http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/20250/ WASHINGTON—Human rights organizations and some in the U.S. Congress are now demanding that Vietnam be placed back on the list of "Country of Particular Concern" (CPC), which would allow the U.S. to impose economic sanctions to pressure the regime to improve its human rights record. Three areas of concern that are being discussed are Vietnam’s record on religious freedom, women and child trafficking, and labor organizing. Presently, the U.S. State Department does not designate Vietnam as a “Country of Particular Concern” or CPC, although it did from 2004-2006. The new Obama administration provides an opportunity to make a new case for Vietnam’s CPC designation. To look into recent developments in Vietnam, the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission held a hearing, July 23, on the status of human rights and religious freedom in Vietnam. The Commission, consisted of a panel of congress members known for their human rights advocacy, including Chris Smith (R-NJ), Ed Royce (R-CA), James McGovern (D-MA), Anh “Joseph” Cao (R-LA), Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), Loretta Sanchez (D-CA), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Frank Wolf (R-VA), and Joe Pitts (R-PA). The anger was palpable in the hearing room on Capitol Hill as the congress members vented harsh words for Vietnam’s religious and labor policies, and most expressed frustration at the State Department’s apparent unwillingness to get tough on Vietnam. And they were incredulous toward U.S. Ambassador to Vietnam Michael Michalak’s recent statement that there was a “lack of evidence” that Vietnam should be placed back on the CPC list. “When Vietnam was placed on the CPC list, we saw some positive changes. Unfortunately, when they were prematurely released in 2006, Vietnam ramped up its persecution,” said Representative Ed Royce. “It is unfortunate a representative of the State Department could not be here with us today. I would appreciate the opportunity to inquire why the administration is not far more engaged on the issue of religious freedom in Vietnam and elsewhere. I hope the State Department will take into account the testimony presented and the discussion that will take place today,” said Representative Chris Smith. UPDATE: Vietnamese translation by Le Minh, http://tiengnoitudodanchu.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=7881    more »

East Asia and the Pacific: Maritime Issues and Sovereignty Disputes in East Asia Wed, 15 Jul 2009 14:38:45 -0500 Maritime Issues and Sovereignty Disputes in East Asia Scot Marciel Deputy Assistant Secretary Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs Statement Before Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs Committee, Senate Foreign Relations Washington, DC July 15, 2009 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chairman Webb and Members of the Committee, I am pleased to testify before you today on maritime and sovereignty issues in East Asia. The sea lanes that run through East Asia are some of the world’s busiest and most strategically important. They serve as the prime arteries of trade that have fueled the tremendous economic growth of the region and brought prosperity to the U.S. economy as well. Billions of dollars of commerce -- much of Asia’s trade with the world, including the United States – flows annually through those waters. Over half of the world’s merchant fleet by tonnage sails through the South China Sea alone each year. The United States has long had a vital interest in maintaining stability, freedom of navigation, and the right to lawful commercial activity in East Asia’s waterways. For decades, active U.S. engagement in East Asia, including the forward-deployed presence of U.S. forces, has been a central factor in keeping the peace and preserving those interests. That continues to be true today. Through diplomacy, commerce, and our military presence, we have protected vital U.S. interests. Our relationships with our allies remain strong, the region is at peace, and – as you know well -- the U.S. Navy continues to carry out the full range of missions necessary to protect our country and preserve our interests. Our presence and our policy have also aimed to support respect for international maritime law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Although the United States has yet to ratify the Convention, as you know Mr. Chairman, this Administration and its predecessors