Alabama Surrenders

Alabama Surrenders

By THE EDITORIAL BOARD   October 30, 2013

State officials in Alabama have agreed to throw out major provisions of that state’s unjust immigration law. The agreement, which was announced Tuesday and awaits a federal judge’s approval, resolves lawsuits brought by civil-rights groups, churches and the Justice Department against the statute, H.B. 56, the most extreme attempt by any state to harass and expel immigrants.

Under the proposed settlement, the state acknowledges, among other things, that requiring public schools to determine students’ immigration status violates equal protection and that criminalizing efforts by day laborers to look for work violates the First Amendment. It further states that making it a crime for immigrants to fail to carry their papers, making it illegal for anyone to “conceal, harbor or shield” unauthorized immigrants, and invalidating any contracts that these immigrants sign are all unlawful intrusions into federal authority over immigration.

The settlement also includes an important check on racial profiling: an acknowledgment that state and local police cannot detain anyone merely on suspicion of being in the country illegally.

The agreement is a huge setback for the hard-line strategy that emerged most notoriously in Arizona and took root in Alabama and elsewhere — the idea that states and communities can force immigrants to “self-deport” by making their lives unbearable.

Alabama’s Legislature and governor were warned, vehemently and repeatedly, that H.B. 56 was a lunatic law that would impose unfair burdens on citizens, stifle the economy and harm public safety by enlisting local police in a pointless hunt for day laborers. Farmers, clergy members and business groups raised an alarm, which the Republicans who control the state government ignored.

Whether those behind H.B. 56 will openly acknowledge the failure of their strategy is uncertain. But regret is setting in elsewhere. Stephen Sandstrom, a former legislator in Utah who sponsored that state’s hard-core immigration law, now disowns it. And other states, recognizing the benefits of immigrant inclusion and assimilation, are moving in the opposite direction. California recently enacted laws granting in-state tuition and driver’s licenses to unauthorized immigrants, and limiting its participation in federal deportation efforts.

If only Congress would see the light. House Republicans are still barreling down a dead-end road, with bills like the SAFE Act, which empowers state and local police to enforce immigration laws. It’s the same self-destructive strategy that Alabama, of all places, is abandoning.

UK Supreme Court supports hospital withholding treatment to dying man

UK Supreme Court supports hospital withholding treatment to dying man

Wednesday, October 30, 2013   Nicholas Tomsho 

http://jurist.org/paperchase/2013/10/uk-supreme-court-supports-hospital-withholding-treatment-to-dying-man.php

[JURIST] The UK Supreme Court [official website] ruled [judgment, PDF; press release, PDF] Wednesday that Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [official website] was justified in its decision that withholding certain invasive treatments would be in the best interests of critical care patient David James, despite resistance from the patient's family. James was admitted to Aintree's critical care unit in May 2012 for an infection acquired during his treatment for colon cancer, where he was reliant on ventilator support and suffered multiple severe setbacks. Despite opposition from James' family, the hospital brought proceedings to the Court of Protection [official website] in September 2012. The hospital sought judicial declaration that withholding the specified treatments would be in James' best interest, pursuant to the2005 Mental Capacity Act [text, PDF; Code of Practice] provision that it may in the best interests of a patient to withhold life-sustaining treatment "where treatment is futile, overly burdensome to the patient or where there is no prospect of recovery." The trial judge ruled against the declarations on December 6, and Aintree appealed. James subsequently suffered "further dramatic deterioration," and the Court of Appeal reversed [judgment, PDF] the decision on December 21, 2012. James died of cardiac arrest only 10 days later. Wednesday's ruling by the Supreme Court subsequently determined that the trial judge was correct in opposing the declarations and that the Court of Appeal was also correct in light of the changed circumstances since the initial ruling.

The issue of medical consent in the UK was recently addressed when the Court of Protection ruled [JURIST report] in August that a vasectomy was "in the best interests" of a man with a learning disability who was unable to provide informed consent as to the procedure. End-of-life and right-to-die issues have also been a contentious topic in Europe. The European Court of Human Rights [official website] ruled [JURIST report] in May that assisted suicide laws in Switzerland fail to provide sufficient guidelines on the extent of the right to die. In August 2012 the High Court of England and Wales denied [JURIST report] a paralyzed man's plea challenging laws prohibiting him from committing suicide. In September 2011 a UK High Court judge ruled[JURIST report] that a woman in a "minimally conscious state" due to brain damage did not meet statutory requirements for her family to discontinue her life support.

