Extrajudicial Killing

This Article examines a controversial national security measure: the use of the armed forces within domestic borders. Military policing blurs the boundaries between crime and war, and tends to entail greater use of force against individuals. It has received relatively little academic attention but deserves to be better understood. No democratic state has relied on military policing for longer than India. And within India, no region has been subject to military policing for as long as the northeastern state of Manipur. I analyze how military policing in Manipur has fostered abuse by the armed forces, which in turn has prompted litigation and judicial innovation. Based on my analysis, I critique dominant theories about the state’s exceptional security powers. I advance two main claims. First, exceptional powers rarely remain exceptional; they eventually become the norm. Once deployed, these powers persist, and the license they provide seeps into broader habits of governance. Second, once normalized, exceptional powers become more vulnerable to judicial intervention. Judges become unwilling to accept the government’s argument that these powers are always and only used to fight pressing threats. These powers eventually become a routine subject of judicial review. Even once judicial review becomes routine, however, judges tend to be more willing to help victims of abuse than to punish abusers.

This May, voters in the Philippines will elect the son of a notorious dictator. Ferdinand Marcos, Jr., or “Bongbong”, is the top candidate to replace Rodrigo Duterte as President. Polls show the younger Marcos with a healthy lead over his opponent, the incumbent Vice President Leni Robredo. The result could see the return of a political dynasty famous for its corruption and a penchant for abuse of power. The May 9 election results could have deep implications for Thailand and broader southeast Asia. For the Philippines, like other parts of east and southeast Asia, the most problematic leaders often arrive as potential saviors. In the 1960s, frustration with the political ruling class brought Marcos to power in the Philippines. Promises to intensify public works projects, boost agricultural yields, tackle growing income inequality, and bring law and order to society gave him instant legitimacy. Similar problems, including a perceived lack of progress coming to terms with drugs and crime brought Duterte to power five years ago, and like Marcos before him, brought disastrous results.

This article explores the cyclical nature of violence in the Philippine War on Drugs, with the aim of charting potential paths out of this violence. With a focus on how media framings of violence can help bring violence to an end, the article proposes a cycle of violence paradigm to explain how violence progresses in three stages: mass public socialization into violence via violent political rhetoric, a process of state denial that sustains the violence, and finally, public socialization out of violence through an effective response by media, communities, and civil society (i.e., human rights activists, academics, churches) at the national level. State strategies of denial, coupled with a lack of transparency in security force operations (i.e., police, military, militia), help perpetuate the violence. Amid a cycle of violence, the deaths of innocent individuals can lead to increased media coverage, public discourse and awareness, which in turn, leads to public identification with the victim and fear for the safety of one's own community and family. As case studies, a comparative narrative analysis is performed of two killings that led to mass public engagement at the national level, namely that of the Filipino teenager Kian delos Santos and the Korean expat businessman Jee Ick Joo.

Extrajudicial killing (EJK) is a relatively recent concept located at the intersection of human rights, criminology and the sociology of law. It is defined as state-killing outside of the formal legal system of a state without due process of law. As a residual category it relies heavily on the definition of what a 'state' is and thus a theory of the state. A key feature of EJK is a denial of state involvement in killing necessitated by EJK's constituting state crime in which the state violates its own self-defined rules for operation. The specific focus of this study is how state 'frames' are used in speeches and political communication to promote state-killing while denying any state connection to that killing. EJK is seen to occur in coordinated waves of violence (cycles of violence) that resemble the trajectory of infectious diseases in epidemics that are influenced by the frames put forth by the state and watchdog institutions in 'cycles of moral reaction'. This case study focuses on EJK in the Philippines which has played a key defining role in EJK internationally, specifically on police encounter shootings and death squad killings during the 'War on Drugs' that began in 2016.

Officially admitted by the Office of then Philippine Supreme Court Chief Justice Reynato Puno (summit convener) for use during the National Consultative Summit on Extrajudicial Killings and Enforced Disappearances - Searching for Solutions, Manila, Philippines, 16-17 July 2007.

Neglected Filipino intellectuals live, teach and pursue research on the island of Mindanao  in the midst of a long-running conflict, writing as critical activist intellectuals deeply embedded in the actual situations that they write about, even to the point of putting their own lives at risk. As activist intellectuals they fight against the ethnocide and epistemicide that takes place before their very eyes. They are intellectuals of the sort evoked by Foucault when he draws a picture of the activist intellectual employing tactics and strategy, fighting in
a politics that is a continuation of war my other means, and also intellectuals of the global south as put forward by  Boaventura de Sousa Santosa in the more recent  Epistemologies of the South: Justice against epistemicide (2015).

This article focuses on the war on drugs in the Philippines in order to explore issues related to extra-judicial killing, which remains common in many countries that have abolished the death penalty and in many more that retain it but seldom carry out judicial executions. In the first year of Rodrigo Duterte’s presidency (2016–17), thousands of people were killed by police or by vigilantes who were encouraged to prosecute his war on drugs. At a time when democracy is in retreat in many parts of the world, this case illustrates how popular harsh punishment can be in states that have failed to meet their citizens’ hopes for freedom, economic growth, and security.

Policing in the USA is dangerous for the US public. The objective of the present study is to determine the gross deaths due to lethal force by police and the racial distribution of those deaths compared to the racial distribution of the US population. Longitudinal data reveal that police in the USA kill one thousand people per year (n=1004 in 2019). Deaths by year and race are presented for the years 2015 through 2019. The racial distribution of victims of US police lethal force is not proportionate to the racial distribution of the US population. Whites account for the largest racial group of deaths, but are underrepresented, accounting for 45% of police killings (and 60% of the population). Blacks are over-represented, accounting for 24% of police killings (and 13% of the population). Hispanics are proportionately represented, accounting for 17% of police killings (and 18% of the population). Others (including Asian, Native American, and others) are under-represented, accounting for 4% of police killings (and 8% of the population). The rate of US police killings has been relatively stable for the past five years (with a low of 962 deaths in 2016 and a high of 1,004 deaths in 2019). The US police killing rate in The USA is 3.05 police killings per million of population. The US police killing rate of Blacks is 5.34 per million of Hispanics is 2.63 per million, of Whites is 1.87 per million, and of others is 1.5 per million of population. The US police killing rate of Blacks is 2.86 times the US police killing rate of Whites. US police killing rates compare unfavorably with other jurisdictions. The police fatal shooting rate in Australia is 0.17% per million of population, one eighteenth of the police killing rate in the USA (an Australian rate of police killings applied to the US population would produce 56 US police killings per year). The reasons for the high rate of police killings in the USA and for the racial disparities of those killings are multifactorial. The valorisation of violence and the glamorization of guns are woven tightly into the history and culture of the USA. The metrics of US police killings are a symptom of larger issues within American society. Treating one symptom will not remedy the malady blighting the organism. Is it time for an American societal and rethink of its relationship with violence, in the light of these metrics of disintegration? Is Violent America fixable? Only time will tell.

RESUMEN
Se parte de la hipótesis siguiente: la mayoría de las muertes en manos de las fuerzas de seguridad del Estado no son producto de enfrentamientos regulares con grupos delictivos equivalentes, son más el resultado de un uso arbitrario y desproporcionado de la fuerza letal por parte de estos organismos. Para verificarla se analiza en primer lugar la victimización letal que padece la policía, luego se hace un ejercicio similar con los civiles que fallecen como consecuencia de su intervención. Una vez realizada la caracterización de ambas formas de violencia letal, se contrastan situacionalmente para tratar de observar las correspondencias existentes entre éstas. Palabras claves: Uso de la fuerza letal, Violencia institucional, Enfrentamientos, Ejecuciones extrajudiciales, Venezuela.
ABSTRACT
This paper is based on the following hypothesis:  the majority of the deaths at the hands of the state security forces are not the product of regular confrontations with equivalent criminal groups. The arbitrary and disproportionate use of lethal force by those police organisms are the most. To verify this, first it is necessary to analyze the lethal victimization suffered by the police. After that, we have to do a similar exercise with the civilians who died by their intervention.  As a result of the characterization of both violence lethal forms, has been carried out, each form is situationally contrasted to try to observe the correspondences between them.

