Latest news with #Islamists'
Ya Biladi
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Ya Biladi
Moroccan MPs demand action on right to inform amid cybersecurity concerns
On Monday, May 5, the parliamentary group of the Justice and Development Party (PJD) expressed concern over the lack of scheduled speaking slots under the «right to inform», as outlined in Article 163 of the House of Representatives' internal regulations. Mustapha Ibrahimi pointed out that «under the two previous governments, this right was exercised four times during each weekly oral question session, whereas under the current government, it has been used only four times since the start of this legislature». He noted that his group had specifically requested to speak about the cyberattack targeting the CNSS database. In a surprising turn, the PAM group—part of the ruling majority—backed the Islamists' request. Ahmed Touizi, head of the PAM's parliamentary group, called on the Akhannouch government to respond to MPs' requests to speak at the end of oral question sessions. «The majority is not afraid», he declared emphatically. Article 163 of the lower house's internal rules defines this right: «Deputies may speak at the end of the weekly oral question session to address a topic of general and urgent interest that should be brought to the attention of national public opinion. The president of the parliamentary group must notify the President of the House in writing of any such request at least twenty-four hours before the session begins». The article further states: «The government may provide data, statements, and clarifications on the issues raised. A total of sixteen minutes is allocated for this purpose. The number of speakers is limited to two from the opposition and two from the majority, alternating between parliamentary groups, while respecting the rights of unaffiliated representatives. Based on these criteria, the Bureau establishes the list of speakers before each session. Each topic is presented in a two-minute intervention».
Ya Biladi
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Ya Biladi
Moroccan MPs demand action on right to inform amid cybersecurity concerns
On Monday, May 5, the parliamentary group of the Justice and Development Party (PJD) expressed concern over the lack of scheduled speaking slots under the «right to inform», as outlined in Article 163 of the House of Representatives' internal regulations. Mustapha Ibrahimi pointed out that «under the two previous governments, this right was exercised four times during each weekly oral question session, whereas under the current government, it has been used only four times since the start of this legislature». He noted that his group had specifically requested to speak about the cyberattack targeting the CNSS database. In a surprising turn, the PAM group—part of the ruling majority—backed the Islamists' request. Ahmed Touizi, head of the PAM's parliamentary group, called on the Akhannouch government to respond to MPs' requests to speak at the end of oral question sessions. «The majority is not afraid», he declared emphatically. Article 163 of the lower house's internal rules defines this right: «Deputies may speak at the end of the weekly oral question session to address a topic of general and urgent interest that should be brought to the attention of national public opinion. The president of the parliamentary group must notify the President of the House in writing of any such request at least twenty-four hours before the session begins». The article further states: «The government may provide data, statements, and clarifications on the issues raised. A total of sixteen minutes is allocated for this purpose. The number of speakers is limited to two from the opposition and two from the majority, alternating between parliamentary groups, while respecting the rights of unaffiliated representatives. Based on these criteria, the Bureau establishes the list of speakers before each session. Each topic is presented in a two-minute intervention».
Japan Times
31-03-2025
- Politics
- Japan Times
Israel must not ignore the anti-Hamas protests in Gaza
Typically, a small anti-war demonstration would not be front-page news unless it happened somewhere like Moscow, where few dare openly to oppose the Kremlin's ongoing aggression against Ukraine. But in war-torn Gaza, the stakes would be even higher. Even before the current conflict, Hamas responded to any criticism of its misrule with brutal repression and torture. Yet on March 25, hundreds of people took to the streets in Beit Lahiya (northern Gaza) to protest not only against the war, but against Hamas. With chants of 'stop war,' 'Hamas out,' 'Hamas terrorists,' the demonstrators sent exactly the right message: For the war to end, Hamas — which started it — must be removed from power. Nor were the Beit Lahiya protesters alone. As news and videos of this extraordinary event spread on social media, similar spontaneous demonstrations erupted elsewhere in Gaza, first in Jabalia and Khan Yunis, and then in Shejaiya, one of the enclave's largest communities. While most of the protesters refused to identify themselves by name to reporters, they nonetheless showed their faces. On Wednesday, over 3,000 people demonstrated again in Beit Lahiya. Anti-Hamas slogans were more visible, but protesters stressed that their main objective is for the war to end. 