ISLAMABAD: Ahmad Waqas Goraya couldn’t see anything through the black hood, but he could hear the screams.
A Pakistani blogger with a penchant for criticizing Pakistan’s powerful military and taking the government to task, Goraya was kidnapped in January along with four other bloggers.
“I could hear the screams of torture,” he said, struggling for words as the memories flooded back. “I don’t even want to think about what they did.”
But that wasn’t the worst of it, he said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. More terrifying was the accusation of blasphemy — punishable by death in Pakistan — hurled at him and his fellow bloggers. They were held in what Goraya called a “black site” on the edge of Lahore that some say is run by Pakistan’s powerful intelligence agency.
Analysts and social media monitors say the blasphemy law is a powerful tool to silence critics. Some say it is being used by extremists to silence moderates at a time when Pakistanis are increasingly speaking out against violence and extremism, and voicing support for a government crackdown on Islamic militants.
In Pakistan, even the suggestion of blasphemy can be tantamount to a death sentence. It has incited extremists to take the law into their own hands and kill alleged perpetrators, often forcing people to flee the country, as Goraya and the other bloggers have.
Pakistan’s government heightened concerns earlier this week when it said it had asked Facebook and Twitter to ferret out Pakistanis posting religiously offensive material, promising to seek their extradition if they are out of the country and prosecute them on blasphemy charges if they are in Pakistan.
In one high-profile case six years ago, Punjab Gov. Salman Taseer was gunned down by one of his guards, who accused him of blasphemy because he criticized the law and defended a Christian woman sentenced to death for allegedly insulting Islam’s Prophet Muhammad.
“Right now they have made sure I cannot come back to Pakistan by introducing blasphemy charges,” Goraya said.
The lawyer who is arguing the case against the bloggers, Tariq Asad, has openly called for their deaths, while praising outlawed Sunni militant groups who want the country’s minority Shiites declared non-Muslims.
“They should have been killed,” Asad told the AP in an interview this week. “If I had the opportunity I would have killed them.”
Asad smiled at the suggestion that invoking the blasphemy law subdues the media and frightens social media activists.
“They should be scared,” he said.
The blasphemy charges against the bloggers being heard in Islamabad’s High Court were filed by Salman Shahid, who has ties to Pakistan’s Red Mosque, a hotbed of Islamic militancy where hundreds were killed in 2007 after security forces ended a months-long standoff with militants holed up inside. Asad is Shahid’s lawyer.
Zahid Hussain, a defense analyst and author of several books on militancy in the region, said invoking the blasphemy law is a form of “pushback” against the proliferation of news outlets and social media that amplify moderate voices.
Extremists “are trying to reassert themselves with this ideological battle and the easiest thing for them to use is the blasphemy law,” he said.
Hamid Mir, a popular Pakistani news anchor, says both media owners and journalists operate under a cloud of fear. Threats come from a variety of quarters in Pakistan, including the powerful spy agencies, but the most frightening are from those who would use the blasphemy law, he said.
Mir was shot six times in a drive-by shooting in Karachi three years ago. The culprits were later said to have been killed, but Mir pointedly accused Pakistan’s intelligence agency at the time.
“I am not afraid of bullets or bombs,” he said in an interview this week in his office in Islamabad. Even with three of the six bullets still in his body, he has refused to leave Pakistan.
But now he is having second thoughts. Last year, he was charged with blasphemy after writing a column condemning those who would kill in the name of honor following the burning death of a young girl.
“It broke me,” he said. “Here I had done nothing wrong and for four months I faced this blasphemy charge. Then I thought I should leave my country.”
Asad, the attorney prosecuting the bloggers, also argued the case against Mir.
A group of senior lawyers in Pakistan told Mir there was only one lawyer who could defend him, Rizwan Abbasi, who was defending the seven militants accused in the deadly 2008 multi-pronged assault in Mumbai, India, which killed 127 people. Abbasi had also defended Hafiz Saeed, the founder of the outlawed Lashkar-e-Taiba group and one of India’s most wanted men.
“I thought if the judge saw him by my side he would think ‘if he is with him then I won’t get into trouble if I free him,’” said Mir, explaining that judges and lawyers fear retaliation from militants if they exonerate someone of blasphemy.
But even Abbasi needed help. He had Mir send his column to five of the country’s top clerics to ask if it contained anything blasphemous. They all rejected the charge and it was dropped, but Mir says his approach to journalism has changed.