In summary this research work is divided into four chapters, Chapter one contain the nature of the research, Chapter two is made up of the conceptual and theoretical frame work of Extra Judicial Killing, Analysis of findings made up on chapter three and four wind up the work offering the conclusion and recommendations.
The aim of the research is to assess on the role of extra judicial killing committed by state organ in relation to the protection of right to Life in Tanzania.
The research tried to analyze the laws which provides for the protection of right to life. It was found that laws which provide for the protection of right to life are too narrow and uncertain. And therefore there is no absolute Article or provision of law which provides for full protections of right to life.
However findings indicated that, there are other problems related to Extra Judicial Killing like, unlawful killing committed by enforcement body which are entrusted to protection of people’s right and property are the one violates the duties established by law.
It is established that most of the unlawful killing committed by state enforcement body arisen from exercising excessive use of force and irrational as to apply reasonable force during executing of their order.

This article describes and explains “police vigilantism” as a mode of authoritative extra-legal coercion performed by public police officials conceived as doing their duty to realize justice in the world. Based on ethnographic observations, interviews and content analysis of news and entertainment media as well as official government reports, this essay examines a specific form of police vigilantism in contemporary India known as encounter killings. Demonstrating that encounter killings are widely constituted as a form of ritual purification and social defense by self-sacrificing police, it theorizes a metaphysics of police vigilantism in India that combines generalized experiences of insecurity with shared cosmologies of just war. Comparing this metaphysics with justified state violence in other global south contexts, this study sheds light on how such violence may be legitimated through a conceptual inextricability of law and war as embodied in uniquely a constituted human figure: the police vigilante.

The article examines the lethal responses by Israeli soldiers and police to Palestinian assailants in the West Bank and East Jerusalem since the start of the "Knife Intifada" in October 2015. It places these responses in the broader context of state violence against Palestinians, arguing that Israeli security personnel often address individual attacks, rioting, and even protest, as "combat" situations (or "hostilities" under International Humanitarian Law), rather than as law enforcement scenarios, and thereby wrongfully justify employing excessive force against Palestinians. The article suggests that Israeli soldiers and police often abandon or abuse the rules of engagement when it comes to policing Palestinians -- in ways that are unfathomable with regard to violent acts by the Jewish settler population in the same areas.

What is more, the article asserts that despite the recent conviction of IDF Sergeant Elor Azaria for killing a previously incapacitated Palestinian assailant, such prosecutions are the rare exception to the rule. The resulting culture of virtual impunity enables the continued use of excessive force by Israeli law enforcement against Palestinians and the systematic violation of Israel's basic duty to protect the Palestinian population under occupation. On the eve of the 50th anniversary of the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories, the article asks whether any protracted occupation is bound to lead to a situation in which the occupying population’s security is prioritized over that of the occupied population, even within clear international legal norms.

This article is concerned with the events of 16 August 2012 at the Lonmin Marikana mine in the North West province, when members of the South African Police Service killed 34 people, most of whom were striking mineworkers. These killings, now widely referred to as the Marikana massacre, are regarded not only as a tragedy but also as an event of great significance in South Africa’s contemporary history. A commission of inquiry was held into the killings, but it did not reach any
conclusions about what had happened at the second massacre site, commonly referred to as Scene 2, at which 17 of the fatal shootings took place. While these events are now the subject of an investigation by police oversight and criminal justice agencies, we cannot assume that this will reveal the truth about the killings at Scene 2. To add to our understanding of the events at Marikana, this article analyses statements from the injured and arrested strikers taken by the Independent Police Investigative Directorate in the five days immediately after the massacre. This article examines data from the statements, and the circumstances in which these statements were taken, in order to
interrogate the assertion that ‘strikers were shot by police while surrendering or injured at Scene 2’. It concludes that, taken as a whole, the statements are a reliable source of information that some of
the strikers at Scene 2 were indeed shot while surrendering.

