Biden calls the landmark Violence Against Women Act his proudest legislative achievement

1 / 2
US President Joe Biden speaks ahead of the 30th anniversary of the Violence Against Women Act in the White House in Washington, DC, on Sept. 12, 2024. (AFP)
2 / 2
US President Joe Biden and Ruth Glenn, president of Survivor Justice Action, applaud during remarks at an event marking the 30th anniversary of the Violence Against Women Act at the White House on Sept. 12, 2024. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 13 September 2024
Follow

Biden calls the landmark Violence Against Women Act his proudest legislative achievement

  • Says his goal was “to change the culture of America” by providing more protection and support for survivors and accountability for perpetrators
  • Biden made the remark on the 30th anniversary of the law which he championed as a senator amid a surge in domestic violence cases in the US

WASHINGTON: President Joe Biden said Thursday joined scores of advocates and survivors of domestic abuse to mark the 30th anniversary of the landmark Violence Against Women Act, a law he wrote and championed as a US senator because he wanted to “change the culture of America” around this touchy issue.
Biden said that back then “society often looked away” and that violence against women was not treated as a crime in many places. He said a national hotline was not available to those suffering abuse and few police departments with what are known now as special victim units.
“My goal was to do more than change the law,” he said at a White House event marking Friday’s 30th anniversary of the law. He said his goal was “to change the culture of America” by providing more protection and support for survivors and accountability for perpetrators.
“I believed the only way we could change the culture was by shining a light on that culture, and speaking its name,” he said.
Biden wrote and championed the legislation as a US senator. It was the first comprehensive federal law that addressed violence against women and sought to provide support for survivors and justice. It sought to shift the national narrative around domestic violence at the time; that it was a private matter best left alone.
The White House said that between 1993 and 2022, annual rates of domestic violence dropped by 67 percent and the rate of rapes and sexual assaults declined by 56 percent, according to FBI statistics. A national domestic violence hotline has fielded more than 7 million calls since 1996, Biden said.
“It matters. It saves lives,” he said Thursday.




US President Joe Biden walks off stage after speaking ahead of the 30th anniversary of the Violence Against Women Act at the White House in Washington on Sept. 12, 2024. (AFP)

During a hearing on domestic violence in 1990, Biden told the committee that “for too long, we have ignored the right of women to be free from the fear of attack based on their gender. For too long, we have kept silent about the obvious.”
He spent years advocating for the law, moved by horrible stories of domestic violence. Congress passed it in 1994 with bipartisan support. Then-President Bill Clinton signed it into law on Sept. 13, 1994.
“The Violence Against Women Act is my proudest legislative achievement,” Biden said at the event on the White House lawn. It was attended by hundreds of people, including survivors of domestic violence, advocates, administration officials and members of Congress.
The president also spoke about continued efforts to strengthen the law, including announcing that the Justice Department was awarding more than $690 million in grants, along with efforts to serve orders of protection electronically and strategies to address online gender-based violence, a growing problem that law enforcement struggles to combat.




US President Joe Biden poses for a selfie during an event marking the 30th anniversary of the Violence Against Women Act, at the White House in Washington on Sept. 12, 2024. (Reuters)

Federal agencies also sent reminders on housing rights for survivors of domestic violence who live in federally funded homes, including that they can request emergency housing transfers.
“Today, officers, prosecutors, judges, families, and society at large understand what should have always been clear: these crimes cannot be cast aside as somehow distinct or private,” said Attorney General Merrick Garland. “Instead, we recognize that they are among the most serious crimes that our society faces and that we must continue to improve access to justice, safety, and services for survivors.”
Jen Klein, the White House gender policy adviser, said the measures are meant to keep pushing efforts to help survivors of domestic violence.
“While we have made tremendous progress since VAWA was signed into law in 1994, we also know that much work remains in the fight to prevent and end gender-based violence,” she said.
The law was reaffirmed in 2022, but it almost didn’t happen. The sticking point was a provision in the last proposal, passed by the House in April 2019, that would have prohibited persons previously convicted of misdemeanor stalking from possessing firearms.
Under current federal law, those convicted of domestic abuse can lose their guns if they are currently or formerly married to their victim, live with the victim, have a child together or are a victim’s parent or guardian. But the law doesn’t apply to stalkers and current or former dating partners. Advocates have long referred to it as the “boyfriend loophole.”
Expanding the restrictions drew fierce opposition from the National Rifle Association and Republicans in Congress, creating an impasse. Democrats backed down and did not include the provision.
That provision was later addressed in Biden’s bipartisan gun safety legislation signed by Congress in 2022, and now prohibits people convicted of misdemeanor crimes in dating relationships from purchasing or possessing firearms for at least five years.


