent commission would report on the future of the banks. Led by Vickers, Warden of All Souls College, Oxford, the commission issued its first report in April, calling for a “ringfence” around customers’ deposits to stop them being used to fund risky investment banking activities, derided as “casino banking” by Cable in opposition. Osborne surprised financial markets by using his Mansion House speech last month to suggest that he would accept the proposals before the final Vickers report is produced in the autumn. But now his hope of drawing a line under the financial sector controversy looks in trouble as a growing number of politicians and experts are warning that the proposals lack teeth. Former chancellor Nigel Lawson said that he expected the Vickers commission to shrug off Osborne’s efforts to pre-empt its final conclusions. Lawson believes the ringfence suggested in Vickers’s preliminary report – and apparently endorsed by Osborne – is not sufficiently radical. “My fear is that it works on paper, but it would not work in the real world,” he said. “I think there needs to be a structural solution.” Paul Fisher, a director at the Bank of England, conceded last week that uncertainty about regulatory reform was weighing on financial markets. The government has faced relentless lobbying from City banks threatening an exodus from the Square Mile and Canary Wharf if a full-blown breakup went ahead. But the bank’s governor, Sir Mervyn King, has called for a “clean” solution to the problem of banks that have become “too big to fail”. The New Economics Foundation’s Tony Greenham warned that the Vickers proposal, involving Chinese walls protecting retail banking, would be bureaucratic and complex. “Behavioural remedies are never as effective as institutional remedies,” he said. “You can create a set of rules to help people behave in a certain way, but they will find ways around that — that’s what highly paid bankers do. It would be a much less bureaucratic solution just to split them up.” Liberal-Conservative coalition Banking Liberal Democrats Conservatives George Osborne Bank of England Toby Helm Heather Stewart guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …