Un ciclone sta per abbattersi sulla famiglia reale norvegese, alimentato da scandali, vicende giudiziarie e crisi istituzionali. A seguito della pubblicazione degli Epstein Files da parte del dipartimento di Giustizia statunitense, la principessa Mette-Marit – moglie dell’erede al trono Haakon – si è vista costretta scusarsi pubblicamente per la sua amicizia con Jeffrey Epstein, dopo che le era stato fatto notare che il suo nome compariva più volte nei documenti. L’imbarazzo per la Corona, però, non si limita soltanto ai legami con il miliardario pedofilo morto suicida nel 2019. Marius Borg Høiby, figlio di Mette-Marit, è a processo per 38 capi d’imputazione di cui quattro stupri. I reali, per ora, si limitano a dichiarazioni formali ma la salute della monarchia è estremamente precaria. 

L’amicizia tra la principessa ed Epstein 

Se si sbircia tra le carte degli Epstein Files, il nome di Mette-Marit compare migliaia di volte. Tra Sua altezza reale e il finanziere newyorchese ci sarebbe stata una fitta corrispondenza dal 2011 al 2014, tempo dopo la prima condanna di Epstein per adescamento di una minorenne ai fini di prostituzione.

I due si sarebbero incontrati per la prima volta su iniziativa dello stilista serbo Boris Nikolic e da quel momento avrebbero dato forma a un rapporto sempre più intimo e confidenziale, tanto che alcuni giornali scandinavi hanno parlato di un tono “civettuolo” negli scambi di messaggi e di posta elettronica. La principessa nelle email scrive ad Epstein “mi solletichi il cervello” oppure “Parigi è perfetta per l’adulterio. Le scandinave sono le migliori come mogli”, mentre lui le confidava di essere nella capitale francese in cerca di una dolce metà ma che preferiva le donne della Scandinavia. In uno scambio risalente al 2012, la principessa chiede al finanziere se “è inappropriato, per una madre, suggerire due donne nude che trasportano una tavola da surf come carta da parati per il figlio quindicenne?”. 

Quanto emerso non dà evidenza di condotte criminali da parte di Mette-Marit, ma sicuramente è rivelatore di una certa intesa che c’era tra i due e che andava oltre la semplice cordialità. Non a caso, la futura regina è stata ospite nella residenza di Epstein in Florida nel 2013, sebbene il padrone di casa in quei giorni non fosse presente. 

In passato, il rapporto tra Mette-Marit e il pedofilo statunitense era già stato oggetto di chiacchiericcio mediatico ma il Palazzo aveva sempre dichiarato che si trattava di voci prive di fondamento e che si erano incontrati in occasioni dal carattere sociale. Le carte, oggi, suggeriscono altro e la principessa ha dovuto fare pubblicamente mea culpa ammettendo una “grave mancanza di giudizio”, assumendosi la responsabilità di non aver tagliato i ponti con Epstein in tempi non sospetti e chiedendo scusa al Re e alla Regina. Ora, però, non deve preoccuparsi solo della sua immagine ma anche di quella di suo figlio, il quale deve affrontare delle accuse, queste sì, penali.        

Marius Borg Høiby: un rampollo alla sbarra

A inizio febbraio, sul banco degli imputati del tribunale di Oslo si è seduto il figliastro del futuro monarca: il 29enne Marius Borg Høiby. Marius è figlio di primo letto di Mette-Marit e a partire dai quattro anni è cresciuto alla corte reale dopo le nozze tra sua madre e il principe Haakon, avvenute nel 2001. 

Oggi, il giovane è costretto  a difendersi da oltre una trentina di accuse tra cui aggressione, minacce con coltello, violazioni di ordinanze restrittive e violenza sessuale. Il rampollo, a inizio del dibattimento, si è dichiarato colpevole di trasporto di marijuana, eccesso di velocità e ha anche ammesso di aver scattato delle foto intime prive del consenso della presunta vittima.  Tuttavia, si è dichiarato non colpevole delle accuse di stupro e ha riferito di non avere mai avuto rapporti sessuali con ragazze in stato di incoscienza, come invece sostiene il pubblico ministero.   

L’erede al trono ha voluto rimarcare le distanze da quanto sta vivendo Marius, affermando che né lui né la sua consorte presenzieranno in tribunale per tutta la durata del processo. Ciononostante, l’opinione pubblica in Norvegia comincia a percepire la monarchia come un’infrastruttura sempre più fatiscente e lontana dai fasti di un tempo. Questo non significa che i norvegesi siano pronti a trasformare il loro Paese in una repubblica dal momento che i sondaggi continuano a indicare una preferenza per un capo di Stato coronato, ma comporta inevitabili contraccolpi. 

