International Day for the Right to the Truth Concerning Human Rights Violations and for the Dignity of Victims - 2025

               Last Monday, 24th of March, all over the world this is the day to remember the victims of human rights violations and their fight for truth, justice and dignity. So, this post is a tribute to all victims that suffered injustice and died without have it, to all human rights defenders who help to bring justice and truth for anyone looking for them, and to all victims that are fighting now for truth, justice and dignity. We all should participate in this fight because it is very important to fight against injustice. Without justice the violations can spread because the perpetrators feel they can do more and more and then we'd are all surviving in this nightmare called dystopia that would become a evil system difficult to combat. Therefore, help fighting human rights violations and injustice, when many abuses have systematically been done for so long time, the justice is even more important.  Do not think you are unreachable. We all must record any violation of human rights happening now. The systematic violations, the impunity, the daily bullying on TV, the indirectly threats about the creation of lies exist to do the victims give up to fight for justice, democracy and political rights. Besides, the violations, the systematic abuses, the daily humiliation and decades of impunity can have a dehumanizing effect in the population, do not let this happens, the solidarity and empathy are the essence of all human being.     This post is a summary of three articles. The first was published at https://unipd-centrodirittiumani.it/en/news/march-24-united-nations-international-day-for-the-right-to-the-truth. The second was published at https://www.oas.org/en/IACHR/jsForm/?File=/en/iachr/media_center/PReleases/2025/058.asp&utm_term=class-dc. The third was published at https://www.coe.int/en/web/commissioner/-/victims-of-human-rights-violations-deserve-more

                 The Purpose of this day is to honor the memory of victims of systematic human rights violations and promote the importance of the right to truth and justice. To pay tribute to those who have dedicated and lost their lives in the struggle to promote and protect human rights for all. To recognize, in particular, the important work of Monsignor Oscar Romero of El Salvador, who was assassinated on March 24th, 1980, after denouncing violations of human rights of the population and defending the lives, promoting human dignity and oppose to violence. U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres emphasizes that truth is a source of strength and healing. He recalled the importance of truth as a powerful light. This light exposes violations that perpetrators would prefer to keep hidden, that illuminates a path towards peace, justice, and remediations for victims, and compels countries to uphold their obligations under international law.                                                                                                                                                                                     On the International Day for the Right to the Truth Concerning Human Rights Violations, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) and the U.N. Special Rapporteur on the Promotion of Justice and Reparation are calling on States across the Americas to intensify their efforts to ensure accountability and take more decisive action on memory, truth and justice. The IACHR and the U.N. Special Rapporteur have observed positive steps in different countries in the Americas towards implementing transitional justice policies in order to secure the rights of victims of human rights violations. However, they warn that these advances are often not sustained and that regressive actions weaken or delay them. Experts have expressed concern over the failure of many States to adopt a holistic approach that coordinates efforts between different state authorities to comprehensively address human rights violations. They note that victims and their families are often left to struggle alone in their pursuit of justice and reparation, often enduring the long-term effects of arbitrary actions on their lives and communities while receiving inadequate responses from public authorities. Both the IACHR and the U.N. Special Rapporteur have repeatedly highlighted the obstacle countries must overcome in the fight against impunity and to achieve reparation for victims while preserving historical memory. To move forward, it is imperative that States implement policies to support truth, justice and reparation, taking a holistic approach that is grounded in the universal, and indivisible nature of human rights. The IACHR and the U.N. Special Rapporteur are calling on States to set up efforts to uphold their international obligations regarding justice. Failure to address injustices denies victims their dignity and undermines the construction of a more just and rights-respecting society, both today and for the future.                                                                                                                                                                                    The right to reparations is a basic human right. It is enshrined in numerous international human rights instruments. Victims of human rights abuses have a right to redress for the suffering and harm caused to them. Reparation is the last step in the achievement of human rights protection. Fistly, violations of human rights should be prevented. Secondly, if a violation does take place, it must be investigated (promptly, thoroughly and impartially). Thirdly, victims should have access to justice. And finally, victims have the right to receive adequate reparation. The question of reparation for victims falls to receive the attention it deserves. Governments have ducked the issue and left to the former prisoners themselves to fight for their rights in complicated court procedures. What does reparation entail? Financial compensation is the most widespread form of reparation. Some damage can be easily estimated in monetary terms, for example loss of earnings, costs of assistance, while other forms can't. I am thinking about mental or moral damages. By taking a victim-oriented approach, we affirm our human solidarity with victims of violations of human rights. Of course, reparations can never fully undo the damage that has been done. Violations of human rights are irreparable. But this must not impede us from fighting to achieve fair redress for victims. The "U.N. Basic Principle on the Right to Reparation" are a good starting point for implementing the various aspects of reparation, a key element to full human rights protection.

