We are excited to announce the Summer 2022 Claudia Jones Editorial Intern is Cygaelle “Cy” Bergado, a senior at Temple University majoring in Media Studies & Production. We asked Cy a few questions.
Tell us about yourself.
I am a Filipino-American organizer based in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. My interests include fighting towards social justice, writing, video production and hanging out with my cat. I am ecstatic to be interning with Toward Freedom!
How would you describe your interest in journalism?
It has been rooted in me since I was a teenager; journalism pays duty to the people by informing us about important issues and events. Journalists provide information that help communities shape decisions—and by extension, organize. I’m proud to be in the journalism field.
What drew you to the Claudia Jones Editorial Internship?
Toward Freedom takes a grassroots perspective. I appreciated its diligence in bringing attention to human rights issues. It was very resonating to find TF‘s dedication towards anti-colonial struggles aligned with mine.
What do you hope to report on this summer?
This summer, I would like to report on the political tyranny of The Philippines. It is important to bring to light the human rights violations being committed there. I am looking to report on the fraudulent Philippine elections ridden with vote buying and voter disenfranchisement. These human rights violations are not anything new to the Filipino diaspora; as we have been colonized, militarized and oppressed by the governments of Spain, the United States, Japan and our own for thousands of years. I also hope to report on the struggle of the Filipino diaspora, from all around the globe, to fight back against these fascist empires.
Anything else you’d like to do while you’re at Toward Freedom?
I hope to strengthen my skills in writing, editing and fact-checking. I also am looking forward to meeting, collaborating with and finding solidarity with new comrades.
Rising out of the shadows of the Andean highlands, schoolteacher and trade unionist Pedro Castillo appears on the verge of winning the presidency and catapulting Perú toward a future free of neoliberal austerity and U.S. meddling after rallying the oppressed masses of the South American country to support his candidacy.
Castillo leaped into the spotlight of Peruvian national politics when the candidate topped all other competitors in the first round of elections held April 11. Castillo’s party, Free Perú (Perú Libre), also won 18.92 percent of congressional seats, more than other competing parties. Then Peruvians in the country and in the diaspora throughout the world cast their ballots June 6 to determine who would be the country’s leader for the next five years. The election became one of the most contentious in Peruvian history, featuring two candidates who personify polar opposite interests and visions for Perú’s future. Castillo is leading this week with a margin of less than 1 percent after 99.8 percent of votes have been counted.
Keiko Fujimori / credit: Congreso de la República del Perú
A trade unionist and native of the Cajamarca region, Pedro Castillo held a lead over Keiko Fujimori, the right-wing daughter of a former despot and currently incarcerated ex-president, Alberto Fujimori. If Keiko Fujimori loses this race, it would be her third time missing the mark in a presidential election.
Fujimori, head of the right-wing Popular Force party, had seen success in Peru’s northern coastal provinces and from foreign votes. But Castillo received a majority of his votes from provinces in the Andean countryside, the Amazon and the southern coast, regions historically neglected and suffering from acute economic exploitation.
When official results first began rolling out to the public, Fujimori held a slight lead over Castillo. But near the end of counting, Castillo surpassed with enough votes to win him the presidency. Fujimori and her attorneys are now asking for a recount on 100,000 Castillo votes, claiming fraud and refusing to recognize Castillo’s victory.
Who is Pedro Castillo?
Nestled in the Andean mountains on the shores of Lake Titicaca lies the town of Puno, where Pedro Castillo was born in 1969. His parents were illiterate peasants, both of whom spent much of their lives working on plantations.
In his youth, Castillo joined the ronda campesinos, or ronderos, a local peasant-based police force launched in place of official Peruvian police, who often were absent and—when they were around—harmed peasant communities. While the ronderos generally exhibited left-wing tendencies, in the Chota district, ronderos found themselves combatting Shining Path insurgents, who were trying to seize control of towns. The Shining Path was a Maoist guerilla insurgency formed out of a split from the Peruvian Communist Party. The organization took up arms against the Peruvian state and against other communist and progressive groups. While the Shining Path committed atrocities, such as the massacre at Lucanamarca, the Peruvian military committed unprecedented human-rights violations in the name of counterinsurgency, leaving peasants in precarious conditions.