support doing so, and in practice, our vessels comply with its provisions governing traditional uses of the oceans. Issues surrounding maritime and sovereignty disputes in East Asia are multifaceted and complex. With your indulgence, Mr. Chairman, I am going to focus on three topics: --First, the multiple sovereignty disputes in the South China Sea; --Second, recent incidents involving China and the activities of U.S. naval vessels in international waters within that country’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ); --And finally, the strategic context of these distinct topics and how the United States should respond. China, Vietnam, Taiwan, the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Brunei each claim sovereignty over parts of the South China Sea, including its land features. The size of each party’s claim varies widely, as does the intensity with which they assert it. The claims center on sovereignty over the 200 small islands, rocks and reefs that make up the Paracel and Spratly Islands chains. Sovereignty disputes notwithstanding, the South China Sea is largely at peace. Tensions among rival claimants rise and fall. To date, the disputes have not led to sustained military conflict. In 2002, the ASEAN countries and China signed the “Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea.” While non-binding, it set out useful principles, such as that all claimants should “resolve disputes…by peaceful means” and “exercise self-restraint,” and that they “reaffirm their respect for and commitment to the freedom of navigation in and overflight above the South China Sea, as provided for by the universally recognized principles of international law, including the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.” More importantly, the 2002 document signaled a willingness among claimants to approach the dispute multilaterally. We welcomed this agreement, which lowered tensions among claimants and strengthened ASEAN as an institution. It has not eliminated tensions, nor has it eliminated unilateral actions by claimants in the South China Sea, but it’s a start, and a good basis on which to address conflict in the region diplomatically. U.S. policy continues to be that we do not take sides on the competing legal claims over territorial sovereignty in the South China Sea. In other words, we do not take sides on the claims to sovereignty over the islands and other land features in the South China Sea, or the maritime zones (such as territorial seas) that derive from those land features. We do, however, have concerns about claims to “territorial waters” or any maritime zone that does not derive from a land territory. Such maritime claims are not consistent with international law, as reflected in the Law of the Sea Convention. We remain concerned about tension between China and Vietnam, as both countries seek to tap potential oil and gas deposits that lie beneath the South China Sea. Starting in the summer of 2007, China told a number of U.S. and foreign oil and gas firms to stop exploration work with Vietnamese partners in the South China Sea or face unspecified consequences in their business dealings with China. We object to any effort to intimidate U.S. companies. During a visit to Vietnam in September 2008, then-Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte asserted the rights of U.S. companies operating in the South China Sea, and stated that we believe that disputed claims should be dealt with peacefully and without resort to any type of coercion. We have raised our concerns with China directly. Sovereignty disputes between nations should not be addressed by attempting to pressure companies that are not party to the dispute. We have also urged that all claimants exercise restraint and avoid aggressive actions to resolve competing claims. We have stated clearly that we oppose the threat or use of force to resolve the disputes, as well as any action that hinders freedom of navigation. We would like to see a resolution in accordance with international law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. There are various other maritime-related disputes in East Asia. Japan and China have differences over EEZ limits in the East China Sea, and sovereignty over the Senkaku Islands. These disputes have drawn less attention than those in the South China Sea. We continue to monitor developments on all of these maritime disputes, as quarrels over sovereignty can escalate quickly in a region where nationalist sentiment runs strong. I