Religion and Politics in Pakistan

Abdus Sattar Ghazali

In a replay of 1977 anti-government demonstration against the government of Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the government of Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan is facing violent protests by religious parties to destabilize the newly elected government.

In 1977, the so-called Pakistan National Alliance, comprising three main religious parties – Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI), Jamiat Ulema-e-Pakistan (JUP), some other political parties and fringe groups – launched a violent campaign with a single point agenda to remove the elected government of Prime Minister Bhutto accusing him of rigging the March 1977 elections in which religious parties performed poor. Their election agenda was to establish Islamic rule in the country. The PNA was successful in its mission as the Army Chief General Ziaul Haq deposed Bhutto and imposed martial law.

Fast forward to 2018, Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) an alliance of five religio-political parties that include Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI-F), Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), Markazi Jamiat Ahle Hadith (JA), Tehreek-e-Jafaria Pakistan (TJP) and Jamiat Ulema-e-Pakistan (JUP), plans to hold a ‘million march’ in Karachi on Thursday (Nov 8) against the Supreme Court’s recent acquittal of Asia Bibi — a Christian woman who was previously sentenced to death on blasphemy charges by lower courts.

Ironically, three of the five MMA parties include three religious parties which were members of the 1977 anti-Bhutto alliance.

Pakistan witnessed violent demonstrations for three days as the Supreme Court announced the verdict on Wednesday Oct 31.  The demonstrations were called by a new religious party, Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP)

Shortly after the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling was pronounced, Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) leaders Khadim Rizvi,  led a major protest outside government buildings in the eastern city of Lahore, with fellow TLP leaders declaring the three judges who acquitted Bibi to be “liable to be killed”.

The sit-in protest in Lahore remained the largest TLP demonstration on Thursday, with other major demonstrations being held in the southern city of Karachi, Pakistan’s largest. Protesters are also blockading a major highway into the capital, Islamabad.

Most schools and many businesses remained closed in all three cities through the day, with hospitals on high alert in case the protests turned violent. Highways were partially shut down and the federal cabinet held an emergency meeting to discuss the law and order situation.

On November 2, Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan agreed with the government to end the violent demonstrations which had paralyzed the country and caused extensive material and economic damage.

According to agreement, a review appeal has been filed in the case of Asia Bibi which is the legal right of complainants and government will have no objection on it.

It was also agreed to initiate legal proceedings to prevent her from traveling abroad. She has been offered asylum by several countries.

The agreement adds that people who have been arrested against the acquittal of Asia Masih from October 30th onwards will be immediately released.

Tehreek-e-Labbaik says judges who acquitted Christian woman ‘deserve death’

Tehreek-e-Labbaik has called for the death of the country’s Supreme Court judges responsible for overturning the death sentence of a Christian woman accused of blasphemy.

“The patron in chief of TLP, Muhammad Afzal Qadri, has issued the edict that says the chief justice and all those who ordered the release of Asia deserve death,” party spokesman Ejaz Ashraf said, as cited by the news agency.

The party also demanded Prime Minister Imran Khan’s government be ousted following the court’s order.

Religious leaders had also demanded the ouster of the head of Pakistan’s military, Gen. Qamar Javed Bajwa, accusing him of acquiescing to Ms. Bibi’s release. Soon after the Supreme Court’s ruling, Pir Muhammad Afzal Qadri, another prominent protest leader, urged army generals to revolt against their top commander.

The military said Friday that it had nothing to do with Ms. Bibi’s release. “The armed forces hope that this matter is resolved without disruption of peace,” Maj. Gen. Asif Ghafoor, the army’s spokesman, was quoted by state-run media as saying.

Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan

The TLP, founded in 2015,  is known for widespread (often countrywide) street power and massive protests in opposition to any change to Pakistan’s blasphemy law.

The TLP party came into existence, and subsequently rose to fame, after the hanging of Mumtaz Qadri, the killer of Salmaan Taseer, an outspoken secular governor of Punjab Province who had campaigned for Asia Bibi’s release and for changes in the blasphemy laws

In October 2017, the government of Pakistan controversially changed the language in its 2017 elections bill. The Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan and its leader Khadim Hussain Rizvi strongly opposed the new language, and demanded the resignation of Pakistan’s Minister for Law and Justice Zahid Hamid, who had changed the law.

The TLP held a large protest against the controversial amendment, stopping traffic at the Faizabad Interchange at first, which then led to further protests across the country. The party led a three-week sit-in protest that paralyzed the entire country including Pakistan’s capital, Islamabad. At least six protesters were killed and 200 were injured when police unsuccessfully tried to disperse the sit-in, the protest had already spread out nationwide.

That protest forced the resignation of the federal law minister Zahid Hamid and paved the way for the group to poll more than 2.23 million votes in the July 25, 2018 general election, in what analysts called a “surprisingly” rapid rise.

What did the Supreme Court say?

Asia Bibi, a Christian who spent eight years on death row under Pakistan’s divisive blasphemy law, had her conviction overturned on October 31 by the Supreme Court . She was convicted in 2010 under the blasphemy law after she was accused of insulting the Prophet.

The Supreme Court judges in their verdict said the prosecution had “categorically failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt”.  The case was based on flimsy evidence, they said, and proper procedures had not been followed.

Blasphemy laws have often been used to get revenge after personal disputes, and that convictions are based on thin evidence.

The Supreme Court while acquitting Asia Bibi pointed out: “Sometimes, to fulfill nefarious designs the law is misused by individuals leveling false allegations of blasphemy. Stately, since 1990, 62 people have been murdered as a result of blasphemy allegations, even before their trial could be conducted in accordance with law. Even prominent figures, who stressed the fact that the blasphemy laws have been misused by some individuals, met with serious repercussions. A latest example of misuse of this law was the murder of Mashal Khan, a student of Abdul Wali Khan University, Mardan, who in April 2017 was killed by a mob in the premises of the university merely due to an allegation that he posted blasphemous content online.”

The Supreme Court also mentioned another instance of the misuse of the blasphemy law. The court said: “Reference may also be made to the case of one Ayub Masih, who was accused of blasphemy by his neighbour Muhammad Akram. The alleged occurrence took place on 14th October 1996, the accused was arrested, but despite the arrest, houses of Christians were set ablaze and the entire Christian population of the village (fourteen families) were forced to leave the village. Ayub was shot and injured in the Sessions Court and was also further attacked in jail. After the trial was concluded, Ayub was convicted and sentenced to death, which was upheld by the High Court. However, in an appeal before this Court, it was observed that the complainant wanted to grab the plot on which Ayub Masih and his father were residing and after implicating him in the said case, he managed to grab the seven-marla plot. The appeal was accepted by this Court and the conviction was set aside.”

