TOP 100 NEWS SITES
| |||
|
| |||
| |||
|
| |||
| China dismisses criticism of execution A defiant China shrugged off condemnation from Gordon Brown and other senior politicians todayand insisted it was fair and humane to execute a British man despite concerns about his psychiatric condition.As China's ambassador to London was summoned to the Foreign Office for a dressing down, officials in Beijing said the UK had no right to meddle in the case of the convicted drug smuggler Akmal Shaikh and warned that "unreasonable criticism" could harm relations between the two countries.The dispute intensified early today when it was confirmed that China had ignored pleas for clemency from the British government and executed the 53-year-old from north London. Campaigners insisted Shaikh had a severe personality disorder and had been duped by gangsters into carrying 4kg of heroin in a suitcase.The prime minister, who had called China's premier, Wen Jiabao, to urge him to halt the execution, said he was "appalled and disappointed" at the execution.In a "difficult" meeting at the Foreign Office, the UK minister Ivan Lewis told the Chinese ambassador Fu Ying that her government had failed in its basic human rights responsibilities by ignoring representations about Shaikh's mental health. "It's a deeply depressing day for anyone with a modicum of compassion or commitment to justice," Lewis said.The response from the Chinese government was swift and dismissive. An annual meeting between the two countries, scheduled for January in Beijing to discuss human rights, was cancelled.Jiang Yu, a spokeswoman for the Chinese foreign ministry, told a press briefing in Beijing: "No one has the right to comment on China's judicial sovereignty. It is the common wish of people around the world to strike against the crime of drug trafficking. We express our strong dissatisfaction and opposition to the British government's unreasonable criticism of the case. We urge the British to correct their mistake in order to avoid harming China-UK relations."Lewis said the execution made him feel "sick to the stomach". Twenty-seven separate representations had been made at ministerial level on Shaikh's behalf to the Chinese authorities, he said.But he admitted there was little Britain could do other than be vocal in its criticism of China. "I'm not going to make idle threats, this morning is not the time for a kneejerk reaction. It's true we must and will continue to engage with China," he said.This acceptance to fight with words and not actions is a marked contrast to other diplomatic disputes in recent years, such as Britain's decision to expel four Russian diplomats in 2007 after Russia's refusal to extradite the former KGB agent Andrei Lugovoi to stand trial for the murder of Alexander Litvinenko.Lewis said: "China cannot expect to receive the respect they yearn [for] from the international community until they abide by minimum standards of human rights. Engagement with China is non-negotiable and any alternative strategy is simply not credible. But by being so clear in our public criticism of China's handling of this case we are demonstrating that it is not business as usual."The Chinese embassy in London said Shaikh, who used to run a minicab firm in Kentish Town, north London, had no previous medical record of mental illness and that his rights and interests had been properly respected.But campaigners said his mental health was never assessed while he was in prison and that the Chinese authorities repeatedly refused access to a forensic psychologist who offered to conduct a free assessment.The legal charity Reprieve, which took on Shaikh's case, said todaythat China ignored evidence from six witnesses who came forward on Monday with tales of his vulnerability. These included a nun and a priest who worked at a centre for asylum seekers in Warsaw, where Shaikh moved five years ago as his mental state declined.In a statement today, the Chinese embassy said: "During the legal process, Mr Shaikh's rights and interests were properly respected and guaranteed and the concerns of the British side were duly noted and taken into consideration by the Chinese judicial authorities."Out of humanitarian consideration, visas were granted to the two cousins of Mr Shaikh on Boxing Day, and they were given access to Mr Shaikh in China."The statement said Shaikh, who was arrested in September 2007 in Urumqi, north-west China, was convicted of "serious" drug trafficking. "The amount of heroin he brought into China was 4,030g, enough to cause 26,800 deaths, threatening numerous families," it said.But Clive Stafford-Smith, director of Reprieve, said if this calculation was correct, about 60% of the world's population (4.2bn people) would be killed annually from heroin.Shaikh learned of his imminent execution only on Monday. He was informed by two cousins who had flown to China seeking a reprieve. "We are deeply saddened, stunned and disappointed at the news of the execution of our beloved cousin," said Soohail and Nasir Shaikh in a statement.The two men said they were "astonished" that the Chinese authorities had refused to investigate their cousin's mental health on the grounds that the defendant ought to have provided evidence of his own fragile state of mind.ChinaCapital punishmentHuman rightsForeign policyHelen PiddJonathan Wattsguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Malaysia Suspends 'Allah' Ruling The court suspended its decision to let Roman Catholics use the word "Allah" in their local newspaper, giving the government breathing room to appeal the decision.. online.wsj.com |
WTO to Probe U.S.-China Tire Rift The World Trade Organization will investigate import tariffs levied by the U.S. on Chinese tires in September, according to documents published Monday by the Geneva-based trade arbiter. online.wsj.com |
Billy Bragg | Why I'm withholding my tax The government has the right to limit the size of RBS bonuses and until it exercises it, Alistair Darling's not having my moneyHow did it come to this? I've just been called an anarchist in a live radio interview by a woman who works for a company that head-hunts financial high flyers. Why? Was I suggesting that we should abolish all forms of centralised authority? Was I calling for the overthrow of the capitalist system? What exactly had I done to suggest to her that I wanted to tear apart the very fabric of society?I had told her that I am withholding my tax until the chancellor of the exchequer acts to curb the bonus payments to investment bankers at RBS. "What if everybody did that?" she cried. "We'd have anarchy!"There isn't much chance of everybody doing that, given that most people's tax is taken directly from their wages via PAYE. However, some of us will have recently received a reminder to pay our tax online by the end of the month. I came across mine the day after seeing RBS executive director Stephen Hester smirk as he told a commons select committee that, rather than explain to the public that he was about to pay his staff an estimated £1.5bn in bonuses next month, he'd avoid the ensuing rancour by sloping off on holiday for a long while.Never mind that RBS posted the worst corporate losses in British financial history last year. He's had his empty coffers replenished with taxpayers' money and now he's going to fill his boots. Watching Hester's "let them eat cake" moment on TV, I felt both outraged and at the same time powerless.Outraged because we'd spent the week being softened up for painful public service cuts by both the government and opposition and powerless because I knew that neither party has the will to do anything about excessive bonus culture.Googling RBS, I found that, as part of the loan they took from the government, the chancellor has the right to veto the bank's bonus payments. That loan made us all shareholders in RBS. By rights, that veto belongs to us. So I wrote to Alistair Darling telling him that I would be withholding my taxes on 31 January unless he used our veto to limit the RBS bonuses.What if everybody did this? Perhaps some form of anarchy would ensue. But if we are going to bring "what ifs" into the debate, then what if we lived in a society that heaped financial rewards on teachers and nurses and soldiers rather than bankers? What if we had a financial system that encouraged fairness rather than greed? Too utopian for you? Well how about this: what if we had a political party capable of winning power at the next election?• Those who wish to express their support for Billy's campaign can do so by joining the Facebook group NoBonus4RBSBankingRoyal Bank of ScotlandTax and spendingEconomic policyTaxProtestBilly BraggBilly Braggguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Haiti's Signal FM: The Little Radio Station that Could How a radio station survived the quake and became the informational lifeline of the country's devastated capital feedproxy.google.com |