Russian military executes Ukrainian POWs near Robotyne, investigation initiated
The New Voice of Ukraine – December 27, 2023
Shell casings on the ground in a trench near the frontline in the east
Russian forces executed Ukrainian prisoners of war near Robotyne in Zaporizhzhya Oblast in December, leading to Ukraine’s Prosecutor General’s Office launching an investigation.
Russian armed forces took three Ukrainian defenders captive during a skirmish with the Ukrainian Defense Forces. An hour later, the captives were shot by the occupiers, and the video surfaced on the internet, Prosecutor General’s Office reported on Telegram on Dec. 27.
The execution by Russians violates Article 3 of the Geneva Convention on the treatment of prisoners of war.
Law enforcement has initiated a criminal case on the fact of violating laws and customs of war, combined with intentional murder.
This is not the first instance where Ukraine has reported the execution of Ukrainian military personnel taken captive by Russian forces. In October, the United Nations documented six such cases in its report.
In early December, a video circulated on social media depicting two Russian military personnel shooting two surrendered Ukrainian soldiers with their hands held behind their heads. This was later confirmed by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Preliminary findings from investigators place the execution in the vicinity of Stepove village in Pokrovsky district, Donetsk Oblast.
In early September, Ukrainian Prosecutor General Andriy Kostin said that some 90% of Ukrainian POWs had been tortured, raped, threatened with sexual violence, or otherwise ill-treated.
Russian mass surrender in Zaporizhzhya sector after inhumane treatment and heavy losses
The New Voice of Ukraine – December 27, 2023
Russian military
A second group of Russian occupiers from the 71st regiment of the Russian Armed Forces surrendered on the Zaporizhzhya front, reporting mistreatment by the Russian command and significant losses, OC West Telegram channel reported on Dec. 27.
Russian military personnel spoke out about the “inhumane treatment” by the Russian command and significant losses. The prisoners claim that the command deploys groups of recently mobilized and untrained soldiers, along with those who have signed contracts, for daily assaults, according to the OC West report.
Commanders of the 71st regiment are accused of deploying groups of recently mobilized and unprepared soldiers, including those under contract, for daily storming operations. Prior to deployment, commanders allegedly mislead soldiers about their proximity to the front line, resulting in a lack of essential supplies and prompting surrenders, the OC West said.
The Russian command reportedly compelled soldiers from the 71st regiment to pre-record New Year greetings before storming operations, possibly to conceal losses from the Russian public.
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Dec. 19 that the exchange of prisoners of war between Ukraine and Russia has slowed down due to “very specific reasons” on the Russian side, suggesting potential diplomatic challenges.
Mitch McConnell is out of step with the majority of Americans. He must go.
Charles Shor – December 27, 2023
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., once legislated on behalf of the interests of Americans. Today, he is nothing more than an opportunist who will sell out the American people to foreign interests and maintain his post as the leader of the Senate Republican conference at the expense of legislative victories. He must go.
Early in his career, McConnell resembled someone more aligned with today’s Republican base. Back then, McConnell supported American jobs and fought foreign imports. To name just a few examples, he took a hard line on China, pressured South Korea to open its markets, increased minimum export tonnage, promoted tourism, limited textile imports and promoted pharmaceutical exports.
Today, McConnell’s key characteristic is being on the wrong side of each and every policy issue facing the United States. Whether it is immigration where he has pushed multiple times for amnesty for illegal immigrants, the war in Ukraine − which he calls the “No. 1 priority for the United States” − or federal spending, McConnell is out of step with the majority of Americans and frankly recalcitrant toward the priorities of the Republican Party.
One explanation for McConnell’s “evolution” begins with the name Elaine Chao, his wife of 30 years, a perennial Washington establishment fixture as secretary of Labor under President George W. Bush (2001-09) and secretary of Transportation under President Donald Trump (2017-21).
The Chaos own and operate Foremost Group − an ostensibly American shipping company that just so happens to ship more than 70% of its present-day freight to China and maintains ties with its communist government. Much of the funding for their fleet has been obtained through banks in China.
Additionally, according to a 38-page inspector general report, she directed her Department of Transportation staff to handle personal tasks and work related to her family’s shipping company, such as arranging interviews, editing Wikipedia pages and planning trips.
Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell and his wife, former Labor and Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, celebrate his reelection in 2020 in Louisville, Ky.
Chao used her leadership position to benefit not just herself but also her husband. According to Politico, she assigned a special Transportation liaison to work with McConnell directly, opening the door to $78 million in grants for McConnell’s favored projects in Kentucky, conveniently timed to coincide with his 2020 reelection bid.
