Impunity Watch: Special Features

Bribes for Contracted Corruption

Increasing international corporate responsibility and government credibility a few hundred-million Euros or a few years in prison at a time...
by Jeff Nelson

Nigeria has begun an investigation of past government ministers for taking bribes.  The investigation comes after Siemens, the German mega-corporation, was fined by a Munich court in October paying bribes. 

The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offenses Commission (ICPC) has begun investigating officials about the scandal.  Two of the mentioned individuals have denied taking any bribes.  The Nigerian government has begun the investigations as an effort of good governance and transparency.  Statements issued, reinforce the governments efforts and give assurances that favorites will not be played if anyone is found to have violated the law. 

Siemens has conducted its own investigations into the matter, which is not isolated to Nigeria.  The internal investigation has uncovered some 1.3 billion Euros in suspicious payments. The suspected Nigerian ministers and officials are said to have been paid ten million between 2001 and 2004.  The bribes being paid to secure contracts in Nigeria.

Back in March of 2007, it was thought to have been only a 200 million Euro slush fund to pay bribes securing contracts.  Two former Siemens executives were tried for paying sums around six million to secure a contract with an Italian firm for gas turbines. Since then investigations have lead to outside anti-corruption experts and law firms revising the company's policies and safeguards. 

The company is still under investigation in the United States and may face additional fines from those imposed by the Munich district court.  The court fined Siemens 210 million Euros.  The company said it would not appeal the decision, and that it would pay an additional 179 million Euros to tax authorities for failure to properly declare payments. 

Now this may not sound that important, but if you look at the core of the issue it has to do with accountability. Now I have harped on government accountability a lot, but if you look back to the first article I published on Impunity Watch it was about Corporate responsibility.  It is very important that not only governments and government officials are held to standards that promote good governance, transparency, and responsibility, but also corporations are held to those same standards.  Globalization is increasing all around.  Not just countries are major players on the international stage anymore, Corporations are rising among the ranks with influence and power. 

Corporations have long been international players, but only recently, within the last twenty years or so, have their actions abroad been considered.  Paying workers meager wages in sweatshops, buying diamonds from war-lords in Africa, or any other form of commodity exploitation are fairly recent concerns when globalization meets social responsibility.   More examples of Siemens-like cases need to be brought to fruition to make sure corporations are playing by the rules that we are expecting everyone else to follow.  We don't have an international regulatory body for corporate responsibility, and not only do I see one as being improbable but detrimental.  Globalization depends on a freer market on a global scale, but countries need to increase control and credibility within their own borders. We need to see countries promoting socially responsible behaviors by entering corporations and maintaining ethical behaviors and transparency in their governments. 

Sources:

Nigeria probes Siemens bribe case, BBC News, (Nov. 21, 2007), available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7105582.stm

Siemens fined after bribery probe, BBC News, (Oct. 4, 2007), available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7028628.stm

Globalization or Exploitation?, Impunity Watch, (June 9, 2007), available at http://www.impunitywatch.com/special_features/2007/06/index.html

Boss to quit scandal-hit Siemens, BBC News, (Apr. 25, 2007), available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6591395.stm

Siemens chair quits amid scandal, BBC News, (Apr. 20, 2007), available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6575177.stm

Siemens executive kept in custody, BBC News (Mar. 28, 2007), available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6503551.stm

Siemens corruption trial starts, BBC News, (Mar. 13, 2007), available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6444797.stm

Women, Men, and the Gender Gap

By Gabie Hart

Many of us are aware that a gap exists between men and women which is pervasive in the majority of societies. This gap hinders the growth and advancement of societies. In some instances, the biases against women cause the evolution of societies to become stagnant, or cause societies to fail to reach their full potential.

The World Economic Forum recently released its 2007 Global Gender Gap Report. The purpose of this report is to understand and highlight the gap which exists between men and women. There are four areas which are analyzed, including: economic participation and opportunity, political empowerment, educational attainment, as well as health and survival.

The top five countries considered to have the most gender equality based on the four categories, included Sweden coming in at number one, followed by: Norway, Finland, Iceland, and New Zealand. As the results demonstrate, Nordic countries were among the top performers, although the report also explained that “no country has yet achieved gender equality.”

