Posts Tagged ‘Kremlin’

The Russian system is characterized by intimidation and political passivity on the part of the population.

24 augusti, 2008

Här kommer flera olika rapporter och nyheter om den ryska regeringens olika brott mot mänskliga rättigheter. Och hur de ”trakasserar” allt och alla som försöker protestera.

Här kommer Freedom House rapport från i år om Ryssland:

http://www.freedomhouse.hu/images/fdh_galleries/NIT2008/NT-Russia-final1.pdf

Executive SUMMARY

National Democratic Governance.

The key issue for 2007 was the presidential succession. Putin made it clear that he would not leave the political stage after the end of his constitutionally-mandated two terms in office. This decision leaves in place the current elite and allows them to continue managing the economic assets they gained control over during the last eight years. The system is characterized by intimidation and political passivity on the part of the population. Russia‘s rating for national democratic governance drops from 6.00 to 6.25. Putin’s decision to remain in power demonstrates that the political system is increasingly authoritarian, with little accountability to the population and few opportunities for substantial public participation in the decision-making process. While the system is stable in the short term, the mid- and long-term prospects are bleak because such a top-heavy government has little ability to understand what is going on in Russian society and react to social change effectively.

Electoral Process.

The State Duma elections were neither free nor fair, setting the stage for similarly controlled presidential elections in 2008. Russia placed such strict constraints on international observers that the OSCE monitors ultimately decided not to observe the elections. The campaign was skewed in favor of United Russia, the party of power, with the authorities making extensive use of state resources to ensure victory. Opposition parties were harassed at every step. The national television networks, under the control of the government, promoted pro-Kremlin parties through their news coverage, thereby creating a playing field that was not level. Russia‘s rating for electoral process drops from 6.50 to 6.75. The 2007 parliamentary elections set a new level of state control over the electoral process in Russia and prepared the ground for equally undemocratic presidential elections in 2008.

Civil Society.

Russia’s NGOs continue to face intense pressure from the Russian state, particularly in complying with the provisions of the 2006 Law on NGOs. The state applies the law more harshly against NGOs it does not favor, and many are having trouble meeting its onerous requirements. Kremlin-sponsored groups like Nashi harass the opposition and Moscow-based diplomats alike. Russia‘s rating for civil society worsens from 5.25 to 5.50 because of the implementation of the Law on NGOs, increasing restrictions on the right to public protest, greater use of psychiatric hospitals against activists, and growing political propaganda in the education system.

Independent Media.

The state continues to exercise extensive control over television, radio, and the print media. Only a few exceptional outlets and the Internet remain open for political discussion. While the Kremlin has not limited the range of free discussion on the Internet, critics accuse it of funding online attacks against opponents, while regional authorities have filed criminal charges against some bloggers who criticize them. Russia‘s rating for independent media remains at 6.25 as the state continues to put binding limits on free expression. Attempts to assert more control over the Internet do not bode well for the future.

Judicial Framework and Independence.

Russia’s courts are subject to political manipulation and can be reliably counted on to return the decisions needed by the authorities. Major problems remain in terms of pre-trial detention, lengthy trials, the failure to implement court decisions, and the poor quality of the defense. The greatest indictment of the Russian court system is the large number of citizens who believe that they cannot get a fair hearing and seek redress at the European Court of Human Rights. Although there are provisions for jury trials, they are rarely used, and the decisions are often overturned by higher courts. Russia‘s rating for judicial framework and independence remains at 5.25 because of the system’s inability to assert greater independence. While some reforms have been implemented, such as increasing the role of judges, it will be a long time before these reforms change the way the system actually operates.

Corruption.

Bribery and other forms of corruption continue to pervade Russian society: Official efforts to address the problem have mostly amounted to politically driven campaigns to discredit opponents. Russia‘s rating for corruption stays the same at 6.00 because in conditions where there is not a free press, energetic civil society, and independent judiciary, there are few prospects for making substantial progress in the battle against bribery and abuse of public office.

