Thursday, 19 September 2013

Παύλος Φύσσας: Θύμα δολοφονικής ρατσιστικής βίας που επιδιώκει τον εκφοβισμό και την κατάλυση της Δημοκρατίας…

Vasilis Giavris (Lawyer & Political Scientist)

Χθες δολοφονήθηκε ο 34χρονος Παύλος Φύσσας. Έπεσε νεκρός από δολοφονικό μαχαίρι. Δολοφονικό μαχαίρι που όπλισε η μισαλλοδοξία, ο ρατσισμός, η βία και το μίσος. Ο τραγικός θάνατος του άτυχου νέου πρέπει να μας αφυπνίσει. Δυστυχώς αυξημένα φαινόμενα βίας, ρατσισμού και η ανάδειξη της Χρυσής Αυγής ως πολιτικού παράγοντα εγκυμονεί περαιτέρω σοβαρούς κινδύνους για την Ελλάδα και την Ελληνική κοινωνία. 

Το παιχνίδι καλλιέργειας και εκμετάλλευσης του φόβου και της δυστυχίας των Ελλήνων πολιτών πρέπει να τελειώσει. Η βία και ο ρατσισμός δεν προσφέρουν λύση στην σημερινή κρίση. Τουναντίον, επιβάλουν πνευματική ανελευθερία και προσβάλλουν την ίδια μας την ανθρώπινη υπόσταση. Δεν είναι δυνατόν αυτοί που αποκαλούν «Μεγάλο Αρχηγό» τον Χίτλερ, που διατυμπανίζουν ότι «μένουν πιστή στα λόγια του Χίτλερ» και επιμένουν για ανωτερότητα της «Άριας φυλής» να είναι οι ίδιοι που θα υπερασπιστούν τα δικαιώματα του δοκιμαζόμενου Ελληνικού λαού. 

Σήμερα κηδεύεται ο Παύλος Φύσσας. Θύμα δολοφονικής ρατσιστικής βίας που επιδιώκει τον εκφοβισμό και την κατάλυση της Δημοκρατίας…

Saturday, 14 September 2013

Zero Tolerance for Violence Against Women: One in Four Males Admit to Rape in Asia-Pacific

by Vasilis Giavris (Lawyer and Political Scientist) 


According to the recently released United Nations Multi-Country Study on Men and Violence in Asia and the Pacific* 25% per cent of men in the Asia-Pacific region have admitted to committing rape against a woman at least once in their life whilst 50% admitted to inflicting violence. The study covered six countries namely: Bangladesh, China, Cambodia, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and Sri Lanka with a total population of 1.8 billion people.

The UN headed study took place between 2010 and 2013. It relied on data collected from over 10,000 males and 3,000 females aged 18-49. Nearly 75% of those who had committed rape said they did so because they felt “sexually entitled” whilst more than half said they did it for “entertainment”. Of those males that admitted to rape only a small minority faced any legal ramifications.

The UN study confirms that despite the rhetoric of gender equality in many parts of the world violence against women continues to be perpetrated in alarming rates whilst the perpetrators are immune from any legal consequences. The study’s findings reaffirm that millions of women are violated and sexually assaulted as an expression of women’s subordination and inequality within a broader structure of human rights abuses.

A change in culture is required. The world cannot stand idle whilst such atrocities are committed on a daily basis. Gender equality and the rights of woman to a healthy, safe and free life are universal human rights that are not culture specific. The notion of cultural “values” being used by certain governmental regimes to excuse and maintain the flagrant violation of human rights is absurd and cannot be tolerated. Cultural practices of early, forced marriages of girls, female genital mutilation and the shaming and punishment of female victims of sexual abuse are not “cultural” rights. 

Human dignity is a common entitlement applicable to all humans, irrespective of social status, gender, religion or country of origin. Changing cultures towards zero tolerance for violence against women signifies one of the most crucial challenges to the universal nature of human rights discourse and to the global implementation of rights.

Change is Possible. Let’s Help Make it Happen.

Friday, 6 September 2013

6 Σεπτεμβρίου 1955:Το «πογκρόμ» εναντίον των Ελλήνων της Κωνσταντινούπολης

by Vasilis Giavris (Lawyer & Political Scientist)

Η σημερινή ημέρα είναι ημέρα μνήμης, θλίψης και περισυλλογής. Σαν σήμερα στις 6 Σεπτεμβρίου 1955 ξεκίνησε το πογκρόμ εναντίων των Ελλήνων, πρωτίστως, αλλά και άλλων μειονοτήτων στην Κωνσταντινούπολη από δεκάδες χιλιάδες Τούρκους πολίτες και παραστρατιωτικούς.

