The decision of an International Mock Trial on Human Rights on Ernst Rüdin was rendered by judges of the highest standing and experience. The trial however was not a real court case, but an action part of an educational program for young leaders organized by the Social Excellence Forum at the United Nations Headquarters in New York. It was part of the 2023 Holocaust Remembrance under the UN Outreach Programme on the Holocaust.
In an imagined courtroom, 32 students between 15 and 22 years old, from ten countries representing a diversity of nationalities, religions, ethnicities and beliefs from around the world, interrogated the so-called father of Nazi Racial Hygiene, ardent Nazi Ernst Rüdin (his person was presented by an actor). A psychiatrist, geneticist, and eugenicist Ernst Rüdin was responsible for untold suffering and death during the 1930s and 40s.
Young litigator. Photo Credit: THIX Photo
The young litigators introduced the Mock Trial with the statement: “The man on trial today never faced a court of law. He was never made to answer for the murderous acts he condoned and facilitated, nor did he have to face the consequences of the role he played in supporting the genocidal policies of the Nazis – in part due to lack of evidence at the time – which we now have – and in part due to a prosecution strategy.”
Young Prosecutor confronting the defendant Ernst Rüdin with the 1933 Nazi Sterilization law for which he co-authored the official commentary as evidence presented to the Court. Photo Credit: THIX Photo
It was further noted, that while this trial did not happen at the time, and the man who was portraying Ernst Rüdin is an actor, the man Ernst Rüdin was very real. And while “he never found a single shred of actual scientific evidence to back up his “Racial Hygiene” ideology, he did not hesitate to promote it with the full force, reputation and authority of medical science,” in service of his personal bias.
Rüdin helped formulate and especially worked on the implementation of the 1933 Nazi “Law for the Prevention of Offspring with Hereditary Diseases” that legalized the forced sterilization of some 400,000 Germans between 1934 and 1939. Rüdin helped to implement the so-called “T4 programme,” — the first mass murder committed under National Socialism (Nazi). Rüdin was directly involved in the killing of children in order to conduct post-mortem research. Because of a loophole in the law, Rüdin was never prosecuted for his crimes.
Young litigator. Photo Credit: THIX Photo
When asked why holding a mock trial today some 70 years after the fact? The answer given was, that through exposing the injustices Ernst Rüdin brought about, some form of justice is restored – it is the justice of acknowledging the irrefutable facts of what took place in Nazi Germany, who the perpetrators and collaborators were, and never forgetting the victims.
Young litigator. Photo Credit: THIX Photo
They added that “We wish to convey an unequivocal and clear message to everyone in the world, that humanity has a multi-generational memory, and those who violated human rights of others will be remembered and brought to justice even after many decades have passed.”
After the Second World War, Ernst Rüdin, who was considered one of the major figures in German psychiatry, genetics and eugenics in the first half of the 20th century, claimed that he was a scientist and not a politician, and thus innocent. He was believed, denazified and classified a nominal party member. The psychiatrist who helped develop the Nazi mass sterilization law, and played a key part in the murder of over 300,000 people deemed to be unworthy of life, died in retirement in 1952, a free man.
Young litigator. Photo Credit: THIX Photo
The panel of three judges of the International Mock Trial consisted of distinguished and proven judges with experience at the highest level. The presiding Judge, the Honorable Judge Angelika Nussberger is a former Vice President of the European Court of Human Rights, the Honourable Judge Silvia Fernández de Gurmendi has been the President of the International Criminal Court (Ret.), and the Honourable Judge Elyakim Rubinstein is a former Vice President of the Israeli Supreme Court.
Following the hours long proceedings by the young prosecution and defense litigators, the judges deliberated and found Ernst Rüdin guilty of:
1. Incitement to Crimes against Humanity of murder, extermination, torture and persecution
2. Incitement as well as directly causing the crime against humanity of sterilization
3. Membership in Criminal Organizations [the Association of German Neurologists and Psychiatrists] as per Articles 9 and 10 to the Nuremberg Principles.
Young litigator. Photo Credit: THIX Photo
The young litigators noted, “today, we believe that justice was served because Rüdin’s lie that he was innocent, has been proven beyond doubt, false.”
They further noted, “We, young leaders from around the world, are not here only to restore historical justice; We are here to make a change. To inspire. To create an effect. To warn of the danger of racism in all its forms and the terrible consequences of classifying and discriminating against people on the basis of a disability, religious affiliation, genetic or ethnic belonging or any other arbitrary reason.
Young litigator. Photo Credit: THIX Photo
We are here today because it is important for us to make the world recognize and respect the diversity and uniqueness of each and every one of us, and to encourage everyone to strengthen international solidarity for the protection of human rights.
The United Nations Headquarters in New York hosted the International Mock Trial on Human Rights as part of the 2023 Holocaust Remembrance under the UN Outreach Programme on the Holocaust. In an imagined courtroom, 32 students between 15 and 22 years old, from ten countries, interrogate the so-called father of Nazi Racial Hygiene, ardent Nazi Ernst Rüdin (his person was presented by an actor). A psychiatrist, geneticist, and eugenicist, Rüdin was responsible for untold suffering and death during the 1930s and 40s. On trial was the right for those most vulnerable to be protected from harm; the responsibility of leadership; and the place of ethics within the sciences.