North Korea Nuclear Timeline - Fast Facts

North Korea Nuclear Timeline - Fast Facts

Tue October 29, 2013   By CNN Library  

http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/29/world/asia/north-korea-nuclear-timeline---fast-facts/

(CNN) -- Here's a look at what you need to know about North Korea's nuclear capabilities and history.

1985
North Korea joins the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

1993 
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) charges that North Korea is violating the NPT and demands that inspectors be given access to two nuclear waste storage sites.

North Korea threatens to quit the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty amid suspicions that it is developing nuclear weapons. It ultimately does not quit the program but agrees to inspections in 1994.

1994 
North Korea and U.S. sign an agreement. North Korea pledges to freeze and eventually dismantle its nuclear weapons program in exchange for international aid to build two power-producing nuclear reactors.

1998
August 31 - North Korea fires a multistage rocket that flies over Japan and lands in the Pacific Ocean, proving the North Koreans can strike any part of Japan's territory.

November 17 - The U.S. and North Korea hold the first round of high-level talks in Pyongyang over North Korea's suspected construction of an underground nuclear facility. The United States demands inspections.

1999
February 27-March 16 - During a fourth round of talks, North Korea allows U.S. access to the site in exchange for U.S. aid in increasing North Korean potato yields. U.S. inspectors find no evidence of any nuclear activity during a visit to site in May.

September 13 - North Korea agrees to freeze testing of long-range missiles while negotiations with the U.S. continue.

September 17 - President Bill Clinton agrees to ease economic sanctions against North Korea.

December - A U.S.-led international consortium signs a $4.6 billion contract to build two nuclear reactors in North Korea.

2000
July - North Korea threatens to restart its nuclear program if the U.S. does not compensate it for the loss of electricity caused by delays in building nuclear power plants.

2001
June - North Korea warns it will drop its moratorium against testing missiles if the U.S. does not pursue normalized relations with North Korea. It also says it will restart its nuclear program if there is not more progress on two U.S.-sponsored nuclear power plants being built in North Korea.

2002
January 29 - President George W. Bush labels North Korea, Iran and Iraq an "axis of evil" in his State of the Union address. "By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger," he says.

October 4 - U.S. officials, in closed talks, confront North Korea with evidence that they are operating a nuclear weapons program in violation of the 1994 nuclear agreement. Specifically, the U.S. has proof that they are operating a uranium enrichment facility. North Korea admits that is has been operating the facility in violation of the agreement. The information is NOT made public.

October 16 - The Bush Administration first reveals that North Korea has admitted operating a secret nuclear weapons program in violation of the 1994 agreement. They have NOT, apparently, admitted having any nuclear weapons.

December 22 - North Korea says it has begun removing IAEA monitoring equipment from nuclear facilities.

December 31 - North Korea expels IAEA inspectors.

2003
January 10 - North Korea withdraws from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

February 5 - North Korea's official news agency says the nation has reactivated its nuclear power facilities.

February 24 - North Korea test fires a land-to-ship missile into the sea between the Korean Peninsula and Japan.

February 26 - The United States says North Korea has reactivated its five-megawatt nuclear reactor at Yongbyon.

March 10 - North Korea test fires another surface-to-vessel anti-ship missile into the Sea of Japan.

April 23, 2003 - Declares it has nuclear weapons.

August 27 - The U.S., North Korea, South Korea, China, Japan and Russia take part in talks about the crisis in North Korea.

2004
February 24-28 - The U.S., North Korea, South Korea, China, Japan and Russia meet in Beijing, China for more talks. The summit closes with no major progress but with an agreement for more talks.

June - The six nations meet again in Beijing for more talks.

August 2004 - North Korea offers to freeze its nuclear program in exchange for aid, easing of sanctions and being removed from the US's list of state sponsors of terrorism. The U.S. wants North Korea to disclose all nuclear activities and allow inspections.

