Crimean Tatars

I am not happy with the United Nations' report some time ago, on the cases of human rights violations in Crimea. The report is misleading as there is no ethnic conflict in Crimea. Turkey is also now trying to discredit Russia with political opportunity to accuse Russia of human rights violations against Crimean Tatars. There is a very small Crimean Tatar minority living in Crimea with the majority of Russians.

Sel, the leader of Crimean Tatars in Turkey said "Crimea had a wide range of internal problems regarding Crimean Tatars. These problems had been in 'sleep mode' prior to reunification with the Crimean Tatars' situation in the years following Ukraine's independence in 1991 characterised by the defective functioning of legislation and Ukraine's legal system. It is incorrect to suggest that violations of the Crimean Tatars' rights began only after the peninsula's return to Russia. There is no explicit and systematic violations of the rights of national minorities on the peninsula. On the peninsula, a number of arrests and detentions of persons suspected of being involved in radical Islamist groups have taken place. However, this activity by law enforcement to detect and prevent the spread of terrorism cannot be interpreted as a violation of human rights. Ankara's situation of the Crimean issue from the standpoint of supporting Ukraine will eventually lead to rupture in the ties between Turkey and Crimea. If Turkey continues to pursue policies in this vein, this could lead to problems for Turkish citizens living in Crimea. Turkey is home to a major Crimean Tatar diaspora estimated to be 150,000".

The Crimean Tatars in Crimea are better off out of Ukraine as Ukraine has got a history of gross violations of human rights. They have been treated badly by Ukraine as they were segregated, and were used as political pawns. 

They do not need to isolate themselves from Russians, and can take part in everyday normalities, and can share with Russians their political views and aspirations if they want to be MPs. They are treated as equals, as any other minorities with different nationalities. Crimean Tatars cannot be discriminated against for wanting to be MPs which Ukraine have already done.

As long as Crimean Tatars are not seeking to destabilise or cause trouble in extremist form or cause divisions with other ethnic minorities as well as Russians. They have the same treatment as others regarding welfare, schooling, health etc.

It is a crime if Crimean Tatars seek to detach, and isolated themselves from the rest of the community in Crimea.

It is a crime if Crimean Tatars cause unrest, discord, use inappropriate propaganda, and use violence against any one. They have to be tried the same way as Russians would be tried.

It is a crime to treat Crimean Tatars any differently from Russians. 

This I have to make clear, and Crimea is living peacefully now, especially being detached from Ukraine has improved the Crimean way of life.

There is no evidence that there are human rights violations against Crimean Tatars living in Crimea and the diaspora.

We cannot have United Nations pursuing their policies in this vein with Turkey and other countries.

Russia does not deserve to have sanctions imposed against it by the United Nations, Europe and United States, when it took action to look after Crimea.

About Crimean Tatars and testimonial from Vasvi Abduraimov

Crimean Tatars - predominantly Muslim ethnic minority formed in Crimea in the Middle Ages. They were forcibly expelled to Central Asia and Turkey by Joseph Stalin's government. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Tatars began to return to Crimea under the new government of Ukraine, and was annexed by Russia for the second time, when new civil war started in Ukraine.

In 1774, the Khanate was proclaimed independent under the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca, and was then annexed by Catherine the Great of Russia in 1783.

That was because of Tatars creating wars since the Ottoman Empire, and their inability to govern a few times, and causing problems for Crimea and Russia.

From 1853 to 1856, the peninsula was the site of the principal engagements of the Crimean War, a conflict fought between the Russian Empire and an alliance of France, Britain, the Ottoman Empire and Sardinia.

Crimea became part of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic in 1921 as the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, which became part of the Soviet Union in 1922.

During the Second World War the peninsula was invaded by Nazi Germany in summer 1941 across the Isthmus of Perekop. Following the capture of Sevastopol on 4 July 1942, Crimea was occupied until German forces were expelled in an offensive by Soviet forces ending in May 1944. After Crimea was liberated, it was downgraded to the Crimean Oblast and the Crimean Tatars were deported for alleged collaboration with the Nazi forces. A total of more than 230,000 people were deported, mostly to Uzbekistan, at the time about a fifth of the total population of the Crimean Peninsula.

Chairman of Crimean public organisation Milli Firka (People’s Party) Vasvi Abduraimov said.

