By Cecilia Russell
JOHANNESBURG, Jan 26 2024 – The International Court of Justice will deliver it’s order for provisional measures submitted by South Africa in the case of South Africa versus Israel today.

South Africa argued that the scale of destruction resulting from the bombardment of Gaza and the deliberate restriction of food, water, medicines, and electricity demonstrated that the government of Israel and its military were intent on destroying Palestinians as a group, which was in violation of the UN Genocide Convention.

The case was argued on January 10 and 11, 2024, and today’s decision is only likely to deal with jurisdiction and the provisional measures that South Africa asked the court to impose.

The provisional measures include:

• that military operations are immediately ceased;
• that the State of Israel take reasonable measures within its power to prevent genocide, including desisting from actions that could bring about physical destruction;
• rescind orders of restrictions and prohibitions to prevent forced displacement and ensure access to humanitarian assistance, including access to adequate fuel, shelter, clothes, hygiene, sanitation and medical supplies;
• avoid public incitement;
• ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of acts and
• submit a report to the court on all measures taken to give effect to the order.

South Africa argued that the scale of destruction resulting from the bombardment of Gaza and the deliberate restriction of food, water, medicines, and electricity demonstrated that the government of Israel and its military were intent on destroying Palestinians as a group.

Israel disputed this, saying that the country had a right to defend itself in the face of the October 7 massacre in Israel. It was argued that South Africa brought a fundamentally flawed case. 

IPS will update the outcome later today.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Andrew Firmin
LONDON, Jan 26 2024 – Serbia’s December 2023 elections saw the ruling party retain power – but amid a great deal of controversy.

Civil society has cried foul about irregularities in the parliamentary election, but particularly the municipal election in the capital, Belgrade. In recent times Belgrade has been a hotbed of anti-government protests. That’s one of the reasons it’s suspicious that the ruling Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) came first in the city election.

Allegations are that the SNS had ruling party supporters from outside Belgrade temporarily register as city residents so they could cast votes. On election day, civil society observers documented large-scale movements of people into Belgrade, from regions where municipal elections weren’t being held and from Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro. Civil society documented irregularities at 14 per cent of Belgrade voting stations. Many in civil society believe this made the crucial difference in stopping the opposition winning.

The main opposition coalition, Serbia Against Violence (SPN), which made gains but finished second, has rejected the results. It’s calling for a rerun, with proper safeguards to prevent any repeat of irregularities.

Thousands have taken to the streets of Belgrade to protest about electoral manipulation, rejecting the violation of the most basic principle of democracy – that the people being governed have the right to elect their representatives.

Facts that can’t be ignored: Serbian NGO @CRTArs has just published its latest findings on the election in #Serbia & #Belgrade. According to CRTA, there was an "organised migration of voters", which had a decisive influence on the close result of the election in Belgrade. https://t.co/a8POlE5VTy

— Andreas Schieder (@SCHIEDER) December 23, 2023

A history of violations

The SNS has held power since 2012. It blends economic neoliberalism with social conservatism and populism, and has presided over declining respect for civic space and media freedoms. In recent years, Serbian environmental activists have been subjected to physical attacks. President Aleksandar Vučić attempted to ban the 2022 EuroPride LGBTQI+ rights march. Journalists have faced public vilification, intimidation and harassment. Far-right nationalist and anti-rights groups have flourished and also target LGBTQI+ people, civil society and journalists.

The SNS has a history of electoral irregularities. The December 2023 vote was a snap election, called just over a year and a half since the previous vote in April 2022, which re-elected Vučić as president. In 2022, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) pointed to an ‘uneven playing field’, characterised by close ties between major media outlets and the government, misuse of public resources, irregularities in campaign financing and pressure on public sector staff to support the SNS.

These same problems were seen in December 2023. Again, the OSCE concluded there’d been systemic SNS advantages. Civil society observers found evidence of vote buying, political pressure on voters, breaches of voting security and pressure on election observers. During the campaign, civil society groups were vilified, opposition officials were subjected to physical and verbal attacks and opposition rallies were prevented.

But the ruling party has denied everything. It’s slurred civil society for calling out irregularities, accusing activists of trying to destabilise Serbia.

Backdrop of protests

The latest vote was called following months of protests against the government. These were sparked by anger at two mass shootings in May 2023 in which 17 people were killed.

The shootings focused attention on the high number of weapons still in circulation after the wars that followed the break-up of Yugoslavia and the growing normalisation of violence, including by the government and its supporters.

Protesters accused state media of promoting violence and called for leadership changes. They also demanded political resignations, including of education minister Branko Ružić, who disgracefully tried to blame the killings on ‘western values’ before being forced to quit. Prime Minister Ana Brnabić blamed foreign intelligence services for fuelling protests. State media poured abuse on protesters.

These might have seemed odd circumstances for the SNS to call elections. But election campaigns have historically played to Vučić’s strengths as a campaigner and give him some powerful levers, with normal government activities on hold and the machinery of the state and associated media at his disposal.