2005
February 10 - North Korea drops out of six-party nuclear talks and says it will bolster its nuclear weapons arsenal. North Korea insists on a bilateral non-aggression pact with the U.S. before it will consider dismantling its nuclear program. The U.S. insists Pyongyang must first agree to permanently and verifiably dismantle its nuclear weapons program before it will grant any incentives, including economic assistance and diplomatic recognition.

August 7 - After meeting for 13 straight days, diplomats from the United States, North Korea and four other Asia-region powers decide to take a recess from talks aimed at getting North Korea to dismantle its nuclear program.

September 13 - The six-party talks resume in Beijing.

September 19 - North Korea agrees to give up its entire nuclear program, including weapons, a joint statement from six-party nuclear arms talks in Beijing said. "The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea) committed to abandoning all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs and returning at an early date to the treaty on the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons (NPT) and to IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) safeguards," the statement said.
- In exchange, the U.S., China, Japan, Russian and South Korea have "stated their willingness" to provide energy assistance to North Korea, as well as promote economic cooperation.
- North Korean officials later state that their country would begin dismantling its nuclear program only if the U.S. provides a light-water reactor for civilian power -- a demand that could threaten a day-old agreement among North Korea, its neighbors and the United States.

"Without this physical guarantee of the (light-water reactor), our position is not to even dream of us giving up our nuclear deterrence."

2006
July 4 - North Korea test-launches a Taepodong-2 missile along with two short-range rockets, but the long-range missile apparently fails.

July 15 - The UN Security Council unanimously passes a resolution demanding that North Korea suspend its missile program. The North Korean ambassador immediately rejects the resolution.

October 9 - North Korea claims to have successfully tested a nuclear weapon. The supposed test is conducted at an underground facility in Hwaderi near Kilju city. Though the nature of the blast as nuclear remains unconfirmed, South Korea's geology research center detects an artificial earthquake in the region of the test, and world leaders condemn North Korea's actions (test conducted at 10:36 am local time or 9:36 pm Eastern time on 10/8/2006).

October 14 - The UN Security Council approved a resolution imposing sanctions against North Korea, restricting military and luxury good trade and requiring an end to nuclear and ballistic missile tests.

October 16 - An analysis of air samples collected on October 11, 2006 detects radioactive debris, confirming North Korea's nuclear test.

2007
February 13 - North Korea agrees to close its main nuclear reactor in exchange for an aid package worth $400 million.

March 5-6 - U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill meets with his North Korean counterpart, Vice Foreign Minister Kim Kye Gwan, to discuss North Korea's nuclear program.

March - During six-party talks, the U.S. agrees to release approximately $25 million of North Korean funds frozen at a Macao bank, a sticking point in the negotiations. The actual release of funds does not occur until June.

June 25 - After spending two days in Pyongyang meeting with North Korea's nuclear negotiator, the U.S. Envoy to North Korea, Chris Hill, says that North Korea has reaffirmed its commitment to the nuclear disarmament agreement reached in February. He also says North Korea has invited the IAEA to monitor the shutdown of the Yongbyon nuclear facility, scheduled to occur within a few weeks.

September 2 - U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill announces that after talks in Geneva between U.S. and North Korean officials, North Korea has agreed to fully declare and disable its nuclear programs by the end of 2007.

September 30 - At six-party talks in Beijing, North Korea signs an agreement stating it will begin disabling its nuclear weapons facilities. North Korea also agrees to include a U.S. team of technical experts in the disabling activities.

October 2, 2007 - South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun becomes the first South Korean leader to walk across the Demilitarized Zone separating North and South Korea on his way to a three day summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Il.

October 4, 2007 - North Korean leader Kim Jong Il and South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun sign an eight-point agreement in Pyongyang; among other things, it calls for a smooth implementation of the six-party agreements to shut down of North Korea's nuclear facilities and the replacement of North and South Korea's current armistice agreement with a permanent peace.

November 14-16, 2007 - North Korean Prime Minister Kim Yong Il and South Korean Prime Minister Han Duck-soo meet in Seoul, South Korea. At the end of the summit, they announce a number of economic projects including cross-border cargo train services, road repairs, and construction of a new industrial complex near Haeju, North Korea.

December 31 - North Korea misses a deadline to declare all its nuclear programs.