40th Anniversary of Redemocratization in Brazil

                    One week ago, precisely on 15th March the return of democracy in Brazil completed 40 years. We all must always defend democracy, human rights, potilical inclusion and justice. We need not only to defend democracy, but search for the improvement of democracy. We must always remember that there is not democracy without human rights and there is not human rights without democracy. For more than two decades I have had this actvism for better political education, for more respect for human rights, for better justice,  I have a YouTube channel here is the link.   https://www.youtube.com/@lucianofietto4773/videos.            This post is a summary of two articles. The first was published at https://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/en/politica/noticia/2025-03/brazil-celebrates-40-years-end-military-dictatorship. The second was published athttps://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/inline_images/Brazil.pdf

                       Brazil's current democratic regime has celebrated its 40th anniversary. It is the longest uninterrupted democratic period in the country's history since the proclamation of the republic in 1889. A lengthy process resulted in the end of 21 years of dictatorship (1964-1985), with the redemocratization being marked by the inauguration of José Sarney as president on March 15, 1985. Until then, Sarney had been the vice-president of president-elect Tancredo Neves. The election had taken place two months earlier by indirect vote, through the Congress. However, Neves's health deteriorated and he had to be hospitalized the day before the swearing-in ceremony. Sarney then took over on an interim basis. "Neves didn't want to be operated on without seeing that the democratic transition would take place, because he knew we could have a political setback if we fell into disagreement," Sarney noted during an event in Brasilia celebrating the date. Noting that Brazil was facing major uncertainties about the nation's political future and the fear that the military would refuse to hand power back to society, Sarney said that Tancredo only agreed to undergo intestinal surgery when he was assured that Sarney would be sworn in, that the Federal Constitution would be observed, and that "the democratic transition would be guided by the law." Tancredo Neves died on April 21, after 39 days in hospital, aged 75. Following his passing, Congress installed Sarney as president. "Those were years of struggle. Setbacks were not only possible but likely, but we managed to overcome them," Sarney declared. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva used his social media to celebrate the date. On X, he wrote that, beyond the significance of the inauguration of a new president, March 15, 1985, went down in history as "the day Brazil reunited with democracy." He added, "Sarney governed under the constant threat of those who longed for a returned of the dictatorship, but with extraordinary skill and political commitment he bought the conditions for us to write the Citizen Constitution of 1988 and change Brazil's history." In a video message, the head of Brazil's Supreme Court Carmen Lúcia said that democracy is under permanent construction.                                                                                                                                                                             Brazil was ruled by the military since 1964. Repression peaked in the early 1970s. Impatience with the military regime accelerated after the economy went into crisis in 1982. By 1985, though an attempt to install its preferred candidate in the presidency, the opposition was able to overcome the system of indirect election and prevail in the election. A sanctioned opposition had been permitted for most of the period of military rule, but the military regime proved increasingly incapable of holding democratic demands in check. Direct elections of governorsand federal and local representatives were reintroduced in 1982. While not formally unified, opposition groups frequently cooperated in order to organize mass demonstrations, such as of 1983 and 1984, calling for direct presidential elections. That effort failed, but the military was unable to prevent opposition candidate Tancredo Neves from triumphing in indirect elections in 1985. Direct elections to the presidency returned in 1989, and different parties have come to power since that time.

How To Stop Fascism: History, Ideology and Resistance

               We all must defend democracy and political rights for all. In Brazil we all must demand that voting machines print the voter's choice and also demand our political rights respected, freedom of speech, right to the monetization of social media, right to privacy and right to reparation whenever any right is violated. We shouldn't be afraid to fight for our rights because all the world is with us supporting this movement to greater democracy, human and political rights, governmental transparency and justice. We all must fight any kind of authoritarian political system that don't respect democracy and voter's choice. The Brazilian institutions including from the government must do more to reinforce human rights. The cowardice and injustice can't carry on. The good people of the world is demanding a fairer and inclusive  Brazil and their demand must be heard for all.  If you want to know my channel and see a small sample of the huge worldwide movement for justice, democracy and political rights, watch my videos, here is the link   https://www.youtube.com/@lucianofietto4773/videos.              This post is a summary of two book reviews of the book with the title above. The first was published at https://www.ebb-magazine.com/reviews/how-to-stop-fascism. The second was published at https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/2021/12/08/book-review-how-to-stop-fascism-history-ideology-resistance-by-paul-mason/