At least 1,472 people were charged under the law between 1987 and 2016, according to the Center for Social Justice, an advocacy group. Of those, 730 were Muslims, 501 were Ahmedis — a sect that is declared as non-Muslim in Pakistan — while 205 were Christians and 26 were Hindus.

Pakistan’s blasphemy laws open to misuse

Those opposing the apex court’s verdict on Asia Bibi should go back to re-educating themselves on what Islam is truly all about , says Tariq A. Al Maeena, a Saudi journalist. Commenting on the violent reaction to the acquittal of Asia Bibi  Al Maeena said:

“Alluding to the fact that the arguments involved insults on both sides, with Jesus Christ’s name thrown in, the court stated: “Blasphemy is a serious offence, but the insult of the appellant’s (Asia Bibi) religion and religious sensibilities by the complainant party and then mixing truth with falsehood in the name of the Holy Prophet [PBUH] was also not short of being blasphemous.”

“The verdict did not sit well with many fundamentalists who took to the streets to vent their anger. From burning rickshaws, cars and lorries to bringing traffic — including ambulances on their way to hospitals — to a standstill, the protesters vented their rage and not just at the court. Posters of Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan were burnt. Some even threw shoes at Imran’s pictures.

“These religious fanatics, as I see them, are the worst examples of what Islam truly is. Far from respecting the verdict, they have become a law unto themselves and have set about creating mayhem and anarchy, something that Islam specifically does not condone. With very little understanding of the true meaning of Islam, these hordes are no different from those ignorant non-Muslims who deride or insult Islam. The actions of these Pakistanis are just as despicable.

“It was during the military dictatorship of former Pakistan president General Zia-ul-Haq in the 1980s when blasphemy laws were radically introduced in the legislature, including punishment by death for those charged with defiling the sacred name of the Prophet (PBUH).

“Over the years, it became evident that the blasphemy law was used more and more for political gain, to settle land disputes or political rivalries than as an agent to maintain sanctity. The law became a way to challenge someone’s status and a powerful tool to intimidate anyone, Muslim or non-Muslim. Most of these cases reveal personal vendetta or are often used by extremists as a cover to persecute religious minorities.”

Papua New Guinea: Thousands strike over extravagant APEC spending

John Braddock 

Thousands of people joined a one-day strike in Papua New Guinea (PNG) on October 26 to protest the purchase of a fleet of luxury cars for use during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit, beginning on November 17. The government of Prime Minister Peter O’Neill presides over one of the world’s most impoverished countries.

The stoppage, dubbed the “Maserati strike,” was organised after the government imported 40 high-end Maseratis, costing up to $350,000 each, and three luxury Bentleys, to ferry dignitaries during the conference in the capital Port Moresby.

The 21-member APEC summit, the first to be held in a Pacific island nation, will be attended by US Vice President Mike Pence, China’s president Xi Jinping and Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, along with 9,000 delegates, staff and media. Amid deepening geo-strategic tensions across the Asia-Pacific and the drive to war, Canberra and Beijing have vied to provide millions of dollars in financial, logistical and infrastructure backing for the event.

The Guardian reported that O’Neill’s extravagant vehicle purchase was greeted with widespread “anger and disbelief,” particularly in the desperately impoverished provincial areas. Martyn Namorong, a PNG commentator and one of the protest organisers, said the fact the purchase was only revealed in a news report highlighted the lack of “transparency” around government spending.

Namorong declared that the strike was not a protest against the summit. “It’s a protest against the corruption associated with the hosting of APEC. It’s not a protest against world leaders, it’s a protest against our own corrupt, unaccountable politicians,” he said.

The Minister for APEC, Justin Tkatchenko, claimed the costs would be recouped by selling the cars to the private sector, predicting they would be snapped up “like hot cakes.” Transparency International (TI) said O’Neill had failed to reveal procurement documents, let alone any likely purchasers. A TI spokesman told Radio New Zealand the cars would likely be on-sold to people “in the know,” at knock-down prices and minus freight charges or import duties.

Opposition MPs called the national day of protest, urging people to boycott work and stay at home. Strikers reportedly included transport drivers and airport staff. Bryan Kramer, MP for Madang, said the boycott was successful and there was “very little traffic on the road” during Port Moresby’s peak hour. In the north of the country, bus drivers refused to work in Wewak, and in Lae, PNG’s second largest city, many people simply attended an agriculture show.

The strikers defied threats from government officials. Chief Secretary Isaac Lupari declared that public servants who failed to report for work would be “in breach of the Public Service Act and their employment conditions.” Police commissioner Gary Baki warned that police would “not tolerate” protests or marches.

In response to growing social opposition, the government has increasingly turned to repressive measures. Last month parliament passed legislation giving unprecedented powers to foreign forces and security personnel during APEC. A former PNG defence force commander Jerry Singirok told Radio NZ that the legislation violates the country’s constitution. He said that under the law change, basic rights of citizens could be over-ridden by external security forces.

The “Maserati strike” was supported by some trade unions, including the PNG Banks and Financial Institutions Workers Union. However John Paska, president of the PNG Trade Union Congress, distanced the central union organisation from the boycott. He said wages, housing, health and education were more pressing issues to protest than the Maseratis, and APEC was “too important” to risk it being “derailed.”

In fact, the escalating spending on APEC is intensifying widespread anger over the country’s dire social conditions and the government’s austerity measures. The entire ruling elite, which is mired in corruption, is responsible for a growing economic catastrophe. The culprits include opposition MPs, who organised the protest in order to head off spiralling disenchantment with the whole political establishment.

A Radio NZ report broadcast on October 28, headed “PNG to host APEC—but is it leaders before locals?” outlined the “social turmoil” and failure of basic services facing the country’s eight million citizens. Severe health crises are worsened by chronic shortages of medicines and inadequate vaccination programs. In June, health authorities confirmed that the country was experiencing its first outbreak of polio in 18 years. Deadly diseases such as Malaria, TB and HIV AIDS are also resurgent.

Radio NZ correspondent Johnny Blades noted: “Shortages of basic drugs and supplies echo shortages of health workers, rather like the situation in schools, where there are often not enough teachers for overcrowded classrooms, where up to 70 students can be taught at once, or funding shortfalls force closure.” The remote Highlands region is still suffering from February’s magnitude 7.5 earthquake which caused almost 200 deaths and extensive devastation.