The panel of three judges of the International Mock Trial consisted of distinguished and proven judges with experience at the highest level.
The presiding Judge, the Honorable Judge Angelika Nussberger is a German professor of law who was the judge in respect of Germany at the European Court of Human Rights from 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2019; from 2017 to 2019 she was the Court’s Vice-President.
The honorable Judge Silvia Alejandra Fernández de Gurmendi is an Argentine lawyer, diplomat and judge. She has been a judge at the International Criminal Court (ICC) from 20 January 2010 and President of the ICC from March 2015 to March 2018. In 2020 she was elected to serve as President of the Assembly of States Parties to Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court for the twentieth to twenty-second sessions (2021-2023).
And the Honourable Judge Elyakim Rubinstein, a former Vice President of the Supreme Court of Israel. Prof. Elyakim Rubinstein has also been an Israeli diplomat and longtime civil servant, who served as the Attorney General of Israel from 1997 to 2004.
Indictment: In the Special International Court for Human Rights: Case no. 001-2022 Prosecutor: Humanity Defendant: Professor Ernst Rüdin, dual citizen of Switzerland and Germany For the purpose of this trial, the honorable court is asked to issue a declarative judgment whether the defendant bears direct or indirect responsibility, as per the legal definitions of a non-military commander or what is known as “Co-Perpetrator”, to the following acts or omissions: 1. Incitement to Crimes against Humanity of murder, extermination, torture and persecution in accordance with articles 7(1)(a), 7(1)(b), 7(1)(f), 7(1)(g) and 7(1)(h) to the Statute of Rome, as well as Article 6(c) from 1945; 2. Incitement to Genocide in accordance with Article 6 of the Statue of Rome as well as Article 3(c) to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide from 1948; 3. Incitement as well as directly causing the crime against humanity of sterilization in accordance with Article 7(1)(g) to the Statute of Rome as well as Articles 7, 17(1). 4. Membership in Criminal Organizations as per Articles 9 and 10 to the Nuremberg Principles.
The presiding Judge, the Honorable Judge Angelika Nussberger. Photo credit: THIX Photo
“Let me start by explaining in a few words why this case is so important. I want to highlight five aspects.
First, the case illustrates the disastrous consequences of an ideology where the individual and his or her dignity and destiny do not matter. In Nazi Germany, the propagandistic slogan was “You are nothing, your people are everything”. The case shows to which extremes such an ideology may lead. It is not only in the past, but also in the present that such ideologies exist, even if Nazi Germany was the most atrocious example. That is why the inviolability of the dignity of each human being should be the starting point for all legal assessments.
Second, the case illustrates white collar criminal responsibility, more concretely, the responsibility of scientists. They cannot act in an ivory tower and pretend not to be responsible for the consequences of their research, theories, and findings.
Third, the non-prosecution of someone who has committed atrocious crimes is an injustice so painfully felt even by later generations, that it has to be addressed. Even if justice cannot be done any more, it should be made clear what justice would have required to do.
Forth, even if a crime is committed by many and in many countries, it is still a crime.
And fifth, it is true that values and convictions change over time. Nevertheless, there are core values like human dignity and the right to life and to physical integrity that must never be put in question.
“Now, let me come to the assessment of Mr Rüdin’s case based on international criminal law.
The Prosecution is “Humanity”, so the case is not fixed in time and space. That is an important factor.
The Prosecution has brought the case against the Accused under the Statute of Rome, under the Genocide Convention and under the Statute of the International Military Tribunal of Nuremberg. These laws did not yet exist at the time when – according to the Prosecution – the Defendant committed his crimes, that is, before 1945. The principle of “nullum crimen sine lege” (“no crime without a law”) can be seen as part of the universally recognized principles of law. But this principle allows trial and punishment based on general principles of law recognized by civilized nations. Thus, the Statute of Rome, the Genocide Convention and the Statute of the International Military Tribunal of Nuremberg are applicable insofar as they mirror general principles of law valid already before 1945.
The first crime the Accused is charged with is incitement to crimes against humanity of murder, extermination, torture and persecution against an identifiable group or collectivity, here people with disabilities. It has been convincingly shown by the Prosecution that the Accused acted intentionally – based on deep convictions – in supporting the euthanasia and the sterilization program of the Nazi government in his writings and in his speeches and proclamations. There was a direct causal link between his research and public statements and the enactment of the programs based on those theories. The euthanasia and the sterilization program encompass the criminal acts of murder, extermination, torture, and persecution against an identifiable group. Accordingly, I find that the Accused should be held responsible in respect of charge number one.
The second crime the Accused is charged with is incitement to genocide. According to the Genocide Convention as well as to the Rome Statute genocide has to be committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. It is not, however, related to disabled people. Thus, it cannot be argued that before or even after 1945 there existed a general principle of law recognized by civilized nations identifying acts committed against people with disabilities as “genocide”. Accordingly, the accused cannot be found guilty of incitement to genocide and would have to be acquitted under charge number two.
The third crime the Accused is charged with is incitement to as well as directly causing the crime against humanity of sterilization. Sterilization is to be considered as an act of torture. Thus, what has been said under charge number one applies here as well. Accordingly, I find that the Accused should also be held responsible in respect of charge number three.
