Tag Archives: reopen

Australia’s international borders to reopen from November. It’s one big step towards living with COVID

Posted on by

Catherine Bennett, Deakin University“Australia will be ready for takeoff very soon” said Prime Minister Scott Morrison today as he announced the ban on international travel will be lifted some time next month.

Returning Australian citizens and permanent residents will be able to quarantine at home for seven days if fully vaccinated with a TGA-approved vaccine.

The recognised vaccines include those already approved for use in Australia by Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Moderna and Johnson and Johnson/Janssen, as well as Sinovac and Covishield (Covishield is AstraZeneca’s vaccine made in India).

Unvaccinated returnees will still need to enter managed hotel quarantine for 14 days until Australia moves beyond Phase C of the National Plan.

Those who can’t be vaccinated, including young children and those with a medical exemption, will be counted as vaccinated for travel.

Arrival caps will also be abolished for fully vaccinated returnees.

Today’s announcement is one big step towards allowing vaccinated Australians to return home soon, as we move to a future that somewhat resembles pre-COVID life.

Is seven days enough?

Home quarantine trials in South Australia and New South Wales will answer this question.

Authorities will be testing returnees and the proportion of those who are COVID-positive, as well as when they test positive, will inform decision-making. This will also be monitored on an ongoing basis once we open up and can be adjusted if it turns out a higher than acceptable number of travellers test positive between day seven and 14.

Currently, NSW data tell us less than half of 1% of returnees in hotel quarantine are testing positive. The NSW Surveillance report from August 21 shows only 4% of those positive cases were in fully vaccinated.

The low percentage of returnees who are positive will matter less anyway as Australia progressively moves towards “living with COVID” with a background rate of the virus in the community.

We know fully vaccinated people can still get infected, but at much lower rates. There’s also mounting evidence suggesting their infectious period is shorter than unvaccinated people, so they’re less likely to pass the virus on. Importantly, there’s now a better than 70% reduction in risk of having a serious infection requiring hospitalisation in all of the vaccines the TGA has recognised for international arrivals.

How will we ensure people stay home?

South Australia is currently trialling an app that uses geo-tagged facial recognition software to ensure people stay home during quarantine.

If this app proves successful it might be rolled out across Australia.

It might also include supports for other aspects of compliance, like prompts to get tested, a checklist of symptoms and other ways to check in with returnees.

Random checks by police or ADF personnel have proven home quarantine and isolation have high levels of compliance. Something similar could also be brought in at some point if there were compliance concerns.



Read more:
Home quarantine for vaccinated returned travellers is extremely low risk, and won’t damage their mental health

One thing that’s more difficult to monitor is whether other people come into the house of a person meant to be isolating. The risk of transmission to the visitor is much higher than if the returnee ventured out. But this is the same risk we currently have with isolating close contacts locally.

Ultimately the system will need to rely, in part, on trust. We know Australians are generally very compliant, and many people will be desperate to travel again and reunite with family and friends. The majority will be likely to comply with the requirements to facilitate keeping travel open.

The system will be safe enough — and that’s all we need going forward.

What about other household members?

One question yet to be answered is whether everyone else in the house has to quarantine if housing a returned traveller.

With the risk of a fully vaccinated returnee being positive very low, so too is the risk to the household. If they do return a positive test on one of their test days, their household members may also be required to quarantine. Rapid Antigen Tests might be useful for early detection of infection in these cases.

Another question is whether we will still have offshore screening, requiring a negative test prior to departure for Australia?

The finer details will emerge and probably change over time as we collect data and manage changing risks. We’ll probably start conservatively and then gradually open things up more and more as we learn which components of risk mitigation are proportionate.

window view from plan
Some details of home quarantine on return from overseas still need clarification.
Unsplash/Eva Darron, CC BY

Which states will go first?

International travel will open to states and territories gradually as they reach 80% of over-16s fully vaccinated. So we won’t have to wait until all jurisdictions have individually hit the threshold.

Based on vaccination uptake rates, the ACT and NSW will likely be the first to open, followed by Victoria.

Tasmania is still tracking well but other states are lagging behind. Queensland and Western Australia will probably be the last to open their borders.

This is broadly in line with the national plan, but is coming probably a month or two earlier than looked possible in June. Vaccination rates, particularly in NSW, Victoria and the ACT, have been spurred on by significant COVID outbreaks. States are also assessing the distribution of vaccine coverage to ensure there are no parts of the community left behind by the time of opening.

What about travel bubbles?

The Prime Minister flagged potential bubble arrangements with countries like New Zealand where there’d be no quarantine requirements. The list of such countries will likely change over time, depending on circulating variants and country risk profiles.

We’re probably heading in the direction of eventually not requiring quarantine for returnees at all, only testing. For now, it’s clear we’re moving towards a system that manages risks rather than operating with zero risk tolerance.

Will contact tracers be able to cope?

As fully vaccinated people contribute less to transmission and are at less risk of severe COVID-19 symptoms, all states and territories will progressively shift the risk settings that underpin contact tracing. We have used comprehensive contact tracing, casting the epidemiological net wide to ensure not one contact of a case who might have contracted the virus was missed.

The chance of someone being positive drops away the more casual the exposure. Once you no longer have to be fearful of missing even just one case, we can make the net smaller and just trace the people at highest risk.



Read more:
Worksafe’s hotel quarantine breach penalties are a warning for other employers to keep workers safe from COVID

We might reach a stage where even close contacts just have to get a test, without having to quarantine.

This shift brings with it some risk of cases to the community, but we’re likely to have an ongoing, even if low, level of cases in the community. A low rate of introduction across international borders will not materially add to that. It’s about managing risk and being much more selective about identifying who’s at risk in a highly vaccinated population.

What about new variants from overseas?

Watching what variants are circulating will be a priority and some border rules changes might be needed if new risks are identified. For example, stricter arrangements for people arriving from “high-risk” areas where a particularly worrisome variant has emerged.

The system can be adapted for changing risks. There might be more transmissible variants which emerge, but we also might start using next-generation COVID vaccines which are a better fit for variants and precautions can be dialled down.

Being highly vaccinated allows Australia to move away from the ultra-conservative ways we’ve had to manage the pandemic previously, and allows us to start reopening to the world.The Conversation

Catherine Bennett, Chair in Epidemiology, Deakin University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

From vaccination to ventilation: 5 ways to keep kids safe from COVID when schools reopen

Posted on by

Shutterstock

C Raina MacIntyre, UNSW; Greg Kelly, The University of Queensland; Holly Seale, UNSW, and Richard Holden, UNSWLast week the New South Wales government announced schools are scheduled to re-open in October. While face-to-face learning undoubtedly has benefits for both children and parents, the announcement left unanswered a series of important questions about how this can be done safely.

By the time NSW lifts restrictions (estimated to be around October), only 60-70% of the population in NSW — and possibly less in Australia — who are 16 years and over may be fully vaccinated.

The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) has recommended vaccination for children 12 and over, but most of these children will not be fully vaccinated by October, and children under 12 will remain unvaccinated for now.

In NSW, with well over 1,000 cases a day and rising, there will still be substantial community transmission when schools open. It is unclear when schools in Victoria (where cases are also on the rise) will open, but there may still be some transmission in the state when they do.

So, what do we need to do to make sure kids are as safe as possible at school?


The Conversation, CC BY-ND

1. Vaccinate the adults around them

In California, a primary school outbreak occurred when an unvaccinated teacher, who came to work despite symptoms, read to students with their mask off. Most kids who became infected were well over 2 metres from the teacher, which confirms the 1-2m distancing rule is not effective for an airborne virus.

Every child and teacher in a classroom or childcare centre with an infected person is at risk. Shared air is the major way SARS-CoV-2 — the virus that causes COVID-19 — spreads.

Children often get the virus from the adults around them, so vaccinating adults in a child’s household, and teachers, can help protect them.

Vaccination is now mandatory for teachers in NSW, but around 67% have had one dose. This probably corresponds to less than 40% of the NSW population being fully vaccinated.

Teacher reading books to kids sitting on the floor.
Anyone in the same room with an infected person, especially if that person isn’t wearing a mask, is at risk of catching the virus.
Shutterstock

One dose of vaccination gives about 31% protection and two doses gives 67% (AstraZeneca) to 88% (Pfizer) protection against the Delta variant. Most kids will still be unvaccinated if schools in the two largest states re-open for the last term of the year. This means it’s even more important to ensure the adults are vaccinated.

2. Mandate masks for teachers and students

We can mandate masks in schools for teachers and students, and highly recommend mask use for younger children in childcare.

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends masks for children two years and up; children over this age can wear masks without much trouble.

As mask use in schools has been more common overseas, there are now numerous toolkits (including translated versions) and recommendations to support children to wear a mask. For example, your child is more likely wear a mask if it has their favourite colour, sports team, character or special interest on it.

Importantly, a DIY cloth mask can be made to fit your child’s face and be high quality if key design principles are followed. It is important to ensure children have choices and understand the reason why they are wearing a mask (for instance: “When we wear a mask, the virus can’t jump from person to person.”



Read more:
Can’t get your kid to wear a mask? Here are 5 things you can try

3. Ventilated classrooms

Classrooms can be ventilated by opening windows (ideally two windows at opposite ends of the room). If there is only one window, a fan can help move the dirty air out. If opening windows is not possible there is fortunately a cheap fix available — portable air purifiers, which dramatically reduce the viral load in classrooms.



Read more:
Poorly ventilated schools are a super-spreader event waiting to happen. It may be as simple as opening windows

There are DIY methods for making air purifiers, too.

4. Reduce numbers of people indoors

Reducing the number of people packed together in a classroom can reduce the risk of COVID. For example, during high epidemic periods, if the decision is made to open schools, a group of kids can come in every second day and learn online on alternate days.

We have shown this approach, when combined with masks, reduces the risk of transmission on university campus.

Use of outdoor spaces for lessons is also a smart move as the weather gets warmer. While Delta can transmit outdoors, the risk is likely much lower.

5. Test school kids

Finally, rapid point-of-care testing in schools will help reduce transmission, and self-testing kits (when approved in Australia) can help.

Saliva tests are also a practical way to test children. These tests are now available in official health settings, so governments could make them available to schools.

What about childcare centres?

We also need to consider childcare centres. Contrary to popular narrative, a new study shows kids up to three years old transmit more than older kids. So, vaccinating childcare workers and parents of young kids is also essential.

All the measures above, except masks for 0-2 year olds, can easily be used in childcare settings.

Girls getting swabbed in the mouth.
Rapid testing in schools could help reduce transmission.
Shutterstock

Record numbers of children are being hospitalised with COVID-19 in the USA. It remains unclear whether the high numbers of sick children are due mostly to Delta’s increased transmissibility, or whether it also causes more severe disease in children, as it does in adults. Although the risk of severe disease remains much lower in children than adults.



Read more:
Under-12s are increasingly catching COVID-19. How sick are they getting and when will we be able to vaccinate them?

One thing we do know is that as vaccination rates increase in adults, unvaccinated groups, the largest of which is children, will be proportionally more at risk. The 70-80% targets for vaccination of eligible adults for relaxing restrictions corresponds to 56-64% of the whole population, which leaves plenty of room for Delta to spread like wildfire in unvaccinated adults and kids. So there is good reason to protect kids if we open schools.

In addition, the productivity losses from lockdowns are an important component of the estimated A$220 million daily economic cost in NSW alone. Sick kids make it harder for their parents to work productively, if at all. And they make it more likely parents themselves become sick and are unable to work.



Read more:
Introducing OzSAGE, a source of practical expert advice for how to reopen Australia from COVID safely


The Conversation

C Raina MacIntyre, Professor of Global Biosecurity, NHMRC Principal Research Fellow, Head, Biosecurity Program, Kirby Institute, UNSW; Greg Kelly, Senior lecturer, The University of Queensland; Holly Seale, Associate professor, UNSW, and Richard Holden, Professor of Economics, UNSW

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Is it time to reopen our borders? For states still recording new cases, it’s too soon

Posted on by

Adrian Esterman, University of South Australia

This week, we’ve seen state governments in heated debate over the question of reopening borders between Australian states and territories.

New South Wales premier Gladys Berejiklian is arguing for the reopening of interstate travel, which will be important for Australia’s economic recovery from the pandemic.

Others, including Western Australian premier Mark McGowan and Queensland premier Annastacia Palaszczuk, have opposed reopening borders at this stage, on the basis the move risks new cases crossing state lines.

From an epidemiological perspective, I would argue the safest option is to wait until two states have achieved disease elimination before opening the borders between them.



Read more:
Grattan on Friday: Border wars split political leaders and embroil health experts

States make their own rules

During a pandemic, it’s important we have disease control strategies in place at different levels: from individual and family to community, state and national.

Some states and territories have closed their borders to interstate travel in an attempt to reduce disease transmission.

The exceptions are NSW, Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory (though these states have still urged people to defer non-essential travel).

Jurisdictions that have closed their borders enforce their own exemptions and regulations, such as requiring entrants to self-quarantine for 14 days on arrival.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison recently announced a three-step roadmap to recovery for Australia. This set out the possibility of recreational interstate travel as part of step 2, but left it to each state and territory to decide the timing.

All states and territories except Western Australia remain in stage 1, and are unlikely to progress to stage 2 until June.

So, if we follow the three-step plan, states and territories pushing for interstate travel may be getting a bit ahead of themselves.

Elimination should be the green light

For disease elimination, there must be zero new cases of the disease in a defined geographic area.

There is no defined time period this needs to be sustained for – it usually depends on the incubation period of the disease (the time between being exposed to the virus and the onset of symptoms).



Read more:
We may well be able to eliminate coronavirus, but we’ll probably never eradicate it. Here’s the difference

Since the incubation period for COVID-19 ranges from 1-14 days, it could be argued a state or territory has eliminated COVID-19 if there are no new cases over a 14-day period.

However, research has shown there’s a small chance (1%) someone could develop symptoms and become infectious beyond 14 days of quarantine. So to be completely safe, it would be prudent to extend this period.

A sensible approach might be to define the elimination of COVID-19 as a 28-day period of no new cases in any state or territory – double the incubation period. Any state or territory that achieves disease elimination could then reopen its borders with any other state or territory that has also achieved this.

Queensland chief health officer Jeanette Young has advocated for this kind of approach.

What might happen if states that have not achieved elimination allow interstate travel? The risk is an infectious person crosses into a state or territory that has achieved disease elimination and reseeds a new epidemic. The risk might be small, but the consequences could be severe.



Read more:
Can you get the COVID-19 coronavirus twice?

We might also take this elimination approach with international borders (yesterday marked New Zealand’s fourth day in a row with no new cases), though this is a way off.

Are we there yet?

While Victoria and NSW continue to record a small number of new cases most days, for other states and territories, the prospect of elimination is in sight.

These data do differ slightly depending on the source, but by my definition, no state or territory has, to date, eliminated COVID-19. And as such, we’re not yet at the point we should be relaxing current border restrictions.

There’s no question Australia is doing well. But we must remain vigilant, particularly with the current easing of restrictions, which might lead to a few clusters of new cases.

We’ll need safeguards in place

Establishing a threshold for when it’s safe for states to open their borders – namely 28 days with no new cases – will minimise the risk of transmission of new infections. It could also serve to stop the quarrelling between leaders over this question.

Even when we do move to open borders, we’ll need to tread carefully. Disease elimination is not the same as disease eradication; there’s still the possibility of the rare community-acquired case being out there. And unless every person in Australia is tested and quarantined if necessary, there’s still a chance of the epidemic restarting.



Read more:
Can we really rely on people to isolate when they’re told to? Experts explain

A sensible approach might therefore be to test anyone crossing a border and asking them to self-isolate for 24 hours until their test results are ready. This would also help eliminate the unlikely chance of the person carrying the virus on their clothes or possessions.The Conversation

Adrian Esterman, Professor of Biostatistics, University of South Australia

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Vatican Library prepares to reopen after three years of restoration

Posted on by

The Vatican Apostolic Library will be reopened again this month after three years of reconstruction. As its director explained to Vatican Radio, it aims to be a cultural aid, to offer a glimpse of the "great truth of the world of God," reports Catholic News Agency.

Vatican Radio interviewed the library’s prefect, Msgr. Cesare Pasini about the grand reopening set to take place on Sept. 20.

Noting a series of initiatives scheduled to mark the reopening of the library this fall, the prefect also spoke of the value of the library to all people.

He said that by reopening the library, "we not only show scholars and the world what we have done … but we remodel ourselves on this fundamental spirit, on our mission, so that we don’t just make it a place to consult books."

The library, which allows scholars from all walks and creeds to study its volumes, has an aspect of universality and cultural preservation because it conserves materials "for today and tomorrow," he said.

Msrg. Pasini also promotes culture by allowing works to be "used, seriously studied and then probed to find any further fragment of truth.

"There are many truths," he said, "historic truths, truths that make investigations into the reality of things, and these little truths form part of the great truth of the world of God."

In an article he wrote for last Sunday’s edition of the L’Osservatore Romano, Msgr. Pasini described some of the 15,000 letters and e-mails his office has received hoping for the prompt conclusion to the restoration work and describing the library’s importance to studies. Responding to the interest, he said that in looking around the now "silent and shining" library, he has seen that "only the friendly presence of our scholars is lacking." He added, "may they know that they are warmly awaited."

Archivist of the Vatican Secret Archives, Cardinal Raffaele Farina, will present the renovated, restored and restructured library in an on-site press conference next Monday.

Report from the Christian Telegraph

Iranian Authorities Release Assyrian Pastor on Bail

Posted on by

Accused of ‘converting Muslims,’ church leader faces trial – and threat of murder.

ISTANBUL, April 5 (CDN) — An Assyrian pastor the Iranian government accused of “converting Muslims” has been released from prison on bail and is awaiting trial.

The Rev. Wilson Issavi, 65, was released from Dastgard prison in Isfahan last week. Conflicting reports indicated Issavi was released sometime between Sunday (March 28) and Tuesday morning (March 30).

On Feb. 2, State Security Investigations (SSI) agents arrested Issavi shortly after he finished a house meeting at a friend’s home in Isfahan. Along with the accusation of “converting Muslims,” the pastor is charged with not co-operating with police, presumably for continuing to hold such house meetings after police sealed the Evangelical Church of Kermanshah and ordered him not to reopen it.

After his arrest, Issavi was held at an unmarked prison facility in Isfahan and apparently tortured, according to a Christian woman who fled Iran and knows Issavi and his family. The Christian woman, who requested anonymity for security reasons, said Issavi’s wife, Medline Nazanin, visited the pastor at the unmarked facility. Nazanin said it was obvious Issavi had been tortured, the Christian told Compass.

Issavi’s confinement cells were so filthy he contracted a life-threatening infection, Nazanin told the Christian woman.

“They took him to the hospital and then returned him back to the prison,” the woman said.

Friends of Issavi added that he is still dealing with the lingering effects of the infection.

During Issavi’s imprisonment, authorities threatened to execute him, sources close to the case said. The joy of Issavi’s family at his release was tinged with fear as they waited in agony for the possibility of him being killed by Islamic extremists, as is common in Iran when Christians are detained for religious reasons and then released.

“Sometimes they release you just to kill you,” the Christian source said.

Issavi has not been informed of his trial date.

Issavi’s friend said that low-key ethnic Christians, such as the Assyrians, are largely unbothered for long periods of time. Active Christians are treated differently.

“When you start evangelizing, then you are in real trouble,” she said.

Iranian authorities have set up a video camera outside Issavi’s church to monitor anyone going in or out of the building, according to the pastor’s friend.

Issavi was one of a few Christians in leadership positions arrested in Isfahan in February during what some Middle Eastern experts described as a crackdown on area church leadership.

Isfahan, a city of more than 1.5 million people located 208 miles (335 kilometers) south of Tehran, has been the site of other anti-Christian persecution. In an incident in July 2008, two Christians died as a result of injuries received from police who were breaking up a house meeting.

On Feb. 28, Isfahan resident Hamid Shafiee and his wife Reyhaneh Aghajary, both converts from Islam and house church leaders, were arrested at their home.

Police handcuffed, beat and pepper-sprayed Aghajary and then took her to prison. Her husband Shafiee, who was away from the house when police arrived, was arrested an hour later when he returned to the house. Approximately 20 police officers raided the home, seizing Bibles, CDs, photographs, computers, telephones, personal items and other literature.

The couple is still being held. Other details about their detainment are unknown.

Three Christians Released

Elsewhere, three Christians arrested on Dec. 24, 2009 have been released, according to Farsi Christian News Network (FCNN).

Maryam Jalili, Mitra Zahmati, and Farzan Matin were initially arrested along with 12 other Christians at a home in Varamin. Eventually they were transferred to Tehran’s notorious Evin Prison, though the other 12 prisoners were conditionally released on Jan. 4. 

Jalili, Zahmati and Matin were freed on March 17, though terms of their release were unclear. Jalili is married and has two children.

Iran has a longstanding history of religious repression. Shia Islam is the official state religion and is ensconced as such in Iran’s constitution. Every year since 1999, the U.S. Secretary of State has designated Iran as a “Country of Particular Concern” for its persecution of Christians and other religious minorities.

According to the 2009 International Religious Freedom Report issued by the U.S. Department of State, persecution of Christians and other religious minorities in Iran continued to get significantly worse.