While most of the population lives in abject poverty after decades of imperialist exploitation, PNG is resource-rich. It is the site of lucrative transnational mining projects, including the Ok Tedi copper and gold mine, oilfields in the highlands and the $US20 billion ExxonMobil liquefied natural gas plant. Corrupt business leaders and politicians, operating in the interests of foreign banks and corporations, have systematically looted these resources at the expense of working people.

There has been an upsurge in social and political unrest since the 2017 election. O’Neill’s government, now in its second term, is widely regarded as illegitimate. An analysis by the Australian National University, cited this week by the Guardian, concluded the election was “hijacked.” The vote was undermined by brazen electoral fraud—including failures in the electoral roll, theft and destruction of ballot boxes, and payments by candidates for votes—amid unprecedented violence and insecurity.

The report further exposes the contempt for the basic rights of ordinary people held by all the parliamentary parties. Tribal violence has surged again, adding to the death toll from fighting between supporters of rival candidates in the elections. A state of emergency was declared in June across the Southern Highlands after major unrest erupted, in which an Air Niugini passenger plane was destroyed at Mendi airport.

Preparations for APEC are being carried out under the closest scrutiny of the US and local imperialist powers—Australia and New Zealand. PNG is of vital economic and strategic importance to both Canberra and Washington in their drive to dominate the Asia-Pacific and block the rise of China.

Australia, PNG’s former colonial overlord, has already stepped up its military presence. Special force soldiers have been secretly despatched, supposedly to help secure Port Moresby ahead of the summit. Australian navy warships will be stationed off the coast, purportedly to protect the cruise ships that will be used for temporary APEC accommodation. A contingent of Australian Federal Police, already deployed to PNG, is to remain on duty.

New Zealand’s Foreign Minister Winston Peters and Defence Minister Ron Mark announced yesterday that the Labour-led government will deploy a naval ship, a military surveillance aircraft and 30 Special Operations soldiers to APEC at the request of the PNG government.

UK students face rising debts, poor wages and further marketisation of higher education

Thomas Scripps

MPs on the Commons education committee have released a report titled “Value for Money in Higher Education.” They draw attention to figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) that indicated 49 percent of recent graduates (within five years of achieving their degree) were in non-graduate roles in 2017.

This is a significant increase over the proportion at the start of 2009, just after the 2008 financial crash, when 41 percent of recent graduates were in that position. It is matched by a very similar rise even among the population of graduates taken as a whole—including mature students—from 31 percent to 37 percent in the same years.

The report stated: “Higher education institutions must be more transparent about the labour market returns of their courses.” It came with the warning that “too many universities are not providing value for money, and ... students are not getting good outcomes from the degrees for which so many of them rack up debt.”

These comments reflect serious concerns about the toxic political legacy of tuition fees. But what they obscure are the deeper, more serious issues underlying the grim situation facing British students which is rooted in class exploitation.

Graduate earnings have fallen considerably in real terms following the recession. The average wage for a recent graduate in 2010 was £24,000; for graduates as a whole it was £32,000. By 2017, the totals had “risen” to £25,000 and £33,000 respectively. Given the average inflation rate of around 2.86 percent over the intervening years, these represent real terms losses of four to five thousand pounds. Student debt, meanwhile, has risen to absurd levels, with the average graduate now owing over £50,000 upon graduating, rising to £57,000 for those from poorer backgrounds.

The fall in real wages has taken place in the context of a supposed recovery in employment figures: unemployment rates for recent and older graduates dropped to 5 percent and 2 percent respectively last year, from 9 percent and 4 percent at a 2011 peak. The recovery, in other words, has in fact been a restructuring, based on effective pay cuts and increasingly enforced by pushing graduates into lower-skilled employment.

Even these statistics present too rosy a picture. Average figures for graduate earnings obscure significant variations. High-end salaries are captured by a very narrow layer of privileged students, often privately educated and taking up the majority of the places at the most prestigious universities. Graduates from the wealthiest fifth of families earn 30 percent more on average than the rest of the graduate population.

For large numbers of poorer students the only thing gained financially by taking a degree is an insurmountable debt. Among graduates of non-Russell group universities (the “top” 24 institutions), the average salary after five years is just under £24,000. One study showed that, of all students who graduated in 2004, one quarter of those in work were earning less than £20,000 a year a decade later.

The declining position of many graduate workers is the result of two main processes.

Firstly, the raising of qualifications thresholds as the number of university entrants has grown. In the decades since the 1980s, the number of jobs requiring a degree has increased substantially, to include, for example, school teachers, nurses, a range of office-based workers and even many part-time positions. So while the quality of many jobs working- and lower-middle-class youth might expect to enter has not improved, the level of qualification required to enter them has greatly increased.

Secondly, and most importantly, the graduate figures are an expression of the declining wages and conditions of the working class. According to the Resolution Foundation, UK millennials have suffered the second worst collapse in pay in the developed world, at 13 percent. Only Greece, savaged by EU-dictated austerity, has worse figures.

The number of zero hours contracts in the UK has ballooned, as have the numbers of self-employed, 80 percent of whom were in poverty in 2012-13. In total, according to an estimate from the GMB union, nearly 10 million UK workers—almost a third of the workforce—are in insecure work of this kind. These positions are disproportionately staffed by young, recent entrants into the labour force.

With poorer university graduates experiencing their own decline in living standards, the 59 percent of those aged 21-64 without a degree are left in an even worse position. On average, they earn five to ten thousand pounds less a year than a graduate, they are more likely to be unemployed and much more likely to be economically inactive—having to stay at home to look after family, for example.

These individuals come overwhelmingly from working-class backgrounds. Just 24 percent of pupils receiving free school meals—an indication of deprivation—go on to university. In 2017, according to the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS), while the most advantaged fifth of the population by area have a university participation rate of 47.1 percent at 18 years old, the rate for the whole remaining four-fifths is just 29.4 percent.

The real problem behind graduate prospects, therefore, is not the “value for money” offered by degrees (though many institutions are doubtless ripping off their students), but the decaying state of British capitalism.

MPs are discussing the issue in terms of “return on investment” both to divert from this reality and to point the way towards a further marketisation of higher education.