"The Crimean Tatar people got an opportunity to restore its usurped rights only after the March 2014 referendum when Crimea reunified with Russia. I recalled that in early 1990s Russia adopted laws on exoneration of repressed peoples and victims of political repressions. And only after March 2014, we got all opportunities for restoration of all usurped rights as an ethnic community. Ukraine officially declared itself a unitary state and in all possible ways neutralised and universalised ethnic and religious communities for its so-called ‘Ukrainianess'. The apotheosis of that policy was the statement by President Viktor Yushchenko that the state doctrine is to build one country, one nation with one language and one faith. Now everyone sees what that mindless policy of universalisation, when fundamental human rights are infringed upon, has led to. Kiev-style universalisation, with total corruption of officials at all levels, when not law and the people rule but 20 oligarchs, could not but lead to a disaster, and it happened. The Ukrainian state currently only exists de jure, and not de facto."

The Milli Firka chairman underscored that in 1954 Crimea was handed from the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic "absolutely illegally", as Crimean Tatars in that period "were rightless in exile." "And no one then asked us or Crimean residents, whether they want Crimea to be handed to Ukraine. The rights of all Crimean residents are now violated by Western countries who imposed restrictions for the peninsula which in particular relate to business, foreign trips and tourism. Due to those restrictions, Crimeans "are unable to conduct economic activity in a normal way. I Abduraimov assessed Western sanctions as "the clearest manifestation of a double standards policy. Declaring sanctions against the policy of the Russian Federation, they actually tie the hands and feet of ordinary people, preventing them from moving freely and doing business".

Crimean Tatars are now back in Crimea under Russian control, and work began since the reunification of Crimea and Russia regarding economy, finance, credit, legal, state power, military conscription and infrastructure systems has been actively underway.

I thank Abduraimov for speaking out against the universalisation of Ukraine. I sympathise about what Crimean Tatars have gone through the centuries, and preserving their rights as its own ethnic minority with a different faith, history, culture and language.

I am against universalisation of Ukraine. No ethnic minority should be affected by changes from Ukraine to attempt getting rid of any languages, histories, faiths, cultures to force universalisation on ethnic minorities. That must not happen now, and in the future. It is violation of international law and human rights.

It is illegal to impose sanctions against the economy of any country.

Crimea

Crimea's future has got to be secure. No one can turn a blind eye on the violation of laws when Crimea was ceded to Ukraine in 1956 forcing Crimeans to be Ukrainians, and forcing them to adopt the Ukrainian ways of life. Crimeans could never speak Ukrainian, use Ukrainian culture and history etc. Countries must recognise the expression of will in Crimea. Referendum is legal and it is not neutral to ask for another referendum. it is seen as trying to sabotage the peace, and goodwill of the Crimeans, and is assassinating Crimeans' democracy.

1951 and 1967 [Geneva] Convention to the Status for Refugees

1951 and 1967 (Geneva) Convention to the Status for Refugees

The Convention entered into force on 22 April 1954 and has been subject to only one amendment in the form of a 1967 Protocol which removed the geographic and temporal limits of the 1951 Convention. Although grounded in Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of human rights 1948 which recognises the right of persons to seek asylum from persecution in other countries. The United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees adopted in 1951 is the centrepiece of international refugee protection today. This would relate to events occurring before 1st January 1951. The rights of refugees has lost significance due to the fact there have been geopolitical changes, and that this treaty did not have terrorists and extremists in mind. United Nations had not anticipated that there would be violence on a very high scale, and that there would be mass exodus of refugees.

The European Union Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29th April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection, and the content of the protection granted.

There is a difference between Asylum seekers, Refugees and Economic migrants. It is the migrants who abused the system by seeking money, jobs and homes for free while the genuine cases of refugees needs more help. Asylum seekers would decades ago be seeking asylum for only political reasons.

The 1951 (Geneva) Convention to the Status for Refugees is outdated.

There should have been proper processing and supporting refugees going to any signatory country. There have been fraudulent documentation for those who wants to be in a humanitarian program who faces threats to life and freedom.

A data is greatly needed for any signatory countries to keep track of refugees getting help in one country, and then moving to another country to order to get more money. A refugee can easily obtain finance or benefits, say in Germany, and then obtain money in Austria which is fraudulent and abusing the States. There have been cases when refugees are moving around freely from country to country taking advantage of each State.

