From audivia2002 at yahoo.fr Mon Mar 1 11:02:10 2010 From: audivia2002 at yahoo.fr (Bishop Venuste Mutiganda) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 11:02:10 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] =?utf-8?q?Je_fais_suivre_cet_article_tel_qu=27il_e?= =?utf-8?q?st_publi=C3=A9_par_le_quotidien_=22New_Times_=22de_Kigali?= Message-ID: <962474.67068.qm@web23808.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Monday, 1st March 2010 Rwanda?s flag to fly at Marlborough House By Edmund Kagire Monday March 8, will be the special day when Rwanda?s national flag is set to be raised at Marlborough House-London, the Commonwealth secretariat, to mark Rwanda?s entry into the group. President Paul Kagame and Patrick Manning, the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago who is the current chair-in-office of the Commonwealth will preside over the ceremony to be observed by Kamalesh Sharma, the Commonwealth Secretary General. After the flag-raising ceremony, Prime Minister Manning and President Kagame will address Commonwealth High Commissioners and invited guests in the grounds of Marlborough House, to mark Rwanda?s first Commonwealth Day. The two leaders will also hold a press conference before Sharma conducts a traditional ?familiarisation tour? to President Kagame regarding the Commonwealth, its traditions and formal practices. Rwanda was admitted to the Commonwealth in November 2009, during the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Trinidad and Tobago.   Manning, Kagame and Sharma will later attend a multi-faith Commonwealth Day Observance at Westminster Abbey, in the presence of Her Majesty the Queen. During his recent visit to Rwanda to officially deliver a message of admission to President Kagame, Sharma noted that Rwanda?s entry into the group will be beneficial on both ends, with Rwanda benefiting from the group while at the same time taking some benefits to other member states. The Commonwealth is comprised of mainly former British colonies and Rwanda became the 54th member and second country to join the group without any colonial connections to the British, Mozambique was the first. Ends -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100301/124a51b9/attachment.html From audivia2002 at yahoo.fr Sat Mar 6 13:23:58 2010 From: audivia2002 at yahoo.fr (Bishop Venuste Mutiganda) Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 13:23:58 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] =?utf-8?q?Je_transfers_cet_article_tel_qu=27il_est?= =?utf-8?q?_publi=C3=A9_par_le_quotidien_New_Times_de_Kigali=2E?= Message-ID: <749879.73185.qm@web23802.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Saturday, 6th March 2010 First Lady attends White Ribbon meeting L-R: Dr. Agnes Binagwaho, Dr. Margaret Chan, Her Excellency Mrs. Azeb Mesfin, First Lady of Ethiopia, Mrs. Sarah Brown, First Lady Jeannette Kagame, Bience Gawanas, Mark Dybul BY OUR REPORTER First Lady, Jeannette Kagame, in her capacity as the Patron for the White Ribbon Alliance?Rwanda chapter, recently attended a meeting in the UK aimed at devising ways of curbing maternal mortality. The meeting was hosted by Sarah Brown, the wife to British Premier, Gordon Brown. The White Ribbon Alliance is an international coalition that advocates for safe motherhood and child health. The main objective of the meeting that was held at 10 Downing Street, was to discuss what maternal mortality campaign activities can be achieved in the run up to the UN General Assembly and the G8 and African Union Summits scheduled to take place later this year. Mrs Kagame, and the First Lady of Ethiopia, Azeb Mesfin, were invited to make special contributions on how leadership is working to improve maternal health in their respective countries - given that Rwanda and Ethiopia are two powerful African success stories in the maternal health arena. In her speech, the First Lady outlined some of the approaches the country has adopted to curb the vice, including maternal death audits, accountability mechanisms that filter down to the district level (performance contracts), the mother and child health week, and performance based financing. ?An exciting result, which will be confirmed through the next Demographic Health Survey planned for this year, is that, from nine maternal deaths a day, we now have less than one death a day, 1 death every 36 hours and that is still unacceptable,? Mrs Kagame said in her remarks. Mrs Mesfin underscored that cultural practices present serious barriers to improving maternal health in Ethiopia, but they have introduced a successful health workers? program and health facilities have been significantly expanded from about 600 to 2,000. The meeting agreed that in order to catch up on MDG 5, which has registered the slowest progress among all the MDGs, there is a need to unite, coordinate, intensify and deliver more to build on what has already been achieved. MDG 5 among the Millennium Development Goals aims at improving maternal health.  Ends -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100306/d3934e72/attachment.html From audivia2002 at yahoo.fr Mon Mar 8 12:50:07 2010 From: audivia2002 at yahoo.fr (Bishop Venuste Mutiganda) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 12:50:07 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] =?utf-8?q?Je_fais_suivre_cet_article_tel_quil_est_?= =?utf-8?q?publi=C3=A9_par_le_quotidien_=22New_Times=22_de_Kigali?= Message-ID: <767315.11263.qm@web23807.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Monday, 8th March 2010 Kagame in London to hoist Rwandan flag By Edmund Kagire KIGALI - President Paul Kagame yesterday, accompanied by the First Lady Jeannette Kagame, left for England for an official visit where he will be attending the Commonwealth Day, in London. During the visit, as the highlight of Commonwealth Day celebrations, Rwanda will be formally welcomed to the Commonwealth Club of Nations, at a ceremony hosted by the Commonwealth Secretariat. President Kagame will meet Her Majesty the Queen, deliver a lecture at the Royal Commonwealth Society and will take part in celebratory multi-faith worship at Westminster Abbey. He is expected, alongside Patrick Manning, the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago who is the current chair-in-office of the Commonwealth and Mr. Kamalesh Sharma, the Commonwealth Secretary General, to participate in the hoisting ceremony of the Rwandan Flag. After the flag-raising ceremony, Manning and President Kagame will address Commonwealth High Commissioners and invited guests in the grounds of Marlborough House, to mark Rwanda?s first Commonwealth Day. The two leaders will also hold a news conference, after which Sharma will conduct a traditional ?familiarisation tour? for President Kagame, regarding the Commonwealth and its traditions and formal practices. In addition to Commonwealth business, President Kagame is expected to take part in meetings with business leaders and various officials. Government officials on the delegation include, Minister for Foreign Affairs Louise Mushikiwabo and Rwanda Development Board Deputy CEO/Business Operations, Clare Akamanzi. Rwanda was admitted to the Commonwealth in November 2009, during the biennial Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Trinidad and Tobago.   The Commonwealth, is comprised of mainly former British colonies and Rwanda became the 54th member and second country, that had no historical links to Britain, to join the group. Mozambique was the first. The commonwealth day is marked every second Monday of March. Ends   -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100308/a0dfae5d/attachment.html From audivia2002 at yahoo.fr Tue Mar 9 15:43:22 2010 From: audivia2002 at yahoo.fr (Bishop Venuste Mutiganda) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 15:43:22 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] =?utf-8?q?Je_transf=C3=A8re_cet_article_tel_qu=27i?= =?utf-8?q?l_est_lu_aujourd=27hui_dans_le_jouranal_New_Times_de_kigali=2E?= Message-ID: <321055.81980.qm@web23807.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Tuesday, 9th March 2010 Rwanda?s flag raised at the Commonwealth President and Mrs. Kagame pose for a photo with the Secretary General of the Commonwealth, Kamalesh Sharma and his wife at Marlborough House yesterday. (Photo. A. Schulz) By Edmund Kagire LONDON - Yesterday, Rwanda?s flag was raised at Marlborough House, the headquarters of the Commonwealth, in London, in a ceremony to officially welcome the country as the 54th member. President Paul Kagame, who attended the ceremony, expressed Rwanda?s readiness to take advantage of existing opportunities that include trade, education and culture. Addressing a gathering which included the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago Patrick Manning, who is also the chair-in-office and the Commonwealth Secretary General Kamalesh Sharma, President Paul Kagame thanked the Commonwealth group for accepting Rwanda?s entry and pledged the country?s active and fully integrated role in the club. ?Rwanda recognizes the strengths of these partnerships ? this is why we greatly value our membership in the Commonwealth, like we do with other organizations,? Kagame said. ?As the newest member of the Commonwealth, Rwanda is prepared to establish stronger bonds with fellow members in a number of important areas?. Kagame added that by associating with other countries in several areas, through sharing common values, Rwanda is able to learn from others and build on its own home-grown solutions for a brighter future. ?Firstly, the future of all nations depends on their youth, and so I hope that Rwanda can capitalise on the wide range of education and training programmes that the Commonwealth provides. ?Secondly, we hope to tap into the trade and investment opportunities that the Commonwealth offers, so that Rwanda can expand its economy and effectively participate in the global marketplace,? Kagame observed. He noted that, at the same time in the context of mutual learning, Rwanda will also play its role in sharing her successful experiences, not only from its recent past, but also its traditions and culture. ?Rwanda is committed to the values of the Commonwealth and will contribute to strengthening the organisation, furthering our mutual development agendas, and working in close partnership with other members to promote prosperity, freedom and rights for all,? Kagame asserted. Shortly after the flag raising ceremony, President Kagame, alongside Prime Minister Manning and Sharma, addressed a news conference. Manning defended the idea of countries joining various blocs or organisations, arguing that there are particular interests that may arise. Secretary General Sharma, formally welcomed Rwanda into the group and pledged the Commonwealth?s commitment to engage with Rwanda in various areas of development. ?I think the gods agreed, Mr President, that this is a very special occasion, and we look forward to installing your membership formally here,? Sharma told President Kagame. ?I just want to say that from now on, we are going to have a very dense roadmap of collaboration with Rwanda, in which I, myself, and the two Deputy Secretaries-General who are present here, will be personally engaged in carrying it forward,? he said. Sharma said that the Commonwealth already has an electoral commission to conduct civic education, train journalists and engage in many of the areas that are coming up, adding that his recent interaction with officials in the areas of audit, women, youth, human rights, budget and others will provide an action plan. Ends -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100309/8112e2f5/attachment.html From bishop at tec-europe.org Wed Mar 10 07:52:45 2010 From: bishop at tec-europe.org (Pierre Whalon) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 08:52:45 +0100 Subject: [Francophones] =?iso-8859-1?q?de_retour_d=27Ha=EFti?= Message-ID: <6998861D-7921-4FEF-BCCC-28C436B5FEC4@tec-europe.org> Chers amis, Visualisez mes premières photos de la Cathédrale de Port-au-Prince: http://bit.ly/dy6ZyU J'ai accompagné Mgr Thabo Mokgawa, primat de la province de l'Afrique australe. Nous avons noué une amitié, alors qu'il a entamé une relation étroite avec notre diocèse d'Haïti. Le plus grand désastre de l'histoire me laisse pantois. Je vous enverrai une copie de mon sermon dimanche sur les ruines de la Cathédrale... J'y ai rencontré le père Yes-Eugène Joseph, qui est membre du Réseau depuis des lustres, et qui y est en tant qu'aumonier de l'armée canadienne. Bishop (Mgr) Pierre Whalon Convocation of Episcopal Churches in Europe 23, avenue George V 75008 Paris France +33 1 53 23 84 06 (tel) +33 1 49 52 96 85 (fax) office at tec-europe.org From audivia2002 at yahoo.fr Wed Mar 10 20:14:41 2010 From: audivia2002 at yahoo.fr (Bishop Venuste Mutiganda) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:14:41 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] (SPAM: ?) je fais suivre cet article tel qu'il est dans le quotidien "New Times" de Kigali. Message-ID: <973081.2918.qm@web23804.mail.ird.yahoo.com> -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100310/8a937c23/attachment.html From audivia2002 at yahoo.fr Thu Mar 11 10:43:13 2010 From: audivia2002 at yahoo.fr (Bishop Venuste Mutiganda) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 10:43:13 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] =?utf-8?q?Je_fais_suivre_cet_article_tel_qu=27il_e?= =?utf-8?q?st_publi=C3=A9_par_le_quotidien_New_Times_de_Kigali=2E?= Message-ID: <729050.52048.qm@web23803.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Thursday, 11th March 2010 Kagame addresses C?wealth Business Council President Kagame with UK?s Prince Charles at a reception to mark Commonwealth Day in London (Photo: Astrid Shulz) By Our reporter LONDON - President Paul Kagame, yesterday attended a lunch held in his honour at the Commonwealth Business Council (CBC), in London, where he addressed the business members of the Commonwealth for the first time since Rwanda joined the bloc. The event was hosted by Dr Mohan Kaul, Director General of the CBC, who took the opportunity to welcome Rwanda and President Kagame into the Commonwealth. In his speech, Dr Kaul told the Council about the benefits Rwandan businesses stand to gain as members of the Commonwealth. This was also emphasised by President Kagame in his speech. "The joining of the Commonwealth presents a huge opportunity for Rwandan businesses and we are looking forward to forging partnerships with all of the member states," he said. President Kagame acknowledged that, while Rwanda has shown great commitment to economic development in recent years, there is still a long journey ahead in the path to development and that Rwanda would continue to focus on its main asset ? its people ?  in order to reach the set goals. President Kagame took the opportunity to invite the members to the Rwanda Investment Forum, to be held in Kigali, May 10-11, 2010. The event, which is being jointly organised by the CBC and Rwanda Development Board, aims to bring together business and political leaders from Commonwealth member countries, to discuss the investment opportunities in Rwanda. The forum also aims to promote the fact that, through Rwanda, businesses can access an East African Market of around 150 million people, which is experiencing rapid growth. It will be the first of its kind since 2008, when Rwanda held the East African International Business Forum, which saw around 500 leaders from business and government attend. President Kagame hopes the forum will enable the government expand its network of relationships, created by joining the Commonwealth. Ends -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100311/cd52885d/attachment.html From Bishop at tec-europe.org Thu Mar 11 13:51:04 2010 From: Bishop at tec-europe.org (Pierre Whalon) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:51:04 +0100 Subject: [Francophones] =?iso-8859-1?q?texte_de_mon_sermon_=E0_Port-au-Pri?= =?iso-8859-1?q?nce?= Message-ID: <12931304-84AB-4CA4-A04E-A8D2F397A800@tec-europe.org> Je le répéterai en anglais ce dimanche à la cathédrale St Paul à Londres... (Mgr) Pierre Whalon -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe non texte a été nettoyée... Nom: Cathédrale de la Sainte Trinité.doc Type: application/msword Taille: 39936 octets Desc: non disponible Url: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100311/453465a0/attachment-0001.doc -------------- section suivante -------------- Convocation of Episcopal Churches in Europe 23, avenue George V 75008 Paris France +33 1 53 23 84 06 (tel) +33 1 49 52 96 85 (fax) office at tec-europe.org From peac_isingoma at yahoo.fr Fri Mar 12 19:24:23 2010 From: peac_isingoma at yahoo.fr (Isingoma Kahwa Henri) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:24:23 +0200 Subject: [Francophones] Fw: Christian Aid: International Women's Day press release on rape as weapon of war in the Congo (DRC) Message-ID: <003301cac219$e05ad2e0$0a057c0a@win06v5> Chers tous, Voici ci-bas un transfert d'article sur la RD Congo que je vous transmets sans aucune modification. ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 7:13 PM Subject: Christian Aid: International Women's Day press release on rape as weapon of war in the Congo (DRC) For immediate release March 5 for International Women's Day on March 8 ONGOING PRESENCE OF ARMED GROUPS IN EASTERN CONGO FUELS USE OF RAPE AS A WEAPON OF WAR Following recent brutal attacks on women by suspected FDLR rebels in South Kivu, DRC, Christian Aid is calling for more to be done to accelerate the voluntary demobilisation of armed groups in the vast central African nation. Of the fifteen women, all mothers, who were abducted and raped by the armed assailants - five were brutally tortured and then beheaded, three survived and were taken to Panzi Hospital in Bukavu for emergency medical care, and the remaining seven are still missing, presumed dead. The attacks took place in February, less than two weeks before UK Foreign Office Minister Baroness Kinnock's visit to rape survivors at Panzi hospital. Since then the Minister has made commitments to addressing the crisis of impunity surrounding rape in the DRC. Christian Aid welcomes this renewed commitment and urges Baroness Kinnock to work with the DRC and Rwandan governments and with the UN to address the underlying causes of insecurity in the Great Lakes region. This must include increasing political will and material support for the voluntary demobilisation and repatriation of Rwandan FDLR armed groups and refugees, many of whom have been in the DRC since the aftermath of the 1994 Rwandan genocide. "With the continued presence of various armed groups, women throughout the region are more vulnerable than ever to reprisals and systematic rape," explains Shuna Keen, Christian Aid's Great Lakes analyst. "Innocent women and young girls continue to be raped by both the Congolese Armed Forces (FARDC) and the Rwandan FDLR and, as a result, many of these women and their subsequent children are HIV positive - the social and psychological effects are devastating and long-term," she adds. Indeed, UNOCHA last year reported that a substantial proportion of the sexual violence in DRC is committed by men in uniform. Most cases of rape in insecure remote areas go unreported, the survivors unable to get treatment. This recent attack in South Kivu is unfortunately not an isolated incident, but part of an ongoing, horrifying trend. More than six million civilian lives have been lost in war and genocide in DRC and Rwanda since the early 1990s, with the conflict now the most deadly since the Second World War. "More can and must be done to encourage voluntary demobilisation and repatriation by FDLR rebels and Rwandan refugees through effective accompaniment, sensitisation and confidence-building measures. The non-military options have not been given enough of a chance," adds Keen. More than 15 years since the Rwandan genocide, it is estimated that there are still around 90,000 Rwandan refugees living in the volatile region of eastern DRC, as well as many thousands of armed FDLR rebel combatants. Christian Aid believes that the voluntary repatriation of refugees is crucial for building lasting peace in the region, as is the voluntary demobilisation and repatriation of the FDLR. The ongoing insecurity in the North and South Kivu regions of DRC which gives rise to systematic sexual violence is itself the result of deep long-term political crisis in the wider African Great Lakes region. As a major diplomatic actor and number one bilateral donor to both DRC and Rwanda, the UK must use its influence in favour of the peaceful resolution of this crisis, the promotion of civil and human rights and the correct exercise of justice mechanisms. To mark International Women's Day 2010, Christian Aid urges Baroness Kinnock to draw inspiration from her recent visit to DRC and lead international efforts to accelerate voluntary demobilisation of armed groups and to address the illegal militarised mining and trade, a major cause of insecurity in the region. ends For further information please contact Shuna Keen on 020 7523 2308/ SKeen at christian-aid.org or Emma Pomfret on 07554 024539/020 7523 2427/ epomfret at christian-aid.org. Notes To Editors: 1. To read more about Christian Aid's work in DRC please visit http://www.christianaid.org.uk/emergencies/past/congo/Index.aspx and http://www.christianaid.org.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/November2009/congo-crisis-made-worse-by-un-backed-military-operation.aspx 2. Christian Aid works in some of the world's poorest communities in nearly 50 countries. We act where the need is greatest, regardless of religion, helping people build the life they deserve. 3. Christian Aid has a vision - an end to poverty. Our new drive, Poverty Over, explains what we believe needs to be done - and can be done - to make that vision a reality. Details at www.christianaid.org.uk 4. Follow Christian Aid's newswire on Twitter: http://twitter.com/caid_newswire. Haiti Earthquake Appeal Christian Aid has launched an emergency appeal for Haiti after a major earthquake struck the country. Thousands of people are feared dead and countless have been left homeless. Please visit the Haiti Earthquake Appeal site to donate Save paper, save trees and only print this email if you have to. Christian Aid is a charity and company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales: 35 Lower Marsh, London SE1 7RL. UK registered charity no. 1105851. Company no. 5171525. Christian Aid also operates in Scotland: Registered Office: 41 George IV Bridge, Edinburgh, EH1 1EL. Charity no. SC039150 Christian Aid Ireland is a charity and company limited by guarantee registered in Northern Ireland: Murray House, Belfast BT1 6DN. Northern Ireland charity no: XR94639. Company no. NI059154. Christian Aid Ireland is a registered charity and registered company limited by guarantee: 17 Clanwilliam Terrace, Dublin 2. Republic of Ireland charity no. CHY 6998. Company no. 426928. Christian Aid Trading Limited is a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales: 35 Lower Marsh, London SE1 7RL. Company no. 1001742. _________________________________________________________________ This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by Webroot. -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100312/e4c59aae/attachment-0001.html -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe non texte a été nettoyée... Nom: non disponible Type: image/jpeg Taille: 16133 octets Desc: non disponible Url: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100312/e4c59aae/attachment-0001.jpe From audivia2002 at yahoo.fr Sun Mar 14 14:42:18 2010 From: audivia2002 at yahoo.fr (Bishop Venuste Mutiganda) Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 14:42:18 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] =?utf-8?q?Je_fais_suivre_cet_article_te_qu=27il_es?= =?utf-8?q?t_publi=C3=A9_par_le_quotidien_=22New_Times=22_de_Kigali=2E?= Message-ID: <714417.29451.qm@web23806.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Sunday, 14th March 2010 10 selected for UK journalism internships Some of the Rwandan Jounalists who were selected for the UK internship. By Moses Gahigi Ten Rwandan journalists, two from broadcast and eight from the print media were selected to go for a one-week internship with some of UK?s top media houses. The selections came after a team sent by News International interviewed 16 journalists fronted by the various media houses in the country. The internship arrangement came as a result of the meeting between President Paul Kagame and the Chief Executive of News International, Rebekah Brooks, who expressed interest in offering training opportunities to Rwandan journalists. In an interview with Michael Binyon the leader writer with The Times news paper and one of the members of the team that interviewed and selected candidates, said the task of selecting who to go was hard because all journalists were good. ?We couldn?t take all of them, so we had to undertake the hard task of selecting who to go since they were all good,? ?We wanted a group of young enthusiastic journalists, open minded and with a creative energy to go out there and benefit from the exposure of how journalism is done in established media houses and we are sure we got them,? said Binyon. He added that although a week is little considering the learning expectations journalists could be having, it will at least serve to open the beneficiary?s view about the world and how news is collected and written in a different environment. A seasoned Journalist with 37 years of experience also noted that News International chose Rwandan journalists for this opportunity partly because it is a country with ?a tragic past but with tremendous positive efforts to overcome and move on.? ?We saw that contributing to building media here was prudent,? he said. On whether this arrangement will continue even after this trip, Binyon said that this is going to be like an experiment to see how feasible the arrangement is since its going to be the first time. He said that they will make sure they follow up on how the internship will benefit the beneficiaries after returning. Ignatius Kabagambe, the Director General at the Ministry of Information, expressed gratitude on behalf of the government for the opportunity granted to the country?s media practitioners. ?We are very grateful for this opportunity, it means a lot to our media industry, especially since it gives the journalists exposure to the wider world of news and a hands-on experience with some of the best media houses in the world,? he observed. Nelson Gatsimbazi, a journalist with Umusingi one of the local news papers, who was among those selected for the internship, noted that among other benefits he expects to get skills on how to develop and manage his paper?s website in a more reader friendly and modern way. ?I am looking forward to learning from those world class media houses on how to improve my paper?s website since it?s also online,? he said. Six of the selected came from The New Times, one from Rwanda News Agency, and others from Rwandan Focus and Rwanda Radio. News International is a UK subsidiary of News Corporation that is owned by world media tycoon, Rupert Murdoch, owner of  The Sun, The Times, The Sunday Times and News of the world, among others. Ends       © 2010 -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100314/6bdad576/attachment.html From audivia2002 at yahoo.fr Mon Mar 15 10:54:52 2010 From: audivia2002 at yahoo.fr (Bishop Venuste Mutiganda) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:54:52 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] =?utf-8?q?Je_fais_suivre_cet_article_tel_qu=27il_e?= =?utf-8?q?st_publi=C3=A9_par_le_quotidien_=22New_Times=22_de_Kigali=2E?= Message-ID: <531009.66277.qm@web23803.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Monday, 15th March 2010 E-mail article   Print article   Kagame addresses US Military Academy President Kagame tours US Military Academy at West Point over the weekend.