Opinion: Post Supreme Court ruling – The International Elections Observer’s statements show their blatant disregard of the public will concerning the Kenyan Presidential Election 2017!

I just have to this, it is sad but I have to. After the Supreme Court nullified the elections and the world had told Raila Odinga, no problem that you lose, just give up and let the Jubilee win. That is initially what Kenyan Press and what the international election observers said, as they praise the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) said the process was adorable and they wished it that it was their own baby. However, today it is verified by the judgement by Supreme Court of Kenya, which the Presidential Election has to be done again within 60 days. This is baffling considering the praise and the international words to National Super Alliance (NASA). That is why I have to show some quotes from these statements and report, so that the 20/20 hindsight can show their disregard of the public will and justice for each and single ballot. This cannot be dismissed, since this is also public and the organizations wants to be friendly with Uhuru Kenyatta and Jubilee. Look!

IGAD: “IGAD EOM has observed the process of the opening of polling stations, the tallying and counting at the same polling stations of the presidential vote. Based on what it has been able to observe, the IGAD EOM preliminary conclusion is that the general elections were conducted in a peaceful, orderly, and transparent manner and in accordance with the Constitution and the laws of the Republic of Kenya. IGAD calls on all political parties and candidates to respect the will of the people of Kenya and to refrain from any act that might be of disruptive nature to the peace and stability of the country” (IGAD ELECTION OBSERVER MISSION – TO THE GENERAL ELECTIONS IN THE REPUBLIC OF KENYA – 9th August 2017, Nairobi, Kenya).

EAC: “The EAC Observer Mission would like to congratulate the people of Kenya for conducting a peaceful electoral process thus far. The Mission commends the IEBC for their professional conduct and the security agencies for ensuring that overall law and order prevailed throughout the electoral process observed. The Mission is gratified to see that isolated incidents and late opening of stations in some areas did not overshadow the peaceful conduct of the elections. As we are releasing this statement, collation and transmission of results is still ongoing in some parts of the country. The Mission hopes that the same atmosphere will prevail during the remaining stages of the electoral process” (THE EAST AFRICAN COMMUNITY ELECTION OBSERVER MISSION TO THE 8 AUGUST 2017 GENERAL ELECTIONS IN THE REPUBLIC OF KENYA, 10.08.2017).

Carter Center: “While the Kenyan people have spoken at the ballot box, the electoral process is still ongoing as the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) continues to tabulate and finalize results. Until official results are announced, it is critical that all parties and candidates refrain from making declarations about the results” (…) “In light of these problems, the IEBC issued a statement on Aug. 9 calling for patience while the tallying process continued. In addition, the IEBC stated that the presidential results reported on the website were unofficial – the official results are those tallied at the constituencies. Citing complaints about the electronic results transmission system and other problems, opposition candidate Raila Odinga said that the tally of results at the national tally center was not legitimate and that he would not accept unsubstantiated results. Coupled with the trouble experienced in data transmission, these statements resulted in increased tension among his supporters and created concerns about a threat of violence in some areas of the country” (…) “The IEBC’s tabulation process, if fully implemented, allows for a high level of transparency and accountability. The IEBC should continue to collect and publish results transparently until the process is concluded, so that the overall integrity of the process can be verified. In addition, all parties and their agents should enjoy full access to the IEBC’s tallying processes at all levels so that any discrepancies can be reviewed and discovered” (Carter Center Preliminary Statement on the 2017 Kenyan Election, 10.08.2017).

These are some of the statements in the aftermath of 8th August 2017, after the polls and beginning of the counting. The striking similarities is evident and that the Election Observers, if they we’re either IGAD, EAC or Carter Center (USA), they saw most of the same and that they didn’t want to touch the hot-potato. They kept silent and instead praised the peace, but not the initial transparency. They did not entail the real issues of counting and tally process, which now been seen as so fraudulent, that the Supreme Court has nullified the IEBC process. With that in mind. Reading these statements today shows the placed arrogance and election tourism done by observers. Instead of writing this, they should have water-skiing in Mombasa or gone hiking at Mount Kenya. This here is insulting now. That IGAD commends the IEBC, that means that IGAD will proclaim anyone, as long as it is member state. EAC will do the same and without any doubt. Carter Center will stand by the process, because the belief in it, even when in doubt. That because the Carter Center rather stop violence, than getting justice served, therefore addressing Odinga directly in their statement.