would now like to discuss recent incidents involving China and the activities of U.S. vessels in international waters within that country’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). In March 2009, the survey ship USNS Impeccable was conducting routine operations, consistent with international law, in international waters in the South China Sea. Actions taken by Chinese fishing vessels to harass the Impeccable put ships of both sides at risk, interfered with freedom of navigation, and were inconsistent with the obligation for ships at sea to show due regard for the safety of other ships. We immediately protested those actions to the Chinese government, and urged that our differences be resolved through established mechanisms for dialogue – not through ship-to-ship confrontations that put sailors and vessels at risk. Our concern over that incident centered on China’s conception of its legal authority over other countries’ vessels operating in its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and the unsafe way China sought to assert what it considers its maritime rights. China’s view of its rights on this specific point is not supported by international law. We have made that point clearly in discussions with the Chinese and underscored that U.S. vessels will continue to operate lawfully in international waters as they have done in the past. I would note that there have been no further incidents of harassment by Chinese fishing vessels since mid-May. In closing, I would like to look at both these concerns – the EEZ concerns with China and the overlapping South China Sea claims – in a broader strategic context. Specifically, what do these issues signify for international law and for the evolving power dynamics in East Asia, and how should the United States respond? The Impeccable incident and the sovereignty disputes in the South China Sea are distinct issues that require distinct policy responses from the United States. On a strategic level, to an extent, both issues highlight a growing assertiveness by China in regard to what it sees as its maritime rights. In some cases, we do not share or even understand China’s interpretation of international maritime law. We believe that there are constructive ways, however, to tackle these difficult issues. With respect to freedom of navigation in the EEZ by U.S. naval vessels, we have urged China to address our differences through dialogue. Last month at the Defense Consultative Talks in Beijing, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Michele Flournoy raised this issue, and the Chinese agreed to hold a special session of our Military Maritime Consultative Agreement (signed in 1998) to take up this issue and seek to resolve differences. In the case of the conflicting sovereignty claims in the South China Sea, we have encouraged all parties to pursue solutions in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and other agreements already made between ASEAN and China. The assertions of a number of claimants to South China Sea territory raise important and sometimes troubling questions for the international community regarding access to sea-lanes and marine resources. There is considerable ambiguity in China’s claim to the South China Sea, both in terms of the exact boundaries of its claim and whether it is an assertion of territorial waters over the entire body of water, or only over its land features. In the past, this ambiguity has had little impact on U.S. interests. It has become a concern, however, with regard to the pressure on our energy firms, as some of the offshore blocks that have been subject to Chinese complaint do not appear to lie within China’s claim. It might be helpful to all parties if China provided greater clarity on the substance of its claims. We need to be vigilant to ensure our interests are protected and advanced. When we have concerns, we will raise them candidly, as we have done over the pressuring of our companies. We note that China has taken a more conciliatory approach to resolving some disputes over its land borders. Last year, for example, China and Vietnam concluded a land border demarcation agreement. China’s general diplomatic approach to Southeast Asia has emphasized friendship and good-neighborliness. Likewise, China’s anti-piracy deployment to the Gulf of Aden has been a positive contribution to a common international concern. We are encouraged by these steps, and hope that China will apply the same constructive approach to its maritime rights and boundaries. We have a broad relationship with China, Mr. Chairman, which encompasses many issues of vital strategic importance to both countries. We agree closely on some issues; on others, we frankly have differences. Our bilateral relationship can accommodate and respect those differences, and address them responsibly through dialogue. Thank you for your time, and I am pleased to answer your questions.   more »

