Login
Around the world, the sudden lockdown to limit the pandemic’s spread is leading to an abrupt economic slowdown. With cash handouts as the only way to avoid starvation and social unrest, the topic of Universal Basic Income is back on the table. Here is why it is (not) the solution.
by Jan Fürth
UBI as a bandaid or a permanent fix?
“In times of crisis, we are all socialists”, as social media memes liked to comment economic measures taken by governments facing the economic crisis caused by the pandemic. Italy, Canada, Germany and even the US are among those who have included cash handouts in their action plans, with many countries following suite. At the beginning of April, Spain made international headlines by announcing the introduction of a permanent Universal Basic Income (UBI), even if it’s not really universal. Finally, in his Easter message, Pope Francis came out in favour of the idea. What was a marginal idea only several weeks ago jumped to the forefront.
Without a question, various forms of (universal) basic income are necessary steps in this time of pandemic to allow people to stay in quarantine while preventing them from starving and losing their homes. Especially, as the quarantine is expected to be on and off, with waves of infection over the next months or years. However, UBI as a long-term instrument has several pitfalls that we must avoid if we don’t want it to become yet another aspect of neoliberalism. Indeed, there is a real risk that UBI could serve as an instrument to worsen the precarisation of labour and excessive consumerism if it is not accompanied by a radical redistribution of wealth and a reorganisation of economic relations.
Panem et circenses
While we should welcome the prospects of freeing people from the necessity to sell their labour or to be policed by social services in order to have a bare minimum to survive on, there are many ways in which UBI could be far from emancipatory. Indeed, we should be wary of a dystopian capitalist future in which the masses on a low UBI would be providing cheap and flexible labour for Uber, Wolt, Airbnb and all the other gig economy villains. With UBI ensuring the basic needs of workers, these corporations could have a powerful argument to scrap work contracts, the minimal wage and social security contributions.
In this sense, a low UBI could just be a perverse way to trap people in the Western consumerist lifestyle by giving them enough to feed corporations but not enough to discourage them from selling their labour to consume even more. As the foremost supporter of UBI in the USA and Democratic Party primaries’ candidate Andrew Yang writes on his website: UBI “actually fits seamlessly into capitalism. […] Markets need consumers to sell things to. UBI is capitalism with a floor that people cannot fall beneath.” While Yang does speak about social issues, this rhetoric betrays the fact that UBI could just be a little fix for the system without really challenging it. A modern version of Ancient Rome’s system of panem et circenses, bread and games for the masses.
Tax, seize, transform
Far from discarding UBI as a tool of neoliberal capitalism, we should see it as a two-edged sword that could be part of a series of immediate measures towards a major overhaul of socio-economic relations. Indeed, in the short-term, it can help society better absorb the shocks of the radical socio-economic changes necessary to avoid new social and environmental destruction, and in the long-term it can be part of a new economical system in which productivism and profit are not central tenets anymore. Accompanied by a radical redistribution of wealth and a reorganisation of economic relations, UBI can be a source of great personal and social emancipation.
If UBI does not go hand in hand with a radical redistribution of wealth, it risks being implemented to the detriment of other key sectors of social intervention such as infrastructures, housing, education, public transport and healthcare. Thus, it can only be introduced if it radically questions wealth redistribution. As a way to immediately fund it, addressing tax justice is crucial. According to the EU Parliament, up to a trillion euro is lost every year to tax avoidance and tax evasion! Yet, no action is taken as EU countries are pitted against each other, with some of them like Ireland having become financially dependent on its role as a tax haven.
While UBI can be financed by taxing the richest individuals and big corporations, we cannot stop short of greater changes and we must challenge the very structure of this system. Thus, UBI should be seen as a tool for radical reforms and a shift in the public and political discourse about labour, wealth, living conditions and the social structure, rather then the end goal, in efforts to stop the madness of the current system built on greed and destruction. With the current crisis, states have a historical chance to challenge the rule of capital and lay the bases for a social and environmental economy. Indeed, now and in the upcoming months, corporations on their knees can be cheaply bought off by the state, or simply nationalised, and transferred to the workers themselves. With UBI, the shocks of mass unemployment and of the transformation can be better absorbed.
