Party Leader Debate

The elections for both the EU Parliament and regarding gender equality in the right to the Danish throne ended up in a debate between the party leaders, hosted by Lotte Mejlhede/TV2 and Kim Bildsøe Lassen/DR1.

First up was Margrethe Vestager from The Social Liberals (B) - since her party has fought hard to make the change in the Constitution not only to be about gender equality to the throne, but a more complex modernisation - including a review of the fundamental rule and of a more expressed inclusion of human and civil rights into the Constitution. A comprehensive modernisation the party before the election now saw as being very slim. Therefore members of the party had opted for giving blank votes on this issue.

So, not for being against gender equality on the throne - but for the above reasons, Margrethe Vestager was asked to explain the party's lack of success in convincing the electorate (The Social-Liberals ended up 'losing' both elections). And to explain the paradox: were there - in fact - many republicans within her semi-liberal party?

The Liberals

Second in line in the European Parliament/EP were The Liberals (V) with oddly 20 percent of the votes and three out of thirteen mandates. PM Lars Løkke Rasmussen was happy to announce progress since the last elections (less than one percent), thanking voters. And also celebrated the gender equality for princes and princesses alike - when it comes to access to the Danish throne.

Lars Løkke Rasmussen then handed the microphone to new EP member and former liberal spokesperson Jens Rohde, who also thanked the voters and more or less commented on the same issues (apart from a later warm thank you note to his wife - also a building constructor at home - for her strong support):

The Social Democrats

The Social Democrats (S) were topscorers at the EU election, although they had to take a beat from the last EU elections. Party leader Helle Thorning-Schmidt thanked the many supporters and first candidate Dan Jørgensen for his hard work - and became the overall winner of the election to the European Parliament/EP.

Dan Jørgensen in turn thanked his party leader and former Prime Minister and later EP member, Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, who supported his campaign with posters reading 'Do like Poul, vote for Dan'. Well, although this received many laughs along the campaign, many actually did - a reference he made during his thank you speech below:

Historic Elections: EU and The Danish Throne

Sunday 7th June 2009 is a historic day in many senses: Today, during the two elections we had to make a choice about changing one single part of the Constitution, in order to assure gender equality between princes and princesses in the right to the Danish throne. At least 40 percent of all had to vote YES to the ammendment to the Constitution. 45,5 percent did - so we now have gender equality on the right to the throne. The elections day had a historical turnout of about 59,5 percent of the population.

And another choice of members to the European Parliament (EP). Of other historic results were that The Social Democrats (S) had to take a fall of about 11 percent, but still came out as topscorer with 21,5 percent of the total votes. With The Liberals (V) in the second place with 20,2 percent. The real surprises were The Danish People's Party (O) in the fourth position, but the highclimber of the day, with a progress of 8,5 percent more votes than at the last EP elections. And The Socialist People's Party (F) in third place, but with a progress of 7,9 percent more votes than at the last EP elections. Actually 'stealing/buying' votes from the EP coalition partner of The Social Liberals (B), that didn't manage to get into the EU Parliament this time - with a fall of about 2 percent.

And very-very historic: the center EP party of the June Movement (so named after the 1992 Maastricht treaty election, that took place in June of that year) also didn't manage to get in. They have existed for almost 16 years, founded in August 1992) - but had to take a severe fall of 6,7 percent of the votes. The president of the movement would later announce that it didn't make sense to continue as an EP party. So now we only have two parties of the listed nine choices to fight the EU from within: The Danish People's Party (O) - and The People's Movement Against The EU (N for NO), that - just - got into the EP with 7,2 percent of the votes, and one mandate of thirteen.

The paradox being that Danish nay-sayers have been well-represented all along - up until yesterday with three of the listed nine parties aimed at fighting the EU from within...Very Danish.

Here are results according to the Danish media:
http://www.dr.dk/Nyheder/Temaer/2009/Europa/?v
http://politiken.dk/system/topicRoot/Valg_til_EU-parlamentet_2009/
http://www.berlingske.dk/article/20090608/epvalg/90608062/

Civil Rights on Constitution Day

Isn't it odd that when you really need a lawyer that you can't even get to one? For the past couple of years I've tried to get legal counsel on numerous occasions. First, my application to the union kept 'disappearing' - for months. Once in the union I spent several months trying to get legal counsel there - in vain. Due to a very busy secretary who demanded to know - not just in main points, but in full detail - what I wanted to talk with the lawyer about. In full detail? Isn't that priviledged information between the lawyer and the client?