Posted on Vietnam Human Rights Journal July 15, 2009 (Stephen Denney)********************************************************************** Vietnamese novelist Nguyen Xuan Nghia and five other pro-democracy advocates have been charged with defaming government leaders, Vietnam state media reported Tuesday. The six, who have been detained since September 2008, are accused of hanging anti-government banners on Haiphong bridges and bridges of the neighboring province of Hai Duong, and then posting photos of the banners on internet. Nghia (age 60) is also accused of writing 57 articles between 2007 and his arrest last year attacking the Vietnamese Communist Party and its leaders. and of belonging to the banned "Bloc 8406", a pro-democracy group founded in 2006 by jailed priest Fr. Nguyen Van Ly. Sources: Associated Press July 14; Lao Dong July 15; Thanh Nien July 15; see also statement of the Vietnam Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Sept. 26, 2008.   more »

Sáng ngày 09-07-2009, chị ruột của linh mục Nguyễn Văn Lý là bà Nguyễn Thị Hiểu và một người cháu gái đã từ Quảng Biên ra trại K1, xã Ba Sao, huyện Kim Bảng, thị xã Phủ Lý, tỉnh Hà Nam để thăm vị tù nhân lương tâm. Cuộc gặp bắt đầu từ 9g và kéo dài đến gần 10g30. in the morning of July 09,2009, Madame Nguyen thi Hieu, Rev Nguyen Van Ly’s sister and a niece of his from Quangbien came to prison camp K1, Basao Commune, Kimbang District, Phuly Town, Hanam Province to visit the prisoner of conscience. The visit lasted from 9:00AM to 10:30AM approximately. Sau khi hỏi han tin tức gia đình và bạn bè, linh mục Lý cho biết: After asking for family and friend’s information, Rev Ly said that, Hôm 13-05-2009, phái đoàn 6 người thuộc Ủy hội Tự do Tôn giáo Quốc tế của Hoa Kỳ đã đến thăm cha tại trại. Ban đầu cuộc gặp được ấn định là 30 phút nhưng rốt cục kéo dài một tiếng rưỡi. Vừa chào hỏi xong, linh mục Lý phân trần: On May 13, 2009 6 person delegation of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom USCIRF visited him at the prison. Initially, the visit had set for 30 minutes but eventually it lasted for one and a half hour. Right after exchanging greetings, Rev Ly explained that, - Quý vị đừng thấy tôi mặc áo tù sọc dưa này [xin xem hình bên dưới, do phái đoàn chụp] mà bảo tôi chấp nhận mình là phạm nhân. Tôi đã không muốn gặp Quý vị với bộ đồ tù này, nhưng vì nghĩ tình Quý vị đã vất vả xin phép nhà nước rồi lặn lội đến đây thăm tôi, nên tôi mới nén lòng mặc nó mà ra tiếp Quý vị. Please don’t assume that I’ve admitted myself as a guilty person despite of the fact that I’m wearing this stripe outfit (see picture below captured by the delegation). I did not want to receive you while wearing this prisoner outfit but I thought that you have work very hard to get this government’s permission and underwent long distance to pay me a visit here, I reluctantly wore it to see you. Trước tiên phái đoàn hỏi là Tòa Tổng giám mục Huế, kể từ 30-03-2007 cho tới hôm nay, đã đi thăm linh mục bao nhiêu lần. Nghe cha Lý đáp là “hai”, phái đoàn cười !?! Lại hỏi: “Thế còn gia đình?” - “Hai tháng thăm một lần” - “Vậy là vẫn ít” - “Gia đình tôi ở xa, cách đây hơn cả 1000 cây số!”. Tay công an canh gác -thiếu tá Nam- xen vào: “Nhưng hàng tháng vẫn có gởi quà! Yêu cầu Anh Lý nói điều này cho phái đoàn rõ” !?! Chế độ ta nhân đạo lắm chứ !?! First the delegation asked him that so far how many time the Archbishop of Hue visited him. The delegation laughed when Father Ly said “two”!?! Another question: “How about family?” _ “bimonthly” - “it’s still little” – “My family is more than 1000 km far from here!”