Amnesty: sign up to the ICC
jueves, mayo 27, 2010

Hilversum, 27. May.2010

Despite progress, a justice gap still exists in the world, according to Amnesty International. In its annual assessment of human rights worldwide, released today, Amnesty calls for all countries to sign up to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Amnesty spokesperson Tom Mackey told RNW that the justice gap manifests itself in the way in which people not only escape criminal justice, but also in a number of other ways that force people to end up staying in poverty or in the discrimination against women.

“We are concerned that far too many perpetrators of crimes against humanity are getting away by not being brought to justice, and that governments are also failing in the implementation of rights such as the right to health, the right to education, and by not providing proper access to justice for people to claim those rights."

A landmark year
But it’s not all bad news, with Amnesty calling 2009 “a landmark year for international justice”.

The report points to the trials of former Latin American leaders like Alberto Fujimori of Peru and Reynaldo Bignone of Argentina. At the same time, it celebrates the first indictment of a sitting head of state [President Omar al Bashir of Sudan] by the ICC.

These developments are signals that no one is above the law, says Mackey. “But of course, we saw misguided reactions from the African Union, who refused to cooperate with the ICC, and also in countries like Sri Lanka, which avoided any scrutiny and any accountability for the final phases of its war against the Tamil Tigers, where both sides committed serious abuses”.

Rome Statute
The report calls on all nations to sign the Rome Statute and become part of the ICC. Seven countries in the G20 have not yet done so, including China and the United States.

“The US used to be very strenuously opposed to the Court, but then they accepted that the ICC should have a role in Sudan. So the prospect of the United States and other countries joining the ICC is not so far-fetched”, Mackey believes.

And there’s another, more immediate way in which Amnesty is pushing governments for action. The organisation is appealing to the world leaders who will be meeting in September to review the Millennium Development Goals ‘’to make sure that these goals turn from political aspirations to legally enforceable rights.”

Looking at the big picture, he believes there are many reasons to be hopeful.

“One hundred and eleven countries have joined the ICC, and we have tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia, Cambodia, Rwanda and Sierra Leone. So there is progress, and we want to pay tribute to the many Human Rights defenders around the world that are part of this fight for justice.”

posted by RicAngel @ 12:59   0 comments
Brazil: squaring diplomatic circles

Hilversum, 18.May.2010

As the airwaves continue to fill with news and commentary on Sunday’s Iranian nuclear swap deal, the push for further sanctions against the Islamic Republic appears to have emerged unscathed.

On Tuesday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced that the permanent members of the UN Security Council (the US, Britain, France, Russia and China) had agreed on a draft resolution against Iran. The draft is now being circulated among the rest of the Council, which includes Turkey and Brazil, the countries that brokered Sunday’s agreement. So far, the move appears to be a rebuff to the much-celebrated nuclear swap deal.

Beating the odds

Regardless of its fate, this agreement has confirmed Brazil’s status as a rising star in international diplomacy. When the country’s president, Luis Inacio ‘Lula’ da Silva, decided to mediate in the Iranian nuclear affair, few took him seriously. Hillary Clinton estimated his chances of success at about 0%, while Russian President Dmitry Medvedev was slightly more optimistic, placing the odds at 33%. In a bold move, Lula said the chances of convincing the Islamic Republic to accept a nuclear fuel swap deal were close to 99%. And like the surprise selection of Brazil to host the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympics, Lula once again beat the odds.

Diplomatic ambitions

Today, nobody dares to underestimate Brazil’s diplomacy anymore. But far from overstretching, Marcel Biato, foreign policy advisor to President Lula, says the Brazilians know their role perfectly well:

“We never intended to introduce a new solution. We don’t have the intention of dominating or having technical solutions for such a complicated issue. What we said is that the agreement that was presented last October had all the technical conditions to move forward, what was needed was to politically ‘square the circle’, so to speak. So what Brazil wanted to do was to find the conditions necessary for mutual trust to give last October’s agreement some political grounding.”