The United States, “which is the world’s leading economy,” came in 31st out of 128 countries. This was a drop from the 2006 results where the United States was ranked 23rd.

The United States’ political empowerment rank was 69th overall. For this category, analysts look at how many females have seats in the government as opposed to males, the number of females at the ministerial level as opposed to males, and the number of female heads of state as compared to males over the past 50 years.

For the educational attainment category, the United States ranked 76th. In this category, analysts looked at the access to education both women and men have at the primary, secondary and tertiary levels. The literacy rate is also used to calculate this category.

Gender inequity exists in one form or another in many societies, whether it is in the form of salary disparities; access to education, health care, and the political system; or the overall treatment and respect women receive. Clearly it is important to continue taking steps to bridge the gap of gender equality. However, the question remains as to whether women will ever be treated as true equals? And if so, when will that day come?

Sources:

Yahoo (Reuters) - Nordics Top Gender Equity Index, US Falls to 31st - 8 November 2007.

World Economic Forum – Global Gender Gap Report 2007 – 2007

Saudi Arabia: Religion in the Kingdom

by: D. Pandian

In his recent trip to Britain in October, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia commented that many countries, including Britain, did not take the threat of international terrorism seriously enough. The vehement denials by the British government were closely followed by sharply worded articles by the international press regarding the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) key role in funding Islamic fundamentalists internationally. As propagation of the Sunni faith was a cornerstone in establishing the Sauds as the ruling family of KSA, the policy of supporting this goal has continued and is clearly manifested in the overt religious discrimination faced non-Sunni Muslims in KSA.

In the wake of 9/11, King Abdullah promised many Western governments that he would work to curb Islamic fundamentalism through Saudi sources. While the 2007 International Religious Freedom Report ("Report") notes that some 2006-07 primary school textbooks were found to be more tolerant than previous textbooks and had fewer negative references to non-Muslims, this statement does not really inspire confidence that KSA is taking genuine steps to curb extremist sentiments. Many books reportedly retained language of intolerance of Judaism, Christianity, Shi’a Islam, and other religious faiths. The Report also noted complaints that teachers in the Eastern Province allegedly used anti-Shi’a rhetoric, calling the Shi’a students infidels or polytheists.

The Report also highlights the continued power of the religious police (the mutawwa’in). Numerous complaints continued to be made regarding mutawwa'in harassing, improperly arresting, abusing, and detaining for longer than 24 hours both citizens and foreigners. Women, especially foreign women, not wearing head scarves were harassed by the mutawwa’in. Mutawwa’in also continued to enforce the practice of detaining men and women found together who are not related.

King Abdullah officially gained his title in 2003, but has been de facto ruler since 1995 due to former King Fahd’s incapacitation due to a stroke. Abdullah’s influence stems from his lineage as the son of a Bedouin mother, connecting him to many powerful Saudi tribes. Abdullah is considered the leader of the Shammar branch of the Saud family, a rival source of power to the Sudairi branch from which Fahd had descended. Abdullah commands the National Guard and maintains support from the large bedouin tribes in the central region of Saudi Arabia. Abdullah is widely viewed as being a more traditional leader, giving more weight to religion and Arab causes than other leading princes.

If the past is any indicator, Saudi kings have tended to increase the pace of reforms in times of economic depression, which always correlated to periods of weak oil markets. As the world watches the price of oil exceed even record highs set in the 1970s, it is unlikely that King Abdullah will be placing his support behind initiatives that seek to reform attitudes of religious intolerance in KSA, especially as King Abdullah derives much of his support from the country’s traditionalists and conservatives. As the price of oil has currently exceeded even the record prices set in the oil boom of the 1970s, religious reform in KSA will likely not happen without external pressure from countries who are major buyers of Saudi oil or resource providers to the kingdom.

Sources:

Department of State - International Religious Freedom Report 2007 -  September 14, 2007.

What rights? This is an "Emergency"

Instability leading to nuclear insecurity...

by Jeff Nelson

Pakistan has been a concern recently with the suspension of the Constitution and emergency rules put into place.  On Nov. 3, President Musharraf, who is also head of the army, declared a state of emergency and imposed restrictions on civil rights.  There have been a series of demonstrations, protests, and arrests since the declaration of emergency rules.