. The guard officer – Major Nam- injected: “but they were allowed to send goods to him every month! Mr. Ly, you are required to tell this clearly to the delegation”!?! How humanitarian our regime is!?! Linh mục Lý nhận định với bà chị (và cháu gái): “Họ nói thế chứ em không hy vọng gì, vì lúc này em đang căng với nhà nước lắm!” Rồi cha kể tiếp: “Cách đây 2 hôm, tức ngày 07-07, lần đầu tiên em được nhà tù cho đọc báo Nhân Dân. Số báo đọc lần đầu này ra ngày 06-06, trong đó có bài “Một việc làm sai lầm”. Tác giả nói hôm 1-7-2009, một số Thượng nghị sĩ Hoa Kỳ đã khơi lại phiên tòa xử em qua bức thư gửi Chủ tịch nước Nguyễn Minh Triết. Họ yêu cầu xem lại những thiếu sót nghiêm trọng trong tiến trình bắt giữ, xét xử và giam em cùng các bạn. Họ còn yêu cầu nhà nước phải lập tức trả tự do vô điều kiện cho em và cho phép em trở về nhà, tiếp tục công việc linh mục, không bị hạn chế các quyền tự do đã được quốc tế công nhận. Rev Ly talked to his sister (and his niece): “ they said so but I have no hope, because the tension between the government and myself is very high so far!” He added: “Two days ago, i.e., July 07, it was the first time that I was allowed to read the Nhan Dan Newspapers. In that newspaper of July 06, I saw the artical titled : “a Mistaken deed”. The author said on July 01,2009, There was a letter sent to President Nguyen Minh Triet by some US senators which recalled the trial. They required VN government to review some serious shortcomings in the process of the arrest, trial and imprisonment of myself and others. They also required the government to release me immediately and unconditionally and let me conduct my work as a priest without limitation of rights which are internationally recognised. OPEN ARTICLE FOR FULL ARTICLE AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION   more »

A year ago, Dr. Le Duy Can from Canada visited his son Le Truong Son and his family in Silver Spring, Maryland. While visiting this school, Dr. Le noticed the red flag of the Communists being displayed to represent the Vietnamese students going to this school. Dr. Le took a pro-active stand and explained to the Principal that only the Vietnamese Heritage Flag is honored by the Vietnamese refugees in the United States and elsewhere in the world. Prior to Dr. Le, a son of Mr. & Mrs. Dau Thanh Van of SBTN, who was a 5th grade student then, also voiced his concern to her. After Dr. Le’s intervention, the Principal graciously showed her understanding and compassion by replacing the red Communist flag with the Yellow Vietnamese Heritage flag, which was provided by Mr. & Mrs. Tuy Le, from Virginia. In appreciation of the Principal's understanding of Vietnamese heritage, Cait James (Le Truong Son’s wife) organized a Traditional Vietnamese Dance Club with the collaboration of Professor Kim Oanh, Tieu Anh Dang, and Tran Chau Le, to teach 28 students of Rolling Terrace Elementary School Vietnamese Dances. The Club of 28 elementary students practiced diligently every week 6 weeks. The first performance was on June 9, 2009, and was a big hit. Parents and students at the school were in for a wonderful and joyous treat. The show was recorded by Mr. Van and broadcast nationwide by SBTN, D.C. Some parents immediately signed up their children to join the Vietnamese Traditional Dance Club next school year. Our hats off to Cait. We sincerely thank Professor Kim Oanh, Tieu Anh Dang, and Tran Chau Le, for all their professional guidance, time, efforts, and dedication in bringing Vietnamese traditional dance to the Community. Genie Nguyen Ngoc Giao Founding Chair, Voice of Vietnamese Americans (VVA) http://voiceofvietnameseamericans.blogspot.com/2009/06/vietnamese-americans-brought.html   more »

Liên tục bắt bất đồng chính kiến? Các vụ bắt bớ diễn ra khi Việt Nam đang chuẩn bị cho đại hội sắp tới của Đảng Cộng sản Vụ bắt thạc sĩ Nguyễn Tiến Trung ở TPHCM một ngày sau khi bị loại ngũ và cựu Trung tá Trần Anh Kim ở Thái Bình đã đưa con số vụ giam giữ vì điều 88 Bộ Luật hình sự lên bảy người trong vòng chưa đầy một tháng. Câu hỏi đặt ra là tại sao Việt Nam tiến hành các vụ bắt những người có quan điểm đối lập vào thời điểm hiện nay. Cơ quan an ninh Việt Nam đã theo dõi những người đòi cạnh tranh với đảng Cộng sản cầm quyền từ lâu. Chẳng hạn trong trường hợp của Nguyễn Tiến Trung, bạn gái của anh nói những gì anh làm đều là ''công khai'' và mọi người đều biết từ trước khi anh vào quân ngũ cách đây một năm. Công an Việt Nam cũng đã biết các hoạt động của các ông Trần Huỳnh Duy Thức, Lê Công Định và Trần Anh Kim từ lâu. Nhưng họ đợi tới thời điểm này mới bắt giam và khởi tố các nhân vật tuyên bố ủng hộ dân chủ. 