Chicago Police Department's Secret Facility in Homan Square

Chicago Police Department's Secret Facility in Homan Square

By Noah Charnas and Matthew Zhu

In Chicago’s Homan Square there is a warehouse owned by the Chicago Police Department. At Homan Square, the CPD randomly detains people while violating many human rights. Because the warehouse and its operation is off-the-books, the detention process there is called “disappearing”. When a detainee was detained, the police don’t have to report it which opened detainees to many human rights abuses.The statistics and data surrounding Homan Square are also very incomplete. There are 7,000 reported cases, but CPD did not report cases that did not end in a charge or cases before 2004. Since the warehouse was purchased in 1995, there is a substantial period of time that isn’t documented. From the disclosed statistics there is a clear racial bias as 82% of reported detainees were black.

There are many human rights abuses that occur at Homan Square. First, the CPD denied the right to an attorney. In 68% of the disclosed cases, the detainee did not have access to an attorney. Even for those that did, many said the access was limited and superficial. Second, the interrogation tactics that were used are very similar to those employed in Guantanamo Bay such as isolation, deprivation of food and being cut off from outside contact. Reports have also shown that police have used racial slurs and try to physically and sexually abuse detainees in order to extract information out of them.

Homan Square is a very interesting topic to think about when considering the different discussions that we have had in this course. With the readings of Just Mercy, that set the basis for this course and consumed most of our attention in the beginning of the year, we are very familiar with racial injustices within the justice system. Stevenson focused more on the ways that the law disproportionately affects black people due to racist judges, juries, and cities. The events at Homan Square focus on those that are supposed to be the enforcers of justice: the police. Racial biases are still prevalent throughout America and through other recent instance of police brutality, many of these incidents have been brought to the public eye. Within our discussions of the UDHR and subsequent human rights documents, we noticed how certain documents specified that it was illegal to discriminate based on race, color, religion, etc. The events at Homan Square clearly exemplify discrimination and denial of rights based off of race and color; therefore breaking the laws and policies that are the basis for the current human rights regime. Other reports of sexual abuse, only add to the catastrophe that has taken place in the middle of Chicago.


So, we ask you:
Who's responsibility is it to take action against the Chicago Police Department, the international community or the federal government?
How can we prevent human rights abuses, such as the one at Homan Square, from occurring?
What changes can the government make to provide all citizens the freedoms, that are taken away due to racial discrimination, they are obliged to?


Links:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/19/homan-square-chicago-police-disappeared-thousands

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/14/homan-square-detainee-police-abuse

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2015/02/behind-the-disappeared-of-chicagos-homan-square/385964/

Capitalism's Negative Impact on Human Rights: The 5,000% Increase in AIDs Medication

http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/heraldextra.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/5/d5/5d51a429-b8f6-51b0-b980-f7cac5af3d0c/50b860791d3df.preview-620.jpg

Turing Pharmaceuticals CEO Martin Shkreli caring about the well-being of his company's consumers 

          Capitalism is a system that allows and often encourages large companies to take advantage of its consumers.  Human rights are often disregarded in this competitive marketplace.  Some companies will ignore people's rights as declared in the UDHR for the sake of making more capital.  This issue becomes alarmingly evident in the case of Martin Shkreli, CEO of Turing Pharmaceuticals hiking up the price of AIDs medication daraprim 5,000% from $13.50 a tablet to $750.  This tablet, which costs about $1 to produce, now becomes difficult for the average American to purchase.  Shkreli knew he was taking advantage of the fact that this medication is need-based; he could only justify his decision by saying that this price increase was primarily to assist in further AIDs research.  Groups such as the HIV Medicine Association and The Infectious Diseases Society of America wrote to Turing Pharmaceuticals: "This cost is unjustifiable for the medically-vulnerable patient population in need of this medication, and unsustainable for the healthcare system".  Making this medication unaffordable to a large majority of people who need it is a violation of the UDHR that is being brought up by these groups against Shkreli and his company.  Article 25 states: "Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control".  By raising the price, Shkreli and his company are completely disregarding this article.  This company has the ability to assist in securing everyone the right to their health, but in this capitalist society they place money over ensuring this right.  The focus of this company, which is meant to create medicine to improve the quality of life of those affected by AIDs, is much more on profit than on anything on the humanitarian level.  