Redefining work
In a context of necessary transformation, UBI is not about getting rid of work. It’s about valuing everyone’s existence while also redefining what is work, who does it and for how much. The post-pandemic cannot be a return to the so-called ‘business as usual’, but must be an acceleration of socio-economic changes. Escaping the grip of global finance through taking back control over public finances and moving away from a growth- and profit-driven economy, it is time to massively invest in socially owned green energy, infrastructures, healthcare, education, housing, agriculture and culture. This requires a lot of work and workers, but it must be done without setting a hierarchy between workers based on their market value.
Indeed, one of the injustices of capitalism is that it sets the standards for what is ‘work’ and how much one earns, with little interest for real value based on social usefulness. Thanks to its financial strength translated in political power, it has been increasingly socialising costs and privatising profit. This is especially obvious in the case of unpaid labour in the care sector (childcare, home care, domestic work), mostly performed by women. Despite its usefulness for capital itself, capitalists have largely escaped their responsibility to contribute to it. In efforts to unharness work from a profit-driven logic, UBI can put an end to this artificial separation between labour and chores, and finally remunerate those people who are often performing inestimable tasks outside of traditional working collectives.
Whether it’s being with children, taking care of the sick at home or just doing other forms of communal, reproductive work, everyone can be sure to at least a living wage through UBI, without bureaucratic hurdles and policing. As we see in these times of pandemic, and as we could see before, many people are eager to help each other without expecting a reward. Unfortunately, this is not seen as ‘work’ in our system, and only few people can afford to devote all their time and energy to serving the community. Instead, they are forced to enter into economic relations based on a logic of exploitation and financial return on investment. This has dire consequences for both society and environment, as human energy is more often than ever put in the service of personal greed and resource depletion.
Social emancipation
UBI is not the solution, but if it comes along with a radical redistribution of wealth and deep changes in economic relations, then it can be a formidable tool on the path to rebuild a social economy from the bottom-up. With UBI covering basic needs, social investments restoring public services and systemic rules restraining or eliminating big capital, the way will be paved for new economic relations based on environmentally responsible and non-hierarchical principles. Limiting the possibility and the need to sacrifice human and non-human well-being in order for one to make a living can open up countless possibilities for creativity and emancipation.
I see the revival of rural communities freed from the need to compete on the global market. I see the sprouting of autonomous workplaces that can develop without the pressure of instant profit-making, with workers able to make decisions collectively without fearing to die of hunger, without the unfair competition of asocial corporations, without state repression and financial rapacity. I see individuals able to devote themselves to their artistic projects and to communal work without having to think about food, rent and the bills. I see slower societies in which no one is pushed aside and social uncertainty is sent to the dustbin of history. And I think to myself, what a wonderful world.
by Alice Claire, Christian Frings and John Malamatinas. Originally published in German on Analyse & Kritik. English translation by Angry Workers for Fever Struggle.
The wildcat strike of Romanian agricultural workers in Bornheim shows that struggles are possible even under conditions of racist super-exploitation. Originally published on akweb.de.
On Friday, 15th of May, some of the 250 seasonal workers of the Spargel Ritter company in Bornheim (North Rhine-Westphalia) stopped working in the asparagus and strawberry fields and informed the local press. Management called the police, but the intimidation attempt failed. The strike was covered widely by the media.
The workers are angry because they received ridiculously low wages of 100 to 250 euros instead of the promised 1,500 to 2,000 euros, and because they are housed under inhuman conditions in a container warehouse, idyllically located between a cemetery and a sewage plant on a vacant building site. As a result of the strike, they were immediately threatened with early dismissal and expulsion from their accommodation. Spargel Ritter has been bankrupt since March 1st, according to other sources even since January, and is now managed by the law firm Andreas Schulte-Beckhausen in nearby Bonn. In April, the firm hired both foreign seasonal workers and labourers from Germany without informing them that the company is in a state of insolvency. Obviously the insolvency administrator is using all means necessary to make the company attractive to new investors.
