logo
ENع
#

Latest news with #rights

Banning child marriage is un-Islamic, Pakistani government told
Banning child marriage is un-Islamic, Pakistani government told

Telegraph

time3 days ago

  • General
  • Telegraph

Banning child marriage is un-Islamic, Pakistani government told

Banning child marriage is un-Islamic, Pakistan's government was told after setting 18 as the minimum age to marry. Its Child Marriage Restraint Bill, unanimously passed by both houses of the country's parliament, seeks to protect the rights of children and eventually eradicate child marriage. Any form of co-habitation between adults and minors will be deemed statutory rape and punished by up to seven years in prison and a fine of no less than 1 million Pakistani rupees (£2,663). But the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII), which advises the government on theological issues, said it rejected the bill because classifying marriage under the age of 18 as rape did not conform with Islamic law. Child marriage should be discouraged but the Bill 'has been declared un-Islamic', it said on Wednesday. Replacing colonial legislation Despite the CII's opposition, the Bill is to be signed into law in the coming days by Asif Ali Zardari, Pakistan's president. It will replace British colonial-era legislation that set the legal age of marriage for boys to 18 and girls at 16, although many Pakistani children continue to be coerced into underage marriages. The new legislation will apply to Islamabad, the capital, but politicians and activists hope to roll out similar laws to other areas of the country in the future. A similar Bill was passed in Sindh province over a decade ago. The CII's verdict is unlikely to prevent the law's enactment in Islamabad but it could increase opposition to future legislation in more religious areas. Pakistan has one of the highest rates of underage marriage in the world, with nearly 30 million women – roughly 30 per cent of the female population – wed before the age of 18. Girls Not Brides, a global coalition aiming to end child marriage, has reported that 4 per cent of Pakistani girls and 5 per cent of Pakistani boys marry before the age of 15. Domestic violence and health problems During the parliamentary debate, Naseema Ehsan, 50, a senator, shared her personal story of being married at 13 and said she wanted the practice banned. Those married as children are statistically the most likely to drop out of school, and are reported to often face domestic violence, or health complications, particularly with underage pregnancies. Dr Ifrah Aslam, a consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist in Mumbai, said: 'These girls are still growing themselves; their bodies aren't ready to carry a pregnancy.

UK plummets down rankings for LGBT+ rights in Europe
UK plummets down rankings for LGBT+ rights in Europe

