 |
| Dr Henry Kofi Wampah, Governor Bank of Ghana |
An internal report has confirmed the difficulties of the
First Capital Plus Bank and it is being published unedited for the benefit of
our readers;
FIRST
CAPITAL PLUS BANK LIMITED
CONFIDENTIAL
REPORT
PRESENTED BY
THE BOARD SPECIAL COMMITTEE TASKED TO ENQUIRE INTO TPF AND TO SEGREGATE
LIABILITIES
1.0
INTRODUCTION
2.0
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
3.0
TERMS OF REFERENCE
4.0
METHODOLOGY
4.1
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
4.2
RESOURCE PERSONS USED
4.3
WITNESSES CALLED
4.4
CONCESSIONARY BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS
5.0
FINDINGS OF FACT
6.0
CONCLUSIONS
7.0
RECOMMENDATIONS
8.0
CLOSING
9.0
ANNEXURES
1.0
INTRODUCTION
1.1.
The Board of Directors on the 18th
September, 2014 constituted a three (3) man special committee out of its
membership to probe into the Third Party Funds, and to segregate liabilities of
persons and/or individuals when appropriate.
2.0. MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE
i. Alhaji Amadu Montia-Chairman
ii. Rev Fitzgerald Odonkor-Member
iii. Mr Micheal Amankwah-Member
3.0
TERMS
OF REFERENCE
i.
To ascertain the full extent of the TPF
ii.
To segregate liabilities and apportion same to
persons liable thereunder
4.0. METHODOLOGY
4.1
DOCUMENTATION REVIEWED
4.1.1 The Committee obtained and reviewed the
following documents:
i. TPF and Non TPF-Historical
Developments-prepared by Mr William Ato Essien
ii. Evidence of treatments on the Bank’s books of
payments that went into
procuring assets for the Bank, i.e., non TPF payments by the Bank.
iii.Source
documents of TPF transactions printed out of the Bank’s books.
iv.
Fixed Deposit Certificate of Investment claims made by individuals and other
financial institutions that did not reflect in the Banks books.
v.
Evidence of correspondences and advise letters evidencing various TPF
transactions.
vi.
Statement of accounts of Liberty Financial Services.
vii.
Statement of accounts of FCP Trust.
vii.
Statement of accounts of SIC-FSL with FCP
ix.
Statement of accounts, Twenty First Century Construction Limited
x.
Historical schedule of interest rates on TPF
xi. Various
computations and compilations by both the witnesses and resource persons.
4.2.
RESOURCE PERSONS USED
4.2.1
The Committee used the services of the Bank’s General Managers in charge of
Finance & Strategy and Treasury.
4.2.2.
The Bank’s Internal Auditor also provided some assistance.
4.3
WITNESSES CALLED
4.3.1.
The Committee invited and took evidence from the following persons.
i.
Mr William Ato Essien
ii.
Dr Stephen Enchill
iii.Mr
Isaac Osah Thompson-Mensah
iv.
Mr John Kofi Mensah
4.4
CONCESSIONARY BASIS FOR THE COMMITTEE’S CONCLUSIONS
4.4.1.
The Committee proceeded to work and to reach the various conclusions it reached
based on some clear understanding and agreements among the various witnesses
who appeared before it.
4.4.2.
The total figure presented by Mr. Essien in his paper titled TPF and Non
TPF-historical developments, was accepted as a true reflection of receipts and
expenditure as claimed in the said paper. Interests were also calculated at the
prevailing interest rates at the particular periods of the receipts of the said
monies and credited to Mr Essien. Finder’s fees of about Four Million Ghana
Cedis on all monies received and used as capital for FCP was also credited to
Mr Essien.
4.4.3.
Additional liabilities paid from Mr Essien’s Five Million Ghana Cedis payment
to FCP were reversed and the said payment treated as credit to him.
4.4.4.
Expenditure incurred on attracting J.K Mensah into FCP was treated as
expenditure against FCP.
4.4.5.
Expenditure incurred on incorporating FCP, Protocols, Preference Shares and
other miscellaneous were all treated as expenditure against FCP and debited to
shareholders.
4.4.6.
Three other individuals were also identified as having some debits standing in
their names which they personally have to redeem.
5.0.
FINDINGS OF FACT
5.1
After reviewing the various documentations, taking evidence from the Witnesses
and listening to the resource persons, the Committee established:
i.
That some expenditure items incurred at the incorporation of FCP reflect in the
Bank’s records.
ii. That there were other expenditure items that
do not reflect in the Bank’s records.
iii. That there were no documentary evidence for
most of the expenditure made in the name of the Bank.
1v. That some individuals and institutions had
made various deposits with the Bank which did not reflect on the Bank’s books.
v. That various persons had contracted personal
liabilities which the Bank had either redeemed out of its own resources or
which were still standing in the name of the Bank.
vi. That some of the Bank’s investments with
other institutions had been used to off-set some personal liabilities.
vii. That part of the purchase price of the
Labone Property and expenditure on the Tesano office renovations were incurred
from the Bank’s books.
viii. That huge expenditure overheads were made
in the name of protocol with no records to substantiate.
5.2 The Labone Property
ix. That the total cost of the Labone property
was USD 3 million, out of which an amount of GHS 2 million being part payment
thereof was paid from the Bank’s resources.
x. An account in the name of Liberty Financial
Services was opened as the medium for the payment of the said amount, and in
favour of Mr. Patrick Sarpong, representative of the Transferor of the Labone
Property.
xi. In total, an amount of about GHS 5.8 Million
went through the said account. The Committee however got confirmation from
FCP’s Finance Department that the GHS 2,000,ooo.00 payment was specifically for
the purchase of the Labone Property. There were no confirmations for the other
transactions on the said accounts. Suffice to say, some of them were credit
interest and payments of interest on investment. (see Appendix k series page
28).
xii. The committee also chanced upon a demand
notice by Minka-Premo&Co. Solicitors, acting on behalf of Mr. Patrick G.A
Sarpong, who was the Lawful Attorney of the Vendor of the said property to FCP.