The protest continued on Monday, 18th of May with a rally organised by the anarcho-syndicalist trade union FAU at the accommodation containers, which was attended by about a hundred external supporters. Women workers in particular protested against their exploitation, making impressive and angry speeches. Afterwards, all of them demonstrated together in front of the company’s nearby yard, where some of the outstanding wages were alleged to be paid. Instead, the workers were expected by a chain of police officers and aggressive security guards. It quickly became clear that the strategy of the insolvency administrator was to divide the workers and set them against each other: Some were paid 600 euros, others only 50 or 70 euros. The security guards opposed the presence of a FAU lawyer during the payments, until the police enforced the lawyer’s presence. While the isolation of migrant workers usually means that this type of super-exploitation is largely ignored, the Bornheim case caused a nationwide sensation. Monday was a difficult day, as FAU Bonn tweeted: “A hard day is coming to an end. Even though we cannot be satisfied with the result: The fact that the wages of a few hundred euros were paid at all is a panic reaction of the class enemy. Tomorrow we will enter round 2.”
On Tuesday, the seasonal workers and solidarity activists met for another rally, this time in downtown Bonn, outside the insolvency administrator’s office. From there they went to the Romanian Consulate General, where a delegation of ten workers was received. The consul admonished the workers to be calm and considerate. They should return to their accommodation and wait – because the Consul is in contact with the Romanian Minister of Labour Violeta Alexandru, who is in Berlin at the invitation of the German Minister of Agriculture Julia Klöckner. According to the Consul her second stop after Berlin happened to be Bonn anyway, where she would meet with the Farmers’ Union.
On Wednesday, the minister actually showed up at the lodgings. After a long conversation with the Romanian workers – in which no trade union representatives were allowed – she announced that “everything was settled”: the insolvency administrator had assured her that she would push ahead with the payments, and her ministry would organize a free return to Romania or, in agreement with the German Farmers’ Union, the transfer to another company. After their departure, buses picked up groups of ten workers each for payment at an unknown location. The supporters together with the workers were able to make sure that a lawyer and interpreters were present for all payments, but they had to hand in their mobile phones first.
Since this dubious payment procedure could not be trusted, supporters followed the buses to “unknown places”, which a visibly disoriented police officer tried to prevent them from doing. It came to absurd wild-west-style chases across the strawberry fields, until the busses stopped at a field, where the payments were made in the burning sun. The lawyer made sure that the workers didn’t sign any termination agreements, and many gave him the power of attorney to check their wage claims in court. The FAU announced on Wednesday evening that the minimum target had been reached.
The fact that not all the workers from Romania and a few from Poland took part in the strike is due to the division caused by different contracts. Those workers with contracts running until September instead of only until June who were also promised higher wages saw their contracts of employment endangered by the strike and criticised the unrest that had arisen. In addition to the foreign seasonal workers, about 200 labourers from Germany have been hired since the end of April. As one worker from this group told us, they are called the “German team”, even though they come from all kinds of countries, but are resident in Germany. It is a motley crew – young people who have responded to the call to help “our” farmers to protect the harvest, and people who simply need the money urgently because of short-time work or unemployment. Unlike the workers from Eastern Europe, they are not employed on a piecework basis, but on an hourly wage, and receive a few cents more than the minimum wage of 9.35 euros, to mark the racist differentiation. Another reason for this is that the untrained workers from Germany would not have been able to work at the same pace as the Eastern European workers, who have been doing this kind of work for longer.
At work, the “German” and “Romanian” columns – these are the divisive terms used by the bosses and their foremen – are kept strictly separate when working in the strawberry tunnels, but they run into each other when the full crates are handed over. However, communication usually fails because of the language barrier. On Friday it was noticed that the “Romanian column” was missing, but it seems that word of the strike didn’t get around to the “German column” until Saturday. After the “German column” had continued working on Saturday and Monday, they were sent home for a day on Tuesday because according to the bosses the situation was too heated.
In the past weeks there have been increasing reports on the miserable working and living conditions of agricultural and slaughterhouse workers in Germany. The main reasons for this are the inhumane living conditions to which the workers are exposed and which are even more threatening in the current corona situation due to the lack of protection against infections. While Germany celebrates its low number of cases, it is not surprising that infections break out in places where people live and work under particularly precarious conditions. The refugee accommodation in Sankt Augustin, the slaughterhouse in Dissen and a deceased Romanian field worker in Baden-Württemberg are examples of these scandalous conditions.