'Màn khói' Một số người cho rằng những vụ bắt bớ này là nhằm để tạo 'màn khói' che đi những vấn đề nóng bỏng và có tính ngòi nổ hơn. Trong đó có sự bức xúc của người dân về những diến biến liên quan tới Biển Đông cũng như làn sóng phản đối dự án bauxite tại Tây Nguyên và Lâm Đồng. Người ta cũng nói trước khi bị bắt luật sư Lê Công Định còn định kiện Trung Quốc về vấn đề lãnh hải. Có nhà bất đồng chính kiến đã nói truyền thông đã không còn chú ý nhiều tới vấn đề Biển Đông và đặc biệt là chuyện khai thác bauxite theo sau những vụ bắt giữ gần đây. Trước đây các vụ bắt người theo điều 88 có thể diễn ra chỉ sau một vài bài viết hay vài tiết giảng về nhân quyền. Nay công an Việt Nam nói Trung tá Trần Anh Kim đã ''phát tán trên mạng 85 bài viết'' và cũng nói ông Kim ''thừa nhận viết và phát tán hơn 60 đầu tài liệu có nội dung chống Nhà nước''. Trên mạng Internet cũng có ý kiến cho rằng vụ bắt các ông Lê Công Định và Trần Huỳnh Duy Thức chỉ là hệ quả của đấu tranh nội bộ trong tầng lớp cầm quyền. Và vẫn theo cách diễn giải đó, chỉ vụ bắt thạc sĩ Nguyễn Tiến Trung, người từng được các nhân vật cao cấp của Phương Tây tiếp, mới là phép thử đối với dư luận từ Hoa Kỳ. Tất nhiên, đây cũng chỉ là một cách giải thích mà thôi. Đại hội Phía công an Việt Nam cũng nói tới khả năng tổ chức các cuộc gặp lớn và những hoạt động của những người bất đồng chính kiến vào cuối năm nay và đầu năm sau. Chính quyền có vẻ sợ ảnh hưởng lan tỏa của những tư tưởng dân chủ mà những người có tư tưởng tự do ở Việt Nam có thể tạo ra. Nhưng điều có thể thấy rõ là các vụ bắt bớ mới nhất diễn ra trong bối cảnh Việt Nam đang chuẩn bị cho kỳ đại hội quan trọng sắp tới của Đảng Cộng sản Việt Nam vào đầu năm 2011. Chủ nghĩa 'Mác Lê' và tư tưởng Hồ Chí Minh luôn được nhắc tới và dường như các nhà lãnh đạo Việt Nam không có ý định từ bỏ chủ nghĩa mà Nguyễn Tiến Trung từng nói là không phải xuất phát trên những điều kiện của xã hội Việt Nam và trong lúc xã hội đang thay đổi hàng ngày. Nếu dựa vào những phát biểu của chủ tịch nước Việt Nam Nguyễn Minh Triết mới đây với ''chính nghĩa rạng ngời'' của Việt Nam và sự chỉ trích Hoa Kỳ ''vi phạm nhân quyền nhất thế giới'' người ta có thể thấy phe bảo thủ đang thể hiện quan điểm và cả sức mạnh qua các vụ trấn áp hiện nay. Nhóm đối lập của Việt Nam trên thực tế chưa làm được gì nhiều ngoài vấn đề phô trương thanh thế. Cái mà giới lãnh đạo có lẽ sợ hơn là những người đứng trong hàng ngũ của chính họ nhưng có tư tưởng tự do. Rất có thể đợt bắt người, tất cả đều theo điều 88 này, là một cố gắng nhắc nhở một số 'đồng chí' hãy đứng vào hàng và đi đúng lề đường. Giới quan sát không thể không đặt câu hỏi vậy những người có thể sẽ bị an ninh đến gõ cửa là những ai đây. Bấm Bấm vào đây để xem ý kiến độc giả. http://www.bbc.co.uk/vietnamese/vietnam/2009/07/090707_dissident_arrest.shtml   more »

SAN JOSE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--In the last three weeks, three members of the Democratic Party of Vietnam (DPV) have been arrested for promoting the strengthening of democracy and human rights for the people of Vietnam. On July 7, 2009, Dr. Nguyen Tien Trung, the leader of the DPV’s Youth for Democracy organization, and Lieutenant Colonel Tran Anh Kim, a key member of the DPV, were imprisoned for urging increased freedoms of the press, religion, travel and improved human rights. On June 13, 2009, Le Cong Dinh, a prominent attorney and member of the DPV, was unlawfully detained for similar reasons. These actions came shortly after the arrest and imprisonment of Tran Huynh Duy Thuc, CEO of OCI, Le Thang Long, Le Thi Thu and Tran Thi Thu on May 24, 2009. The above individuals had been politically involved in a peaceful manner with the aim of promoting & strengthening democracy and human rights, leading to economic prosperity and stamping out poverty. According to Dr. Nguyen X. Ngai, the Vice Secretary of the Democratic Party of Vietnam, “The actions of the Vietnam government are unlawful and unacceptable in the world community, and is just the opposite of what the Vietnam government agreed to when it joined the WTO and the United Nations. “The DPV deplores this action and demands that the government of Vietnam obey the law and release all the above individuals, as well as other political members who are still unlawfully imprisoned in Viet Nam, without any restrictions or conditions attached.” The Democratic Party of Vietnam has been cooperating with the Vietnamese Communist Party since 1944. At that time, the late Hoang Minh Chinh, former Secretary of the DPV, reformed and reshaped the DPV to place emphasis on non-violent but law-abiding activities with no affiliation to any other political parties. This was announced and reemphasized again on January 9, 2008. Central Executive Committee Democratic Party of Vietnam   more »

