lundi 29 avril 2013

Indignés. Images à l'appui...



c'est aussi un manifeste en images.
De Tony Gatlif.
Avec l'incontournable 
Stéphane Hessel.

Connu depuis longtemps pour son engagement en faveur des gitans, le réalisateur Tony Gatlif s'est, cette fois, tourné vers un autre univers.
Un univers qui n'en reste pas moins, lui aussi, dépourvu de frontières: celui du mouvement global des Indignados/Indignés
Le film documentaire «Indignez-vous!» (1) s'inscrit en effet dans la lignée du livre homonyme de Stéphane Hessel. 
Loin de se contenter de dresser le portrait d'un monde en dysfonctionnement, il fait émerger des espérances et des voies nouvelles...

Etat d'urgence

«Très vite, en lisant ce livre, j'ai vu un film», explique l'intéressé.
Exit donc, ici, l'écrit.
Et place au cinéma.
Une discipline qui, pour le réalisateur, se doit d'affronter le présent.
Plus que jamais...
«C'est qu'il y a urgence. 
Car le dérèglement du capitalisme financier précipite le monde et les peuples dans la crise.
Une crise de plus en plus dure pour des millions de gens, réduits au chômage et plongés dans la misère. 
Cette période sombre qui est la nôtre peut déboucher sur pire encore... 
Un déferlement de violence xénophobe et raciste.
Une guerre de civilisation, dressant les peuples les uns contre les autres peuples.
Que ce soit au nom de Dieu, de l’incompatibilité des cultures ou, tout simplement, de la haine de l’autre. 

Face à cette terrible perspective, le cinéma doit se battre, au même titre que la littérature, la musique et les autres discipline artistiques
Il lui faut réagir vite, sans, pour autant, renoncer à ses vertus et à sa singularité. 
De nos jours, le septième art a plus que jamais vocation et nécessité de se confronter avec l’actuel. 
Les progrès accomplis en matière d’enregistrement rendent la tache plus aisée.
Malraux ne disait-il pas que l’art était l’antidestin?
Le cinéma peut et doit prendre le maquis par rapport à la fatalité du marché. 
Question d’éthique et de volonté. 
Là où il y a volonté, là se trouve le chemin...» (2)
Celui, en l'occurrence, d'un reportage. 
Que Arte, en diffusant ce film il y a quelques semaines, nous présentait comme «libre et poétique». 
Et comme «docu-pamphlet»... 

(1) Gatlif Tony, Indignez-vous!, une coproduction de ARTE France et Princes Production, France, 2012,1h12mn.

10 commentaires:

  1. Bonjour, mardi approche !

    Vous êtes conviés à une réunion très spéciale du Comité Central,
    la veille du 1er mai,

    Sur ARTE, mardi 30 avril de 20H50 à minuit
    Des Chinois parlent aux Français...

    Un siècle et demi de bruits et de fureurs,
    d’enthousiasmes et de souffrances,
    d’erreurs et de prouesses.


    CHINE, LE NOUVEL EMPIRE

    Un film en trois épisodes de Jean-Michel Carré

    20h50 : La Chine s’éveille
    21h50 : La Chine s’affirme
    22h50 : La Chine domine

    RépondreSupprimer
  2. Bonjour,



    Je vous fais suivre en attaché la correspondance adressée par le Rapporteur des Nations Unies sur le droit à l'alimentation quant à situation catastrophique pour les droits humains dès lors qu'il y a production d'agrocarburants. Voyez page 6: "Based on these considerations, it can be concluded that the biofuels policy pursued by the EU is in contradiction with the objectives of its own development cooperation. While the Policy Coherence for Development Strategy and the EU Policy Framework to Assist Developing Countries in Addressing Food Security Challenges pledge to support smallholders, its biofuel policy promotes large-scale industrial farming that threatens the right to food. The EU is therefore jeopardizing, on the one hand, what it supports through its development policy, on the other hand. This incoherence also raises questions of a legal nature, as this trajectory runs counter to article 21 of the EU Treaty itself, which includes human rights as an objective of all external EU policies, including in the areas of trade and investment. The EU Member States are all States parties to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which imposes a duty to abstain from measures that could threaten the realization of economic and social rights in other countries."



    Pour ce qui est de la Belgique et, par ailleurs, des autres Etats membres, le citoyen que je suis souligne la nécessité de mettre fin au soutien public à la production des agrocarburants, sous toute forme de subventions.



    Alors que des ajustements budgétaires se profilent encore à l'horizon, je considère que couper dans ce type de dépenses fondamentalement nuisibles à la planète et ses habitants - et donc inutiles - est une bonne solution car cela évitera de devoir couper des dépenses économiques, sociales, environnementales et culturelles qui sont beaucoup plus importantes pour le bien-être de la société.



    Supprimer les subventions aux agrocarburants permettra de faire des ajustements budgétaires moins douloureux pour les habitants de ce Royaume. Les citoyens de ce Royaume le méritent bien.



    Bien cordialement



    Eric Watteau

    ./...

    RépondreSupprimer
  3. ./...

    NOTE ON THE IMPACTS OF THE EU BIOFUELS POLICY
    ON THE RIGHT TO FOOD

    This note expresses the deep concerns of the Special Rapporteur in regard to
    European Union (EU) biofuels policy and the considerable negative impacts this policy
    is having on the enjoyment of the right to food in a number of developing countries. The
    key recommendation is for incentives for the production of biofuels that threaten the
    right to food, such as the binding EU targets for renewable energy in transport and
    national biofuel mandates, to be reduced and eventually removed.

    The Renewable Energy Directive (2009/28/EC) imposes a number of targets on
    the EU Member States. Under the Renewable Energy Directive, Member States must
    derive 20 per cent of overall energy consumption, across all sectors, from renewable
    sources by 2020; ten per cent of energy consumption within the transport sector must be
    derived from renewable sources by 2020; and greenhouse gas emission reductions
    targets are set, amounting to 50 per cent relative to fossil fuels by 2017 and 60 per cent
    by 2018 for fuels produced in 2017 or later. The Fuel Quality Directive (2009/30/EC)
    establishes the specifications for transportation fuels to be used across the EU.

    The available arable land in the EU is insufficient to produce all the needed
    feedstocks for biofuels that compliance with the Renewable Energy Directive would
    require. Consequently, the EU Member States must outsource biofuels production to
    developing countries in order to meet the targets set. The impacts on these countries are
    overwhelmingly negative and are alleged to infringe on the realization of the human
    right to adequate food. The main concerns are as follows:

    1. The cultivation of feedstocks (i.e., agricultural raw materials such
    as maize, palm oil or sugar cane) to produce biofuels requires large areas of
    land, thereby creating incentives for the land leases or acquisitions in
    countries, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, where the rights of the
    current land users are often inadequately protected. The European
    Commission estimated that 6.6 million hectares of additional arable land
    globally was cultivated for biofuels production between 2003 and 2008. This
    trend has further accelerated with the sharp increase of biofuels production
    required to meet the EU targets. A broad range of studies, including from the
    United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Bank,
    show that the scale of the land acquired to produce biofuels in developing
    ./...

    RépondreSupprimer
  4. ./...

    countries is massive. A World Bank study, based on a review of 405 large-scale
    agricultural investment projects, showed that 21 per cent of these projects were
    for the production of energy crops.

    Estimates vary as to the areas that could be affected in the future: one
    report reviews different projections and concludes that ten million hectares of
    additional land could be needed by 2020, including five million hectares of
    additional land outside the EU. Another study has found that six million hectares
    in Africa have been taken over by EU companies for biofuels between 2009 and
    2013. Although debate continues on the exact amount of land that is at stake,
    there is no doubt that the land surfaces concerned are vast, and larger than what
    food-insecure countries can support. The land and water resources of the
    countries concerned should serve, in the first instance, the realization of the right
    to food the local populations; these populations should not be forced to compete
    against EU consumers, whose purchasing power is vastly higher.

    2. The increased pressure on land and water resources in developing
    countries extends beyond the areas dedicated to energy crops. As biofuels
    are produced in the EU (e.g., from rapeseed or sugar beet), additional land
    outside the EU is required to help meet its food needs. Palm oil imports to the
    EU have doubled between 2000 and 2006, mostly to substitute for rapeseed oil
    diverted from food to fuel uses.2 This phenomenon, referred to as indirect land-

    use change (defined as when land previously used to grow food or animal feed
    is turned over to grow biofuels thereby displacing the original land use into new
    areas), constrains land use in other countries. Many countries are dedicating an
    increasing portion of their farmland either to the energy crops production or to
    food production for the EU. As such, competition is increasing for access to
    land, water and other resources, with potentially detrimental consequences for
    food crops production that feed the local communities and thus the enjoyment of
    the right to food.

    3. The EU biofuels policy is encouraging speculation on arable land,
    particularly land that is the most fertile and located nearby ports or roads.
    By setting mandatory targets and subsidizing biofuels, the EU not only creates a
    heavily distorted biofuel market, but it also encourages an artificial land market,
    3
    boosting land values and transforming it into a profitable asset for investors. As
    noted in a report presented to the United Nations Human Rights Council by the
    Special Rapporteur, this encourages speculation on farmland, independent from
    the actual surfaces used for energy crops cultivation or for export crops that
    substitute for the reduced food crops production in the EU (UN doc.
    A/HRC/9/23, para. 31). As a result, threats to the security of tenure for
    smallholders are further increased, with potential negative consequences on the
    food security of local communities.

    4. Sub-Saharan Africa is a region particularly exposed to negative
    risks connected to biofuels production. This region is a particular focus for
    ./...

    RépondreSupprimer
  5. ./...

    new land investments for several reasons: land is perceived to be cheap and
    abundant; enforcement of regulatory frameworks is often weak; and most
    African countries enjoy trade preferences with the EU. However, targeting
    countries with weak land governance increases the risk of large-scale land deals
    turning in to actual “land grabs” where free, prior and informed consent of
    affected communities is not sought and human rights violations often occur. The
    risks of forced evictions occurring are not limited to Sub-Saharan Africa; they
    are becoming a worldwide phenomenon. Data collected by the Land Matrix
    Project show, based on a sample of 86 projects, that only in six cases were the
    former land users provided with the opportunity to give their informed consent
    to the shift in land use. For most projects, investments came as a surprise to the
    local communities depending on the resources concerned.4

    5. Public incentives for biofuels inject significant additional demand
    into the commodities markets and, therefore, impact prices significantly,
    both on international markets and on the domestic markets of net-food-
    importing countries. According to a 2011 report on price volatility in food
    commodities jointly prepared by nine international organizations, including UN
    agencies, “prices [of food commodities] are substantially higher than they would
    be if no biofuels were produced”.5 The consequences are particularly of concern

    for low-income countries with few means to shield their populations against
    price volatility. The EU Joint Research Centre, as well as independent research
    institutes, shows that by 2020, EU biofuel targets could push up the agricultural
    price of vegetable oils by 36 per cent, maize by 22 per cent, wheat by 13 per
    6
    cent and oilseeds by 20 per cent. It is troubling that the broad consensus across
    both the research and the policy-making communities is currently being either
    minimized or even ignored.

    High food prices on international and domestic markets can put food out
    of reach for people living in poverty, and are therefore a major threat to the
    enjoyment of the right to food. This is of serious concern because people living
    in poverty in developing countries spend a significant proportion of their
    household income on food; it can be as high as 70 to 80 per cent for the poorest
    families. Contrary to common perception, smallholder farmers are also
    negatively affected by high food prices. First, the poorest farmers are often net
    food buyers and, although they may profit from selling surplus crops on the
    market, they usually rely on combining different sources of income to feed
    themselves through the lean season. As such, for smallholders higher retail
    prices are a problem, not a solution. Second, small-scale farmers are usually in a
    weak bargaining position and are often forced to sell their crops at low prices
    even when prices on international markets rise, in part because of a lack of
    information and a lack of storage facilities, and in part because they face a
    limited number of dominant commodity buyers, who can dictate relatively low
    prices to the producers.

    6. The EU biofuels policy is alleged to favour large-scale industrial
    models of agricultural production that appear to offer limited benefits to
    local populations. It is sometimes asserted that the increased importance of
    ./...

    RépondreSupprimer
  6. ./...
    energy crops and the market growth for biofuels will benefit rural development
    and poverty alleviation in the regions from where the feedstock is sourced.
    However, this is not what typically happens under current conditions. Evidence
    indicates that biofuels production requires more capital-intensive farming, which
    favours large agricultural producers who are better connected to the markets.

    The United Nations High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and
    Nutrition, a body of independent researchers who were commissioned by the
    Committee on World Food Security to produce a study on this issue, concludes
    that “the bio-energy market tends to promote large industrial plantations with
    7
    efficient crop handling and processing”. This is also because economies of
    scale are essential for biofuels production to be profitable, and biofuels
    production by smallholders does not seem to be economically viable at present.8

    This analysis is supported even by studies that are generally favourable to
    biofuel development. For instance, a study prepared for the FAO on the
    prospects of biofuels production in Tanzania, while acknowledging that “small-
    scale outgrower schemes, especially for typical smallholder crops such as
    cassava and jatropha, […] are most effective at raising poorer households’
    incomes,” states that “supporting evidence indicates that these mixed systems
    may reduce the profitability of biofuels in Tanzania and reduce the reliability of
    9
    feedstock supply for downstream processing”. In other terms, involving
    smallholders in the production of feedstock reduces competitiveness due to the
    transaction costs involved and to the reduced economies of scale, making it
    unlikely that the expansion of biofuels production can contribute significantly to
    the reduction of rural poverty. In various country missions undertaken by the
    Special Rapporteur it has frequently transpired that the added value of biofuel
    projects is captured mainly by international investors and local elites, whereas
    the benefits are minor for the local economy and for people living in poverty.
    This contradicts the argument that the additional income from biofuels
    production can compensate for the increased import bills of countries that must
    procure from international markets the commodities they are not producing to
    satisfy their domestic needs.

    Clearly, additional employment opportunities that the development of
    energy crops may create cannot be underestimated. Such opportunities are, in
    principle, one of the most important benefits of biofuels production for local
    populations.10 However, evidence shows that few jobs are created by biofuel-
    related investments relative to other sectors.11 When an area where small-scale

    farming was practiced is replaced by large-scale and heavily-mechanized
    12
    monocultures, many of the former land users end up jobless and landless. For
    example, the Oakland Institute found that on recently leased land in Mali, which
    could conservatively sustain 112,537 farming families, the land is concentrated
    ./...

    RépondreSupprimer
  7. ./...

    ccellulosic feedstocks) as well as agrofuels produced from food crops. Based on these considerations, it can be concluded that the biofuels policy pursued by the EU is in contradiction with the objectives of its own development cooperation. While the Policy
    Coherence for Development Strategy and the EU Policy Framework to Assist Developing Countries in Addressing Food Security Challenges pledge to support smallholders, its biofuel policy promotes large-scale industrial farming that threatens
    the right to food. The EU is therefore jeopardizing, on the one hand, what it supports through its development policy, on the other hand. This incoherence also raises questions of a legal nature, as this trajectory runs counter to article 21 of the EU Treaty itself, which includes human rights as an objective of all external EU policies, including in the areas of trade and investment. The EU Member States are all States parties to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which imposes a duty
    to abstain from measures that could threaten the realization of economic and social rights in other countries.

    The sustainability criteria laid out in article 17 of the Renewable Energy Directive to ensure that biofuels produced are counted toward the greenhouse gas emission reductions targets only under certain conditions are purely environmental and do not address social and human rights impacts. Current sustainability criteria are therefore inadequate or non-existent with regard to the interests of smallholder farming, local food security and the enjoyment of the right to food. Although the monitoring and
    bi-annual reporting on social issues proposed in the Renewable Energy Directive is a useful tool, it is only reactive and cannot prevent violations. The first such Renewable Energy Progress Report (published on 27 March 2013) purportedly examines the
    sustainability of biofuels. Yet, it fails to account for the full impacts of biofuels on food prices, and, by its own assessment, is unable to take into account impacts on land use rights. The anticipated report from the European Commission's DG Development and Cooperation on biofuels and Policy Coherence for Development must not shy away from these questions. Pending such a report, the European Union is yet to conduct an adequate assessment of the impact of the EU biofuels policy that would take into account social and human rights impacts and, in particular, the impacts of the policy on the realization of the right to food.

    Taking into account the available evidence, and with a view to avoiding negative impacts on the right to food, the direction in which biofuel policy must go is clear. Public incentives for the production of food crop-based biofuels must be reduced and
    eventually removed, while only those advanced biofuels that do not compete with food production for land or other resources should be incentivised. The European Commission’s proposed five per cent cap for counting food crop-based biofuels towards the ten per cent target for renewable energy in transport fuels is therefore a step in the right direction. However, given the array of incentives for biofuels production, and the risk they pose to food security, further measures should be considered, such as equivalent capping of food-based biofuels in meeting the terms of the Fuel Quality Directive (2009/30/EC) and the abolition of national biofuels blending mandates.

    All such proposals must address the core problem, namely the very existence of public incentives for biofuels that send a signal to markets that speculation on farmland is bound to continue and that investments in energy crops are worth pursuing.

    RépondreSupprimer
  8. Ruser avec ses principes « de précaution »

    L’enfant occidental est devenu rare. Les couples se forment plus tardivement et sur d’autres bases que naguère[1]. Les études, puis la volonté de faire carrière, prennent souvent le pas sur la vie affective et familiale. Selon le sociologue Paul Yonnet[2], le recul de la mortalité maternelle et infantile ainsi que l’avènement de techniques efficaces de contraception au cours du XXème siècle, ont donné à l’enfant un statut nouveau. Il est désiré et semble être un bien suprême. Ainsi, les personnes qui ne peuvent enfanter pour des raisons physiologiques ou médicales, éprouvent souvent frustration et désespoir. Ils se sentent privés de ce « droit », apparu insidieusement au cours des dernières années, le « droit à l’enfant ». Celui-ci place alors dans l’imaginaire collectif, la parentalité comme un droit intangible. Ce « droit », serait sur le même plan que d’autres droits, tels celui au logement ou encore celui à une allocation sociale. Grâce aux avancées de la procréation médicalement assistée (PMA), chacun pense pouvoir obtenir une descendance et ne pas être frustré de l’amour de sa progéniture. Puisque l’on peut, le « droit à l’enfant » s’exprime et l'existence d'un droit produit des revendications. Mais il y a là un mauvais tour joué par le verbe « pouvoir » en français contrairement à d’autres langues : il ne distingue pas la possibilité technique de faire, de la permission légale d’agir. C’est dans ce contexte que s’inscrit la question d’actualité de l’accès à la PMA pour les couples homosexuels, que l’on pourrait étendre aux femmes ou aux hommes célibataires.
    ./...

    RépondreSupprimer
  9. ./...

    En vertu du principe d’égalité faut-il répondre techniquement à ce désir d’enfant et ne pas laisser exclusivement à un homme et une femme en couple, le droit de donner la vie ? Avant de prendre position pour l’une ou l’autre de ces deux visions de société, il faudrait s’assurer que les questions posées sur l’évolution psychique et sociétale des enfants nés dans ces nouvelles conditions, aient trouvé réponse. Or, même si régulièrement des statistiques, souvent fragiles, des histoires de vie et de petites séries sont rapportées pour montrer que ces enfants ne sont pas différents des autres, un doute persiste. Les positions contradictoires prises sur ce sujet par des psychanalystes, des philosophes ou des sociologues de renom en témoignent. Malgré cette incertitude, les tenants de la généralisation de la PMA minimisent dans l'argumentation, le discernement philosophique et les considérations anthropologiques ou spirituelles, au profit de l'émotionnel qui tiennent alors lieu d'arguments. Ils acceptent, sur l’autel du « droit à l’enfant », une inconnue qui peut éventuellement perturber l’avenir même de ces enfants à naître et à vivre dans des conditions inhabituelles. On ne sait pas précisément ce que le « droit à l’enfant » convoqué pour satisfaire ce puissant désir d’enfant, peut avoir comme effets sur sa vie future. Alors, ne sachant pas répondre à cette question, la société semble prête à « ruser », selon la tournure du poète Aimé Césaire[3], avec certains des principes de la recherche clinique : puisqu’il y a ici un doute, la situation mériterait les mêmes attentions que celles habituellement exigées dans ce domaine. Car enfin, pourquoi faut-il passer devant un pointilleux Comité de Protection des Personnes pour pouvoir donner le moindre placebo à un sujet qui consent à participer à une étude clinique et ne rien exiger de tel ici ? Pourquoi le principe de précaution qui face à une incertitude conseille la prudence plutôt que l’audace et qui s’impose dès qu’une suspicion de risque pour la santé est évoquée, n’est-il pas invoqué dans ce cas précis ? Il n’y a pas de réponse univoque à ces questions. Cependant, en suggérant implicitement que l’enfant n’a pas les droits habituellement accordés aux personnes, il est à craindre qu’il soit pris avant tout comme un dû, comme une chose destinée à combler un manque. [4]

    Michel Hasselmann, Professeur de réanimation médicale, Président de l'ERERAL (Espace de Réflexion Éthique Région Alsace)


    [1] Luc Ferry. La révolution de l'amour. Pour une spiritualité laïque. Plon, col. Essai, Paris 2010
    [2] Paul Yonnet. Le recul de la mort. L’avènement de l’individu contemporain. Gallimard, Paris 2006
    [3] Aimé Césaire. Discours sur le colonialisme. Présence Africaine, col. Poche, Paris 2000
    [4] Ce message reprend l'éditorial de l'édition du mois de mai 2013 de la lettre du CEERE (n°63): http://ethique-alsace.unistra.fr/index.php?id=4564

    CEERE - Centre Européen d'Enseignement et de Recherche en Éthique
    ceere@u-strasbg.fr - tél. +33 (0)3 68 85 39 68
    http://ethique-alsace.unistra.fr
    Adresse postale : CEERE - Faculté de médecine - 4 Rue Kirschleger - F - 67085 Strasbourg cedex
    Adresse de localisation du CEERE : Hôpital civil - 1 Place de lHôpital Bât. dAnatomie (Entrée par l'arrière du bâtiment)

    RépondreSupprimer
  10. Belgique

    La plateforme « Justice pour tous », dont fait partie le « Syndicat des Avocats pour la Démocratie », a mobilisé une large coalition d'organisations autour d’une pétition intitulée « Halte au démantèlement de l’aide juridique ». Dans cette pétition, nous demandons le renforcement du droit à l’aide juridique, d’autant plus nécessaire en ces temps de crise économique, et nous nous opposons à la limitation de l’accès à la justice. La pétition a été communiquée ce vendredi 26 avril à la presse.

    Nous vous invitons à signer cette pétition de manière individuelle ou au nom des organisations dont vous faites partie et vous invitons également à la diffuser aussi largement que possible à travers les membres de vos organisations et vos connaissances, via des sites web, des lettres d’information, … La pétition peut être signée via le lien : http://www.petitions24.net/halte_au_demantelement_du_droit_a_laide_juridique ou http://www.petities24.com/stop_afbraak_juridische_bijstand

    Nous voulons récolter un maximum de signatures et nous vous tiendrons au courant des prochaines actions que nous allons organiser dans le cadre de la plateforme « Justice pour tous ».

    Nous vous remercions d’avance pour votre soutien, en espérant que ces initiatives porteront leurs fruits.

    Pour le Syndicat des Avocats pour la Démocratie,



    Pierre ROBERT

    Avocat

    RépondreSupprimer