                Paul Mason, the self-declared 'Gramscian social-democrat', has written a book on anti-fascism. In "How To Stop Fascism:History, Ideology and Resistance," Mason construct a familiar narrative in which the left paved the way to fascism by alienating reformists and the liberal centre. His defence of the centrist politics rests on the assumption that liberalism is self-moderating. A notion belied by the liberal establishment's response to the social and economic crises of the 1920s and 1930s. Mason's claim to provide a new, materislist theory of fascism is undermined by his tacit promotion of a culturalist framing of civilisational conflict and romanticised portrayal of the 'rationalist, liberal principles of the Enlightenment'. This reflects Mason's increasing preocupation to defend the liberal order against what he calls the 'authoritarian, anti-modernist dictatorships'. At a time when neoliberal states are intensifying their powers to suppress popular protest and stifle intellectual dissent, "How To Stop Fascism", calls for a revival of the 'militant democracy' adopted by anti-communist governments in the Cold War context. In the First World War, the reformists parties of the Second International allowed themselves to be swept up in the patriotic fervour, mobilising labour movement support for a catastrophic inter-imperialist conflict. Over the following decade, the ability to advance a socialist counter to the rise of reaction was utterly hamstrung by its 'sense of constitutionalist responsibility and traditional prejudices about the undisciplined instincts of the non-Social Democratic masses'. As Mason acknowledges, the reformists were blindly committed to legality, at a time when politics was becoming radical, populist and moving to the streets.' Mason is correct to say of liberal democracy that not only does it allow workers and oppressed people the space to organize in but we, the people, actually helped created it, through two centuries of struggle. The rise of fascism demonstrated how quickly the 'men of power, and privilege' are willing to dispense with political liberties if they see this as necessary to preserving their order. Deploying the Gramscian language of hegemony, Mason argues that a modern front needs to occupy some kind of centre ground on social issues: 'if there is a social force that represent progress, it needs to builds alliance with other social forces and to avoid needless cultural friction with them. While in his book Mason distances himself from the Cold War theory of totalitarianism, which served the political purpose of mobilising anti-fascists rhetoric against various threats to post-war capitalism, he has clearly internalised its inner logic. After the outbreak of the Ukraine conflict, Mason asserted that "the whole survival of democracy and the post-1945 charter system depends on defeating, morally, politically and if necessary militarily, states which have become aggressive, totalitarian and ethnonationalist.' "How To Stop Fascism" concludes by calling for a revival of the 'militant democracy' advocated by liberals in the post-war context. Mason is an instructive case of what happens when the watering down of principle for the sake of pragmatism is guiding politics.                                                                                                               A thought-provoking, uneasy and striking statement of, 'Fascism is back' opens "How To Stop Fascism: History, Ideology, Resistance". Paul Mason, a British TV commentator and award-winning journalist, sets out to warn the world of the fascist danger and to provide a practical guide on how to fight back. At a time of democratic backsliding around the globe, Mason's book arrives at a timely moment to warn people, of what might slip away from their hands. The book talks about a new kind of fascism, but one which is no less harmful or threatening. On the contrary, what we witness today is as dangerous as fascism in the past, if not more so. While all of their actions aim to undermine the rule of law and intimidate opponents in general. And online spaces, such as Telegram and Signal, play into the hands of fascists, providing them with easy and anonymised platforms to spread hatred, fantasies of violence and conspiracy theories. Mason provides a detailed historical account of fascism in an attenpt to explain the process by which fascism emerged in Europe during the interwar period and to draw similarities with today. They took advantage of the economic crisis of the Great Depression which caused high inflation and mass unemployment, as well as the inability of liberal explanations or interventions of the time to address the needs of people. Drawing on lessons from history, Mason's main solution to fascism is 'to win the battle of ideas, and well in advance of its electoral breakthrough'. This solution requires two main approaches. First, fascism should be understood as an ideological war, not just based on conspitacy theories but also in intolerance and violence. To that end, Mason defines fascism as 'the fear of freedom triggered by a glimpse of freedom. As such, a fascist mindset fears that a 'group that is supposed to be subordinate to them might be on the verge of achieving freedom and equality'. We already observe that populists and authoritarians put significant efforts into preventing other people from achieving greater freedom and impeding them any gained rights. Second, the struggle against fascism requires a greater alliance. Parties and people should put aside their differences and unite to defend democracy. Furthermore, Mason states that this goal could achieved only by involving 'struggles both from below and coercive action by the state'. The book offers suggestive evidence not only to explain the process by which fascism emerged in the 1930s, but also to provide guidance for both activists and political elites around the world to stop fascism today. The book is also relatable to many other nascent topics in political science, including populism, new authoritarianism and political polarisation.