         Disparity between capitalism and human rights becomes clearly evident in Shkreli's statements about the increase in price.  In an interview discussing his decision to increase this price to such an incredulous percentage, "Shkreli first said that it was 'a great business decision that also benefits all of our stakeholders'".  Stakeholders first, patients second; investors first, consumers second.  This dangerous idea is one that fills the capitalist society, where companies care more about their investors than the people actually purchasing the product.  It becomes especially dangerous when these companies ignore the actual needs of their customers just to make their stakeholders happy, as Shkreli stated.  Although he says the money will go to research, what company needs to increase the price of their product 5,000% just to make a 'fair profit'?  Furthermore, this is not the first time the Shkreli has tried drastically increasing the price of a pharmaceutical products of his own company: "He was forced out of the last drug company he founded, Retrophin, which specialized in buying the rights to little-known drugs and increasing their prices".  What's disturbing is that, in a capitalist society, that it is possible to do this.  Shkreli knows exactly what he wants by increasing his medication by 5,000%; the issue was that this time his intentions were exposed by a large number of people on social media.  

Discussion Questions

1.  Do companies owe their consumers anything; does Shkreli owe the purchasers of his drug anything?

2.  How do you prevent companies in a capitalist system from taking advantage of its customers?

3.  Is Shkreli justified in this as a business decision; is he right in trying to make as much profit from his company as he can?

Sources

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3246093/Drugs-boss-hiked-price-life-saving-AIDS-treatment-5-000-cent-tried-kidney-pills-vows-reduce-price-refuses-say-much.html

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/business/a-huge-overnight-increase-in-a-drugs-price-raises-protests.html?referer=&_r=1

http://www.blackenterprise.com/news/turing-pharmaceuticals-aids-medication-price-increase/

Civil War in Somalia

The country of Somalia is a very young country that has not able to gain enough stability to prosper. Somalia was created in 1960 by merging the Italian Somaliland and the British Somaliland. It quickly became a socialist state in 1970 with Major General Barre in power. The overthrow of President Barre in 1991 by rebel forces started the civil war still going on today. Many regional governments have been established but they do not help the stability of the country.  The UN had some involvement in Somalia through military action and food aid in the 1990’s but they had little success. After over 20 years of unsuccessful national governments, an internationally supported government known as the Transitional Federal Government was established in 2012. This did not end the problems occurring in Somalia. Because of the amount of groups fighting against each other including the Transitional Federal Government, Ethiopian National Defense Forces, insurgents specifically the al-Shabaab, civilians are put in the center of the war.  According to nongovernmental organization, Human Rights Watch, all three of these groups are involved in the human rights violations occurring. Many times civilians are caught in cross fire between the government and insurgent forces. The lack of access to medical care means that an injury will most likely result in death. The insurgents also target children to recruit them into their militia or force them into marriages. Over 1,000,000 Somalians have been displaced from their homes to flee the violence in recent years. A majority of these Somalians are from Mogadishu, Somalia’s capital. If a Somalian can successfully escape the violence most likely after having to endure sexual abuses, beatings, and lootings, the humanitarian agencies face many challenges in helping them besides the large amount of people. Al-Shabaab creates blockades so supplies and assistance cannot get to the people in camps. There has also many attacks and killings on the doctors and personal working in the camps. Currently, the UN supports the African Union Mission in Somalia as a way to provide support to Somalia. It is currently looking to expand this involvement and the area the African Union Mission in Somalia covers but no definite plans have been made for how to solve the human rights violations in Somalia.

The ongoing Somali Civil War connects with a couple of critical issues we have already discussed in other current events presentations. In a similar manner to how the violence between insurgent groups such as ISIS in the Middle East have been fighting the government of Syria and Iraq, groups in Somalia such as al-Shabab fighting with the Traditional Federal Government had caused an influx of people leaving the country. That fact that over two million Somalis have been displaced once again raises the question of how we accommodate the needs of the refugees. We are able to see similar themes in refugee camps for Somali displaced peoples compared to the ones for Syrian war refugees, including their access to water, food, shelter, medical attention, and education. Some camps are even forced to shut down due to the efforts of al-Shabab to cut off humanitarian aid from the UN and global humanitarian agencies, similar to how certain Syrian refugee camps are targeted by radical groups such as Hezbollah. Connecting the story to Persepolis, there is a worrying tendency for both sides to use child soldiers as a means to fuel their war effort, although the situation is not an international conflict but instead a matter of civil war. Al-Shabab controlled areas can force boys at the age of nine to take up arms and fight against the TFG, under the ideology that they will be martyrs for the cause. Girls are also forced to support the war effort under al-Shabab’s sharia law, which requires them to marry members of the group and manage their homes as faithful wives, while all other options for girls such as pursuing university level education is cut off. The TFG of Somalia is also responsible for the severity of the child soldier problem in Somalia, since they have been documented recruiting their own children and killing those of al-Shabab’s.

