Mediaboss Marketing

Hong Kong The construction crane arrived hours after dark, along with tarps, gold-coloured plastic fencing, and a steel shipping container. As electric drills whirred, more than a dozen workers in hard hats dismantled an iconic statute before dawn at the University of Hong Kong.

The eight-metre (26-foot) Pillar of Shame a thin tower of 50 contorted and frightened faces painted in a vivid hue of earthy rust depicted the massacre of hundreds of pro-democracy protesters by Chinese troops at Beijings Tiananmen Square on June 4, 1989.

To many Hong Kongers, the statues removal was a callous and ironic blow and justified with strange excuses amid a continuing crackdown on Hong Kongs own democracy movement.

The statues Danish creator, Jens Galschiot, said he loaned his work permanently to the Chinese-controlled city in 1997. He said the statue was removed without any discussion or notification by the university officials and meant to send a clear message to the residents.

Dont do anything. Dont talk about the crackdown. Dont say anything about China we dont like Dont talk about the party. Dont talk about Xinjiang. Dont talk about Tibet. Dont talk about anything that the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) doesnt like to hear, Galschiot told Al Jazeera over the telephone.

This is a way to oppress the population.

The university, according to the sculptor, made a series of violations. This is a monument about a crime, a states crime against the population, he said.

Its a crime against the democracy movement in Beijing a peaceful movement. Also, its a monument against the decision by the Chinese government to kill all those people to do an attack against their own young people. Now, its a monument about what happened in Hong Kong.

The University of Hong Kong, known locally as HKU, defended its decision, citing safety and legal risks.

The latest legal advice given to the University cautioned that the continued display of the statue would pose legal risks to the University, said a three-paragraph statement posted online by HKU, which also cited an ordinance that contains a colonial-era ban on seditious material against the government.

The destruction of monuments, the eradication of culture After one or two generations, people forget, Hong Kong artist Kacey Wong, who recently moved to Taiwan, told Al Jazeera.

He noted that local art institutions or students have not condemned the statues removal. Its awfully quiet in Hong Kong, he said. Its like it didnt happen.

Every year since 1989, tens of thousands of Hong Kongers would gather on June 4 to remember the Tiananmen victims, an event that drove a democracy movement in Hong Kong even before the United Kingdom relinquished the colony to China in 1997.

The demonstrators gathered last year as well, even after the government banned the vigil, citing the coronavirus pandemic. Authorities have also prosecuted key vigil organisers who wanted free speech and expanded voting rights.

In 2019, Hong Kong witnessed mass protests as millions of residents marched and held night-long street battles against Beijings move to alter an extradition law that would have allowed the city to transfer fugitives for trial in courts in other jurisdictions, including mainland China.

Soon, the protests expanded to include demands for fair elections and inquiries into accusations of police brutality.

Beijing responded by imposing a harsh national security law in 2020 and dozens of activists, politicians, union officials, news editors, and even lawyers were arrested under the law.

Hong Kongs determination to remind the world about the Tiananmen massacre clashed with Chinas efforts to erase the events memory. In mainland China, residents are barred from discussing or even mentioning references to the massacre.

Hong Kong was the only part of the Communist Party-ruled nation where people openly discussed, shared photos and watched films about the event and its aftermath. Many Hong Kongers helped student leaders in China escape the mainland after the 1989 killings.

Under Chinas security law, Hong Kongs educational campuses are devoid of much activism, indeed of much art. Students unions at some universities have been disbanded.

After some members of HKUs students union issued a statement in support of a man who stabbed a police officer before killing himself, the police charged the undergraduates with security crimes.

A democracy wall at the university that used to display posters and slogans is now empty. Another wall, named after singer John Lennon, that overflowed with drawings and posters depicting scenes from the 2019 protests was also removed by the university last year.

In fact, HKU indicated in October that the Pillar of Shame was next. After hearing about it, sculptor Galschiot told reporters he would fly to Hong Kong to remove the artwork himself. He said the university did not return his calls or reply to his emails.

On Wednesday, when HKU was empty due to a holiday break, the universitys administrative council voted to remove the statue and decided to block journalists and witnesses from recording the incident.

Workers erected tarps and set up a large plastic fence around it as some shooed reporters away. A large metal container was driven in to cart off the statues sections.

To me, it is not the act, but the rhetoric around it, Sean Tierney, an American film studies lecturer who has taught at HKU for years, told Al Jazeera.

Tierney said a safety concern about the statue was never raised earlier. As an educator, thats most galling, Tierney said. I am trying to tell these kids that its important to be grounded in truth and fact.

The academic said the people who run the government or the university are not stating the truth or facts.

They dont need it; they have power. They will say things that are blatantly false and untrue. And they dont care if you notice.