There are suggestions that the ongoing review into higher education, due to report early next year, is considering a variable fee system. Tuition fees for some courses would be cut—apparently down to £6,500—while others, mainly in the sciences, would rise to £13,500. A spur was given to such moves when the Universities and Colleges Union organised the defeat of a massive strike of university staff earlier this year that had raised opposition to further marketisation as central to the defence of their conditions.

Depriving less financially rewarding subjects of funds would be a significant attack on arts and culture and would greatly entrench what is already a two-tier university system. Low-reward subjects and universities will be priced more cheaply (though still at eye-watering rates) and signed up to by those desperate to reduce the burden of future debt. High-reward subjects and universities, the latter already the preserve of the rich, will be placed further beyond the reach of the vast majority of the population.

Nothing remains of the claims of the Blair New Labour government that widening higher education participation would usher in a new era of social mobility and rising fortunes. Students have been laden with debt for degrees, which do less and less to boost their employment and earnings. Young workers outside of the universities have endured a catastrophic collapse in their life chances. Both face the consequences of worsening social inequality and the transformation of the education system into an ever more naked instrument for securing privileged lives for the rich.

The fight for good quality higher education, accessible to all and guaranteeing a decent standard of living, is the fight of the whole working class and depends on its carrying out a socialist struggle against capitalism.

Hans-Georg Maassen: A right-wing extremist at the head of the German secret service

Peter Schwarz

The latest development in the case of Hans-Georg Maassen demonstrates that Germany’s domestic intelligence service has been run by an outright right-wing extremist for the past six and a half years.

Maassen was due to be dismissed two months ago as head of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Verfassungsschutz), after backing a neo-Nazi demonstration in the East German city of Chemnitz. At the time the government decided to entrust him with a leading position at the Interior Ministry, but he continued to remain at his previous post. Now, the German Interior Minister, Horst Seehofer, has sent him into retirement.

On Sunday it was revealed that Maassen had used his position as head of the secret service to maintain his defence of the neo-Nazi demonstration in Chemnitz while denouncing his alleged critics in the government as “left-wing radicals.” In a farewell speech to leaders of European intelligence services in Warsaw on 18 October, he described himself as the victim of a conspiracy by “left-wing radical forces” inside the Social Democratic Party (SPD). The speech was then posted in the BfV intranet to be read by Verfassungsschutz employees.

Despite overwhelming proof to the contrary—there is overwhelming evidence that neo-Nazis attacked immigrants, showed the Hitler salute and vandalized a Jewish restaurant—Maassen maintained his version of the Chemnitz events at the meeting in Warsaw.

The claim that neo-Nazis had “chased” foreigners in Chemnitz was “fictitious”, he said. “I have already experienced a lot of German media manipulation and Russian disinformation. But that politicians and media freely invent a ‘chase’—or at least spread this misinformation unchecked—represents for me a new quality of fake reporting in Germany.”

He had told the appropriate German parliamentary committees that “a struggle against right-wing extremism does not justify inventing right-wing extremist crimes,” Maassen bragged. In response “the media, Green and leftist politicians” had called for his dismissal because they felt that “due to me they had been caught out with their fake reporting.”

For “left-wing radical forces in the SPD,” Maassen continued, his case provided an opportunity “to provoke the break-up of this coalition government.” He had also been forced out of office by his political opponents and sections of the media because he was “known in Germany to be a critic of an idealistic, naïve and left-wing immigrant and security policy.”

On Monday afternoon, Interior Minister Horst Seehofer placed Maassen in temporary retirement—after thanking him for his “good services.” Up to that point, Seehofer had consistently defended him. As a retired senior civil servant Maassen will receive 72 percent of his previous salary for the next three years and at least 35 percent for the rest of his life. Seehofer could have dismissed him on the grounds of a serious dereliction of duty.

Maassen’s departure and the displays of indignation by some politicians from the government and opposition camp about his recent remarks serve, above all, to cover their own tracks. Maassen’s right-wing extremist views were not only well known, they were desired. His task was to pave the way for the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), in order to impose the government’s antisocial and militaristic policies in the face of growing opposition from the working class and youth. Maassen was part of the political conspiracy with which the ruling elites are enforcing highly unpopular policies.

This is particularly clear in the official annual report of the Secret Service, which Maassen presented this summer alongside Interior Minister Seehofer. The AfD and its far-right milieu are ignored in the report, while any criticism of capitalism is branded as “left-wing extremism”.

The “ideological basis” of “left-wing extremists,” it states, is “the rejection of the “capitalist system” as a whole. In particular, the report states that “left-wing extremists” blame capitalism for “all societal and political ills such as social injustice, the ‘destruction’ of housing, wars, right-wing extremism and racism, as well as environmental disasters.”

The Socialist Equality Party (SGP) is noted in the report for the first time as a “left-wing extremist party” and “object for observation”, because it opposes “the EU, alleged nationalism, imperialism and militarism”.

No political organization besides the SGP protested against this report, which places all opposition to capitalism and its consequences—war, social inequality, right-wing extremism, and nationalism—into the murky category of “hostility to the constitution,” and threatens it with legal prohibition. Now it is clear that Maassen, who had met with leading representatives of the AfD and drew up the report with them, himself supports the political line of the AfD.

It is not without irony that he is now also denouncing the SPD as “left-wing extremist”—the very same party that has always vigorously defended the Verfassungsschutz and its anti-democratic methods and which has itself provided its president for many years.

Maassen has worked for the Ministry of the Interior since 1991 and was a close associate of Otto Schily (SPD), who headed the ministry from 1998 to 2005. In 2002, under Schily’s rule, Maassen ensured that Murat Kurnaz, who had grown up in the German city of Bremen, was detained for three years longer than necessary in the US Guantanamo Bay detention center, although Kurnaz had committed no crime.

The Greens and the Left Party have also supported Maassen. In 2013 the Left Party invited him to address a public meeting, where Left Party politicians cheerfully chatted with the head of the German secret service on a couch.

A right-wing figure like Maassen was only able to stay at the helm of the BfV for six and a half years because he had broad support from within the secret service itself and from leading political circles. Even now, none of the parties has called for the dissolution of the secret service or even a purge of its leadership, although it is well known that not only Maassen, but also many of his employees, are politically close to the AfD, and that the Verfassungsschutz effectively runs and finances Germany’s neo-Nazi scene via its undercover agents.

Instead, all of the parties are anxious to continue Maassen’s right-wing policies without him. His successor is the BfV’s previous deputy, Thomas Haldenwang, who worked closely with Maassen.

