Hi Everyone,

On behalf of The Earth Charter, I'd like to invite you to share your stories and/or photographs for a chance to get published. Please see details below:

Have you ever experienced moments of deep connection with the world around you? Do you have stories or photos that illustrate the oneness of life? We warmly welcome you to become part of the Earth Charter Oneness Book Project...

THE CALL:
Earth Charter International invites you to reflect upon moments when you have suddenly felt a deep sense of oneness or connection with the world around you. We are seeking personal stories and photos on this theme of connection from a great diversity of ages, cultures, religions, and walks of life. Submissions will be selected from every region of the world, and published in a book to be released internationally in 2009. For full details and the Youtube version of the Call, please visit: http://www.earthcharterinaction.org/publication. Please share with us your voice, your images, and your inspiration!

THE QUESTION:
The question we are inviting you to respond to has two parts: When have you experienced moments of unexpected connection or oneness in your life, and how has this feeling inspired and sustained your vision, hope, and action for a better world?

WHAT ARE WE LOOKING FOR?
Stories and photos that come out of your personal experience and speak to unexpected moments of connection. This connection could be with anything that has inspired in you a feeling of oneness – with a culture, a stranger, a mountain, a community, or a passing butterfly. These may stem from experiences of the everyday or the extraordinary, from a random encounter that expanded your sense of connection to a defining revelation in your life. Ultimately, we want to hear about those moments of connection that have had a meaningful impact on your everyday life. Stories should be 1-4 pages in length (500-2400 words). Full details are available at www.earthcharterinaction.org/publication.

WHEN IS THE DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSIONS?


Send in your submissions by August 15th, 2008 (12 midnight GMT) for first priority consideration.

HOW TO SUBMIT?
Visit http://www.earthcharterinaction.org/publication for full rules, guidelines, and instructions.

WHO ARE WE?
The Earth Charter is a widely recognized, global consensus statement on ethics and values for a more just, sustainable, and peaceful future. You can find out more at www.earthcharter.org.

CONTACT PERSON (for Singapore):
For queries, please get in touch with Jacques DM Gimeno at jacqyves@pmail.ntu.edu.sg, mobile number 81385744.

This is wonderful news! I learned about it 4 days ago and I'm overwhelmingly happy that victims of the misguided "assimilation" are finally going to get the justice they deserve. See more here, http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080611/ap_on_re_ca/canada_indian_apology

This follows another historic apology from Australia's PM in recognizing the unjust treatment of aborigines in the country.

More than apology, I believe that unification and reconciliation should follow. Recognition of past cruelty is always good because this shows that humans not only evolve physically...we also evolve with compassion and love for other human beings.

So here's to a better future for all Native Canadians as they start a new life free of injustice and cruelty.

Special thanks to a very good friend of mine who "educated" me about this fact.

We were able to raise about US$124 to cover for Dabo's Canada visa and some of the expenses for his trip to the Canadian embassy in Ivory Coast. The fund was transmitted via Western Union today (June 16).

Huge thanks goes to my friend Manali and to an anonymous donor who also handled transmittal charges.

I always believe in transparency. Transparency prevents corruption on the onset. Imagine how many people will benefit from their country's natural resources if their so-called leaders weren't so corrupt and exploitative. So being true to my words, here's the breakdown of the donation (and yeah I have documentation if you wish to verify). Approximation only because donations were in Singapore dollars (US$1 = S$1.374):

US$54.5 - Ms. Manali Pattnaik
US$54.5 - Anonymous
US$14.5 - Myself

US$14.5 - same Anonymous donor (for the transmittal charges)

Thanks once again.

Please find time to pledge a book for Rwanda's first public library...

We have set up a temporary page for accepting book pledges for Rwanda.

As soon as we have our website up and running, we will direct you accordingly.

For information on how to pledge a book for us to collect in the near future, please go to

http://groups.google.com/group/books-for-rwanda?hl=en

Thanks...looking forward to your help --- one book at a time.

I've been closely following the progress of the establishment of Rwanda's first ever public library. The construction is underway and more info of the project can be seen here http://www.kigalilibrary.org/index.html

Rwandans of course would be needing books and other educational materials to populate their library. As the library is scheduled to open sometime in 2008, Project RAFT International (an organization I'm with) would like to start a Book Drive.

HOW YOU CAN HELP

I'm currently negotiating with a shipment company to help ship the books to Rwanda. What you can do is pledge at least one - just one book for us to pick up in the near future.