Nations in Transit Ratings and Averaged Scores
1999 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Electoral Process 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 5.50 6.00 6.25 6.50 6.75
Civil Society 3.75 4.00 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 5.00 5.25 5.50
Independent Media 4.75 5.25 5.50 5.50 5.75 6.00 6.00 6.25 6.25
Governance* 4.50 5.00 5.25 5.00 5.25 n/a n/a n/a n/a
National Democratic Governance n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 5.75 6.00 6.00 6.25
Local Democratic Governance n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.75
Judicial Framework and Independence 4.25 4.50 4.75 4.50 4.75 5.25 5.25 5.25 5.25
Corruption 6.25 6.25 6.00 5.75 5.75 5.75 6.00 6.00 6.00
Democracy Score 4.58 4.88 5.00 4.96 5.25 5.61 5.75 5.86 5.96

Och här Human Rights Watch senaste rapport (2007) från Rysland:

http://hrw.org/wr2k7/pdfs/russia.pdf

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/Fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>Fri- och rättigheter</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/Yttrandefrihet.” rel=”tag”>Yttrandefrihet.</a>

(more…)

How Putins critics get “erased” from the TV screen

21 augusti, 2008

Ränderna går tydligen aldrig ur. Det flitiga användandet av manipulation av officiella fotografier under Stalin tiden – där personer ”försvann” från bilder när de hamnade i ”onåd” hos Stalin.

Nå Putin har återupptagit traditionen i en modern tappning.

Old Soviet Style

Before 1940

After: People’s Commissar for the Interior Nikolai Yezhov, the young man strolling with Stalin to his left, was shot in 1940. He was edited out from a photo by Soviet censors.

http://www.newseum.org/berlinwall/commissar_vanishes/vanishes.htm

”New” Putin Style

In a still frame from video, the incomplete digital erasure of a Putin critic named Mikhail G. Delyagin from an episode of the program ”The People Want to Know” can be seen. Mr. Delyagin’s leg and hand remain visible, to the right of the man holding the microphone.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/03/world/europe/03russia.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

June 3, 2008

Kremlin Rules It Isn’t Magic: Putin Opponents Vanish From TV

By CLIFFORD J. LEVY

MOSCOW – On a talk show last fall, a prominent political analyst named Mikhail G. Delyagin had some tart words about Vladimir V. Putin. When the program was later televised, Mr. Delyagin was not.

Not only were his remarks cut – he was also digitally erased from the show, like a disgraced comrade airbrushed from an old Soviet photo. (The technicians may have worked a bit hastily, leaving his disembodied legs in one shot.)

Mr. Delyagin, it turned out, has for some time resided on the so-called stop list, a roster of political opponents and other critics of the government who have been barred from TV news and political talk shows by the Kremlin.

The stop list is, as Mr. Delyagin put it, ”an excellent way to stifle dissent.”

It is also a striking indication of how Mr. Putin has increasingly relied on the Kremlin-controlled TV networks to consolidate power, especially in recent elections.

Opponents who were on TV a year or two ago all but vanished during the campaigns, as Mr. Putin won a parliamentary landslide for his party and then installed his protégé, Dmitri A. Medvedev, as his successor. Mr. Putin is now prime minister, but is still widely considered Russia’s leader.

Onetime Putin allies like Mikhail M. Kasyanov, his former prime minister, and Andrei N. Illarionov, his former chief economic adviser, disappeared from view. Garry K. Kasparov, the former chess champion and leader of the Other Russia opposition coalition, was banned, as were members of liberal parties.

Even the Communist Party, the only remaining opposition party in Parliament, has said that its leaders are kept off TV.

And it is not just politicians. Televizor, a rock group whose name means TV set, had its booking on a St. Petersburg station canceled in April, after its members took part in an Other Russia demonstration.

When some actors cracked a few mild jokes about Mr. Putin and Mr. Medvedev at Russia‘s equivalent of the Academy Awards in March, they were expunged from the telecast.

Indeed, political humor in general has been exiled from TV. One of the nation’s most popular satirists, Viktor A. Shenderovich, once had a show that featured puppet caricatures of Russian leaders, including Mr. Putin. It was canceled in Mr. Putin’s first term, and Mr. Shenderovich has been all but barred from TV.

Senior government officials deny the existence of a stop list, saying that people hostile to the Kremlin do not appear on TV simply because their views are not newsworthy.

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/Fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>Fri- och rättigheter</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/Yttrandefrihet.” rel=”tag”>Yttrandefrihet.</a>

(more…)


%d bloggare gillar detta: