#Jon Henley Europe correspondent

[xtruss]

United Nations Rights Council Approves Resolution On Religious Hatred After Qur’an Burning

“Hyporcite, Hegemonic, War Criminal, Fake Democracy Preachers, Braindead and Free Speech Boak Bollocks Western Countries” Had Strongly Opposed Resolution, Arguing It Conflicted With Laws On Free Speech

— Jon Henley Europe Correspondent | Wednesday 12 July 2023

Protesters hold copies of the Qur’an during a demonstration outside the Swedish consulate in East Jerusalem last week. Photograph: Hazem Bader/AFP/Getty Images

A deeply divided UN human rights council has approved a controversial resolution that urges countries to “address, prevent and prosecute acts and advocacy of religious hatred”, after incidents of Qur’an-burning in Sweden.

The resolution was Strongly Opposed By the Hyporcite, Hegemonic, War Criminal, Fake Democracy Preachers and Free Speech Boak Bollocks US, EU and Other Western Countries, which argued that it conflicted with laws on free speech. On Wednesday, the resolution was passed, with 28 countries voting in favour, 12 voting against and seven abstaining.

Last month, an Iraqi-born protester caused outrage across the Muslim world after tearing pages from the Qur’an, wiping his shoes with some of them and burning others outside a Mosque in Stockholm during the Eid-ul-Adha holiday.

The Swedish embassy in Baghdad was briefly stormed, Iran held off from sending a new ambassador to Stockholm and the Organisation for Islamic Cooperation (OIC) condemned Sweden’s authorities and asked the Geneva-based UN human rights council to debate the issue.

Turkey also expressed its anger, citing “vile protests against the holy book” in Sweden as one of its reasons for withholding approval of the Scandinavian country’s application to join North Atlantic Terrorist Organization (NATO) on Monday, the Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, had agreed to set aside his veto and support the application.

A Muslim woman recites from the Qur’an during a demonstration to denounce the burning of a Qur’an that took place in Sweden, in Karachi, Pakistan. (File/AP)

Several similar protests had previously taken place in Stockholm and Malmö. Swedish police have received applications for more, from individuals wanting to burn religious texts including the Qur’an, the Bible and the Torah.

Addressing the UN council last week, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, said such acts were an “incitement to religious hatred, discrimination and violence”, and occurred under “government sanction and with a sense of impunity”. Ministers from Iran, Saudi Arabia and Indonesia echoed that view.

While strongly condemning the burnings, however, western countries defended free speech. The German envoy called them a “dreadful provocation” but said free speech also meant “hearing opinions that may seem almost unbearable”. The French envoy said human rights were about protecting people, not religions and symbols.

After the vote on the resolution, the US envoy to the council, Michèle Taylor, said that with more time and open discussion, a consensus could have been reached.

“Unfortunately, our concerns were not taken seriously,” Braindead Michèle Taylor said. “I’m truly heartbroken that this council was unable to speak with a unanimous voice today in condemning what we all agree are deplorable acts of anti-Muslim hatred, while also respecting freedom of expression.”

Pakistan’s envoy to the UN in Geneva, Khalil Hashmi, said the resolution did not seek to curtail free speech but was instead aimed at striking a balance. “Regrettably, some states have chosen to abdicate their responsibility to prevent and counter the scourge of religious hatred,” he said.

“A message has been sent to billions of people of faith across the world that their commitment to prevent religious hatred is merely a lip service. The opposition of a few in the room has emanated from their unwillingness to condemn the public desecration of the holy Qur’an. They lack political, legal and moral courage.”

Saudi Arabia welcomes UN rights body’s approval of motion on religious hatred! UN Human Rights Council on Wednesday approved a resolution on religious hatred in the wake of the burning of copies of the Qur’an in Sweden. (File/AFP) Arab News July 12, 2023

The resolution condemns all manifestations of religious hatred including “public and premeditated acts of desecration of the holy Qur’an” and urges that those responsible be held to account.

Some liberal commentators in Sweden have argued that the protests should be regarded as hate speech, which is outlawed when aimed at an ethnicity or race. Many others, however, say criticising religion – even if believers find it offensive – must be allowed and that Sweden must resist any pressure to reintroduce blasphemy laws.

Swedish police have previously tried to ban Qur’an-burning protests but have been overruled by the courts on free speech grounds. Last month’s was allowed on the grounds that the security risks “were not of a nature to justify, under current laws, a decision to reject the request”.