The fourth crime is membership in the criminal organization of the Association of German Neurologists and Psychiatrists. This organization was, as was shown by the Prosecution, responsible for the implementation of the Euthanasia program. Accordingly, I find that the Accused should also be held responsible in respect of charge number four.”
Honourable Judge Silvia Fernández de Gurmendi:
The Honourable Judge Silvia Fernández de Gurmendi. Photo credit: THIX Photo
“Before giving my assessment of the crimes committed in the case we try here, I would like to congratulate all parties and participants for their presentations, you have all greatly contributed to a better understanding of the circumstances and ideas that escalated into heinous acts and ultimately led to the Holocaust.
Having listened carefully to all arguments, I am convinced beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Ernst Rüdin is guilty on all charges, except for the charge of incitement to genocide, for the reasons I will develop further.
I would like to focus briefly on three crucial arguments raised by the Defence.
First, according to the defense, Ernst Rüdin, who died 70 years ago, cannot be judged through the lens of our current laws and values.
Indeed, the principle of legality requires us to judge Mr Rüdin according to the law and values that were applicable at his time, not ours.
However, based on the evidence that was presented, including the public uproar provoked by the killings when they became known, I am convinced that his acts were neither legal nor acceptable at the time of their commission.
It is true that the theories advocated by the defendant were not initiated by him and were also endorsed in many other countries, including here in the United States, where many states had passed sterilization laws.
However, Mr Rüdin’s culpability is not based only on the theories he upheld but, rather, on the concrete actions he promoted to ensure their extreme implementation. This went far beyond forced sterilization, resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths and ultimately paved the way to the Holocaust.
Second set of arguments. The defendant cannot be responsible for criminal acts because he held no official position.
However, I cannot agree with this argument, the Nuremberg Tribunal convicted and sentenced to death Julius Streicher, owner of the newspaper Der Sturmer, for his involvement in the Nazi propaganda against the Jews, although he did not hold any administrative position nor harm anyone directly.
Mr Rüdin was not part of the state apparatus either, but he exercised leadership in relation to the entire field of Psychiatry and Racial Hygiene. The Society of German Neurologists and Psychiatrists, which he led, became itself a criminal organisation as virtually all members and managing board were directly involved in the execution of the forced sterilization and the so-called “euthanasia” program.
Third set of arguments. The defendant’s conduct does not qualify as incitement to genocide because the “disabled” is not one of the groups included in the applicable definition of genocide.
I believe this is correct, as already referred here by the presiding judge Nussberger. Only attacks to destroy national, ethnic, racial, or religious groups may constitute genocide under existing law. Again based on the principle of legality, an expansion of this law cannot be done by judges but would require a reform of the Rome Statute. It is therefore not applicable to the defendant.
Distinguished participants, today’s trial demonstrates the dangerous slippery road that starting with discrimination, even in a theoretical form, may escalate to atrocious crimes. Indeed, genocide does not happen overnight. It is the culmination of a long process, which may begin with words, hateful messages, or, as in this case, pseudo-scientific theories to justify discrimination of a group.
Considering what we have learned today, it is now up to you to identify any current gaps in national or international law and to seek to promote additional standards as may be necessary to prevent and sanction more effectively any form of prejudice or intolerance.”
Honourable Judge Elyakim Rubinstein:
The Honourable Judge Elyakim Rubinstein. Photo credit: THIX Photo
“It is amazing and disappointing that Ernst Rüdin escaped indictment in the post-Nazi era, and was able to end his life peacefully. How did it happen? Reading the shocking evidence poses this question, indeed shouts the question.
And I will not repeat the legal reasons brought by my honorable colleagues. The Shoah was the major Nazi crime. That does not mean that the wicked race ideology did not bear other rotten fruit, that may have lead to the Shoah, as mentioned before. Euthanasia and the crimes again connected with it, including the evidence of “the forced sterilization of 400,000 human beings” and “the systematic killings of 300,000 human beings including 10,000 children, who were labeled ‘feeble-minded’ or mentally ill or handicapped”, consisted a part and an implementation of that theory, for which the defendant was especially responsible. There is no real denial of that, supported by documents and not even by the speech by the defendant.
And beyond that there is the slippery slope: what started with euthanasia deteriorated into a much wider dark picture – the systematic murder of six million Jews and many others: Roma (Gypsies) and other human groups. In particular in an era of renewed antisemitism it is our sacred duty to remember and never forget. And this mock trial is a good reminder against those human rights violations.
The defendant argues concerning eugenics and sterilization that such actions were acceptable in different countries during the Nazi era. After having studied the evidence, I believe this is different in theory and practice. Here we deal with a major murder plan, whatever “scientific” packaging and theorizing was used. It is very difficult, indeed unacceptable, to compare it with an American case, albeit bad and puzzling such as Buck v. Bell. It stands by itself, as in the Unites States, while sad and totally unacceptable deeds indeed happened, it never developed into a “strategy of mass killing” of extermination.
I concur with my two colleagues and their well-written opinions. The main point that distinguishes Rüdin and his policy from other countries and their doctors was the translation of the theory into mass implementation, a pathway to the Holocaust. Indeed, he had no official position, but had “indirect direct” involvement, by training doctors and others to implement the crimes envisioned by him and his colleagues in the Society of German Neurologists and Psychiatrists, many of whom performed the “real” work. And I agree that the genocide treaty, initiated by a Jewish refugee from Poland, Raphael Lemkin, for legal reasons of interpretation of the Statute of Rome, should not be part of the conviction in the eyes of the criminal law which insists on the principle of legality.