See more here:
Crime against democracy: Danish creator of the Tiananmen statue - Al Jazeera English

West Bengal Governor Jagdeep Dhankhar at Agenda Aaj Tak. (Image credits: Rajwant Rawat)

West Bengal Governor Jagdeep Dhankhar lashed out at the Mamata Banerjee government, levelling a series of charges against the Trinamool Congress regime at Agenda Aaj Tak on Friday. He said the situation in Bengal was such that it resembles a gas chamber for democracy.

Dhankhar said, Bengal has become a gas chamber for democracy. People are so scared that they cant talk about that fear.

He said Bengal saw excessive violence after the assembly poll results were announced in May this year. He said, A retired judge of the Calcutta High Court who heads the state human rights commission told me, My human rights commission is in ICU. This is the state of affairs in Bengal.

He said the Constitution was not being followed in Bengal. As Governor of Bengal, I addressed the Bengal Assembly twice. It was blacked out both times, he said.

Over a dozen vice-chancellors were appointed without my knowledge. The governor is the VC of universities in a state but this happened without my knowledge, said Dhankhar, claiming that the Mamata Banerjee government was not allowing him to function as the governor of the state.

Dhankhar said CM Mamata Banerjee did not provide the information sought by him over the matters of the state in two years. He said the governor enjoyed the power to seek a response from the chief minister, but in Bengal, Mamata Banerjee refused to provide any answer.

READ MORE: Bring MSP law, public will bless you in polls: Rakesh Tikait to Centre | Agenda Aaj Tak

Click here for IndiaToday.ins complete coverage of the coronavirus pandemic.

More here:
Bengal a gas chamber for democracy: Governor Dhankhar ...

BJP MLA Sudip Roy Baraman spoke out against Tripura CM Biplab Deb. (Picture credit: PTI)

Two days ahead of Tripura civic polls, BJP MLA Sudip Roy Barman spoke out against chief minister Biplab Deb and said "there is no democracy in Tripura".

Sudip Barman said: "Law and order is the responsibility of the state government. There is no democracy in Tripura. Not a single statement from the home minister (Biplab Deb) that hooliganism won't be tolerated... what does he think of himself? His days are numbered, I can tell you."

The MLA added: "There's no shred of democracy in Tripura. It is being stifled. We don't care, which party we belong to. My duty as a BJP worker is to ensure democracy is restored. The people's voice is being heard... it is my duty and I will ensure that."

While speaking about the TMC delegation meeting, the home minister Barman said: "Home Minister Amit Shah met the Trinamool delegation on Monday and assured law and order will be ensured. What else do you want from BJP leadership?"

This violence, however, is giving Tripura and our party a bad name, added the BJP MLA.

Click here for IndiaToday.ins complete coverage of the coronavirus pandemic.

Originally posted here:
There's no democracy in Tripura: BJP MLA Sudip Barman ...

Photo: Getty Images/Andrey Denisyuk

WASHINGTON You may have missed a hugely important story recently because the media soft-pedaled it. But Congress has just taken a major step toward hand-cuffing the unchecked presidential abuse of power that was a hallmark of the Trump Presidency.

For four years and more, Donald Trump ran roughshod over the guardrails of our republic, inviting the Kremlin to interfere in our 2016 election; enriching himself by doing businesses with foreign governments; firing independent US government watchdogs; pardoning his jailed political lieutenants, even toying with pardoning himself; grabbing funds for his border wall that Congress had appropriated for other purposes; and repeatedly stonewalling Congressional oversight.

A rogue president, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said. Others saw him as a Wannabe Monarch, whose disdain for the rule of law and brash flouting of the norms of democracy have now provoked the House to draft and to adopt a robust package of reforms aimed, as the Speaker told the House, at defending the rule of law, revitalizing our system of checks and balances and restoring our democratic institutions.

Five Republicans dared to break away from the Trump-driven House GOP caucus, to vote with 220 Democrats to pass the Protecting Our Democracy Act. The GOP break-aways included Representatives Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, John Katko of New York, Chris Smith and Jefferson Van Drew of New Jersey, and Don Young of Alaska only one of whom (Katko) voted last January to impeach Trump.

Echoes of Watergate reforms

The bills principal architect and sponsor, Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff of California, casts the new reform package as an echo of Watergate Era restraints on the presidency enacted by Congress in the wake of President Nixons resignation in 1974 after being impeached for abuses of power.

Just as after Watergate Congress worked to enact reforms, so we must now examine the cracks in the Democratic foundation and address them, Schiff explained. He framed his bill, point by point, to match targeted legal restraints against specific Trump excesses during his presidential campaigns, his tenure in the White House, and the political activities of his staff.

Foreign interference and secret tax returns

In his 2016 and 2020 campaigns, Trump stubbornly refused to follow the pattern of presidential candidates in both parties since the 1970s of voluntarily releasing their tax returns. Trump insisted his returns must stay secret. So the Protecting Our Democracy Act requires all future candidates for president or vice president to disclose their income tax returns for the 10 most recent taxable years.