In the said letter, they were making a demand on some investments their clients
had with FCP. (see Appendix I series page 23).
xiii. The Committee then requested for further
information from the said Solicitors on how his client’s monies were paid.
However, they were unable to provide any information with regards to the said
request.
6.o CONCLUSIONS
6.1 The Committee reached various conclusions
with regards to individuals and corporate liabilities. These conclusions were
reached in agreement with all the witnesses which could prove detrimental to
their interests. The following conclusions were reached:
i. A total amount of GHS 136, 726,101.00 was
identified as TPF
ii. Out of the said amount, GHS 56,788,289.00
was to be debited to shareholders.
iii.
GHS 1,557,089.00 was to be
debited to Mr Ossah.
iv.
GHS 1,245,671.00 was to be
debited to Dr. Enchill
v.
GHS 77,135,052 was to be
debited to Mr Essien.
vi.
In the absence of any superior
evidence to the contrary, The Labone land, title deeds of which is currently in
the custody of Mr. Essien could have been paid for partly by him, perhaps from
TPF or his own resources.
6.2 The liability of
shareholders in proposition to their shareholdings, as per the amount standing
against shareholders ( the former shareholding structure before the David
Goldman share transfer is herby applicable)
Name of shareholder %of shares Liability
1.
Mr Willaim Ato Essien 52 29,529,910.28
2.
Dr Stephen Enchill 11 6,246,711.79
3.
Mr John Kofi Mensah 10 5,678,828.90
4.
Otabil& Associates Rep
by Dr. M. Otabil 7 3,975,180.23
5.
Isaac Osah Thompson-Mensah 5 2,839,414.45
6.
Mr. Kinsley Attah Ghansah 5 2,839,414.45
7.
Mr Isaac Oheneba Osei
Akoto 5 2,839,414.45
8.
International Gospel Church
rep, by Dr Mensah
Otabil 3 1,703,648.67
9.
Rev. Edwin Obeng Donkor 2 1,1135,765.78
Total 100 56,788,289.00
7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 The Committee makes
the following recommendations;
i. That all amounts identified
as standing in the names of individuals should be paid within 7 days of a
formal demand made on them. This is inclusive of various liabilities shown in
the table above.
ii. In default of (i)
above, steps should be taken to compel payment including without limitation the
attachment of shares in the Bank of such persons.
iii. That subject to any
contrary information that will become apparent after the Committee’s work, Mr
William Ato Essein be allowed to keep the Labone Property upon the payment to the
Bank of an amount of GHS 5,190,295.97 being the sum total of the GHS
2,000,000.00 paid from FCP’s accounts and interests accruing thereon at the
prevailing interest rates (see Appendix j page 27).
The said amount should
also be paid within 7 days of a formal request made for that purpose.
iv. In default of (iii),
further shares should be attached and/or personal properties attached to
discharge the said liability.
8.0 CLOSING
8.1 The Committee
expresses its gratitude to the Witnesses and the Resource Persons for the times
spent with the Committee, the documents presented for its review and the
various concessions made and understandings reached which made the Committee’s
work smooth.
Editorial
NPP’s NOISE
The insistence of the elements of the New Patriotic
Party (NPP) that the pressure group, Committee for Joint Action (CJA) should
organise demonstrations against the Mahama government is very strange.
If the NPP finds the need to organise
demonstrations against the Mahama government, why doesn’t it go ahead and do
so? Why does the NPP need the company of the CJA?
The CJA has a right to choose its own methods of
struggle and nobody or organisation can dictate that.
Isn’t interesting that the very elements who
criticized and brutalised CJA members for embarking on demonstrations are today
demanding that the same organisation should hit the streets.
The CJA would not be part of the NPP’s agenda.
Nana Konadu has wings but can’t fly
 |
| Nana Konadu, Agyemang Rawlings |
By Dr. Michael J.K. Bokor
Folks,
hardly has the appeal by former President Rawlings sunk than his wife has
sprung up to create the impression that she still doesn't understand or know
what is at stake. Speaking at the 8th national delegates’ congress of the
ruling party, Rawlings had urged his wife to consider returning to the NDC
fold: “Let us invite our mother Nana Konadu to come back home… I hope she can
hear us, I hope she can see us,” he had said.
But
Nana Konadu has shot down everything. She is reported as stressing that she
won’t ever return to the NDC and that she has turned down the invitation.
According to her, the main reasons why she walked out of the NDC to be an
integral part of the National Democratic Party (NDP) still remain.
Here
is a major part of her reaction: “I worked to build [NDC]," she pointed
out. “But even when you build a house, you build the house because you want to
live in it...and you find that robbers have taken over your house and the house
has been desecrated in some way and you have the chance to move to a smaller
house somewhere, if you are not staying there, then that's your problem.”
I
want to isolate some salient aspects of her reaction for analysis:
1. "However, the leader of the 31st December
Women’s Movement has turned down the invitation, saying the main reasons why
she walked out of the NDC to be an integral part of the National Democratic
Party (NDP) still remain."
Turned
down the invitation? Which invitation? Has anybody in the NDC even considered
inviting her back into the party? None!! So, if she is saying that she has
"turned down the invitation", doesn't she intend to mislead people?
2. “I worked to build [NDC]," she pointed
out. “But even when you build a house, you build the house because you want to
live in it...and you find that robbers have taken over your house and the house
has been desecrated in some way and you have the chance to move to a smaller
house somewhere, if you are not staying there, then that's your problem.”
Building
the NDC as a house to occupy? To lead to the elections and become Ghana's
President at all costs? Here lies her main problem. Did she "build"
the NDC alone to want to live in it and use it for any purpose that she wills
and wishes?
Folks,
do you see the rabid mentality of this woman? I for one won't support anybody
insisting that everything be done to bring her back into the party. If she is
content with living in a boys' quarters instead of the main house, so be it.
The
problem is that with this overweening mentality and dangerouss political
posture, she will return to the party with more venom than she has spat so far.