Only this time it seems the SNS didn’t think all its advantages would be quite enough and, in Belgrade at least, upped its electoral manipulation to the point where it became hard to ignore.

East and west

There’s little pressure from Serbia’s partners to both east and west. Its far-right and socially conservative forces are staunchly pro-Russia, drawing on ideas of a greater Slavic identity. Russian connections run deep. In the last census, 85 per cent of people identified themselves as affiliated with the Serbian Orthodox Church, strongly in the sway of its Russian counterpart, in turn closely integrated with Russia’s repressive machinery.

The Serbian government relies on Russian support to prevent international recognition of Kosovo. Russian officials were only too happy to characterise post-election protests as western attempts at unrest, while Prime Minister Brnabić thanked Russian intelligence services for providing information on planned opposition activities.

But states that sit between the EU and Russia are being lured on both sides. Serbia is an EU membership candidate. The EU wants to keep it onside and stop it drifting closer to Russia, so EU states have offered little criticism.

Serbia keeps performing its balancing act, gravitating towards Russia while doing just enough to keep in with the EU. In the 2022 UN resolution on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, it voted to condemn Russia’s aggression and suspend it from the Human Rights Council. But it’s resisted calls to impose sanctions on Russia and in 2022 signed a deal with Russia to consult on foreign policy issues.

The European Parliament is at least prepared to voice concerns. In a recent debate, many of its members pointed to irregularities and its observation mission noted problems including media bias, phantom voters and vilification of election observers.

Other EU institutions should acknowledge what happened in Belgrade. They should raise concerns about electoral manipulation and defend democracy in Serbia. To do so, they need to support and work with civil society. An independent and enabled civil society will bring much-needed scrutiny and accountability. This must be non-negotiable for the EU.

Andrew Firmin is CIVICUS Editor-in-Chief, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

Rural Kenyans are forging a path toward a more sustainable future and protecting their lives and livelihoods from climate change through regenerative agriculture, nurturing hope for their communities and the environment.

 

By Ulysses Dorotheo
BANGKOK, Thailand, Jan 26 2024 – A hot debate on electronic smoking devices is expected to engage governments, scheduled to meet in Panama from 5-10 February for the tenth session of the Conference of Parties (COP) to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC).

The WHO FCTC, the first health treaty, was developed to address the global tobacco epidemic and to ensure that governments are supported in implementing comprehensive and effective tobacco control strategies.

Earlier in 2016, the governments during COP8 made a decision to either prohibit or restrict the manufacture, importation, distribution, presentation, sale and use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (e-cigarettes). Since then, more than 45 countries and jurisdictions have banned e-cigarettes as a precautionary principle (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Countries that have banned e-cigarettes

Electronic smoking devices (ESDs), which include e-cigarettes (or vape products) and heated tobacco products (HTPs), has grown into a multi-billion dollar industry estimated to be worth about USD 18 billion in 2022 to about USD 46 billion by 2030.

While the tobacco and vape industries claim these devices are safer than traditional cigarettes and can be used by smokers to quit, no country has approved them as cessation tools. ESDs cannot help smoking cessation as studies show the nicotine in ESDs keeps its users addicted to tobacco products, and most smokers who took up ESDs to quit smoking ended up using both ESDs and traditional cigarettes (dual use).

ESDs are not harmless. Current research indicates that ESD pose health risks, as aerosols from these devices contain nicotine as well as toxic chemicals, volatile organic compounds, and heavy metals that may damage the lung and heart.

WHO warning to act urgently on e-cigarettes

Last month, the WHO issued an urgent call to control e-cigarettes to protect children and the general population. According to WHO’s statement, “E-cigarettes with nicotine are highly addictive and alarming evidence has emerged of adverse population health effects.”

According to WHO, 88 countries have no minimum age at which e-cigarettes can be bought and 74 countries have no regulations for these harmful products.

A number of high-income countries with declining smoking prevalence but who legalized e-cigarettes are now grappling with increasing youth vaping, such as Canada, New Zealand, U.K. and USA. Low-and-middle-income countries who are already struggling to overcome the burden of the tobacco epidemic now face a double burden with nicotine addiction.

But despite the growing evidence that ESDs are dangerous and highly addictive, the tobacco and nicotine industry aggressively market these devices, particularly to youth.

The industry and its lobbyists pressure governments to approve sales of these new products with routine arguments about loss of taxes and smuggling, while simultaneously exaggerating their virtues.

Youth targeted in new nicotine products

The ASEAN region’s 213 million youths are an easy target for the tobacco industry which employs a host of marketing tactics to lure these young people. In 2019, about 14% of Filipino adolescents aged 13 to 15 years reported using ESDs, alongside nearly 15% (2022) of Malaysian and 11% (2018) of Indonesian teens.

ESDs come with a variety of flavors, most of which are made to attract young people, such as fruity, candy-based, and dessert-like flavors. Over 16,000 e-liquid flavors are sold in the market currently, and there is clear evidence these flavors harm the body.

Food flavors are meant to be used in foodstuff to be digested, not inhaled into the lungs which harms the respiratory system. This harm is seen in cases where young vapers have suffered collapsed lungs and have been admitted to intensive care.