“I don’t talk about human rights any more. . . You become selective in your criticism,” he said.
The Committee to Protect Journalists and Amnesty International have spoken out against the abduction of the bloggers and expressed concerns about growing fears within Pakistan’s journalist community brought about by the use of the blasphemy law.
“It’s not the elected government that is putting pressure on the media, but journalists express fear of offending religious and militant groups, and the military and intelligence organizations,” said Steven Butler, the CPJ’s Asia program director. “The latest fear is of being labeled as ‘blasphemer’ and that this could lead to attacks.”
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif did nothing to allay fears earlier this week when he demanded a review of social media to seek out offensive content, and when his interior minister said the government had reached out to Facebook and Twitter.
Facebook said it reviews all government requests carefully, “with the goal of protecting the privacy and rights of our users.” Twitter declined to comment.
In the past, Pakistan has banned YouTube after the circulation of videos deemed offensive to Islam.
“Our argument has never been about the law, but what is most dangerous is how it is used in Pakistan,” to stifle critics and muffle moderate voices, said Haroon Baloch with the Islamabad-based Internet advocacy group Bytesforall. He said radical religious groups use social media to attack moderate views, but there have been no restrictions imposed on them.
In an open letter to Pakistan’s interior minister, Amnesty International earlier this month asked that the government “protect journalists, bloggers, civil society and other human rights activists who are facing constant harassment, intimidation, threats and violent attacks in the country.”
Goraya, the blogger, is still haunted by his three weeks of captivity at the black site, where he said several cells were overcrowded with men both young and old, many of them in chains. One of his eardrums is damaged and he no longer has feeling in one hand.
“I was tortured beyond limits, beatings, different equipment used, psychological torture,” he said.
Blasphemy charges create climate of fear for Pakistani media
Blasphemy charges create climate of fear for Pakistani media
EU border agency must use aerial surveillance to save lives: Human Rights Watch
- ‘The shocking death toll in the Mediterranean requires concerted action’
- Petition urges Frontex to take concrete steps on refugee vessels after decade of tragedies
LONDON: The EU’s border and coast guard agency Frontex must use its aerial surveillance capabilities to prevent refugee deaths in the Mediterranean Sea, Human Rights Watch said on Monday.
The appeal came after HRW met the agency’s executive director, Hans Leijtens, on April 2. He was delivered an EU-wide petition, signed by almost 18,000 people, urging Frontex to take concrete steps to help expedite the rescue of vessels in distress.
This would involve the agency’s aircraft sharing information with NGO vessels operating in the Mediterranean about sightings of refugee vessels.
Frontex could also issue more frequent emergency alerts to all nearby vessels and provide continuous monitoring, HRW said.
In the past decade, at least 31,700 people have died or been reported missing in the Mediterranean Sea, according to the International Organization for Migration.
Judith Sunderland, associate Europe and Central Asia director at HRW, said: “The shocking death toll in the Mediterranean requires concerted action. As an actor at sea, Frontex has a responsibility under international law to use its resources to facilitate rescues that end in disembarkation of rescued people in a safe place.”
Part of the HRW appeal focuses on a policy of a “broad interpretation of distress” that if adopted by Frontex would allow it to take a precautionary approach in its alert system.
Late last year, several UN agencies jointly called for a broader understanding of distress, which would “reflect the foreseeable danger facing unseaworthy boats at sea and the positive obligations attached to the right to life,” HRW said.
The European Commission has suggested expanding Frontex significantly, tripling the number of border guards to 30,000 and allowing the agency to carry out increased deportations through a mandate review in 2026.
Since its creation in 2004, Frontex’s size, role and responsibilities have grown. Its annual budget reached €922 million ($1 billion) in 2024, up from just €142 million in 2015.
Changes to its mandate must strengthen its human rights standards, transparency and accountability, HRW said, highlighting the utility that a “broad interpretation of distress” would provide in saving lives at sea.
Frontex previously faced criticism over its sharing of aerial intelligence with authorities in Libya, with HRW documenting the agency’s complicity in the abuse and indefinite detention of migrants in the North African country.
The intelligence-sharing is part of an EU policy to bolster the ability of Libya and Tunisia — common departure countries for refugees — to patrol their coastlines.