Let nobody pay heed to her tantrums. As she grows old, she will come to realize
her folly at the end of the journey to nowhere. A good riddance she is!!
Nana Konadu over-used her “First Lady” status to grow wings.
That is the issue I take with this status, especially when it is not defined,
recognized, or supported by our Constitution but is given so much elbow room
just because the woman at the centre of it is the President’s wife. I wish that
something would be inserted in the Constitution to restrain and constrain such
a “wife” from doing things to create problems of the sort emanating from Nana
Konadu’s quarters. That is not to say that such a wife should be denied her
freedom of participation in partisan politics. The law framers should know
better how to manage the situation.
She is pushing the button and will regret the nasty
consequences. After exploiting the 31st December Women’s Movement to build her own political
stature and after using its aegis to acquire property, let somebody ask her
what has become of that Movement today? Where is it? Strangled by her
over-ambition, especially after the main pillars of the Movement broke ranks
with her.
The
fact that Rawlings would even make the appeal the way he did it entails a lot.
If his wife indeed needed the NDC to survive politically, why won’t the
Rawlingses sort things out on the quiet? Not so for the Rawlingses who have
come to realize that splitting their family into political camps might help
sustain them.
That
is why Nana Konadu is leaning toward the NPP while Rawlings remains stuck to
the NDC. Was Nana Konadu not saying the other day that she had decided not to
contest Election 2016 but to support Akufo-Addo? The anticipation is that
whether it is the NDC that is power or the NPP, the Rawlingses can still keep
their heads above water.
That is the kind of "lorgorligi" politics that the
Rawlingses do to focus attention on themselves. Can they not ever bring
themselves to the point where they will see themselves in the mirror and know
that once their era is gone, it is gone for good? Do they not even know
anything about empires rising and falling and never coming back to life?
Resolution: She should be ignored. From what is happening, I
suspect strongly that she wants to pull strings and set conditions for the NDC.
Better to ignore her and move on. Those behind her will come to realize their
childishness as the pond dries up around them. Pathetic souls!!
DOVVSU records 936 cases
in Brong Ahafo
 |
| IGP, Mohammed Alhassan |
Brong-Ahafo Regional Branch of Domestic Violence and Victim
Support Unit (DOVVSU) of Ghana Police Service recorded 936 cases in 2014.
Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Joseph Kwame Apoya,
the Regional Coordinator of DOVVSU told the GNA on Wednesday in Sunyani that
the figure for 2013 was 1,115.
He said the reduction of the number of cases was the result
of intensive education by the Unit.
DSP Apoya said during the year under review, 609 cases were
non-maintenance, spousal assault 88, non-acceptance of pregnancy 26, threat of
harm 33, deprivation of properties 24, defilement 22 and rape three cases.
He said for some many years non-maintenance cases had always
led in annual statistics of the Unit in the Region and appealed to the public
that “taking care of children is not a privilege but a constitutional
responsibility”.
DSP Apoya said “teenage parents are always unable to take
good care of their babies since they were not prepared to give birth and
therefore do not have interest in the children”.
He said divorce had been one of the major factors that
prevented parents especially fathers from taking care of their children since
they used the divorce as a punishment against the mothers.
DSP Apoyah attributed the situation to the fathers’
erroneous belief that the mothers were those who would benefit when the
children grew up.
He urged parents to take care of their children, saying that
was the only way to prevent them from becoming school drop-outs, street
children and criminals in the society.
GNA
Upper West Region
records high under-nutrition rate
 |
| Dr Kweku Agyemang Mensah Minister of Health |
The Upper West Region has not made significant improvements
in the under-nutrition situation among children less than five years.
Acute malnutrition, which could be prevented and managed
with optimum nutrition and improved health, had increased from 7.7 per cent in
2006 to 9.2 per cent in 2011, Dr Abdulai Adams Forgor, Upper West Regional
Director of Health Services, has said.
Giving the malnutrition statistics at this year’s Nutrition
Review and Planning Meeting, Dr Forgor said it was not surprising that the
region was not doing well because it was still bedeviled with food insecurity,
poor hygiene and sanitation practices.
He said immediate determinants of this under nutrition were
inadequate food intake and disease or infections among children less than five
years in the region.
Quoting from World Food Programme Comprehensive Food
Security and Vulnerability Analysis Report of 2012, Dr Forgor said 22.3 per
cent of households in the region were moderately food insecured and 1.4 per
cent was severe food unsecured.
This, he said, meant that a total of 23.7 per cent of
households suffered from one level of food insecurity or the other, while from
2006 to 2011 households that used improved sanitary facilities had increased
from 17.3 per cent to 24.3 per cent and with open defecation by adults
decreasing from 78.7 per cent to 71.1 per cent.
“This is still very serious and has a lot of health
implications and increased infection rates which eventually result in
under-nutrition in children less than five years,” he said.
Dr Forgor, who also gave perturbing statistics on stunting
among children, said stunting for the region was 22.5 per cent in 2006 but that
had increased to 23.1 per cent in 2011.
Stunting is a chronic under-nutrition which can start in
utro, when a pregnant woman is malnourished during her pregnancy.
The Regional Director of Health Services said stunting had
serious consequences in the life of a growing child, both short term and long
term, with the short term implications being its ability to affect cognitive,
motor and language development of the affected.
Some of its long term challenges include increased health
expenditure and opportunity costs for care of the sick and increased morbidity
and mortality, as well as reduced learning capacity, poor school performance
and work capacity and productivity among others.
Dr Forgor said the Regional Health Directorate was
implementing several nutrition interventions to help prevent malnutrition or
manage it when it was detected.
He mentioned the Infant and Young Child Feeding Practices
(IYCF) as one of the preventive interventions which involved counseling of
caregivers and other family members on infant and young child feeding practices
at the various health facilities and at the community level.
The IYCF targeted pregnant women and women with children less
than five years to help improve maternal and child care practices at the
household level.
Dr Forgor said the Community Based Management of Severe
Acute Malnutrition was also a rehabilitative intervention for children with
severe acute malnutrition or severe wasting, who were sent to the facilities
and rehabilitated using a therapeutic food.