140th Birthday of Sinclair Lewis

                              Almost one month ago, precisely on 7th of February, the American writer Sinclair Lewis would complete 140 years-old. So this post is a tribute to him. He wrote against totalitarianism and hypocrisy and about the importance of democracy, freedom of speech and free media, political inclusion and free elections.  This post is a summary of two articles. The first was published at https://www.britannica.com/biography/Sinclair-Lewis. The second was published at https://repositorio.ual.es/bitstream/handle/10835/13465/MORILLAS%20HURTADO%2C%20JOSE%20CARLOS.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

                                 Sinclair Lewis (1885-1951) was an American novelist and social critic who punctured American complacency with his broadly drawn, widely popular satirical novels. He won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1930, the first given to an American. Lewis Graduated from Yale University in 1907 and was for a time a reporter and also worked as an editor for several publishers. His first novel, "Our Mr. Wrenn" (1914), attracted favourable criticism. At the same time he was writing with success for popular magazines such as Cosmopolitan. "Main Street" (1920) is seen through the eyes of Carol Kennicott, an Eastern girl married to a Midwestern doctor who settles in Minnesota. The power of the book derives from Lewis' careful rendering of local speech, customs and social amenities. The satire is double-edged. In the years following its publication, Main Street became not just a novel but the textbook on American provincialism. In 1922, Lewis published "Babbit", a study of the complacent American whose individuality has been sucked out of him Rotary clubs, business ideals and general conformity. The name Babbit passed into general usage to represent the optimistic, self-congratulatory, middle-aged businessman whose horizons were bounded by his village limits. He followed this success with "Arrowsmith" (1925), a satiric study of the medical profession, with emphasis on the frustation of fine scientific ideals. His next important book, "Elmer Gantry" (1927), was an attack on the ignorant, gross and predatory leaders who had crept into the Protestant church. "It Can't Happen Here" (1935) dramatized the possibilities of a Fascist takeover of the U.S. In 1930, as a recognition to his remarkable back catalogue, he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature, "for his vigorous and graphic art of description and his ability to create, with wit and humour, new type of character". He was the first American writer to receive such a prestigious acknoledgement. "It Can't Happen Here", was published in 1935 and in this novel he describes an American society where fascism slowly takes control. This novel comes as a response by Sinclair Lewis to the growing wave of totalitarian regimes that were arising in the decade of the Great Depression, showing his inner fear of this political movement planting its seed in the minds of the American people. This opportunitty that people had to identify with the story on a practical level, made it easier for this specific audience to see the relation between the demagogues in the story and their counterparts in real life. "It Can't Happen Here", would be his last piece of work to be widely acclaimed by the public. His following productions, although they made him money, were not considered to demonstrate the high quality that was present in previous publications. Although Sinclair Lewis was part of a democratic society, he still saw the cracks in the system that could potentially affect in a negative way. As he was concerned like the development of fascism in such an advanced and highly educated nation as Germany. The totalitarian approaches to politics also come with the removal of freedom of speech in the media. This topic is represented in a very personal manner in "It Can't Happen Here", since the main character, Doremus Jessup who is a journalist, suffers from this issue at first hand. After witnessing his country fall apart and drift away from the American values that it once had, we can see how Doremus lost the very thing that still held meaningful value to him. Sinclair Lewis made this character to be involved in journalism as a way to bring awareness to how serious the removal of liberty in the media truly is, and to showcase the evolution that this activity experiences in a fascist regime. In this novel, we can see how Windrip's despises the notion of the economic systems that were implemented around the world at the time, and considers them as enemies. Buzz Windrip paints them as the reason for the American debacle, therefore the country should work against them. He also conveys the idea that a brief authoritarian government would be ideal for the quick recovery of the situation in the country. In this depiction of a fascist American state, Doremus Jessup serves as a representation of the willingness of people to not lose their authenticity and to fight against a deeply rotten system where the individual freedom that America was built on no longer exists. With this novel, Sinclair is demonstrating how easily it could be to demolish the democratic basis of a society, and also how the economic difficulties can radicalize the way in which people think. In "It Can't Happen Here", we can recognize the role that propaganda plays in the development and survival of a totalitarian regime. In "It Can't Happen Here", we are witnesses to the radicalization of the political approach in a dystopian U.S. I want to bring awareness about his aggressive manner of conducting politics during his term, and how people should be able to identify these unoriginal concepts which he based his message on. We have the power to choose who represents us in government, this is why we should use our right wisely in order not to elect people lisleading discourses are ultimately harmful towards society.