The Romanian field workers were initially left on their own. Their outcry was heard by left-wing supporters – above all the FAU. And what about the IG BAU, the mainstream construction union? And the DGB federation? Members of parliament? No chance! With little money and few resources, FAU Bonn managed to support the workers in every step, despite the language barrier – a prime example of concrete solidarity.
This struggle shows above all that even the precarious and unorganised can defend themselves. This experience gives courage for the future. And it remains to be seen whether those who have now been placed on other farms through the Farmers’ Union will carry the strike virus to other fields. In Romania, all major daily newspapers have reported on the strike in Bornheim. This, too, could strengthen the self-confidence and entitlement of the seasonal workers.
In the Corona crisis, in view of the danger of infection, numerous social grievances have become the subject of discussion, which were already disastrous before Corona, but remained hidden for years. In a situation of crisis, people might initially deal with the burdens and troubles on an individual level. But in various sectors, micro-processes of resistance are currently taking place that can easily develop into collective struggles. In some cases these struggles come together, in others the divisions and hierarchies need to be broken through.
Alice Claire is an activist from Cologne and member of Beyond Europe.
Christian Frings is an activist, author and translator (of David Harvey and others).
John Malamatinas is a freelance journalist from Berlin, Brussels and Thessaloniki.
Ελληνικά: Το Δικαίωμα στην Ελευθερία του Συνέρχεσθαι και του Συνεταιρίζεσθαι στην Εποχή της Πανδημίας Covid-19: η περίπτωση της Κύπρου
Türkçe: Covid-19 Pandemisi Sürecinde Toplanma ve Örgütlenme Özgürlüğü Hakkı: Kıbrıs Vakası
The events of Saturday the 13th of February 2021 have certainly fueled us with grave concern and anger about what has initially started as a peaceful demonstration to show the dissatisfaction with the government with how it has handled the corruption scandal and how it managed the coronavirus situation, in relation particularly to its approach towards the migrant communities and the arbitrary ban on the right to protest, to the use of “water cannon and tear gas” in clashes with protesters.
However, beyond the emotional outrage, the eagerness on behalf of the police to exert force and use violence certainly poses some important legal questions with regard to our democracy, constitutional values and human rights in Cyprus and beyond.
A Reminder from the UN Special Rapporteur
The Covid-19 pandemic has already posed so many unprecedented challenges to all aspects of human rights around the world. Clément Voule, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association highlighted, however, that “States’ responses to the Covid-19 threat should not halt freedoms of assembly and association.”
In the face of the current public health emergency, the Special Rapporteur reminds States of the necessity of responding in a manner compliant with their human rights obligations. In particular, the Special Rapporteur emphasises ten key principles:
An elaborate explanation of each can be found here.
What does this mean for Cyprus?
While all principles are relevant and key to the pandemic situation in Cyprus, the Special Rapporteur’s final point specifically refers to the situation as being unlikely to alleviate many demands; if anything, the economic downturn caused by the crisis, combined with financial measures that enhance inequality only serve to exacerbate underlying causes.
While we acknowledge the unprecedented situation the government of Cyprus, along with other governments around the world, has been faced with, its response to this crisis is what has been voiced by the protesters as unsuccessful. Arguably, the state’s responses to the crisis did not take citizens’ demands fully into account which is a testament to the failure to adopt more democratic governance structures.
Andreas, a lawyer and part of the protest organisers’ legal team who declined to provide his surname, told AFP that people from across the political spectrum were taking part in the demonstration. “The government has lost legitimacy after the passport scandal and they are using the pandemic as a reason to stop protests,” he said. “We think that the right to protest is the basis of our democracy, and the epidemiological situation allows people to protest” safely, the 26-year-old added. But, he said, “they want us to shut up.”
The Right to Freedom of Assembly and Association: Cyprus and ECHR jurisprudence
When we refer to the right to peaceful assembly and the restriction of human rights for the purpose of protecting public health, we must consider whether the restrictions are necessary and proportionate to the intended purpose in order to conclude whether they are legal or not.
The renowned Human Rights Lawyer, Mrs Nicoletta Charalambidou, explains that what we are talking about is a possible fine to the protesters imposed by the Courts. Therefore, the unjustified use of violence by the state is a separate matter to consider. In our case, the excessive violence exercised by the police in the name of public health protection is hard to be justified as necessary and proportionate. The violent repression of the protest violates, at first sight, both the constitutional right to peaceful assembly as provided in Article 21 of the Cyprus Constitution, as well as Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Freedom of Assembly and Association).