It would be great if you can pledge educational books that would aid Rwandan students in their studies.

BE FAITHFUL TO YOUR PROMISE

Once you've made your pledge known to us, write a simple message and your name and country on the inside flap of the book. Let Rwandans know how much you care and they will be ever so grateful.

WAIT AWHILE

Once we reach our target of 1,000 books and secure cooperation from a shipper, we would let you know how we will gather the books from your respective countries. During this time, we would also be looking for volunteer representatives from different countries to help collect the books.

We hope that you'd take time to really think about this important matter.

JUST ONE BOOK WILL HELP SO MANY RWANDANS...IMAGINE WHAT 1,000 CAN DO

An anonymous donor gave another CAD55 for the fund. We now have approximately CAD127 for Dabo's Canada visa and some of his trip to Ivory Coast. I'll be sending the fund to him soon.

If you're still interested in helping, Dabo still needs additional funding for his plane fare.

Thank you to all those who have helped.

A good friend and classmate of mine in Singapore has kindly offered to chip in to the fund that would help Mohamed Dabo realize his dream of presenting at the World Youth Congress in Canada in August this year.

We have raised CAD70 for his visa to Canada.

If you want to help out, please sound off....

Mohamed Sidque Dabo, a fellow TIG member of ours, has been invited by to attend the World Youth Congress (WYC) 2008 in Quebec City, Canada this coming August. For this, I congratulate him.

This means he would be needing all the help he could get in terms of making the trip to Canada and participating in the event.

Mr. Dabo has appealed for our help to help him raise $75 for his visa fee to Canada and part of his plane fare. I have received an e-mail from Director General Christian Robitaille from the WYC and I was told that Ms. Courtney Loring from the US has already kindly helped partially with the plane fare.

70% of Sierra Leoneans live below the poverty line, but the country is doing fairly well in combating some prevalent diseases compared to other Sub-Saharan countries (more on Sierra Leone http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/AFRICAEXT/SIERRALEONEEXTN/0,,menuPK:367833~pagePK:141132~piPK:141107~theSitePK:367809,00.html)

The WYC is a good event to help youths around the world about leadership and taking initiatives to improve the situation in their respective countries. In Mr. Dabo's case, his community in Sierra Leone will benefit a lot from his knowledge, training, and exposure in the WYC.

So what do you say? I'm pledging $20 of my own savings to raise funds for Mr. Dabo. Please help out, a dollar or two when put together will go a long way for Mr. Dabo and the Sierra Leonean youths he represents.

Mr. Dabo is our fellow TIG member, to view his profile http://profiles.takingitglobal.org/dabo589

Many people have weighed in on the topic of my research that has to do with protecting the identity and dignity of human rights victims in documentation - videos and still images used either in the news or in user-generated platforms like YouTube and other video sharing websites.

So far, most people have spoken from the spectator's point of view.


*The Spectator*

The spectator or the viewer believes that it is in his or her discretion to view or not to view. Point taken. Every person reserves the right to know what's contained in a human rights documentation for a host of several reasons - education, information, curiosity, interest, and what have you.


*The Journalist*

Some of the journalists I've spoken to contend that it is their responsibility to inform the public. As long as the victim shown on the video consents to the publicity, then it is ethical. Yes, very reasonable, indeed.


*The Victim*

I haven't had the opportunity to speak to actual human rights victims whose ordeal was captured on camera. There are scores of videos and still images of this nature on video sharing websites like YouTube. Where I'm coming from right now, considering the victim's point of view, is that victims would naturally not have their ordeal seen by millions of people for also several reasons: humiliation, dignity, privacy, protection and security against further harm and retaliation especially when the victims could easily be identified.


*The Delicate Balance*

I'm talking about human rights videos depicting rape, slavery, torture, child abuse, and persecution, and a lot more. From the spectator's view, watching the videos may bring a certain degree of satisfaction or answer to their reasons for viewing. Likeweise, journalists would feel obligated to report on such violations for the public's information.

Let's look at cases where mainstream media made use footages of interviews with victims. And to this I direct you to the Safety & Security chapter of Witness.org's Video for Change by Katerina Cizek http://www.witness.org/images/stories/pdf/VideoforChange_SafetyandSecurity_Titled.pdf

Cizek presented cases in Tibet in the 80s and 90s under China's rule. Apparently some journalists interviewed Tibetans for a feature, but the said journalists fell short of protecting the victims' identities. What happened then was the Chinese government retaliated as soon as they've identified the interviewees...the ensuing accounts of torture and further harm were very disturbing.