URGENT ACTION: Further Information on UA: 155/09 AI Index: ASA 41/003/2009 Issue Date: 6 July 2009 INCOMMUNICADO LAWYER NOW DISBARRED Lawyer Le Cong Dinh has been disbarred by the Ho Chi Minh City Bar Association and the Vietnamese Ministry of Justice has revoked his practising licence. Le Cong Dinh is a prisoner of conscience who has been held incommunicado since his arrest on 13 June. On 1 July 2009, the deputy head of the Ho Chi Minh City Bar Association told journalists that it had disbarred and that the Ministry of Justice had revoked his licence, forbidding him to practice law. Le Cong Dinh has still not been allowed to receive any visits from family members or legal professionals that could represent his case, and Le Cong Dinh's well-being remains unknown. The Vietnamese authorities have launched a public propaganda campaign against Le Cong Dinh following international pressure calling for the lawyer’s release. In a statement issued on 26 June, the government requested “international understanding and support for its struggle against conspiracies and acts conducted by organizations and individuals to carry out acts of terrorism and unrest, overthrow the State and destroy the peaceful life of the people”. Le Cong Dinh was arrested 13 June under Article 88 in the national security section of the Penal Code. Together with other lawyers, Le Cong Dinh had previously argued that Article 88 breaches Viet Nam’s constitution and international human rights law. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has stated that he is accused of contacting and colluding “with some exiled Vietnamese organizations and groups abroad, including those listed by the Vietnamese government as terrorist groups, in an attempt to prepare for riots and cause social instability and public disorder with the ultimate goal of overthrowing the State of Viet Nam”. Le Cong Dinh has been charged with "conducting propaganda" against the state, under Article 88 of the Penal Code. If convicted, he faces a three- to 20-year prison sentence. He is a prisoner of conscience, detained solely for the peaceful exercise of his right to freedom of expression. The Vietnamese authorities have sentenced at least 30 dissidents, including a number of lawyers, to long prison terms since 2006 in an attempt to stifle freedom of expression and association. Most are supporters of an internet-based pro-democracy movement, Bloc 8406, or other unauthorized groups calling for democracy and human rights. The majority have been sentenced to imprisonment under the national security section of the 1999 Penal Code, with additional sentences of up to five years of house arrest on release from prison. An unknown number of dissidents are in custody awaiting trial. Articles of the Penal Code used to criminalize peaceful political dissent include Article 80 (Spying), 87 (Undermining the unity policy), and 88 (Conducting propaganda against the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam). In May 2009, the UN Human Rights Council considered Viet Nam under the Universal Periodic Review (UPR). Viet Nam rejected the recommendations of other states to allow greater freedom of expression and to reform national security laws which limit freedom of expression, among others. PLEASE WRITE IMMEDIATELY in English, French, Vietnamese or your own language: * expressing concern that lawyer Le Cong Dinh is a prisoner of conscience that has been arrested under Article 88 of the Penal Code solely for the peaceful exercise of his right to freedom of expression; * urging the authorities to release him immediately and unconditionally, and drop all charges against him; * calling on the authorities to ensure that he is allowed immediate access to his family and a lawyer of his choosing and, that he is provided with any medical attention he may require; * calling on the authorities to either repeal or amend provisions in the 1999 Penal Code which criminalize peaceful political dissent; PLEASE SEND APPEALS BEFORE 17 AUGUST 2009 TO: OPEN ARTICLE FOR NAMES AND ADDRESSES ****************************** This is the first update of UA: 155/09, AI index: ASA 41/002/2009 Working to protect human rights worldwide   more »

