Ovi -
we cover every issue
newsletterNewsletter
subscribeSubscribe
contactContact
searchSearch
worldwide creative inspiration  
Ovi Bookshop - Free Ebook
Stop human trafficking
Ovi Language
Books by Avgi Meleti
Stop violence against women
Tony Zuvela - Cartoons, Illustrations
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement
 
BBC News :   - 
iBite :   - 
GermanGreekEnglishSpanishFinnishFrenchItalianPortugueseSwedish
Belgian report Belgian report
by Euro Reporter
2015-03-25 11:07:10
Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author
DeliciousRedditFacebookDigg! StumbleUpon

Belgium minister sparks scorn by 'blacking up'

belgi_400An image of Belgium's foreign minister "blacked up" at a charity event in Brussels has prompted scorn and outrage on social media. Didier Reynders took part Saturday in a procession for "Les Noirauds" ("The Blacks"), a charity set up in 1876 under royal patronage to raise money for children's charities. Dressing in blackface is still common in Belgium and the Netherlands, where "Zwarte Piet" ("Black Pete") is a beloved, although increasingly controversial, Christmas character.

But local TV station VTM News commented that "in France they find it totally inappropriate, especially for a minister. They think that he is desecrating Africa. Reynders seems unaware." Reynders posted images on his official website of himself at the event, under the headline: "I marched with Swarthy in the streets of Brussels."  A translation of one caption reads: "The motto of the swarthy is 'Fun and Charity.' Both components have been fully met again this year and it is with joy and good humour that I have attended."

Twitter erupted with comments. Human Rights Watch's emergencies director Peter Bouckaert tweeted: "Belgium FM @Dreynders I have question: will u wear #blackface outfit 2 next meeting with African leaders? Shame on you!" And in a number of posts Nigerian-born author Chika Unigwe tweeted: "@dreynders ought to be ashamed. Dressing up in black face is super offensive. A politician of his stature should know this!"

**********************************************************************

Belgium to scrap prison sentences less than 1 year from penal code

Belgium plans to axe all prison sentences of less than 12 months as part of a large-scale reform to modernize the country’s penal system and make it more efficient. Earlier this week, Belgian Justice Minister Koen Geens told parliament short prison sentences have proven ineffective.  “A short prison sentence, a try-out in jail, rarely leads to good results. It does not contribute to re-integration, but helps inmates to learn bad habits," the minister is cited as saying by Reuters.

According to Geens, alternative sentences should be handed out to criminals who commit minor offences.  The minister’s also said inmates serving sentences of up to five years will be automatically released after they have served half their term, if there is no objection from the prosecutors. Prisoners serving longer sentences will also be considered for early release, he added. In addition, the Belgian government plans to reduce the number of courts, cut transport costs, and downsize appeal opportunities as part of the reform.

According to local media, the Belgian justice ministry’s budget was cut by €200 million this year. Geens confirmed the plan “would have been equally useful in another budgetary context,” but stressed that money wasn’t the only motivation for the changes. However, the reform was criticized by the Chairman of Brussels First Instance Court, Luc Hennart, who called it “a magic trick,” which only creates the illusion of saving money. "Putting fewer people in prison costs less, it's true. But the house of cards collapses when you consider the use of the electronic bracelet,” Hennart told RTBF broadcaster. The judge said the bracelets, used for non-custodial sentences, are expensive and he’s “not convinced that it will be a lesser punishment for the criminals then a detention.”

**********************************************************************

Belgium pledges to review 'No Palm Oil' label

THE new EU Food Information for Consumers Regulation (FIC), which came into effect on Dec 13, 2014, has completely transformed the debate on the “No Palm Oil” labels. The new FIC Regulation has confirmed beyond doubt that the “No Palm Oil” labels are illegal, and have started being denounced accordingly. A first encouraging sign came from Belgium a few weeks ago. In his reply to a Parliamentary Question, the Belgian Minister for Economy and Foreign Trade, Kris Peeters, acknowledged the effect on “No Palm Oil” labels of the new EU regulation. As he explained, “under the former regulation all products containing natural oils could just display natural oils in the list of ingredients. Now this needs to be followed with the exact kind of natural oils that are used in the product. In this way the consumer can see for himself if palm oil has been used in the production process of the product”. Because the “No Palm Oil” labels are superfluous under the new EU legislation, Minister Peeters promised to discuss with Belgian manufacturers to review the use of these labels.