The Independent

time16-05-2025

  • Politics
  • The Independent

UK plummets down rankings for LGBT+ rights in Europe

The UK has plummeted to a new low in European rankings for LGBT+ rights, despite having topped the list just a decade ago. Britain dropped six places to 22nd in 2025's rankings - its lowest position ever - in The Rainbow Map and Index, which has been published annually since 2009. The UK was ranked at the top of the list from 2011 to 2015, but has had all legal gender recognition-related points deducted following the recent Supreme Court ruling, which has defined a woman strictly by biological sex under the Equality Act. The UK was given an overall score of 45.65 per cent in the rankings, meaning it has an above-average score for Europe, which is 41.85 per cent, but is lower than the European Union members' average of 51.13 per cent. The rankings give countries in Europe a score between zero and 100 per cent. A score of zero would mean the country grossly violates human rights for LGBT+ people, while 100 per cent means it champions them. Malta topped the 2025 list with a score of 89 per cent, followed by Belgium in second with 89 per cent, Iceland with 84 per cent, Denmark with 80 per cent and Spain with 78 per cent. ILGA Europe, the advocacy group that publishes the rankings, said it had removed all legal gender recognition-related points from the UK's score in 2025, as the ruling had meant 'legal gender recognition is no longer fully effective'. 'Legal gender recognition should enable a person to legally function and be recognised in their affirmed gender in all areas of life; this is no longer the case in the UK,' it said. 'The ruling, along with interim guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), means that individuals with a gender recognition certificate are not fully recognised as their affirmed gender in important legal contexts. 'It is, in fact, impossible for a trans person to be fully legally recognised in their gender identity within the legal framework created by the judgment and interim update.' Britain also lost points for not yet having a ban on conversion therapy, and limited options for healthcare for young trans people. The UK also scored low on issues such as rights for intersex people and the draft government guidance advising teachers in England not to teach schoolchildren about gender identity, and proposing a ban on sex education for children under nine. A low score of 16.67 per cent was also given for the UK's record over LGBT+ asylum seekers, with such refugees often facing homelessness and abuse. LGBT+ rights group Stonewall said the rankings should be a 'wake-up call' for the government as it 'undermines our position on the global stage'. 'No country can afford to be on autopilot during these turbulent times,' a spokesperson said. "The UK has reached an all-time low position of 22 out of 49. Warm words and empty promises from the government won't restore the UK's global reputation on LGBTQ+ rights. Action will.' The Good Law Project's executive director, Jo Maugham, said the sharp fall in the UK's ranking came as little surprise. 'Only ten years ago, we were the best in the world in the annual LGBTI Rights Ranking,' he said. 'We're now 22nd and making all the wrong headlines, alongside Hungary and Georgia, for the biggest decline in protections. This is not just an embarrassment abroad – it's also a tragedy at home for tens of thousands of people struggling to live lives of quiet dignity.' The UK did score highly in some categories, such as family and civil society space. The country was given a score of 85.67 per cent for LGBT+ families, with the Marriage Act 2013 being cited as a reason. Civil society space was given 100 per cent, as the UK was deemed to have laws, policies and practices in place which allow for full exercise of freedom of assembly, association and expression for LGBT+ people. Equality and non-discrimination were given an average score of 49.13 per cent, while hate crime and hate speech were given a score of 40.55 per cent. The UK was joined by Hungary and Georgia in seeing big drops in its annual rankings. Hungary has seen the prohibition of Pride events and criminalisation of participants, and both Georgia and Hungary have removed references to 'gender identity and expression' from their legislation. Despite slipping down the ranks, the UK is still far above those at the bottom of the list. Russia came in last with a score of just 2 per cent, followed marginally by Azerbaijan at 2.25 per cent and Turkey at 4.75 per cent. In 2023, Russia's Supreme Court effectively outlawed any LGBT+ activism in a ruling that designated 'the international LGBT movement' as extremist. A UK government spokesperson said: ' The UK has long championed the rights of LGBT+ people at home and abroad. We proudly uphold a clear and robust expansive legislative framework. 'We are working to advance the rights afforded to LGBT+ people, including bringing forward legislation to finally ban conversion practices and strengthening protections against hate crime.' A spokesperson for the EHRC told The Independent: 'At the EHRC we uphold and enforce the Equality Act. Our response to the Supreme Court's judgment has been, and will continue to be, firmly grounded in the law. Those who rely on us are reassured that every explanation of equality law from the EHRC will be accurate and authoritative. That is our job, as Britain's independent and expert equality regulator. 'We know there is uncertainty among duty-bearers and affected groups. The EHRC has been visible in providing clarity on the consequences of the judgment and will continue to be so.'

US moral principles vs its interest-driven tactics
US moral principles vs its interest-driven tactics