During May, we three participated as subcommissioners in the Independent International Commission of Investigation Into Human Rights Violations in the Philippines (Investigate PH). Its new report is at www.investigate.ph/SecondReport. We listened to the testimony of witnesses, victims and survivors of human rights. The Second Report of the commission was released on July 6 — and it includes a series of recommendations, including a clear call for a United Nations-led probe on the human rights violations of the Duterte administration. One witness was Dr. Raquel Fortun, professor of forensic pathology at the University of the Philippines. She had been requested by surviving family members to perform autopsies on a number of victims of police killings. A number of the bodies showed evidence of handcuffs or zip ties. Some had bullet wounds in their wrists, which they had raised as they were shot. Nonetheless, the police reports indicated that the victims had resisted arrest and had fought back. Duterte must not be allowed to continue to violate the human rights of the people of the Philippines. He must be prosecuted for crimes against humanity.

“Terrorism” is fundamentally the same, whether it is carried out by States or non-State actors. Difference arises as one identifies the processes wherein labels are applied which identify select acts of political violence as "terrorism," while terming others "legitimate defense" within the national interest. The subjective labeling of “terrorism” which obscures the systemic violence of State terrorism has accelerated in the post-9/11 "Global War On Terror/Terrorism," as wars advanced by the US and its allies have further expanded into the Middle East, Asia and Africa with numerous proxy wars. This construction of terrorism can be seen as a rhetorical tool utilized by the State, as well as non-State actors that challenge State authority. Throughout these arenas of violence, authoritative language is used by the State within a process of “othering,” and intentional language is adopted to demonize anti-State opponents and legitimize State-crafted actions

To view the online group exhibition "Dark Lens/ Lente ng Karimlan: The Filipino Camera in Duterte's Republic" featuring photographs by Eloisa Lopez, Br. Ciriaco Santiago III, Ezra Acayan, and Raffy Lerma, navigate to: https://inequality.studies.stonybrook.edu/wordpress/dark-lens/

This comparative study provides is an effort to identify shortcomings of the Albanian legislation and criminal justice in the challenge of identification of over 6000 missing persons during the communist regime. In a major struggle of duality and legal ambiguity of acknowledgement, the state tents to “throw” the ball from institution to institutions without being able to address the issue, aim for exhaustive solutions and start a process that can bring clarity for the missing truth.
The issue of the missing persons, apart of being considered as a crime against humanity, it is a clear violation of the right to life – a fundamental right, violated randomly during the period of dictatorship in Albania.
According to Article 7/1 of the Rome Statute, the "enforced disappearance of persons" means the arrest, detention or abduction of persons by, or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of, a State or a political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give information on the fate or whereabouts of those persons, with the intention of removing them from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time”. 
This should be the legal definition of the law on the missing persons during the communist regime. And such Article should orient a process of institutional reform with regards to the existing structures, mechanisms and agencies that are legally obliged to address these major un-condemned crimes of the communist past in Albania. 
The international law offers unified interpretation with regards to the national mechanisms in implementing and bringing justice to victim families, but it also takes into account the efforts to condemn the crimes against humanity openly and publicly. And in this study, cases of countries in Latin America and closer, Kosovo and Bosnia are brought as a comparison with regards to the role of state institutions responsible for the identification, and effective investigation and prosecution of the cases of the missing persons (accountability measures).
However, a more holistic approach renders visible all the different transitional justice principles that comprise (1) the right to justice, (2) right to reparations (pertaining compensation, restitution or rehabilitation of victims of human rights violations), (3) right to know, and the (4) guarantee of Non-Recurrence.
This study stresses the urgent need to address the unsolved issue of the missing persons by drafting a special law that could incorporate the required holistic approach for this category of the victims of the past dictatorship in Albania.

The cases of murdered drug addicts, drug users, and drug dealers in the Philippines show staggering numbers ever since President Rodrigo Duterte came into office on 2016 June 30.

The international media have closely followed the events following Duterte’s win, and his campaign against drugs in the country. Various human rights groups have criticized and openly condemned the drug-related extrajudicial killings in the Philippines, but the Duterte administration continues to be defiant and justifies its anti-drug war.