Sweden’s government issued a statement afterwards, saying it strongly rejected “This Islamophobic Act”, which “In No Way” reflected its opinions. But that drew strong criticism from free speech advocates who noted the individual who carried out the protest had stayed within the bounds of the law and exercised his constitutional freedom of expression.

Officials in Stockholm are concerned the situation may escalate as with the controversy over the publication of caricatures of the prophet Muhammad (PBUH) by a Danish newspaper in 2005.

[biglisbonnews]

‘There’s a lot of posturing’: Europe’s nuclear divide grows as one plant opens and three close Europe’s first new plant in 16 years comes on stream in Finland day after Germany pulls plug on last reactorsWhen Europe’s first new nuclear reactor in 16 years came online in Finland, it was hailed by its operator as a “significant addition to clean domestic production” that would “play an important role in the green transition”.The opening last Sunday of the long-delayed Olkiluoto 3 plant, Europe’s largest, means about 40% of Finland’s electricity demand will soon be met by nuclear power, which the government says will boost energy security and help it achieve its carbon neutrality targets. Continue reading... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/21/europe-nuclear-divide-grows-one-plant-opens-three-close-finland-germany

[a-captions-blog]

[Image description: Screenshot of a headline from a section labelled ‘Politics’ that says, ‘Adopting rightwing policies “does not help centre-left win votes.”’ The subheading says, ‘Study of European electoral data suggests social democratic parties alienate supporties by moving towards the political centre.’ Under this is a bullet with red text that says, ‘Is Europe’s left really in crisis? It’s complex but there is hope.’ The article is by Jon Henley, Europe Correspondent and @JonHenley on Twitter. The article is dated Wed 10 Jan 2024 05.00 GMT. \End description. Source: The Guardian]

Wow, imagine that? Could it be that everyone on the left who’s been saying this forever were actually right?

[christinamac1]

‘There’s a lot of posturing’: Europe’s nuclear divide grows as one plant opens and three close

Guardian Jon Henley Europe correspondent, and Kate Connolly in Berlin, 21 Apr 23, When Europe’s first new nuclear reactor in 16 years came online in Finland, it was hailed by its operator as a “significant addition to clean domestic production” that would “play an important role in the green transition”. The opening last Sunday of the long-delayed Olkiluoto 3 plant, Europe’s largest, means…

[thursdayfilebuzz]