I mentioned before, the subject of this trial, and Rüdin’s history and wicked influence, are ideologically and practically a part of the Nazi era, the climax of which was the Holocaust.
In this particular Rüdin case, Germans were a major part of the victims. The Shoah, of course, consisted mainly of Jewish victims. Humanity made a long way since 1945, both in international and domestic legislation of Treaties and Laws.
And I would like to express the hope and my two colleagues in fact, represent [through] their former positions as judges in the international effort for human rights and for criminal convictions of perpetrators. I would like to express the hope that crimes such as Rüdin’s could not happen today. Regretfully, I am not sure. There is the bad slippery slope; you begin with a step which may seem innocent, even scientific. You end up with millions of people exterminated.
The rise of antisemitism rather human rights violations is evident. It should be fought against by all legal means – public, diplomatic and judicial.
“This trial is not for revenge, which is in God’s possession. But we can speak of a positive revenge. New generations who rose from the ashes of the Shoah, those who survived who now have great grand-children and some of them are part of the team here.
Having said that, I am still optimistic that wherever there are perpetrators of crimes under international law, there will nowadays be efforts to enforce the law. Courts will stand up to the challenge.
Finally, the idea to conduct this mock proceeding was indeed right. The educational benefits are very important and self-explanatory. We all have to work against racist occurrences, foreign or domestic, with an eye to the future.”
Discarded textiles in Europe, including used clothing and footwear, are an increasing waste and export problem. Rapidly increasing EU exports of used textiles — some of which is reused and some of which ends up in landfills — show that Europe faces a challenge in how to handle its own used textiles, according to a European Environment Agency (EEA) briefing published today.
The amount of used textiles exported from the European Union (EU) has tripled over the past two decades, and the amounts may increase further, according to the EEA briefing ‘EU exports of used textiles in Europe’s circular economy’. The briefing is based on a more detailed analysis by the EEA’s European Topic Centre of Circular Economy and Resource Use.
Europe faces major challenges in the management of used textiles, which are to be collected separately in the EU by 2025. As reuse and recycling capacities in Europe are limited, a large share of discarded and donated clothing and other textile products are exported to Africa and Asia. Common public perceptions that used clothing donations are always of use in those regions do not reflect the reality. Once exported, the fate of used textiles is often uncertain, according to the EEA briefing which looks at the patterns of and trends in EU exports of used textiles from 2000 to 2019.
According to analysed data from the United Nations, EU exports of textiles have increased and shifted from mainly African destinations to both Africa and Asia. The briefing also shows how some challenges related to these exports are being addressed in current and proposed EU policies. In the EU strategy on sustainable and circular textiles, published in March 2022, the need for addressing the challenges from exports is specifically mentioned.
The amount of used textiles exported from the EU has tripled over the past two decades from slightly over 550,000 tonnes in 2000 to almost 1.7 million tonnes in 2019.
The amount of used textiles exported in 2019 was on average 3.8 kilogrammes per person, or 25% of the approximately 15 kg of textiles consumed each year in the EU.
In 2019, 46% of used textiles exported from the EU ended up in Africa. The textiles primarily go to local reuse as there is a demand for cheap, used clothes from Europe. What is not fit for reuse mostly ends up in open landfills and informal waste streams.
In 2019, 41% of used textiles exported from the EU ended up in Asia. Most of these textiles are directed to dedicated economic zones where they are sorted and processed. The used textiles are then mostly downcycled into industrial rags or filling, or re-exported for recycling in other Asian countries or for reuse in Africa. Textiles that cannot be recycled or re-exported likely end up in landfills.
Bio-based fibre products: do they offer a ‘greener’ alternative?
Bio-based fibres that are used in clothing and other textile products are often regarded as more sustainable alternatives, but a new technical report by the EEA’s European Topic Centre of Circular Economy and Resource Use demonstrates that this picture requires some caution.
While bio-based fibres offer potential to steer away from synthetic textiles made from plastics (mainly derived from oil and gas), they cause other environmental pressures, including water and land use related to agricultural activities, deforestation and fibre processing. Moreover, the report highlights that their bio-based origin does not free them from environmental concerns related to microfibres, waste and recyclability.
Raising concerns over such continuous reports of revisionism concerning atrocity crimes perpetrated during the three-year-long conflict that began in 1992, she also pointed to recent incidents reported following a decision to amend the Law on the Center for the Srebrenica-Potočari Memorial and Cemetery for the Victims of the 1995 Genocide.
“The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia determined conclusively that a genocide was committed in Srebrenica,” she said.
“Denial of the genocide is an affront to international law and justice and to the dignity of the victims and survivors whose loved ones were killed simply because of who they were.”
Acknowledging the efforts of survivors and other civil society actors in Bosnia and Herzegovina, she said they are tackling the denial of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, and promoting sustainable peace, and reconciliation across the country.
These stakeholders are working tirelessly to promote a future where division, hate, and denial has no place, she said, encouraging all political, religious, and community leaders to support such initiatives and to lead by example in using their voices to promote constructive dialogue based on trust, respect, and dignity.
“The most serious cases of genocide and Holocaust denial can constitute incitement to discrimination, hostility, or violence, and to genocide,” the policy paper noted. “Historical experience has shown us that such violence often includes denial of past violations and is almost alwayspreceded by online and offline hate speech.”