The Brazilians, having squared the circle on Sunday, are now signalling their intention to join, together with Turkey, the group of world powers that are negotiating an end to the standoff on Iran’s nuclear programme, also known as the “Iran Six”. The group is composed of the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany. And this is not the end of Brazil’s ambitions on the world stage; Lula has openly stated in the past his intentions to become a credible mediator in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Lula’s motives

With the world’s attention on them, some people in Brazil debate whether Lula should be busy playing ‘major league’ diplomacy in countries halfway around the world, with insignificant ties to Brazil. Brazilian analysts have pointed at Lula’s personal intentions to explain his bold diplomatic moves. The president, they say, may aspire to become Secretary General of the UN, thus he’s using his country’s diplomatic apparatus to position himself as an international mediator. Lula’s term in office is set to end in a mere seven months and with the presidential campaign in full swing he may have already become a lame duck.

Suspicions aside, it is irrefutable that Brazil has achieved a new prominent position on the international scene. This will bring new possibilities, as was shown on Sunday in Tehran. “It is a demonstration of political will and courage to advance this sour agenda”, said Biato.
posted by RicAngel @ 12:55   1 comments
Israel's nukes: much ado about nothing

Hilversum, 11.May.2010

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) made clear on Tuesday that it does not intend to compare Israel's nuclear program with that of Iran, in reaction to a recent report that Israel's nuclear activities may undergo unprecedented scrutiny next month.

The report was published after a leaked copy of June’s IAEA board meeting’s agenda was obtained by the Associated Press. It erroneously claimed that, for the first time, the issue was to be discussed by the UN’s nuclear watchdog. The AP, however, released a retraction of its report.

“This is not a new issue. Since the 80s the matter has been coming up time and again. The IAEA has always wanted to create a nuclear-weapons-free zone in the Middle East”, said Dr Ephraim Asculai, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv. “And Israel”, he added, “has never been opposed to it. What Israel has said is that the conditions are not ripe”.

Israel’s nuclear ambiguity

Israel is widely believed to possess nuclear weapons. But the country has maintained, since the program was unveiled in 1986, a “nuclear ambiguity” policy. Israel doesn’t deny nor does it acknowledge having a nuclear arsenal. The country is not a party of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), but in the past has acted to make sure that no other countries in the region obtain nuclear arms. In 1981, it bombed the Osirak nuclear reactor in Baghdad, and in 2007 it struck on a similar facility in Syria.

Now, Israel’s focus is on Iran. The Islamic Republic is a member of the NPT, but remains under heavy pressure from the US, the EU and Israel, who believe their uranium enrichment programme is partly aimed at manufacturing weapon’s grade nuclear material.

For the Israeli government, the fact that Iran is a member of the NPT makes the prospect of them acquiring a nuclear weapon a bigger threat. And Dr Asculai agrees: “If Iran becomes a de facto nuclear state, it will probably mean the collapse of the NPT regime”.

But is it not hypocritical of Israel, a country widely recognized to have nuclear weapons, which is not a party to the only treaty that regulates them, to criticize Iran, which doesn’t have nukes and is, indeed, part of the NPT?

“Israel’s program is not unique. In the Middle East-South Asia region there three countries that possess nuclear weapons and are not parties to the NPT”, explains Dr Asculai, “and if Iran is not taken care of, then why should Israel, Pakistan or India join something [the NPT regime] which is failing totally?”.

A nuke-free Middle East?

The latest calls for a nuclear-weapons-free Middle East have come from the month-long NPT review conference, which is currently underway in New York. Several countries including Iran and Egypt have supported the initiative. And today, Syria’s President Bashar al Assad asked Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in Damascus to “help rid the Middle East of nuclear weapons”.

While these calls have widely been interpreted as directed to Israel, Dr Asculai thinks that putting pressure on a nuclear-armed state is pointless. “It’s very difficult if the country is not interested. Look at India for example, not only has it not been forced to join the NPT, but it has been given support to continue its programs.”

For Dr Asculai, politics is what really calls the shots. “Relations between recognized nuclear powers –the US, Britain, France, China and Russia—and nuclear-armed states like India, Pakistan and Israel are more important than talks of disarmament or a nuclear-free Middle East. I think these countries should reach an agreement. Not everybody would like it, but it would be better.”
posted by RicAngel @ 12:51   0 comments
Ocampo: Garzón charges not legitimate

Hilversum, 11.May.2010

Luis Moreno Ocampo, chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), has come out in support of beleaguered Spanish judge Baltasar Garzón. He told RNW that he “doesn’t see legitimacy” in Garzón’s indictment for exceeding his authority when investigating crimes committed during the Franco regime that were included in an amnesty.