Data Privacy Day - 2025

                Almost one month ago, precisely on 28th of January, all over the world was celebrated the right to privacy. Since the creation of this blog in 2010, its counter of visualizations doesn't work and the same is happening with my YouTube channel since its creation in 2020. For no reason,  I'm being  harmed in so many ways and for so long. Why can I not have a YouTube channel and blog with their counter of visualizations working like everyone else? However, all the world is demanding justice and equality. The Brazilian institutions including from the government must do more to reinforce human rights. Including demanding justice and fighting the daily bullying on TV. The cowardice and injustices can't carry on. The good people of the world is demanding a fairer and inclusive  Brazil, because they know about what is happening here and their demand must be heard for all.  If you want to know my channel and see a small sample of the huge worldwide movement for justice, democracy and political rights, watch my videos, here is the link   https://www.youtube.com/@lucianofietto4773/videos.           This post is a summary of three articles. The first was published at https://www.dsci.in/data-privacy-day-2025/. The second was published at https://awareness-days.co.uk/awareness-day/data-privacy-day/2025-01-28/. The third was published at https://pacc-ccap.ca/dpd/

                Data Privacy Day, observed annualy on January 28th, is a global initiative dedicated to raising awareness about data protection and privacy. Data Privacy Day aims to educate organizations on the importance of responsible data handling and empower individuals to protect their personal information through best practices. Keeping the central theme for this year as "Privacy in the age of A.I.", which addresses the evolving challenges and opportunities presented by A.I. In the ever-evolving landscape of the digital age, A.I. is deeply embedded in our daily experiences. In this new era of A.I., prioritizing data privacy and building a foundation of trust through proactive privacy practices is vital for both individuals and businesses.                                                                                                                   Data Privacy Day takes place on 28th of January every year to raise awareness and promote privacy and data protection best practices. Initiated by the Council of Europe and celebrated globally, this day marks the anniversary of the signing of Convention 108, the first legally binding international treaty dealing with privacy and data protection. Data Privacy Day is a call to action for businesses, governments, and individuals to respect privacy, safeguard data and enable trust. This day highlights the importance of protecting personal information in our increasingly digital world and encourages everyone to learn more about their rights and responsibilities regarding data privacy. It is a day to emphasize the impact of data in our lives and the need for effective legislation and practices to protect privacy and personal data. To engage your audience on Data Privacy Day, here are some ideas for your social media: 1)Tips on Data Protection - Share useful tips and best practices for individuals and organizations to protect their personal and sensitive data.  2)Information on Data Rights - Educate your audience about their rights regarding data privacy and the importance of data consent and control.  3)Data breaches and Security - Discuss data breaches and cybersecurity threats, highlighting the importance of staying vigilant and secure online.  4)Data Privacy Resources - Provide resources or links to helpful information about data privacy laws, regulations and guidelines.  5)Expert Insights and Discussions - Feature insights from data privacy experts, including interviews, webinars, or articles discussing current trends and challenges in data privacy.                                                                Data Privacy Day is an internationally recognized effort to increase awareness about the importance of privacy and protecting personal information, because privacy is at the heart of everything we do. Data Privacy Day is also an opportunity for organizations to recognize that the best way to earn trust is by protecting the information about individuals, properly, consistently and ethically. We believe genuine respect for individual privacy is the foundation of freedom, and that public policy and laws that reflect that foundation are beneficial for well-functioning democracy, financial and digital economies, and public safety. We also believe that individuals' privacy, not organizational secrecy, should be at the heart of everything governments and commercial organizations do.

E-Voting in Brazil - The Risks to Democracy

                    We human rights defenders must always keep our fighting for justice, democracy and human rights. The right to reparation when systematic violations of human rights is hapenning is essential part of the justice demanded by the world.  Since the creation of this blog in 2010, its counter of visualizations doesn't work and the same is happening with my YouTube channel since its creation in 2020. For no reason,  I'm being  harmed in so many ways and for so long. Why can I not have a YouTube channel and blog with their counter of visualizations working like everyone else? If you want to know my channel and see a small sample of the huge worldwide movement for justice, democracy and political rights, watch my videos, here is the link   https://www.youtube.com/@lucianofietto4773/videos.        This post is a summary of the report written after research by professors at the Federal University of Paraiba, Brazil and Acadia University, Nova Scotia, Canada.  The title of the report is above and was published at https://oro.open.ac.uk/12543/1/12543.pdf