While it is ultimately unclear how much McConnell and his family have profited from their positions of influence, we know the two received a gift in 2008 that was reported on McConnell’s taxes as valued between $5 million and $25 million. A McConnell spokesman confirmed to The Washington Post that this was an inheritance for Chao after her mother died.
China isn’t the only place we see his ideology bending in the direction of personal opportunity. In 2019, for example, Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley blamed McConnell for blocking bipartisan legislation that sought to lower prescription drug prices.
Why would the Senate Republican leader block legislation that was favored by 88% of Americans? The answer lies in his financial disclosures.
By December of the same year, $50,000 had been donated to McConnell’s campaign by political action committees and individuals tied to the pharmaceutical industry, according to American Journal News. Pfizer’s recent decision to contribute an unprecedented $1 million to expanding Kentucky’s Republican Party headquarters suggests that McConnell’s cozy relationship with the drug companies continues to this day.
What this brief rehearsal of McConnell’s shifting sensibilities and personal ambition shows us is not simply a hero who lived long enough to become the villain, but a man whose position has always depended on supporting whatever policies would benefit him and his inner circle.
McConnell would rather drag down the party than sacrifice his ability to use it as a way to increase his own power and influence.
Whenever opportunity knocks, Mitch McConnell will be the first to answer, even if it means sacrificing American interests at the altar of the almighty yen. It’s time we take away his key to the congressional kingdom and hand it to someone we can trust.
“Terrifying”: Republicans warn court that Trump’s “dangerous argument” opens door to more crimes
Igor Derysh – December 27, 2023
Donald Trump Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images
A group of former Republican federal officials on Tuesday warned a federal court to reject former President Donald Trump’s presidential immunity claim in his D.C. election subversion case.
The group in an amicus brief filed to the Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia warns that ruling that Trump is immune from prosecution would “encourage” future presidents to commit crimes to stay in power.
“Nothing in our Constitution, or any case, supports former President Trump’s dangerous argument for criminal immunity,” the brief said, according to Business Insider.
The Republican authors argued that Trump’s claim that he is immune in the case because he was president at the time is “especially weak.”
“The last thing presidential immunity should do is embolden Presidents who lose re-election to engage in criminal conduct, through official acts or otherwise, as part of efforts to prevent the vesting of executive power required by Article II in their lawfully-elected successors,” they wrote.
Allowing future presidents to commit crimes to alter election outcomes would turn the Constitution “on its head,” they added.
“These terrifying possibilities are real, not remote,” wrote the group, which included former UN Ambassador and Sen. John Danforth, former Reagan Solicitor General Charles Fried, and former CPAC Chairman and Rep. Mickey Edwards.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan rejected Trump’s immunity argument, writing that the presidency “does not confer a lifelong ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ pass.” The appeals court is set to review the matter after the Supreme Court last week rejected special counsel Jack Smith’s request to fast-track it.
Though the appeals process is likely to delay the case beyond the scheduled March trial date, legal experts widely expect Chutkan’s ruling to hold up.
“It’s kind of ridiculous,” Paul Saputo, a Texas defense lawyer, told The Daily Beast. “We’re not even going to have a 5-4 decision. I don’t think it’s going to be a close call. They realize that in order for them to really keep the country together, it’s got to be pretty unanimous.”
But Michael Waldman, the head of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School, acknowledged that there is “not much precedent” on post-presidential prosecutions.
“There have been so few presidents as crooked as Trump,” Waldman told the outlet, adding that the Justice Department’s policy against indicting a sitting president relies on the assumption that “you can prosecute someone after-the-fact.”
“Even if the Supreme Court doesn’t want a president always looking over his back… if they want to try to draw a line, what they can say is, ‘This was not just some random act he did while in office,” Waldman explained. “This was his attempt to overthrow the Constitution,” he said. “This was about the presidency. You can’t use presidential immunity… to cling to the presidency.”
Former U.S Attorney Harry Litman told CNN that the D.C. case poses “the biggest threat” to Trump because even with the delays the trial is likely to occur before the election.
“There is still a lot of space, even if we lose a couple months, for that to be tried and go to the jury, conviction, one might think,” he said. “Plenty of time before the election, though; not plenty of time before he secures the nomination. But, that to me, is coming at him with the most seriousness.”
It’s a trap! Small towns across US use traffic tickets to collect big money from drivers.
Matthew Prensky and Rob Johnson – December 26, 2023
Towns across America are once again relying on an old scheme to generate revenue: Turn their police forces into collection agencies to squeeze money out of the citizens they are sworn to protect.