So here I am, questioning the same practice that is now undertaken by the public as well on YouTube, LiveLeak, and others.

What measures have we taken to protect the victims when we uploaded videos of rape, torture, and child abuse?

Late last year, the Myanmar junta raided Yangon to further intimidate the people there (here: http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=3684982). Disturbing because they announced: "We have photographs! We are going to make arrests!" Similarly, a blogger reported that the junta has ordered Internet monitoring especially "screen captures". I can only imagine what the junta could do once they obtain user-gernerated videos of the conflict in the country.

A CNN reporter who was resourceful enough to stay in Myanmar to gather news deemed it necessary to not show his face on camera nor say his name on TV for fear of retaliation from the government. But ironically, he interviewed people in Burma...the journalist stated names and even locations of the interviewees.

In this issue of minimizing harm, many factors come into play. My stand though is that, the victim's right to safety and privacy should prevail over freedom of expression.

*Background image courtesy of Human Rights Commission - "Draft Discussion Document of the Human Rights Commission and the Treaty of Waitangi"

Just got back from the International Communication Association conference in Montreal last May 22 to 26.

There were hundreds of scholars and industry experts there and I was glad to have been given an opportunity to present and discuss my study about human rights in cyberspace. At the end of the day though, the whole thing fell short of my expectations.

I realized that very few people (in that group at least) are really interested in doing in-depth studies and research into human rights issues.

I'm not saying this for the sake of being critical. I just would've loved to meet more people with whom I can collaborate in researching human rights violations -- not just in the context of what is happening or what has happened, but in the more realistic sense of actually being able to do something. Of course there were brilliant people who gave me advice on the field that I'm working on.

----------------

So what is my field and what is my project about?

I'm in human rights communication and advocacy. To be more specific, I look into how messages are sent and perceived by people when it comes to HR issues.

My project is something that I've been working on for more than a year now and it has several parts which I hope to accomplish in several years to come.

----------------

As many of already know, I looked into how unedited user-generated human rights videos on YouTube are potentially creating more harm for the victims because their identities were not concealed.

Why is it important to protect the identity of victims? Common sense dictates that there is a possibility they be subject to further harm in several ways: retaliation from the perpetrators of the crime; shame and violation to their dignity; privacy; and the right to reintegrate themselves into the society without any form of stigma.

A whole lot of issues can spring from this issue and I will try my best to discuss them in upcoming posts.

Would love to hear from you...share your insights...

Strict visa rulings called unfair
Are visitors from developing countries being denied entry into Canada due to old rules?

Aug 21, 2007 04:30 AM
Nicholas Keung
IMMIGRATION/DIVERSITY REPORTER
The Toronto Star
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/248246

Guillermo Duarte had a lot to prove just to take a two-week vacation to visit his brother in Canada.

The engineer, 36, had to convince Canadian visa officers that he, his engineer wife, Luz, and their younger children Fernando, 10, and Faviola, 8, had strong enough ties to Guatemala to ensure they would leave Canada after a visit to his brother, Mauricio, in Toronto.

But after paying a non-refundable fee of $300, they were denied visitor's visas. (Even leaving two teens at home didn't convince the officer they wouldn't stay in Canada.)

While the denial cost the Duartes a ruined vacation, for other prospective visitors it might mean not being able to bid farewell to a dying relative, attend a loved one's wedding, or see a newborn grandchild.

This summer, the body of immigrant Hu Xiu-hua lay unclaimed in a Toronto morgue for eight weeks because her retired parents in China were denied a visa six times.

As a growing number of Canada's immigrants arrive from developing countries such as China, India and the Philippines, whose citizens need visas to visit, the problem of denials is becoming more acute.

Critics wonder if overseas visa officers grasp Canada's new reality when they reject entry with the stroke of a pen. A refusal may permanently affect future attempts.

"It's a very big problem for our community," says Gurmeet Singh of Brampton's Nanaksar Satsang Sabha Sikh temple. "And it's going to get worse ... if our visa officials don't change their attitude and show some compassion."

Visas are imposed to help "facilitate the entry of bonafide visitors to Canada for such purposes as trade, commerce, tourism, international understanding, and cultural, educational and scientific activities, while also protecting the health, safety and security of Canadian society," says Citizenship and Immigration spokesperson Karen Shadd-Evelyn.