Promoted as cool, lifestyle must-haves, the tobacco industry also entices the youth to use ESDs through social media platforms such as Instagram and Facebook, and through sponsorships of events and concerts.

To ban or restrict electronic smoking devices

In the ASEAN region Singapore imposed a ban on these devices in 2011 to prevent unchecked use of ESDs. They also consider ESDs as starter products which may cause nicotine addiction and lead consumers to use both ESDs and cigarettes later in life.

Hong Kong, like Singapore, banned ESDs in 2022 as a response to the growing youth uptake for these products. Other countries who have banned ESD in the ASEAN include Thailand, Laos and Brunei. Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines legalized e-cigarettes and face a big youth vaping problem.

Australia adopted a prescription only approach to e-cigarettes, while HTPs are banned. The United States, through its Food and Drug Administration regulates ESDs on the basis of age restrictions, health warning labels, ingredients disclosure, and marketing restrictions.

Some governments have implemented stringent regulations on the basis of price or tax measures, product standards control, health warning labels and restrictions on marketing and advertisements. Policies however should also cover age restrictions, flavor bans, and smoke-free regulations.

Eight million deaths due to tobacco are eight million deaths too many. With ESDs, history cannot repeat itself. At COP10, governments will be presented with a once-in-a-generation opportunity to ensure that the tobacco industry cannot deceive anymore. Governments must perform their mandate to protect the people’s right to good health and well-being and to work towards a healthy, tobacco-free world.

Dr Ulysses Dorotheo is the executive director of the Southeast Asia Tobacco Control Alliance. He is also a member of the World Health Organization’s Civil Society Working Group on Non-Communicable Diseases and the World Heart Federation Tobacco Experts Group.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Cecilia Russell
JOHANNESBURG, Jan 26 2024 – The International Court of Justice today told Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent a genocide in the Gaza Strip.

Judge Joan E. Donoghue, the court’s president, read the order directing the State of Israel to abide by temporary measures to stop the humanitarian crisis facing the Palestinian population in Gaza from worsening.

Donoghue said that the facts and circumstances were sufficient to conclude that some of the “rights claimed by South Africa and for which it is seeking protection (for the Palestinian people in Gaza) were plausible.”

The International Court of Justice (ICJ), the main court of the United Nations, issued its ruling in the case South Africa submitted regarding the application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip. You can read the full order here. 

“The court is not called upon for purposes of its decision on the request for the indication of provisional measures to establish the existence of breaches of obligations under the Genocide Convention, but to determine whether the circumstances require the indication of provisional measures for the protection of rights under that instrument,” she explained.

Quoting from UN General Assembly Resolution 96 of December 11, 1946, she said genocide shocks “the conscience of mankind.”

Before going through the list of provisional measures, she quoted high-profile members of the United Nations, including its Secretary General, António Guterres, who warned the Security Council on December 6, 2023, that health care in Gaza was collapsing.

“Nowhere is safe in Gaza, amid constant bombardment by the Israel Defense Forces and without shelter or the essentials to survive. I expect public order to break to completely break down soon, due to the desperate conditions rendering even limited humanitarian assistance impossible.”

He then went on to warn that the situation could get worse, “including epidemic diseases and increased pressure for mass displacement into neighboring countries. We are facing a severe risk of the collapse of the humanitarian system. The situation is fast deteriorating into a catastrophe, with potentially irreversible implications for Palestinians as a whole.”

Donoghue told the court that it considers the rights in question in the proceeding plausible.

“The court considers that the plausible rights in question in this proceeding, namely, the right of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip to be protected from acts of genocide and related prohibited acts identified in Article 3 of the Genocide Convention and the right of South Africa to seek Israel’s compliance with the latter’s obligation under the convention, are of such a nature that prejudiced them and was “capable of causing irreparable harm.”

She pointed out that the provisional measures didn’t have to match those South Africa requested.

In terms of the order:

• Israel must, in accordance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article 2 of the Convention, which deals with the destruction of a group in whole or in part. This includes killing groups of members of the group, causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, and deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part. It was also prevented from imposing measures that were intended to prevent births within the group. Article 2
• The court further considered that Israel must ensure, with immediate effect, that its military forces do not commit any of the acts designed to destroy a group, and the State of Israel must take measures within its power to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide in relation to the members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip.
• The court ordered Israel to take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
• Israel must also take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of acts within the scope of Articles 2 and 3 of the Genocide Convention against members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip.
• Israel must submit a report to the court on all measures taken to give effect to the order within one month of the order. “The report so provided shall then be communicated to South Africa.

“The court reaffirms the decision given in the present proceedings and in no way prejudges the question of the jurisdiction of the court to deal with the merits of the case or any questions related to the admissibility of the application or to the merits themselves.”

She added that the court was gravely concerned about the fate of the hostages abducted during the attack in Israel on October 7, 2023, and held since then by Hamas and other armed groups, and called for their immediate and unconditional release.

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);