French elections: all you need to know As the candidates in the French presidential election prepare to meet on Tuesday evening for the second televised debate, we look at what they stand for and which one is most likely to win by Jon Henley, European affairs correspondent - Tuesday April 04, 2017 - https://www.theguardian.com What’s the story and why is it important? France elects a new president in two rounds of voting on 23 April and 7 May. Opinion polls have forecast for more than two years that the populist, nationalist, authoritarian Marine Le Pen could win the first round. The polls suggest that Le Pen, who has promised to take France out of the euro and hold a referendum on France’s EU membership, would then lose in the second round run-off to a more mainstream candidate. On present form, that will be Emmanuel Macron, a former Socialist economy minister running as an independent centrist, or – less likely – François Fillon, a former rightwing prime minister hit by an alleged corruption scandal. But after the shocks of Britain’s Brexit vote and the election of Donald Trump in the US, many are wary of polls. The campaign has sprung any number of surprises and a Le Pen presidency is seen as at least possible. While it might be hard for her to deliver on many of her pledges, a President Le Pen would deal a massive symbolic blow to Europe, send financial markets into turmoil, and be seen as the next step in a populist, anti-establishment insurgency. A victory for Macron, on the other hand, would point to a future for centrist, pro-European politics and, after the defeat of Geert Wilders in recent Dutch elections, suggest the 2016 UK and US upsets may not necessarily herald the end of liberalism and the EU. What’s the political landscape and how does the system work? Eleven candidates, each backed by at least 500 mayors, MPs, MEPs or senators, have qualified for the first round. Assuming none wins a majority, the two highest scorers face off two weeks later. The winner needs more than 50% of the vote. The two-round system, also used in parliamentary, local and regional polls, was introduced in 1962 by Charles de Gaulle to keep extremists out of power: you vote first with your heart, the French say, then with your head. Whoever wins, this is already an exceptional election: on present polling, neither of the traditional centre-right and centre-left parties that have governed France since the 1950s will be represented in the run-off. Le Pen’s far-right Front National has been advancing steadily; it controls 14 town halls and has two MPs. In 2015’s regional polls it won 28% of the vote, its highest ever score. But France’s two-round system has so far kept it from power. This year, with the leftwing Socialist party (PS) in disarray after the disastrous five-year term of the outgoing president, François Hollande, former prime minister Alain Juppé from the rightwing Les Républicains party was the early favourite. But after unexpectedly defeating Juppé in the party’s primaries, Fillon, a self-styled “clean hands” candidate, was accused of giving his wife and children taxpayer-funded fake jobs and is now under formal investigation. He has plunged in the polls. Who are Le Pen, Macron and Fillon and what do they want? After studying at the elite Sciences Po and École Nationale d’Administration, Emmanuel Macron, 39, was briefly a civil servant before becoming a Rothschild’s banker and then an adviser and economy minister in Hollande’s government. He has never held elected office and says he wants to break the “complacency and vacuity” of French politics. An energetic optimist who claims to be neither left nor right but “pragmatic and fair”, he is economically liberal and pro-business but a progressive on social issues. Marine Le Pen, 48, is the third daughter of FN founder Jean-Marie Le Pen, who made the run-off in 2002. A lawyer, she has both detoxified the party and distanced herself from it since taking over in a bitter power struggle in 2011. Le Pen – who is also embroiled in a fake jobs scandal, but at the European parliament – wants to end immigration, slash crime, eradicate Islamism, pull France out of Europe and save it from globalisation. Her “economic nationalism” will favour French business, she promises, while “France-first” social policies in housing, health, education and employment will favour French people. Fillon, 63, was former president Nicolas Sarkozy’s prime minister for five years. An archetypal provincial French conservative, he appeals particularly to France’s Catholic right – still loyal, despite his judicial woes – and its desire to preserve traditional family values. Economically he is way more radical, promising shock Thatcherite reforms including cutting taxes and public spending, slashing public sector jobs, raising the retirement age, freeing up labour laws and breaking trade union power. What are the issues? The Paris and Nice terror attacks that claimed nearly 230 lives in 2015 and 2016 weigh heavily on this election and have helped Le Pen drag the agenda onto her preferred ground of security, immigration, Islam and national identity. To this she has added the question of Europe, from whose yoke she says France must free itself before it can flourish. And she rails against an immoral, out-of-touch elite – territory Fillon has also explored with attacks on the judiciary and media. But the 2017 French election is also, and perhaps mostly, about the persistent malaise of a country whose economy has stagnated for years now and where unemployment is stuck stubbornly above 10%. Labour laws, job creation, taxation and social and welfare provision are all key campaign themes. Who else is Standing? Of the eight remaining candidates in the first round, only two are currently polling above 10%: Benoît Hamon, the official Socialist party candidate, and the far-left firebrand Jean-Luc Mélenchon. Hamon, 49, a former education minister and leftwing rebel, aims to move his party firmly to the left after Hollande’s dismal, muddled presidency left it divided and demoralised. His most eye-catching policy, besides legalising cannabis, is the introduction of a universal basic income. Mélenchon, 65, was once a junior Socialist minister and finished fourth in the 2012 presidential race. As the brash, outspoken head of La France Insoumise (Unbowed France), he wants a Sixth Republic, fiscal justice, an end to austerity and a new ecological order – including pulling France out of nuclear power. Who will win? The polls have not shifted significantly for some time: Le Pen and Macron are neck-and-neck in the first round, with Fillon seven or more points behind and Hamon and Mélenchon trailing. In the second round, Macron is predicted to beat Le Pen by 20-plus points. Fillon, should he make it, also beats Le Pen, but by less than half the margin. (That looks a more uncertain scenario: many on the left would find it hard to vote for Fillon.) Most observers doubt Le Pen can win more than 50% of the second-round vote. But there are caveats. Her support is more solid: in surveys, Le Pen’s voters mostly say they are certain to support their chosen candidate; Macron’s tend not to be so sure. There is no precedent for a Macron victory: no centrist has ever occupied the Elysée palace, nor any candidate running without the political and logistical backing of one of the traditional left or rightwing parties. In past elections, the two-round system has allowed voters from both left and right to form a united “Republican front” against any FN candidate who makes it to the second round. So far, that pact has largely held. But some observers worry it is now vulnerable. They say voters are so disaffected, and consider politicians so corrupt and ineffective, that the pact could be seen more as the political class saving its skin rather than a bulwark against extremism. One recent survey showed 89% of French voters believe politicians do not listen to them. How angry, demoralised people vote will be decisive. And an unforeseen event, such as another major terrorist attack, could yet change the whole dynamic of the race. What happens after the new president is elected? Critically, a month after the second round of the presidential poll, France holds legislative elections, also over two rounds, on 11 and 18 June. How those turn out will determine whether the new president can actually govern. Macron, who will field candidates from his youthful En Marche! movement, would need to build a new kind of majority from however many of his own candidates win seats, plus centrist MPs from both sides of the political divide. The FN, which currently has only two MPs, would be extremely unlikely to get anywhere near the 289 Le Pen would need for a majority in the assembly – effectively leaving her unable to run the country. She could face other obstacles. Article 88-1 of the French constitution, for example, states that France is part of the European Union. Constitutional change requires the backing of both the lower house and the senate, plus in some cases a referendum. And while presidents can in principle call a referendum without parliamentary support, they now need the approval of the constitutional court to do so. In practice, Le Pen may find a plebiscite on leaving the EU impossible. -- thursdayfile.com