Conclusion
Saturday’s events should concern all factions of our society – the judiciary, executive, legislature, civil society and the press, particularly. The recent corruption scandals have, sadly, shown us the opposite. The corruption scandals involving politicians from major political parties are not uncommon and when these get uncovered, little to no effort is taken to pursue them.
In addition, laws limiting public gatherings as well as freedom of movement have been passed in so many States, including Cyprus. However, restrictions based on public health concerns are justified only where they are necessary and proportionate in light of the circumstances. Regrettably, the civil society has rarely been consulted in the process of designing or reviewing appropriate measures of response, and in several cases the processes through which such laws and regulations have been passed have been questionable. In many cases, it appears these measures are being enforced in a discriminatory manner, with opposition figures and groups, together with vulnerable communities, constituting prime targets.
Protest is not a departure from democracy; it is the absolute exercise of it.
Τα γεγονότα του Σαββάτου της 13ης Φεβρουαρίου 2021 σίγουρα μας πυροδότησαν έντονη ανησυχία και οργή για το τι ξεκίνησε αρχικά ως ειρηνική διαδήλωση για να δείξει τη δυσαρέσκεια των πολιτών με την κυβέρνηση για το πώς χειρίστηκε το σκάνδαλο διαφθοράς και πώς διαχειρίστηκε την κατάσταση του κορονοϊού, σε σχέση ιδίως με την προσέγγισή της απέναντι στις κοινότητες των μεταναστών και την αυθαίρετη απαγόρευση του δικαιώματος διαμαρτυρίας, στη χρήση «κανόνιου νερού και δακρυγόνων» σε συγκρούσεις με διαδηλωτές.
Ωστόσο, πέρα από τη συναισθηματική οργή, η επιθυμία εκ μέρους της αστυνομίας να χρησιμοποιήσει βία σίγουρα θέτει ορισμένα σημαντικά νομικά ζητήματα σχετικά με τη δημοκρατία, τις συνταγματικές αξίες και τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα στην Κύπρο και πέραν αυτής.
Υπενθύμιση από τον Ειδικό Εισηγητή του ΟΗΕ
Η πανδημία Covid-19 έχει ήδη θέσει τόσες πολλές πρωτοφανείς προκλήσεις σε όλες τις πτυχές των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων σε όλο τον κόσμο. Ο Clément Voule, Ειδικός Εισηγητής των Ηνωμένων Εθνών για τα δικαιώματα στην Ελευθερία της Ειρηνικής Συνέλευσης και του Συνδέσμου τόνισε, ωστόσο, ότι «οι απαντήσεις των κρατών στην απειλή Covid-19 δεν πρέπει να σταματήσουν τις ελευθερίες του συνέρχεσθαι και του συνεταιρίζεσθαι».
Μια λεπτομερής εξήγηση για το καθένα μπορεί να βρεθεί εδώ.
Τι σημαίνει αυτό για την Κύπρο;
Ενώ όλες οι αρχές είναι σχετικές και βασικές για την πανδημία στην Κύπρο, το τελευταίο σημείο του Ειδικού Εισηγητή αναφέρεται συγκεκριμένα στην κατάσταση ως απίθανο να ανακουφίσει πολλές απαιτήσεις. Αν μη τι άλλο, η οικονομική ύφεση που προκλήθηκε από την κρίση, σε συνδυασμό με χρηματοοικονομικά μέτρα που ενισχύουν την ανισότητα χρησιμεύουν μόνο στην επιδείνωση των υποκείμενων αιτιών.
Παρόλο που αναγνωρίζουμε την άνευ προηγουμένου κατάσταση που αντιμετώπισε η κυβέρνηση της Κύπρου, μαζί με άλλες κυβερνήσεις σε όλο τον κόσμο, η απάντησή της σε αυτήν την κρίση είναι αυτή που εξέφρασαν οι διαδηλωτές ως ανεπιτυχής. Αναμφισβήτητα, οι απαντήσεις του κράτους στην κρίση δεν έλαβαν πλήρως υπόψη τις απαιτήσεις των πολιτών, γεγονός που αποτελεί απόδειξη της αποτυχίας υιοθέτησης δημοκρατικών δομών διακυβέρνησης.