                          Literature has shown that countries with strong democratic traditions are not yet using eletronic voting systems, given citizens and policy makers' concern about the security of such systems. To date, commercially available technology requires an infrastructure that poses complex technical challenges for reliability and security. E-voting technology does not yet provide a completely "secure e-transaction environment". Some authors claim that e-voting will never be error-free and that it is nice in theory, but that in practice, the risks are too large. Given the lack of security of e-voting systems, what are the risks of e-voting to democracy when the systems are introduced? Can less mature democracies such as those in Latin America, be reinforced with the adoption of e-voting systems? The contradictions are apparent: most countries in the developed world have held off adopting e-voting systems given their concerns about security and their knowledge of the implications of insecure systems for democracy. The controversis over e-voting are under way and e-voting technologies failures have been documented. Scientists started to worry about computer voting systems and numerous reports have found them vulnerable to "error" and tampering. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how the introduction of e-voting in Brazil is highly risky to democracy due to the lack of emphasis on security and the lack of a socially-informed and socially driven approach to technological innovation. Brazil was the first country in the world to conduct its biggest election using e-voting tech. The e-voting technology deployed in Brazil is a direct recording eletronic voting system;--- it has been judged by Brazilian experts as being more vulnerable to tampering than any another voting system. For some eletronic voting experts, the Electoral Justice has opened the doors for new and sophisticated fraud, more serious than the traditional kind. Many reports in the U.S., articulate the risks of this technology, corroborating with what Brazilian academics and scientists say. In the U.S. the controversies over e-voting are not stifled, e-voting tech failures have been registered all over. A recent study carried out by the OECD confirms that, if governments do not learn how to manage the risks of information technology, the eletronic dreams will become global nightmares. In developed countries, resistance to e-voting has been consistent. Without a market for e-voting systems in the developed world, corporate actors have turned to developing countries. Just as pharmaceutical companies whose medicine do not pass the FDA's criteria push their market nets in the south hemisphere. While Diebold, the eletronic voting machine maker, is so questioned in the U.S., in Brazil it has the largest contract in its history by selling e-voting machines to the Brazilian government. If both e-voting and e-democracy are conceived and adopted based on popular demand, then the efficiency of traditional democratic electoral processes may be enhanced. However, if e-voting technology is introduced as a supply-driven operation, it is imperative to identify and assess the risks to democracy. It seems that the e-voting system in Brazil has been risky business. Democracy is at stake. Health and social welfare are on the line, subject to cutbacks despite growing needs. Technological hubris and market imperatives have driven the evolution of the digital society, with important democratic implications. Appropriate technological processes can reverse this trend in a way that ensures that we are not travelling along the path of least resistance.

Criminalization of Human Rights Defenders - Part II

             We human rights defenders can't let threats about the creation of lies stop us fighting for justice, democracy, political and civil rights. The right to reparation when violations of human rights hapenned is essential part of the justice demanded by the world.  Since the creation of this blog in 2010, its counter of visualizations doesn't work and the same is happening with my YouTube channel since its creation in 2020. For no reason,  I'm being  harmed in so many ways and for so long. Why can I not have a YouTube channel and blog with their counter of visualizations working like everyone else? If you want to know my channel and see a small sample of the huge worldwide movement for justice, democracy and political rights, watch my videos, here is the link   https://www.youtube.com/@lucianofietto4773/videos.    Carry on with the same book from last week. This post is a summary of the book with the title above published at http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/criminalization2016.pdf