Castillo later went on to study at Cesar Vallejo University, named after the Peruvian communist poet. He received a bachelor’s degree in education and a master’s degree in psychology, eventually becoming an elementary school teacher. In 2017, he garnered esteem in Peruvian politics by leading a teacher’s strike against the underfunding of public education as well as teacher’s salaries.
Despite actively defending the Chota district from the Shining Path’s incursions, major Peruvian media conglomerates El Comercio and La República led a media campaign against Castillo, red-baiting the candidate as a “Shining Path terrorist” because of his links with the Movement for Amnesty and Fundamental Rights (Movadef).
Movadef had campaigned for the release of ex-Shining Path guerillas, an act that led former Interior Minister Carlos Basombrío to label the group an arm of the Shining Path. In the 2017 teacher’s protest Castillo headed, Movadef had been involved in the broad coalition. To the Peruvian media and political elite, that implied Castillo was a Shining Path terrorist.
Castillo’s party, Free Perú (Perú Libre), identifies as Marxist-Leninist-Mariáteguist, upholding socialism and the power of the working class. While Castillo himself does not openly label himself a communist, he has said he plans to create a new constitution with stronger market regulations, break up monopolies, initiate a second agrarian reform, and revise contracts with multinational companies for stronger labor rights and a greater share of profits for the Peruvian state.
Perú Libre’s plans for governance include the eradication of the neoliberal economic model, set forth by the current constitution that was written under Alberto Fujimori. They seek to replace it with what they call a “Popular Economy with Markets,” a model that would allow private sectors and capital to exist under stronger state regulation. Both Castillo and Perú Libre have reaffirmed they will nationalize those companies that have exploited “strategic resources, particularly in foreign hands [corporations]”.
Who is Keiko Fujimori?
At just 19 years old, Keiko Fujimori became the First Lady of Perú—the youngest in Peruvian history—as her father and ex-President Alberto Fujimori stripped his wife Susana Higuchi of her title and threw her into prison when she accused her husband of crimes against humanity.
Fujimori now sits in prison for crimes including organizing the death squad, Colina Group, overseeing disappearances, and a slew of human-rights violations. Then in 2009, he was convicted of an embezzlement charge and sentenced to an additional 7-1⁄2 years. Alberto Fujimori / credit: Staff Sergeant Karen L. Sanders, United States Air Force
Fujimori is currently facing another trial under charges of forced sterilizations that occurred through his Family Planning Program. This program reportedly sought to target Indigenous women in Perú’s countryside. Despite all this, his daughter, Keiko, has promised that, if elected, she will pardon her father.
Yet, Keiko Fujimori’s legacy isn’t stained only by the crimes of her father. In 2011, Fujimori admitted to having received donations from known narco traffickers. Fujimori also was implicated in the Panama Papers, which exposed illegal donations to her 2011 and 2016 presidential campaigns. Later, in 2018, she was arrested on charges of embezzlement that occurred during her unsuccessful 2011 bid for the presidency.
She left prison in April 2020 on a conditional release due to COVID-19. If Fujimori fails to win the presidency, she faces a 31-year sentence for money laundering.
Frente a la difusión en redes sociales con llamados a la intervención de las Fuerzas Armadas en asuntos netamente electorales o políticos. pic.twitter.com/xEvGmDc139
The Peruvian Ministry of Defense released a statement Wednesday afternoon stating it will not intervene, citing the constitution and claiming it must maintain a neutral role so it can respect the sovereignty of the Peruvian people.
Since the start of the pandemic, Peru has seen mass unemployment, the highest COVID-19 death rates per capita in the world and a significant increase in national poverty. In the first week of November alone, the country had three presidents, and erupted in national strikes and protests that led to the police-sanctioned murders of Inti Sotelo and Bryan Pintado. Not only that, but in the past 30 years, the country has experienced political instability and brutal repression at the hands of the state.
The Future of U.S.-Perú Relations
Castillo’s victory also would upend U.S. interests in South America. For example, it could help kickstart the process of re-building a coalition of Latin American left-ruled states. Castillo has promised to withdraw Perú from the Lima Group, an organization of countries dedicated to subverting the democratically elected Bolivarian government of Venezuela.
Besides that, the Perú Libre party calls for booting U.S. military bases and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), notorious for using humanitarian aid to undermine democratic processes in other countries, including during the Fujimori dictatorship. While Castillo has publicly opposed the Organization of American States (OAS), he has said he wants to fortify two regional groups: The Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) and the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR).