Ο μαινόμενος Τουρκικός όχλος στοχοποίησε τους Έλληνες της Κωνσταντινούπολης και προχώρησε σε ωμές βιαιότητες. Δεκάδες Έλληνες σκοτώθηκαν και χιλιάδες άλλοι υπέστησαν σοβαρούς ξυλοδαρμούς και βιασμούς. Μέσα σε λίγες ώρες καταστράφηκαν χιλιάδες Ελληνικά σπίτια, καταστήματα, σχολεία, πολιτιστικοί σύλλογοι, νοσοκομεία και δεκάδες εκκλησίες.

Ως αποτέλεσμα, ο Ελληνικός πληθυσμός στην Τουρκία μειώθηκε κατακόρυφα και για άλλη μια φορά αναγκάστηκε να ξεριζωθεί και να πάρει το δρόμο της προσφυγιάς.

Δυστυχώς όλα αυτά δεν συνέβησαν σε κάποια άλλη εποχή. Είναι πρόσφατα γεγονότα με πολλούς από τους πρωταγωνιστές να βρίσκονται εν ζωή. Υποχρέωση μας είναι να θυμόμαστε, να τιμάμε αλλά και να μαθαίνουμε από αυτά.





Thursday, 5 September 2013

Aegean Sea Dispute in Context: Delimitation of the Continental Shelf

by Vasilis Giavris - Lawyer & Political Scientist

It is generally accepted that the delimitation of the continental shelf boundary in the Aegean Sea first became an issue of contention between Greece and Turkey on November 1, 1973 when the Turkish government decided to unilaterally grant permits to the Turkish State Petroleum Company for the exploration and exploitation of the seabed of the Aegean Sea surrounding the Greek islands of Samothrace, Limnos, Agios Eustratios, Lesbos, Chios, Psara and Antipsara. Turkey followed this decision by publishing in the Turkish Government Gazette a map which effectively drew the line of delimitation between Greece and Turkey in the middle of the Aegean Sea and failed to account for the existence of the Greek islands. 

Turkey’s actions drew an immediate protest from the Greek Government which on 7 February 1974 addressed a Note Verbale to the government of Turkey in which it disputed the validity of Turkey’s actions and reserved Greece’s sovereign rights over the continental shelf of the above named islands (Greek Note Verbale No.6243-29/AS 103, 7 February 1974). Whilst both states initially agreed to enter into some form of negotiations to deal with the issue in dispute this agreement was quickly abandoned as a result of the illegal invasion of Cyprus by Turkey in 1974 and by the Turkish decision in 1976 to authorize further Turkish ships to undertake explorations in the disputed areas. 

Nature of dispute 


There is a divergence of opinion as to the exact limit of the dispute in question. Greece perceives the dispute to be limited to the continental shelf adjacent to the Greek islands of Samothrace, Limnos, Agios Eustratios, Lesbos, Chios, Psara, Antipsara, Samos, Ikaria, and the islands comprising the Dodecanese group. On the contrary, Turkey maintains the view that the dispute applies to the whole of the Aegean Sea and as such is not limited to particular islands.

Both states revert to legal arguments to support their respective claims. Greece correctly articulates the view that islands are entitled to their own continental shelf and in this regard points to Article 1(b) of the Convention on the Continental Shelf 1958 which states that the term “continental shelf” also applies to the seabed and subsoil of submarine areas adjacent to the coasts of islands. Greece further relies on Article 121(2) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 (UNCLOS III) which states that “the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf of an island are determined in accordance with the provisions of this Convention applicable to other land territory” and as such, according to Greece, reinforces the argument that islands do have their own economic zone and continental shelf. 

Finally, Greece quite rightly points to Article 6(1) of the Convention on the Continental Shelf 1958 which states that in circumstances where an agreement cannot be reached between states, and unless there are special circumstances that justify another determination, the boundary is to be determined by a median line, every point of which is equidistant from the nearest point of the baseline of each state (Greek Note Verbale No.6243-29/AS 103, 7 February 1974). According to Greece, this point can only be the median line between the Greek islands of the eastern Aegean and the Turkish coast..

Turkey, which is not a signatory of UNCLOS III, refuses to be bound by its provisions. It denies that Greek islands possess continental shelves of their own but rather ironically perceives them as “protuberances” of the Turkish continental shelf and a “prolongation of the Anatolian landmass”. Turkey further claims that “special” circumstances apply to the Aegean Sea. In particular, Turkey claims that failing to achieve agreement on the delimitation line then both states need to define their respective continental shelf areas by taking into consideration factors such as the “geomorphologic and geological structure of the shelf” and special circumstances including the “general configuration of the respective coasts, the existence of islands, islets or rocks of one State on the continental shelf of the other”. 

Greece does not accept the special circumstances claimed by Turkey. On the contrary, it claims that if special circumstances are deemed to exist they must favour Greece since the “Archipelagic unity” of the Greek islands should not be interrupted by the imposition of Turkey’s continental shelf.     


It is imperative that Greece continues to make it clear to all and sundry that resolution to long standing disputes can only be achieved by insisting on the implementation of United Nations Resolutions, International Conventions, European Acquis and International Law.