                The Commission has received information that many of the criminal proceedings that are initiated against human rights defenders are slow or accelerated, in an unreasonable manner in order to hinder their work at a crucial time for the causes they defend and to intimidate them personally, which also has an intimidating effect that extends to other human rights defenders that could instill fear of suffering the same fate if they continue their work in defense of human rights. For example, some organizations have expressed their concern before the Commission over the speed with which arrest warrants and other measures to the detriment of human rights defenders are issued. In contrast, the processes opened to investigate acts of harassment committed against defenders, are often undertaken without celerity and procedural efficiency. The misuse of the criminal law against human rights defenders generates among them a number of negative impacts at a personal and collective level, affecting their physical health and generating effects at the family and social level. The Commission believes the condition of being a human rights defnder is particularly important whether a process has respected the guarantee of a reasonable timeframe, given the affection that occurs over time in the legal situation of the defender. Furthermore, the Commission has learned that defenders not only have been subjected to lengthy criminal proceedings based on criminal offenses contrary to the standards of international law but, in some cases, have also been charged with crimes based on false and fabricated evidence without the defenders having engaged in unlawful conduct. The Commission has noted that initiation of criminal proceedings against defenders implies, in some cases, issuing preventive measures such as remand, bail, the obligation to appear periodically before a court, and/or a ban on leaving the country. The Commission has also been informed that some countries have issued measures such as the inability to attend certain meetings or places. The main impact of criminalization through the misuse of criminal law is on the right to defend human rights. Criminalization not only affects the criminally prosecuted defender, who must invest time and resources in his procedural defense, neglecting his work, but also generates an intimidating and chilling effect on other defenders who for fear retaliation may refrain from doing their work of promoting and protecting human rights. This affects society as a whole, given that the defenders promote complaints, present claims and make demands at the social and collective level that contribute to the realization of the rule of law and democracy by combating impunity. The Commission has identified that some States have issued directives to guide the actions of justice operators and considers this a good practice to avoid misuse of criminal law gaginst human rights defenders. For example, in Colombia various types of guidelines have been adopted to guide the action of the Attorney General Office, making it more efficient and providing security to victims and the accused. Based on the information and analysis conducted by the Commission throughout this report, and in order to promote the full use of international standards to guide States on lines of action to address criminalization through the misuse of criminal law, the IACHR recommends to the American States: 1) To ensure that the authorities do not use the punitive power of the States to harass human rights defenders. States must adopt all necessary measures, through judicial investigations, to prevent HR defenders from being subjected to unjust or unfounded trials.  2) To adopt all necessary legislative, administrative and other measures to ensure the effective guarantee of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the American Convention and in particular, the right to defend rights.  To achieve these objectives, the IACHR urges States to comply with the following specific recommendations:  3) Acknowledge publicly and unequivocally the fundamental role played by HR defenders to guarantee democracy and the rule of law in society, whose commitment is reflected in all levels of government. This can be achieved through special programs, the granting of awards, ceremonies, press releases or other measures that make visible the work of defenders and demonstrate their value and importance to society.  4) Undertake education and dissemination activities directed towards all States agents, society and the media, to sensitize them on the legitimacy of the work of promotion and defense of human rights, as well as the importance and value of the work of HR defenders and their organizations, as their actions do not weaken the States but strengthen it, taking into account for that the international instruments referred to this subject.  5) Instruct government authorities to ensure that, from the highest-level space for open dialogue with human rights organizations are created to receive their feedback regarding existing policies and the effect of such policies on their works, as well as on legislative gaps.  7) Refrain from making statements that stigmatize HR defenders and that suggest that defenders, as well as HR organizations, act illegally, merely for carrying out of their work to protect human rights. 8) Ensure that criminal offenses included in their legislation are formulated in a manner consistent with the principle of legality. That is, expressly, precisely, comprehensively with a clear definition of the criminalized conduct, establishing its elements and allowing it to be differentiated from behavior that are not punishable or punishable with non-penal measures. 10) Promote the modification of laws on criminal defamation to eliminate the use of criminal procedure to protect honor and reputation when information on matters of public interest, public officials, or candidates for public office is disseminated.  11) Decriminalize defamation and promote the modification of ambiguous or vague criminal laws disproportionately limiting freedom of expression, such as those designed to protect the honor of institutions, in order to eliminate the use of criminal proceedings yo inhibit the free democratic debate on all matters of public interest.  18) Ensure that any intelligence activity that is carried out, especially when a HR defender is involved or subject to the operation, has the proper prior authorization, with clear limits pre-established by law, and is performed under the supervision of other authorities who periodically issue reports on its activities.  22) To promote that judges strictly abide by the dispositions of criminal law, and observe the rigor in considering whether the behavior of the person incriminated falls within the description of the criminal offense, in order not to incur in the criminalization of the legitimate activities of HR defenders.  Guarantee the right access to justice, which implies that anyone who is subjected to a judicial proceeding must be able to obtain a final decision from the courts without undue delays arising from the lack of diligence and care.  24) Faced with an abusive and baseless criminal complaint, investigate the individual responsible for promoting such complaint, in order to clarify the facts.   29) Ensure that the detention of HR defenders be brought before a judicial review in order to avoid arbitrary or unlawful detention.  30) Adopt the necessary steps to stop all illegal detentions, as well as the isolation, ill-treatment and other violations of due process that may arise in the context of the detention of a HR defender.  41) Implement campaigns for public recognition of the important role that defenders exercise in guaranteeing democracy and the rule of law in society.  43) Strengthen the justice mechanisms and guarantee the independence and impartiality of the judicial operators, which are necessary conditions for the legitimate and nondiscriminatory application of the laws.