Now that within 60 days before next Presidential polls, the Election Observers better stay home, their legitimacy is also shattered. Not only the IEBC, but also IGAD, EAC and Carter Center, better be home and not away. They have no insights or understanding of the fraud and the rigging. If not they looked the other way and praised the elections for peace, but not for procedure or justice. That is devastating, but also the mere fact. The days ahead and the new plans to hold elections will come. There will be some foreign election observer’s mission, but they have to be honest and not lie like last time. We cannot handle to see that again. You can lie once, and get away with it. However, not twice, because then it is a pattern and your devious ways are displayed. Peace.

UK’s United Nations Security Council Draft Resolution sets a certain tone to the new possible mandate of AMISOM!

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Member State of the United Kingdom (UK), wrote a draft resolution on the African Union Mission to Somalia (AMISOM) and the operation there. The draft resolution says a lot things. But what is important is the intent of the mission and the scope of it. As if, the United Nations and the donors of the funding will uphold its core and the security operations intact. If they will continue to feed the nations of peacekeepers or wishing for another fate. That is why a Draft Resolution from the UK are important.

Here is the key quotes from resolution:

Decides to authorize the Member States of the AU to maintain the deployment of AMISOM until 31 May 2018, and to reduce the level of uniformed AMISOM personnel to a maximum level of 21,626 by 31 December 2017, to include a minimum of 1,040 AMISOM police personnel including five Formed Police Units, with a further reduction of uniformed personnel to 20,626 by 30 October 2018, unless the Security Council decides to accelerate the pace of the reduction, taking into account the capabilities of the Somali security forces thus far” (UNSC, P: 3, 2017).

Decides to authorize AMISOM to pursue the following strategic objectives:

(a) Enable the gradual handing over of security responsibilities from AMISOM to the Somali security forces contingent on abilities of the Somali security forces and political and security progress in Somalia;

(b) Reduce the threat posed by Al Shabaab and other armed opposition groups;

(c) Assist the Somali security forces to provide security for the political process at all levels as well as stabilization, reconciliation and peacebuilding in Somalia” (UNSC, P: 3, 2017).

Requests the Secretary-General to conduct a comprehensive assessment of AMISOM by 15 April 2018, working closely with the African Union and the Federal Government of Somalia, to take stock of the transition thus far including the development of Somali security institutions, and to make recommendations on the progressive transition from AMISOM to Somali security responsibility including over the electoral period, taking into account the capacities of the Somali security forces” (UNSC, P: 5-6, 2017).

This is the newest draft resolution on the AMISOM, the previous one was made on the 27th May 2017. When the United Nations Security Council voted it to extended the mission until 31st August 2017. Now that is tomorrow. Therefore, the key statements from that is:

The Security Council today decided to authorize member States of the African Union to maintain the deployment of the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) until 31 August” (…) “The Council also decided that the Mission would maintain its current maximum deployment level of 22,126 uniformed personnel. It further authorized AMISOM to take all necessary measures in carrying out its mandate” (UNSC, 2017).

So the draft wants less deployment in Somalia, the UK draft says the AMISOM will cut by 1500 soldiers. This means brigades pulled back to their republics. That being Kenyan, Ugandan or Burundian troops sent home. The other important part of it is to make reductions and assess more thoroughly the mission. As the mission of peace-building and creating a stronger Somali National Army. That the Secretary General will work on a transition away from the AMISOM. This is another state than before, because the UNSC and AMISOM has been naturally extended without any core assessment of their mission. The peacekeeping mission has been important, but will a possible leaving the Somalian Federation open doors to an uncertainty of the security situation. Since the Somalian republic has been in dire straights since the fall of Said Barre in 1970s. The time for rebuilding and not civil-war is important. The AMISOM mission has not been able to stop that even, as the Al-Shabaab has had the ability to create havoc. Therefore, the battle-zones has shifted.