'We can't stop Israel from killing us, but we can press Hamas to give concessions,' said Mohammed Abu Saker, a father of three from the nearby town of Beit Hanoun. Even Hamas-controlled media covered the event, though only after editing out statements attacking the Islamists' rule. Though still relatively small in scale, the demonstrations clearly indicate a shift in opinion. After Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, Hamas took power the following year in the only free elections the Palestinians had ever had. Fatah, the secular nationalist party with majority support in the West Bank, had been tainted by corruption, so more Gazans voted for Hamas, which promised not terrorism, but clean government, even running under the name 'Change and Reform.' But after winning the election, Hamas violently expelled Fatah from Gaza — 345 people were killed in the process — and started firing rockets at Israel. This caused a series of wars, culminating in the current one — by far the most violent yet. Neither Gaza nor the West Bank has held an election in 20 years and Hamas's rule has proved no less corrupt than Fatah's (municipal elections have been held in the West Bank, but Hamas has boycotted all of them). Meanwhile, Israeli governments — led mainly by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — have regarded Hamas's totalitarian rule in Gaza as advantageous. With terrorists in power in Gaza and corrupt incompetents in Ramallah (the seat of the Palestinian Authority), the argument goes, Israel has had no legitimate counterparty with which to negotiate. Then came Oct. 7, 2023. The scale and viciousness of the slaughter, which visibly had broad support in Gaza, seemed to prove Netanyahu's point. Even the country's moderate president, Isaac Herzog, said — in the shock of the immediate aftermath of the slaughter — that 'there is an entire nation out there that is responsible.' In a November 2023 poll conducted by the respected Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, 72% of Palestinians thought Hamas was 'correct' to launch the Oct. 7 attack, while over 90% refused to believe that civilians were killed on that day. Yet it is worth noting that support was much higher in the West Bank (82%) than in Gaza (57%), which was already enduring Israel's counterattack. Similarly, overall support for Hamas had been consistently higher in the West Bank, where it is the opposition, than in Gaza, which has suffered under its rule. Since then, however, support for the attack and for Hamas has been systematically declining, though the difference between West Bank and Gazan attitudes remains. Last fall, only 39% of Gazans supported the attack and in January 2025 only around 20% supported Hamas rule. This disenchantment almost certainly reflects the high cost of the war — there have been more than 50,000 fatalities (civilian and combatant) in Gaza, according to the unverifiable data provided by Gaza's Hamas-controlled Ministry of Health — rather than a revaluation of attitudes toward terrorism. Still, the recent demonstrations indicate that a segment of Palestinian opinion in Gaza wants the war over and Hamas out. That means it shares Israel's own stated goals. Yet Netanyahu's government, embroiled in an internal political crisis of its own making, has failed to respond to the Gaza protests. Apart from a cursory remark by the defense minister, Israel Katz, there has been radio silence. With Israel having broken the ceasefire and reignited the war, Netanyahu's claim to want peace rings increasingly hollow. True, the Gaza protesters have not spoken out explicitly against the continuing detention of 59 Israeli hostages — only 24 of whom are believed to remain alive. But this issue, understandably, might not seem too important to them, just as the Gazans' fate is not a high priority for the Israeli anti-government protesters who want to free the hostages. What matters is that some Gazans and some Israelis have common ground — even if their governments do not share their goals. That is unprecedented. The demonstrators in Beit Lahiya and Tel Aviv cannot end the war. But they do represent the only possible path to a lasting peace. Konstanty Gebert is a Polish journalist, former anti-communist activist, and the author of 14 books on Polish, Jewish and international affairs.© Project Syndicate, 2025
Rudaw Net
29-03-2025
- Politics
- Rudaw Net
Syrians must take lead in long road to democracy: Slovenian UN rep
Also in Interview Germany will not fund 'Islamists' in Syria: FM Druze, Kurds share 'harmonic' relationship, vision for Syria's future: Senior Druze cleric Germany must have 'clear demands' for Syria: State premier Germany welcomes immigrants, but deports criminals: State minister A+ A- ERBIL, Kurdistan Region - The Syrian people - including women and minorities - must take the lead in their country's 'long process' towards democracy after 14 years of civil war and decades of dictatorship, Slovenia's representative to the United Nations Security Council said on Friday. 'We understand that the transitional authority is there to prepare the transition to constitution and restore the order in democracy, to establish a democracy and for the rehabilitation and restoration of Syria. It's going to be a long process,' Samuel Zbogar, Slovenia's representative to the UN, told Rudaw in New York, adding that the transition period must not last too long. He called on the Damascus authorities to assume responsibility for a 'Syrian-led, Syrian-guided, Syrian-owned' future where all Syrians, regardless of ethnicity or religion, 'will feel comfortable.' 'The Security Council is expecting that everybody in Syria, all minorities, ethnic groups, all parts of society, and women and civil societies, will get a role and a place when discussing the future of Syria,' Zbogar said, but added that it is not up to the council 'to micromanage the constitution of Syria.' Syria's civil war dramatically reignited late last year when a coalition of rebel groups led by the Islamist Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) launched a blistering offensive that culminated in the ousting of Bashar al-Assad as Damascus fell, ending decades of Baathist rule. After HTS leader Ahmed al-Sharaa was appointed interim president in late January, he vowed to uphold the rights of all ethnic and religious groups. He has, however, come under fire internationally and domestically for an interim constitution that cements authoritarian rule and for his administration's treatment of minority populations. In early March, Damascus faced widespread condemnation after a violent crackdown on Assad loyalists in the coastal Alawite-majority areas, where at least 1,500 people were killed - mostly civilians - according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights war monitor. According to Zbogar, safeguarding minority rights 'can strengthen the relations with neighboring countries and it can strengthen the self-confidence of the nation if minorities are feeling comfortable in a common home.'