British royal left tearful after visit to Sudanese refugees in Chad

Updated 6 sec ago
Follow

British royal left tearful after visit to Sudanese refugees in Chad

  • Duchess of Edinburgh hears stories of mass slaughter, sexual violence
  • ‘What they do to the children is … I can’t even use the words,’ she tells The Times

LONDON: Sophie, Duchess of Edinburgh, was brought to tears during a visit to survivors of the ongoing Sudanese genocide on the border with Chad.

The duchess told The Times that she had private audiences with female survivors of the violence, which included stories of rape in return for safety and food for their families.

“What they do to the children is … I can’t even use the words,” she told the newspaper. “These women have no option but to leave.”

The duchess spoke to one refugee, Hadidah Abdullah, in the town of Adre on the Chadian border with the war-torn Darfur region.

Abdullah, cradling her 9-month-old baby Bayena, said they had traveled for 60 km to reach safety.

Around 230,000 refugees are in Adre, with many comparing the situation to that of the previous genocide in Darfur over 20 years ago, which killed 300,000 people.

The region, which is being fought over by the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces, is also experiencing famine, with millions at risk of starvation. 

One woman who arrived at the camp in Adre during the duchess’s visit with five children in tow said she had not seen her husband since the outbreak of the conflict in April 2023.

Others talk of the RSF forcing young men and boys into service, and killing people who refuse to cooperate.

The duchess has traveled to numerous conflict zones, including Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Ukraine and the Democratic Republic of Congo, as part of her work helping victims of sexual violence in war.

After meeting five women at a hospital in Adre, one of them told The Times that she and her family had been trapped in the city of Geneina where they witnessed RSF atrocities, including rape and looting.

She said: “If you tried to go out … some can kill you or threaten sexual violence. More than 10 people were killed at a time and they took whatever from the houses.”

She added that her teenage son was taken by the RSF alongside her brothers to fight, and that when she and her remaining relatives escaped, they saw bodies stacked “like a wall” in the streets.

The duchess told The Times that the experience of talking to the women about their ordeals had left her feeling “quite wobbly.”

She said the international community’s attention is “focused very much on other conflicts around the world,” and she wants to “shine the light” on the crisis in Sudan which, The Times said, “aid organisations rank as the world’s gravest” humanitarian crisis.

“This is a human catastrophe that is vast and Chad is having to pick up the pieces when it can ill afford to do,” Sophie said.

“The organisations are saying they are seeing budgets being pulled back and things like that because the money is being siphoned to go elsewhere.

“And, again, whose need is greater? Everybody’s need is great but this is pretty desperate. We’ve got to keep the attention on this.”


Far-right Danish-Swedish politician on trial for Qur’an burnings in Sweden

Updated 5 min 27 sec ago
Follow

Far-right Danish-Swedish politician on trial for Qur’an burnings in Sweden

  • Paludan, leader of the Danish Stram Kurs (Hard Line) party, is the first individual to stand trial in Sweden in connection with Qur’an burnings

LONDON: Rasmus Paludan, a far-right Danish-Swedish politician known for burning copies of the Qur’an, went on trial in Sweden on Monday facing charges of incitement against an ethnic group.

Paludan, leader of the Danish Stram Kurs (Hard Line) party, is the first individual to stand trial in Sweden in connection with Qur’an burnings.

He faces two charges of incitement against an ethnic group and one charge of insult, stemming from public gatherings held in Sweden in 2022 and 2023.

During an event in April 2022, Paludan made statements that allegedly incited violence against ethnic groups, leading to riots in several cities, including Malmo, where about 20 percent of the population identifies as Muslim.

In a separate incident in September 2022, he was accused of verbally attacking “Arabs and Africans,” resulting in the insult charge, which can carry a penalty of up to six months’ imprisonment.

And in January 2023, he was involved with Qur’an burnings outside the Turkish Embassy in Stockholm, which sparked diplomatic tensions between Sweden and Muslim-majority countries. The furore delayed Sweden’s bid for NATO membership, political commentators said.

Paludan has denied all charges.