President Musharraf has tried to justify the suspension of rights and increased policing actions. He argues that it is necessary at this time to impose emergency rule to combat Islamic militancy because it will give him a free hand to battle groups like the Taliban and al-Qaeda.  Yet Musharraf and the army still do not have control over parts of the country in the Northwest. 

Even though Islamic militancy is the focus of the imposed emergency rules, many lawyers and opposing party members have been arrested and put in prison for violating the rules.  These rules have suspended rights such as: the right to free movement; protection of life and liberty; the right to assemble in public; the right to free speech; and equal legal rights of all citizens before the law and for legal protection. Journalists face up to three years in jail for ridiculing members of the government or armed forces. 

Apparently, not deciding a court case to the liking of the President may also get you fired from the Supreme Court.  Several Supreme Court justices were fired after the imposition of the emergency rule because it was suspected that they were going to overrule the October election invalid. Musharraf won, but there is contention whether it was valid because he has already served two terms as President.  After pressure from opposing parties within the country and the United States, Musharraf has re-scheduled elections for January, but has yet to step down as the leader of the army as promised nor set a date for when the Constitution would be re-instated.

The emergency rule has lead to increasing instability within Pakistan and so much so it has started to worry people about nuclear security.  I do not intend to downplay the suspension of civil rights or unsubstantiated arrests that have lead to lawyers, journalists, students, and people with opposing voices being held in jail.  I am concerned with where this is going to lead. 

Pakistan is one of the nine countries with nuclear arsenals.  Instability in the region is not good no matter which way you look at it.  The formerly Taliban controlled Afghanistan and the nuclear hungry Iran both border Pakistan on the west.  The northwest of Pakistan still holds Taliban and al-Qaeda operatives. Now, there are masses of people throughout the country becoming more restless with each day emergency rule continues and the former Prime Minister Bhutto remains under house arrest. 

With the unrest in the country we are facing the possibility of insurgents getting their hands on the nuclear weapons.  Things start to fall apart, people will start looking the other way, and then parts will end up being sold on the black market.  I know, I know, it sounds cynical but with the demonstrations being organized the army is going to be focusing on other things.  There are people in the army or even at the nuclear bunkers that would not think twice about turning a profit on a few weapons parts, some fissile material, or even a nuclear core.   As an example, in 2004 one of Pakistan's nuclear scientists was pardoned for passing nuclear secrets to the Taliban, Iran, and North Korea.   

What do we do? I do not know exactly but I am sure ending this emergency rule stuff is probably a good bet.  The free press needs to be re-instated before the elections and fair elections need to beheld again free of emergency rule being imposed by the leader of the army who also happens to be up for election.  If you want to know more about the free speech issues and what is going on from the perspectives of people in Pakistan, check out the post by the lawyer located on Impunity Watch or look for the Pakistani student blog entitled "Emergency Telegraph."  Something needs to be done.

Sources:

Emily Wax, Pamela Constable & Howard Schneider, Bhutto Calls on Musharraf to Step Down, Wash. Post, (Nov. 13, 2007), available at  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article
/2007/11/13/AR2007111300260.html

 

Griff Witte & Imtiaz Ali, Musharraf's Army Losing Ground in Insurgent Areas, Wash. Post, (Nov. 13, 2007), available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/ 11/12/AR2007111202043.html

 

Emily Wax, For Pakistani Students, a Reawakening: 'We Can't Just Sit Idle', Wash. Post, (Nov. 12, 2007), available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/11 /AR2007111101595.html

 

Joby Warrick, Pakistan Nuclear Security Questioned, Wash. Post, (Nov. 11, 2007), available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/10/AR2007111001684.html

 

Experts Weigh in on Security of Pakistan's Nukes, CNN.com, (Nov. 11, 2007), available at http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/11/11/pakistan.nuclear/index.html?iref=newssearch

Post-Conflict Violence Against Women

By Gabie Hart

As has become evident over the past few years, women and girls are more frequently becoming targeted during times of armed conflict. Oftentimes, rape is used as a weapon of conflict. In some situations it becomes so systematic that fear is instilled on large portions of the population, resulting in an overall sense of insecurity. Other atrocities committed against women in conflict-ridden countries include, but are not limited to: being forced to perform domestic labor, kidnapping, physical abuse, forced marriage and murder.