New Democrat MP Olivia Chow (Trinity-Spadina) says her office has 65 outstanding complaints from constituents involving relatives' failed visa applications.

"Visa officers have the discretionary power to decide who to let in. There's no humanitarian and compassionate consideration. Their decisions are completely arbitrary and don't get reviewed," Chow says. "The onus should've been on the Canadian officials to show that these people would not leave Canada after their visits."

Duarte walked into the Canadian embassy in Guatemala City last month, hands full of documents: pay stubs, an employer letter, bank statements, the deeds on his three properties and a passport to show his lengthy travel history.

When his first try failed, his brother in Canada wrote an official invitation and asked his local councillor, MP and even a senator to intervene. The visa office later called Duarte in to apply for a minister's special permit for an extra $185. But by then, the date was too close to the family's booked vacation time and the airfare too expensive. "We are all disappointed," says Mauricio Duarte, who immigrated 17 years ago. "Whenever we go back home, we stay with our families and relatives. We would like to play hosts to someone when they come here."

Lawyer Avvy Go, director of the Metro Toronto Chinese and Southeast Asian Legal Clinic, points out there's no guarantee that visitors from visa-exempt countries would leave Canada either.

"There's ... an underlying prejudicial overtone against those from developing countries. It's not really just a class issue, because you can be a millionaire in China but still get rejected," she says. "The visa ... is to protect our border from the `undesirables.' That's why we welcome some more than others."

Shadd-Evelyn says visa officers consider many factors in their decision, such as whether applicants can document that they have enough money to fund their stay.

Rather than paint everyone from the developing world with the same brush, says Liberal MP Colleen Beaumier (Brampton West), Ottawa should start collecting exit records on visitors so as to identify offenders, and monitor whether visa officers exercise "discretion" fairly.

Immigration lawyer Guidy Mamann says that since 9/11 visa offices have been under pressure to scrutinize applicants more closely, but with no new resources. They're inclined to be strict, he notes.

"Immigration reacts slowly to the global economic and political changes. Countries like China and India are becoming bigger economic powers," says Mamann, an ex-immigration officer. "My concern is our visa officers are still using outdated standards to judge these applications, (believing) these people will come and stay in Canada."

If nothing changes, he adds, Canada stands to lose the substantial economic benefits from delegates attending conferences, buyers going to trade shows and tourists all in a world that's become closer and more intimate than ever before.

Entry requirements

Countries whose citizens need visas to visit: 148

Where: Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, South and Central America

Non-refundable fees: single entry, $75 per person; multiple entry $150; $400 per family

Applications received at visa posts annually: 1 million

Approval rate: 80 per cent

Top 10 visitor source countries: United Kingdom, France, Japan, Germany, Mexico, Australia, South Korea, China, Netherlands and India

Visa-required countries in top 10: 2 (China and India)

Top 10 immigrant source countries: China, India, Philippines, Pakistan, United States, Iran, United Kingdom, Korea, Colombia and France

Visa-required countries in top 10: 6 (except U.S., U.K., Korea and France)

Good news - Bill C-280 passed 3rd reading in the House! Next step: the Senate.

Toronto Star
New bill misses point

May 24, 2007 04:30 AM
Allan Thompson

Citizenship and Immigration Minister Diane Finley has taken steps to keep
vulnerable people out of Canada with a new bill that would instruct
immigration officers to deny work permits to foreign strippers or others
bound for "humiliating or degrading treatment." According to Finley and
her officials, these measures would help "strippers, low-skilled labourers
as well as potential victims of human trafficking," by keeping them out of
Canada and out of the degrading work.

Some newcomers to Canada would tell you strippers are not the only people
forced to work in degrading, demoralizing jobs after they arrive. Talk to
the skilled professionals driving cabs, the doctors working as orderlies
and the lawyers making telemarketing calls. They need Finley's attention
too.

Some critics see Finley's proposal as a crass political move designed to
conjure up memories of the Liberal era "strippergate," the case of an
exotic dancer who ended up working for then immigration minister Judy
Sgro. Indeed, Finley made an explicit connection to the Sgro situation in
her public rationale for the proposed changes.

Certainly there is reason to question whether Finley's proposal to use
legislative changes to block strippers should top the agenda, or even if
it is the most effective way to deal with victims of human trafficking, or
those in vulnerable situations.