He appeared via video link at Monday’s hearing from an undisclosed location, saying he feared for his safety if attending the Malmo district court in person.

Law professor Vilhelm Persson from Lund University highlighted the significance of the trial as the first related to Qur’an burnings, though he noted that a ruling from the Swedish supreme court would be necessary to establish legal precedent, The Guardian newspaper reported.


UK tribunal rules academic’s anti-Zionism beliefs are protected under law

Updated 53 min 36 sec ago
Follow

UK tribunal rules academic’s anti-Zionism beliefs are protected under law

  • Although Miller won his case, the tribunal acknowledged that his public statements “contributed” to his dismissal

LONDON: An employment tribunal in the UK has ruled that an academic’s anti-Zionism should be protected under anti-discrimination laws as a “philosophical belief,” concluding that his views were “worthy of respect in a democratic society.”

The judgment came after Prof. David Miller’s dismissal from the University of Bristol in 2021, where he taught political sociology, for alleged antisemitic remarks in which he argued Zionism was inherently “racist, imperialist, and colonial,” leading to apartheid and ethnic cleansing.

The tribunal, which first ruled in February that Miller had been unfairly discriminated against, has now published a 120-page judgment outlining its decision, acknowledging the divisive nature and controversy of his comments but concluding that his beliefs were genuinely held and protected.

Judge Rohan Pirani said: “Although many would vehemently and cogently disagree with (Miller)’s analysis of politics and history, others have the same or similar beliefs. We find that he has established that (the criteria) have been met and that his belief amounted to a philosophical belief.”

The tribunal also recognized Miller’s expertise in the field and confirmed that his dismissal was due to the expression of these protected beliefs.

Miller gave a lecture in 2019 in which he identified Zionism as a pillar of Islamophobia, which prompted complaints from Jewish students and led the Community Security Trust, which campaigns against antisemitism, to call his remarks a “disgraceful slur.”

A university review found Miller had no case to answer because he did not express hatred toward Jews, but he was dismissed for gross misconduct two years later after sending an email to the university’s student newspaper.

In the email, he said, “Zionism is and always has been a racist, violent, imperialist ideology premised on ethnic cleansing” and claimed the university’s Jewish Society was tantamount to an “Israel lobby group.”

His statements were deemed offensive, leading to his eventual sacking.

However, the tribunal found that Miller’s comments were lawful and did not incite violence.

“What (Miller) said was accepted as lawful, was not antisemitic and did not incite violence and did not pose any threat to any person’s health or safety,” the tribunal decided.

Pirani found that Miller’s anti-Zionism did not equate to antisemitism or opposition to Jewish self-determination, but rather “opposition to Zionism’s realization of exclusive Jewish rights within a land that also includes a significant non-Jewish population.”

Although Miller won his case, the tribunal acknowledged that his public statements “contributed” to his dismissal, resulting in any compensation being reduced by 50 percent. The final amount will be determined in a future hearing.


Indian FM’s visit to Pakistan unlikely to thaw frosty ties, experts say

India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar arrives to visit the India Coast Guard Ship Samudra Paheredar docked in Manila.
Updated 14 October 2024
Follow

Indian FM’s visit to Pakistan unlikely to thaw frosty ties, experts say

  • Jaishankar has said he will not discuss bilateral relations during trip
  • High-level visit may still contribute to ‘slight improvement’ in India-Pakistan ties  

NEW DELHI: Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar’s visit to Islamabad is unlikely to thaw frosty relations between India and Pakistan as both countries struggle with domestic issues, experts said on Monday ahead of the first such trip by a high-level Indian official.

The Ministry of External Affairs confirmed last Friday that Jaishankar will be leading the Indian delegation to attend the summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization — a 10-member trans-regional economic and security body established by China and Russia — from Oct. 15-16 in the Pakistani capital. 

Jaishankar has said he will not discuss bilateral relations during the visit.

India has fought three wars with its nuclear-armed neighbor, including two over control of the disputed Kashmir region in the Himalayas.

India controls Jammu and Kashmir, which is part of the larger Kashmiri territory that has been the subject of international dispute since the 1947 partition of the Indian subcontinent into Hindu-majority India and Muslim-majority Pakistan.

Both countries, which claim Kashmir in full and rule in part, further downgraded their diplomatic ties in tit-for-tat moves in 2019, after India unilaterally stripped Jammu and Kashmir of its limited constitutional autonomy. In protest, Pakistan also suspended all bilateral trade.

“It (the visit) would contribute in certain ways in thawing the relationship that has been frozen for the last 10 years and may provide an opportunity for India to construct (and) begin conversation with Pakistan,” Sanjay Kapoor, analyst and political editor, told Arab News.

However, Pakistan’s political instability and security challenges are also a drawback to potential bilateral engagements, said Prof. Harsh V. Pant, vice president of the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi.

“Pakistan is in such a febrile (state) that who to talk to is a big question,” he told Arab News.

“The way political challenges are rising for the Pakistani government, they are quite substantive and there is no way in which a unified machinery exists … even if India wants to have a conversation with Pakistan and take that conversation forward.”

Unless “something fundamental shifts” in Islamabad concerning its approach to regional security and terrorism, Pant said that India will not be “very incentivized to engage with Pakistan.”

Cross-border terrorism was a top-of-mind issue for the Indian government, said Manish Chand, the CEO of the think tank Center for Global India Insights.

“Pakistan has not done anything tangible, concrete” to address Delhi’s concerns over the matter, he told Arab News, adding that any dialogue with Islamabad also depended on the Indian public perception and mood, after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party lost its absolute majority in parliament in June.

“This government, the BJP, does not want to be seen as soft on Pakistan or cross-border terror, so they don’t want to take a political chance because that would mean that it could be they will face cracking political scrutiny,” Chand told Arab News.

Despite the challenges, Jaishankar’s trip should still be seen as a “very positive gesture” that may lead “to a slight improvement” in bilateral relations, which “may eventually lead to some tangible move leading to reengagement at some level or revival of the dialogue process,” he said.

But Prof. Siddiq Wahid, a Srinagar-based political analyst, said engaging with Pakistan was not a priority for the Indian government.

“The current Indian government is hampered by its self-image of India in the world. That self-image is of a major global player. As a result it thinks that time is on its side and it does not have to deal with Islamabad,” he told Arab News.

“Meanwhile, the regional rivalry between Delhi and Islamabad continues to fester.” 


Father accused of Sara Sharif’s murder confessed to UK police, jurors told

Sara Sharif was found dead in August 2023 at her home in Woking, a town southwest of London. (File/Surrey Police)
Updated 14 October 2024
Follow

Father accused of Sara Sharif’s murder confessed to UK police, jurors told

  • Sharif was found dead in August 2023 at her home in Woking, after what prosecutors say was a campaign of “serious and repeated violence”

LONDON: The father of Sara Sharif, a 10-year-old girl who was found dead in her home in Britain, told police “I beat her up too much,” prosecutors said at his murder trial on Monday.
Sharif was found dead in August 2023 at her home in Woking, a town southwest of London, after what prosecutors say was a campaign of “serious and repeated violence.”
Her father Urfan Sharif, 42, his wife and Sara Sharif’s stepmother Beinash Batool, 30, and the girl’s uncle Faisal Malik, 29, are on trial at London’s Old Bailey court charged with her murder.
The trio are alternatively charged with causing or allowing the death of a child. All three deny the charges against them and blame each other for her death, prosecutors say.
Prosecutor Bill Emlyn Jones told jurors on the first day of the trial on Monday that Urfan Sharif called British police, having fled to Pakistan after Sara Sharif’s death.
“He used what you may think is an odd expression,” Emlyn Jones said. “He said: ‘I legally punished her and she died’.”
Emlyn Jones said that Urfan Sharif also told police: “I beat her up. It wasn’t my intention to kill her, but I beat her up too much.”
The prosecutor said a note in Urfan Sharif’s handwriting was also found next to his daughter’s body, which read: “I swear to God that my intention was not to kill her. But I lost it.”
Emlyn Jones told the jury that each of Urfan Sharif, Batool and Malik “played their part in the violence and mistreatment which resulted in Sara’s death.”
The three defendants all deny responsibility for any of violence and abuse and each “seeks to deflect the blame onto one or both of the others,” Emlyn Jones said.
Urfan Sharif blames his wife Batool, Emlyn Jones said, and his apparent confessions to the police were designed to “protect the true guilty party.”
The prosecutor added that Batool’s case is that Urfan Sharif was a “violent disciplinarian” and that she was scared of him, while Malik says he was unaware of any abuse or violence.
The trial is expected to run until December.