Children less than five years with this condition were
treated at the outpatient department and those with severe conditions were
admitted.
He said People Living with HIV and AIDS and Tuberculosis
were also treated with fortified blended flour in addition to the plumpy nuts
from World Food Programme under the Nutrition Assessment, Counselling and
Support intervention.
The Regional Directorate has also embarked on a campaign
aimed at informing people about the importance of consuming iodised salt a the
household level meant to achieve 90 per cent adequate salt iodisation at the
household level.
The two days review forum was on the theme: “Harnessing
Sectors for Multi-sectoral Coordinating and Planning for Nutrition.”
It would review nutrition specific and nutrition sensitive
activities and plan for scaling up priority interventions in 2015 to meet the
specific objectives of the national nutrition policy as part of the common
results framework of Ghana.
Stakeholders in the health sector attended the meeting.
GNA
“Free Speech” hypocrisy
in the aftermath of Charlie Hebdo
 |
| French President Francois Hollande |
In the immediate aftermath of the shootings, the state and media are seeking to exploit the fear and the confusion of the public. Once again, the political bankruptcy and essentially reactionary character of terrorism is exposed. It serves the interests of the state, which utilizes the opportunity provided by the terrorists to whip up support for authoritarianism and militarism. In 2003, when the Bush administration invaded Iraq, French popular opposition was so overwhelming that the government led by President Jacques Chirac was compelled to oppose the war, even in the face of massive political pressure from the United States. Now, 12 years later, as President François Hollande is striving to transform France into the United States’ principal ally in the “war on terror,” the attack in Paris plays into his hands.
In these efforts Hollande can rely on the media, which in such circumstances directs all its energies toward the emotional manipulation and political disorientation of the public. The capitalist media, skillfully combining the suppression of information with half-truths and outright lies, devises a narrative that is calculated to appeal not only to the basest instincts of the broad public, but also to its democratic and idealistic sentiments.
Throughout Europe and the United States, the claim is being made that the attack on the magazine Charlie Hebdo was an assault on the freedom of the press and the unalienable right of journalists in a democratic society to express themselves without loss of freedom or fear for their lives. The killing of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists and editors is being proclaimed an assault on the principles of free speech that are, supposedly, held so dear in Europe and the United States. The attack on Charlie Hebdo is, thus, presented as another outrage by Muslims who cannot tolerate Western “freedoms.” From this the conclusion must be drawn that the “war on terror”—i.e., the imperialist onslaught on the Middle East, Central Asia and North and Central Africa—is an unavoidable necessity.
In the midst of this orgy of democratic hypocrisy, no reference is made to the fact that the American military, in the course of its wars in the Middle East, is responsible for the deaths of at least 15 journalists. In the on-going narrative of “Freedom of Speech Under Attack,” there is no place for any mention of the 2003 air-to-surface missile attack on the offices of Al Jazeera in Baghdad that left three journalists dead and four wounded.
Nor is anything being written or said about the July 2007 murder of two Reuters journalists working in Baghdad, staff photographer Namir Noor-Eldeen and driver Saeed Chmagh. Both men were deliberately targeted by US Apache gunships while on assignment in East Baghdad.
The American and international public was first able to view a video of the cold-blooded murder of the two journalists as well as a group of Iraqis—taken from one of the gunships—as the result of WikiLeaks’ release of classified material that it had obtained from an American soldier, Corporal Bradley Chelsea Manning.
And how has the United States and Europe acted to protect WikiLeaks’ exercise of free speech? Julian Assange, the founder and publisher of WikiLeaks, has been subjected to relentless persecution. Leading political and media figures in the United States and Canada have denounced him as a “terrorist” and demanded his arrest, with some even calling publicly for his murder. Assange is being pursued on fraudulent “rape” allegations concocted by American and Swedish intelligence services. He has been compelled to seek sanctuary in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, which is under constant guard by British police who will seize Assange if he steps out of the embassy. As for Chelsea Manning, she is presently in prison, serving out a 35-year sentence for treason.
That is how the great capitalist “democracies” of North America and Europe have demonstrated their commitment to free speech and the safety of journalists!
The dishonest and hypocritical narrative spun out by the state and the media requires that Charlie Hebdo and its murdered cartoonists and journalists be upheld as martyrs to free speech and representatives of a revered democratic tradition of hard-hitting iconoclastic journalism.
In a column published Wednesday in the Financial Times, the liberal historian Simon Schama places Charlie Hebdo in a glorious tradition of journalistic irreverence that “is the lifeblood of freedom.” He recalls the great European satirists between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries who subjected the great and powerful to their withering scorn. Among their illustrious targets, Schama reminds us, were the brutal Duke of Alba, who in the 1500s drowned the Dutch struggle for freedom in blood; the French “Sun King,” Louis XIV; the British Prime Minister William Pitt; and the Prince of Wales. “Satire,” writes Schama, “became the oxygen of politics, ventilating healthy howls of derision in coffee houses and taverns where caricatures circulated every day and every week.”
Schama places Charlie Hebdo in a tradition to which it does not belong. All the great satirists to whom Schama refers were representatives of a democratic Enlightenment who directed their scorn against the powerful and corrupt defenders of aristocratic privilege. In its relentlessly degrading portrayals of Muslims, Charlie Hebdo has mocked the poor and the powerless.
To speak bluntly and honestly about the sordid, cynical and degraded character of Charlie Hebdo is not to condone the killing of its personnel. But when the slogan “I am Charlie” is adopted and heavily promoted by the media as the slogan of protest demonstrations, those who have not been overwhelmed by state and media propaganda are obligated to reply: “We oppose the violent assault on the magazine, but we are not—and have nothing in common with—‘Charlie.’”
Marxists are no strangers to the struggle to overcome the influence of religion among the masses. But they conduct this struggle with the understanding that religious faith is sustained by conditions of adversity and desperate hardship. Religion is not to be mocked, but understood and criticized as Karl Marx understood and criticized it:
“Religious distress is … the expression of real distress and also the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of spiritless conditions. It is the opium of the people.