How should the UN and international forces intervene in Somalia to be effective?

Is it possible to restore Somalia as a united nation, or is a multi-state solution the only way for Somalia to see the return of peace?

Sources:

https://www.hrw.org/news/2008/03/30/human-rights-crisis-somalia

https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2015/country-chapters/somalia

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-14094503

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/somalia.htm

http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/countries/africa/somalia

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14094503 ​ 

India Rape Crisis

               

      India has a long history of public and gang rape. This year there have been over one thousand cases of gang rape alone. The most recent attack was on July 30^th and a few weeks ago the Amnesty International club had a fundraiser for the two girls that were sentenced to public rape. Two sisters, ages fifteen and twenty-three, were sentenced to gang-rape because their brother eloped with a woman from another caste.  In India it is strictly forbidden to marry someone that is in a higher class than you. The sisters and the rest of their family are part of the Dalit caste, which one of the poorer classes. Their sentence also states that after they have been raped they must walk around their village naked with black face paint on. The inhumane nature of this punishment makes us wonder what type of government would sentence two young girls to such a cruel punishment. The sentence was not created by an official Indian court but by an unelected panel of men. These panels act as a court in several Indian villages even though legally they have no power.  The problem with these illegitimate courts is that in many cases women are treated unfairly and are sentenced to cruel and unusual punishments. Unfortunately India’s Supreme Court does not enforce the rule of law onto these panels and as a result they continue to mistreat many Indian women. Non-profit organizations have tried to stop cruel punishment but unfortunately they have not successfully ended the unfair treatment of women.

      In this story, we can see not only flagrant human rights violations of the woman sentenced to rape, but also the widespread violation of human rights in connection with India’s dalit social caste. Just by glancing at the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it is apparent that India, which signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, is not upholding its intentions to move towards universal human rights. The first human right that this case violates is Article 1 in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This article states that “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood”. The very status of women in rural Indian villages such as the one in the eastern Indian state of Jharkand is that they are considered “property” of their fathers or husbands. This violates the law that every human being is free and equal to any other, as property implies ownership, and ownership of a person does not equal freedom. Women in this village are viewed as property of their husbands or fathers. By raping these two sisters, the village views this not as a violation of their human rights, but as an attack on the honor of their husbands or fathers. The psychological state of the woman herself is completely ignored and viewed as irrelevant as she is held to be subhuman. Another article that this sentence violates is article 5 of the UDHR, which states that “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”. The public rape of any woman is cruel, inhuman, degrading and undeserved. The even more disgusting part of this situation is that this sentence is even being debated, so much so that it has reached the Supreme Court. Even though it should be a no-brainer that this is a violation of human rights, the problem lies in the disagreement of what it constitutes to mean being human. The two sisters and their brother are part of the dalit social caste, otherwise known as the Untouchables. The Untouchables are the members of the lowest case of the Hindu caste system. Any contact with the Untouchables supposedly defiles members of the upper castes. Dalits are constantly subjected to appalling human rights violations, including murder, rape, forced prostitution and other forms of slavery. Although the caste system is ostensibly outlawed in India, these crimes are committed with impunity by members of higher castes. This caste discrimination in and of itself blatantly violates human rights, and explains why the punishment of these two sisters is even a question. If the sisters are dalits, they are for all intensive purposes, according to the caste system, sub-human and therefore will not be given human rights. So long as the misogyny that is so deeply entrenched in this village and the inherent dismissal of human rights due to the caste system remains, there is little hope for universal human rights. The best that can be done is to call on the international community to condemn, and more importantly, stop such violations.
Discussion Questions:

      Does public humiliation inherently violate human rights? Why or why not

      What can the international community to stop these kinds of cruel punishment?