Over the next few years, Brazil, Chile and Colombia will hold presidential elections. With the turn of events in favor of the left in countries like Bolivia and Perú, the future looks hopeful for people’s movements in South America.
The victory of Castillo and Perú Libre, as well as the adoption of a new constitution, could open a path for the country reminiscent of the progressive military government of General Juan Velasco Alvarado. But these elections also have highlighted the deep divide permeating through Perú, one that remains to be resolved whether a Fujimori administration or a Castillo administration comes to fruition.
Kayla Popuchet, a Peruvian national of Perúvian-Haitian descent, studies and writes about Latin America and eastern Europe. She was a 2019 Pulitzer Center Reporting Fellow.
Sonia Guajajara, an Indigenous rights campaigner who was elected this autumn to be a federal lawmaker from the Brazilian state of São Paolo, marched in September with a feminist bloc at a left-wing rally the day after a Bolsonaro supporter threatened two other candidates with a gun / credit: Richard Matoušek
RECIFE, Brazil—On election night, the city of Recife erupted in cheers of joy.
In the capital of the Workers’ Party presidential candidate Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva’s home state of Pernambuco, thousands roared as the vote count showed Lula overtaking his rival, right-wing President Jair Bolsonaro. While supporters set off fireworks over the Atlantic Ocean, others made the “L” sign with their fingers and thumbs to indicate support for Lula. When buses couldn’t get through the crowd of revelers, drivers gave up with beaming smiles, making the L as well.
Brazilians had just voted in their most consequential election since democratization.
But, just as after the first-round election, cheers soon turned into murmurs as people lowered their eyes to their phones to see if Lula would retain his lead. This was far from certain, given events earlier that day. The Federal Highway Police (PRF) had conducted over 500 operations by pulling over buses and cars. The miles of traffic jams that ensued impeded people from reaching voting booths, especially in northeastern states like Pernambuco. Then news broke that these operations were part of a plan the Bolsonarista-led PRF had hatched in the presidential palace.
While the Electoral Commission (TSE) condemned this, it did not take action to compensate for lost voting time. By contrast, in the first round, the TSE extended voting for the large Brazilian diaspora in Lisbon, Portugal, after someone wearing the green and yellow colors many Bolsonaristas adorn, broke into a voting booth to double vote, annulling dozens of votes.
“It’s as if,” Rômulo Cavalcante, a lawyer from the northeastern state of Alagoas, told Toward Freedom, ”[the TSE in the second round] was afraid of provoking some kind of conflict.” Due to the highway police’s unprecedented actions, Calvacante believes “democracy in Brazil remains more fragile than ever.”
Contrary to the TSE and PRF’s assurances, the operations stopped some people from voting. Yet, Lula retained his lead. He became the first candidate to beat an incumbent since Brazil emerged from a military dictatorship in the 1980s, but also won with the smallest margin since then (1.8 percent).
“[I] didn’t just defeat a candidate,” Lula proclaimed. “[I] defeated the entire machinery of the Brazilian state.”
Almost three weeks later, Bolsonaro still has not explicitly conceded. His supporters have staged roadblocks around the country, sometimes aided by the PRF. João, a tourist landlord in the northeastern state of Rio Grande do Norte, told Toward Freedom that he believes “the election was stolen.” That echoes a false belief still held by much of the Bolsonaro camp, said Danny Shaw, Latin American and Caribbean Studies Professor at the City University of New York. “[That camp] lives in a parallel universe of half-truths, misinformation and propaganda.”
“But,” as Shaw said, “the fact that Washington recognized [the election results] so early on, put pressure on Bolsonaro and his supporters.” The chances Bolsonaro could stage a successful coup—which his camp was “constantly measuring”—have diminished rapidly.
Former Brazilian President Luiz Inácio “Lula” Da Silva (left) and current Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro (right) are the main contenders in Brazil’s first-round presidential election being held on October 2 / credit: Ricardo Stuckert (right) / Alan Santos / PR (left)
Beyond Bolsonaro
Talk of a Bolsonaro coup has subsided. In the last few days, he and his sons visited the Italian embassy to apply for citizenship, and Bolsonaro has told allies he may leave Brazil on Lula’s inauguration, to be held on New Year’s Day. This may be because he will lose political immunity. “I think he is planning to ask for exile in another country, like Hungary, where [President Viktor] Orbán is his friend or even Italy because he is going to be charged in Brazil,” Cavalcante predicted. That is partly because Italy’s governing party (Brothers of Italy) is far-right, and an iteration of a fascist party.