A total of 64 articles published online in The New York Times and The Japan Times were analyzed from the period of 2016 June 30 until 2017 June 30, a complete year from his Duterte’s first day in office.

The prime objective of this research study is to discover how the international press frames the extrajudicial killings linked to President Duterte’s anti-drug war, and if these frames perpetuate categorical stereotypes of a colonized country.

Ain o Salish Kendra, during a press conference on January revealed that at least 466 people were killed in cross-fire and police custody in 2018, contrary to 162 in 2017. Comparing the sharp rise of number of extra-judicial killing to Edgar Allan Poe’s short story ‘A Tell-Tale Heart’, writes Muhammad Kamruzzamann.--'NEW AGE'

If we compare American and European legal systems, differences are essentially due to the different way of dealing with the culture of security and the relationship between politics and law. Today, that gap is narrowing because Europe is changing its approach to security and, in the field of migration, its political quest for more security also involves the limitation of the judicial check and a more formalistic approach to interpreting and applying the law, i.e. two legal solutions that are typical of the US approach to security. Following decades of strong and wide protection of human rights in any situation, States and the European Commission are seeking for a new and different balance between human rights and security and are ready to trade some political idealism and legal functionalism in the field of migration and human rights for more political pragmatism and legal formalism in the field of security

This Article examines a controversial national security measure: the use of the armed forces within domestic borders. Military policing blurs the boundaries between crime and war, and tends to entail greater use of force against individuals. It has received relatively little academic attention but deserves to be better understood. No democratic state has relied on military policing for longer than India. And within India, no region has been subject to military policing for as long as the northeastern state of Manipur. I analyze how military policing in Manipur has fostered abuse by the armed forces, which in turn has prompted litigation and judicial innovation. Based on my analysis, I critique dominant theories about the state’s exceptional security powers. I advance two main claims. First, exceptional powers rarely remain exceptional; they eventually become the norm. Once deployed, these powers persist, and the license they provide seeps into broader habits of governance. Second, o...

Russell Tribunal on Kashmir in Sarajevo, Bosnia on December 17-19, 2021. Together, this tribunal aims to highlight the grave crimes against humanity, including genocide, that are occurring in the Indian occupied territory of Jammu and Kashmir. The seriousness of these crimes is what motivated us to bring this to the attention of the world, since it is a direct threat to global peace.

This foundational international event, the first of many tribunals being planned over the coming years, aims to set the stage for exposing the seriousness of the Kashmir conflict. More specifically, the focus of the tribunal will be on 4 thematic areas: (a) Genocide, including a discussion on the Jammu Genocide in which an estimated 230,000 - 500,000 people were killed. (b) De-Colonization, Kashmir is not a secessionist/separatist movement, but a de-colonial movement; (c) Settler-Colonialism (landgrabs, coercive patriotism etc); (d) Crimes Against Humanity and Nuclear War - mass graves, rape as a weapon of war, and the ever present threat of nuclear war in this contested region.

This tribunal brings together key global personalities, academics and celebrities to highlight the ongoing genocide, massive violations of human rights, crimes against humanity, and political oppression of the people in the disputed territory of Indian Occupied Jammu and Kashmir. In actuality, Russell Tribunal on War Crimes in Kashmir 2021 aims to replicate the significance and impact of the Russell Tribunal on Vietnam that gained worldwide press coverage and had a clear, discernible impact on transforming the narrative on Vietnam. For that reason, and in paying homage to the courage of Professor Bertrand Russell, who dared to challenge American hegemony at the height of its power, we use that model to expose the crimes of India in Kashmir. Likewise, the Russell Tribunal on Kashmir aims to reaffirm the primacy of international law as the basis for solving the Kashmir conflict. Moreover, it aims to raise awareness of the responsibility of the international community to prevent ongoing crimes against humanity and the potential for genocide to occur.