This is a major shift in the position of the Belgian government, and a great sign of hope for millions of people, whose lives depend on the palm oil sector, in Asia and Africa. This is also an important step towards the final removal of an unfair labelling practice, which has been tolerated in Belgium and France – the only countries in Europe where these labels are being used – for far too long. Following the entry into force of the FIC Regulation, manufacturers are obliged to specify the type of vegetable oil used in their food products, including palm oil. It is then a total nonsense to specify its absence. No more additional labelling is today needed, or desired. It is just misleading and misinforming European consumers – and unfairly denigrating palm oil producers. Yet, some politicians seem to tolerate these labels, confusing them with the generic vegetable oil labelling provisions of the FIC Regulation. As I have recently explained to a Belgian Member of the European Parliament, Marc Tarabella, in my reply to some of his inaccurate and misleading statements relating to palm oil, these two issues are totally separate. Malaysian Palm Oil is comfortable with the new FIC labelling rules for vegetable oils. These specify that the oil of origin (e.g. palm oil; sunflower; etc) must be specified in the ingredients list. This is non-discriminatory and applies to all oils. The “No Palm Oil” labels are different. This is a campaign by certain companies – and is not a legal provision or regulation at all. It is an attempt by these companies to deliberately denigrate palm oil, and harm the palm oil industry and the many hundreds of thousands of small farmers, who produce palm oil in Malaysia. The Malaysian Palm Oil industry is transparent and responsible, and does not need to be dictated to on these issues.

Food producers – like Delhaize, Galler, Casino and Système U – are not transparent or responsible in their communications and their practices. By keeping the “No Palm Oil” labels, they are showing their true purpose, which has nothing to do with transparency or consumer awareness, already in place under the new EU regulation. It is about denigration of palm oil and harming small farmers. This practice has proven to be in breach of EU law, and also domestic French and Belgian laws. An analysis undertaken by international law firm Hogan Lovells, has highlighted numerous illegalities of the anti-palm oil labels. Beside the new FIC Regulation, companies in Belgium, and in France are also in breach of many existing laws on unfair competition, health claims, and advertising.  

The Belgian Government is moving in the right direction. The recent reply of Minister Peeters to the Parliamentary Question on palm oil labelling acknowledges the change of the situation with the entry into force of the FIC regulation: palm oil-free labels became totally useless and unnecessary. The position of French public authorities has changed too. The French Directorate for fraud (DGCCRF) has recently stated that the “No Palm Oil” labels “could be considered licit in some cases or in breach of regulations in others”. This is another major move that shows how the FIC Regulation has completely changed the debate over the “No Palm Oil” labels in the last months. If public authorities have now acknowledged their illegality, private companies need to remove the labels. For this reason we expect the Belgian and French governments to enforce the law, with the support of the two competent authorities – AFSCA in Belgium and DGCCRF in France – and ban the “No Palm Oil” labels once for all. The EU has a key role to play in this debate. DG SANTE, the body overseeing all EU food labelling regulation, should ensure a correct application of their new regulation and denounce any irregularities. There are major European retailers that are using discriminatory labels, which are against the provisions of the FIC regulation. This is a major irregularity and we expect DG SANTE to take the lead in enforcing the regulation.

This lack of action is a source of great frustration to the Malaysian Palm Oil community, who sees European companies denigrating an amazing food crop without merit. Palm oil is the most efficient vegetable oilseed crop in the world. It produces up to 10 times more oil than other leading oilseed crops. It is a unique food ingredient, with many cooking properties and health benefits, including being completely free of dangerous trans fats. Most importantly, palm oil is one of Malaysia’s major exports and a source of rural development and poverty alleviation. Small farmers, whose lives and livelihoods have been transformed by planting oil palm, carry out almost 40% of the total production. If not removed promptly, “No Palm Oil” labels could have a negative impact on trading relations between Malaysia and Belgium, a point that was confirmed during the recent Trade Mission of Belgian businesses to Malaysia. Minister Kris Peeters has taken a good step in the right direction, in Belgium. It is now time for the companies and regulators, of both Belgium and France, to properly enforce the EU’s FIC Regulation and eliminate these illegal labels altogether.

 


         
Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author

Comments(0)
Get it off your chest
Name:
Comment:
 (comments policy)

© Copyright CHAMELEON PROJECT Tmi 2005-2008  -  Sitemap  -  Add to favourites  -  Link to Ovi
Privacy Policy  -  Contact  -  RSS Feeds  -  Search  -  Submissions  -  Subscribe  -  About Ovi