This draft sets the tone of what that could be possible mandate and willing of the United Nations to support. As the Member States and the Security Council votes for tomorrow. The uncertainty and the reports from the Secretary General. And wanting the AMISOM to give more power to the Somali National Army (SNA), this is powerful shift of will. This idea to engage more directly the transition and the government of Somalia. The SNA will get more training and less deployment of the peacekeepers to make sure they can be more independent. The AMISOM will continue its mandate to 31st May 2018.

We have to see what the United Nations Security Council votes and what resolution that will be put forward. Peace.

Reference:

United Nations Security Council (UNSC) – ‘United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland: draft resolution’ (25.08.2017)

United Nations Security Council (UNSC) – ‘Security Council Authorizes African Union to Maintain Mission’s Deployment in Somalia until 31 August, Unanimously Adopting Resolution 2355 (2017)’ (26.05.2017) link: https://www.un.org/press/en/2017/sc12843.doc.htm

US: State Department plan shelving Special Envoys to the Great Lakes, South Sudan and Sudan!

The Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, as part of the Trump Administration has clearly been working hard. Since the revamp of the Department of State, the Secretary has letter explaining cuts in the Department to the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations at the United States Congress, Bob Corker. The United States government has clearly shifted their foreign policy and care for former allies. Their engagement are moving, but not as ready-made policy!

Tillerson wrote in his letter about this shift in African diplomacy or foreign relations:

The titles for following positions will be removed and the functions and staff assumed by the Bureau of African Affairs (AF):

U.S. Special Envoy for the Great Lakes Region of Africa & Democratic Republic of Congo. The Special Envoy position currently is organized in AF, however the authorized staff positions and associated funding are currently in the Office of the Secretary and will be reprogrammed to AF. This will involve realigning 4 positions and $957,000 in support costs within D&CP from the Office of the Secretary to the Bureau of African Affairs (AF).

U.S. Special Envoy to Sudan and South Sudan. This will involve realigning 6 positions and $4,408,000 in support costs within D&CP from the Office of the Secretary to the Bureau of African Affairs (AF). We intend to request that Congress repeal the statutory provision for this special envoy position, since a deputy assistant secretary in AF already fulfills the responsibilities” (Rex Tillerson to Bob Corker on ‘Special Envoys and Special Representatives’).

So the Department of State will remove the Special Envoys to the Great Lakes and Democratic Republic Congo, also to the Sudan and South Sudan. These are all nations where the United States has been involved and been important part of the development. Their sanctions and acts within these republics has been vital. That is why the opposition in the DRC has asked for stronger sanctions and travel bans on the Kabila government.

The others are the South Sudan, where the US are parts of the Troika, who is also major donors to the South Sudanese government. The newly independent republic, that got massive help from the Americans for their independence from Khartoum and Sudan. The Sudan has also been important for the Americans as they have tried to solve the crisis in Darfur and it has also worked well with them for their oil. The reasons for why usually the Americans has involved itself in foreign countries.

The US now clearly doesn’t see the value in Sudan, South Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo and the other countries of Great Lakes. These are now undervalued, as the Special Envoys and their functions are now moved to others. The African Affairs staff gets more functions, as the Special Envoys will not create relationship it used to have.

The Envoy will have the same close work with Burundi, Rwanda, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan and Sudan. All of these Republic will not be represented in a fashion that the United States has done before. This proves that the American government doesn’t care about the state of affairs or wanting to engage in the conflicts, the internal problems and the totalitarian governments. The US neglects its place and purpose in these republics.

So when the United States comes to the crisis in South Sudan and other places. They will not have the same connections or understanding of the republics. This will second-sourced information, instead of getting it directly.

The United States are downgrading their diplomatic leadership to all these nations, as the Special Envoys will be shelved by the force of the State Department. The Americans are clearly not caring or bothered by the conflict, the refugee crisis or the oppressive behavior against opposition. The United States are now distant and not engaged there. They will be far away and only there when it fits their interests. Peace.

The World needs Rambo right now!

John Rambo: “[alternate line from Director’s Cut] You’re not going anywhere. And there isn’t one of us that doesn’t want to be someplace else. But this is what we do, who we are. Live for nothing, or die for something. Your call” (John Ramo, 2008).