“People across the EU are sending a message that no one should be left to die at sea,” Sunderland said. “As warmer weather may see more attempts to cross the Mediterranean, Frontex should act now to ensure it does everything it can to prevent avoidable tragedies.”
South Korea’s former president Yoon Suk Yeol denies insurrection at criminal trial
- Yoon Suk Yeol was formally stripped of office earlier this month
- He became South Korea’s first sitting head of state to be arrested
SEOUL: South Korea’s former president Yoon Suk Yeol denied he had committed insurrection Monday, as the impeached leader appeared in court on the first day of his criminal trial over his martial law declaration.
Yoon was formally stripped of office earlier this month, after being impeached and suspended by lawmakers over his December 3 attempt to subvert civilian rule, which saw armed soldiers deployed to parliament.
He became South Korea’s first sitting head of state to be arrested in January in connection to the criminal case against him, although he was later released on procedural grounds.
Yoon attended the trial at Seoul Central District Court on Monday morning and was asked by the justices to state his name, date of birth and other personal information, according to pool reports.
Yoon is accused of insurrection over his abortive martial law declaration, but his legal team denied all the charges, with the former president then taking to the stand to defend himself.
“To frame an event that lasted only a few hours, was non-violent, and immediately accepted the dissolution request from the National Assembly as insurrection... strikes me as legally unfounded,” Yoon told the court.
Yoon, himself a former prosecutor, asked the court to display the prosecution’s presentation on a courtroom monitor, and proceeded to rebut their opening statement point by point, according to pool reports.
The prosecution argued that Yoon “planned to incite an uprising with the intent to subvert the constitutional order.”
They gave evidence including Yoon’s planning of the martial law in advance and his deployment of the military to the parliament, with orders to break windows and cut the power.
The court will hear witness testimonies from two military officers called by prosecutors, including one officer who claims he was instructed by top commanders “to drag out the lawmakers gathered in the National Assembly to lift the martial law.”
Lawmakers defied armed soldiers and climbed over fences in order to gather in parliament and vote down Yoon’s martial law declaration, forcing him to backtrack in a matter of hours.
Experts say his criminal trial is likely to be a lengthy one.
“The first verdict is likely to be delivered around August, but the case involves around 70,000 pages of evidence and numerous witnesses. So if deemed necessary by the court, the trial may be extended,” lawyer Min Kyoung-sic said.
Former president Park Geun-hye, for example, was impeached in December 2016 — but it wasn’t until January 2021 that the Supreme Court finalized her sentence for influence peddling and corruption.
If found guilty, Yoon would become the third South Korean president to be found guilty of insurrection – after two military leaders in connection to a 1979 coup.
“Legal experts say that the precedent coup could be applied in the current case, as it also involved the coercive deployment of military forces,” said Min.
For charges of insurrection, Yoon could be sentenced to life in prison or the maximum penalty: the death sentence.
But is it highly unlikely that sentence would be carried out. South Korea has had an unofficial moratorium on executions since 1997.
Billionaire tech leaders’ move toward Trump has created a split with workers in Silicon Valley
- Trump has filled a number of his administration’s posts with billionaires and his support from wealthy tech leaders led Democratic President Joe Biden to warn that the US risked becoming an oligarchy ruled by elite
SAN JOSE, California: Like many in the tech industry, Jeremy Lyons used to think of himself as a relatively apolitical guy.
The only time he had participated in a demonstration before now was in the opening days of Donald Trump’s first presidential term, when he joined fellow Google workers walking out of the company’s Silicon Valley campus to protest immigration restrictions. Google’s co-founder and its chief executive officer joined them.
Last weekend was Lyons’ second, also against Trump, but it had a very different feel.
The man directing thousands of marchers with a bullhorn in downtown San Jose on April 5 was another tech worker who would not give his full name for fear of being identified by Trump backers. Marchers were urged not to harass drivers of Tesla vehicles, which have gone from a symbol of Silicon Valley’s environmental futurism to a pro-Trump icon. And no tech executives were anywhere to be seen, only months after several had joined Trump at his January inauguration.
To Lyons, 54, the change says as much about what’s happened to Silicon Valley over the past quarter-century as it does about the atmosphere of fear surrounding many Trump critics nowadays.
“One of the things I’ve seen over that time is a shift from a nerdy utopia to a money first, move fast and break things,” Lyons said.