Ο Ανδρέας, δικηγόρος και μέλος της νομικής ομάδας των διοργανωτών διαμαρτυρίας, δήλωσε στο AFP άτομα από όλο το πολιτικό φάσμα συμμετείχαν στη διαδήλωση. «Η κυβέρνηση έχει χάσει τη νομιμότητα μετά το σκάνδαλο διαβατηρίων και χρησιμοποιεί την πανδημία ως λόγο για να σταματήσουν οι διαμαρτυρίες», είπε. «Πιστεύουμε ότι το δικαίωμα διαμαρτυρίας είναι η βάση της δημοκρατίας μας και η επιδημιολογική κατάσταση επιτρέπει στους ανθρώπους να διαμαρτυρηθούν» με ασφάλεια, πρόσθεσε ο 26χρονος. Όμως, είπε, «θέλουν να μας σταματήσουν από το να εκφραζόμαστε».
Το δικαίωμα στην ελευθερία του συνέρχεσθαι και του συνεταιρίζεσθαι: η νομολογία της Κύπρου και της ΕΣΔΑ
Όταν αναφερόμαστε στο δικαίωμα ειρηνικής συνάθροισης και στον περιορισμό των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων με σκοπό την προστασία της δημόσιας υγείας, οφείλουμε να εξετάσουμε εάν οι περιορισμοί είναι απαραίτητοι και ανάλογοι προς τον επιδιωκόμενο σκοπό, προκειμένου να συμπεράνουμε εάν είναι νόμιμοι ή όχι.
Η γνωστή Δικηγόρος για τα Ανθρώπινα Δικαιώματα, κα Νικολέτα Χαραλαμπίδου, εξηγεί ότι αυτό που αναφερόμαστε είναι πιθανά προστίματα για τους διαδηλωτές που επιβάλλονται από τα δικαστήρια. Επομένως, η αδικαιολόγητη χρήση βίας από το κράτος είναι ένα ξεχωριστό ζήτημα που πρέπει να ληφθεί υπόψη. Στην περίπτωσή μας, η υπερβολική βία που ασκείται από την αστυνομία στο όνομα της προστασίας της δημόσιας υγείας είναι δύσκολο να δικαιολογηθεί ως απαραίτητη και αναλογική. Η βίαιη καταστολή της διαμαρτυρίας παραβιάζει, εκ πρώτης όψεως, τόσο το συνταγματικό δικαίωμα στην ειρηνική συνέλευση, όπως ορίζεται στο Άρθρο 21 του Κυπριακού Συντάγματος, όσο και το Άρθρο 11 της Ευρωπαϊκής Σύμβασης για τα Ανθρώπινα Δικαιώματα (Ελευθερία του Συνέλευσης και του Συνδέσμου).
Συμπέρασμα
Οι εκδηλώσεις του Σαββάτου αφορούν όλες τις φατρίες της κοινωνίας μας. Ιδιαίτερα αφορά το δικαστικό σώμα, το εκτελεστικό σώμα, το νομοθετικό σώμα, την κοινωνία των πολιτών και τον τύπο. Δυστυχώς, τα πρόσφατα σκάνδαλα διαφθοράς μάς έδειξαν το αντίθετο. Τα σκάνδαλα διαφθοράς που εμπλέκουν πολιτικούς από μεγάλα πολιτικά κόμματα δεν είναι ασυνήθιστα και όταν αποκαλυφθούν, δεν καταβάλλεται καμία προσπάθεια για την επιδίωξή τους.
Επιπλέον, σε πολλά κράτη, συμπεριλαμβανομένης της Κύπρου, έχουν θεσπιστεί νόμοι που περιορίζουν τις δημόσιες συγκεντρώσεις καθώς και την ελεύθερη κυκλοφορία. Ωστόσο, περιορισμοί που βασίζονται σε ανησυχίες για τη δημόσια υγεία δικαιολογούνται μόνο όταν είναι απαραίτητοι και αναλογικοί υπό το φως των περιστάσεων. Δυστυχώς, σπάνια ζητήθηκε η γνώμη της κοινωνίας των πολιτών κατά τη διαδικασία σχεδιασμού ή επανεξέτασης κατάλληλων μέτρων αντιμετώπισης, και σε πολλές περιπτώσεις οι διαδικασίες μέσω των οποίων έχουν εγκριθεί τέτοιοι νόμοι και κανονισμοί ήταν αμφισβητήσιμες. Σε πολλές περιπτώσεις, φαίνεται ότι αυτά τα μέτρα εφαρμόζονται με διακρίσεις προς τις ομάδες αντιπολίτευσης και τις ευάλωτες κοινότητες, οι οποίες στοχοποιούνται.