“I don’t want to make judgments, but I don’t see real charges against him. They’re accusing him of things that don’t look like crimes”, the Argentinean judge told Radio Netherlands Worldwide at his office in The Hague last week.

What he does see, however, is that prosecutors, like Garzón or himself, are always bound to take risks, and that this case “confirms that investigating power is hard”.

“It shows that we, as lawyers, have an enormous responsibility to work to secure these limits”, he added.

If convicted, Garzón could be barred from his duties for up to 20 years. Many international bodies, from newspapers to human rights groups and even the UN, have already voiced their support for the Spanish judge. But the ICC has not yet issued a statement.

“This case is not for the ICC, so officially I can’t say anything”, explained Ocampo, “but of course, it’s a case that I follow very closely, since I’ve known Garzón for more than 20 years. We’ve worked together and I’ve eaten at his house, so I know him pretty well”.

Despite all the controversy about Garzón’s case, the ICC prosecutor has a clear idea of where the Spanish judge would be if it were up to him. “Garzón has all my respect, and I’d love it if he could come help us here.”

posted by RicAngel @ 12:48   0 comments
Islamists vie with pirates in Somalia

Hilversum, 4.May.2010

As members of Somali insurgent group Hizbul Islam stormed into the port of Harardhere earlier this week, the local pirates were not the only ones to rush out of the small town. Speculation was almost immediate: two of Somalia’s biggest problems –piracy and militant Islam—had just clashed, and the insurgents got the upper hand.

The initial picture looked something like this: hardline Islamists had taken control of a major pirate haven, and the question was what was going to happen to the ships and hostages held there. The rebels, aware of this, rushed to promise that their goal was to free the Somali coast of pirates.

A different picture
Getting information out of a country like Somalia –with no effective government control since 1991—is a difficult task. What was first reported as a “pirate haven” is now revealed as a minor port of small significance for the pirates, who were holding just three of the 23 hijacked ships in Harardhere. And the treatment that the Islamists would have given the hostages will remain unknown, since the pirates have moved the hijacked ships up north to the port of Hobyo.

The militants say they will liberate any hostages and ships they might find. And Dr Jon Abbink, an expert on Somalia at the African Studies Center in Leiden, thinks that they will probably live up to their words. “If they want to improve their image in Somalia and in front the international community, they will probably release them.”

The militants’ intentions
But the real intentions of Hizbul Islam are still a mystery. As to their claim that they came at the request of the local population, to free the port from piracy, Dr Abbink finds it hard to believe. “Their behaviour is quite ambiguous. Some reports say that they took of control of the port after the local pirates refused to cut a profit-sharing deal with them.”

Last year, Hizbul Islam lost control of the important port of Kismayo to their al-Qaeda-linked opponents al-Shabaab, and some reports speculate that they might have moved into Harardhere just to get a port through which to move supplies. Dr Abbink disagrees, “Harardhere has no port infrastructure and no commercial activity comparable to Mogadishu or Kismayo, so they wouldn’t gain much profit from that”.

Influence on piracy
Reports have also speculated about the security status of the important shipping lanes that run through the Gulf of Aden. But again, Dr Abbink puts things in context: “the ports with major pirate activity are all in the north in the region of Puntland. There’s no militant control in any of these ports, so it’s impossible to know how this would affect pirate activity”.

And what about the UN-backed Transitional Federal Government? “It’s an irony. They are the legitimate government and the only ones who really want to end piracy, but unfortunately they are quite irrelevant, even in Mogadishu.”

posted by RicAngel @ 12:44   0 comments
Chaos and hope in Kyrgyzstan

Hilversum, 20.April.2010

Land seizures, clashes and a pervading sense of chaos have revived the Kyrgyz' worst fears. But where some fear civil war, others see an opportunity for democracy.

While ousted Kyrgyz president Kurmanbek Bakiyev is in Belarus, the interim government headed by Roza Otunbayeva is struggling to impose order on the country.