“To abolish religion as the illusory happiness of the people is to demand their real happiness. The demand to give up illusions about the existing affairs is the demand to give up a state of affairs that needs illusions. The criticism of religion is therefore in embryo the criticism of the vale of tears, the halo of which is religion.” [Contribution to Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Law, in Marx and Engels Collected Works, Volume 3 (New York, 1975), pp. 175-76]
One has only to read these words to see the intellectual and moral chasm that separates Marxism from the unhealthy milieu of the ex-left political cynicism that has found expression in Charlie Hebdo. There has been nothing enlightening, let alone edifying, in their puerile and often obscene denigration of the Muslim religion and its traditions.
The cynically provocative anti-Muslim caricatures that have appeared on so many covers of Charlie Hebdo have pandered to and facilitated the growth of right-wing chauvinist movements in France. It is absurd to claim, by way of defense of Charlie Hebdo, that its cartoons are all “in good fun” and have no political consequences. Aside from the fact that the French government is desperate to rally support for its growing military agenda in Africa and the Middle East, France is a country where the influence of the neo-fascist National Front is growing rapidly. In this political context, Charlie Hebdo has facilitated the growth of a form of politicized anti-Muslim sentiment that bears a disturbing resemblance to the politicized anti-Semitism that emerged as a mass movement in France in the 1890s.
In its use of crude and vulgar caricatures that purvey a sinister and stereotyped image of Muslims, Charlie Hebdo recalls the cheap racist publications that played a significant role in fostering the anti-Semitic agitation that swept France during the famous Dreyfus Affair, which erupted in 1894 after a Jewish officer was accused and falsely convicted of espionage on behalf of Germany. In whipping up popular hatred of Jews, La Libre Parole [“Free Speech”], published by the infamous Edoard Adolfe Drumont, made highly effective use of cartoons that employed the familiar anti-Semitic devices. The caricatures served to inflame public opinion, inciting mobs against Dreyfus and his defenders, such as Emile Zola, the great novelist and author of J’Accuse.
The World Socialist Web Site, on the basis of long-standing political principles, opposes and unequivocally condemns the terrorist assault on Charlie Hebdo. But we refuse to join in the portrayal of Charlie Hebdo as a martyr to the cause of democracy and free speech, and we warn our readers to be wary of the reactionary agenda that motivates this hypocritical and dishonest campaign.
David North
What Putin is not
telling us
 |
| President Vladimir Putin |
Even facing what under any circumstances is a perfect storm;
President Putin delivered an extremely measured performance at his annual press
conference and Q&A marathon.
The perfect storm evolves in two fronts; an overt economic
war – as in siege by sanctions - and a concerted, covert, shadow attack to the
heart of the Russian economy. Washington’s endgame is clear: impoverish and
defang the adversary and force him to meekly bow to the ‘Empire of Chaos’s’ whims. And bragging about it all the way to
“victory.”
The problem is Moscow happens to have impeccably deciphered
the game – even before Putin, at the Valdai Club in October, pinned down the
Obama doctrine as “our Western partners” working as practitioners of the
“theory of controlled chaos.”
So Putin neatly understood this week’s monster controlled
chaos attack. The Empire has massive money power; a great deal of influence
over the world’s GDP at $85 trillion, and the banking power behind that. So
nothing easier than using that power through the private banking systems that
actually controls central banks to create a run on the ruble. Think about the
‘Empire of Chaos’ dreaming of driving the ruble down by 99% or so – thus
wrecking the Russian economy. What better way to impose imperial discipline on
Russia?
The “nuclear” option
Russia sells oil in US dollars to the West. Lukoil, for
instance, would have a deposit in US dollars in an American bank for the oil
they sell. If Lukoil has to pay wages in rubles in Russia, then they will have
to sell the US dollar deposits and buy in Russia a ruble deposit for their bank
account. This in effect supports the ruble. The question is whether Lukoil,
Rosneft and Gazprom are hoarding US dollars overseas - and holding back. The
answer is no. And the same applies to other Russian businesses.
Russia is not “losing their savings”, as Western corporate
media gloats. Russia can always require foreign companies to relocate to Russia.
Apple, for instance, may open a manufacturing plant in Russia. The recent
Russia-China deals include the Chinese building factories in Russia. With a
depreciated ruble, Russia is able to force manufacturing that might have been
located in the EU to be located in Russia; otherwise these companies lose the
market. Putin somewhat admitted that Russia should have been demanding this
much earlier. The – positive – process is now inevitable.
And then there’s a “nuclear” option – which Putin didn’t
even have to mention. If Russia decides to impose capital controls and/or
imposes a “holiday” on repayment of larger debt tranches coming due in early
2015, the European financial system will be bombed – Shock and Awe-style; after
all, much of the Russian bank and corporate funding was underwritten in Europe.
Exposure to Russia per se is not the issue; what matters is
the linkage to European banks. As an American investment banker told me, Lehman
Brothers, for instance, brought down Europe just as much as New York City -
based on inter-linkages. And yet Lehman was based in New York. It’s the domino
effect that counts.
Were Russia to deploy this “nuclear” financial option, the
Western financial system would not be able to absorb a shock of default. And
that would demonstrate – once and for all - that Wall Street speculators have
built a ‘House of Cards’ so fragile and corrupt that the first real storm turns
it to dust.
It's just a shot away
And what if Russia defaults - creating a holy mess out of
the country’s $600 billion debt? This scenario reads as the Masters of the
Universe telling Janet Yellen and Mario Draghi to create credits in the banking
systems to prevent “undue damage” - as in 2008.
But then Russia decides to cut off natural gas and oil from
the West (while keeping the flow to the East). Russian intel may wreak non-stop
havoc in pumping stations from the Maghreb to the Middle East. Russia may block
all the oil and natural gas pumped in the Central Asian ‘stans’. The result:
the greatest financial collapse in history. And the end of the ‘Empire of
Chaos’s’ exceptionalist panacea.