The paper also contains targeted guidance and recommendations for addressing genocide denial for such key actors as governments, the UN system, and social media companies, she said.
Migrating Birds – Every year, millions of birds undertake incredible journeys, often covering thousands of miles, to reach their seasonal habitats. This annual migration is driven by changes in food availability, weather patterns, and the need to breed.
The UCLA study has the potential to enhance scientists’ understanding of the dangers faced by birds and their capacity for adaptation.
It is widely understood that adverse weather conditions can disorient birds during their fall migrations, leading them to end up in unfamiliar territory. But why, even when the weather is not a major factor, do birds travel far away from their usual routes?
According to a recent paper by ecologists at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), disturbances in the Earth’s magnetic field may cause birds to stray from their migration paths, a phenomenon known as “vagrancy.” This can occur even in ideal weather conditions and is particularly prevalent during fall migration. The findings were recently published in the journal Scientific Reports.
With North America’s bird populations steadily declining, assessing the causes of vagrancy could help scientists better understand the threats birds face and the ways they adapt to those threats. For example, birds that wind up in unfamiliar territory are likely to face challenges finding food and habitats that suit them, and may die as a result. But it also could be beneficial for birds whose traditional homes are becoming uninhabitable due to climate change, by “accidentally” introducing the animals into geographic regions that are now better suited for them.
Earth’s magnetic field, which runs between the North and South Poles, is generated by several factors, both above and below the planet’s surface. Decades’ worth of lab research suggests that birds can sense magnetic fields using magnetoreceptors in their eyes. The new UCLA study lends support to those findings from an ecological perspective.
“There’s increasing evidence that birds can actually see geomagnetic fields,” said Morgan Tingley, the paper’s corresponding author and a UCLA associate professor of ecology and evolutionary biology. “In familiar areas, birds may navigate by geography, but in some situations, it’s easier to use geomagnetism.”
But birds’ ability to navigate using geomagnetic fields can be impaired when those magnetic fields are disturbed. Such disturbances can come from the sun’s magnetic field, for example, particularly during periods of heightened solar activity, such as sunspots and solar flares, but also from other sources.
“If the geomagnetic field experiences disturbance, it’s like using a distorted map that sends the birds off course,” Tingley said.
Lead researcher Benjamin Tonelli, a UCLA doctoral student, worked with Tingley and postdoctoral researcher Casey Youngflesh to compare data from 2.2 million birds, representing 152 species, that had been captured and released between 1960 and 2019 — part of a United States Geological Survey tracking program — against historic records of geomagnetic disturbances and solar activity.
While other factors such as weather likely play bigger roles in causing vagrancy, the researchers found a strong correlation between birds that were captured far outside of their expected range and the geomagnetic disturbances that occurred during both fall and spring migrations. But the relationship was particularly pronounced during the fall migration, the authors noted.
Geomagnetic disturbances affected the navigation of both young birds and their elders, suggesting that birds rely similarly on geomagnetism regardless of their level of migration experience.
The researchers had expected that geomagnetic disturbances associated with heightened solar activity would be associated with the most vagrancy. To their surprise, solar activity actually reduced the incidence of vagrancy. One possible reason is that radiofrequency activity generated by the solar disturbances could make birds’ magnetoreceptors unusable, leaving birds to navigate by other cues instead.
“We think the combination of high solar activity and geomagnetic disturbance leads to either a pause in migration or a switch to other cues during fall migration,” Tonelli said. “Interestingly, birds that migrate during the day were generally exceptions to this rule — they were more affected by solar activity.”
Although the researchers only studied birds, their methods and findings could help scientists understand why other migratory species, including whales, become disoriented or stranded far from their usual territory.
“This research was actually inspired by whale strandings, and we hope our work will help other scientists who study animal navigation,” Tingley said.
To make the research more accessible to the birdwatching public, Tonelli developed a web-based tool that tracks geomagnetic conditions and predicts vagrancy in real-time. The tracker is offline during the winter, but it will go live again in the spring, when migration begins again.
Reference: “Geomagnetic disturbance associated with increased vagrancy in migratory landbirds” by Benjamin A. Tonelli, Casey Youngflesh, and Morgan W. Tingley, 9 January 2023, Scientific Reports. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-26586-0
On the sad commemoration of one year since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the Council adopted today a tenth package of additional restrictive measures giving another turn of the screw to the government of the Russian Federation and those responsible for Russia’s continuing war of aggression.
PUTIN IS ESCALATING THIS ILLEGAL AGGRESSION, WEAPONISING WINTER, FOOD AND HUNGER. RUSSIA CONTINUES TO SHOW ITS INHUMAN FACE WITH BRUTAL MISSILE TERROR AGAINST CIVILIAN TARGETS. TODAY’S 10TH PACKAGE OF SANCTIONS TARGETS THOSE WHO ARE INSTRUMENTAL IN THE CONTINUATION OF THIS BRUTAL WAR. WE ARE TAKING MORE MEASURES, TACKLING THE BANKING SECTOR, ACCESS TO DUAL-USE TECHNOLOGY AND ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES. WE WILL CONTINUE TO INCREASE PRESSURE ON RUSSIA – AND WE WILL DO IT FOR AS LONG AS NEEDED, UNTIL UKRAINE IS LIBERATED FROM THE BRUTAL RUSSIAN AGGRESSION.JOSEP BORRELL, HIGH REPRESENTATIVE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND SECURITY POLICY
Today’s decision imposes further export bansoncritical technology and industrial goods, such as electronics, specialised vehicles, machine parts, spare parts for trucks and jet engines, as well as goods for the construction sector which can be directed to Russia’s military, such as antennas or cranes.