“Christians, particularly evangelicals, continued to be subject to harassment and close surveillance,” the report states. “The government vigilantly enforced its prohibition on proselytizing by closely monitoring the activities of evangelical Christians, discouraging Muslims from entering church premises, closing churches, and arresting Christian converts.”

Report from Compass Direct News 

Iranian Pastor Tortured, Threatened for ‘Converting Muslims’

Posted on by

Arrest, imprisonment appear to be part of larger crackdown in Isfahan.

ISTANBUL, March 8 (CDN) — An Assyrian pastor the Iranian government accused of “converting Muslims” is being tortured in prison and threatened with execution, sources close to the case said.

State Security agents on Feb. 2 arrested the Rev. Wilson Issavi, 65, shortly after he finished a house meeting at a friend’s home in Isfahan. A city of more than 1.5 million people, Isfahan is located 208 miles (335 kilometers) south of Tehran.

According to Farsi Christian News Network, Issavi’s wife, Medline Nazanin, recently visited her husband in prison, where she saw that he had obvious signs of torture and was in poor condition. Iranian intelligence officials told Nazanin that her husband might be executed for his alleged activities.

Issavi is the pastor of The Evangelical Church of Kermanshah in Isfahan, a 50-year-old church body affiliated with The Assemblies of God that caters to the local Assyrian population.

During the raid, State Security police detained everyone in the house, later releasing all but Issavi and the owner of the home. Security officials also seized personal property from the home. Typically in Christian arrests in Iran, security officials confiscate all documents, media materials, computers, and personal documentation.

Issavi is being held in an unmarked prison, according to FCNN.

Last month’s arrest seems to be part of an anti-Christian sweep that is taking place across Isfahan. In addition to the politically motivated detentions and executions that have taken place after June’s contested election and subsequent nation-wide political protests, it appears authorities are rounding up Christian leaders.

More Arrests

On Feb. 28, Isfahan residents Hamid Shafiee and his wife Reyhaneh Aghajary, both converts from Islam and house church leaders, were arrested at their home.

Aghajary was at home with a group of other Christians when police came for her and her husband, who was not at home, according to Middle East Concern, a group that assists persecuted Christians. Police handcuffed Aghajary and, upon finding boxes of Bibles, began beating her.

The assault continued until eventually Aghajary was pepper-sprayed and removed from the scene. Her husband Shafiee was arrested an hour later when he returned to the house.

Their fate and whereabouts are still unknown.

Authorities assaulted another Christian visiting the house at the time of the raid when he protested the police action. Other Christians at the house were threatened, but no one else was arrested. Approximately 20 police officers raided the home, seizing Bibles, CDs, photographs, computers, telephones, personal items and other literature.

One regional analyst, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the Iranian government is set on crushing religious freedom within the country.

“The recent spate of church leader arrests provides clear evidence of the Iranian authorities’ desperate determination to strangle the growing church movement, along with all other forms of perceived political dissent,” he said.

February’s arrest was not the first time Shafiee has had run-ins with Iranian authorities. He has routinely been ordered to appear before police for questioning and then released. This arrest, however, was different. When family members contacted police on March 1, they were told that the couple’s case was under the jurisdiction of the Revolutionary Court and were turned away with no other information.

While the couple is imprisoned, family members are caring for their two teenage boys.

Frequent Harassment

Like Shafiee, Issavi has been harassed frequently by the Isfahan branch of the State Security police. He has been ordered to appear before the police many times, then arrested and interrogated. In addition, police have threatened members of his family and have broken into his house and taken items such as his computer.

On Jan. 2, 2010, police sealed the Kermanshah church and ordered Issavi not to reopen it. The church continued to have house meetings, and authorities charged Issavi with not cooperating with the government.

The Assyrians were one of the first ethnic groups in the Middle East to adopt Christianity. The existence of the Assyrian Christian community in Iran predates the existence of their Islamic counterparts by several hundred years. There are 10,000 to 20,000 Assyrian Christians living in Iran, according to unofficial estimates cited in the 2009 International Religious Freedom Report issued by the U.S. Department of State. The total Christian population is 300,000 nationwide, according to the United Nations. Most of those Christians are ethnic Armenians.