It seems more likely that Bolsonaro will flee while signaling as little clarity as he can about the result, than stage a coup. He has shown with basic questions—such as whether he’s received a Covid vaccine—that he can maintain strategic obfuscation, and observers have predicted he is likely to do the same with the election’s legitimacy.
Depending on what happens to the charges of wrongdoing that are likely to be brought against him, that could be how he hopes to return to politics in future.
And whatever happens to Bolsonaro, the right will have decent prospects at the next election. It remains to be seen how united it will be. Some elements prefer the anti-institutionalism and inflammatory cultural rhetoric of Bolsonarismo. While others prefer the more rationalized “Third Way” discourse of candidates like surprise third-placed Simone Tebet, who in this campaign was promoted by a significant section of the right-wing media. Both approaches have close ties to agro-business and prioritize what Brazil’s most-read newspaper recently called “fiscal responsibility” over reducing the country’s hunger crisis, in a recent op-ed attacking Lula for prioritizing tackling hunger. The anti-redistributive right in Brazil has been resilient, even when it had to get behind a leader who oversaw hundreds of thousands of avoidable Covid deaths.
The media will have a significant impact on Brazilian discourse over the next four years. Cavalcante explained Brazilians like himself “were successfully manipulated by the media” when former President Dilma Rousseff was deposed in a 2016 procedural coup. And he told Toward Freedom that the media will need to hold accountable politicians who espouse violence, in order to return Brazil to a time when “political polarization [didn’t involve Brazilians] being threatened by their bosses, neighbors and strangers in the street.”
Supporters of Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva rally in São Paolo / credit: Richard Matoušek
Neoliberalism’s Future in Brazil
The president-elect faces significant struggles, particularly in reducing the hunger crisis. He has proven credentials, but faces a hostile climate.
Lula’s “Bolsa Família” program of conditional cash transfers during his 2003-11 presidency was cited as a major factor in the 28 percent decline in poverty rates in his first term. Bolsonaro ended Bolsa Família and, despite enacting a different cash transfer scheme, has presided over a huge increase in hunger, from 19 million in late 2020 to 33 million now. This, despite being the fourth-largest food producer in the world.
“Brazil is now back on [the United Nations’] Hunger Map,” Ediane Maria, a newly-elected Socialist and Liberty Party state legislator in São Paulo, told Toward Freedom. “People who eat breakfast today are not sure they can have dinner. Lula started the Zero Hunger programme [including Bolsa Família], which got Brazil off the Hunger Map; but [under Bolsonaro], our country is in a worse state than during the biggest hunger crisis of recent memory in 1993.”
And unlike in the 2000s, Brazil is not benefitting from a commodity boom, increasing pressure from the large section of Brazilian media who advocate smaller state expenditure.
Lula will not have the resources, power, and potentially the will, to transition significantly away from neoliberalism in Brazil. Neoliberalism is the systematic movement of public resources under private control. As Jemima Pierre, the Haiti/Americas coordinator for the U.S.-based Black Alliance for Peace (BAP), told Toward Freedom, “Even though [recent Latin American election-winners have produced] leftist governments, they’re still following the lead of the U.S. in terrible neoliberal policies. So, I think it’s a good thing that Bolsonaro lost. But I also think people need to hold Lula’s feet to the fire.” Pierre worries that “the left is so relieved that Bolsonaro lost that they’re not going to push Lula, because the fear is that if you go against Lula, then you’re going to get this right-wing government back. So, the left is really stuck between a rock and a hard place.”
As long as Lula governs effectively enough to implement key progressive policies, despite his obstacles, he could continue to increase popularity of such politics in Brazil, paving the way for further progression after his term.
An aerial view of the municipality of Tefé in the Amazonian rainforest of Brazil / credit: Rodrigo Kugnharski on Unsplash
Lula’s Global Moves
Advocates of multilateralism and environmentalism view this election positively.
For instance, U.S. human- and labor-rights lawyer Dan Kovalik told Toward Freedom Lula’s victory “would help bring about the multipolar world that we need.”