The Canadian Council for Refugees, an umbrella organization for groups
dealing with refugees, has been floating a proposal for months for
legislative change that would provide more protection for victims of
trafficking who find themselves in Canada. Notably the refugee council
proposal deals with helping vulnerable people in Canada, rather than
focusing on keeping vulnerable people out of the country.

According to the refugee council, provisions in the law now serve only to
criminalize trafficking and promote the detention of trafficked persons.
The refugee council is calling for explicit changes that would make it a
priority to protect the human rights of trafficked persons in Canada.

The refugee council says the rules for how trafficked persons can seek
temporary residence in Canada are of limited use. For one thing,
applicants have to meet a high standard to prove they are indeed a victim
of trafficking. And they are obliged to talk to law enforcement officials
as part of the process of being allowed to remain, something the council
fears would deter many from even coming forward.

The refugee council's proposals are worth a look, especially if we are
serious about dealing with human trafficking.

And when it comes to addressing the needs of those vulnerable to abuse,
other issues cry out for the minister's attention. Canada has been
criticized for its agonizingly slow process for dealing with requests for
resettlement to Canada by vulnerable people. The office of the United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees is aware of the problem.

Wouldn't it make more sense to focus our energy on the vulnerable people
who need Canada's protection, rather than devising ways to keep people
out?

Government bill takes the wrong approach to the problem of trafficking

Montréal – The Canadian Council for Refugees today expressed disappointment with Bill C-57, tabled in Parliament on 16 May by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.

“This bill does nothing to protect the rights of trafficked persons already here in Canada,” said Loly Rico, chair of the CCR’s Anti-Trafficking Committee. “Worse, the bill takes a condescending, moralistic approach, empowering visa officers to decide which women should be kept out of Canada for their own good.”

The CCR is deeply concerned about the exploitation of non-citizens in Canada, and the lack of adequate measures to protect them. The CCR has prepared a proposal to protect trafficked persons, available at http://www.ccrweb.ca/traffickingproposal.html.

The CCR finds Bill C-57 problematic in a number of ways:

- The bill fails to address the root problem of the existence in Canada of jobs that humiliate and degrade workers. Work permits can only be issued by visa officers after the employer’s job offer has been validated by Human Resources and Social Development Canada (HRSDC). Why is such work available in Canada if it humiliates and degrades workers?

- Only a handful of work permits have been issued to “exotic dancers” in recent years. Parliamentary time would be better used to address the broader problem of the exploitation of non-citizens in Canada.

- The bill proposes to address the problem of exploitation by excluding people, mostly women, from Canada. It is demeaning for women to have a visa officer decide that they should be kept out of Canada for their own protection.

- The bill fails to address the situation of the most vulnerable of exploited non-citizens: those who have no valid work permit. In fact, closing the door on valid work permits may expose women to greater vulnerability by forcing them underground.

- The government’s focus on “strippers” betrays a moralistic approach. Instead of passing moral judgment, the government should work on ensuring that non-citizens’ rights are protected and that they have the freedom to make informed choices about their own lives.

The Minister’s announcement of Bill C-57 is available at http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/press/07/2007-05-16.html

CIC
News release
Canada’s new government to facilitate the immigration of stateless
Vietnamese living in the Philippines

Ottawa, May 22, 2007 — The Honourable Diane Finley, Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration, today announced that Canada will facilitate
the immigration of Vietnamese living in the Philippines without status
since the late 1970s through humanitarian and compassionate provisions.

“Canada’s new government will make every effort to examine the special
circumstances of this community, and to facilitate their immigration to
Canada,” said Minister Finley. “We will work with the Vietnamese Canadian
Federation to identify those still living in the Philippines without
status.”

Following the fall of Saigon in 1975, more than half a million Vietnamese
fled Vietnam, with many arriving in the Philippines. Several hundred
Vietnamese eventually remained in the Philippines because they were not
recognized as refugees by the United Nations High Commissioner for
Refugees. A number have since immigrated to other countries, including
Canada, as part of an international effort to help them. But approximately
150 Vietnamese remain without status in the Philippines.

While this group is not considered to be in need of protection, they can
apply for humanitarian and compassionate consideration. This is a
discretionary provision under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
which allows for permanent residence to be granted on humanitarian and
compassionate grounds. Applications received by December 31, 2007, will be
considered on a priority basis. This does not guarantee acceptance. While
the goal is to facilitate the immigration of these individuals to Canada,
immigration officers must examine applications on a case-by-case basis and
use their discretion to decide whether the case warrants exemption from
the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and Regulations.