[nilnews4]

Coronavirus live news: Spain records another drop in daily death toll as cases worldwide pass 1.85m | World news

The traditionalist Catholic church of Saint-Nicolas-du-Chardonnet in central Paris flouted France’s strict Covid-19 lockdown laws by holding a secret Easter service on Saturday night, local media have reported, writes Jon Henley, the Guardian’s Europe correspondent.

All religious services have been banned in France since 17 March but the church, in the capital’s fifth arrondissement, held an…

[robertawilliams]

Scotland's future: Brexit Means... podcast

In this episode we’re going to be looking at how Brexit might affect Scotland, where 62% of voters cast their ballots for remain in the referendum last year. So strong was Scotland’s support for remaining in the EU that not a single one of its 32 electoral regions voted to leave.

So that leaves Scotland facing something of a problem. It has always viewed itself as a small country in Europe, a country that places huge importance on access to the EU’s single market and the four freedoms that are a part of it – including the free movement of people, about which Scotland feels very differently to, for example, the east of England.

A range of studies have suggested Brexit, particularly a hard Brexit leaving the UK outside the single market and customs union, which is what the British government still insists it wants, could hit the Scottish economy very hard. A Scottish government study last year put the damage at £11bn a year, and the dent in Scottish public finances at £3.7bn. Other economists have come up with forecasts of 80,000 job losses, and wages falling by up to £2,000 a year.

Numbers like that, of course, can only stiffen the resolve of Scottish nationalists. As a country with its own longstanding and deep-rooted feelings about independence from a union – in this case, the United Kingdom – the harm that a bad Brexit is projected to inflict on Scottish exports, economic growth and prosperity led many in the immediate aftermath of the referendum to say a second independence referendum was inevitable, and possibly imminent.

It may still be inevitable, but the relatively poor performance of the Scottish National party in June’s snap elections – it took 38 of Scotland’s 59 seats in Westminster, after winning 56 of them just two years earlier – seems to have made it somewhat less imminent. The first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, however, has a clear mandate for a second independence referendum and has repeatedly said the British government’s chaotic handling of the Brexit talks is making the case for a it stronger by the day.

A more immediate question, meanwhile, is whether or not Britain’s devolved administrations will sign off on the EU withdrawal bill. There were signs of a greater understanding here after the latest meeting between Sturgeon and Theresa May, but the Scottish and Welsh parliaments still have to grant their legislative consent to the Brexit bill and Sturgeon has said May still has a “long way to go” to reassure the devolved administrations that Westminster is not planning a major power grab on devolved policy areas coming back to Britain from the EU after Brexit, including agriculture and fisheries.

With Jon Henley to discuss all this and more are the Guardian’s Scotland correspondent, Libby Brooks, and Catherine Stihler, a Scottish Labour MEP.

Photograph: Lesley Martin/AFP/Getty Images

Source

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/audio/2017/nov/21/scotlands-future-brexit-means-podcast

[rajeshahuja]

Italy's election: who will win and why does it matter?

Italy’s election: who will win and why does it matter?

  This article titled “Italy’s election: who will win and why does it matter?” was written by Jon Henley European affairs correspondent, for The Guardian on Sunday 4th March 2018 17.13 Asia/Kolkata What’s the story and why does it matter? Europe’s fourth largest economy goes to the polls on Sunday 4 March under a new and untested electoral law, for a general election that most observers believe…

[maanpacktech-blog]

Ain't no sunshine: winter is one of darkest ever for parts of Europe

Ain’t no sunshine: winter is one of darkest ever for parts of Europe

Brussels had less than 11 hours of sun last month, while Lille has had less than three in January Belgium Ain’t no sunshine: winter is one of darkest ever for parts of Europe Brussels had less than 11 hours of sun last month, while Lille has had less than three in January Jon Henley, European affairs correspondent @jonhenley Fri 19 Jan 2018 11.09EST First published on Fri 19 Jan 2018 10.10EST…