Then I tried a civil rights specialist lawyer, because the above incidents themselves woke me up. Again, a very busy secretary hindered my access. Probably also part of her job. Busy lawyer and all. But what cannot be part of her job was, that she referred me to two different so-called lawyers - whose names I later checked. There were no such lawyers in the lawyer lists. Reversely checking the addresses, there were not even any kind of legal company there. Lastly, after a couple of years of trying to get access to a lawyer, I tried a free of charge legal counsel service - no help, too busy, not even a referral. Isn't it odd though, and isn't legal counsel a civil and human right? Just paradoxed on Constitution Day!

More Civil Rights Celebrations

President Ole Egelund of the association of Forældre mod Politibrutalitet hands the torches to the joggler
Constitution Day should be a celebration. And it truly turned out to be one. As if the musicians managed to drive away the heavy midday rains, the sun broke out, the barbecue was lit - and the joggler started his show. Kindly assisted by parent members from the association of Forældre mod Politibrutalitet (parents against police brutality) - lending him their thighs to stand on.

Before everybody joined in the - very Danish - dancing in circles. All in all a very merry Constitution Day Celebration.

Civil Rights Celebrations

'Sentences should not be given in the streets', 'Hippie bashing should be stopped', 'The police act as gang members' - were some of the one-liners delivered by the association of Forældre mod Politibrutalitet (parents against police brutality).

They referred for one example to the demonstration for Palestine in Copenhagen 13th January this year, where demonstrators were detained - under a paragraph in the law giving the police the right to detain demonstrators for upto six hours under unrest - thus enacting detention in the streets. With no civil right like the right to speak to a lawyer. And as if some superior power heard this, the heavy rains set in during this Constitution Day event. Still, not preventing the group from enjoying and celebrating the day.

Constitution Day Celebration

Today is Constitution Day in Denmark. We celebrate it every year on 5th June with speeches and events around the country.

The constitution was signed on 5th June 1859 by then absolute ruler, Frederik VII. Hereby creating the limited Monarchy we know today - with the Danish Parliament as the legislative assembly, and reducing the monarch to a more or less ceremonial figure.

One of the events took place in the Copenhagen park of Ørstedsparken. The event was arranged by the association of Forældre mod Politibrutalitet (parents against police brutality). It was founded in 2006 after an anti-nazi demonstration that got out of hand with conflicting groups. The members had many other examples of misplaced use of brutality by the police within the past years - latest during the World Business Summit on Climate Change in Bella Center end of May. Therefore, the association presented its main speaker, lawyer Michael Bjørn Hansen, from the law firm of Christian Harlang, specialized in civil rights cases. He spoke up for the right to demonstrate. And against the brutality of the metods used by the police in dealing with demonstrations of various kinds.

One point he made - on this Constitution Day - was that there is actually no demand in the Constitution for the prior announcement to the authorities (police and others) before a demonstration. This is merely a practical arrangement in order to control the potential negative side effects of demonstrations - if they get out of hand. Actually, he pointed out, demonstration is a civil freedom right. Delivering the paradox of the day: the Constitution and the laws of the country should protect demonstrations - rather than control them. Since demonstrations are often the only measure to voice opinions for the week in society. He harvested many cheers and applauses for his help to the association. Which he in turn returned with thanks to the association for gathering examples and cases.

Nicaragua in Political Quicksand

Here we go again: the Nicaraguan government - and even the opposition parties - enters quicksand. This according to Centro de Investigaciones de la Comunicación (CINCO) in Managua, that investigates and forecasts the climate for democracy, government, the media, and political culture in Nicaragua. Reflecting on the past 2½ years of FSLN government under Ortega, since the november 2006 elections. In the latest issue of the analytical political publication of Perspectivas/Boletín (Edición 32), CINCO asked the population of Nicaragua seven questions:

• Has Nicaragua become more democratic?
• Do the institutions function better?
• Does the population have more confidence in them?
• Have relations between government and society become more transparent and better?
• Does the country (Nicaragua) enjoy more international legitimacy?
• Has the social and economic situation improved?
• Has the population more positive expectations?