From Texas to Ohio, municipalities are using law enforcement to counteract declining tax bases through the aggressive enforcement of fineable offenses such as speeding. A 2019 report estimated that nearly 600 jurisdictions nationwide generate at least 10% of their general fund revenue through fines and forfeitures.
Yet, the current initiatives erode community trust, harm public safety and violate Americans’ constitutional rights. And the scale, of both the number of tickets written and the amount of money collected, is astounding.
In Peninsula, Ohio, police used handheld speed cameras to issue 8,900 speeding tickets in only five months this year, generating at least $1.3 million in fines. That’s more than 16 tickets per resident in the community of 536 people.
The village, with an annual budget of about $1 million, collected $400,000 in fines. The private company that supplies the cameras, Targeting and Solutions Ltd., received more than $250,000 in fines issued to motorists.
Worse, Peninsula requires individuals to pay a $100 fee to contest a citation in municipal court. Those who can’t afford the fee are stripped of their constitutional right to due process. Even those who can afford the fee risk nearly doubling the cost of their ticket if the fine is upheld. Even if you believe you’re innocent, the rational thing to do is just to pay.
Other municipalities have enacted their own policing-for-profit programs. In Brookside, Alabama, the town of about 1,200 residents saw its revenue increase more than 640% in only two years, according to AL.com, after police began an aggressive traffic stop and ticket-writing campaign. Fines and forfeitures made up almost half of the town’s budget.
In Texas, Coffee City, with a population of about 250 people, hired 50 full-time and reserve police officers, who wrote more than 5,000 citations last year. The town collected more than $1 million in fines.
Moreover, these programs often violate other constitutional rights like protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, or the prohibition against the issuance of excessive fines.
Beyond these constitutional problems, a 2019 study performed by the Institute for Justice showed that a heavy reliance on fines or fees can reduce a community’s trust and cooperation with its police department. An unrelated 2018 study found cities that rely on fines solve violent and property crimes at significantly lower rates.
Nothing about these schemes has anything to do with helping the public. If it did, municipalities wouldn’t need to engineer bogus reasons to pull someone over or impose fees designed to dissuade individuals from appealing their tickets.
If Peninsula’s program was meant to promote public safety, as officials claim, the village would’ve done more to warn the 12,000 visitors who pass through town while visiting Cuyahoga Valley National Park. Instead, Peninsula warned its residents that the tickets would be coming, but provided no such alert to visitors.
Government shouldn’t treat citizens like a piggy bank
No government should be allowed to treat citizens like ATMs. The Constitution is meant to safeguard the American people from government abuses like this.
The Institute for Justice has sued dozens of local governments for infringing on citizens’ rights by collecting unreasonable fees through procedures that violate individuals’ rights to due process. In Peninsula, the institute warned village officials that they needed to bring their speed enforcement program into compliance with the Constitution or face a lawsuit.
These revenue-generating initiatives are a nuisance to communities across America. They abuse people’s civil liberties, destroy community trust and harm public safety. Luckily, the liberties enshrined in the Constitution can help Americans stand up to towns like Peninsula and force them to stop treating citizens like walking piggy banks.
Matthew Prensky is a writer and Rob Johnson is a senior attorney at the Institute for Justice.
Trump isn’t the real threat to democracy. Christian nationalism is
Herb Paine – December 26, 2023
Less than a year away from what is surely the most fateful presidential election in American history, warnings about the threats to democracy associated with right-wing extremism and Trumpist authoritarianism dominate media’s attention.
NACL’s mission is to “formulate model statutes, ordinances and resolutions based upon a biblical worldview for introduction in cities, states and the Federal government.”
NACL now has a legislative presence in more than 30 states, including Arizona, participating in the drafting of model legislation “to reestablish and protect conservative values in America.”
NACL’s initiatives to Christianize the nation and merge church and state (essentially dismissing the Constitution’s Establishment Clause) are inspired by Christian dominionism.
Its principles are “a world-changing strategy” to “bring Godly change” to America by transforming seven spheres of societal influence: religion, family education, government, media, arts and entertainment, and business.
As this year closes, the evidence grows that state legislatures and local school boards are the fronts on which the movement’s anti-constitutional and anti-democratic policies are being pursued.
How legislation played out in Arizona
In Arizona, the NACL’s objectives are reflected in a pattern of state policy initiatives that extend as far back as 2018 when Senate Bill 1289, modeled after the National Motto Display Act, established “Ditat Deus” (“God enriches”) as Arizona’s state motto.
That may sound benign, but, as a result, whenever ADOT sells an In God We Trust license plate, $17 goes to the Scottsdale-based Alliance Defending Freedom, an anti-choice, anti-LGBTQ+ organization that files lawsuits to enshrine Christianity in government and jurisprudence.