The world is spinning in circle and things are continuing sometimes without any change. But the situations are still uncertain. There are fleeing civilians from the Democratic Republic of Congo, continues civil-war inside South Sudan, oppression in Burundi and Rwanda. Grand issues in regions of Somalia as AMISOM fiercely goes after Al-Shabaab. The continued civil-war infused with control from Saudi Arabia and United States in Yemen. The war inside Syria with the fleeing refugees from there. The international complications this all assess. The massive amounts of people who are inflicted in this conflicts.

This is also the issues created by and their national alliances, like Syria are also in hot-bed with Russia, United States, Turkey and Iran. The same can be said with the international implications to the stalemate between Qatar and the rest of Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). That the Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Bahrain and so on are all blocking, so many nations has cut their diplomatic ties with Qatar.

With all the conflicts and bigger diplomatic spats, the world needs Rambo’s. Especially considering that the deaths where it doesn’t counts is showed when it comes to mud-slides in Sierra Leone. The importance of Hurricane Harry, which is credible storm in Texas, but the world should have cared of the 500 deaths in Western Africa.

That the world is significant fragile is with the President Trump and the nuclear codes, the vicious attacks of both representatives and international leaders like Merkel and President Kim Jung-Un. The threats between North Korea and United States are clearly flaring up the tensions in South-East Asia, as the rockets keep shooting-up and testing.

Therefore, with this we need Rambo, someone to come in with confidence. Rambo needs to come into the problems and sort them out. So that the diplomatic disputes gets sorted out, as his spring fears into the ones who are in the same room. If Rambo came with his weapons and his rhetoric, maybe Trump wouldn’t such and ass. Maybe Putin would try out other tricks, than actually using methods of deception. As so many other world leaders would seek peace instead of wars and refugees. Rambo could come in and make a change.

The nice talk of Bono, the ethical codes of United Nations has not worked. The non-peaceful atmosphere is steady in too many places, to many deaths should be examined and not die without any consideration. Rambo could have helped, made sure the council and the world forums would actually not talk, but act. The crisis in South Sudan, DRC, Burundi, Syria, Yemen, Middle East and so on.

The world needs Rambo, the world needs a hero who can actually give a damn, not just make the world a place for multi-national companies who rob the resources and would not care for kids working for militias, so the world can cobalt for the smart-phones production. Rambo needs to come and make change, he might not be perfect. But something has to change. Someone has step-in, Rambo needs to come and significantly change in the world. Times change, but Rambo might sort it out!

Murdock: Rambo, you can feel totally safe because we have the most advanced weapons in the world available to us.

Rambo: I’ve always believed that the mind is the best weapon.

Murdock: Times change.

Rambo: For some people” (Rambo: First Blood Part II, 1985).

CIA Director John Brennan internal memo on “Russian Interference in the Election” (16.12.2016)

Brexit: Another future exit report with wishful thinking considering the role of CJEU post-Brexit!

The Tories-DUP Government released today yet another report, this report was on enforcement and disputes arising between the Her Majesties Government (HM Government) and the European Union (EU). As of when the United Kingdom abandon it’s membership status to become a non-member of the EU. The Brexit Minister David Davis clearly has lack of vision or trying to take the easy way out. Since the UK government has delivered nothing else, than wishful, we want it as today. So when I went into reading this, it was as expected. It is like the Tories doesn’t care about it or wanting to define what they want as they are going out of the EU. Here some of favorite quotes from today’s report.

As we exit the EU, the UK wants to agree an orderly withdrawal and establish a new, deep and special partnership with the EU. The UK has also made clear that in order to avoid any cliff-edge as we move from our current relationship to our future partnership, people and businesses in both the UK and the EU would benefit from an interim period, where this is necessary for the smooth and orderly implementation of new arrangements” (…) “The success of the future partnership will depend on mutual respect. We will be starting from a strong position: our shared commitment to upholding the rule of law and to meeting our international obligations, and our intention to comply with the agreements reached between us, are not in doubt” (HM Government, P: 3, 2017).