Of course this is a doomsday scenario. But don’t provoke the
bear, because the bear could pull that off in a flash.
Putin
was so cool, calm, collected – and eager to delve into details - at his press
conference because he knows Moscow is able to move in total autonomy. This is –
of course – an asymmetrical war – against a crumbling, dangerous empire. What
those intellectual midgets swarming the lame duck Obama administration are
thinking? That they can sell American – and world – public opinion the notion
Washington (European poodles, actually) will brave nuclear war, in the European
theater, in the name of failed state Ukraine?
This is a chess game. The raid on the ruble was supposed to
be a checkmate. It’s not. Not when deployed by amateur scrabble players. And
don’t forget the Russia-China strategic partnership. The storm may be abating,
but the match continues.
Is Political Zionism
Another Form of Ideological Fundamentalism?
Global Research
The Political Zionist doctrine of the
Netanyahu government that claims the whole of former Palestine as being a ‘gift
from God’ is essentially ideological fundamentalism i.e. a ritualistic reading
of scripture and a reliance upon dogma – a position also known as ‘extremism’.
It is this fundamentalist ideology that gives the state of
Israel its sole claim to the West Bank and East Jerusalem – which position it
relies upon exclusively in its assertion that its policy that has persuaded
half a million of its citizens to settle on Palestinian land is legitimate when
the entire international community has branded it a violation of international
law.
The paradox in the status quo established by the Likud
government to back-up its claim to the occupied Palestinian Territories, is
that Israel actually claims to be a secular state. This means that its claim to
the West Bank and East Jerusalem is merely a fabricated position used to
justify that which is unjustifiable.
Political or religious extremism is unacceptable to the
democratic nations of the world in the 21st century, and the UN Security
Council should pass a resolution to that effect. In the event that any UNSC
member would use its veto against such a resolution then it will be clear to
all as to where the illegality lies; who supports and fuels the conflict and
who it is that ensures the continuity of the illegal settlements and the
dispossession of the oldest continuous indigenous people of the region, the
Palestinian Arabs who have farmed and lived on the land for over a thousand
years.
Fundamentalism either in Paris, London, Jerusalem or Hebron
needs to be dealt with in an appropriate manner by democratic governments. We
have all seen the damaging violence that such extremist beliefs can bring to
the community of free nations.
Action is needed now to root-out fundamentalism wherever it
rears its head – regardless of the attitude of any state or party that overtly,
or covertly, supports such violence.
The Fate of the ICC:
When Law and Politics Mix
 |
| Israeli Prime Minister and Terrorist Benjamin Netanyahu |
Global Research,
“The Israel-Palestinian issue from the
time of the court’s inception was the nightmare scenario.”
Madeleine Morris, NPR, Jan 11, 2014
Madeleine Morris, NPR, Jan 11, 2014
Where to, with the International Criminal Court this
year? Much has been put into it, and even more written about it.
But the body continues to receive submissions and requests in terms of
indicting war crime suspects that seem to gather dust. When efforts have
been successful, the usual charge of partiality towards Africa is
suggested. The current chief prosecutor of the ICC, Fatou Bensouda,
assumed her job in June 2012. Since then, she has introduced a certain
stutter to the workings of the court. In some cases, these stutters have become
more prolonged.
In December, Fatouda announced that she would drop charges
against Kenya’s president, Uhuru Kenyatta, for his purported role in the bloody
violence that followed the 2007 elections. The reason: a lack of
cooperation between his government and those working for her (New York Times,
Jan 10).
Bensouda’s headaches are set to become full blown
migraines. There are allegations of torture against US forces in
Afghanistan that are awaiting her keen attention. Legal watchers are
wondering if she will take the matter to the stage of a full investigation.
Then there is the issue of Palestine, which joined the ICC
last week, wishing the ICC to get itself busy in investigation alleged crimes
committed on Palestinian land since June. Palestinian Authority President
Mahmoud Abbas signed the Rome Statute of the ICC on December 30.
The good offices of Israel and the United States are already
busy attempting to disrupt, if not halt any action that might be initiated by
the PA altogether. US senators are noisily scheming and blustering
against the prospect that the ICC might engage in what are termed “politically
abusive” actions. (When the ICC’s actions are deemed inconvenient to the state
in question, they are usually branded as “political” measures.)
In a statement signed by Senators Lindsey Graham (R-South
Carolina), Robert Menendez (D-New Jersey), Chuck Schumer (D-New York) and Mark
Kirk (R-Illinois), a not so well veiled threat is directed against the
PA. “Existing US law makes clear that if the Palestinians initiate an ICC
judicially authorised investigation, or actively support such an investigation,
all economic assistance to the PA must end” (Jerusalem Post, Jan 12). The
money is not negligible: $400 million in aid provided on an annual basis.
Jen Psaki of the US State Department decided to make that
now customary assertion that the Palestinian entity, seeing that it does not
formally exist as a state, can’t initiate any actions against a belligerent in
terms of war crimes allegations. This is the language used against the
minor wounded, abused and incapable of seeking redress – except through
mediated channels.
“Neither the steps that the Palestinians have taken, nor the
actions the UN Secretariat has taken in performing the Secretary-General’s
functions as depository for the Rome Statute, warrant the conclusion that the
Palestinians have established a ‘state’ or have the legal competences necessary
to fulfill the requirements of the Rome Statute.”
Such is the language of absolute circularity. To
obtain a hearing, one needs to be a state, a view that is becoming increasingly
anachronistic. To become a state, one needs to be recognised by powers
which, in many instances, are part of the sordid activity being investigated.
(Notwithstanding this, alleged war crimes taking place on Palestinian authority
can still be investigated.)
Such a sentiment shows that the power of the purse is often
linked to that of political purpose. If Abbas pursues the rather withered arm
of international law against Israel through a formally acknowledged
international body, the PA will be punished. When Israeli forces engage
in the next high intensity conflict in urban areas resulting in the deaths of
hundreds of civilians, US funding to the IDF, far from being stopped, is bound
to be increased. Hamas will be singing songs of praise.