When a state is formed as a republic, it is expected that all the power is held by the people, the lawmakers are elected freely and the state is always ruled by none else but only law. Nevertheless, concerns continuously strike in the case of Bangladesh as there has been sneaking popularity of extrajudicial execution. The promise of due process is stolen; and the judicial process is dodged randomly at will. This crossfire populism has challenged the fundamental promise and premise of 'rule of law' on which the state was formed. The executive branch of the state tends to fuse with the legislative branch in such a sophisticated way that sometimes it is difficult to distinguish the two. Adding to it now, this inclination towards execution without bothering judicial proceedings challenges the existence of the adjudicative branch of the state as well. Separation of power, systematized to uphold the rule of law, is threatened to be diminished. Power is dripping slowly into the control of one dominating body. Such regression into an unchecked and imbalanced power setup may cause the state to lose its fundamental character as a 'Republic'. The existence of the 'courts', therefore, cannot be allowed to get blurred further. Under the intense inflation of crossfire populism, to preserve the constitutional oath of rule of law, 'how to save the courts?' is the question this paper raises and looks for an answer to.

In 2017, college professor Jocelyn Martin invited her freshmen English classes to write fiction stories about the issue of extrajudicial killings in the Philippines. Six of the best stories were chosen for publication. Her fellow teacher Cyan Abad-Jugo invited professional writers to mentor these students in polishing their stories and in learning more about how to process this very complex topic, all while contributing their own written pieces in response.
What resulted was an anthology of creative responses to a crucial subject, a conversation between generations, and a memorial against oblivion. Triggered is YA (young adult fiction) written by YA. Edited by Jocelyn S. Martin and Cyan Abad-Jugo.

Available for pre-order here: http://chambershell.com/triggered/

Bangladesh has witnessed a widespread incident of 'extrajudicial killings' in the name of 'crossfire / gunfight'  for the last few decades. Although such killings are considered as something that happened without any legal process in the dominant discourse, this article argues that the legitimacy of such killings originates from within the legal frameworks, more specifically within Bangladesh's constitution and penal codes. The article starts by questioning why the official statement's structure after such killings has remained similar for fifty years. It attempts to show that this similarity is, in fact, an indication of 'legitimacy' borrowed from the constitution and the legal framework.

In 1985 at the height of the Martial Law Era of Philippine history, just before the fall of Marcos (1965-86) in the rural community of Tulunan on the island of Mindanao, half-way between the cities of Davao and Cotabato, a priest was shot dead by a local militia member. The killing of Father Favali is one of the most well-documented cases in Philippine history of extrajudicial killing (EJK), i.e. state killing outside the formal legal system of the state. Since the perpetrators were tried, found guilty and punished for their crime, the killing was also an exception to the historical norm of impunity for the perpetrators of EJK (Parenno 2011), a norm once again present in the wave of EJK that began in 2016 under the Duterte regime. This study probes deeper into the Father Favali case to see what it can teach us about the relationship between perpetrators of EJK, the state and the public, as well as what it reveals about how impunity becomes a norm for perpetrators of EJK.

Less than 50 days into the presidency of Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines, serious concerns are being raised over the hundreds of extrajudicial killings being perpetrated under the administration’s watch. Some have characterized the situation as a reign of terror, while Duterte himself has declared: “I don’t care about human rights.” While purportedly a war against drug dealers and users, the killings not only forgo the rule of law, but entrench disadvantage among the country’s poor.

English abstract

In a text that takes the form of a chronicle composed from notes that the author compiled in a diary he kept during one of his stays in Haiti, he recounts how violence appears in the interstices of everyday life. The chronicle starts on October 27th, three days before the Day of the Dead, and finishes on November 18th, the date of the victory of Dessalines’ army at the battle of Vertières in 1803, which lead Haïti to free itself from the French colony. Between both dates, on November 13th, the massacre of La Saline took place. By paying attention to the details of ordinary interactions and the swells that affect communal life, the author makes his readers feel the atmosphere of Haiti’s recent history, in which it has become difficult to say and think violence. The form of the text itself is an invitation to rethink the relation between modes of writing in anthropology and our ways of thinking violence and human cruelty.