In agreements between the EU and third countries, where cooperation is facilitated through replicating language which is identical in substance to EU law, these agreements can specify that account is to be taken of CJEU decisions when interpreting those concepts. This is relevant where both parties agree that divergence in interpretation would be undesirable, for example, for operational reasons such as continued close cooperation with EU agencies” (…) “The value of such arrangements lie where there is a shared interest in reducing or eliminating divergence in how specific aspects of an agreement with the EU are implemented in the EU and the third country respectively. The extent to which this approach may be valuable depends on the extent to which there is agreement that divergence should be avoided in specific areas” (HM Government, P: 9, 2017).

In international agreements, final remedies are principally retaliatory in nature and implemented unilaterally by the parties. This includes the ability to take safeguard measures to mitigate any negative effects from the other party’s noncompliance as well as the option to suspend all or part of the agreement (or several linked agreements), or, ultimately, withdraw from the agreement (or several linked agreements). The ability of the European Commission and the CJEU within the EU legal system to impose sanctions, such as fines for non-compliance with EU rules, is exceptional” (…) “The agreements governing the UK’s withdrawal from, and future partnership with, the EU will cover a broad range of areas of cooperation. Those agreements should set out clear means by which the terms of the agreements should be implemented and enforced within the UK and the EU. They should also establish a mechanism for the resolution of disputes concerning those agreements” (HM Government, P: 11-12, 2017).

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the United Kingdom, this relationship will get into another position after the withdrawal from the EU. Since the legal disputes will be different between UK and EU, as the membership are now ceased. The UK might have some legal framework between them and the EU.

That EU and UK wants a mutual respect, they both want that. This paper actually states: In agreements between the EU and third countries, where cooperation is facilitated through replicating language which is identical in substance to EU law, these agreements can specify that account is to be taken of CJEU decisions when interpreting those concepts. This is relevant where both parties agree that divergence in interpretation would be undesirable, for example, for operational reasons such as continued close cooperation with EU agencies” (HM Government, 2017).

This specific passage says in essence, that the UK wants to be facilitated and replicating the legal language of the EU, so they can cooperate with EU law, even after leaving. So that it will in general stay much as the same. The concepts and the parties will agree, so they also will function directly with the EU agencies. So the UK want an agreement that fits directly to EU law. This is countering the independence and the mindset of a “hard” Brexit, more like smoothing their system to the EU. The Remains must be jolly, that yet another paper, the HM Government are working for more of the same. Not really changing the status, but wishing for a similar system of today. That means dispute and laws would work in sync with agencies and the CJEU. Which is impressive!

Clearly, the UK want a special mechanism to be sufficient between them, as their new cooperative spirit starts after the withdrawal, but the EU will have a new agreement and a new non Member State who wants to trade, follow procedure and the jurisdiction. This means the UK and the EU needs a new function to fix disputes and legal remedies between the non-members and the EU. The UK are afraid of the EU possible sanctions, as the powers of CJEU are powerful towards to third countries, which means the UK could be sanctioned in a way that haven’t in the past. That is why the UK want to consider a legal language in sync with the EU, so they will follow the EU, even when they are outside the EU. That means a pretty soft, compared to what the Brexit wanted to be. Peace.

Reference:

HM Government – ‘Enforcement and dispute resolution – A FUTURE PARTNERSHIP PAPER’ (23.08.2017)

Grace “Gucci Gucci” Mugabe [above the law] got her ‘Diplomatic Immunity’ today after her violent acts against several models at Sandton Hotel!

We can now officially say that First Lady of Zimbabwe are now standing above the laws of South Africa, a republic where she doesn’t reside, but because the relationship between Mugabe family and South African government, the RSA laws doesn’t matter to the Princes of ZANU-PF and their Family members. Grace Mugabe can now assault with battery and with intent, and get away it it. Since it was internal family matters, a visit to look after her long-lost kids who lives in luxury, while the Zimbabweans are starving. Such justice there, but the point now, is that Grace Mugabe can assault not only one person, but more with help of her bodyguards. Just take a look, first the ‘Diplomatic Immunity’ and then eyewitness stories from what she is free of charges from, because of her stature and place of life. The law isn’t the same for all kind, especially not when you have powerful friends, it seems.