Green Party deputy Konstantin von Notz praised Haldenwang in the highest tones. “I'm looking forward to working with you,” he said. “I wish the new president a good hand to tackle things with determination and restore lost confidence.”

Little information has emerged from the gathering of European intelligence chiefs in Warsaw but one can assume, based on Maassen’s own words, that his right-wing course had their support. He had “enjoyed listening to this circle” and had experienced “a high degree of collegiality and solidarity,” he said. “I have found that we have the same goals, share the same values and fight against the same opponents of freedom and democracy.”

Maassen also hinted to the gathering of senior intelligence officials that he was considering going into politics himself, but did not indicate for which party. For its part the AfD was jubilant. “He is an outstanding official committed to a high work ethic and has the courage to pronounce even uncomfortable truths,” declared AfD leader Jörg Meuthen. “Of course, if he had any interest in joining us, he would be welcome.”

OutRight United Nations Religious Fellowship Program 2019 for LGBTI human rights defenders

Application Deadline: 9th December 2018.

Eligible Countries: Countries in The Caribbean, Africa, or Latin America.

About the Award: The OutRight United Nations Fellowship is a 12-month program that supports LGBTI human rights defenders from around the world to harness the New York-based United Nations (UN) system to add value to their existing work. The program is designed to support existing work defending LGBTI people from the impact of religiously motivated violence and discrimination in the African, Caribbean and Latin American regions.
The aim of the UN Fellowship is four-fold:

1. Facilitate the use of New York-based UN spaces for LGBTI activists from Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America to enhance their networks and identify new entry points for progressing the protection and promotion of LGBTI human rights in their country.
2. Increase visibility and engagement of LGBTI human rights defenders from the Global-South within high-level UN political forums, specifically in response to religiously-motivated homophobia and transphobia.
3. Build the capacity of New York-based UN and State representatives in the human rights of LGBTI people to assist in the protection and promotion of these rights at the international level.
4. Strengthen relationships with diplomats in the New York-based UN system.

Fields: The Fellowship will operate around in-person participation at five key New York-based advocacy opportunities: The Commission on the Status of Women, the High-Level Political Forum on the Sustainable Development Goals, UN General Assembly High Level week, OutRight’s annual Week of UN Advocacy and OutRight’s OutSummit Conference. The Fellowship will include advocacy training.

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility:

• Experience working with the UN system, including UN agencies and human rights mechanisms, is not a pre-requisite for this Fellowship.
• Women, trans, gender non-confirming and intersex human rights defenders are especially encouraged to apply.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: 

• Fellows will be funded to travel to four of these five meetings, each of which generally lasts 1-2 weeks. Funding includes roundtrip airfare, accommodations, visa fees, ground transportation, and per diem.
• OutRight UN Fellows are expected to attend four of the five meetings highlighted above. They will also be required to participate in activities around communications including social media highlights during sessions and reflection blogs. Fellows will also be required to produce a final report of their experience of the fellowship as well as participate in a follow up survey 6 months after the fellowship concludes to measure the impact of the fellowship on their national advocacy.

Duration of Programme: 12 months

How to Apply: If you are an LGBTI activist from the Caribbean, Africa, or Latin America and feel you or your organization will benefit from taking part in OutRight’s UN Fellowship, please fill out the questionnaire below.
Please fill out the questionnaire at:

APPLY NOW

Applications are due by December 9th 2018. The successful applications will be confirmed on January 7th 2019.

Please email applications@outrightinternational.org if you have any questions.

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Degree Scholarships in Media Arts Cultures 2019/2020

Application Deadline: 1st January, 2019

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: International

Eligible Fields of Study: Student’s prerequisite degrees will most likely be from the following: art history, cultural studies, media/communication studies, fine arts practice (media related), cultural management, museology, art restoration, library and archive science, computer science, and any other field directly related to digital media, the arts or culture. Other fields will be taken into consideration by the Application Board. We do not require the 1st university degree to be in a certain field or subject. We do expect the applicant’s motivation to study in the MediaAC programme to balance his/her previous education, working experience (if applicable) and future career plans and that this balance make sense for playing a role in the future of Media Arts Cultures.

To be taken at (country): 

• Danube University Krems (coordinating partner)
• Aalborg University (full partner)
• University of Lodz (full partner)
• City University Hong Kong (full partner)

About the Award: The Erasmus Mundus Media Arts Culture is a Consortium of four universities and influential global associated partners from the creative and cultural sector dedicate to grow a new generation of professionals based on the future needs of the field and grounded in rigorous academic training.

Type: Masters

Eligibility: 

• Students must have as first degree at least a Bachelor degree or higher issued by a university (quantified as three years of studies corresponding to 180 ECTS). Or (if ECTS is not used in countries where the first degree was acquired): proof a period of study at a higher education level considered comparable to a Bachelor’s degree (on decision of the MediaAC Admission board). Note for Erasmus+ Scholarship applicants: Your degree must be completed by the scholarship deadline
• Applicants must also have sufficient knowledge of English for academic purposes corresponding to level B2 within the CEFR/Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. This is to be sent directly from the test centre TOEFL  (School Code 8773/Art History) (PBT paper-based): 550 www.ets.org/toefl, TOEFL (CBT computer-based, 230 www.ets.org/toefl, TOEFL (iBT internet-based): 80www.ets.org/toefl, Cambridge ESOL, C1 www.cambridgeenglish.org. An original or verified copy is accepted: IELTS (academic test): 6.5 www.ielts.org.
  Your tests results must be less than 2 years old fron your application date to be eligible to submit.

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Scholarship: Full participation fees, 1000€ per month living stipend, plus travel expenses.

Duration of Scholarship: 2 years

How to Apply: 

• Application Form
• Copy of passport
• Curriculum vitae (Europass)
• Letter of motivation that expresses interest in studying Media Arts Cultures (max 1 page)
• Final university diploma from previous degree(s)
• Transcripts of records of all higher education studies
• Recent photograph
• Proof of proficiency in the English language (transcript of TOEFL / IELTS / Cambridge CPE scores)
• Essay on “state/future of the art” in Media Arts Cultures (max 2 pages)
• Example of relevant work. (academic paper, cultural project, art work) (max 5 pages and 50MB)

Apply via the online application system on the Website. It is important to go through the Erasmus Mundus Media Arts Cultures Scholarship Webpage before applying.