The list of restricted items that could contribute to the technologicalenhancement ofRussia’s defence and security sector will now include additional new electronic components that are be used in Russian weapons systems retrieved on the battlefield, including drones, missiles, helicopters, as well as specific rare earth materials, electronic integrated circuits, and thermal cameras.
Dual use goods are also targeted. Today’s decision expands the list of entities supporting directly Russia’s military and industrial complex in its war of aggression by additional 96 entities, thereby imposing tighter export restrictions on them.
For the first time ever, this list will include sevenIranian entities manufacturing military unmanned aerial vehicles, which have been used by Russia’s military in its war of aggression including against civilian infrastructure.
Furthermore the Council decided to prohibit the transit through Russia of EU exported dual use goods and technology, in order to avoid circumvention.
Lastly, further restrictions are imposed on imports of goods which generate significant revenues for Russia, such as asphalt and synthetic rubber.
Broadcasting
In order to address the Russian Federation’s systematic, international campaign of disinformation and information manipulation intended to destabilise its neighbouring countries, the EU and its member states, the Council initiated the process for suspending the broadcasting licences of two additional media outlets: RT Arabic and Sputnik Arabic. These outlets are under the permanent direct or indirect control of the leadership of the Russian Federation and have been used by latter for its continuous and concerted disinformation and war propaganda actions, which legitimise Russia’s aggression and undermine support for Ukraine. In line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights, these measures will not prevent those media outlets and their staff from carrying out activities in the EU other than broadcasting, e.g. research and interviews.
Critical infrastructure
Today’s decision restricts the possibility for Russian nationals to hold any position in the governing bodies of EU critical infrastructures and entities, as Russia’s influence in these bodies could jeopardise their well-functioning and ultimately constitute and hazard for the provision of essential services to the European citizens.
Energy
The Council introduced the prohibition to provide gas storage capacity (with the exclusion of the part of LNG facilities) to Russian nationals, in order to protect the security of gas supply in the EU, and avoid Russia’s weaponisation of its gas supply and risks of market manipulation.
Reporting obligations
In order to ensure the effectiveness of the asset freeze prohibitions, the Council decided to introduce more detailed reporting obligations on funds and economic resources belonging to listed individuals and entities which have been frozen or were subject to any move shortly before the listing. The Council also introduced new reporting obligations to the Member States and to the Commission on immobilizedreserves and assetsof the Central Bank of Russia. Moreover, aircraft operators will have to notify non-scheduled flights to their national competent authorities, which will then inform other member states.
Individual listings
In addition to economic sanctions, the Council decided to list a significant amount of additional individuals and entities.
Three Russian banks have been added to the list of entities subject to the asset freeze and the prohibition to make funds and economic resources available.
In the European Council conclusions of 9 February 2023, the EU reiterated its resolute condemnation of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, which constitutes a manifest violation of the UN Charter, and has brought immense suffering and destruction upon Ukraine and its people.
Russia must stop this atrocious war immediately.
The European Union will stand by Ukraine with steadfast support for as long as it takes, and remains unwavering in its support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
The relevant legal acts will soon be published in the Official Journalof the EU.
On January 31, 2023, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), having considered seven complaints from Jehovah’s Witnesses from Russia, recognized the disruption of worship services from 2010 to 2014 as a violation of fundamental freedoms. The ECHR ruled to pay compensation to the applicants in the amount of 345,773 EUR and another 5,000 EUR as legal costs.
This case concerns the disruption of religious meetings in 17 regions of Russia, as well as searches, confiscation of literature and personal belongings, and several cases of detention with personal searches.
Law enforcement officers, sometimes armed and wearing masks, would brake into the buildings where worship services of Jehovah’s Witnesses were being conducted. The actions of law enforcement officers were justified by technicalities, for example, by the fact that the meetings were organized without prior notice to the authorities. The security forces either demanded that the event be stopped or remained on the premises and filmed what was happening using photo and video equipment, after which they interrogated those present.
On several occasions, police raided places of worship, including private residences. The search warrants did not provide specific grounds. They only stated that the buildings may contain “evidence relevant to the criminal case.”
“The applicants unsuccessfully pleaded with [the police] to postpone the search until after the end of the religious services.” Several similar cases are described in the ECtHR decision (§ 4).
The victims appealed against the actions of the security forces in local courts, but their demands were not satisfied.
ECtHR Decision
The European Court concluded that the actions of the Russian authorities violated Article 9 of the Convention on Human Rights, which declares the fundamental right to participate in peaceful religious assemblies.
Here are excerpts from the judgment of the ECtHR.