It is right that Asylum seekers, Refugees and Migrants seek protection from United Nations, but they have no rights to risk their lives by going on a perilous journey without protection. It is the United Nations responsibility to provide protection before they do. If they have to be returned to the destination from which they came, then they have to have protection to go back where they came from.

It was an appalling situation that all these refugees who came by boats should be allowed to land with the help of warships owned by different countries. They should have taken all the refugees back with protection.

Some of these refugees have committed crimes such as sex crimes, theft, and fraud. They are unsettling countries in which they are in, while we should think of its own civilians safety and protection of each country from the refugees. The health and safety of civilians of their own country is paramount, and they should not take second place to refugees losing their homes, jobs and livelihoods to them. Civilians have more rights than refugees.

Refugees can only live in any country temporarily, and must have legal status to live in any country by registering legally as a citizen. They must then return to their own country, when it is safe to do so. They are safer in their own country, than in another country.

It is the United Nations' responsibility to oversee that any country is safe for refugees to return, and making sure that each country is free of any terrorists and extremists by cooperating with these countries who are annihilating terrorists and extremists.

Merkel was so very irresponsible to introduce an open door policy which led to migrant's situation being out of control, and created a huge mess. European Union is now trying to do a deal with Turkey to clean up their mess, and bribing Turkey with billions of pounds. There are no agreements which are unlikely to implement which could violate the Treaty of 1951 (Geneva) Convention to the Status for Refugees. As well as violations of human rights.

http://sputniknews.com/europe/20160308/1035976217/eu-turkey-migrant-deal-flawed.html

Broken promises and lack of leadership imperil latest EU-Turkey migrant deal. Flaws in agreements.

http://tass.ru/en/politics/861192

EU fails to manage migration processes effectively leaving it all up to the countries. There have been no profiling of taking photographs, and fingerprinting which can be easily done without the police's help to speed up the process to create IDs, and help the migrants settle more quickly.

Human Rights on abortion

I have been asked to write an article after a 21 year old woman is charged and faces life imprisonment for taking an abortion pill under a 19th century law that still applies in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland may be the country in UK where the 1967 Abortion Act does not apply. Terminations are only legal when medics prove a woman's mental or physical life is at risk. 

The County Down woman was charged with unlawfully taking the drugs mifepristone and misoprotsol with the intention of inducing a miscarriage and was also charged with supplying or procuring 'poison' for the same reason.

Protesters are raising awareness of this woman's case. Women have travelled to UK or Europe for terminations. There are expenses incurred for travel and accommodation costing about £2,000 while it is cheaper to purchase pills online via sites. Politicians and lawmakers should not turn a blind eye to terminations. It has a backyard attitude buying pills online.

I have to describe the nature or basic qualities of Human Rights. I have to explain that there are human rights and no human rights concerning terminations. There is no such thing as denying access to health care services and are not violating human rights.

Whether the Abortion Law is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights or not, is not important. A judge could argue that abortion be considered a human right in cases of rape, incest or fatal abnormalities.

I would cite reasons on grounds of poverty, danger to health, disabilities, danger to mental welfare, the embryo being deformed. These would be human rights.

But it is not human right to abuse one's body by taking poison and to induce miscarriage without reasons. This would lead to psychological problems such as 'guilty complex or wishing I had kept the child'.

These psychological problems will never end, and will stay with the person involved for the rest of one's life. Abortion Law protects women and must have control over women for these reasons. No one should self harm, or mutilate part of their bodies without medical supervision and support.

The law does need to be changed citing reasons for abortion such as having no chance of survival outside the womb etc.

I agree that it is a cruel and outdated law of the 19th century, and that no one should be imprisoned for life. But there is no reason why we should not stop making abortion illegal for the reasons I mentioned above.

Abortions must be carried out with medical supervision and support. Young girls as young as ten should be able to get help, and must have access to health care. Taking pills or any attempt to induce miscarriage will have to be punished, as it could result in serious mental and physical health complications.

While Northern Ireland has got the restrictive abortion laws in the world, they are negligent in making sure there are no pills or form of equipment used to induce miscarriage in any way from online via sites. These types of advertising and selling should be banned, so no one should fall victim to criminality of the Abortion Act. We have to draw the line on criminality and human rights.