(Courtesy photo) By Edwin Musoni WEST POINT - President Paul Kagame has said that the international community now shares similar security challenges and urged common understanding and joint pursuit of sustainable solutions. He made the remarks while addressing the Cadet Class of 2013 at the United States Military Academy at West Point, at the end of the Plebe Parent Weekend. President Kagame noted that it was rewarding to see the progress being made by the young men and women in their first year at West Point. Addressing an audience of cadets, their visiting families, faculty and staff at the academy, including Brigadier General William E. Rapp, the Commandant of Cadets, President Kagame cited international terrorism; appropriate threat assessment; accessibility of weapons of mass destruction; ethnic and religious extremism; as well as cyber crimes, human and drug trafficking, small arms proliferation, climate change, and natural disasters as contributors to global insecurity. President Kagame offered several suggestions for consideration in the search for sustainable solutions to ongoing international threats to security, starting with the adoption a holistic concept of human security because consequences of insecurity often persist and spill across borders. He also stressed the need to address root causes of conflict rather than the symptoms, in order to truly resolve instability whose origins are usually governance related. Contrasting the response to the 9/11 attacks in New York and the genocide in Rwanda, President Kagame pointed to the need to enhance international response, solidarity and cooperation, so that international threats ?carry the same weight and meaning to all countries irrespective of which interests are at stake? and not only when the interests of powerful nations are threatened. President Kagame also urged the appreciation of the causal link between sustainable development and sustainable peace saying that focusing international attention and resources on socio-economic development, trade and investment, would facilitate self-sufficiency and increased ownership of national agendas. On the changing character of warfare, President Kagame said that the international community needed to adapt to this contemporary challenge by addressing the fight for hearts and minds as opposed to focusing exclusively on military solutions, because sophisticated weaponry is not as effective against people?s ideas and beliefs. President Kagame called on the West Point cadets to reflect on how, in the face of the existing security challenges, they can make a difference in today?s world, and noting that they were in a environment that encouraged excellence, and urged them to ?Push as far as you can go ? and that will always be further than you imagine ? let the best come out of you and make your presence here count?. President Kagame thanked West Point for opening its doors to aspiring officers from other countries saying that it was ?further testament to the School?s and the United States generosity and sense of responsibility to global security and mutual learning.? Ends   -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100315/dc131396/attachment.html From audivia2002 at yahoo.fr Mon Mar 15 10:59:26 2010 From: audivia2002 at yahoo.fr (Bishop Venuste Mutiganda) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:59:26 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] =?utf-8?q?Je_fais_suivre_cet_article_tel_qu=27il_e?= =?utf-8?q?st_publi=C3=A9_par_le_quotidien_=22New_Times=22_de_Kigali=2E?= Message-ID: <704451.39831.qm@web23801.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Monday, 15th March 2010 CPA Secretary General shocked by Murambi memorial site Dr.William Shija laying a wreath on grave at Murambi genocide memorial site in Nyamagabe district. (Photo/ J. Bucyensenge) By Jean-Pierre Bucyensenge NYAMAGABE - The Secretary-General of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA), Dr William F. Shija, on Saturday visited Murambi genocide memorial site in Nyamagabe district, to pay tribute to victims of the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi. Together with his executive assistant and the Commonwealth Secretary for Africa Region, Shija, was joined by the Rwandan Deputy Speaker of Parliament, Jean-Damascene Ntawukuriryayo, Senator Seth Safari and local leaders in Nyamagabe district. The delegation toured different parts of the memorial site and local leaders explained to them how the many lives perished during the Genocide.  The Mayor of Nyamagabe district, Alphonse Munyentwari told the delegation that the Genocide occurred because of the planning by the authorities at the time. ?We had identity cards with ethnic groups and surprisingly, we know that we have no ethnics in Rwanda; Hutu and Tutsi were like economic classes and one would easily move from one category to another,? Munyentwari told the delegation. ?I remember when we entered school for the first time, the first thing we were asked was our ethnic groups; whether we were Hutu or Tutsi.? The Mayor narrated how the Tutsi were hunted from the first republic in 1959 until they were massively butchered in 1994. After touring the memorial site, Dr. Shija expressed sorrow for what happened in Rwanda, referring to it as unthinkable and unbelievable. ?I and my colleagues wish to express our very sorry feelings about what happened in 1994. What happened is not a scar for Rwanda only but for the whole of Africa,? he said. Dr Shija, a Tanzanian, also spoke in Swahili, advising Rwandans to keep fostering their unity, in order to build a better future. He urged Rwandans and Africans in general to go beyond small differences and build a unified continent. ?Poleni sana. Now we as Africans have to move into the new and painless Africa we deserve,? he wrote in the guests? book. He said that what happened in Rwanda should serve as a lesson for the whole continent. ?Africa went through many tribulations. The pain is enough,? Dr Shija said. ?Let us stop causing pain to our continent, it is enough.? The Deputy Speaker of Parliament, Ntawukuriryayo asked the visitors to tell the world the real truth about the genocide. ?We request you to be our ambassador and tell the truth you saw to those who still deny the existence of the genocide against Tutsi,? he said. 50 000 Tutsi who sought refuge at Murambi during the genocide were butchered by Interahamwe militias in no more than three days.  Later, Dr Shija and his delegation visited community development initiatives in Nzega cell, Gasaka sector in Nyamagabe district. They visited a 112 hectares consolidated lands where residents grow coffee as part of the ?One village, One product? program, an initiative by the district local authorities aimed at raising residents? production. The plantation was selected by the government as a pilot that should be applied in the whole nation, local leaders revealed. Ends -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100315/8af789fe/attachment-0001.html From audivia2002 at yahoo.fr Tue Mar 16 16:54:40 2010 From: audivia2002 at yahoo.fr (Bishop Venuste Mutiganda) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:54:40 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] =?utf-8?q?Je_fais_suivre_cet_article_tel_qu=27il_e?= =?utf-8?q?st_publi=C3=A9_par_le_quotidien_=22New_Times=22_de_Kigali?= Message-ID: <766884.69477.qm@web23802.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Tuesday, 16th March 2010 Bishop Rucyahana retires STILL GOING STRONG: Rt. Rev John Rucyahana By Eugene Mutara Bishop, John Rucyahana, who has been at the helm of Shyira Anglican Church Diocese for the last 13 years, has quit after reaching the retirement age. Rucyahana?s retirement request was approved by the Diocesan High Council during its recent meeting. He will be replaced by Rev. Dr. Laurent Mbanda, whose consecration is slated for later this month. When contacted, Rucyahana, 65, confirmed the development, saying his retirement was in conformity with the church guidelines. ?I still have energy to serve my church, but institutionary every bishop who clocks 65 years should retire,? he said, adding that he would still be available to serve his church or the country whenever needed. ?I cannot change the law because I feel stronger. What is important is not finishing what you started but what foundation you laid for others?I have played my role successfully.? He spoke of his successor Rev. Dr. Mbanda as a trust worthy person with vast experience and capable of continuing from where he stopped. Mbanda was the vice president of Compassion International. ?He [Mbanda] is an experienced man with integrity and momentum to move the diocese ahead,? Rucyahana said. Ends   -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100316/5515dc57/attachment.html From audivia2002 at yahoo.fr Mon Mar 22 12:35:37 2010 From: audivia2002 at yahoo.fr (Bishop Venuste Mutiganda) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:35:37 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] =?utf-8?q?Je_fais_suivre_cet_article_tel_qu=27il_e?= =?utf-8?q?st_publi=C3=A9_dans_le_quotidien_=22New_Times=22_de_Kigali=2E?= Message-ID: <31048.86516.qm@web23802.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Monday, 22nd March 2010 Over 208 ex-combatants complete reintegration course A cross section of the ex-combatants who were discharged on Friday.(Photo/ B. Mukombozi) By Bonny Mukombozi MUSANZE ? At least 209 ex-combatants from different rebel groups fighting in the Democratic Republic of Congo, were on Friday discharged after completing a three month  reintegration course at Mutobo Demobilisation and Reintegration Centre in Musanze district. Among them was one former Major, two Captains, four Lieutenants, Sergeants and several corporals.   ?We lived a very bad life in the forest of Uvira (DR Congo) for the last 13 years. The conditions were unbearable, the soldiers are held back there due to wrong propaganda,?? said Bonavanture Bimenyimana, a former FDLR Major. Speaking during the discharge ceremony, the US Ambassador to Rwanda, W. Stuart Symington, said that it was a positive signal reflecting the stability of the country. ?Rwanda today is a better [place]?there is no country or people who have not made mistakes, but every one is judged by the works they do every day,??  W. Stuart said.   The ex-combatants accused the UN Peace keeping Mission in Congo-MONUC, for failing to deploy in rebel occupied zones to provide safe routes for the civilians and the rebels willing to defect. MP Anne Marie Musabyemungu, said the government commends the ex combatants? return to Rwanda to join others in rebuilding the country. She challenged the group to foster peace, unity and reconciliation. ?Peace and reconciliation spirit should start from your hearts,?? Musabyemungu said. The chairman of Rwanda Demobilisation and Reintegration Commission, Jean Sayinzoga said that Rwanda is ready to receive all those who stop rebel activities. He urged the group to register in order to vote in the in the upcoming presidential elections. The former rebels said that during the course, they acquired a clear perspective about Rwanda?s history, good governance, human rights and justice. Also present was the Burundian Ambassador to Rwanda, Remmy Sinkazi, officials from the embassies of Kenya, Tanzania and the MONUC representatives in Congo. Ends   -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100322/ddf332cd/attachment.html From anglmansit at yahoo.fr Mon Mar 22 13:36:26 2010 From: anglmansit at yahoo.fr (mans mansita) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 06:36:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Francophones] Fw : Thank you, Mansita Message-ID: <372193.9834.qm@web24106.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Je vous transmets ce message   ci-dessous tel qu'il m'a été envoyé. --- En date de : Lun 22.3.10, Barack Obama a écrit : De: Barack Obama Objet: Thank you, Mansita À: "Mansita Sangi" Date: Lundi 22 mars 2010, 7h09 Mansita -- For the first time in our nation's history, Congress has passed comprehensive health care reform. America waited a hundred years and fought for decades to reach this moment. Tonight, thanks to you, we are finally here. Consider the staggering scope of what you have just accomplished: Because of you, every American will finally be guaranteed high quality, affordable health care coverage. Every American will be covered under the toughest patient protections in history. Arbitrary premium hikes, insurance cancellations, and discrimination against pre-existing conditions will now be gone forever. And we'll finally start reducing the cost of care -- creating millions of jobs, preventing families and businesses from plunging into bankruptcy, and removing over a trillion dollars of debt from the backs of our children. But the victory that matters most tonight goes beyond the laws and far past the numbers. It is the peace of mind enjoyed by every American, no longer one injury or illness away from catastrophe. It is the workers and entrepreneurs who are now freed to pursue their slice of the American dream without fear of losing coverage or facing a crippling bill. And it is the immeasurable joy of families in every part of this great nation, living happier, healthier lives together because they can finally receive the vital care they need. This is what change looks like. My gratitude tonight is profound. I am thankful for those in past generations whose heroic efforts brought this great goal within reach for our times. I am thankful for the members of Congress whose months of effort and brave votes made it possible to take this final step. But most of all, I am thankful for you. This day is not the end of this journey. Much hard work remains, and we have a solemn responsibility to do it right. But we can face that work together with the confidence of those who have moved mountains. Our journey began three years ago, driven by a shared belief that fundamental change is indeed still possible. We have worked hard together every day since to deliver on that belief. We have shared moments of tremendous hope, and we've faced setbacks and doubt. We have all been forced to ask if our politics had simply become too polarized and too short-sighted to meet the pressing challenges of our time. This struggle became a test of whether the American people could still rally together when the cause was right -- and actually create the change we believe in. Tonight, thanks to your mighty efforts, the answer is indisputable: Yes we can. Thank you, President Barack Obama Paid for by Organizing for America, a project of the Democratic National Committee -- 430 South Capitol Street SE, Washington, D.C. 20003. This communication is not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. This email was sent to: anglmansit at yahoo.fr Change Email Address | Unsubscribe -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100322/c5242656/attachment.html From audivia2002 at yahoo.fr Tue Mar 23 11:59:42 2010 From: audivia2002 at yahoo.fr (Bishop Venuste Mutiganda) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 11:59:42 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] =?utf-8?q?Je_fais_suivre_cet_article_tel_qu=27il_e?= =?utf-8?q?st_publi=C3=A9_par_le_quotidien_=22New_Times=22_de_Kigali?= Message-ID: <489963.1268.qm@web23805.