It appears that in the aftermath of these conflicts, when these nations are trying to rebuild themselves, the abuses inflicted upon the female population continue. Most recently, the United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon stated, “violence against women has reached hideous and pandemic proportions in some societies attempting to recover from conflict.”

Those committing these atrocities often receive impunity. Without consequences for these acts, there is nothing to deter the abusers. Further, without a sense of security, these women will continue to be oppressed; their basic and fundamental rights as a human being will continue to be violated.

Violence against women is pervasive in all societies. As the Secretary General voiced in his statement on International Women’s Day, “Worst of all, violence against women and girls continues unabated in every continent, country and culture. It takes a devastating toll on women's lives, on their families, and on society as a whole. Most societies prohibit such violence -- yet the reality is that too often, it is covered up or tacitly condoned.”

For women, it is vital that drastic measures be taken to ensure the equality and proper treatment of women internationally. These efforts need to take place at all levels of society: locally, nationally and internationally. Recently, two senior United Nations officials have spoken out to bring attention to “gender-based violence.” The U.N. Undersecretary-General for Peacekeeping Jean-Marie Guehno stated: “[C]ombating rape and other forms of sexual violence calls for concerted, robust and ongoing action on the part of both national actors and also the international community at every level of engagement.”

Until individuals, communities, nations, and the world make it clear that abuses against women will not be tolerated, that consequences will be imposed upon the perpetrators committing these abuses, then women, whether it is our mother, daughter, sister, cousin, aunt, grandmother, friend or neighbor, will continue to be oppressed and will continue to find themselves targeted as weapons of conflicts and post-conflict.

Sources:

Associated Press, UN Issues Warning on Violence against Women in Post-Conflict Countries, IHT, (Oct., 23, 2007), available at http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/10/24/news/UN-GEN-UN-Women-and-Peace.php.

Senior UN Officials Call on Member States to Address Rape as a Weapon of War, UN News Service, (Oct. 22, 2007), available at http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=24373&Cr=women&Cr1.

Message of the Secretary-General, Message on International Women’s Day, (March 8, 2007), available at http://www.un.org/events/women/iwd/2007/sg-message.shtml.

Too Much of a Good Thing?

• By: Lara Sewers

I joined this online publication because I firmly believe that access and freedom of information is a basic need; it is the tool by which many seek empowerment and justice. Precisely this is Impunity Watch’s goal; to give a voice to the voiceless and to provide a forum for the oppressed to speak against abuses that otherwise would remain outside the pages of human history. Burton, with his theory of basic human needs was onto something. Security, recognition, distributive justice, control and role defense appear among nine basic human needs, unfulfillment of which inevitably leads to conflict. Freedom of expression and access to information is an essential part of seeking to satisfy many of these needs, particularly, the need for recognition.

Today, the internet has provided people with unprecedented access to information and immense power to disseminate information all over the world in a matter of seconds. Printed publications have been supplanted by this new method of communication that has allowed for people across the globe to be closer than ever before. Indeed, as Thomas Friedman points out, the world is now “flat”.

Along with its many contributions, the internet has also been employed by some who have chosen to exercise their freedom of speech to deliver a message of hatred and violence. More recently, terrorist groups have used the web as a new front in their war against the West. Recognizing the amazing potential of the internet in this age where electronic communications have replaced more traditional means of communication, they have employed this tool to disseminate their propaganda and exploit the internet as a different front in their struggles.

Samir Khan, a 21-year-old American faithful to Islam has used his blog as means of spreading the jihadist message. Through a combination of literature advocating violent jihad, news broadcasts, and video clips of terrorist attacks on American troops, he is a member of the new generation of jihadist who believe it is their duty to spread the word and “speak the truth”. Young new militants have become “unlikely foot soldiers” for terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda which calls sources like these bloggers, the “Islamic jihadi media”.