Political gap seen between tech leaders and their workforce
The tech industry’s political allegiances remain divided. But as some in the upper echelons of Silicon Valley began shifting to the right politically, many of the tech industry’s everyday workers have remained liberal — but also increasingly nervous and disillusioned. Their mood is in stark contrast to the prominent tech leaders who have embraced a conservative populist ideology.
“I think you’re seeing a real gap between the leadership elite here in Silicon Valley and their workforce,” said Ann Skeet, who helps run a center at Santa Clara University studying the ethics of the tech industry.
“The shift hasn’t been for a lot of people,” said Lenny Siegel, a former mayor of Mountain View and longtime liberal activist in the valley. “It’s a handful of people who’ve gotten the attention.”
The biggest example of that is Elon Musk, the world’s richest person and CEO of the world’s best-known electric car company who has taken on a prominent role slashing federal agencies in Trump’s administration. Musk has been joined by several tech billionaires, including investor David Sacks, who helped fundraise for Trump’s campaign and became the White House’s artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency czar, and venture capitalist Marc Andreesen. Google CEO Sundar Pichai and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg also attended Trump’s inauguration in Washington.
Zuckerberg began praising Trump after the then-candidate, angered over money Zuckerberg steered toward local election offices in some states in 2020 during the coronavirus pandemic, threatened last summer to imprison him. Zuckerberg also donated $1 million to the president’s inauguration fund and co-hosted an inauguration reception for billionaire Republican donors.
Trump has filled a number of his administration’s posts with billionaires and his support from wealthy tech leaders led Democratic President Joe Biden to warn that the United States risked becoming an oligarchy ruled by elites. During Trump’s first term, the valley and its leaders were a bulwark of resistance to the Republican, especially over immigration, given that the industry draws its workforce from around the globe.
It’s against that backdrop that thousands of people attended the recent rally at a downtown San Jose park to protest the actions of Trump and Musk.
Even as tech industry has changed, Silicon Valley has leaned Democratic
Santa Clara County, which comprises most of Silicon Valley, swung 8 percentage points toward Trump in November election against Democrat Kamala Harris, matching the shift across California. Even with that swing, the county voted 68 percent to 28 percent for the then-vice president and remains a Democratic stronghold.
“We’re still in the belly of the beast,” said Dave Johnson, the new executive director of the Santa Clara GOP, who said the party has gained some new members in the county but few from the tech industry. “If the lake was frozen, there’s a little glimmer on top. I would not say there are cracks in the ice.”
The valley has long leaned Democratic, but with an unusual political mix: a general dislike of getting too involved in Washington’s business coupled with an at-times contradictory mix of libertarian individualism, Bay Area activism and belief in the ability of science to solve the world’s problems.
That has persisted even as the tech industry has changed.
The tech boom was fueled by scrappy startups that catered to their workers’ dreams of changing the world for the better. Google’s motto was “don’t be evil,” a phrase it removed from its code of conduct by 2018, when it and other companies such as Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, had grown into multinational behemoths. The companies have had layoffs in recent years, a shock to an industry that not long ago seemed poised for unlimited growth.
Entrepreneurs once dreamed of building startups that would change the world, said Jan English-Lueck, a San Jose State University professor who has been studying Silicon Valley culture for more than 20 years.
“Now,” she said, “if you’re part of a startup, you’re hoping you’ll be absorbed in a way that’s profitable.”
Discontent among some in the tech industry about where it’s headed
Even before some prominent tech leaders shifted toward Trump, there was mounting discontent among some in the industry over its direction. IdaRose Sylvester runs a business promoting a Silicon Valley-style approach to entrepreneurs in other countries.
“I feel sick to my stomach now,” she said.
Sylvester was already disenchanted with the growing inequality in the valley and the environmental cost of all the energy needed to power crypto, AI and data centers. She took part in protests against Trump in 2017, but felt that energy fade once he lost the 2020 election to Biden.
“I saw a lot of people get out of politics once Biden won. There was a feeling it was all OK,” Sylvester said. “It was not all OK.”
It is worse now, she said. She helped organize one of several demonstrations across the valley last weekend during a national day of protests against the new administration.
At first glance, the one in downtown San Jose could have been a typical anti-Trump protest anywhere. A large crowd of largely middle-age and older people carried signs against the president and Musk while chanting against oligarchs.
But it was clearly a Silicon Valley crowd, one still reeling not only from Trump’s challenges to the country’s system of checks and balances but also from the actions of the valley’s top executives.