Fresh violence has erupted over disputed land close to the capital, Bishkek. Five people died in the clashes, more than 40 were injured, and the police claim they have arrested 130 rioters. The unrest, in which thousands of ethnic Kyrgyz seized land from Turks and ethnic Russians, suggests that the new government is still not fully in control. Furthermore, the incidents have fuelled fears of ethnic violence in the small Central Asian state.

But, not everyone sees it that way. "Land issues are a big problem in Kyrgyzstan, especially around Bishkek. I don't see ethnic issues being the motivator of the violence. These people are just seeing the opportunity of chaos to seize land," says Pepijn Trapman, a Dutch aid worker with ICCO, an NGO in Bishkek.

What's more important, Mr Trapman believes, is the current chaos and uncertainty in the country. "The minister of internal affairs, for example, has been replaced three times in the last 24 hours. The police officers and the army are demonstrating because they don't agree with the interim government, which appoints the minister. There's no governmental structure whatsoever, each ministry is appointing their own people."

The wild south
And then there's the situation in the south, where the government currently has no effective control. Supporters of Bakiyev, who seized power during the 2005 'Tulip Revolution', have been gathering to protest and distribute leaflets calling for the ousted president's return. While there hasn't been any significant violence, the situation has sparked fears of a civil war in the country, which hosts both US and Russian military bases.

"The question [of a civil war] is in everybody's minds, but I prefer to be more optimistic. I see everyone here looking for a way out, and everybody knows that a civil war is not a way to solve anything," says an optimistic Mr Trapman.

But the challenge of avoiding civil war and setting up an effective government is certainly a big one for a country with little experience with democracy. "This country has endured 70 years of [the] Soviet Union and then five more with Bakiyev, so this is a huge opportunity for the new government to guide Kyrgyzstan through a process of democracy."
posted by RicAngel @ 12:36   0 comments
“En 40 años, el mundo entero va a ser parte de esta Corte”: Entrevista a Luis Moreno Ocampo

La Haya, Mayo.23.2010

Una francesa que trabaja conmigo me dice 'pero fiscal, nuestro trabajo es muy duro, tengo que convencer a la gente todo el tiempo de lo que hacemos. Me recuerda a una novela en donde la protagonista es una señora que vive en una isla en Indochina. La isla está siempre atacada por el Océano Pacífico, y la señora se la pasa el día poniendo bolsas de arena para que la isla no sea comida por el mar. Yo me siento como esa señora'. Y yo le dije 'estás equivocada. Nosotros somos el Pacífico. Los que nos quieren parar ponen las bolsas de arena'”.

Si la idea de una Corte Penal Internacional (CPI) es como el Océano Pacífico, avanzando inexorablemente sobre la pequeña isla en la que moran los escépticos, entonces Luis Moreno Ocampo, su Fiscal Jefe, se encuentra a la vanguardia de las olas. El argentino, con aire de cansancio y barba de varios días, recibió a La Estrella en su espaciosa oficina en el piso 11 del imponente edificio de la CPI en La Haya. Siete años después de ser nombrado Fiscal de la Corte –y con dos más de gestión por delante--, Ocampo puede mirar al pasado satisfecho: “En 2003 esta corte no existía. Había una comisión para investigar crimenes masivos creada hace más de 30 años y apoyada por 71 Estados, ¡y nunca tuvo ningún caso! Existía la posibilidad de que nunca lográramos tener un caso. Lo pusimos en movimiento y estamos funcionando. En siete años nos ganamos un espacio internacional y somos un referente”.

A día de hoy, la CPI ha iniciado investigaciones en cinco casos: Uganda, la República Democrática del Congo (RDC), la República Centroafricana, Darfur (Sudán) y Kenya. Y es aquí donde los críticos aprovechan para poner el dedo en la llaga. ¿Es que la CPI sólo tiene autoridad en África? Pero el fiscal ni se inmuta: “estoy orgulloso de mis casos en África. Los casos estan en África porque las víctimas están en África, y no hay justicia para ellos, y mi deber es estar ahí. Nadie tiene derecho a matarlos, africanos o no africanos”.

Ocampo debe haber escuchado esta pregunta mil veces. Sin embargo, la pasión con la que responde llama la atención. Pero para él no es ningún misterio. De hecho, se reduce a algo muy sencillo: “si yo fuera sueco no estaría acá. Latinoamérica me dio la visión de entender la importancia de establecer la ley para manejar crímenes masivos. Y justamente, yo voy a África y entiendo lo que pasa, porque Sudamérica es como un puente entre dos mundos”. Para Ocampo, América Latina tiene un rol clave en el establecimiento y funcionamiento de la Corte, “ahora sólo tenemos problemas en Colombia. En el resto del continente no tenemos crímenes masivos. Hace 30 años todo Sudamérica los sufría, en ese sentido es un enorme progreso. En África los crímenes masivos todavía ocurren hoy, y por eso es el lugar donde tenemos que trabajar. Por eso Sudamérica tiene un rol importante, pues entiende los problemas y no los sufre”.

En este marco, es imposible pensar en una persona más idónea para ocupar el cargo que él. Nacido en Buenos Aires en 1952, Luis Moreno Ocampo decidió dedicarse al derecho porque “la Argentina que era un país que tenia golpes de Estado y me parecía interesante estudiar como habia que organizar el país”. Su carrera transcurrió con un aire de normalidad hasta que en 1984 le ofrecieron ser el fiscal adjunto en el Juicio a las Juntas. Para Ocampo, que nunca había trabajado de fiscal, las cosas nunca volvería a ser iguales. “Empecé con un caso grande”, recuerda, haciendo hincapié en la magnitud de la responsabilidad que se le estaba otorgando. “Yo siempre pensé que el juicio de las juntas iba a ser el caso más importante de mi vida... siempre pensé que en mi vida lo más importante lo había hecho con 32 años”.

Precisamente por eso, una vez finalizado el juicio, hizo, en sus propias palabras, lo que se le vino en gana. “Trabajé para empresas, para víctimas, fui profesor de Harvard e hice el programa de televisión”. Pero nada de lo que estaba haciendo lo iba a preparar para lo que le esperaba al amanecer del siglo XXI. “Pasó que me llaman por telefono para decirme que mi nombre había sido sugerido entre los candidatos [para fiscal de la CPI], que era el primero, pero que no sabían si yo quería el cargo. En ese momento me estaba yendo a Harvard como profesor visitante, y me parecía fantástico, pero ser fiscal de la Corte me parecía algo soñado. Estaba bien ir a reuniones, pero no me iban a nombrar. Y bueno, un buen día me nombraron, y lo de Harvard ya no era nada. Yo nunca ni había soñado este cargo”.

Y así, Luis Ocampo, el fiscal que de jóven había perseguido a los hombres más poderosos de su país, el que pensaba que lo había hecho todo con 32 años, se encontraba a los 50 pidiendo permiso para entrar en la Historia. La recién establecida Corte Penal Internacional, apoyada por más de 100 países, lo tendría nada menos que a él como su primer fiscal.

Sus primeros días en La Haya fueron duros. “Llegué acá con mi familia, estuvieron mes y medio, y se regresaron a Argentina pues como yo viajo mucho igual iban a estar solos en Holanda”. El reto que tenía ante sí transcendía de largo sus deberes como fiscal: había venido “a construir una institución para los siglos”. “Yo tenía una oficina vacía, cinco pisos vacíos, dos personas trabajando... tenía que montar la oficina y comenzar las investigaciones. Fue un proceso doloroso, pero afortunadamente ya se hizo”.

Hoy, Moreno Ocampo ya se ha hecho un hueco en la historia. La CPI ya inspira respeto y esperanza, como certifica la reacción del pueblo keniano al inicio de las investigaciones en ese país. Pero quizá el reto más grande, la verdadera prueba del algodón, ha sido el caso de Omar al Bashir, presidente de Sudán. Cuando Ocampo emitió una orden de arresto contra él en 2008, se levantó una polémica que dura hasta hoy. Las críticas le llovieron desde todos los rincones. Muchos pensaban que era una imprudencia emitir una orden de arresto contra un jefe de Estado en funciones. Otros decían que los cargos eran insuficientes y que el caso era muy pequeño. “Es normal en mi cargo generar polémica. Por ejemplo, Carla del Ponte presentó un caso enorme contra Milosevic. Se murió Milosevic, y la criticaron porque no había reducido el caso. Mi política es hacer casos muy pequeños, ¡y la misma gente que criticó a Carla por hacer casos muy grandes me critica a mí por hacer casos muy pequeños! Es así, y está bien, un fiscal sabe que va a ser criticado, y un fiscal que enfrenta al poder aún más”.