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Media Arts Cultures co-funded by the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Union

New Caledonia referendum rejects independence from France

John Braddock

Voters in the French Pacific territory of New Caledonia chose by a 56.9 percent majority in Sunday’s referendum to reject full independence from France. The turnout was high with nearly 80 percent of 270,000 residents casting a ballot. Notwithstanding the anti-independence victory, the referendum was marked by a late surge in support by pro-independence indigenous Kanaks.

While the territory has a measure of self-government, France retains control over defence, policing, the judiciary, monetary policy and foreign affairs. Underlining the real relationship with Paris, 350 extra French riot police were sent to the country in mid-October to provide extra “security.”

Speaking on television, French President Emmanuel Macron hailed the result as “a vote of confidence in the French republic, its future and its values.” He added the French state would ensure “liberty, equality and fraternity for everyone”—hypocritical claims given the long and brutal history of French colonial rule in the Pacific, Africa and elsewhere.

While Macron had formally struck a “neutral” position before the vote, the French ruling elite was opposed to any breakaway. New Caledonia occupies a key strategic position as France’s with military headquarters in the Pacific. In May, Macron visited Australia before heading to New Caledonia as part of the referendum preparations. He proposed an axis between France, India and Australia in the Indo-Pacific, with New Caledonia playing a key role in the US-led confrontation with China.

In the lead-up to the vote, Charles Wea, a Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front (FLNKS) spokesman in Australia, told SBS News: “We want to build a new society and new country and set up effectively a new relationship with France because we can no longer accept French colonialism in New Caledonia.”

These hopes have, not for the first time, been dashed. A plebiscite in 1987, which was boycotted by the FLNKS, saw a 98 percent vote against independence. Sunday’s result will further entrench the deep social divisions between the largely impoverished Kanaks, who make up 44 percent of the population, and the more privileged, mainly European, layers.

A controversial electoral roll was created for the poll on which all Kanaks and only long-term New Caledonian residents could register. In October 2016, 5,000 people rallied in the capital Noumea to demand that Kanaks be automatically enrolled for the vote. An estimated 25,000 Kanaks were not on the general roll and were at risk of missing out. There were widespread claims of fraud by the authorities in the vetting process.

Divisions over independence continue. The 2014 elections saw a victory for three anti-independence parties—Caledonia Together, Front for Unity and Union for Caledonia in France. Together they won 29 of the 54 seats in the Congress, but just 49 percent of the popular vote.

Under agreements signed as part of the 1988 Matignon Accord, further votes are possible in 2020 and again 2023. The anti-independence parties, which have strong support in France from the far-right leader Marine LePen, want a clause allowing for a new referendum only every 25 years, and only if half the voters request one. They claim that without France, New Caledonia would not only become impoverished like other Pacific nations, but also a “province of China.”

While no French political party endorses independence, a recent poll commissioned by French television found that within France, almost two thirds of respondents thought New Caledonia’s independence would be a “good, or a very good thing.”

With the build-up against China intensifying, French influence in the Pacific was boosted when the Pacific Islands Forum unanimously agreed in 2016 to admit New Caledonia and French Polynesia as members. France had been pushing for membership for its territories since 2003.

New Caledonia’s economy is underpinned by annual subsidies from France to the tune of €1.3 billion ($US1.48 billion), while French companies retain significant economic interests. The main island, Grande Terre, has the world’s largest known nickel deposits, about a quarter of all known reserves. It is also the second largest cobalt producer. Nickel is critically important in the defence industry, and has been designated a “strategic material” to ensure the French state can maintain a close watch over its production and distribution.

New Caledonia was established as a French colonial possession in 1853, and used as a penal colony. The Kanak people were removed from their land, forced onto reservations and subject to the Indignat, a code of ‘native regulations,’ which gave them inferior legal status. Uprisings occurred in 1878 and 1917.

Today Kanaks make up 95 percent of the unemployed and many low-paid workers live in slum conditions. Police clashes with Kanak youth have erupted with increasing violence, prompting demands by local politicians for harsher “law and order” measures.

Meanwhile, descendants of the original European settlers known as Caldoches, French public servants, military personnel and business employees occupy expensive residences overlooking the tourist beaches and yacht harbors.

Tensions erupted in 1988 when a group of Kanaks captured the gendarmerie on the island of Ouvea, killed four gendarmes and took 27 hostages. Some 300 troops were flown in under the command of the head of the French elite anti-terrorist squad. The military stormed the cave where the Kanaks were holed up, killing 21 Kanaks and 2 policemen. The French troops reportedly tortured and beat civilians during the massacre.

The then minority Socialist Party government in Paris moved to bring the crisis under control. Prime Minister Rocard brokered the Matignon Accord, which was billed as a “compromise” between the independence movement, led by Jean-Marie Tjibaou of the FLNKS, and anti-independence leader Jacques Lafleur. The accord, which set out the long-term process for the independence referendum, was ratified by an 81 percent majority in a national plebiscite in which, however, only 37 percent of the electorate voted.

The Matignon Accord was followed in 1998 by the Nouméa Accord. The agreements gave limited influence to a privileged Kanak layer, effectively defusing the independence movement. Money was poured in to building a Kanak infrastructure, training public servants and establishing a base for this layer in the lucrative mining industry.

The nationalist movement—formed by a layer of educated Kanaks radicalised while studying in France during the late 1960s—put the issue of independence on the backburner and dropped its socialistic phrase-mongering, in return for political and business opportunities. Amid a widespread feeling among ordinary Kanaks that they had been betrayed, Tjibaou and his deputy were assassinated in 1989 by a former supporter.

As around the world, the globalisation of production has completely undermined the program of national economic regulation on which nationalist movements such as the FLNKS were based. The tiny island states in the Pacific that were granted nominal independence in the 1970s and 1980s are completely dependent on the major powers economically and strategically. Insofar as the FLNKS still calls for independence from France, it represents the interests of a relatively privileged layer of Kanaks who are seeking a larger slice of the economic pie and a greater political say.

While the nationalist movement is now increasingly moribund, class struggles have erupted, propelled by a precipitous collapse in global commodity prices, including nickel. Broad sections of the working class, including miners, processing workers, truck drivers, airport workers and others have all engaged in militant struggles to defend jobs and conditions, bringing them into conflict with the entire ruling class.

Workers in New Caledonia should turn to their class brothers and sisters throughout the Pacific, as well as the working class in France, Australia, New Zealand and internationally for a joint struggle against the capitalist system that oppresses them all.