Government Notice number 850 of 20th August from Minister Maite Nkoana-Mshabane, the Minister of International Relations and Cooperations wrote: “In accordance with the powers vested in me by section 7(2) of the Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges Act, 2001 (Act No. 37 of 2001) and acting in the interest of Republic of South Africa, I hereby recognize the immunities and privileges of the First Lady of Zimbabwe, Dr. Grace Mugabe, in terms of international law and as set out in the attached Notice” (Government Gazette, 20.08.2017 – Government Notice No. 850 of 2017).

Victims of Grace Mugabe’s rage:

One of the three women, who describes herself as a promotional model, told of her terror as Mugabe lashed out at them. Mugabe was accompanied by about 10 bodyguards and hotel security guards and she was looking for her sons, Robert jnr, 25, and Chatunga Bellarmine, 21. Both men had fled the room when they heard their mother coming. The attack took place in Sandton’s The Capital 20 West hotel. The woman said that at the time she did not know who her assailant was or why she and her friends were being beaten. “I really thought she was going to kill me … From the moment she stormed into the room she was ready to murder someone,” the woman said. “The electrical cord-cable was tightly wrapped around her hands. No one could stop her. The guards and hotel security guards just stood there and watched as she whipped me with the cord and dragged me across the floor by my hair.” Mugabe’s sons have recently been in the news for their behaviour. The brothers were kicked out of a Sandton hotel last month, allegedly for bad behaviour” (…) “When the three friends could not tell her where her sons where, Mugabe lashed out at them with the electrical cord. The woman said the attack carried on for 20 minutes. While she was being assaulted, her friends fled. “She dragged me by my hair and held me tight. She slashed me viciously with the electrical cord. She then dragged me by my hair across the floor and threw me on a couch where she forced me to call our mutual friend and Bellarmine’s best friend, but their phones were off. “She continued beating me with the cord; I was rescued by the hotel manager, who rushed to the room after hearing my screams for help.” Engels’s two friends said they were too frightened of Grace Mugabe to lay criminal complaints, but said they would support Engels in court” (Ndabeni, 2017).

This should be insulting to the victims, the families and to the justice system of South Africa. That a foreign dignitary can carry out assaults and violence on their citizens. Than, run home with immunity from her crimes. The violence done because of the sons wish of partying with models and expensive bottles wine. The sons of Robert Mugabe have already caused trouble on the same hotel in past, but because of their standing and ranks they are allowed back. If someone else did similar acts, they would be banned from the premises.

Still, as that is awful enough – Grace Mugabe put-up the ante and attacked fellow guests of her sons. She violated them and harassed them. Grace Mugabe actually torn them and used violence. The First Lady did not act against her sons in this way, but against strangers who was invited by her sons. She attacked innocent South African girls, who had no ill-intent and was invited to the hotel. This is vicious and insane!

So with this in mind, the RSA and the Minister Maite Nkoana-Mshabane should offer a leaf of faith. This should be investigated and taken to the law. First Lady Mugabe should stand trial and answer for the possible misgivings and assault with battery. This isn’t flattering, this is a clear violation of ordinary and civilian courtesy. The First Lady could have talked ordinary to the woman and asked why they we’re there and why her sons was gone. Instead, she attacked them with the force of 10 bodyguards and left no-one with wounds. The witnesses even fear the woman after this and that is not strange, she attacked them viciously.

What is more insulting, is that the State offers no sympathy for their own citizens and leaves them behind. They are just flesh-wounds and exchangeable, they can be traded with someone else. The next time the Mugabe boys looking for a fling. No big-deal, but the Mugabe family is so unique and special. So they can assault strangers without any consequence or facing justice. They are above the law, not only in Zimbabwe, but also in the proud Republic of South Africa.

This is just proving that the First Lady of Zimbabwe can do whatever she wants, the same for her sons and also the President. Since they are dignitaries and state officials with different passports, but that doesn’t mean they should get away with everything. Also, this shows how accommodating the RSA is the Mugabe family and therefore, accept this sort of behavior. It is okay and nothing wrong, apparently that is the message. Peace.

Reference:

Ndabeni, Khanyi – ‘ First Lady, Grace Mugabe ‘was ready to murder’ (20.08.2017) link: https://www.timeslive.co.za/sunday-times/news/2017-08-19-first-lady-grace-mugabe-was-ready-to-murder/

Burundi: CNARED-GIRITEKA – Communique de Presse (17.08.2017)

Brexit: Tories Government – “Future Costums Arrangements” paper are made of “dreams” and not reality!