Η διαμαρτυρία δεν αποτελεί απόκλιση από τη δημοκρατία. Είναι η απόλυτη άσκησή της.
13 Şubat 2021 Cumartesi olayları, hükümetin yolsuzluk skandalıyla nasıl başa çıktığı ve korona virüs durumunu, özellikle göçmen topluluklara yaklaşımıyla, nasıl yönettiği ve protesto hakkının keyfi olarak yasaklanması konularındaki memnuniyetsizliği göstermek için başlangıçta barışçıl bir gösteri olarak başlatılan etkinlik, protestocularla çatışmalarda “tazyikli su ve göz yaşartıcı gaz” kullanımıyla bizi ağır endişe ve öfke ile doldurdu.
Bununla birlikte, duygusal öfkenin ötesinde, polislerin kuvvet ve şiddet kullanma hevesi, Kıbrıs’ta ve ötesinde olmak üzere demokrasimiz, anayasal değerlerimiz ve insan haklarımızla ilgili bazı önemli hukuki soruları da beraberinde getirmektedir.
BM Özel Sözcüsünden Bir Hatırlatma
Covid-19 salgını, şimdiden tüm dünyada insan haklarının her yönünden daha önce görülmemiş pek çok zorluk çıkarmıştır. Barışçıl Toplanma ve Örgütlenme Özgürlüğü hakları üzerine Birleşmiş Milletler Özel Sözcüsü Clément Voule, “Devletlerin Covid-19 tehdidine tepkilerinin, toplanma ve örgütlenme özgürlüklerini durdurmaması gerektiğini” vurguladı.
Mevcut halk sağlığı acil durumu karşısında Özel Sözcü, Devletlere insan hakları yükümlülüklerine uygun bir şekilde yanıt vermeleri gerektiğini hatırlatmaktadır. Özel Sözcü özellikle on temel ilkeyi vurgulamaktadır:
1. Yeni yasal tedbirlerin insan haklarına saygılı olmasını sağlamak.
2. Halk sağlığı acil durumunun hak ihlalleri için bir mazeret olarak kullanılmamasını sağlamak.
3. Demokrasi süresiz olarak ertelenemez.
4. Kapsayıcı katılımın sağlanması.
5. Çevrimiçi örgütlenme ve toplanma özgürlüğünü güvence altına almak.
6. İşyerinde örgütlenme ve toplanma özgürlüğü haklarının korunması (grev hakkını da kapsamaktadır).
7. Yedinci: ifade özgürlüğü sağlanmalıdır.
8. Sivil toplumun çok taraflı kurumlara katılımı güvence altına alınmalıdır.
9. Uluslararası dayanışmaya her zamankinden daha çok ihtiyaç vardır.
10. Covid-19’un gelecekteki etkileri ve reform için popüler çağrılara yanıt verilmesi.
Her birinin ayrıntılı bir açıklaması burada bulunabilir.
Bu Kıbrıs için ne anlama geliyor?
Tüm ilkeler Kıbrıs’taki pandemi durumuyla ilgili ve anahtar olmakla birlikte, Özel Sözcü’nün son noktası, özellikle pek çok talebi hafifletme ihtimalinin düşük olduğuna işaret etmektedir; her şeyden önce, krizin neden olduğu ekonomik gerileme, eşitsizliği artıran mali tedbirlerle birleştiğinde, yalnızca altta yatan nedenleri artırmaya hizmet etmektedir.