La pubblicazione degli Epstein Files e l’eventuale condanna del figlio di Mette-Marit rappresenterebbero un grattacapo non da poco per la credibilità della Corona scandinava e non è detto che questa riesca a uscirne indenne dall’onda che potrebbe travolgerla.  

InsideOver è una testata libera e indipendente che vuole raccontare il mondo fuori dagli schemi convenzionali del mainstream.  Unisciti a noi, abbonati oggi!

L'articolo Ombre sulla Corona norvegese, tra Epstein Files e processi per stupro proviene da InsideOver.

Turkey is set to make another attempt to introduce a bill aimed at giving rapists amnesty by allowing them to marry their victims. The legislation which was first brought to parliament for debate on January 16 would pave the way for amnesty to men convicted of child sex offenses so long as they reach a marriage agreement with their victims and their age difference is less than 10 years.

Critics Slam Bill As Legalizing Child Abuse

Critics of the bill have voiced their concerns on grounds that it could legalize statutory rape and child abuse. The UN has also raised concerns that the law would essentially legalize child rape and leave the victims at the mercy of their tormentors.

Leading campaigns against the bill in the Turkish parliament is the opposition party the Peoples Democratic Party (HDP) which has stated that standing against the legislation is “a duty of humanity.” One of the party officials Mrs. Figen Demirci warned: “This amnesty law could actually lead to the reduction of the legal age of sexual intercourse to under 12 years with the child then forced into marriage.” The party’s spokeswoman complained that the government appeared to be more interested in protecting the rights of child abusers than that of other vulnerable people.

History Of Turkey’s Rape Marriage Law

Turkey’s rape marriage law was in existence until 2005 when the country repealed it as part of the negotiations to join the European Union. However, in 2016 the Erdogan government made an attempt to reintroduce the law by allowing 3,000 men accused of statutory rape to marry their victims. However, because of the public outcry the issued generated both locally and internationally the proposal was dropped.

The matter resurfaced last year with Turkey’s ruling party AKP insisting that the aim of the legislation was not to excuse rape but to rehabilitate those who may not have realized that their sexual relations with young girls was unlawful, and also to protect the young victims from being ostracized. This came against a backdrop of a 2018 report that showed that a total of 482,908 girls under 18 were married since 2008 in Turkey, despite the legal marriage age being 18.

The Colonial Roots Of Rape-Marriage Laws

Rape-marriages are common in many Arab and Asian countries. According to Humans Rights Watch, many originated from colonial laws in the Middle East and North Africa. HR Watch Senior Researcher, Rothna Begum wrote, “They largely stem from or were inspired by the French Napoleonic code of 1810 which allowed a man who kidnapped a girl to escape persecution if he married her.”

These laws were further supported by patriarchal attitudes that linked a family’s honor to a woman’s chastity and virginity. In many countries rape victims were treated like outcasts and marrying them was resented and seen as shameful. However, because of international pressure and campaigns by women, some countries have began to repeal the draconian laws.

Case Studies: Morocco, Bahrain, Tunisia, Jordan And Lebanon

In 2014 Morocco repealed a provision that allowed convicted rapists to evade punishment by marrying their victims. However the repeal was only taken after a 16-year-old girl called Amina Filali committed suicide by swallowing rat poison after she was forced to marry a man she had accused of raping her.

In 2016 Bahrain Parliament voted to repeal a similar law but the cabinet rejected the proposal on grounds that the marriage loophole should be revoked only in cases of gang rape.

In 2017 Tunisia , Jordan and Lebanon also furthered women’s rights protections by repealing legislation that allowed rapists to avoid criminal prosecution if they married their victims. However, Lebanon was criticized for retaining a loophole that allowed sex with children between the ages of 15 to 17 and seducing a minor with the promise of sex. According to women’s rights campaigners, this article also needs to be repealed.

Nevertheless, UN Human Rights Commissioner Zeid Raad Al Hussein welcomed these reforms stating there’s no place for hideous laws that seek to “punish a rape victim by making her marry the perpetrator of a horrible crime against her.”

‘Work Towards The Swift Repeal Of Other Legislation That Condones Sexual Violence Against Women And Girls’

She urged the governments of Jordan, Lebanon and Tunisia and other Arab countries “to build on this positive momentum and to work towards the swift repeal of other legislation that condones sexual violence against women and girls and perpetuates discrimination against them in clear violation of international law.”

For a country like Turkey which is divided between religiously-based laws and secularism, the proposed bill is likely to generate a heated debate in the political and religious spheres. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has never hidden his perception of the role of a woman in the context of Islam. In 2014 he was accused of sexism when he said that “you cannot put women and men on an equal footing.”