Terrorism experts indicate that as many as 100 English language sites – aimed at a Western audience – offer militant Islamic views and draw as many as 500 regular readers. While there is nothing that evidences how effective sources like these are in recruiting sympathizers to the jihadist cause, it is clear that terrorist organizations are actively seeking to appeal to young Suicide bombings are turned into hip-hop videos and flashy movies that glorify attacks against American targets. Jihadists, through their widespread use of websites and blogs show images of Islam under attack and play on their anger over the war in Iraq and Afghanistan to rally support.

Whereas blogs seek to express ideas and communicate a message – albeit a regrettable one – other people have engaged in more active recruiting and “online training” of potential terrorists. This is the legacy of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the former leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq who discovered the power of the internet while in prison. While in prison his handwritten letters were sent to others in Europe who then posted them online to reach a wider audience than print propaganda ever could. Shortly after this, he directed groups to carry a video camera with them and to tape every operation which were turned into videos to be broadcasted over the internet.

After Mr. Zarqawi’s methods prove successful, many have followed suit. Today, Abu Omar an expert explosive-maker who worked with Zarqawi in Iraq, has carried on with the legacy. Currently, Omar videotapes do-it-yourself videos on how to assemble bombs to be used in attacks against American troops or buildings. These videos are then sent to jihadi websites to be seen by people all over the world. Mr. Omar is just one among many that have engaged in this practice designed to teach brothers all over the world on how to conduct their fight.

While some abuse the power that the internet provides to people all over the world, others yearn to have the ability or freedom to employ it towards more constructive ends. In Myanmar, after the most recent protest by Buddhist monks, the junta shut down the few internet providers in the country to prevent outside media from accessing information about the protests and the subsequent violent response by the junta. The internet had been one of the primary tools used by exiled Burmese in Thailand to acquire information about the country and to call attention to the numerous abuses by the junta. Without it, the country was effectively isolated once again. Information about the aftermath of the violent response to the peaceful protest was extremely limited and without it, much of the strength that dissenters drew from the support received from people all over the world, disappeared.

In Eritrea, “Africa’s newest country, independent since 1993, has become a kind of open-air prison guarded by an ultra-nationalist sole party which sees the least democratic claim as a threat to national security. Among the hundreds of political prisoners, at least 13 journalists have just spent their sixth year in jail. Three of them may well have died as a result of conditions reminiscent of a penal colony.”[1] The country ranked the lowest in the world in terms of freedom of the press in the 2007 Annual Report published by Reporters Without Borders. Eritrea's government exhibits open contempt for the press and has a tight control over channels of information. Journalists who dissent from the authoritarianism have been forced into exile and those who dare to remain face the risk of incarceration or even death.

Sadly, not only terrorists have recognized the importance of the free flow of information; oppressive and tyrannical governments are also well aware of its power. By controlling access to information, governments can effectively control how much and what kind information about the country is released to the rest of the world. This monopoly of information provides these dictatorships with a false sense of security. By shutting down their country’s window to the world, they believe world opinion will not be able to turn against them. Silencing their victims they can cover up the multiple and egregious acts against them and delay the inevitable; the day when their rule will end, when a simple “muffler” will not be enough to mute the screams for freedom and justice.

Technology has provided us with an incredible tool which can be as harmful or as beneficial to human kind as we want it to be. Tyrants fear its power while terrorists embrace it and in the middle remain those who truly need it to free themselves from oppression and abuse. While it is difficult to strike a balance between what is too much freedom that can be abused or what is too little, we have the choice everyday. And while those who need it the most may be prevented from exercising their right to express themselves through no fault of their own and to fulfill their basic human need for recognition, We have the ability to do what is right. We have the power at our fingertips to either participate in the destructive exercise of spreading a message of hatred and violence or to employ this powerful tool to give a voice to those who are muted. Which one are you going to choose?

---

[1] Reporters Without Borders: 2007 Annual Report. Available at: http://www.rsf.org/IMG/pdf/rapport_en_bd-4.pdf

[2] New York Times: An internet Jihad Aims at U.S. Viewers. Oct. 15, 2007.

[3] Economist.com: Gag the messenger. Sept. 26, 2007. Available at: http://economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9859125

[4] Economist.com: Dashing hopes in Myanmar. Oct. 3, 2007. Available at: http://economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9897689