On 15th August 2017, the United Kingdom or the Her Majesties Government laid out there paper on the Costums Union with the European Union. You would imagine that this one would be a paper drawing the lines in the sand and putting things in order. They are apparently not so, not surprising that people have called the Brexit Minister David Davis lazy, the reasons for doing. Is by looking at the paperwork and the white papers who are initially spelling out the policies for the break-up. These are supposed standards of acts and of understanding from one part to the other. Therefore, the quotes and the basic framework says a lot. That is why it is intriguing how little dep’t there are in the “Future customs arrangements – A FUTURE PARTNERSHIP PAPER”, it is insane how little it says at this point.

Let’s be brief about the quotes worth mentioning from this “paper”:

“As a first step, we will seek continuity in our existing trade and investment relationships, including those covered by EU Free Trade Agreements or other EU preferential arrangements. Our exit from the EU will provide considerable additional opportunities for UK business through ambitious new trade arrangements and comprehensive trade deals that play to the strengths of the UK economy of today and the future, including in areas such as services and digital trade, as well as trade in goods. As a services-based economy, services account for around 80 per cent of UK GDP6 and the UK is the second largest exporter of services worldwide.7 Services exports accounted for £246 billion in 2016.8 The share of services in total UK exports has increased from around 27 per cent in 1990 to 45 per cent in 20169 – the largest share of any of the G7 economies.10 To capitalise fully on those opportunities, the UK will need an independent trade policy, with the freedom to set for ourselves the terms of our trade with the world” (HM Government, P: 4, 15.08.2017).

So again, the Conservative Party and the Democratic Unionist Party Government comes with statements that underline the possible positives about the break-up without considering the real implications of the act. They are playing safe and promising excellent opportunities, without underlining the doubts of trade and border issues, granted the exit. It is like the doors open and they are coming directly into Narnia and not upon a new unknown quest.

Therefore the next statements saying this: “In assessing the options for the UK’s future outside the EU Customs Union, the Government will be guided by what delivers the greatest economic advantage to the UK, and by three strategic objectives:

  • ● ensuring UK-EU trade is as frictionless as possible;
  • ● avoiding a ‘hard border’ between Ireland and Northern Ireland; and
  • ● establishing an independent international trade policy” (HM Government, P: 6, 15.08.2017).

It is like the UK Government and their negotiation team is dreaming that the EU will grant them all of their wishes and make the world a peaceful and lovable space, where anyone living wants to have a house in Nothing Hill or in Yorkshire. But, alas that is not case. That the UK-EU trade will not be frictionless, if it was so, the massive amount trade-agreements would be settled, also the businesses would start to move to European cities for security of future transactions, like to Dublin or Frankfurt. Therefore, the Tories frictionless is near impossible and will implode on them at one point!

The border question on Ireland is another subject, which will be hustled and bustled, where nothing is certain. What that it will be, is an advantage standpoint for Unionists, but not for the Irish or the European Union, which would like similar rules for all their Member States. The last one is something the UK has to work upon and find-out as the directives and the legislation for trade from Brussels will cease, but that also makes it hard to be very independent if the EU are their major trading-partner.

One potential approach the UK intends to explore further with the EU would involve the UK acting in partnership with the EU to operate a regime for imports that aligns precisely with the EU’s external customs border, for goods that will be consumed in the EU market, even if they are part of a supply chain in the UK first. The UK would need to apply the same tariffs as the EU, and provide the same treatment for rules of origin for those goods arriving in the UK and destined for the EU” (…) “By mirroring the EU’s customs approach at its external border, we could ensure that all goods entering the EU via the UK have paid the correct EU duties. This would remove the need for the UK and the EU to introduce customs processes between us, so that goods moving between the UK and the EU would be treated as they are now for customs purposes. The UK would also be able to apply its own tariffs and trade policy to UK exports and imports from other countries destined for the UK market, in line with our aspiration for an independent trade policy. We would need to explore with the EU how such an approach would fit with the other elements of our deep and special partnership” (HM Government, P: 10, 15.08.2017).