2008
January 4 - The North Korean Foreign Ministry states, via broadcast message, that North Korea had already provided enough explanation to meet the 12/31/2007 deadline, and that it had provided that information in a report presented to the U.S. in November. Members of the six party talks dispute this claim.

February 21 - After meeting with North Korean Foreign Minister Kim Kye Gwan, South Korean envoy Chun Yung Woo states that North Korea still plans to meet the obligations it agreed to during six party talks in 2007.

May 8 - An official with the U.S. State Department announces that North Korea has handed over thousands of documents pertaining to its nuclear activities, especially related to its production of plutonium, to visiting U.S. official Sohn Kim. Another official puts the number of documents at 18,000 to 19,000.

June 27 - North Korea destroys a water cooling tower at the Yongbyon facility, where officials now acknowledge they extracted plutonium to build nuclear weapons. The massive implosion is intended to be a powerful public symbol of a move to end nuclear activities by the Communist nation.

September 24 - At the request of North Korea, the IAEA removes surveillance equipment and seals from the Yongbyon nuclear facility.

October 11 - U.S. State Dept. spokesman Sear McCormack announces that North Korea has been removed from the U.S. list of states that sponsor terrorism.

October 10-17 - In response to the U.S. move, North Korea replaces the seals and surveillance equipment at its Yongbyon nuclear facility.

December 8 -11 - Another round of six-party talks is held in Beijing, China. The talks break down over North Korea's refusal to allow international inspectors unfettered access to suspected nuclear sites.

2009
January - U.S. scholar Selig Harrison meets with senior officials in North Korea. After the meeting he reports that the officials have claimed that North Korea has weaponized most of its plutonium stockpile. The amount of weaponized plutonium is allegedly enough for four to five nuclear bombs.

April 25 - North Korea announces it has begun reprocessing spent fuel rods.

May 25 - North Korea announces it has conducted its second nuclear test shortly after the U.S. Geological Survey reports a magnitude 4.7 seismic disturbance at the site of North Korea's first nuclear test. The White House is reporting that North Korea also test-fired a short range missile.

June 12 - The UN Security Council approves Resolution 1874, condemning North Korea's May 25th nuclear test. The UN also impose new sanctions, banning the sale of most arms to or from North Korea.

November 3 - North Korea's state run news agency reports that the reprocessing of 8,000 spent nuclear fuel rods has been completed. The reprocessing garnered enough weapons-grade plutonium for one to two nuclear bombs.

2010
November 20 - According to a report by Stanford University professor, Siegfried Hecker, North Korea has a new nuclear enrichment facility composed of 2,000 centrifuges. Hecker was given unprecedented access to North Korea's facility and documents.

2011
October 24 - 25 - U.S. officials, led by U.S. Ambassador Stephen Bosworth, meet with a North Korean delegation, led by First Vice Foreign Minister Kim Kye-gwan, in Geneva, Switzerland, in an effort to restart the six-party nuclear arms talks that broke down in 2008.

December 15 - U.S. and North Korean officials meet in Beijing to discuss possible food assistance to North Korea in exchange for the suspension of North Korea's uranium enrichment program.

2012
January 11 - North Korea indicates that it is open to further discussions with the U.S. over suspending its uranium enrichment program in exchange for food aid, an agreement that seemed close to realization before Kim Jong Il's death on December 17, 2011.

February 29 - The U.S. State Department announces that North Korea has agreed to a moratorium on long-range missile launches and nuclear activity at Yongbyon, the nation's major nuclear facility.

April 10 - Ryu Kun Chol, the deputy director of the Space Development Department of the Korea Space Technology Committee, outlines the country's plans to complete and launch a rocket within the next seven days. Japan, South Korea and the U.S. believe the launch to be a cover-up for testing a long-range ballistic missile.

April 13 - North Korea's long-range rocket launch is a failure. Shortly after launch, it breaks apart and falls into the sea.

May 24 - A spokesperson for South Korea's Defense Ministry says that based on analysis of commercial satellite images at North Korea's nuclear test site, North Korea appears ready to carry out a nuclear test at anytime.

December 12, 2012 - North Korea successfully launches an Unha-3 long-range rocket from the Sohae Space Center in Cholsan County and puts a "working satellite" into orbit, days after Pyongyang suggested the launch could be delayed.