Isfahan has been the site of some of the worst religious persecution in Iran. On July 30, 2008, Abbas Amiri, a Christian man in his 60s, died in a hospital after being beaten by Isfahan security police. Authorities had arrested Amiri along with seven other men, six women and two minors during a July 17 raid on a house meeting. Four days after her husband died, Sakineh Rahnama succumbed to her injuries and a stress-related heart attack. Later, officials wouldn’t allow local Christians to hold a memorial service.

Iran, where Shia Islam is the official state religion, is known to be one of the worst countries for repression against Christians. The U.S. Secretary of State has designated Iran as a Country of Particular Concern every year since 1999 for its persecution of non-Shia Muslims, among others.

Last year, according to the International Religious Freedom Report, persecution of Christians and other religious minorities continued to get “significantly worse.” The state department placed the blame for this squarely at the feet of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Iran’s conservative media, who “intensified a campaign against non-Muslim religious minorities, and political and religious leaders” by issuing a continual stream of inflammatory statements.

“Christians, particularly evangelicals, continued to be subject to harassment and close surveillance,” the report states. “The government vigilantly enforced its prohibition on proselytizing by closely monitoring the activities of evangelical Christians, discouraging Muslims from entering church premises, closing churches, and arresting Christian converts.”

Evangelical Christians were required to carry church membership cards and provide photocopies to authorities, according to the report.

“Worshippers were subject to identity checks by authorities posted outside congregation centers,” it states. “The government restricted meetings for evangelical services to Sundays, and church officials were ordered to inform the Ministry of Information and Islamic Guidance before admitting new members.”

Report from Compass Direct News 

MEXICO: CHRISTIANS JAILED FOR ACTEAL MASSACRE WIN RELEASE

Posted on by

Supreme Court rules their rights were violated; violence threatened in Chiapas.

MEXICO CITY, Aug. 13 (Compass Direct News) – At least 20 men accused of participating in a massacre in Chiapas state in December 1997 left prison early this morning – amid concerns over threats of violence at their home communities near San Cristobal de las Casas – following a Supreme Court ruling yesterday that their convictions violated fundamental norms of justice.

The release of the 20 men, most of them evangelical Christians, came after Mexico’s Supreme Court ruled in a 4-1 decision that they had been convicted in unfair trials in which prosecutors fabricated testimony and illegally obtained evidence. Area evangelicals view the imprisoned Christians as caught between survivors clamoring for convictions and government police and military forces eager to shift blame away from their minions following the Dec. 22, 1997 killing of 45 civilians in Acteal village.

“Acteal is a double tragedy,” attorney Javier Cruz Angulo reportedly said after the ruling. “On the one hand you have an abominable massacre, and on the other more than 50 human beings imprisoned without proofs.”

The court will review the cases of another 31 men convicted in connection with the massacre, and six more will be given new trials, according to news reports.

The identities of those released were not immediately known. As 32 of those imprisoned for the crime were Christians and another 15 received Christ while in prison, most of the previous total of 57 prisoners are Christians.

“In prison, the majority of us converted to the Presbyterian faith,” Tomas Perez Mendez, 60, told El Universal before the Supreme Court decision; at press time it was not known if he was among those released.

He told the Mexican newspaper that he bears no resentment even though his imprisonment led to illnesses that contributed to the deaths of family members. “My wife is ill, my father and one brother died from sorrow at seeing us here in prison . . . I no longer feel anger or resentment against those who accused me, and I plan to preach.”

Authorities had told a total of 57 prisoners that they would be freed after their paperwork was reviewed, a source in Chiapas told Compass.

“Naturally, those prisoners who had been informed of their impending release last week are extremely disappointed, as well wondering if they will ever be released,” said the source, who requested anonymity.

Two brothers, Pablo and Juan Hernandez Perez, reportedly said that they have no home to return to; their house was burned to the ground while they were in prison. Another hoping for release, Javier Vazquez Luna, told El Universal he played no part in the crime, and that indeed his father was one of the victims of the massacre.

The Supreme Court justices stated that they were not ruling on the guilt or innocence of the men, only on the violation of due process.

“During the investigation, their constitutional rights were violated,” the court said in a statement. “The majority of cases … were based on the use of illegally obtained evidence.”

In recent months relatives of the imprisoned men ratcheted up citizen campaigns seeking their freedom, backed by many others. For several years Presbyterian churches have carried banners outside their buildings requesting justice for those wrongly convicted in the Acteal violence. The Chiapas government had said it could do nothing because the case was under federal jurisdiction.