Jordan Times

time15-05-2025

  • Politics
  • Jordan Times

US moral principles vs its interest-driven tactics

In 1776 a new nation was created. Its avant-garde principles then were embodied in the declaration of independence. They emanated from the intellectual universal concepts of the brewing Enlightenment in the old continent then. 'All men are created equal (..) with certain inalienable rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, Whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new Government.' These initial principles were further reinforced by a Bill of Rights in 1789; in which ten amendments set out basic rights for every US citizen; including freedom of speech, assembly and religion, freedom to bear arms, and freedom from unreasonable searches. These principles and ideals provided a unique compass for the US. In his farewell address, First President George Washington (1789-1997) warned against the peril of foreign entanglements: 'Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all (..) Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur (..). So, likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils (..) It leads to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others (..) And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country without odium, sometimes even with popularity, gilding with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption or infatuation.' The principles encapsulated in the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights and the leader's beliefs buoyed the US for two centuries. They made America a beacon for others. In the Middle East, these principles were clearly demonstrated in 1956, when President Eisenhower, stopped British, French and Israeli aggression on Egypt, possibly indicating the last vestiges of the Euro-Colonial era. Eisenhower's Warning: The principles upon which the United States was established permeated past political elites. Before leaving office in 1961, President Dwight Eisenhower gave a clear warning in his farewell address, regarding the impending evolution of American politics: 'This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. . . .Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. . . . We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.' Poignant words, because Eisenhower, the Supreme Allied Commander of the European Theater in World War II, oversaw the defeat of Fascist Nazi Germany. Fascism is defined as the convergence of political and economic power (integration of economic and political elites). Forced labour (Slaves) in the concentration camps of Nazi Germany provided an inhumane avenue for German companies to cut their cost. Having sensed the rise and political impact of corporate interests in the US, particularly of 'defense' companies, Eisenhower publicly warned of the inevitable rise and influence of the 'military industrial complex.' Eisenhower also called for safeguarding American principles; notably freedom, '…from the sanctity of our families and the wealth of our soil to the genius of our scientists.' Evolving Economic Hypocrisy: In 1776, the fledgling US was perhaps the wealthiest natural nation state. Based on Adam Smith's theory of economic comparative advantage (The Wealth of Nations – 1776). This theory stipulates that a nation's wealth is intimately and directly connected to the amount and quality of its natural resources. This concept was a primary driver for colonialism, where European nations bolstered their own economic prosperity by exploiting the natural resources of other countries and peoples in Africa, the Americas, Asia and the Middle East. In the 1980s, Harvard Professor Michael Porter coined a new economic theory; the Competitive Economic Advantage described how countries with limited natural resources could generate improving living standards. It is ultimately based on the innovation and creativity of a population; exactly what Eisenhower had highlighted two decades before the theory became in vogue. Asia Tigers Creativity and innovation are not a natural monopoly. Countries like China and India have recently struck creative and innovative prowess. In 2019, China surpassed the US in terms of international patent filings. In 2023, China rose as a global leader in 37 out of 44 key technologies, indicating a relative decline in the US dominance. Under Bill Clinton (1993-2001), America embarked on an economic transformative path favoring services over industry. As such, it lost its industrial competitiveness - with the exception of its robust military industry. The US greenback, however, remained the Globe's reserve currency. Since competitive economic dominance has been in decline, the US has been seeking to secure its interests and develop comparative economic dominance through the control of strategic resources. In 1999, Clinton passed an act equating between companies and citizens in contributing to political campaigns. This removed previous limitations on corporate political contributions and enabled wealthy corporations to direct financial contributions towards political representatives who best served their corporate interests. Ultimately this has led to the convergence of economic and political power (also called fascism). Flagrant Aggression The desire to control comparative global economic resources was stated by US presidential candidate Wesley Clark, a previous supreme commander of NATO. In September 2003, two years after 9-11 mayhem, Clark boasted that Washington was concocting coups in seven countries over five years; Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Libya, Iran, Lebanon and Sudan. Cherchez the black gold This oil rich zone tops US interests abroad. In hindsight, the US has been successful in Iraq, and Libya and somewhat successful in Sudan, and Syria where they control the oil/gas producing areas. Iran, Somalia and Lebanon are in process. Controlling energy can undermine the prosperity of competitive economies. The destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline between Russia and Germany in September 2022 harmed Germany's industrial base as well as potential economic cooperation and integration between Germany and Russia. In the last century, German-Russian economic integration has always been a threat to countries such as Britain as it integrates comparative (Russian) and competitive (German) economic advantages. This threat is now felt by an economically declining US, as it seeks means to maintain or prolong its global dominance. What does this mean? The US has fallen victim to its own success. At the end of the Cold War, it came out as the sole victor. Armed with its principles and its economic ability could have led the world to a peaceful, cooperative and competitive future. But the convergence of corporate economic interests and political power (fascism) turned the US from a long-term principle-driven superpower into a short-term interest-driven. This transformation has led to the decline of its global clout; as most allies can no longer trust the principles upon which decisions are made. It manipulates strategic resources (such as Nord Stream gas) to control the growth and prosperity of corporations in competing economies; allies and foes alike. This transformation puts at risk the collective economic prosperity of the citizens of nations 'allied' to the US such as Germany and most of western Europe. On the other front, its opponents/enemies witness an increasingly tactical set of political and economic interventions which secure short-term benefit for specific US based corporations and their shareholders while sacrificing the long-term interests of this country at a global level. The recent sequential financial support of Ukraine against Russia and Israel against the Palestinians indicate the influence of the military industrial complex on political decision making. The United States is increasingly going into debt to fund US based military foreign assistance to prevent economic integration between Russia and Europe and to maintain Israel as a hegemon and US proxy in the energy rich Middle East. This interest-based set of interventions does not economically or politically bode well, in the medium to long term, for a once principle-based US. Its interests are prone to being incrementally corroded as global players establish alternative means of economic and political cooperation and integration. This is the typical fate of all empires. Former Royal Court Chief and Former Head of the Jordanian Diplomacy

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store