In the 2016 campaign, Trump called on Russian intelligence to hack Hillary Clintons emails, his son Donald Jr met with a Kremlin-linked Russian lawyer offering dirt on Hillary, and other campaign operatives opened contacts with Russian businessmen and alleged intelligence operatives. To combat such links, this new bill requires that a presidential candidate, family, and campaign organization must report all foreign contacts to the FBI within one week and the FBI must quickly investigate and report Congress.

To curb foreign interference in future elections, such as the Russian-promoted Wikileaks of Clinton and Democratic Party emails and social media posts that benefited Trump, the new legislation bars not only foreign donations to U.S. campaigns, not just money but any other thing of value, with stiff penalties for violations.

On the domestic side of campaigns, 13 high Trump officials including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and White House Counselor Kellyanne Conway were formally found to have violated Hatch Act prohibitions against political campaigning, the new law strengthens enforcement of the Hatch Act with heavy fines and mandatory reports to Congress by the Special Counsel of the Executive Branch.

Follow the money

Perhaps the most unique aberration of the Trump Presidency was Trumps massive personal business operations while in the White House, his continued ownership of the Trump-Organizations many global properties including the Trump International Hotel in Washington which was widely used by foreign embassies and governments in what critics saw as currying favor with Trump by giving him profitable business at his hotel.

To cope with this problem, Schiffs bill seeks to plug a loophole in the Constitutions vaguely-defined ban against presidents accepting emoluments- payments or benefits from foreign countries, by extending the emoluments prohibition to include any profit, gain or advantage arising from commercial transactions.

On the domestic side, many in Congress were angered byTrumps diverting $14 billion in Pentagon funds intended for fighter jets, equipment, and military construction to his border wall project in defiance of Congressional votes and appropriations, and so the reform package reasserts the Congressional power of the purse and imposes new limits on presidential action.

Pardons, firings, subpoenas, and defiance

But the sharpest challenges to the Trump model are in the political arena, directed at Trumps more inflammatory political actions, from his pardons and firings to his glaring defiance of Congress. In this legislation, his political antagonists and critics have not only struck back at the Trump legacy but have moved to prevent a repeat performance either by Trump or another Trump-minded authoritarian.

In response to Trumps pardoning of convicted campaign aides Roger Stone and Paul Manafort, who in their legal battles shielded Trump personally, and in response to worries that Trump might try to pardon himself, the reform package puts Congress on record as flatly forbidding a presidential self-pardon and barring the use of a pardon, or the promise of a pardon, as a political bribe for a quid pro quo.

In reaction to Trumps purge of the independent-minded federal watchdogs, the Inspectors General (IGs) at the Pentagon, State Department, intelligence, and other agencies, who were probing the Trump administration, the new law offers legal protections from political reprisals by barring removal of IG watchdogs, except for cause.

To combat Trumps patented strategy of stonewall-and-delay when challenged by Congressional subpoenas, the reform bill institutes legal shortcuts immediate three-judge appeals court hearings and speedy procedures to give Congress leverage to enforce its subpoenas.

And now, with Trump facing several criminal investigations, the reform act includes a section tellingly titled, No President Is Above the Law. It moves to hold presidents permanently accountable for abuses of power and illegal actions by suspending the statute of limitations for any federal offense committed by a sitting president, either before or during his or her term of office

Now, its up to the Senate and voters like you

Theres more to this bill, but you can see already that its an impressive and urgently needed menu of reforms born out of the painful personal experience of Adam Schiff, who led the first unsuccessful attempt to impeach and convict Trump of abuse of power and violating his Oath to the Constitution.

The Protecting Our Democracy Act now goes to the Senate where it can be strangled in its crib by Republican party-line opposition if thats what Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, orders.

But seven Republican senators from Alaska, Louisiana, Maine, Nebraska, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Utah voted last January to convict Donald Trump of what Maines Susan Collins called a clear abuse of power. McConnell himself later held Trump practically and morally responsible for the Jan 6 mob attack on Congress. From that terrifying day, McConnell knows personally the mortal danger posed by a Chief Executive who is unconstrained by the rule of the law.

My hunch is that if enough voters, especially those in swing states, tell their senators now that We the People consider it imperative to bolster the guardrails that protect our Constitutional order, the U.S, Senate might just surprise us and vote in favor of Protecting Our Democracy.

Hedrick Smith is the former New York Times Washington, DC bureau chief. This article originally appeared on Smiths own website, Reclaim the American Dream.