CINCO notes that the responses varies from political colour of the respondents, but overall the population feels set back. According to CINCO, one of the major political problems is that FSLN/Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional and PLC/Partido Liberal Constitucionalista since the onset of the so-called pact (El Pacto, formed in 2000) controls everything from government institutions, like the legislative institutions, supreme court, and the supreme electoral council. And that FSLN and PLC controls the network of cadres of the local municipalities (los caudillos, so nicknamed after Spanish general Franco - El Caudillo).

So the government sits in quicksand, because the economic situation is continuously worsened. Partly due to sanctions from the international community, partly due to promises of financial assistance from Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez - that just haven't materialized. Meanwhile holding the public institutions and the population hostages.

So the opposition also sits in quicksand - due to lack of political or institutional influence. What CINCO suggests is for the opposition to unite more strongly, with the intellectuals of the left wing parties of MRS/Movimiento Renovador Sandinista and MPRS/El Movimiento por el Rescate del Sandinismo (or simply El Rescate). CINCO criticizes the opposition for not presenting a coherent political plan or strategy - encouraging them to sharpen their profile and focus on the civil rights of the population. And to form a coalition much like UNO/Unión Nacional Opositoro did in the historical 1990 elections, backed by the USA, when Violetta Chamorro managed to overthrow Daniel Ortega and FSLN with 55 percent of the votes to Ortega's 41 percent.

With less than one in ten votes there seems to be a bit of way to overthrow Daniel Ortega and FSLN, unless they manage to bridge all the way to one of the liberal parties - PLC that also calls itself opposition, despite El Pacto - this is the real paradox in Nicaragua. ALN/Alianza Liberal Nicaragüense already formed an alliance with PLC/Partido Liberal Constitucionalista during the 2008 municipal elections - so what the opposition parties do have in common is a critique of the frauds during these elections. And what CINCO suggests is to mobilize and to ride the waves of a wider protest of the government in the population. Ay-Ay-Ay, the quicksand keeps spreading.

For further information, please see:
http://www.cinco.org.ni/publicaciones/

http://www.laprensa.com.ni/archivo/2009/junio/02/noticias/politica/330679.shtml

Emission Omission

It's not in the measurement itself - it's in the reading. The European Environment Agency/EEA just held a technical press briefing to report the latest results from the analytical department of EEA - on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the collective EU member states. And they were happy to note that for the past three consecutive years (2005-2007) the greenhouse gas emissions of the EU member states had declined.

Below is a graphic display of the numbers. Source: European Environment Agency/EEA 2009. Note that the EU15 (blue) comprises the 'old' EU member states: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. And EU27 (golden) all of them, including the new East Block member states:

Paradoxical News took a hard look at this mildly fluctuating graph and asked itself: If the goal is to reach a 20 percent reduction in GHG emissions below 1990 level by 2020 - and the collective member states have achieved an approximate reduction of 9 percent over the past 17 years - isn't it then very optimistic to hope for a further reduction of 11 percent during the next 13 years? And even more optimistic to promise a joint EU GHG emissions reduction of 30 percent, provided that a global deal can be sealed at COP15 in December (i.e. a further 21 percent reduction by 2020)? When all we could read from this graph were merely repeated fluctuations over the entire period. So their happy note appeared to be more of an Emission Omission statement.

So I asked the members of EEA, among them Ricardo Fernandez (EEA analyst), Dr. Andreas Barkman (head of Mitigation Group at EEA), and their points were these:

• Since the Kyoto Protocol (negociated in December 1997, and finally sealed in February 2005) countries have introduced legislation to lock the GHG emissions in.
• Domestic households have introduced GHG saving technologies.
• Countries and private companies have introduced green energy and overall Clean Development Mechanisms/CDMs (i.e. GHG emission saving technical projects).
• There has been an introduction of the ETS/Emission Trading System (were GHG emission allowances are traded between member states) to benefit the overall goal of the joint EU member states.

Jan Høst Schmidt (head of the EU representation in Denmark) further remarked:
'We are in a totally different ball game now'

- and referred to EU President José Manuel Barroso's statement, that we have the public and the science on our side now. Compared to 1990 - or even the Kyoto negociations from 1997 onwards. The editor of Paradoxical News is keeping fingres crossed for further GHG emission omissions.