It would a) “give religious organizations blanket immunity from all civil and criminal liability, as long as they claim to be exercising their faith while engaging in the unlawful conduct” and b) forbid the government from imposing fees, penalties, injunctions or damages against these entities.
This year, Rep. David Livingston, who serves as chairman of Arizona NACL, along with 34 other lawmakers, sponsored SB 1600, which would criminalize an abortion clinic, hospital or medical practitioner who fails to “take all medically appropriate and reasonable actions to preserve the life and health of the infant who is born alive,” regardless the newborn’s likelihood of survival.
They pushed book, transgender sports bans
In 2022, lawmakers passed SB 1164, last year’s variation of NACL’s model Heartbeat Bill, that bans abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. It makes exceptions for medical emergencies but not for rape or incest.
The constitutionality of that bill is now before the state Supreme Court. However the court decides, the movement’s efforts to intrude upon a woman’s health and family planning choices will continue.
This year’s NACL legislative agenda corresponds to Civics Alliance’s “American Birthright Movement,” which prioritizes a curriculum that exalts America’s past as a Christian nation, its exceptionalism and its achievements, without reference to the nation’s history of repression and exploitation.
ban transgender girls and women from participating in girls’/women’s sports teams;
ban books in schools that discuss sexuality or race;
require schools to disclose information that could “out” LGBTQ+ students to their parents.
They have also introduced or passed legislation to undermine ethical investing strategies by corporations that address racial and gender equality and reproductive rights.
What’s next on Christian nationalist agenda
All these initiatives are a precursor of what is yet to come.
Pending actions include:
an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to recognize America’s Christian heritage;
the reinstatement of prayer in public schools;
the enshrinement of a “Christian nationalist interpretation” of American history in school curricula;
immigration restrictions; and
stronger governmental actions to restrict “immoral behavior.”
This Christian nationalism agenda is unfolding at school boards throughout the country and in the Phoenix area.
One was on the grounds that the teacher had presented her high school science students with sexually explicit material in the form of a PowerPoint (in fact, information about reproduction in a biology class).
The second had encouraged students and staff to wear transgender colors to celebrate the International Transgender Day of Visibility.
History has revealed the ability of small but tenacious and single-minded groups to overtake the majority.
We are compelled, therefore, amid a global anti-democratic trend, to be vigilant, speak out and vote!
Herb Paine is president of Paine Consulting Services, a social and political commentator, and former congressional candidate.
Why a 100-year supply? How Arizona got its famous, yet arbitrarily numbered groundwater rule
Ray Stern, Arizona Republic – December 26, 2023
Arizona’s 100-year water supply requirement came into sharp focus this year when Gov. Katie Hobbs announced news of a potential shortfall.
It came up again recently when state Senate President Warren Petersen publicly discussed why the requirement is 100 years and not some other number.
Petersen, R-Gilbert, said the number is arbitrary during a meeting about the state’s financial health in November. Petersen denied he’s planning, or has heard of plans, for new legislation next year to change the number.
The longtime politician hailing from a family of homebuilders said in the aftermath of Hobbs’ announcement he wants the public to know Arizona has “plenty of water” to continue building homes. He stood by the position in a Dec. 13 interview on azcentral.com’s Gaggle podcast.
“Why is it 100 years?” he said on the podcast. “Why isn’t it 105 years — why isn’t it 95 years? California’s (rule) is 25 years … You don’t go to the gas station and buy 100 years of gas.”
What is the 100-year requirement?
The Indigenous Hohokam, forefathers of the Pima, Maricopa and other Native American tribes, thrived for centuries in what are now called the Phoenix and Pinal Active Management Areas.
These parts of the state are flush with surface water in certain areas, augmented by the Central Arizona Project canal that moves water from Colorado River reservoirs to communities including Tucson.
They also contain untold acre-feet of groundwater, which experts say is still being pumped out at unsustainable rates. An acre-foot of water is roughly enough to serve two to three households for a year.
The amount pumped from the Active Management Areas is regulated because of the Groundwater Management Act. The law, passed in 1980 by the Arizona Legislature and former Democratic Gov. Bruce Babbitt, is still praised as one of the most forward-thinking water laws in the country.
It requires developers of housing subdivisions in the Active Management Areas to prove a 100-year water supply actually exists on the land before they fire up the bulldozers.
One of its goals was to steer the state’s fast-growing development into the Active Management Areas that have more water than other parts of Arizona. It also helped ensure the CAP canal would receive help from federal officials, who required a check on groundwater pumping.