Lula already has touted creating a cartel of rainforest-endowed countries, including the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Indonesia, to motivate conservation.
“Lula’s first foreign policy visit will be to Argentina to increase and expand the BRICS,” Shaw said, referring to the group of states (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) that are trying to counter U.S. control over international finance. Lula also advocated the creation of a South America-wide currency—the Sur—during this campaign.
Like any leader, Lula will need to be held to account to meet his stated goals. As Pierre states, “We are happy that there’s a leftist president, but we also remember that it’s the same leftist president who was behind the snuffing out of Haiti sovereignty as it was trying to bring Brazil on the international stage,” referring to the 2004-17 Brazilian-led UN peacekeeping occupation of Haiti, where Brazilian troops abused their power and stayed for years after being asked to leave. Upon Washington’s re-intervention in Haiti this year, Pierre explains that the United States “has worked with leftist governments [like Mexico] to get its work done… What we’re worried about is that Lula will fall into this trap.”
Lula’s victory could probably be considered the crowning achievement of the leftist Pink Tide’s resurgence across Latin America. That’s something BAP National Organizer Ajamu Baraka believes “represents the continued shift of power away from the international colonial ruling classes”—as long as Lula has learned geopolitical lessons from the 2000s.
Inauguration is over a month away. Lula faces strong economic, political, international, environmental and societal pressures that can hinder progressive policymaking. But, just like on election night in Recife, if you’re a progressive or simply espouse democratic values, now is the time for cautious celebration.
Richard Matoušek is a journalist who covers sociopolitical issues in southern Europe and Latin America. He can be followed on Twitter at @RichMatousek and on Instagram at @richmatico.
Maasai in the Masai Mara National Reserve in Kenya / credit: Henrik Hansen on Unsplash
NAIROBI—Close to 500 organizations and 4,747 individuals recently petitioned the Tanzanian government to respect the rights of 70,000 Maasai pastoralists, who are at risk of being evicted from ancestral land because of the government’s collusion with big-game hunting interests.
The petition was delivered after a government official summoned on January 11 village and ward leaders within the 1,500 square kilometers in question, informing them the government would be making a decision for the interest of the country. Maasai residents are calling on President Samia Suluhu Hassan to drop the plans.
“The Maasai residing within the targeted Ngorongoro Conservation Area (NCA) are disallowed from building decent houses or even planting a tree, including even owning a motorbike,” Joseph Oleshangay, a lawyer representing the Maasai, told Toward Freedom. “Successive governments have eternally destined this community to remain impoverished. Now, this current move is a continuation of the abuse meted on the Maasai.”
The boundaries of the Ngorongoro Conservation Area is in pink / credit: Encyclopedia Britanica
Royal Intervention
The Tanzanian government had planned to lease the 1,500 square kilometers of Maasai ancestral land to Otterlo Business Corporation (OBC), which a group of Dubai royal families own, according to the petitioners. But after evictions in 2009, 2013 and 2017, the Maasai sought legal recourse. A 2018 East African Court of Justice (EACJ) ruling placed an injunction, prohibiting the destruction of Maasai property, the harassment of the Maasai, and the eviction of the people as well as their more than 200,000 livestock. The injunction remains until the case arrives in court.
Despite several attempts, Tanzania’s Directorate of Presidential Communications declined to respond to Toward Freedom.
According to Oleshangay, with the government ignoring the court, the Maasai community has gone back to a regional court to seek protection and direction.
Within the three years the Maasai people have faced eviction, an estimated 15,000 people have been displaced from their homes.
Isaya Lesion, spokesperson for OBC and himself a Tanzanian national, told Toward Freedom that all the land in Tanzania belonged to the public and the president holds the land in trust of the citizens and may intermittently change its usage for the benefit of the country.
“It has happened before in Ihefu Basin, Mtwara and Kilobero, just to name a few places where evictions by the government have happened to pave the way for development on behalf of the nation.”
Lesion further says that the coterie of Civil Society Organizations (CSO), particularly in Tanzania, who are opposed to the eviction plans have “turned the Maasais into their milking cows, using them to secure funding from external donors. It’s a lucrative business and the key players, who disproportionately live in urban centers, live large as the Maasais continue languishing in poverty.”