Criminalization of Human Rights Defenders

                   We human rights defenders can't let threats about the creation of lies stop us fighting for justice, democracy, political and civil rights. The right to reparation when violations of human rights hapenned is essential part of the justice demanded by the world.  Since the creation of this blog in 2010, its counter of visualizations doesn't work and the same is happening with my YouTube channel since its creation in 2020. For no reason,  I'm being  harmed in so many ways and for so long. Why can I not have a YouTube channel and blog with their counter of visualizations working like everyone else? If you want to know my channel and see a small sample of the huge worldwide movement for justice, democracy and political rights, watch my videos, here is the link   https://www.youtube.com/@lucianofietto4773/videos. This post is a summary of the book with the title above published in December of 2015 at https://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/criminalization2016.pdf

                      This report addresses the problem of the misuse of criminal law by State and non-state actors with the aim to criminalize the work of human rights defenders. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) has continued to receive alarming reports of a trend indicating that human rights defenders in various contexts are systematically subjected to unfounded criminal proceedings in order to paralyze or delegitimize their causes. This report conceptualizes the phenomenon of criminalization and identifies the contexts and groups of defenders who are most affected by this practice, as well as the actors who usually participate in the processes of criminalization through the misuse of criminal law. Additionally, the IACHR identifies the main forms of criminalization against human rights defenders and the obligations that States must observe in criminal proceedings to prevent them from becoming tools to hinder the defense of human rights. According to information received, the misuse of criminal law most often occurs in contexts where there are tensions or conflicts of interest with the State and non-state actors. The IACHR has also noted that there are certain groups of defenders who have been more frequently the target of these forms of criminalization due to the causes they advance or the content of their demands. The Commission has found that criminalization processes usually begins with the filing of baseless allegations or complaints based on criminal offenses that do not conform to the principle of legality. In recent years, through its continuous monitoring work, the IACHR has noticed a growing actions taken to prevent, obstruct, and discourage the defense of human rights. One of the actions frequently reported to the IACHR is the adoption and misapplication of the law to the detriment of human rights defenders in order to obstruct their activities. Based on these considerations, given that criminal law is the means available to the state for establishing liability for unlawful conduct, this report will focus on the various forms of manipulation of the punitive power, and what the IACHR refers to as the criminalization and misuse of criminal law. Human Rights Defenders are individuals who any way promote the realization of human rights. This concept also covers justice operators as defenders of the access to justice for victims of violations of their rights. The recognition of the right to defend rights has expanded. For its part, the IACHR has emphasized that "the defense of human rights not only serves civil and political rights, but covers the monitoring, reporting, and education of economic and social rights. The IACHR has emphasized that the work of human rights defenders is fundamental for the universal implementation of human rights and for the full existence of democracy and the rule of law. In this regard, the IACHR has recommended that States publicly recognize that the promotion of human rights are legitimate actions and foster a human rights culture in which the role played by human rights defenders in guaranteeing democracy is recognized publicly. Human Rights (HR) defenders have also been victims of criminalization after filing complaints against public officials for alleged corruption or in the pursuit of the investigation, prosecution, and punishment of cases of grave human rights violations and breaches of humanitarian law by State. In this regard, the IACHR has recognized the efforts of the victims, family members, H.R. defenders and civil society organizations and their contribution to the right to the truth regarding human rights violations, as their activity is essential in the search for the right to the truth. The Commission has observed that defenders are often criminalized for the activities they carry out in the defense of human rights and are subject to criminal proceedings that are initiated against them following complaints that come from both State officials and private individuals. They are often accused of crimes defined in a broad or ambiguos manner, contrary to the principle of legality. Judges also participate in criminalizing defenders when they accept processes without evidence or with claims from false witnesses, accelerate processes with the goal to repress the accused defender, issue arrest warrants without sufficient basis, do not respect the guarantee of reasonable time and subject defenders to lengthy proceedings. In any criminal proceeding, clear proof of the guilt is a prerequisite for the criminal sanction, and the burden of proof should lie with the accusing part and not the accused. When justice operators are confronted with accusations and criminal charges that are clearly unfounded, they are obligated to investigate the source of these arbitrary complaints and impose an appropriate sanction. Doing so will also serve to discourage future abuse of the judicial process and waste of judicial resources. The Commission is aware of statements and assertions issued by authorities seeking to delegitimize the work of H.R. defenders, stigmatizing them before society. The IACHR has noted that States have a position as guarantors of the fundamental rights, and therefore the exercise of freedom of expression by public officials is subject to special duties, including the duty to reasonably verify the facts on which their statements are based. Public officials, especially those in the highest positions, have the duty to respect opinions, even when these are contrary to their interests. In this sense, they should actively promote pluralism and tolerance, inherent in a democratic society. This derives from the obligation to protect the human rights of all people and in particular those in situations of risk, as in the case of H.R. defenders who have been threatened. In several countries in the region, H.R. defenders have faced criminal prosecution for exercising their right of free expression after making complaints alleging human rights violations. The Commission has noted with concern that in some countries of the region, criminal offenses of defamation continue to be used to criminalize and punish statements concerning public officials, which has disproportionately affected the work of human rights defenders. In a State in which the reporting of human rights violations is criminalized in order to protect the honor of public officials, citizens lose an essential tool in the fight for the protection of rights, thus greatly affecting the democratic system.