2013
January 24, 2013 - North Korea's National Defense Commission says it will continue nuclear testing and long-range rocket launches, all of which are a part of an "upcoming all-out action" aimed at the United States, "the sworn enemy of the Korean people." Two days prior to this statement, the United Nations Security Council condemned a recent rocket launch by North Korea and expanded sanctions.

February 12, 2013 - Conducts its third underground nuclear test. This is the first nuclear test carried out under leader, Kim Jong Un.

AHRC on Samsung's 'No-Union Policy'

AHRC News

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE   AHRC-STM-192-2013    October 25, 2013

A Statement from the Asian Human Rights Commission

SOUTH KOREA: How long will the government let Samsung have its own way in denial of the Constitution?

It is alleged that the 'No-Union Policy' has been the management principle of the Samsung group since it was established 75 years ago. This policy has allegedly been perpetrated and has subsequently become public knowledge. According to the information received, a lawmaker disclosed a document (called, "2012 S group's labour and management strategy" in Korean, personal information in the eleventh slide is withheld by author, hereafter 'the strategy document') on October 14, which was used for an executive members' meeting in 2012 for the group, containing Samsung group's strategies for the destruction of efforts to unionise. The document is significant because it verifies this policy, is the first written evidence of such a scheme, and it elaborates as to how the management intends to thwart employees involved in any attempt to create a union. This raises deep concerns and has drawn the immediate attention of the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC).

The strategy document contains detailed strategies on how to react to any attempt to prepare for the establishment of a union, one of which says: "If a situation where a union is established arises, collapse it as quickly as possible with full capabilities. If the union is not collapsed, then kill it (cause it to dissolve – explanation by author)." It also advises that the management should daily collect and keep records of delinquent acts of work performance or non-performance of the employees so that if anyone attempts to form a union, the records can be used as evidence to either dismiss them or take disciplinary action against them in order to avoid possible charges of unfair labour practices. It also recommends profiling personal information such as hobbies, friendships with other employees, personal assets, and tolerance for alcohol. The document exemplifies the Samsung Everland Co. as a company with the best practice. This company had made a "yellow union" in late June with which it had made a collective bargaining agreement, which provided a legal basis for denial of engaging in collective bargaining with the newly established union: Korean Metal Workers' Union Gyeonggi Regional Branch Samsung Local. As proved, employees involved have faced several legal cases from the company before and after the Samsung Local was established in July 2011.

In fact, trade unions exist at eight Samsung companies and most of them existed before the companies were taken over by the Samsung group (which now has a total of 27 affiliated companies). However, allegedly, most of these unions are so called "yellow unions." Notably, the Samsung Local, established in July 2011 at the Samsung Everland Co., has been continually targeted by the Samsung group. Employees involved in the establishment of the trade union have reportedly suffered from various forms of harassment and threats from the company in an attempt to deter them from forming a union for any length of time. According to the union activists such harassment includes illegal surveillance, conciliation, threats, assaults, disciplinary action, dismissal, legal action, and interference with distribution of the union's magazine. Considering these circumstances, it is reasonable to believe that the Samsung group has adopted and operated strategies such as those written in the strategy document on more than one occasion. Reports indicate that investigations and prosecutions are not carried out properly; it appears that those responsible are not beyond the influence of the group. (see further: AHRC-STM-073-2012)

When it comes to occupational diseases the relevant authorities, such as National Labour Relations Commission and Korea Workers' Compensation & Welfare Service, have been criticised for deciding in favour of the company and deciding appeals on the advice of the relevant company of the group. This would mean that the institutions that are supposed to function for the protection of workers are in fact playing a role in delaying justice to the families of the dead or those suffering occupational diseases. It is reported that more than 40 workers died and at least 100 workers, as of November 2011, have suffered from blood cancers (leukaemia and lymphoma) in Samsung Electronics factories producing semi-conductors, LCDs, mobiles, and other devices (please see further the report prepared by SNU Public Interest Legal Clinic Source Book). Another obstruction in similar cases is that the burden of proof that lies on the complainants who are workers. The Samsung Electronics Co. has refused to provide any requested information claiming it would reveal business secrets (see further a letter of allegation sent to relevant UN Special Procedures on September 25, 2013). Despite the serious nature of these cases, the families of those who died or suffer have been struggling for justice for many years.