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Tuesday, 23rd March 2010 Rwandans in UK to commemorate Genocide By Pelagie Mbabazi KIGALI - The Rwandan community in the United Kingdom will hold a service to commemorate the victims of the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi. According to a statement by Rwanda?s High Commissioner to UK, Ernest Rwamucyo, a service will be held on April 7, 2010 at Southwark Cathedral, London Bridge SE1 9DA to honour the victims. ?All Rwandans living in the UK are invited to take part in commemorating and sharing ideas on how they can contribute towards this year?s theme,? the statement reads in part. ?Many people tend to think that to commemorate is enough but to do something that can help many lives of people that experienced hard times would help more.? Rwamucyo said in the statement. Last week, the National Commission to fight against Genocide (CNLG) called on everyone to help those who had not recovered from what they went through during the Genocide. Ends   -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100323/842d547e/attachment.html From audivia2002 at yahoo.fr Thu Mar 25 11:13:31 2010 From: audivia2002 at yahoo.fr (Bishop Venuste Mutiganda) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 11:13:31 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] =?utf-8?q?Je_fais_suivre_cet_article_tel_qu=27il_e?= =?utf-8?q?st_publi=C3=A9_dans_le_quotidien_=22New_Times=22_de_Kigali=2E?= Message-ID: <669782.49860.qm@web23802.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Thursday, 25th March 2010 Regional clerics vow to promote peace President Paul Kagame speaking to the religious leaders yesterday. (Photo Urugwiro Village) By Irene V. Nambi URUGWIRO VILLAGE - A team of 47 inter-religious leaders from various countries in the Great Lakes region yesterday pledged to play their role in peace building, sustainable development as well as foster reconciliation amongst people in regional countries. Under their network, African Council of Religious Leaders, the group made this promise at Urugwiro Village where they had gone to pay a courtesy call on President Paul Kagame. According to the Mufti of Rwanda, Sheikh Saleh Habimana, who is also the head of the network, the leaders visited the country in a bid to stand in solidarity with the Rwandan community as the country prepares for the 16th commemoration of the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi. ?During our discussions with the President, he advised us to have ownership of our continent and operate with dignity.? ?He also emphasized that before donors get tired of giving us (religious groups) assistance, we should have already broken the cycle of begging so that at one point we can sustainably finance our activities,? Habimana said. According to the official, Kagame highlighted that when political and religious leaders seek funding from the same donors, then they (donors) are bound to get tired at some point. The Mufti of Uganda, Sheikh Shaban Mubaje, also added that the Council was established to work hand in hand with stakeholders around the continent to positively change the situation in Africa. ?We as inter-religious leaders have a strong message from the Almighty God which forbids bloodshed and hatred, encourages love and peaceful co-existence among all people,? he said. ?It is therefore upon us to use this tool to deliver the message to our followers and promote peace - a shared vision with political leaders and other organisations,? Mubaje noted. The council was formed in 2003 with an aim of mobilizing other religious leaders across the continent to transform conflict into peace building as well as advance sustainable development. ?We will do whatever it takes to achieve this and as a result this continent will be peaceful,? officials added. The team which has representatives from Kenya, Tanzania, Burundi, South Africa, Angola, Cameroon and the Democratic Republic of Congo also congratulated President Kagame upon the excellent achievements during his first term in office. Ends   -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100325/ce6d9617/attachment.html From audivia2002 at yahoo.fr Fri Mar 26 19:10:06 2010 From: audivia2002 at yahoo.fr (Bishop Venuste Mutiganda) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:10:06 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] =?utf-8?q?Que_pensez-vous_de_cet_exploit_de_ma_vil?= =?utf-8?q?le_Butare_o=C3=B9_se_trouve_la_Cath=C3=A9drale_Saint-Paul_du_Di?= =?utf-8?q?oc=C3=A8se_de_Butare_dont_l=27article_est_publi=C3=A9_par_le_qu?= =?utf-8?q?otidien_=22New_Times=22_de_Kigali=3F?= Message-ID: <258379.31055.qm@web23806.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Friday, 26th March 2010 IRST to launch Biodiesel bus The Bio-Diesel bus first went on display during last year's Expo (File Photo) By Charles Kwizera KIGALI - The Institute of Scientific and Technological Research (IRST) will today launch the Rwanda Biodiesel Express Bus. The bus, which is 100 percent powered by environmental friendly diesel, is an invention of the institute?s Biodiesel and Bioethanol laboratory. Biodiesel is made out of vegetable oil- or animal fat. The bus, according to a statement from IRST is the first of its kind in Africa. ?There are only two buses of this kind in the world and were specifically designed by the Swedish Scania company which are driven by 100 percent biodiesel. Another biodiesel bus is in Brazil,? says the statement. The bus will make its first long distance run from Kanombe-Mulindi to Akanyaru on the Rwanda-Burundi border. The statement, further says that the data collected through the use of the bus will not only help the two countries protect their environment, but also help people in the private sector who are interested in investing in public transport using safe, low-cost and locally available cleaner energies. Ends -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100326/b81638e6/attachment.html From anglmansit at yahoo.fr Sat Mar 27 11:31:02 2010 From: anglmansit at yahoo.fr (mans mansita) Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 11:31:02 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] Fw : Speeches: The Obama Administration and International Law Message-ID: <652318.9343.qm@web24105.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Je vous transmets ce message ci-dessous tel qu'il m'a été envoyé. --- En date de : Ven 26.3.10, U.S. Department of State a écrit : De: U.S. Department of State Objet: Speeches: The Obama Administration and International Law À: anglmansit at yahoo.fr Date: Vendredi 26 mars 2010, 16h08 #yiv927948375 { font-size:12px;font-family:arial, verdana, sans-serif;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;} #yiv927948375 .physicalAddress { color:gray;font-size:10px;font-family:arial, verdana, sans-serif;font-weight:100;} Speeches: The Obama Administration and International Law Fri, 26 Mar 2010 09:47:34 -0500 The Obama Administration and International Law Harold Hongju Koh Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State  Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law Washington, DC March 25, 2010 Thank you, Dean Areen, for that very generous introduction, and very special thanks to my good friends President Lucy Reed and Executive Director Betsy Andersen for the extraordinary work you do with the American Society of International Law. It has been such a great joy in my new position to be able to collaborate with the Society on so many issues. It is such a pleasure to be back here at the ASIL. I am embarrassed to confess that I have been a member of ASIL for more than 30 years, since my first year of law school, and coming to the annual meeting has always been a highlight of my year. As a young lawyer just out of law school I would come to the American Society meeting and stand in the hotel lobby gaping at all the famous international lawyers walking by: for international lawyers, that is as close as we get to watching the Hollywood stars stroll the red carpet at the Oscars! And last year at this time, when this meeting was held, I was still in the middle of my confirmation process. So under the arcane rules of that process, I was allowed to come here to be seen, but not heard. So it is a pleasure finally to be able to address all of you and to give you my perspective on the Obama Administration?s approach to international law. Let me start by bringing you special greetings from someone you already know. [play video] As you saw, my client, Secretary Clinton very much wanted to be here in person, but as you see in the headlines, this week she has been called away to Mexico, to meeting visiting Pakistani dignitaries, to testify on Capitol Hill, and many other duties. As you can tell, she is very proud of the strong historical relationship between the American Society and the State Department, and she is determined to keep it strong. As the Secretary mentioned, I and another long time member of the Society, your former President Anne Marie Slaughter of the Policy Planning Staff join her every morning at her 8:45 am senior staff meeting, so the spirit of the American Society is very much in the room (and the smell of the Society as well, as I am usually there at that hour clutching my ASIL coffee mug!) Since this is my first chance to address you as Legal Adviser, I thought I would speak to three issues. First, the nature of my job as Legal Adviser. Second, to discuss the strategic vision of international law that we in the Obama Administration are attempting to implement. Third and finally, to discuss particular issues that we have grappled with in our first year in a number of high-profile areas: the International Criminal Court, the Human Rights Council, and what I call The Law of 9/11: detentions, use of force, and prosecutions. I. The Role of the Legal Adviser First, my job. I have now been the Legal Adviser of the State Department for about nine months. This is a position I first heard of about 40 years ago, and it has struck me throughout my career as the most fascinating legal job in the U.S. Government. Now that I?ve actually been in the job for awhile, I have become even more convinced that that is true, for four reasons. First, I have absolutely extraordinary colleagues at the Legal Adviser?s Office, which we call ?L,? which is surely the greatest international law firm in the world. Its numbers include many current lawyers and alumni who are sitting here in the audience, and it is a training ground for America?s international lawyers [To prove that point, could I have a show of hands of how many of you in the audience have worked in L sometime during your careers?] Our 175 lawyers are spread over 24 offices, including four extraordinary career deputies and a Counselor of International Law, nearly all of whom are members of this Society and many of whom you will find speaking on the various panels throughout this Annual Meeting program. Second, I have extraordinary clients and you just saw one, Secretary Hillary Clinton, who is a remarkably able lawyer. Of course, another client of mine, the President, is also an outstanding lawyer, as are both Deputy Secretaries, the Department?s Counselor, the Deputy Chief of Staff, and a host of Undersecretaries and Assistant Secretaries. Third, each day we tackle extraordinarily fascinating legal questions. When I was a professor, I would spend a lot of time trying to think up exam questions. For those of you who are professors, this job literally presents you with a new exam question every single day. For example, I had never really thought about the question: ?can you attach a panda?? Or the question, can Mu'ammar al-Qadhafi erect a tent in Englewood, New Jersey, notwithstanding a contrary local ordinance? To be honest, I had never really thought about those questions. But rest assured, in the future,many Yale law students will. Fourth and finally, my position allows me to play extraordinary and varied roles. Some government lawyers have the privilege for example, of giving regular advice to a particularly prominent client or pleading particular cases before a particular court. But the Legal Adviser must shift back and forth constantly between four rich and varied roles: which I call counselor, conscience, defender of U.S. interests, and spokesperson for international law. As Counselor, I mean obviously, that the Legal Adviser must play all the traditional functions of an agency general counsel, but with a twist. Like every in-house counsel?s office, we do buildings and acquisitions, but those buildings may well be in Afghanistan or Beijing. We review government contracts, but they may require contracting activities in Iraq or Pakistan. We review employment decisions, but with respect to employees with diplomatic and consular immunities or special visa problems. But in addition to being counselors, we also serve as a conscience for the U.S. government with regard to international law. The Legal Adviser, along with many others in policy as well as legal positions, offers opinions on both the wisdom and morality of proposed international actions. For it is the unique role of the Legal Adviser?s Office to coordinate and render authoritative legal advice for the State Department on international legal issues, or as Dick Bilder once put it, to ?speak law to power.? In this role, the Legal Adviser must serve not only as a source of black letter advice to his clients, but more fundamentally, as a source of good judgment. That means that one of the most important roles of the Legal Adviser is to advise the Secretary when a policy option being proposed is ?lawful but awful.? As Herman Pfleger, one former Legal Adviser, put it: ?You should never say no to your client when the law and your conscience say yes; but you should never, ever say yes when your law and conscience say no.? And because my job is simply to provide the President and the Secretary of State with the very best legal advice that I can give them, I have felt little conflict with my past roles as a law professor, dean and human rights lawyer, because as my old professor, former legal adviser Abram Chayes, once put it: ?There?s nothing wrong with a lawyer holding the United States to its own best standards and principles.? A third role the Legal Adviser plays is defender of the United States interests in the many international fora in which the U.S. appears-- the International Court of Justice, where I had the honor recently of appearing for the United States in the Kosovo case; the UN Compensation Commission; the Iran-US Claims Tribunal; NAFTA tribunals (where I was privileged to argue recently before a Chapter XI tribunal in the Grand River case) ? and we also appear regularly in US domestic litigation, usually as of counsel to the Department of Justice in a case such as the Supreme Court?s current case of Samantar v. Yousuf, on which this Society held a panel this morning. A fourth and final role for the Legal Adviser, and the reason I?m here tonight, is to act as a spokesperson for the US government about why international law matters. Many people don?t understand why obeying our international commitments