Pressure to reopen the case has intensified each December with remembrances of the massacre. In spite of intense political pressure to the contrary, the Supreme Court finally agreed to review the facts.

Threats of Violence

Amid statements by survivors of the Acteal crime that tensions could heighten in the area – and a grim warning from a former leader of Las Abejas, a supposedly non-violent group sympathetic to rebel militants whose members were killed in the massacre – defense attorneys and family members of the released men appealed to authorities to provide security and guarantee social peace.

“A former leader of the Abejas made a public declaration that if the men returned to their homes, the Abejas would be waiting for them, and the released prisoners would be repaid for the pain they caused 12 years ago,” the Chiapas source told Compass. “Tensions exist, and with statements like he made, the government is nervous about letting the men return to their homes due to possible violence. At this point, there are still no violent actions, but the threat of an outbreak is real.”

At press time authorities had prevented the released men from returning to the Acteal area, keeping them in a hotel in Berriozabal after loading them onto a truck through a back door of the El Amate prison at 3:35 a.m., El Universal reported.

Initially the prison director refused to see the men’s lawyers when they arrived at El Amate prison in Chiapas near midnight with orders for their release, the Compass source said.

“When he finally relented and met with the lawyers, it was only under extreme pressure from the Mexico City lawyers who refused to be dissuaded,” the source said. “There was an extended time of wrangling before the warden eventually released the prisoners, only under threat of returning to the Supreme Court and the Human Rights Commission about his intransigence.”

The released men had been promised there would be a government-paid bus waiting to take them to San Cristobal de las Casas, he said, but instead they were taken to the hotel in Berriozabal.

“The men were to meet with government officials today in Tuxtla, and we are still awaiting word on their arrival in San Cristobal after some five hours of waiting,” the source said. “It appears there are delaying tactics, hindrances and lack of cooperation in the entire release process.”

Some of the released men were able to meet with family members, and most expressed desire to return to the Acteal area, but the prison director said that authorities had determined that it was not safe for them to go back to their communities, according to El Universal. Authorities have reportedly proposed the possibility of providing them land parcels to avoid their returning to the area of the original conflict.

The evangelical Christians convicted were serving 25- or 36-year sentences and had exhausted all appeals. Some of them say they were arrested because rebel sympathizers with whom they had been embroiled in years of land disputes named them. Others said they were simply nearby when authorities made random round-ups.

Of the 34 men originally convicted, one died in prison and another had been released as a minor.

The family of one prisoner, Agustin Gomez Perez, tried to visit him in 2005. He told El Universal that they had an accident on the way, killing one small child and putting his wife in the hospital for 20 days – leaving their other five children without parents during that period.

Controversy over who killed the 45 people has revolved around whether there was a “massacre” by numerous “paramilitary” villagers or a “confrontation” between a handful of neighboring peasants and Zapatista National Liberation Army rebels. Historian Héctor Aguilar Camín has argued that there was both a confrontation and a massacre, with some overlap between each, but that they were largely separate incidents.

Five confessed killers have testified that they and four others engaged only Zapatista militia to avenge the death of a relative, while the federal attorney general’s office charged that at least 50 pro-government “paramilitaries” descended on a relief camp hermitage full of displaced peasants bent on killing and robbing them. The testimonies of the five confessed killers – four others remain at large – agree that the nine avengers were the only ones involved in the firefights, and that the decision to attack the Zapatistas was a private family decision made with no involvement from government authorities.

They also agree that the sole motive was to avenge the assassination of a relative – the latest of 18 unprosecuted murders by Zapatistas over the previous three months, according to Aguilar Camín.

Government prosecutors unduly dismissed much of the testimony of the five confessed avengers, Aguilar Camín wrote in a 2007 article for Nexos, noting that the killers testified that state security forces were nearby and did nothing. He highlights the judicial irregularities of the round-up and conviction of the peasants – apprehensions without evidence or warrant, charging 83 people with homicide when only 45 people were killed and lack of translators and attorneys for the suspects, Tzotzil Mayans who did not know Spanish.

The Supreme Court pointed out those violations in its ruling. Arturo Farela Gutierrez, head of the National Association of Evangelical Christian Churches, praised the court decision.

“We are in the presence of a court different from that of 12 years ago,” he said, according to El Universal. “The court is strengthened without fear of anything or anyone, and it’s the court that democratic Mexico needs.”

Report from Compass Direct News