Homelessness in London: Rough sleeping increases, removal of families from the city doubles

Paul Bond

New figures shed more light on London’s catastrophic housing crisis. A record number of people found sleeping rough in the capital was recorded between July and September.

The first six months of the year saw a rise of almost 50 percent in the numbers of London’s homeless families being rehoused outside the city, some as far away as Cornwall and Manchester.

The first six months of 2018 saw a 46 percent rise in out-of-London placements, with councils sending more than 1,200 households out of the city. Most of these placements have been to neighbouring counties like Kent and Essex, but over the last year councils have sent households to Newcastle, Cardiff and the West Midlands and as far away as Glasgow.

Between April and June 2018 alone, 688 households were sent out of the capital. This is the highest rate in at least six years, up from 113 households in the first quarter of 2012-2013.

London accounts for more than two-thirds of all England’s homeless households, and it is believed that the majority of those rehoused outside the city are families. Councils have a legal obligation to find them homes. This hardly alleviates the pressure on the households, as shelter provided is sometimes only for a few nights at a time.

Attention has focused on the massive distances some homeless households are being sent, but local displacement has a similarly devastating effect. Westminster North Labour MP Karen Buck reported one of her constituents with a job, a 12-year-old at school and a 14-month-old baby being moved away. She told Buck she had to wake her family at 5:40 a.m. to get her daughter to school and herself to work. They got home at 9 p.m. after nearly five hours spent commuting.

Greg Beales, director of campaigns at the Shelter charity, said the result was that people were often forced to quit their jobs and drop out of education. Shelter described the figures as “a damning indictment of our housing system,” pointing to the desperate need for more social housing.

The problem is not exclusive to London. According to responses to Freedom of Information requests made by the Huffington Post, in the last five years Birmingham has moved nearly 2,000 households outside the city, and Liverpool has moved 82. The Birmingham figure is significant, as many London boroughs have sought to do relocation deals with councils around that area.

The housing crisis, along with the slashing of benefit provision, has produced a record spike in rough sleeping. Between July and September this year, 3,103 people were found sleeping rough in London. This is the first time the figure has topped 3,000 in a three-month period. It marks a 20 percent rise on the previous three months, and a 17 percent rise on the same period in 2017.

Rough sleeping has been rising year on year consistently for the last seven years. Figures for January 2018 showed a 169 percent increase in rough sleeping since 2010. The July-September figures show this trend continuing, with outreach workers finding 1,382 people sleeping rough for the first time during this period. This was up 28 percent on the previous three months, and up 20 percent on the same period last year.

Official rough sleeping counts are considered a vast underestimation of the true scale of the problem.

As the figures for rehousing of homeless households outside London were being released, the BBC was reporting on the city’s “hidden homeless” who, either because of difficulties getting into hostels or from fear of sleeping on the street, sleep instead on the city’s night-buses.

Dionne, who regularly sleeps on the N38 bus, told the BBC she had problems finding hostel accommodation because of her drug addiction. Because of the dangers of the street she preferred to sleep on the bus, although this meant sleeping only 40 minutes at a time. Such sleep patterns cannot help those already struggling with mental health issues.

Last month the Bureau of Investigative Journalism (BIJ) compiled figures on homeless deaths over the previous year. As no official bodies collate these figures, the BIJ count is likely to be a substantial underestimation, but they documented 449 deaths since October 2017, well over one per day.

A bus driver said he often had to wake up to a dozen people sleeping on his vehicle. Transport for London and City Hall are funding outreach workers to try and get bus sleepers into hostels. This is no humanitarian or altruistic gesture, but an attempt to prevent disruption to services and revenue.

The crisis has been fuelled by punitive benefit changes over the last period. On average, poorer households in the UK spend 47.4 percent of their average disposable income on housing costs. The amount that can be spent on private rent under housing benefit has been frozen for the last three years, even though rents have continued to rise.

Rollout of the Universal Credit (UC) benefit system has seen around 80 percent of recipients in arrears before payment comes through. This can take up to eight weeks, meaning claimants are losing their housing and being seen by landlords as a high risk for future tenancy. UC is increasing numbers of the working homeless.

Labour councils laid heavy emphasis on the rehousing figures ahead of last week’s Budget in an appeal for stabilising funding, which is on course to be cut by 63 percent, more than £4 billion, from 2010 to 2020.

But it is Labour councils that lead the way in the social cleansing policy of moving homeless households out of London boroughs. Former Mayor of Newham, Sir Robin Wales, told 29 mothers from the Focus E15 hostel who went to meet him after cuts to a mother and baby unit, “If you can’t afford to live in Newham then you can’t afford to live in Newham.”

Labour councils have also pioneered the transfer of social assets into the hands of private companies. Haringey Council, run by Blairites around former leader Claire Kober, was forced to scrap the hugely unpopular Haringey Development Vehicle, under which £2 billion of assets was to be sold off. After being forced to stand, the councillors who replaced them—supporters of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn—propose instead a “a wholly-owned company for the purpose of delivering new council-owned homes.” This would see a council-owned for-profit company building council housing alongside private accommodation and acting as landlord for the council properties. Even while abandoning HDV the council continued to describe it as a “social investment programme.”

Mayor of London Sadiq Khan pledged in May to build 10,000 council homes over the next four years. This is paltry compared to the around 250,000 Londoners on housing waiting lists. Labour are fully aware of the insignificance of these plans, with deputy mayor for housing James Murray admitting they were spending £1 billion on new homes, but this would not resolve the crisis.

In July, Khan introduced legislation requiring London councils to ballot residents on major regeneration plans if they wish to secure City Hall funding. These plans will not apply retrospectively, meaning existing social cleansing projects can proceed unhindered. Responsibility for deciding whether balloting applies is left up to the developers themselves, who have numerous exemption clauses open to them.

Chinese president denounces “law of the jungle” on trade

Nick Beams

China’s president Xi Jinping has again attempted to position Beijing as the defender of free trade in opposition to the US, denouncing the “law of the jungle” in a major speech delivered yesterday.

Xi was speaking at an international business fair in Shanghai at which he cast China as an importing nation. It was an attempt to secure allies in the intensifying trade and economic war with the US, ahead of a scheduled meeting with US President Donald Trump at the G20 summit meeting at the end of the month.

“China has a big market of over 1.3 billion people and it is our sincere commitment to open the Chinese market,” he said. The audience included representatives of major global corporations, some heads of governments and delegates from international organisations, including the World Trade Organisation and the International Monetary Fund.