is both right and smart, and that is a message that this Administration, and I as Legal Adviser, are committed to spreading. II. The Strategic Vision That brings me to my second topic: what Strategic Vision of international law are we trying to implement? How does obeying international law advance U.S foreign policy interests and strengthen America?s position of global leadership? Or to put it another way, with respect to international law, is this Administration really committed to what our President has famously called ?change we can believe in?? Some, including a number of the panelists who have addressed this conference, have argued that there is really more Continuity than Change from the last administration to this one. To them I would answer that, of course, in foreign policy, from administration to administration, there will always be more continuity than change; you simply cannot turn the ship of state 360 degrees from administration to administration every four to eight years, nor should you. But, I would argue?and these are the core of my remarks today-- to say that is to understate the most important difference between this administration and the last: and that is with respect to its approach and attitude toward international law. The difference in that approach to international law I would argue is captured in an Emerging ?Obama-Clinton Doctrine,? which is based on four commitments: to: 1. Principled Engagement; 2. Diplomacy as a Critical Element of Smart Power; 3. Strategic Multilateralism; and 4. the notion that Living Our Values Makes us Stronger and Safer, by Following Rules of Domestic and International Law; and Following Universal Standards, Not Double Standards. As articulated by the President and Secretary Clinton, I believe the Obama/Clinton doctrine reflects these four core commitments. First, a Commitment to Principled Engagement: A powerful belief in the interdependence of the global community is a major theme for our President, whose father came from a Kenyan family and who as a child spent several years in Indonesia. Second, a commitment to what Secretary Clinton calls ?smart power??a blend of principle and pragmatism? that makes ?intelligent use of all means at our disposal,? including promotion of democracy, development, technology, and human rights and international law to place diplomacy at the vanguard of our foreign policy. Third, a commitment to what some have called Strategic Multilateralism: the notion acknowledged by President Obama at Cairo, that the challenges of the twenty-first century ?can?t be met by any one leader or any one nation? and must therefore be addressed by open dialogue and partnership by the United States with peoples and nations across traditional regional divides, ?based on mutual interest and mutual respect? as well as acknowledgment of ?the rights and responsibilities of [all] nations.? And fourth and finally, a commitment to living our values by respecting the rule of law, As I said, both the President and Secretary Clinton are outstanding lawyers, and they understand that by imposing constraints on government action, law legitimates and gives credibility to governmental action. As the President emphasized forcefully in his National Archives speech and elsewhere, the American political system was founded on a vision of common humanity, universal rights and rule of law. Fidelity to [these] values? makes us stronger and safer. This also means following universal standards, not double standards. In his Nobel lecture at Oslo, President Obama affirmed that ?[a]dhering to standards, international standards, strengthens those who do, and isolates those who don?t.? And in her December speech on a 21st Century human rights agenda, and again two weeks ago in introducing our annual human rights reports, Secretary Clinton reiterated that ?a commitment to human rights starts with universal standards and with holding everyone accountable to those standards, including ourselves.? Now in implementing this ambitious vision?this Obama-Clinton doctrine based on principled international engagement, smart power, strategic multilateralism, and the view that global leadership flows to those who live their values and obey the law and global standards?I am reminded of two stories. The first, told by a former teammate is about the late Mickey Mantle of the American baseball team, the New York Yankees, who, having been told that he would not play the next day, went out and got terrifically drunk (as he was wont to do). The next day, he arrived at the ballpark, somewhat impaired, but in the late innings was unexpectedly called upon to pinch-hit. After staggering out to the field, he swung wildly at the first two pitches and missed by a mile. But on the third pitch, he hit a tremendous home run. And when he returned to the dugout, he squinted out at the wildly cheering crowd and confided to his teammates, ?[t]hose people don?t know how hard that really was.?[1] In much the same way, I learned that the making of U.S. foreign policy is infinitely harder than it looks from the ivory tower. Why? Because, as lawyers, we are accustomed to the relatively orderly world of law and litigation, which is based on a knowable and identifiable structure and sequence of events. The workload comes with courtroom deadlines, page limits and scheduled arguments. But if conducting litigation is like climbing a ladder, making foreign policy is much more like driving the roundabout near the Coliseum in Rome. In this maze of bureaucratic politics, you are only one lawyer, and there is only so much that any one person can do. Collective government decision-making creates enormous coordination problems. We in the Legal Adviser?s Office are not the only lawyers in government: On any given issue, my office needs to reach consensus decisions with all of the other interested State Department bureaus, but our Department as a whole then needs to coordinate its positions not just with other Government Law Offices, which include: our lawyer clients (POTUS/SecState/DepSecState); White House Lawyers: WHCounsel/NSC Legal Counsel/USTR General Counsel; DOD Lawyers (OGC, Jt Staff, CoComs, Services, JAGs); DOJ Lawyers (OLC, OSG, Litigating Divisions-Civ., Crim, OIL, NSD); IC Lawyers (DNI, CIA); DHS Lawyers, not to mention lawyers in the Senate and House. To make matters even more complex, we participate in a complicated web of legal processes within processes: The Policy Process, The Clearance Process, The Interagency Process, The Legislative Process; and once a U.S. position is developed, an Intergovernmental Lawyering Process. So unlike academics, who are accustomed to being individualists, in government you are necessarily part of a team. One obvious corollary to this is that as one government lawyer, your views and the views of your client are not the only views that matter. As Walter Dellinger observed when he worked at OLC: [U]nlike an academic lawyer, an executive branch attorney may have an obligation to work within a tradition of reasoned, executive branch precedent, memorialized in formal written opinions. Lawyers in the executive branch have thought and written for decades about the President?s legal authority? When lawyers who are now [in my office] begin to research an issue, they are not expected to turn to what I might have written or said in a floor discussion at a law professors? convention. They are expected to look to the previous opinions of the Attorneys General and of heads of this office to develop and refine the executive branch?s legal positions.[2] Now to say that is not to say that one Administration cannot or should not reverse a previous administration?s legal positions.But what it does mean, as I noted at my confirmation hearings is that government lawyers should begin with a presumption of stare decisis--that an existing interpretation of the Executive Branch should stand-- unless after careful review, a considered reexamination of the text, structure, legislative or negotiating history, purpose and practice under the treaty or statute firmly convinces us that a change to the prior interpretation is warranted. So that is what I mean when I say it?s harder than it looks. And as those listening who have served in government know, it is a lot harder to get from a good idea to the implementation of that idea than those outside the government can imagine. That brings me to my second, shorter story: about two Irishmen walking down the road near Galway. One of them asks the other, "So how do you get to Dublin?" And the other answers, "I wouldn't start from here." In the same way, given the choice, no one would have started with what we inherited: the worst recession since the Depression, with conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan, against Al Qaeda. Add to this mix a difficult and divided political environment, which makes it very difficult to get 60 Senate votes for cloture, much less the 67 you would need for treaty ratification, and such thorny carryover issues as resuming international engagement, closing Guantanamo, not to mention tackling an array of new challenges brought to us by the 21st century: climate change, attendant shifts in the polar environment; cyber crime, aggression and terrorism, food security, and global health just to name a few. Just to round things out, throw in a 7.0 earthquake in Haiti, another earthquake in Chile, four feet of snow in Washington, and you might well say to yourselves, to coin a phrase, ?I wouldn?t start from here.? But that having been said, how have we played the hand we have been dealt? What legal challenges do we face? There are really five fields of law that have occupied most of my time: what I call the law of international justice and dispute resolution, the law of 9/11, the law of international agreements, the law of the State Department, and the law of globalization. Tonight I want to focus on the first two of these areas: the law of international justice and dispute resolution and the law of 9/11. For they best illustrate how we have tried to implement the four themes I have outlined: principled engagement, multilateralism, smart power, and living our values. III. Current Legal Challenges A. International Justice and Dispute Resolution By International justice and Dispute resolution, I refer to the U.S.?s renewed relationship to international tribunals and other international bodies. Let me address two of them: the International Criminal Court and the U.N. Human Rights Council. As President Obama recognized, ?a new era of engagement has begun and renewed respect for international law and institutions is critical if we are to resume American leadership in a new global century.? 1. The International Criminal Court With respect to the U.S. relationship to the ICC, let me report on my recent participation in the Resumed 8th Session of ICC Assembly of States Parties in New York, from which I have just returned. Last November, Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Stephen Rapp and I led an interagency delegation that resumed engagement with the Court by attending a meeting of the ICC Assembly of States Parties (ASP). This was the first time that the United States had attended such a meeting, and this week?s New York meeting continued that November session. As you know, the United States is not party to the Rome Statute, but we have attended these meetings as an Observer. Our goal in November was to listen and learn, and by listening to gain a better understanding of the issues being considered by the ASP and of the workings of the International Criminal Court. Significantly, although during the last decade the U.S. was largely absent from the ICC, our historic commitment to the cause of international justice has remained strong. As you all know, we have not been silent in the face of war crimes and crimes against humanity. As one of the vigorous supporters of the work of the ad hoc tribunals regarding the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Cambodia, Sierra Leone, and Lebanon, the United States has worked for decades, and we will continue to work, with other States to ensure accountability on behalf of victims of such crimes. But as some of those ad hoc war crimes tribunals enter their final years, the eyes of the world are increasingly turned toward the ICC. At the end of May, the United States will attend the ASP?s Review Conference in Kampala, Uganda. There are two key items on the agenda: stock-taking and aggression. In the current situation where the Court has open investigations and prosecutiosn in relation to four situations, but has not yet concluded any trials, the stock-taking exercise is designed to address ways to strengthen the Court, and includes issues such as state cooperation; complementarity; effect on victims; peace and justice; and universality of membership. Even as a non-State party, the United States believes that it can be a valuable partner and ally in the cause of advancing international justice. The Obama Administration has been actively looking at ways that the U.S. can, consistent with U.S. law, assist the ICC in fulfilling its historic charge of providing justice to those who have endured crimes of epic savagery and scope. And as Ambassador Rapp announced in New York, we would like to meet with the Prosecutor at the ICC to examine whether there are specific ways that the United States might be able to support the particular prosecutions that already underway in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, Central African Republic, and Uganda. But as for the second agenda item, the definition of the crime of aggression, the United States has a number of serious concerns and questions. The crime of aggression, which is a jus ad bellum crime based on acts committed by the state, fundamentally differs from the other three crimes under the Court?s jurisdiction?genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity?which are jus in bello crimes directed against particular individuals. In particular, we are concerned that adopting a definition of aggression at this point in the court?s history could divert the ICC from its core mission, and potentially politicize and weaken this young institution. Among the States Parties we found strongly held, yet divergent, views on many fundamental and unresolved questions. First, there are questions raised by the terms of the definition itself, including the degree to which it may depart from customary international law of both the ?crime of aggression? and the state ?act of aggression.? This encompasses questions like what does it mean when the current draft definition requires that an act of aggression must