But as Fatma the spokeswoman for the PDP said in response to the marry your rapist bill that the attempt to pass it will increase opposition to abuse of women and girls and awareness of their situation: “The struggles of women is spreading in waves, creating a butterfly effect. We will never allow the masculine mentality which wants to dominate the world to win.”

L'articolo Turkey To Introduce ‘Marry Your Rapist’ Bill proviene da InsideOver.

“We are free today because we are stronger; we will be slaves again when the government becomes the stronger,” said Toussaint Louverture, leader of the Haitian Revolution. Two centuries and two decades later, Haiti is not free.

On January 12, 2020, an earthquake claiming an estimated 316,000 lives devastated the country. Measuring 7.0 on the Richter scale, it left 1.5 million Haitians injured and another 1.5 million homeless.

The international community reacted en mass, pledging $13.3 billion to support the decimated Caribbean country.

“The international community was very efficient during three or four months to provide water, shelter in the form of tents and provisional shelters, provide medicine, food, etc.,” said Leslie Voltaire, a Haitian urban planner.

Efforts to rebuild Haiti, however, failed. Very few permanent houses have been built and notable landmarks – the presidential palace and the cathedral – have not been rebuilt. The Haitian government has been accused of mismanaging funds and keeping aid for themselves. Even worse, humanitarian ground often focuses on giving Haitians fish rather than teaching them how to fish, further destroying Haiti’s already broken economy.

“Negative aid … is undermining the natural development of the Haitian people,” Bertrhude Albert, founder of P4H Global, a non-profit organisation that trains and properly equips teachers in Haiti, said.

“Instead of giving people T-shirts, they are begging for us to train them how to make their own T-shirts. Instead of giving them American rice, they want us to revitalize their rice industry. There are a lot of missionaries still going to Haiti, but we are giving the inappropriate type of aid.”

Aid, nevertheless, stopped pouring in, as charity and humanitarian organisations gave up on the country. To make matters worse, many who had pledged financial aid to Haiti would renege on their promises.

“It has been a disaster,” Voltaire continued. “All the displaced people are found in Canaan or other slums area. They don’t have real shelter. They have been building by themselves and without proper guidance by the state. If there is another earthquake it will crumble again.”

In December last year, it was reported that UN peacekeepers to Haiti had offered transactional sex to many girls and women in exchange for money, abandoning them once they became pregnant. Some girls and women had been raped.

“All day, I heard women who are complaining about the sexual violence that MINUSTAH [UN Stabilization Mission in Haiti] did to them. And they had given them AIDS through sexual violence. Some of them are pregnant,” a local from Cité Soleil said.

Another local described the situation that UN peacekeepers left behind: “The soldiers destroy these young girls’ futures by getting them pregnant with a couple of babies and abandoning them.

“Basically, these actions of the soldiers can have a negative impact on the society and the country in general because these young girls could have been lawyers, doctors or anything that would have helped Haiti tomorrow … Now some of them are walking in the street, or in the flea market and other places with a basket over their head selling oranges, peppers, and other goods to raise children they have with the MINUSTAH soldiers.”

The same troubles plague Haiti today as did the country after its independence. Under the unlawful Haiti indemnity controversy, France would demand reparations worth FRF150 million from Haiti. Haiti was to pay for French slaveholders’ property lost during the revolution. The reparations would cripple the country right from its independence.

Today, the country continues to putrefy, in part because of outside sources corrupting its internal system. Following the earthquake, France agreed to cancel the country’s debt, but this was not enough. When activists called upon the former colonial power to return reparations to Haiti (worth $40bn) for the sum it had paid, France refused.

Haiti has a long history of governmental corruption. In 2019, the country faced three different nationwide shutdowns, as citizens protested against Jovenel Moise’s presidency. The protesters barricaded streets and prevented movement within the capital and between cities. The countrywide lockdown occurred after protesters demanded the resignation of President Jovenel. Elections that were supposed to occur in October 2019 have been postponed indefinitely.

The same troubles plague Haiti as plagued its past. The earthquake only exacerbated the country’s political and financial strife.

“As a nation, as a state, we have failed,” Voltaire added. Despite Louverture’s proclamation, Haiti is enslaved once again.

“Everything is falling apart,” said Haiti expert, Robert Fatton, at the University of Virginia. “There is a complete vacuum of authority. There is massive popular discontent against Jovenel and his government, but the opposition doesn’t seem to have the strength to force him out, and the international community, they may dislike Jovenel but they don’t see any alternative.”

“I am extremely pessimistic about the country’s future. The only good thing I can say is that history is full of surprises and unexpected developments.

“No one at the time could have predicted the Haitian Revolution; no one predicted the fall of the Berlin Wall.

“In addition, several devastated countries, which were considered corrupt basket cases, managed phenomenal economic and political developments in the midterm and long term; see the examples of South Korea, or more recently Rwanda.”