Résumé en français

Dans un texte qui prend la forme d’une chronique composée à partir des notes consignées dans un carnet que l’auteur a tenu durant l’un de ses séjours en Haïti, il raconte comment la violence apparaît dans les interstices de la vie quotidienne. La chronique commence le 27 octobre, trois jours avant le début de la fête des Morts, et prend fin le 18 novembre, la date de la victoire de l’armée de Dessalines lors de la bataille de Vertières de 1803 qui mena Haïti à s’affranchir du colon français. Entre ces deux dates, le 13 novembre 2018 a eu lieu le massacre de La Saline. En prêtant attention aux détails des interactions ordinaires et aux remous qui affectent la vie en commun, l’auteur fait sentir le climat spécifique à une période de l’histoire récente d’Haïti où il est devenu difficile de dire et de penser la violence qui a lieu. La forme du texte elle-même est une invitation à repenser la relation entre les modes d’écriture en anthropologie et nos façons de penser la violence et la cruauté humaines.

https://www.cairn.info/revue-a-contrario-2021-2-page-87.htm

Since 18 April 2018, the force deployed by the Sandinista state against a surge of popular protest has left over 400 dead, over 2,000 injured, and hundreds extra-legally detained, beaten, and disappeared.[1] This heavy-handed repression, the appearance of paramilitary, and the rampant numbers of illegal detentions now resulting in convictions for “terrorism,” all point to the long, yet well-hidden, hybrid nature of this state. It also reveals an increasingly authoritarian politics of cauterization and confinement that has long flown under the radar of scholarly attention, especially when it comes to Nicaragua’s reputed citizen security model and regional “safety.” Drawing on my analysis of the devolving realities and governance relations that permeated prison life during my extensive field research with prisoners and former prisoners (2009-2016), I suggest that a politics of cauterization long reserved for the “excludable” has now reached far beyond the prison system and into public view, criminalizing and attempting to confine political dissent. This process is contingent upon the defacement of the Sandinista state from within, largely by way of its (lethal) reaction to the student protests. The chain of events that this set in motion brought practices once veiled by public secrecy into the public eye, particularly the extralegal workings of the “Sistema”. It is here that the prison environment serves as a fruitful starting point for an exploration of what is happening in the country at present.

A car accident in the early morning
You were dazed no doubt
Frantically searching
I can’t help but wonder if you knew
About Brother Ferrell



Black Brother
Similar story
Early morning accident
Searching
Left with no choice but to hope
Knocking on a door
Black Sister
Hoping for a different outcome

Face twisted in pain
Why must our faces always be twisted in pain
Black Sister
I cannot get a voice I’ve never heard
Out of my mind

One could wish you would’ve picked
Another door
But who’s to say it would have been
Different
Black Sister
A white man with a shotgun


What did that look like to you
Early morning accident with blood in your eyes
He had blood in his eyes
Did you see it
Black Sister
I’m sure it stalled your heart

A white man with a shotgun
Might as well have been Brother Ferrell’s executioner
A cop with a handgun
A white man with a shotgun
Your voice
Then a blast that silenced your plea
Black Sister

A shotgun blast twisted your face in pain
It brought stall to your heart
It silenced a voice
I cannot stop hearing
Black Sister

Oh my Black Sister

How my heart aches
At the thought of your voice
Flattened in an instant
White man with a shotgun
The same as cop with a handgun
Standing in front of a Black body
Black Sister

They dumped your body
If not at the corner of
Warren and Outer
Then at the intersection of
Racism and sexism
Black Sister
You must have felt a moment of relief
Replaced with the horror of knowing
As you saw the shotgun
Before all feeling was removed

I cannot get your voice
Out of my mind
A voice that was flattened and silenced
By a white man with a shotgun
The same as a cop with a handgun

When will all this silencing cease?

Since this op-ed was written, the US-Iran conflict, escalated by President Trump's assassination of Qassim Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, appears to have deescalated, especially since Iran has admitted accidentally shooting down a Ukrainian passenger jet. But the danger of a US-Iran war still persists, and it is still incumbent upon Congress to take steps to ensure that Trump's response to alleged Iranian provocations does not risk igniting a Middle East war.