be a ?manifest? ?as opposed to an ?egregious? violation of the U.N. Charter? A second question of who decides. The United States believes that investigation or prosecution of the crime of aggression should not take place absent a determination by the UN Security Council that aggression has occurred. The UN Charter confers on the Security Council the responsibility for determining when aggression has taken place. We are concerned by the confusion that might arise if more than one institution were legally empowered to make such a determination in the same case, especially since these bodies, under the current proposal, would be applying different definitions of aggression. Third, there are questions about how such a crime would potentially affect the Court at this point in its development. For example, how would the still-maturing Court be affected if its Prosecutor were mandated to investigate and prosecute this crime, which by its very nature, even if perfectly defined, would inevitably be seen as political-- both by those who are charged, as well as by those who believe aggressors have been wrongly left uncharged? To what extent would the availability of such a charge place burdens on the Prosecutor in every case, both those in which he chooses to charge aggression and those in which he does not? If you think of the Court as a wobbly bicycle that is finally starting to move forward, is this frankly more weight than the bicycle can bear? Fourth, would adopting the crime of aggression at this time advance or hinder the key goals of the stocktaking exercise: promoting complementarity, cooperation, and universality? With respect to complementarity, how would this principle apply to a crime of aggression? Do we want national courts to pass judgment on public acts of foreign states that are elements of the crime of aggression? Would adding at this time a crime that would run against heads of state and senior leaders enhance or obstruct the prospects for state cooperation with the Court? And will moving to adopt this highly politicized crime at a time when there is genuine disagreement on such issues enhance the prospects for universal adherence to the Rome Statute? All of these questions go to our ultimate concern: has a genuine consensus yet emerged to finalize a definition of the crime of aggression? What outcome in Kampala will truly strengthen the Court at this critical moment in its history? What we heard at the Resumed Session in New York is that no clear consensus has yet emerged on many of these questions. Because this is such a momentous decision for this institution, which would bring about such an organic change in the Court?s work, that we believe that we should leave no stone unturned in search of genuine consensus. And we look forward to discussing these important issues with as many States Parties and Non States Parties as possible between now and what we hope will be a successful Review Conference in Kampala. 2. Human Rights Council In addition to reengaging with the ICC, the United States has also reengaged the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva. Along with my long time friend and colleague, Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor Michael Posner, who has my old job, and Assistant Secretary of State for International Organizations Esther Brimmer, I had the privilege of leading the first U.S. delegation to return to the Human Rights Council this past September. You know the history: In March 2006, the UN General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to replace the flawed Human Rights Commission with this new body: the Human Rights Council. The last Administration participated actively in the negotiations in New York to reform the Commission, but ultimately voted against adoption of the UNGA resolution that created the HRC, and decided not to run for a seat. The UNGA resolution that created the HRC made a number of important changes from the commission process: it created the Universal Periodic Review process, a mandatory process of self-examination and peer review that requires each UN member state to defend its own record before the HRC every four years. The Obama Administration would like our report to serve as a model for the world. Accordingly we are preparing our first UPR report, which will be presented this November, with outreach sessions in an unprecedented interagency listening tour being conducted in about ten locations around the United States to hear about human rights concerns from civil society, community leaders, and tribal governments. Second, the HRC and its various subsidiary bodies and mechanisms meet far more frequently throughout the year than did the Commission, a pace that exhausts delegations. Third, the election criteria were revised. So while HRC membership still includes a number of authoritarian regimes that do not respect human rights, the election requirement of a majority of UNGA votes in often competitive elections has led to certain countries being defeated for membership and others declining to run for a seat. The rule that only one-third of membership (16 members) can convene a special session, has led to a disproportionate number of special sessions dedicated to criticism of Israel, which already is the only country with a permanent agenda item dedicated to examination of its human rights practices: an unbalanced focus that we have clearly and consistently criticized. When the Obama Administration took office, we faced two choices with respect to the Human Rights Council: we could continue to stay away, and watch the flaws continue and possibly get worse, or we could engage and fight for better outcomes on human rights issues, even if they would not be easy to achieve. With the HRC, as with the ICC and other for a, we have chosen principled engagement and strategic multilateralism. While the institution is far from perfect, it is important and deserves the long-term commitment of the United States, and the United States must deploy its stature and moral authority to improve the UN human rights system where possible. This is a long-term effort, but one that we are committed to seeing through to success consistent with the basic goals of the Obama-Clinton doctrine: principled engagement and universality of human rights law. Our inaugural session as an HRC member in September saw some important successes, most notably the adoption by consensus of a freedom of expression resolution, which we co-sponsored with Egypt, that brought warring regional groups together and preserved the resolution as a vehicle to express firm support for freedom of speech and expression. This resolution was a way of implementing some of the themes in President Obama?s historic speech in Cairo, bridging geographic and cultural divides and dealing with global issues of discrimination and intolerance. We also joined country resolutions highlighting human rights situations in Burma, Somalia, Cambodia, and Honduras, and were able to take positions joined by other countries on several resolutions on which the United States previously would have been isolated, including ones on toxic waste and the financial crisis. The challenges in developing a body that fairly and even-handedly addresses human rights issues are significant, but we will continue to work toward that end. At the March HRC session, which ends tomorrow, we have continued to pursue principled engagement by taking on a variety of initiatives at the HRC that seek to weaken protections on freedom of expression, in particular, the push of some Council Members to ban speech that ?defames? religions, such as the Danish cartoons. At this session, we made supported a country resolution on Guinea and made significant progress in opposing the Organization of the Islamic Conference?s highly problematic ?defamation of religions? resolution, even while continuing to deal with underlying concerns about religious intolerance. B. The Law of 9/11 Let me focus the balance of my remarks on that aspect of my job that I call ?The Law of 9/11.? In this area, as in the other areas of our work, we believe, in the President?s words, that ?living our values doesn?t make us weaker, it makes us safer and it makes us stronger.? We live in a time, when, as you know, the United States finds itself engaged in several armed conflicts. As the President has noted, one conflict, in Iraq, is winding down. He also reminded us that the conflict in Afghanistan is a ?conflict that America did not seek, one in which we are joined by forty-three other countries? in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks.? In the conflict occurring in Afghanistan and elsewhere, we continue to fight the perpetrators of 9/11: a nonstate actor, Al Qaeda (as well as the Taliban forces that harbored al Qaeda). Everyone here at this meeting is committed to international law. But as President Obama reminded us, ?the world must remember that it was not simply international institutions -- not just treaties and declarations -- that brought stability to a post-World War II world. ? [T]he instruments of war do have a role to play in preserving the peace.? With this background, let me address a question on many of your minds: how has this Administration determined to conduct these armed conflicts and to defend our national security, consistent with its abiding commitment to international law? Let there be no doubt: the Obama Administration is firmly committed to complying with all applicable law, including the laws of war, in all aspects of these ongoing armed conflicts. As the President reaffirmed in his Nobel Prize Lecture, ?Where force is necessary, we have a moral and strategic interest in binding ourselves to certain rules of conduct ? [E]ven as we confront a vicious adversary that abides by no rules ? the United States of America must remain a standard bearer in the conduct of war. That is what makes us different from those whom we fight. That is the source of our strength.? We in the Obama Administration have worked hard since we entered office to ensure that we conduct all aspects of these armed conflicts ? in particular, detention operations, targeting, and prosecution of terrorist suspects ? in a manner consistent not just with the applicable laws of war, but also with the Constitution and laws of the United States. Let me say a word about each: detention, targeting, and prosecution.1. Detention With respect to detention, as you know, the last administration?s detention practices were widely criticized around the world, and as a private citizen, I was among the vocal critics of those practices. This Administration and I personally have spent much of the last year seeking to revise those practices to ensure their full compliance with domestic and international law, first, by unequivocally guaranteeing humane treatment for all individuals in U.S. custody as a result of armed conflict and second, by ensuring that all detained individuals are being held pursuant to lawful authorities. a. Treatment To ensure humane treatment, on his second full day in office, the President unequivocally banned the use of torture as an instrument of U.S. policy, a commitment that he has repeatedly reaffirmed in the months since. He directed that Executive officials could no longer rely upon the Justice Department OLC opinions that had permitted practices that I consider to be torture and cruel treatment -- many of which he later disclosed publicly -- and he instructed that henceforth, all interrogations of detainees must be conducted in accordance with Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and with the revised Army Field Manual. An interagency review of U.S. interrogation practices later advised ? and the President agreed ? that no techniques beyond those in the Army Field Manual (and traditional noncoercive FBI techniques) are necessary to conduct effective interrogations. That Interrogation and Transfer Task Force also issued a set of recommendations to help ensure that the United States will not transfer individuals to face torture. The President also revoked Executive Order 13440, which had interpreted particular provisions of Common Article 3, and restored the meaning of those provisions to the way they have traditionally been understood in international law. The President ordered CIA ?black sites? closed and directed the Secretary of Defense to conduct an immediate review ? with two follow-up visits by a blue ribbon task force of former government officials ? to ensure that the conditions of detention at Guantanamo fully comply with Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. Last December, I visited Guantanamo, a place I had visited several times over the last two decades, and I believe that the conditions I observed are humane and meet Geneva Conventions standards. As you all know, also on his second full day in office, the President ordered Guantanamo closed, and his commitment to doing so has not wavered, even as closing Guantanamo has proven to be an arduous and painstaking process. Since the beginning of the Administration, through the work of my colleague Ambassador Dan Fried, we have transferred approximately 57 detainees to 22 different countries, of whom 33 were resettled in countries that are not the detainees? countries of origin. Our efforts continue on a daily basis. Just this week, five more detainees were transferred out of Guantanamo for resettlement. We are very grateful to those countries who have contributed to our efforts to close Guantanamo by resettling detainees; that list continues to grow as more and more countries see the positive changes we are making and wish to offer their support. During the past year, we completed an exhaustive, rigorous, and collaborative interagency review of the status of the roughly 240 individuals detained at Guantanamo Bay when President Obama took office. The President?s Executive Order placed responsibility for review of each Guantanamo detainee with six entities ?the Departments of Justice, State, Defense, and Homeland Security, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), and the Joint Chiefs of Staff ? to collect and consolidate from across the government all information concerning the detainees and to ensure that diplomatic, military, intelligence, homeland security, and law enforcement viewpoints would all be fully considered in the review process. This interagency task force, on which several State Department attorneys participated, painstakingly considered each and every Guantanamo detainee?s case to assess whether the detainee could be transferred or repatriated consistently with national security, the interests of justice, and our policy