Failure of the Korean government to adhere to their obligations to the UN Covenants

Being a state party to both international covenants on civil and political and social, economic and cultural rights, it is the obligation of the government of South Korea to respect, protect, promote, and fulfil those rights. The right to form a trade union and the freedom of association are enshrined in the article 8 of International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and article 22 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights respectively.

Obligations are incurred by the commission or omission of an act by the government. In order to ensure the rights are implemented, the government shall take steps by appropriate means of legislative, administrative and judicial measures. Thus, the government's obligation to protect includes a duty to prevent individuals or third parties from violating those rights.

Accordingly, if no action is taken against the unfair labour practices of the Samsung group by the government, it will be highly likely that international human rights bodies will hold the government of South Korea responsible for their lack of due diligence to prevent the violations. Therefore, the contents of the strategy document require immediate attention from an investigatory body to take appropriate action, unless the government intends to disregard its international obligations as well as any potential negative impact on foreign investors in the future caused by the lack of due diligence.

Protection of domestic legislation

In fact, domestic legislation provides more protection of those rights. According to article 33(1) of the Constitution "workers shall have the right to independent association, collective bargaining and collective action." In order for the realisation of these rights, article 81(1) of Trade Union and Labour Relations Adjustment Act further prohibits employers from committing acts that include, 'Dismissal of or discrimination against a worker on the grounds that the worker has joined or intended to join a trade union, intended to establish a trade union, or performed a lawful act for the operation of a trade union.' However, in spite of this being codified it is not enforced, rather it is ignored, particularly in the workplaces of the Samsung group. As expected then, there has hardly been any action taken by the government against the continued deprivation of rights guaranteed in the Constitution. This dereliction should no longer be tolerated.

It is necessary to recall the rapid development of the normative framework in the field of business and human rights; the global companies will have less space for their business if such discriminatory practices continue.

In response to the release of the strategy document, the Samsung group acknowledged on 14 October 2013 that the document was prepared for a seminar for higher level officials of the group in early 2012 in order to discuss the desirable culture of the organisation. It added that Samsung group has maintained a no-union stance throughout its growth as a global company like other companies (such as Apple, IBM, HP, Google and MS). In response to criticism, the group noted, on October 20, that Samsung did not prepare the document.

However, there are important facts that the group has acknowledged: firstly, the group encouraged and educated its high-level officials to violate the Constitutional rights of their workers, other rights such as the right to privacy and against discrimination of employees on grounds of their union activities; secondly several cases currently at trials are enough to prove the strategies are indeed carried out in accordance with the strategies mentioned in the document.

In addition, the examples of the US based companies are actually misleading. The fact is that the rights of workers written in the Korean Constitution are not the same as those in the US Constitution. This evidence illustrates that the rights of workers of the Korean Constitution are not applied to employees of the group, since their rights are not as protected as one would imagine the Constitution demands. Thus, if no investigation is carried out, it will only prove that a policy and practice of an enterprise is above the law of the Constitution of a country. Furthermore, in the United States, cases of discrimination against union activists on grounds of their union activism and the criminal activities of obtaining personal information, threat or harassment to deter them from joining a union by the company are taken very seriously by the judiciary which is not the case in South Korea.

Given the above, the AHRC wishes to share its concerns and add its voice to those of the local organisations asking for a special investigation to be carried out in the workplaces of the Samsung group where Constitutional rights are ignored. The AHRC urges the government to take appropriate steps to ensure the rights enshrined in the Korean Constitution are enjoyed in its jurisdiction and to fulfil its obligations to international human rights laws to which the government is a state party. The AHRC will closely monitor, follow up, and take further action on this situation as it deems fit. The Samsung group is explicitly urged to declare to the public that those rights are acknowledged in all affiliated companies of the group and the rights of workers enshrined in the Constitution are enjoyed by its employees. The group must also declare publically that their discriminatory practices against workers wishing to create a union has ceased forthwith.

# # #

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation that monitors human rights in Asia, documents violations and advocates for justice and institutional reform to ensure the protection and promotion of these rights. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.