Desde entonces, si bien Bashir sigue sentado en su palacio presidencial en Jartún, ya empieza a sentir a Ocampo respirándole en la nuca. Según el Estatuto de Roma, que estableció la Corte, todo país miembro de la CPI (Sudán no lo es, y el caso de Darfur le fue referido a Ocampo por el Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU) está en obligación de arrestar al presidente sudanés en cuanto pise su territorio. “Ya no va a cualquier lado. Sudáfrica le avisó que si iba a la ceremonia de [el presidente Jacob] Zuma lo iba a arrestar. Luego Uganda lo invitó. Y yo estuve con el presidente de Uganda, y él me dijo 'usted, fiscal, no lo va a entender, porque es una cuestión tribal. Al final del día Bashir es de mi tribu'. Y yo le dije 'pero presidente, a mí me encanta el concepto tribal. De hecho, yo siempre pensé que usted y yo somos de la misma tribu. De la tribu de la Corte Penal Internacional'. Y Bashir no viajo a Uganda... la tribu está creciendo”, dice con una sonrisa.

El caso Darfur es uno de los muchos desafíos a los que se enfrenta la CPI. Pero cada vez que siente el pesimismo, el fiscal se apresura a poner las cosas en contexto. “El Estado nacional tardó ocho siglos para establecer un sistema de justicia, desde la Carta Magna hasta los juicios penales de hoy en día. Con la CPI hemos exportado al sistema global una idea que tardó ochocientos años en desarrollarse. Es un paso gigantesco. Vos pensá, la idea de una paz permanente solamente existe desde hace dos siglos y todavía hay que implementarla, pues fracasó brutalmente en el siglo XX. Si la paz permanente es una idea nueva, usar la ley para lograrla es una idea de ayer”.

La idea de una corte global apoyada por gente de todo el mundo es una idea revolucionaria. Es increíble que se haya concretado, y sólo se pudo concretar en el momento en que se concretó. No podía ser antes de que acabara la Guerra Fría, ni después del 11-S. Una de mis asistentes, que tiene 25 años, me decía, 'pero fiscal, como dice usted que es un paso gigantesco la CPI, si cuando yo estaba en la Universidad ya estaba en los libros'... para la gente jóven es normal, pero para la gente de mi generación, una idea de una corte que no fuera nacional es absurda y genera muchos conflictos”.

En la actualidad, 149 Estados han firmado el Estatuto de Roma. De esos, 111 –en su mayoría países latinoamericanos, europeos y del África subsahariana-- lo han ratificado y son miembros de la Corte. Los restantes 38 no lo han hecho aún. Ninguna de las grandes potencias –EEUU, Rusia, China o India—han mostrado intenciones de unirse al club. Mirando a Ocampo a la cara, enfrentado su optimismo, cuesta hacerle la pregunta. Sin el apoyo de las grandes potencias, ¿qué futuro tiene esta Corte? El fiscal vuelve a sonreír. Su fé en la CPI parece inquebrantable. “Yo creo que en 40 años el mundo va a ser parte de esto. El agua nunca avanza antes de tiempo, sólo cuando hay espacio. El Pacifico va a seguir avanzando, no hay dudas. En 40 años supongo que casi todos los Estados van a ser parte de la corte. Porque sino, no hay otra manera de convivir”.

Por lo pronto, los últimos días del mes verán a los Estados miembros reunirse en Kampala, Uganda, para revisar el estatuto y debatir la inclusión de nuevos crímenes –entre ellos el de narcotráfico—dentro de la jurisdicción de la Corte, que se limita a genocidio, crímenes de guerra, crímenes contra la humanidad y guerras de agresión. Para Ocampo, la reunión representa mucho más, “lo importante es que es una celebración del éxito de la idea. Es una celebración de que está funcionando. Esto funciona mucho mas allá de cualquier expectativa. El Oceano Pacifico avanza...”

posted by RicAngel @ 12:21   0 comments

Name: RicAngel
Home: Panama
Buddha header designed by Free Wordpress Themes
Locations of visitors to this page


Powered by Blogger

Democracy Now!

Image Hosted by