“ The disruption of a religious assembly by the authorities and sanctioning oftheapplicants for holding ‘unauthorized’ religious events amounts to ‘interference by a public authority’ with the applicants’ right to manifest their religion.” (§ 9)“The Court has previously noted the consistent case-law of Russia’s Supreme Court that religious meetings, even those conducted on rented premises, did not require prior authorization from, or notice to, the authorities . . . [the applicants’] conviction did not have a clear... legal basis and was not ‘prescribed by law.’” (§ 10)
“It is undisputed that all religious assemblies were peaceful in their nature and were not likely to cause any disturbance or danger to the public order. Their disruption . . . did not pursue a ‘pressing social need’ and therefore not ‘necessary in a democratic society.’” §·11)“The Court finds that the search warrants had been couched in extremely broad terms... They did not specify why the particular premises were targeted, what it wasthat the police expected to find there and what relevant and sufficient reasonsjustified the need to conduct the search.” (§·12)
What Does the Decision of the European Court Mean?
Although the cases reviewed by the ECHR dealt with events prior to the ban on Russian legal entities of Jehovah’s Witnesses in 2017, hundreds of criminal cases filed since then have treated the joint discussion of the Holy Scriptures as a crime.
Yaroslav Sivulskiy, representative of the European Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses, commented on the decision of the ECHR: “The ECHR once again emphasized that there is not and cannot be anything extremist in the religious meetings of Jehovah’s Witnesses. The same was recognized by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of Russia; however, some Russian courts continue to act contrary to these rulings, putting Jehovah’s Witnesses behind bars merely because of their religion.”
More than 60 applications from those who suffered from the repressive campaign against Russian Jehovah’s Witnesses are awaiting the European Court’s decision.
In June 2022, the European Court of Human Rights recognized the liquidation of legal entities of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia as illegal and demanded that the criminal prosecution of believers be stopped and that all those imprisoned for their faith be released.
“Life is a living hell for the people of Ukraine,” UN Secretary-General António Guterres told the Council, which has held more than 40 debates on the conflict since Russia’s full-scale invasion one year ago.
On the occasion, the 15-member organ held a ministerial-level meeting on the heels of the UN General Assembly’s new demand that Russia immediately leave Ukraine, adopted at the world body’s resumed eleventh emergency special session on Thursday.
“The guns are talking now, but in the end we all know that the path of diplomacy and accountability is the road to a just and sustainable peace, in line with the UN Charter and international law,” the Secretary-General said.
The conflict has erased 30 per cent of pre-war jobs, millions are displaced, and nearly 40 per cent of the population of Ukraine require aid and protection. Almost 10 million people, including 7.8 million children, are at risk of acute post-traumatic stress disorder, he said, adding that Russia is also suffering the deadly consequences.
“We must prevent further escalation, encourage every meaningful effort to end the bloodshed and, at long last, give peace a chance,” he said.
UN Photo/Evan Schneider
Dmytro Kuleba (at table), Minister for Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, addresses the UN Security Council meeting on maintenance of peace and security of Ukraine.
Ukraine’s Minister for Foreign Affairs Dmytro Kuleba pointed to clear violations of Charter provisions related to acts of aggression, saying “Russia is the problem of the world.”
“Justice must be served,” he said. In this vein, he called for creating a special tribunal with jurisdiction over the crime of aggression against Ukraine and the ability to deal with the personal immunities of principal perpetrators.
“Peace means justice, and all the peace-loving nations will win peace on the battlefield and at the diplomatic table,” he said, requesting a minute of silence in memory of victims of aggression.
Russia: ‘Goal is not to destroy Ukraine’
Russian ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said the “goal of our military operation is not to destroy Ukraine”. But, there had been a missed opportunity to forge peace.
UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe
Vassily Nebenzia, Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, addresses the UN Security Council meeting on threats to international peace and security.
Recalling that the conflict had started with a coup in 2014, he said Ukraine is “not a victim” and is “up to its elbows in blood and Nazi tattoos”. If Kyiv did not wage war on the people of Donetsk and Luhansk, there would have been no need for Russia’s special military operation, he added.
“If Russia stops hostilities, Ukraine will continue discriminating against Russian-speaking people and glorifying Nazism,” he warned. “If Ukraine stops hostilities, it will save many lives. Russia stands ready to negotiate for peace.”
Echoing calls for peace
Echoing calls for peace, many Council members pointed to such reflections of strong international support as the 141 countries who voted for the General Assembly’s new resolution.
“If we abandon Ukraine, we abandon the UN Charter itself and invite a world where might makes right and the strong dominate the weak,” said US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, adding that Russian President Vladimir Putin “has failed to break the spirit” of Ukrainians.
Emphasizing that Council members must now push for a just peace and ensure accountability, he said “we can never let the crimes Russia committed become ‘normal’. Behind every atrocity in this wretched war and in conflicts around the world is a human being. One man started this war – Vladimir Putin; one man can end it.”
Global impact
The war has caused a grave global crisis, including among developing countries, cancelling out gains made in the COVID-19 pandemic recovery, said Domingos Estêvão Fernandes of Mozambique, which had cast an abstention on the new General Assembly resolution.
From an African perspective, he said, wars only result in people’s suffering. In fulfilling its duty, the international community must now uphold the UN Charter’s provisions on collective security, he added.
Ambassador Michel Xavier Biang of Gabon, which had also abstained on the new resolution, said the UN Charter forms the foundation for all nations’ existence. Recalling divergent views shared in the Council over the past year, he called for unity “to silence the guns in Ukraine”.