not to transfer individuals to countries where they would likely face torture or persecution. The six entities ultimately reached unanimous agreement on the proper disposition of all detainees subject to review. As the President has made clear, this is not a one-time review; there will be ?a thorough process of periodic review, so that any prolonged detention is carefully evaluated and justified.? Similarly, the Department of Defense has created new review procedures for individuals held at the detention facility in Parwan at Bagram airfield, Afghanistan, with increased representation for detainees, greater opportunities to present evidence, and more transparent proceedings. Outside organizations have begun to monitor these proceedings, and even some of the toughest critics have acknowledged the positive changes that have been made. b. Legal Authority to Detain Some have asked what legal basis we have for continuing to detain those held on Guantanamo and at Bagram. But as a matter of both international and domestic law, the legal framework is well-established. As a matter of international law, our detention operations rest on three legal foundations. First, we continue to fight a war of self-defense against an enemy that attacked us on September 11, 2001, and before, and that continues to undertake armed attacks against the United States. Second, in Afghanistan, we work as partners with a consenting host government. And third, the United Nations Security Council has, through a series of successive resolutions, authorized the use of ?all necessary measures? by the NATO countries constituting the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) to fulfill their mandate in Afghanistan. As a nation at war, we must comply with the laws of war, but detention of enemy belligerents to prevent them from returning to hostilities is a well-recognized feature of the conduct of armed conflict, as the drafters of Common Article 3 and Additional Protocol II recognized and as our own Supreme Court recognized in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld. The federal courts have confirmed our legal authority to detain in the Guantanamo habeas cases, but the Administration is not asserting an unlimited detention authority. For example, with regard to individuals detained at Guantanamo, we explained in a March 13, 2009 habeas filing before the DC federal court --and repeatedly in habeas cases since -- that we are resting our detention authority on a domestic statute ? the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) ? as informed by the principles of the laws of war. Our detention authority in Afghanistan comes from the same source. In explaining this approach, let me note two important differences from the legal approach of the last administration. First, as a matter of domestic law, the Obama Administration has not based its claim of authority to detain those at GTMO and Bagram on the President?s Article II authority as Commander-in-Chief. Instead, we have relied on legislative authority expressly granted to the President by Congress in the 2001 AUMF. Second, unlike the last administration, as a matter of international law, this Administration has expressly acknowledged that international law informs the scope of our detention authority. Both in our internal decisions about specific Guantanamo detainees, and before the courts in habeas cases, we have interpreted the scope of detention authority authorized by Congress in the AUMF as informed by the laws of war. Those laws of war were designed primarily for traditional armed conflicts among states, not conflicts against a diffuse, difficult-to-identify terrorist enemy, therefore construing what is ?necessary and appropriate? under the AUMF requires some ?translation,? or analogizing principles from the laws of war governing traditional international conflicts. Some commentators have criticized our decision to detain certain individuals based on their membership in a non-state armed group. But as those of you who follow the Guantanamo habeas litigation know, we have defended this position based on the AUMF, as informed by the text, structure, and history of the Geneva Conventions and other sources of the laws of war. Moreover, while the various judges who have considered these arguments have taken issue with certain points, they have accepted the overall proposition that individuals who are part of an organized armed group like al Qaeda can be subject to law of war detention for the duration of the current conflict. In sum, we have based our authority to detain not on conclusory labels, like "enemy combatant," but on whether the factual record in the particular case meets the legal standard. This includes, but is not limited to, whether an individual joined with or became part of al Qaeda or Taliban forces or associated forces, which can be demonstrated by relevant evidence of formal or functional membership, which may include an oath of loyalty, training with al Qaeda, or taking positions with enemy forces. Often these factors operate in combination. While we disagree with the International Committee of the Red Cross on some of the particulars, our general approach of looking at ?functional? membership in an armed group has been endorsed not only by the federal courts, but also is consistent with the approach taken in the targeting context by the ICRC in its recent study on Direct Participation in Hostilities (DPH). A final point: the Obama Administration has made clear both its goal not only of closing Guantanamo, but also of moving to shift detention responsibilities to the local governments in Iraq and Afghanistan. Last July, I visited the detention facilities in Afghanistan at Bagram, as well as Afghan detention facilities near Kabul, and I discussed the conditions at those facilities with both Afghan and U.S. military officials and representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross. I was impressed by the efforts that the Department of Defense is making both to improve our ongoing operations and to prepare the Afghans for the day when we turn over responsibility for detention operations. This Fall, DOD created a joint task force led by a three-star admiral, Robert Harward, to bring new energy and focus to these efforts, and you can see evidence of his work in the rigorous implementation of our new detainee review procedures at Bagram, the increased transparency of these proceedings, and closer coordination with our Afghan partners in our detention operations. In sum, with respect to both treatment and detainability, we believe that our detention practices comport with both domestic and international law. B. Use of Force In the same way, in all of our operations involving the use of force, including those in the armed conflict with al Qaeda, the Taliban and associated forces, the Obama Administration is committed by word and deed to conducting ourselves in accordance with all applicable law. With respect to the subject of targeting, which has been much commented upon in the media and international legal circles, there are obviously limits to what I can say publicly. What I can say is that it is the considered view of this Administration?and it has certainly been my experience during my time as Legal Adviser?that U.S. targeting practices, including lethal operations conducted with the use of unmanned aerial vehicles, comply with all applicable law, including the laws of war. The United States agrees that it must conform its actions to all applicable law. As I have explained, as a matter of international law, the United States is in an armed conflict with al Qaeda, as well as the Taliban and associated forces, in response to the horrific 9/11 attacks, and may use force consistent with its inherent right to self-defense under international law. As a matter of domestic law, Congress authorized the use of all necessary and appropriate force through the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF). These domestic and international legal authorities continue to this day. As recent events have shown, Al Qaeda has not abandoned its intent to attack the United States, and indeed continues to attack us. Thus, in this ongoing armed conflict, the United States has the authority under international law, and the responsibility to its citizens, to use force, including lethal force, to defend itself, including by targeting persons such as high-level al Qaeda leaders who are planning attacks. As you know, this is a conflict with an organized terrorist enemy that does not have conventional forces, but that plans and executes its attacks against us and our allies while hiding among civilian populations. That behavior simultaneously makes the application of international law more difficult and more critical for the protection of innocent civilians. Of course, whether a particular individual will be targeted in a particular location will depend upon considerations specific to each case, including those related to the imminence of the threat, the sovereignty of the other states involved, and the willingness and ability of those states to suppress the threat the target poses. In particular, this Administration has carefully reviewed the rules governing targeting operations to ensure that these operations are conducted consistently with law of war principles, including: First, the principle of distinction, which requires that attacks be limited to military objectives and that civilians or civilian objects shall not be the object of the attack; and Second, the principle of proportionality, which prohibits attacks that may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, that would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.In U.S. operations against al Qaeda and its associated forces-- including lethal operations conducted with the use of unmanned aerial vehicles-- great care is taken to adhere to these principles in both planning and execution, to ensure that only legitimate objectives are targeted and that collateral damage is kept to a minimum. Recently, a number of legal objections have been raised against U.S. targeting practices. While today is obviously not the occasion for a detailed legal opinion responding to each of these objections, let me briefly address four: First, some have suggested that the very act of targeting a particular leader of an enemy force in an armed conflict must violate the laws of war. But individuals who are part of such an armed group are belligerents and, therefore, lawful targets under international law. During World War II, for example, American aviators tracked and shot down the airplane carrying the architect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, who was also the leader of enemy forces in the Battle of Midway. This was a lawful operation then, and would be if conducted today. Indeed, targeting particular individuals serves to narrow the focus when force is employed and to avoid broader harm to civilians and civilian objects. Second, some have challenged the very use of advanced weapons systems, such as unmanned aerial vehicles, for lethal operations. But the rules that govern targeting do not turn on the type of weapon system used, and there is no prohibition under the laws of war on the use of technologically advanced weapons systems in armed conflict-- such as pilotless aircraft or so-called smart bombs-- so long as they are employed in conformity with applicable laws of war. Indeed, using such advanced technologies can ensure both that the best intelligence is available for planning operations, and that civilian casualties are minimized in carrying out such operations. Third, some have argued that the use of lethal force against specific individuals fails to provide adequate process and thus constitutes unlawful extrajudicial killing. But a state that is engaged in an armed conflict or in legitimate self-defense is not required to provide targets with legal process before the state may use lethal force. Our procedures and practices for identifying lawful targets are extremely robust, and advanced technologies have helped to make our targeting even more precise. In my experience, the principles of distinction and proportionality that the United States applies are not just recited at meetings. They are implemented rigorously throughout the planning and execution of lethal operations to ensure that such operations are conducted in accordance with all applicable law. Fourth and finally, some have argued that our targeting practices violate domestic law, in particular, the long-standing domestic ban on assassinations. But under domestic law, the use of lawful weapons systems?consistent with the applicable laws of war?for precision targeting of specific high-level belligerent leaders when acting in self-defense or during an armed conflict is not unlawful, and hence does not constitute ?assassination.? In sum, let me repeat: as in the area of detention operations, this Administration is committed to ensuring that the targeting practices that I have described are lawful. C. Prosecutions: The same goes, third and finally, for our policy of prosecutions. As the President made clear in his May 2009 National Archives speech, we have a national security interest in trying terrorists, either before Article III courts or military commissions, and in keeping the number of individuals detained under the laws of war low. Obviously, the choice between Article III courts and military commissions must be made on a case-by-case basis, depending on the facts of each particular case. Many acts of terrorism committed in the context of an armed conflict can constitute both war crimes and violations of our Federal criminal law, and they can be prosecuted in either federal courts or military commissions. As the last administration found, those who have violated American criminal laws can be successfully tried in federal courts, for example, Richard Reid, Zacarias Moussaoui, and a number of others. With respect to the criminal justice system, to reiterate what Attorney General Holder recently explained, Article III prosecutions have proven to be remarkably effective in incapacitating terrorists. In 2009, there were more defendants charged with terrorism violations in federal court than in any year since 9/11. In February 2010, for example, Najibullah Zazi pleaded guilty in the Eastern District of New York to a three-count information charging him with conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction, specifically explosives, against persons or property in the United States, conspiracy to commit murder in a foreign country, and provision of material support to al-Qaeda. We have