This here proves that UK Government thinks the EU will accept free-trade and movement of goods, without taking one of their pillars, the movement of people. Like the borders was made for cows, Iphone’s and automobiles, but not made for securing people trespassing from one garden to the next. The fences and guidelines of crossings, will be within concern of the status of the UK deal with the EU, as a non-EU State. Meaning, the Third Party state, has to reissue boundaries and extended efforts on trade, to justify itself concerning the ones that are Member States already. This should be obvious to the UK Government and the Tories, but their paper is disregarding this mere facts.

It is amazing how this is the sort of framework and due diligence, the government operates within. That they are not thinking in the prospects of not their dream-world, but the reality of the ones they are negotiating with. It is as if they think only on their own behalf, and not of the reactions from the Union, they are leaving. Instead of being concern with by-laws and regulations that are already on “third-nations” and “non-Member-States”, the United Kingdom government should operate like that and not as it is today. The dreams has to stop and the shattered glass has to appear. The broken screens and the trouble of scrolling has to happen. Peace.

“Gucci Gucci Mugabe” ditches justice in South Africa!

You know your an important person or of some influence when you can run from the law and not get into greater trouble. If it was an ordinary person or an ordinary Zimbabwean citizen who did something unjust in South Africa, the person would be questioned, would make an affidavit and been put for trial. Nevertheless, the First Lady Grace Mugabe could access lawyers and even run from the Republic. She was not on official business as a diplomat, but she was there for her sons. Just take a look!

Gabriella Engels on Monday said she was visiting Mugabe’s two sons Robert and Chatunga at the Capital 20 West Hotel whom she met through a mutual friend on Saturday. Engels said a bodyguard asked her and a friend to wait in a separate room before Mugabe allegedly started beating her. “When Grace entered I had no idea who she was. She walked in with an extension cord and just started beating me with it,” Engels told News24 over the phone. Engels said Mugabe accused her of living with her sons. “She flipped and just kept beating me with the plug. Over and over. I had no idea what was going on. I was surprised… I needed to crawl out of the room before I could run away” (…) “Her ten bodyguards just stood there watching, no one did anything, no one tried to help me.” Engels said hotel staff escorted her out of the hotel. She immediately tried to open a case of assault at the Sandton police station” (De Villiers, 2017).

So when you have these sort of allegations against the First Lady of Zimbabwe, the South African Police Service (SAPS) should take this serious. Instead, they are doing this:

That she wants to use diplomatic immunity for her assault of a 20 year old lady and model at the Hotel in South Africa, shows the proof of using her reach of power to personal gain. This is disrespectful of the person violated by her and her assistance, there is nothing that justifies this and also it should be wrong of the South African state to disband the investigation and not look into the matter.

That means that VIPs and greater persons of power can be over the state and over the law. She should be indicted and put into question over the acts that happen at the hotel. That they can be verified and the assault charges can be put to rest. She was not a diplomat or a part of state convoy with state security ushering her around in South Africa. “Gucci Gucci” was initial a tourist in South Africa visiting family members, not being there to discuss trade and border issues between Zimbabwe and RSA. That was not the issue of the days, she was not at Gauteng or Pretoria trying to discuss important members with officials. Instead, she was there visiting her kids, where she met a model and hurt Engels.

This is really sad, how little the law matter, when VIPs and people of Power breaches the laws in the RSA. That is shown with the Gupta’s and Zuma’s, now also Mugabe’s, surely it must help that Zuma and Mugabe has houses close by in Dubai. So they have surely shared a few moments together there around the pool. This is disgraceful to Zimbabwe and also to South Africa. Both republics are played around by the First Lady Mugabe. This is beneath the State and the Authorities, as they can do as they want.

If the RSA gives “Gucci Gucci” diplomatic immunity in this case, than their true allies of Zimbabwe, but are disgracing their own laws and justice, which is not equal for all, but the VIPs can do as they want. Peace.

Reference:

De Villiers, James – ‘Grace Mugabe ‘assaulted’ me with an extension cord, model, 20, claims’ (14.08.2017) link: http://m.news24.com/news24/SouthAfrica/News/grace-mugabe-assaulted-me-with-an-extension-cord-model-20-claims-20170814