“It is time to stem the blood flow,” he said, highlighting the war’s wide-reaching devastating impact. “As Council members, we owe a response to all those killed and injured and to those asking when they can return home.”
‘War of choice’
Josep Borrell, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, said this is a “war of choice”, by President Putin.
“This war matters both for the principles at stake and for the shockwaves it is creating; it needs to stop, and it needs to stop now,” he said, pointing to Ukrainian and Chinese proposals on that goal. “Looking to the future, we need to build onthis [new General Assembly] resolution and make it happen.”
UN chief calls for urgent action
At the outset of the meeting, the UN Secretary-General outlined a range of urgent actions. Efforts must prioritize civilian protection, including ending targeted attacks against them and the use of explosive weapons with wide-area effects in populated areas.
UN Photo/Evan Schneider
UN Secretary-General António Guterres addresses the UN Security Council meeting on the maintenance of peace and security of Ukraine.
Some achievements demonstrate that international cooperation is possible, even in the midst of conflict, he said, underscoring the importance of continued engagement in the Black Sea Grain Initiative, by which more than 700 ships have carried more than 20 million metric tonnes of foodstuffs to global supply chains. As the agreement expires in March, he called for its extension.
At the same time, the Secretary-General called for unimpeded humanitarian access for life-saving assistance, and support for reconstruction and recovery efforts. In addition, he urged all parties to swiftly agree and implement a nuclear safety and security protection zone at Europe’s largest nuclear power plant in Zaporizhzhia, in line with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
“Veiled threats to use nuclear weapons in the context of the conflict have spiked nuclear risks to levels not seen since the darkest days of the cold war,” he said. “These threats are unacceptable.”
In a press release from the worldwide organization UNITED SIKHS, it stated that they are “disheartened to learn that a 15-year-old Sikh soccer player was asked by the referee to remove his turban during a football match on February 4, 2023 in Spain. The young Sikh was playing in a game between Arratia C and the rival Padura de Arrigorriaga. The referee turned towards Gurpreet Singh in the first few minutes of the second half and ordered him to remove his turban. What happened next is a testament to the spirit of gamesmanship and a remarkable gesture of humanity. UNITED SIKHS learned that both the teams showed solidarity with their colleague by leaving the field in protest against the referee’s discriminatory and unfair ruling.”
According to the statement shared by Manvinder Sigh, Director of Advocacy of United Sikhs, the referee’s action caused a painful and traumatic experience for the young Sikh. “Any conduct or action that targets a Sikh’s articles of faith, such as turban is discriminatory,” said Manvinder Singh. “Turban [patka] is an integral part of the Sikh faith. It is worn by approximately 27 million Sikhs around the world. Not only does it symbolize spiritual grace for Sikhs but it is also considered part of their identity and no Sikh is supposed to part with it,” he added.
The referee’s ruling was wrong. A FIFA panel known as the International Football Association Board issued a landmark decision in 2014, allowing turban to be worn during matches. This came in response to the Quebec Soccer Federation’s attempts to discriminate against and ban players who wore turbans.
Despite the FIFA decision, the problem still persists. This latest unfortunate event is a testament to the fact that more education and training on cultural sensitivity and anti-discrimination is needed. The FIFA ruling is a good start in order to making the playing fields free from discrimination and harassment for players of different countries and backgrounds.
The football-specialized outlet INFOCANCHA, has reported in an article written by Remigio Frisco that the president of the Aratea club, Pedro Ormazabal, explained: “He has been playing informally for at least five years, in his first year as a cadet and so far this season. We’ve never had a single problem. However, he added the other day that the situation was also “humiliating” for the youngster.
“It was the first few minutes of the second half, and as soon as he came on, the referee turned to him and forced him to take off his turban. In front of everyone: all the families, the players… Something like that cannot be left to the interpretation of the referees, because what happened in Arigoriaca can happen”
UNITED SIKHS have voiced their intention to take this opportunity to for launching
“a call on the national sports federations and international organizations to prioritize the need for diversity training to ensure that officials at all levels are trained so that this doesn’t happen again in the world’s most-loved sport. We have also requested Spain’s Soccer Federation to take measures to disciplinary measures against the referee”. “We have written to FIFA President Gianni Infantino and other organizations in this regard, and would keep the community abreast with the latest updates”.
German scientist and inventor Rudolf Diesel patented the famous engine that bears his name on February 23, 1893.
The first functioning engine was made by Diesel at the Augsburg Engineering Works (since 1904 MAN) in 1897. The engine power was 20 hp. c. at 172 rpm, efficiency 26.2% at a weight of 5 tons.
In the beginning, the “diesel” engine known today was actually powered by vegetable oils, mostly peanut oil.
On January 1, 1898, a factory for the production of diesel engines was founded.
The engine finds rapid application in ships, locomotives, power plants, oil wells. The first ship with a diesel engine was built in 1903.
In 1908, the first small engine was made for locomotives and trucks. In 1936, a passenger car with a diesel engine (Mercedes-Benz-260D) was put into series production for the first time.
On September 29, 1913, Rudolf Diesel set off on the steamship “Dresden” from the Belgian port of Anvers for England, but mysteriously disappeared. Ten days later, fishermen found his body.
The world is losing an undeniable genius!
Diesel’s creation is the most popular means of propulsion for cars, industrial machines, agricultural machinery, ships, and its modernization continues within the third century.