Read the original post:
Legendary journalist: This is how how we preserve and protect our democracy - ncpolicywatch.com

The much-touted Summit for Democracy hosted by US President Joe Biden has come and gone without generating much heat. For the American leader, making democracy globally attractive has been a priority, and in that spirit, this summit was aimed at generating a greater sense of solidarity among fellow democracies. This is an age when the health of democracies across the world is a genuine cause for concern and the rise of China has made the debate on the efficacy of political institutions even more germane to contemporary shifts in global narratives. The intellectual consensus of the past that democracy is the best option available no longer seems secure.

For Biden, it has been an article of faith to showcase the effectiveness of democracy, and he campaigned on this agenda, keen to project it both at home and abroad at a time when the credibility of American democracy has been challenged, unlike any other time in its history. He, therefore, rallied world leaders to work with him to bolster democratic institutions amid the march of authoritarian systems like Chinas and Russias as well as a backward slide of democracy around the globe. In the context of the mob attack on the Capitol complex in Washington DC on 6 January this year, he also turned the spotlight inwards by arguing that here in the United States we know as well as anyone that renewing our democracy and strengthening our democratic institutions requires constant effort."

The summit saw the participation of more than 100 leaders, who underlined growing challenges to global democratic aspirations such as corruption, socio-economic inequalities, disinformation and the growing role of Big Tech. There was a joint pushback from China and Russia, which lambasted the Biden administration as exhibiting a Cold-War mentality" that would stoke up ideological confrontation and a rift in the world." The Chinese Communist Party went even further and hosted its own International Forum on Democracy, where it claimed that China is a true democracy that works" as it integrates process-oriented democracy with results-oriented democracy, procedural democracy with substantive democracy, direct democracy with indirect democracy, and peoples democracy with the will of the state." It released a white paper titled China: Democracy That Works, which enunciated that there is no fixed model of democracy; it manifests itself in many forms. Assessing the myriad political systems in the world against a single yardstick and examining diverse political structures in monochrome are in themselves undemocratic."

It is ironical that this contestation of the very meaning of democracy is happening two decades after Chinas accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) In December 2001 that has had a transformative impact on the global economy as well as global polity. That was the time when Francis Fukuyamas end of history" narrative still resonated with policymakers, exemplified in the views of former US President Bill Clinton when he suggested that importing one of democracys most cherished values, economic freedom", would eventually bring political changes in China. That political freedom would smoothly flow from economic liberalization was the consensus across the political and academic world back then.

But even as China used the opportunities it got to emerge over the past two decades as the worlds largest economy in purchasing power parity terms, the second largest at market exchange rates, and the worlds largest trading nation, democracy was nowhere to be found. Significantly, China started using its global economic clout for geopolitical ends, as reflected in its trade coercion of Australia since 2020 and more recently Lithuania. American policymakers today are left complaining that Beijing is pursuing a state-centred economic model that tilts the field by deploying policies that disadvantage US businesses and other foreign companies in sectors deemed strategic."

The West has been forced to reckon with the challenge China poses to the global economic and political order after decades of ignoring a fundamental contradiction in its approach. The very global economic system that propelled China to the global hierarchys top has been undercut by Beijing through its market distortion and coercive trade practices. The US is beginning to challenge this more frontally than ever before. In a recent intervention, the US undersecretary for economic growth, energy and the environment, Jose W. Fernandez, exhorted the US business community to not see themselves as mere bystanders in the US-China strategic engagement, but be mindful how your activities can affect US National Security and the fundamental values we hold dear."

This is an important US shift away from viewing politics as subservient to economic interests towards a reassertion of the primacy of political objectives. This brings us back to the fundamental issue of democracy and reasons for the emergence of new geopolitical fault-lines. Indias role as the worlds largest democracy is critical in this discourse, and as Prime Minister Narendra Modi highlighted in his remarks at the summit, the India story has one clear message to the worldthat democracy can deliver; that democracy has delivered and that democracy will continue to deliver."

Every democracy is a work in progress and responding to democratic aspirations in a society riven with multiple socio-economic fault-lines is a huge challenge, but India has repeatedly proven naysayers wrong on the countrys democratic consolidation. And Indias economic rise within a democratic set-up is itself a challenge to Chinese propaganda on an authoritarian models efficacy. While the fragility of democracies in the West has been apparent to the whole world, Indian democracy has remained resilient.

For the West, an important corrective was in order, but, significantly for China, the summit sent out a message that resilient Indian democracy could take its political claims apart. If the Chinese Communist Party can tom-tom its non-existent democratic credentials, India should be far more vocal about its genuine democratic accomplishments without being despondent about challenges.

Harsh V. Pant is professor of international relations, Kings College London

Subscribe to Mint Newsletters

* Enter a valid email

* Thank you for subscribing to our newsletter.

Never miss a story! Stay connected and informed with Mint. Download our App Now!!

Read more here:
What constitutes democracy is for actual democracies to define - Mint