Kıbrıs hükümetinin, dünyadaki diğer hükümetlerle birlikte karşı karşıya kaldığı daha önce görülmemiş durumu kabul etsek de, protestocular tarafından başarısız olarak dile getirilen, hükümetin bu krize verdiği tepkidir. Tartışmaya açık bir şekilde, devletin krize verdiği tepkilerin vatandaşların taleplerini tam olarak hesaba katmaması, daha demokratik yönetim yapılarının benimsenmesindeki başarısızlığın bir kanıtıdır.
Soyadını vermeyi reddeden protesto organizatörlerinin hukuk ekibinin bir parçası olan avukat Andreas, AFP’ye, gösteriye siyasi yelpazenin her yerinden insanların katıldığını söyledi. “Hükümet, pasaport skandalı sonrasında meşruiyetini kaybetti ve salgını protestoları durdurmak için bir mazeret olarak kullanıyor” dedi. 26 yaşındaki, “Protesto hakkının demokrasimizin temeli olduğunu ve epidemiyolojik durumun insanların güvenli bir şekilde protesto etmesine izin verdiğini düşünüyoruz” diyerek ekledi. Fakat, “bizim susmamızı istiyorlar” dedi.
Toplanma ve Örgütlenme Özgürlüğü: Kıbrıs ve AİHM içtihadı
Barışçıl toplanma hakkını ve halk sağlığının korunması amacı ile insan haklarının kısıtlanmasından bahsettiğimizde, yasal olup olmadıklarına karar vermek için kısıtlamaların gerekli ve amaçlanan amaca uygun olup olmadığını değerlendirmeliyiz.
Tanınmış İnsan Hakları Avukatı Bayan Nicoletta Charalambidou, bahsettiğimiz şeyin Mahkemeler tarafından protestoculara verilmiş olası bir para cezası olduğunu açıklıyor. Bu nedenle, hükümetin haksız şiddet kullanması dikkate alınacak ayrı bir konudur. Bizim durumumuzda, halk sağlığının korunması adına polisin uyguladığı aşırı şiddetin gerekli ve orantılı olarak gerekçelendirilmesi zordur. Protestoya yönelik şiddetli baskı, ilk bakışta, hem Kıbrıs Anayasasının 21. Maddesinde öngörülen barışçıl toplanma anayasal hakkını hem de Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi’nin (Toplanma ve Örgütlenme Özgürlüğü) 11. Maddesini ihlal etmektedir.
Sonuç
Cumartesi günü yaşanan olaylar toplumumuzun tüm kesimlerini – özellikle yargı, yürütme, yasama, sivil toplum ve basın – ilgilendirmelidir. Son yolsuzluk skandalları, ne yazık ki bize bunun tam tersini gösterdi. Büyük siyasi partilerin politikacılarını içeren yolsuzluk skandalları alışılmamış değildir ve ortaya çıktığında, onları takip etmek için çok az veya hiç çaba harcanmamaktadır.
Buna ek olarak, Kıbrıs da dahil olmak üzere pek çok Devlette halka açık toplanmaların ve dolaşım özgürlüğünü sınırlayan yasalar çıkarıldı. Bununla birlikte, halk sağlığı kaygılarına dayalı kısıtlamalar, yalnızca gerekli ve orantılı olduklarında koşullar ışığında haklı çıkarılabilir. Ne yazık ki, uygun müdahale önlemlerinin tasarlanması veya gözden geçirilmesi sürecinde sivil topluma nadiren danışılmıştır ve bazı durumlarda bu tür yasa ve düzenlemelerin geçirildiği süreçler sorgulanmıştır. Pek çok durumda, bu tedbirlerin, muhalif figürler ve gruplar ile, savunmasız toplulukların, birincil hedefleri oluşturacak ayrımcı bir şekilde uygulandığı görülmektedir.
Protesto etmek demokrasiden sapmak değil; aksine onun mutlak uygulanmasıdır.
Thank you! Eυχαριστούμε! Teşekkür ederiz!
Author/Συντάκτης/Yazar: EC from Avli
Çevirmenler/Μεταφραστές/Translators: EC, VS
Συντάκτες/Editors/Editörler: Avli Team
Photographer/Fotoğrafçı/Φωτογράφος: Cyprus Mail
The post The Right to Freedom of Assembly and Association in Times of the Covid-19 Pandemic: the case of Cyprus’ Anti-Corruption March (TR, EL, EN) first appeared on AVLI.
One Radical Planet 