also effectively used the criminal justice system to pursue those who have sought to commit terrorist acts overseas. On March 18, 2010, for example, David Headley pleaded guilty to a dozen terrorism charges in U.S. federal court in Chicago, admitting that he participated in planning the November 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India, as well as later planning to attack a Danish newspaper. As the President noted in his National Archives speech, lawfully constituted military commissions are also appropriate venues for trying persons for violations of the laws of war. In 2009, with significant input from this Administration, the Military Commissions Act was amended, with important changes to address the defects in the previous Military Commissions Act of 2006, including the addition of a provision that renders inadmissible any statements taken as a result of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The 2009 legislative reforms also require the government to disclose more potentially exculpatory information, restrict hearsay evidence, and generally require that statements of the accused be admitted only if they were provided voluntarily (with a carefully defined exception for battlefield statements). IV. CONCLUSION In closing, in the last year, this Administration has pursued principled engagement with the ICC and the Human Rights Council, and has reaffirmed its commitment to international law with respect to all three aspects of the armed conflicts in which we find ourselves: detention, targeting and prosecution. While these are not all we want to achieve, neither are they small accomplishments. As the President said in his Nobel Lecture, ?I have reaffirmed America's commitment to abide by the Geneva Conventions. We lose ourselves when we compromise the very ideals that we fight to defend. And we honor ideals by upholding them not when it's easy, but when it is hard.? As President Obama went on to say, even in this day and age war is sometimes justified, but ?this truth?, he said, ?must coexist with another ? that no matter how justified, war promises human tragedy. The soldier's courage and sacrifice is full of glory ? But war itself is never glorious, and we must never trumpet it as such. So part of our challenge is reconciling these two seemingly irreconcilable truths ? that war is sometimes necessary, and war at some level is an expression of human folly.? Although it is not always easy, I see my job as an international lawyer in this Administration as reconciling these truths around a thoroughgoing commitment to the rule of law. That is the commitment I made to the President and the Secretary when I took this job with an oath to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States. That is a commitment that I make to myself every day that I am a government lawyer. And that is a commitment that I make to each of you, as a lawyer deeply committed?as we all are?to the goals and aspirations of this American Society of International Law. Thank you. [1] Jim Bouton, Ball Four: My Life and Hard Times Throwing the Knuckleball in the Big Leagues 30 (1970). [2] Walter Dellinger, After the Cold War: Presidential Power and the Use of Military Force, 50 U. Miami L. Rev. 107 (1995). The Office of Electronic Information, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department. External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein. Update your subscriptions, modify your password or e-mail address, or stop subscriptions at any time on your Subscriber Preferences Page. You will need to use your e-mail address to log in. If you have questions or problems with the subscription service, please contact support at govdelivery.com. Other inquires can be directed to the U.S. Department of State. This service is provided to you at no charge by the U.S. Department of State. GovDelivery, Inc. sending on behalf of U.S. Department of State · 2210 C Street NW · Washington DC 20520 · 1-800-439-1420 -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100327/41e522ed/attachment-0001.html From audivia2002 at yahoo.fr Mon Mar 29 10:28:47 2010 From: audivia2002 at yahoo.fr (Bishop Venuste Mutiganda) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 10:28:47 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] =?utf-8?q?Je_fais_suivre_cet_article_tel_qu=27il_e?= =?utf-8?q?st_publi=C3=A9_par_le_quotidien_=22New_Times=22_de_Kigali=2E?= Message-ID: <686012.47933.qm@web23804.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Monday, 29th March 2010 Kagame challenges clergy on leadership By Edmund Kagire & Bonny Mukombozi   President Paul Kagame with the Archbishop of the Anglican Church of Rwanda, Rt Rev Emmanuel Kolini (L) and Bishop elect of Shyira diocese, Rev. Dr Laurent Mbanda (R) at the consecration ceremony yesterday in Musanze district. (Photo/Urugwiro Village) Editor, MUSANZE - President Paul Kagame has challenged religious leaders to put the interests of their flock before their own, if they are to live up to the biblical character of the ?good shepherd?. President Kagame gave the advice yesterday while officiating at the consecration ceremony of Rev. Dr Laurent Mbanda, as a Coadjutor Bishop of Shyira Diocese replacing the retiring Bishop John Rucyahana, who has been at the helm of the Diocese since 1997. Addressing thousands of the faithful, who braved the rain at St. John the Baptist Cathedral in Musanze Town, President Kagame said that all leaders, be it in government or church, should have a sense of responsibility and accountability to those they are responsible for. The president emphasised the need to be result oriented. Kagame urged the church leaders not to be like a shepherd who abandons his flock and instead seeks self satisfaction. At the end of the day, he said, the shepherd will reap the benefits at the expense of the flock. He referred to the outgoing Bishop Ruchyahana as a leader, who during his reign, did not only fulfil his duties at the diocese but also served the whole country. He said that the country will continue seeking his services, adding that he personally has been seeking his advice from time to time and will continue to do so. On the other hand, Kagame advised the incoming Bishop to consolidate what his predecessor has put in place and to come up with more initiatives to improve the lives of his followers, while contributing to the economy. The Governor of the Northern Province, Aimé Bosenibamwe, hailed Bishop Ruchyahana for having greatly contributed to the development and well being of the people of the Northern Province. He highlighted some of Ruchyahana?s development initiatives in the education sector, construction and hotel industry, social welfare as well as unity and reconciliation. In his remarks, Bishop Rucyahana said that the prevailing peace in the country, support and cooperation he received from the Government enabled him accomplish the tasks bestowed on him during his service in the ministry. Rt. Rev. Laurent Mbanda who was awarded a Certificate of Episcopal Consecration rallied the Christians to support him in accomplishing and fostering the established developments, and the outreach missions which have been started ?It is a big honour to serve God, I am going to fill big shoes but by God?s grace we will get there,? Bishop Laurent Mbanda said after taking oath. The Episcopal Consecration of Rev. Dr Mbanda, as the Bishop-elect, of Shyira Diocese was conducted by the Archbishop of the Province of Anglican Church of Rwanda, Rt. Rev Emmanuel Kolini, assisted by other provincial bishops. Anglican Bishops from the neighbouring countries; Burundi, D R Congo, and Uganda also attended the ceremony. Ends -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100329/a3d512d3/attachment.html From anglmansit at yahoo.fr Tue Mar 30 11:01:12 2010 From: anglmansit at yahoo.fr (mans mansita) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:01:12 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] =?utf-8?q?Fw_=3A_=5Bdefap=2Efr=5D_Guyane=2C_outils?= =?utf-8?q?_d=27animation=2C_d=C3=A9placements_en_paroisses?= Message-ID: <943644.88060.qm@web24104.mail.ird.yahoo.com> --- En date de : Mar 30.3.10, Service protestant de mission a écrit : De: Service protestant de mission Objet: [defap.fr] Guyane, outils d'animation, déplacements en paroisses À: anglmansit at yahoo.fr Date: Mardi 30 mars 2010, 11h30 #yiv924891243 A:hover { text-decoration:underline;} #yiv924891243 DIV.titre { font-family:tahoma;color:#3ead83;font-size:18px;padding:8px 0px 0px 0px;font-weight:bold;} #yiv924891243 h3.spip { font-family:tahoma;color:#3ead83;font-size:14px;font-weight:bold;padding:2px 0px 4px 0px;} #yiv924891243 table.spip tr.row_first { background-color:#FCF4D0;font-family:tahoma;font-size:11px;} #yiv924891243 HR.spip { height:1px;color:#3BAA8F;} #yiv924891243 table.spip tr.row_odd { background-color:#d0d0d0;font-family:tahoma;font-size:11px;} #yiv924891243 table.spip tr.row_even { background-color:#F0F0F0;font-family:tahoma;font-size:11px;} #yiv924891243 table.spip td { padding:3px;text-align:left;vertical-align:middle;font-family:tahoma;font-size:11px;} #yiv924891243 a.spip_in { color:#0002AF;} #yiv924891243 a.spip_in:hover { color:#0002AF;text-decoration:none;} #yiv924891243 a.spip_out { color:#0002AF;} #yiv924891243 a.spip_out:hover { color:#0002AF;text-decoration:none;} Le mensuel Revue Mission numéro 196 est disponible, pour lire quelques extraits, cliquez ici. En bref Derniers articles : - Communiqué de presse Assemblée (...) - Les photos de l?assemblée (...) - Assemblée générale 2010, le message - AG 2010 : rapport de gestion (...) - Vidéo de présentation du Service (...) Articles les plus consultés : - Postes à pourvoir - Liste des Envoyés - Calendrier du Défap - Le calendrier des animations - Agenda des animations en France Guyane, outils d?animation, déplacements en paroisses Installation des pasteurs Dominique Calla et Stéphane Desmarais. Le 28 février, la paroisse réformée et l?aumônerie protestante aux armées ont vécu un temps fort : l?installation commune du pasteur Stéphane Desmarais et de l?aumônier militaire Dominique Calla. Une centaine de personnes se sont réunies à la chapelle de l?armée du salut pour ce culte d?installation. Parmi elle, le général Jean- Pierre Hestin, l?évêque de Guyane, Monseigneur Lafont, l?aumônier militaire catholique Claude Mino-Matot, et des pasteurs d?autres Eglises évangéliques dont Richard Kahn, aumônier protestant des prisons avec Stéphane Desmarais et une équipe multiconfessionnelle. Imposition des mains sur Cindy et Stéphane Desmarais Lire la suite de l?article Outils d?animation Télécharger le diaporama sur Haïti à l?usage des paroisses : visible mais encore éclaté, le protestantisme haïtien s?organise pour agir au sein de la société civile (janvier 2010) Télécharger le diaporama sur le Sénégal à l?usage des paroisses de l?inspection luthérienne de Paris : action de solidarité lors du Carême 2010 (février 2010) Agenda des animations en France L?animation en France consiste à garder les yeux levés, au-delà de nos clochers, vers cette Église Universelle que nous confessons. Elle contribue à développer et à partager une réflexion dans les Églises sur la Mission chrétienne dans le monde et dans une société française sécularisée. Le service animation du DEFAP est à la disposition des paroisses membres pour aider à organiser, préparer ou animer de tels moments. Nous pouvons vous apporter des idées, des contacts, du matériel. Consulter le tableau des animations en paroisses Des déplacements au service des Eglises Le tableau suivant résume les diverses missions et déplacements des personnels ou collaborateurs du Défap dans le cadre de nos activités et relations d?Eglises. La Cevaa est une Communauté d?Eglises protestantes en Mission, créée en 1971 à Paris. Elle regroupe actuellement 37 Eglises protestantes réparties dans 24 pays en Afrique, en Amérique Latine, en Europe, dans l?Océan Indien et dans le Pacifique. L?animation théologique est un principe de vie communautaire, une dynamique pour partager la foi et la vivre en actes dans un mouvement de libération et de réconciliation. Consulter le nouveau site de la Cevaa Pour vous désabonner, cliquez ici -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100330/20b54e18/attachment.html From anglmansit at yahoo.fr Wed Mar 31 12:15:02 2010 From: anglmansit at yahoo.fr (mans mansita) Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 12:15:02 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Francophones] Fw : Highlights: International Donors' Conference for Haiti Message-ID: <989848.27352.qm@web24101.mail.ird.yahoo.com> --- En date de : Mer 31.3.10, U.S. Department of State a écrit : De: U.S. Department of State Objet: Highlights: International Donors' Conference for Haiti À: anglmansit at yahoo.fr Date: Mercredi 31 mars 2010, 14h08 Highlights: International Donors' Conference for Haiti #yiv1457992368 { font-size:12px;font-family:arial, verdana, sans-serif;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;} #yiv1457992368 .physicalAddress { color:gray;font-size:10px;font-family:arial, verdana, sans-serif;font-weight:100;} Highlights: International Donors' Conference for Haiti Wed, 31 Mar 2010 08:00:00 -0500 International Donors' Conference for Haiti Date: 03/30/2010 Location: New York, NY Description: Cheryl Mills, Counselor and Chief of Staff to Secretary Clinton, briefs on the International Donors' Conference Towards a New Future for Haiti at the New York Foreign Press Center. - State Dept Image No March 30, 2010 Counselor Mills (Mar. 30): "We are committed to ensuring that we have the continued cooperation and support to ensure that the Haiti today has the foundations for the Haiti tomorrow." Full Text» Briefing by Assistant Secretary Crowley» The Office of Electronic Information, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department. External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein. Update your subscriptions, modify your password or e-mail address, or stop subscriptions at any time on your Subscriber Preferences Page. You will need to use your e-mail address to log in. If you have questions or problems with the subscription service, please contact support at govdelivery.com. Other inquires can be directed to the U.S. Department of State. This service is provided to you at no charge by the U.S. Department of State. GovDelivery, Inc. sending on behalf of U.S. Department of State · 2210 C Street NW · Washington DC 20520 · 1-800-439-1420 -------------- section suivante -------------- Une pièce jointe HTML a été nettoyée... URL: http://justus.anglican.org/pipermail/francophones.justus/attachments/20100331/6538d6cb/attachment.html