ÐẢNG DÂN CHỦ NHÂN DÂN The People's Democratic Party http://ddcnd.org/main/ July 07, 2009 The Honorable Barbara Boxer United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20520 Dear Senator Boxer: Re: Vietnam’s ongoing of crackdown dissidents and violation of human rights. On the occasion of your effort to reintroduce The Vietnam Human Rights Act (S.1159) to address human rights abuses in Vietnam, including religious and political persecution, I am writing this letter to call your attention to Vietnam’s on going crackdowns of dissidents and violations of human rights. - On June 13, 2009, Vietnam arrested attorney Le Cong Dinh, Mr. Tran Huynh Duy Thuc, Mr. Le Thang Long, Ms. Tran Thi Thu and Ms. Le Thi Thu Thu. All were accused of violating Article 88 of the Penal Code of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, which alleged “dissemination of propaganda acts against The Socialist Republic of Vietnam”. In fact, these individuals are pro-democracy activists who bravely raise their voices to promote democracy and freedom for Vietnam. - On July 7, 2009, Vietnam continues to arrest two more dissidents, Mr. Tran Anh Kim in Ha Noi and Mr. Nguyen Tien Trung in Saigon. Both also were accused of violating Article 88. - In addition, five democratic activists including writer Nguyen Xuan Nghia, teacher Vu Hung, Mr. Ngo Quynh, Mr. Pham Van Troi and Ms. Pham Thanh Nghien were incarcerated in Hanoi since September 2008 without trials. All were accused of the same violation as the above-named detainees. Being a member of United Nations Security Council, yet Vietnam continues to commit serious human rights abuses. Using detention to silent dissidents and fragrantly disregarding internationally respected human rights values. To date, many Vietnamese pro-democracy activists such as Father Nguyen Van Ly, lawyers Nguyen Van Dai, Le Thi Cong Nhan, Nguyen Bac Truyen, Tran Quoc Hien, Le Quoc Quan, Dr. Le Nguyen Sang, journalists Huynh Nguyen Dao and Truong Minh Duc, writer Tran Khai Thanh Thuy, Ms. Le Thi Kim Thu and many others have been arrested and suppressed for the peaceful expression of their political views. - We call on Vietnam's government to accept open and direct dialogue with opposing political party; to end all baseless allegations and arbitrary detentions of pro-democracy activists. We urgently ask that they release these pro-democracy activists immediately. - The People’s Democratic Party strongly protests and condemns the Vietnamese authorities for their repressive acts and call on the US Senators to urgently pass The Vietnam Human Rights Act (S.1159). Sincerely, Cong Thanh Do, Spokesperson of The People’s Democratic Party cc: Members of US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Sen. John Kerry, Sen. Richard Lugar, Sen. John Barrasso, Sen. Benjamin Cardin, Sen. Robert Casey, Sen. Bob Corker, Sen. Jim Demint, Sen. Christopher Dodd, Sen. Russell Feingold, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, Sen. John Isakson, Sen. Edward Kaufman, Sen. Robert Menendez, Sen. James Risch, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, Sen. Jim Webb and Sen. Roger Wicker. Members of US Congressional Caucus on Vietnam: Reps. Zoe Lofgren, Loretta Sanchez, Chris Smith and Anh “Joseph” Cao.   more »

Amnesty International USA Group 19 members Jean Libby jlibby@alum.calberkeley.org Fax: 1-650-618-8603 Senator Barbara Boxer 112 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator Boxer, Thank you for your leadership in seeking the release of imprisoned Father Nguyen Van Ly in Vietnam. Amnesty International USA Group 19 recently mailed petitions with 780 signatures to President Nguyen Minh Triet in care of the Vietnamese Embassy in Washington asking for the release of Father Ly. The petition campaign was bilingual. We circulated them among Vietnamese Americans in San Jose and in Westminster, with grateful response. I have enclosed copies as examples. Your efforts along with thirty-six colleagues in the United States Senate will surely help in alleviating conditions of political imprisonment in Vietnam. Although the Vietnamese government ignores communications from Amnesty International USA, and treated the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom with rudeness and refusal to allow them visitation, protocol does require that they reply to Senators. Group 19 in Palo Alto, which was founded by the late Ginetta Sagan, has adopted Father Ly as an Individual at Risk campaign. We are greatly encouraged to continue our efforts in seeking his release.by your leadership He has been imprisoned regularly for seventeen years since 1983. His recent imprisonment has been more than two years in solitary confinement. With sincere gratitude, Jean Libby, case coordinator for Individual at Risk The Reverend Nguyen Van Ly Group 19 Amnesty International USA Letter from Senators attached Cc: U.S. State Department, Vietnam Desk, Washington, D.C.   more »