Abbas himself is not immune to using law as both shield and
cudgel. Membership of the ICC has been viewed as one of the steps towards
Palestinian independence. Praise for his leadership among Palestinians is
certainly far from abundant, and rivals Hamas continues to do well in the wake
of last year’s war against Israel in Gaza and the failure to pass a UN Security
Council resolution seeking an end of Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories
by 2017.
The Palestinians are by no means the only ones who are being
frustrated. Globally, efforts are being made to fill the ICC inboxes with pleas
and appeals. The Committee of the SEARCH Foundation, to take one example,
has been busy attempting to bring former Australian Prime Minister John Howard
before the court for his role in sending Australian troops to Iraq in 2003,
arguing that it has exhausted every domestic avenue.[1] The ICC remains
silent.
That said, the body should be busier than ever. But
the swords of the prosecution are, in a growing number of cases, being
sheathed. Leila Nadya Sadat, special advisor on crimes against humanity and an
ICC prosecutor, sees a far more crucial problem in the international legal
system. Critics have misidentified the source “of the current
difficulties with international justice.” It is not the ICC, which is
“thriving” but “states refusing to join cause with the court against genocide,
war crimes and crimes against humanity” that are damaging the cause (St. Louis
Post-Dispatch, Jan 11).[2]
Legal specialists will be looking on rather glumly at the
fact that the forces that seek to evade that every issue of joining cause are
countries such as Israel and the United States, the biggest critics against recent
Palestinian efforts.
Shelving cases will do everything to suggest that
prosecutions are illusions at the international level, with the grand exit
clause for every brief: taking a leader to book for crimes of war, humanity and
genocide will fail for want of ease and consensus. In the words of Duke
University law professor Madeleine Morris, “If it [the ICC] acts, it will be
very much criticised and if it doesn’t act it will be very much criticised”
(NPR, Jan 11).[3] That should never be an excuse, but politics remains
both an advancing cause and a crippling defect in the cause of international
law.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was as Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He
lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com
Notes:
[1] http://theaimn.com/complaint-john-howard-international-criminal-court/
[2] http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/mailbag/international-criminal-court-is-thriving-not-foundering/article_f9de2e03-173e-5f4e-a2d6-9df5fc4db440.html
[3] http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2015/01/09/376092020/mideast-conflict-could-bog-down-international-criminal-court?utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=world&utm_source=dlvr.it
[1] http://theaimn.com/complaint-john-howard-international-criminal-court/
[2] http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/mailbag/international-criminal-court-is-thriving-not-foundering/article_f9de2e03-173e-5f4e-a2d6-9df5fc4db440.html
[3] http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2015/01/09/376092020/mideast-conflict-could-bog-down-international-criminal-court?utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=world&utm_source=dlvr.it
Double
Standards in the World Order
 |
| A victim of Israeli Massacre |
Israel can thumb its nose at UN inquiries and openly blame
Palestinians for seeking justice through the international courts. Nato can
rebuff the UN over Libya. The US can ignore its own torture investigation. The
powerful are not accountable..
Palestine approaches the United Nations Security Council
asking to set a deadline to end the Israeli occupation. It is rebuffed by the
United States.
Palestine approaches the International Criminal Court (ICC), seeking membership in this world body. The United States threatens to cut its funding to the Palestinian Authority while Israel threatens to accelerate its settlement policy.
Palestine approaches the International Criminal Court (ICC), seeking membership in this world body. The United States threatens to cut its funding to the Palestinian Authority while Israel threatens to accelerate its settlement policy.
The US State Department’s hyperventilated reaction included
the suggestion that entry into the ICC “badly damages the atmosphere with the
very people with whom [the Palestinians] ultimately need to make peace.” Just
as Palestine attempts to use the very legal means that it is accused of
abjuring, it is blamed for being “unhelpful".
The infancy of the United Nations was spent in Palestine –
in the late 1940s, its major agencies grew up around the expulsion of the
Palestinians, the creation of the refugee crisis and the refusal of the new
state of Israel to budge on the question of Palestinian rights. Now, the United
Nations is once more the terrain on which the question of Palestine rests, if
barely.
When the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) decided to investigate the 2009 Israeli assault on Gaza, Tel Aviv refused to allow the panel – led by Justice Richard Goldstone – into the lands its continues to occupy. There was no public denunciation by Israel’s allies for this snub. In fact, US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice told Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman that she had organized a “blocking coalition” to prevent action on Goldstone’s report. She met with the ICC’s Sang-Hyun Song to inform him that the US would see his actions on the report “as a test for the ICC”.
When the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) decided to investigate the 2009 Israeli assault on Gaza, Tel Aviv refused to allow the panel – led by Justice Richard Goldstone – into the lands its continues to occupy. There was no public denunciation by Israel’s allies for this snub. In fact, US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice told Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman that she had organized a “blocking coalition” to prevent action on Goldstone’s report. She met with the ICC’s Sang-Hyun Song to inform him that the US would see his actions on the report “as a test for the ICC”.
Rice also saw UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and told him
that he needed to write a “strong cover letter [for the report] that made it
clear that no further action was needed.” Two years later, Rice told the US
Congress about her actions regarding the report: “What we want to see is for it
to disappear.”
The HRC’s new panel to investigate the 2014 Israeli bombing of Gaza faces the same challenge as Goldstone. Israel has already refused to cooperate with it.
NATO's clean conscience
Israel is not alone in its refusal to submit to UN investigation. NATO conducted a war in Libya in 2011 based on UNSC Resolution 1973. In March 2012, the HRC’s Commission of Inquiry released a report on evidence of civilian casualties as a result of the NATO bombing in Libya (this was also alleged, with clear documentation, by a Human Rights Watch report – Unacknowledged Deaths: Civilian Casualties in NATO’s Air Campaign in Libya, May 2012). There is a whiff of war crimes at the margins of these reports. They do not make any rash claims, but it is hard to ignore the implications of the evidence.