However, the speech did not contain any new initiatives to win support for China in its conflict with the US. It was largely a repeat of his earlier statements in support of globalisation since the coming to power of Trump.

“As globalisation deepens,” he said, “the practices of ‘law of the jungle’ and ‘winner-take-all’ are a narrowing road that leads to a dead end. Inclusion and reciprocity, win-win and mutual benefits are a widening and correct path.”

In an indirect reference to the US and its criticism of China’s trade policies, Xi said: “Each country should work hard to improve its own business environment. One cannot always beautify oneself while criticising others, and one can’t shine a flashlight on other people without looking at oneself.”

Xi said the economic and social well-being of countries was increasingly interconnected and claimed reform of the global governance was picking up speed. “On the other hand, the world economy is going through profound adjustment and protectionism and unilateralism are resurging. Economic globalisation faces headwinds, and multilateralism and the system of free trade are under threat,” he said.

The composition of the audience reflected the shifts and manoeuvres in the global trade conflict. Major western European countries joined the US in not sending high-level delegations, signalling the European Union’s decision to at least partially align itself with US complaints against China’s push to acquire enhanced technology through so-called forced technology transfers and alleged theft of intellectual property. Representatives of the G20 group of countries were conspicuous by their absence.

The representatives of foreign corporations tended to be lower-level executives. But in a sign of easing of tensions between the two countries, 450 Japanese companies were represented.

The main criticism of foreign corporations is that China should do more to open up its market to their operations, enabling them to compete with domestic Chinese companies.

Xi sought to address those concerns, saying that China would undertake more opening measures in telecommunications, medical care, education and culture. But no specific details were provided and corporate executives are insisting that more concrete measures be announced.

The vice-president of the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China, Carlo D’Andrea said: “Meaningful progress can only be claimed when major structural challenges are positively dealt with and international companies can compete on an equal footing with domestic ones.”

Xi pledged that China would import $30 trillion worth of goods over the next 15 years, an increase from $24 trillion in previous commitments. But the figure was not a significant departure from the current trajectory of Chinese imports. There was also a commitment to further cut tariffs. However, this has been made before. As one market analyst observed, an announcement to this affect had been made in September and it “can only be milked so many times.”

In an attempt to deflect criticism both from the US and other countries over technology theft, Xi said there would be tighter protection for intellectual property and stronger punishments for violations.

He also addressed concerns among Asian countries about the slowdown in the Chinese economy and its possible impact on the region, referring to recent stimulus measures.

“Uncertainty in some areas has risen, operating difficulties for some companies have multiplied and risk challenges have increased in some areas,” Xi said. “These are problems that one encounters amid progress. We are taking active measures to address them and the result is already apparent.”

The trade war has yet to have a wide impact but the effects are starting to show up. Hyundai, the South Korean car firm, announced a sharp fall in third quarter earnings, attributing it to weaker sales in the US and China, its two biggest markets.

The Japanese copier and camera company, Canon, has voiced fears that the US-China trade war will lead to slower growth.

“One concern is how long this trade war is going to last,” the company’s chief financial officer Tishizo Tanaka told the Financial Times. “A far more serious issue is if this becomes a catalyst for an economic slowdown, not only in China and the US, but in other regions across the world.”

Those concerns are likely to grow because the view in key sections of the Trump administration directing the trade war measures is that China must feel real economic pain before it will make concessions to the US on its central demands.

Those demands are not primarily for a reduction of the trade deficit between the two countries but that China makes substantial “structural” changes in its economy, essentially scrapping its state-subsidies for key industries, which the US claims are “market-distorting,” and ceasing its alleged theft of technology and intellectual property.

There had been hopes that the meeting between Trump and Xi on the sidelines of the G20 would result in at least a ceasefire in the trade war. After Trump held out the prospect of a deal, markets in Asia enjoyed one of their largest rises in the recent period last Friday.

But expectations were swiftly dashed when White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said China and the US were not on the cusp of a trade agreement.

Open Africa Power 2019 for Young African Leaders – Call for applications

Application Deadline: 26^th November 2018

Eligible Countries: African countries

To be taken at (country): Ethiopia, Italy

About the Award: Open Africa Power is an education venture initiated by Enel Foundation in 2018 in partnership with top Academic institutions such as Strathmore University from Kenya, the University of Addis Ababa from Ethiopia, and Italian institutions such as the Politecnico di Torino, the Politecnico di Milano, Bocconi University and Florence School of Regulation.
The program aims to forge a new generation of African leaders deeply engaged with their countries clean energy future. After involving 29 selected candidates in the inaugural module of the first edition, Open Africa Power’s second edition, taking place in 2019, will engage up to 60 African students and alumni in a series of professional development and leadership activities, comprising residential training modules in Ethiopia and Italy in 2019.
Open Africa Power program is open to high-profile African graduates wishing to acquire an holistic knowhow of the electricity sector, enhancing the technical, regulatory and business skills required to work in the private and public sector towards the electrification of Africa. Precisely for this reason, from this year, candidates living abroad but wanting to relocate back to Africa will also be admitted.

Type: Training

Eligibility: The Open Africa Power selection process is an open, merit-based, competition. The application
period opens on October 25th, 2018, and closes on November 26th, 2018.

To be eligible candidates must meet the following criteria:

• Be between the ages of 24 and 35 by January, 2019;
• Be a citizen of an African country;
• Currently resident in an African country or planning to relocate in Africa within the end of 2019;
• Be eligible to travel to Italy in case of admission to the second module;
• Have at least a Bachelor’s Degree in Engineering, Computer Science, Law or Business from an African University;
• Have an admission letter to or being a student of a PhD MSc, LLM, MPP or MBA degree from an African University;
• Have a demonstrated interest in the electricity sector in the African Continent;
• Be fully proficient in English.

Number of Awards: up to 60

Value of Award: Open Africa Power’s second edition, taking place in 2019, will engage up to 60 African students and alumni in a series of professional development and leadership activities, comprising residential training modules in Ethiopia and Italy in 2019.

Duration of Programme: 

How to Apply: Applications must be sent to openafricapower@enelfoundation.org. Applicants should send in the
following items:

• A copy of their CV;
• Copy of their BSc or MSc, MBA, MPP, LLM academic records/transcript;
• A copy of their Passport;
• A motivation letter;
• Three references from industry, academia and/or civil servant representatives.

Inquiries regarding the program must also be sent to openafricapower@enelfoundation.org


Visit Programme Webpage for Details