Dr. Nisperos is a physician and educator who works tirelessly for Health for All. Dr. Nisperos and Dr. Caguiat are targeted for advocating for better health services for the poor. These death threats directed against them constitute violations of human rights, workers’ rights, free speech, and academic freedom. Health workers around the world should stand with Doc Gene and Doc Julie. #StopTheAttacks

Taking a contrarian stance on the justifications for targeted killings, this article posits that the debate surrounding these killings is a type of post-hoc rationalization. The article rejects the assertion that targets in the war on terror are in fact at war with any nation state, and thus, force should be the last resort and only after intense scrutiny. The article then proceeds to shift the burden on the legitimacy of targeting killings by questioning classifications like “enemy combatant,” ultimately arguing that those who commit terrorist acts should be treated as criminals with all the attendant procedural and substantive safeguards, rather than “targeted” for killing-a euphemism for assassination that distracts from the moral and legal issues surrounding this type of state action.

President Trump's targeted killing of Qassim Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis in a US drone strike near Baghdad Airport on January 3, 2020, has been criticized for the deficient intelligence upon which it was based and for his failure to consult the Congressional Gang of Eight before carrying out an action that might lead to a US-Iran war. It should also be observed, however, that Trump's action was facially illegal both under the executive orders banning assassination issued by US Presidents Ford Carter and Reagan and never repealed and under the 2001/2002 AUMFs that authorized the US war on terrorism.

বরিশাল নগরীর কোতোয়ালি থানা এলাকার রূপাতলীর হামিদ খান সড়কের নিজ বাসার পার্শ্ববর্তী সড়ক থেকে গত ২৯ ডিসেম্বর ২০২০ তারিখ রাত আনুমানিক ৮টার সময় শিক্ষানবিশ আইনজীবী রেজাউল করিম রেজাকে (৩০) গ্রেফতার করে গোয়েন্দা পুলিশের (ডিবি) উপপরিদর্শক (এসআই) মহিউদ্দিন আহম্মেদ মাহী। পরবর্তী সময়ে বরিশাল কেন্দ্রীয় কারাগারে গুরুতর অসুস্থ হয়ে পড়লে ১ জানুয়ারি ২০২১ তারিখ রাত সাড়ে ৯টার দিকে শের-ই-বাংলা মেডিক্যাল কলেজ হাসপাতালে (শেবাচিম) ভর্তি করা হয়। শেবাচিম হাসপাতালে চিকিৎসাধীন অবস্থায় ২ জানুয়ারি দিবাগত রাত অর্থাৎ ৩ জানুয়ারি ১২.০৫টায় রেজার মৃত্যু হয়েছে বলে হাসপাতাল কর্তৃপক্ষ জানায়। এ ঘটনায় ৫ জানুয়ারি ২০২১ তারিখে মৃতের পিতা ইউনুস মিয়া বরিশাল মেট্রোপলিটন ম্যাজিস্ট্রেট কোর্টে হেফাজতে নির্যাতন ও মৃত্যু নিবারণ আইন (২০১৩)-এ উপপরিদর্শক মহিউদ্দিনসহ অজ্ঞাতনামা দুই পুলিশ সদস্যের বিরুদ্ধে হত্যার অভিযোগ দায়ের করেছেন। আদালত অভিযোগটি আমলে নিয়ে পুলিশ ব্যুরো অব ইনভেস্টিগেশনকে (পিবিআই) তদন্তের দায়িত্ব দিয়েছেন। অন্যদিকে এসআই মহিউদ্দিন আহম্মেদকে গোয়েন্দা পুলিশ থেকে প্রত্যাহার করে পুলিশ লাইনে সংযুক্ত করা হয়েছে। তবে মামলা তুলে নেওয়ার জন্য একাধিক অজ্ঞাতনামা ব্যক্তি মামলার বাদীকে হুমকি ও ভয়ভীতি দেখাচ্ছে বলে ৭ জানুয়ারি ২০২১ তারিখে আসক প্রতিনিধিকে জানিয়েছেন রেজার স্ত্রী মারুফা আক্তার।