NATO refused to cooperate with the UN Commission. To the UN, NATO’s legal advisor Peter Olson explained that “NATO incidents” – as he called them – are not war crimes. “We would accordingly request,” he wrote on February 15, 2012, “that, in the event that the commission elects to include a discussion of NATO actions in Libya, its report clearly state that NATO did not deliberately target civilians and did not commit war crimes.”
When Human Rights Watch approached NATO, Richard Froh (Deputy Secretary General of Operations, NATO) replied, “We encourage you to consider these comments [to the UN] when drafting your own report.”
There has been no investigation of either the conduct of NATO’s war in Libya or the implications of Resolution 1973, which some might suggest, has destroyed Libya.
The US Senate report on CIA torture comes with a clear-headed introduction from Senator Diane Feinstein. She writes, “It is my personal conclusion [that] CIA detainees were tortured.” The use of the word “torture” is very significant. The US is a signatory to the UN Convention Against Torture (1984). It requires no outside investigation to establish the facts of torture. Its own government has done so. Given this, it seems strange that there is little public demand for accountability for the CIA torture.
'Plenty of other cities'
Senior UN officials are wary of public comment. It is hard to blame them. The stranglehold by the US on the UN is perilous. Chile has taken over the presidency of the UN Security Council this month. By the rules of procedure, says Olivia Cook, the press officer of the Chilean mission, a formal request to discuss the question of the torture report has to come from elsewhere – such as, perhaps, the Venezuelan Ambassador, who also sits on the Security Council at this time. Would they bring this up for public discussion, and could they refer this file to the ICC? It is not impossible, but it is unlikely.
In early December, the White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said, “It’s difficult to imagine – and I’m happy to be proven wrong – but it’s difficult to imagine any other country in the world going to the lengths that this country has to have a public reckoning or a public detained accounting of our shortcomings.” The arrogance of this statement deserves consideration. But more than that is the falsity. On the torture report, there has been little appetite for “a public detailed accounting”, let alone accountability for the crimes.
In Donald Rumsfeld’s memoir he recounts a telling moment about how the US deals with questions of accountability. A War Crimes Law (1993) in Belgium had been used to file cases against US and Israeli officials. In 2003, Rumsfeld took aside Belgian Defense Minister Andre Flahaut, and flayed him on this point. He said that if Belgium did not repeal the law, NATO headquarters in Brussels could move elsewhere – “There were plenty of other cities between Washington and Ankara.” The Belgians wanted US funds to help build a new NATO headquarters. “Within two months of that conversation,” Rumsfeld recalls, “the Belgian government repealed the law.” What Rumsfeld called “law fare” had been thwarted.
The double standards in the world order remained intact.
The HRC’s new panel to investigate the 2014 Israeli bombing of Gaza faces the same challenge as Goldstone. Israel has already refused to cooperate with it.
NATO's clean conscience
Israel is not alone in its refusal to submit to UN investigation. NATO conducted a war in Libya in 2011 based on UNSC Resolution 1973. In March 2012, the HRC’s Commission of Inquiry released a report on evidence of civilian casualties as a result of the NATO bombing in Libya (this was also alleged, with clear documentation, by a Human Rights Watch report – Unacknowledged Deaths: Civilian Casualties in NATO’s Air Campaign in Libya, May 2012). There is a whiff of war crimes at the margins of these reports. They do not make any rash claims, but it is hard to ignore the implications of the evidence.
NATO refused to cooperate with the UN Commission. To the UN, NATO’s legal advisor Peter Olson explained that “NATO incidents” – as he called them – are not war crimes. “We would accordingly request,” he wrote on February 15, 2012, “that, in the event that the commission elects to include a discussion of NATO actions in Libya, its report clearly state that NATO did not deliberately target civilians and did not commit war crimes.”
When Human Rights Watch approached NATO, Richard Froh (Deputy Secretary General of Operations, NATO) replied, “We encourage you to consider these comments [to the UN] when drafting your own report.”
There has been no investigation of either the conduct of NATO’s war in Libya or the implications of Resolution 1973, which some might suggest, has destroyed Libya.
The US Senate report on CIA torture comes with a clear-headed introduction from Senator Diane Feinstein. She writes, “It is my personal conclusion [that] CIA detainees were tortured.” The use of the word “torture” is very significant. The US is a signatory to the UN Convention Against Torture (1984). It requires no outside investigation to establish the facts of torture. Its own government has done so. Given this, it seems strange that there is little public demand for accountability for the CIA torture.
'Plenty of other cities'
Senior UN officials are wary of public comment. It is hard to blame them. The stranglehold by the US on the UN is perilous. Chile has taken over the presidency of the UN Security Council this month. By the rules of procedure, says Olivia Cook, the press officer of the Chilean mission, a formal request to discuss the question of the torture report has to come from elsewhere – such as, perhaps, the Venezuelan Ambassador, who also sits on the Security Council at this time. Would they bring this up for public discussion, and could they refer this file to the ICC? It is not impossible, but it is unlikely.
In early December, the White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said, “It’s difficult to imagine – and I’m happy to be proven wrong – but it’s difficult to imagine any other country in the world going to the lengths that this country has to have a public reckoning or a public detained accounting of our shortcomings.” The arrogance of this statement deserves consideration. But more than that is the falsity. On the torture report, there has been little appetite for “a public detailed accounting”, let alone accountability for the crimes.
In Donald Rumsfeld’s memoir he recounts a telling moment about how the US deals with questions of accountability. A War Crimes Law (1993) in Belgium had been used to file cases against US and Israeli officials. In 2003, Rumsfeld took aside Belgian Defense Minister Andre Flahaut, and flayed him on this point. He said that if Belgium did not repeal the law, NATO headquarters in Brussels could move elsewhere – “There were plenty of other cities between Washington and Ankara.” The Belgians wanted US funds to help build a new NATO headquarters. “Within two months of that conversation,” Rumsfeld recalls, “the Belgian government repealed the law.” What Rumsfeld called “law fare” had been thwarted.
The double standards in the world order remained intact.
No comments:
Post a Comment