“The money is all shifting to the wealthiest, and that terrifies me,” said Dianne Wood, who works at a startup. “Unfortunately, you’ve got the Zuckerbergs and Elon Musks of the world who are taking that over.”
“Just coming here, everyone’s saying turn off the facial recognition on your phone,” Wood added. “We’re all scared.”
Kamal Ali, who works in AI, said he felt betrayed by that shift.
“The trust is broken. A lot of employees are very upset by what’s going on,” he said. “It’s going to be different forever.”
Trump says Russian strike on Ukraine ‘a horrible thing’
- “They made a mistake... you’re gonna ask them,” Trump told reporters without specifying who or what he meant
- The Sumy strike came two days after US envoy Witkoff traveled to Russia to meet Putin and push Trump’s efforts to end the war
WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump on Sunday said a Russian strike on the Ukrainian city of Sumy that killed at least 34 people was “a horrible thing.”
“I think it was terrible. And I was told they made a mistake. But I think it’s a horrible thing. I think the whole war is a horrible thing,” Trump told reporters on board Air Force One while headed back to Washington.
Asked to clarify what he meant by a “mistake,” Trump said that “they made a mistake... you’re gonna ask them” — without specifying who or what he meant.
The American leader’s National Security Council (NSC) had earlier Sunday called the Russian strike “a clear and stark reminder of why President Donald Trump’s efforts to try and end this terrible war comes at a crucial time.”
Neither Trump nor the White House named Moscow as the perpetrator of the attack, though Secretary of State Marco Rubio earlier offered condolences to the “victims of today’s horrifying Russian missile attack on Sumy.”
The Sumy strike came two days after US presidential envoy Steve Witkoff traveled to Russia to meet President Vladimir Putin and push Trump’s efforts to end the war.
Zelensky on Sunday urged the US president to visit his country to better understand the devastation wrought by Russia’s invasion.
“Please, before any kind of decisions, any kind of forms of negotiations, come to see people, civilians, warriors, hospitals, churches, children destroyed or dead,” the Ukrainian leader said in an interview broadcast on US network CBS.
Amnesty urges halt to Ethiopia evictions for urban development
- PM Abiy Ahmed's “corridor project”, which aims to renovate and widen streets, has seen homes, shops, and offices razed in Addis Ababa and at least 58 other cities since its launch in December 2022
ADDIS ABABA: Ethiopia is conducting forced evictions on an “unprecedented” scale, Amnesty International said on Monday, urging authorities to “immediately pause” urban renewal projects.
Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, in power since 2018, is spearheading a “corridor project” in which streets in the capital and in cities across the country have been renovated and widened.
Launched in December 2022, the project has seen homes, shops, and offices razed in Addis Ababa and at least 58 other cities, leaving parts of the capital resembling a giant building site.
Ethiopian authorities have “failed to adequately consult with affected communities, provided insufficient notice, and none of the people reported receiving compensation,” Amnesty said in their report.
The international NGO urged a pause in evictions and suspension of the project “until a human rights impact assessment is conducted.”
Authorities did not respond to AFP’s requests for comment.
The scale of the evictions is “unprecedented in Ethiopia,” the report said, describing a climate of fear among residents, who are “uncertain if they will be the next to be displaced.”
The NGO interviewed 47 families who were evicted in Addis Ababa between January and February of this year. All requested anonymity, citing security reasons.
Family members told Amnesty that only a week after a public meeting, local officials came to their doors, “asking them to leave their homes within three days and warning them that their homes would be demolished.”
“The 47 respondents stated that their homes were demolished within 24 to 72 hours after officials delivered the door-to-door notice,” Amnesty said, with families forced into rental properties on the city’s outskirts.
“My child is suffering because his school is now too far,” said one parent, saying they were grappling with mental health issues as their social lives had been “ruined.”
“Life has also gotten expensive due to additional transport and house rent costs,” another said.
Two journalists contacted by Amnesty also said they were “victims of harassment” when they attempted to report on the corridor work. They did not provide further details.
International partners “should engage Ethiopian authorities to end forced eviction with no further delay,” Amnesty researcher Haimanot Ashenafi told AFP.
Authorities in Ethiopia, home to some 130 million people, are regularly criticized by global organizations and NGOs for human rights abuses and the repression of dissenting voices.