However, human rights violations are the crux of the case against the government. Indigenous Maasai pastoralists are recognized as legal inhabitants of the land. About 2 million Maasai roam the arid and semi-arid parts of southern Kenya and northern Tanzania, making them one of the largest pastoral groups worldwide. The Maasai are among the Horn of Africa’s pastoralists and itinerant farmers who have lost access to grazing areas and farmlands because of land grabs.
“Any attempts to evict them will certainly be unlawful, unjust, and discriminatory under national law and the international human-rights obligations and commitments of the Government of Tanzania,” said Ann Henga, executive director of the Dar es Salaam-based Legal and Human Rights Centre (LHRC), in an interview with Toward Freedom.
Competing Interest
Hassan government announced plans to create a wildlife corridor, so OBC could use it for trophy hunting and tourism. The company describes itself on its Twitter account as “Sustainable Utilization (Hunting) and photography outfitters in Tanzania. Investors in Loliondo GCA hunting concession. 100% for wildlife conservation.”
Wildlife is 1 of the crucial aspect in our heritage as a country, we must invest and dedicate more in Anti-poaching and educating more people about the benefits of it. This wasn’t a successful raid b’coz the damage was already done, but it’s progress, consistency must be the key. pic.twitter.com/NjGrvN2gds
The government plans to lease to OBC the NCA, which encompasses the Loliondo division, among others. NCA is considered one of the most cinematic landscapes on the globe, with more than 1 million wildebeest migrating through the area every year. It is home to the critically endangered black rhino. In 1979, UNESCO declared the NCA a World Heritage Site.
Joan Carling, co-convener of Indigenous Peoples’ Rights International (IPRI), told Toward Freedom international attention appears to have stamped out eviction efforts.
“The inter-related reasons … are the pressure from UNESCO to address the growing number of humans in the area, which they consider a serious threat to the conservation of wildlife, and, in this sense, would affect the status of the park as a World Wildlife Heritage and Conservation area.”
NCA losing UNESCO recognition would mean fewer tourists. Loliondo is on the main migratory route for wildlife north of the Ngorongoro Crater, east of Serengeti National Park and south of Kenya’s Maasai Mara National Reserve.
In November 2017, the government ended a 25-year-old hunting tourism deal with OBC that reportedly was in exchange for millions of dollars to Tanzania’s armed forces.
The Gulf royal families gave $32,000 to the ruling Chama cha Mapinduzi (CCM) party and $2 million to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, according to government records The East African newspaper reports to have seen. The monies were given in 1994, according to the regional newspaper, which quotes then-Chief Opposition Chief Whip Tundu Lissu. He said he had interrogated the issue for the past 20 years, but because of the alleged chicanery involved in the deal, the government has kept the details of the engagement shrouded in mystery.
“Once again, the Maasai are facing eviction just to please the UAE royal family, underlining the Tanzanian government insensitivity towards the Indigenous pastoralists, as it clearly prioritizes tourism revenue over its people,” said Dr. Paula Kahumbu, a wildlife conservationist and Chief Executive Officer of Wildlife Direct, a nonprofit registered in both Kenya and the United States, in an interview with Toward Freedom.
Trophy Fees
Despite the November 2017 announcement, OBC did not leave Tanzania for a few days. But current Prime Minister Kassim Majaliwa said OBC would stay. In November 2018, Tanzania lifted a hunting ban, which had been imposed in October 2015 following abuse and misuse of hunting permits. The OBC had been granted an exclusive license to hunt in 1992 during the presidency of Ali Hassan Mwinyi.
The annual hunting license fee is $60,000 per block allocated to a hunting safari company. Trophy fees for hunting an elephant or a lion are the most expensive. It costs $15,000 to kill an elephant and $12,000 to kill a lion. Presently, Tanzania is focused on attracting tourists who can afford a 21-day hunting safari that costs about $60,000, excluding the cost of flights, gun import permits and trophy fees.
“The Maasai have been subjected to a series of human rights violations and violent evictions in the name of conservation and luxury hunting and safari tourism,” Chris Lang of news outlet REDD-Monitor told Toward Freedom. “The rights of Tanzania’s Indigenous peoples and Tanzanian law must come ahead of a deal with a luxury hunting tourism corporation.”
Charles Wachira is a foreign correspondent based in Nairobi, Kenya, and is formerly an East Africa correspondent with Bloomberg. He covers issues including human rights, business, politics and international relations.