In the aftermath of the Rwandan genocide, Rwanda taught itself to fish. Haiti must do the same before anarchy and destruction take over.

L'articolo Why Haiti has not Recovered a Decade After the Earthquake proviene da InsideOver.

Her face once inspired hope in the downtrodden – but as Aung San Suu Kyi’s drawn features appeared on screen, the refugee camp erupted in fury. “Liar! Liar! Shame!” rose up the cries from the squalid, Bangladeshi settlement. Half a world away, the protesters’ compatriots—assembled outside the UN’s highest court in the Hague—echoed the message with vigor. 

Suu Kyi: What Genocide?

Myanmar’s leader won’t have heard them, nor the hundreds of her supporters also on the street. With laser-like focus, the one-time champion of democracy systematically denied charges of genocide against the Rohingya people being brought against her nation in the UN’s International Court of Justice (ICJ). Myanmar’s bloody suppression of its Muslim minority was an internal security matter, she maintained—but few, it seems, are convinced.   

Background On Myanmar’s Campaign Against The Rohingya

It was, in 2017, the world’s fastest growing refugee crisis. Upwards of 700,000 people forced from their homes amid a military campaign of systemic destruction and murder. Most ended up in neighboring Bangladesh’s engorged and under-resourced refugee camps. It was a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing,” the UN later concluded—one that had occurred on Aung San Suu Kyi’s watch. Horrified by the apparent act of genocide, which is said to be unfolding still, Gambia has brought World Court charges against the southeast Asian state.  

Suu Kyi Defends Myanmar Army’s Actions: Lawful Counter-Terror Operation

Electing to represent her nation in person, Suu Kyi is the first national leader to answer a charge of genocide while the crime is allegedly ongoing. Her defence has been unwavering. Yes, hundreds of villages have been destroyed, and yes, disproportionate force may at times have been used, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate conceded, but Suu Kyi has maintained throughout the proceedings that the army’s operation was a lawful counter-terror operation.

Regarding the allegations of systematic sexual violence and rape as a tactic of war, detailed in three agonizing hours of witness testimony, Suu Kyi remained silent. Instead, she used her time to attack the ICJ’s supposed overreach, assailing its judges for meddling in what she claimed is an internal security affair.

Reaction To Suu Kyi’s Defense Against The Charges

Suu Kyi’s spirited defense of the military was well received back home; but for the opposing side, it’s a desperate race against time. Gambia’s legal team are not at this stage seeking official recognition of the genocide, but rather the imposition of “provisional measures” to protect Myanmar’s remaining Rohingya community.

Roughly half a million Rohingya individuals still reside in the country’s westerly Rakhine State. Where once their ancestral villages stood, the court heard that new security bases and government offices have been built. It is a cynical effort to destroy evidence of mass murder, said the Gambian lawyers, who worry the military’s genocidal intentions may actually have strengthened in recent months.   

Suu Kyi disputes this charge, claiming that Myanmar’s generals remain firmly under her control. Her government “actively investigates, prosecutes and punishes soldiers and officers that are accused of wrongdoing,” she told the court, pointing to the conviction of seven servicemen in 2017. The group had massacred ten Rohingya villagers, a crime exposed by two Reuters reporters. For their reporting of the killing, the journalists languished in jail for more than 16 months, significantly longer than the murderous soldiers, who were released only one year into their 10-year sentences. The affair is indicative of Myanmar’s inability to self-police, critics argue.      

“Aung San Suu Kyi says Myanmar is investigating its own crimes… Once atrocities are systematically committed as policy, you lose the credibility to investigate them yourself,” said Mark Kersten of the Wayamo Foundation, an international justice group. “We’d never accept the Nazis investigating the Holocaust, or Milosevic’s Serbs investigating Srebrenica.”

Proving Genocide And Holding Myanmar Responsible

In the cases of the Holocaust and other horrors, genocide’s high benchmark—acting with the “intent to destroy in whole or in part” a community—was proven. With the weight of evidence at their disposal, Gambia’s legal team will be hopeful of a similar verdict against Myanmar. But even if Myanmar is eventually found guilty, the ICJ has no way of enforcing its decisions. Neither the country’s civilian leader nor its military commanders would necessarily be arrested or put on trial.

Foreign sanctions would, however, be a likely consequence—as would severe reputational damage. However, for those suffering in ramshackle Bangladeshi camps or encircled Rakhine homesteads, that means very little. Myanmar’s much-feted leader must be made to call off the dogs, critics say. But whether she will—or even can—is far from clear.  

L'articolo Aung San Suu Kyi Denies Myanmar’s Alleged Rohingya Genocide proviene da InsideOver.