The requirement has two major provisions. The first is that metro Phoenix developers must either obtain an agreement to build homes from a city or another “designated assured water supply,” which includes some water companies. These water-distributing entities use surface water to replenish the groundwater they use.
Developers outside of major city areas, but still in Active Management Areas, must obtain a certificate from the state Department of Water Resources showing that a property has a 100-year water supply.
The act doesn’t affect rural Arizona or parts outside of the management areas. It also doesn’t generally affect industrial, agricultural or commercial sites that weren’t built as part of subdivided lands.
Is 100 years the right number?
Fraudulent land sales in Arizona led the state to pass a law in 1973 forcing developers to disclose if there’s an “adequate” water supply on land they sell. Arizona officials determined a few years later that “adequate” meant water “continuously available” for at least 100 years.
Critics at the time argued for 30 to 50 years, saying that would be more in line with the 30-year mortgage typically used in borrowing money to buy a home. A former land commissioner called the 100-year requirement “unrealistic, arbitrary and capricious.”
State officials ignored their concerns and stuck with 100 years. The number was soon codified in the 1980 Groundwater Management Act, which banned development in the Active Management Areas where at least a century’s worth of water could not be proven.
Kathy Ferris, a lawyer and one of the architects of the 1980 law, said that she and the late Jack DeBolske, former executive director of the League of Arizona Cities and Towns, pushed for the “adequate water supply” rule of “at least 100 years” to be included in their sweeping new law.
“We really didn’t discuss the number of years,” said Ferris, now a senior researcher for the Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University’s Morrison Institute.
Water expert Sarah Porter, executive director for the Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University’s Morrison Institute, agrees with Petersen that the number “100” isn’t validated scientifically. But she doesn’t think it should be lowered.
“In the minds of greatest water planners and industry leaders, 100 years was the right time frame,” Porter said. “New water-supply projects have very long timelines because of the vulnerability of cities and how devastating it could be for a city to have a serious water shortage.”
Considering the growth in Maricopa County over the past 40 years, “I’m very thankful it’s a 100-year timeline.”
If it were only 40 years, for example, it might be tougher to convince people that buying a home in metro Phoenix would still be a good investment decades from now, she said.
Arizona’s water supply is well-managed
Porter pointed out that in most Phoenix-area cities, the 100-year rule gets extended every 15 years.
For now, scientific modeling shows the system can go on almost indefinitely in these better-watered areas. Yet outlying parts of metro Phoenix that require a 100-year certificate for development don’t provide the same assurance.
In Petersen’s view, the 4% deficit means that some areas “only have a 96-year supply.”
If Arizona’s rule required only a 95-year supply, or 25-year supply like in California, “nobody would be talking about how Arizona is out of water,” Petersen said on the podcast.
Yet the problem is that “some areas would be hit harder than others, especially in Buckeye,” Ferris said. She added she believes Petersen is “in denial” about the water supply.
“We have a problem in some places. California has a problem in many places. There is not plenty of water for everyone to do just do as they please,” she said.
With climate change, drought and fights over dwindling levels of Colorado River water available for all of the states that use it, water researchers want to see more regulation, not less.
“In 1980, 100 years was a big lift,” Ferris said. “Now I definitely think it’s not long enough.”
CEOs will finally admit next year that return-to-office mandates didn’t move the productivity needle, future of work experts predict
Jane Thier – December 26, 2023
vorDa – Getty Images
Happy holidays, remote workers. In software firm Scoop’s 2024 Flex Report, which includes flexible work predictions from an array of industry experts, one idea bubbled to prominence: CEOs might finally give up the effort on making mandated in-office days happen.
“By the end of 2024, executives will be forced to admit their RTO mandates did not improve productivity,” read the top-line prediction from Annie Dean, longtime flexible work evangelist and head of Team Anywhere at software firm Atlassian.
For years now, experts like Dean have said flexibility is key, and employees have made that priority clear on their own terms, too—often with their feet. So why do so many bosses nonetheless hold out?
“There are two camps on RTO mandates: Small companies and large companies,” Robert Sadow, Scoop’s CEO and co-founder, tells Fortune. Small companies, those with under 500 employees, “overwhelmingly” let workers choose whether or not to go in. It’s the bigger companies, especially those with over 25,000 employees, that tend to set mandates.
Dean went on to cite a recent Atlassian survey of Fortune 500 executives, which concluded that low productivity is expected to be a prime challenge for most of them in the coming year—as it’s been in years past. That’s despite the fact that nearly all (91%) of the leaders surveyed currently mandate some amount of in-office presence per week.
“It seems like many already know that these mandates aren’t the answer,” Dean commented. “Only one in three executives with an in-office mandate are convinced that their in-office policies have had a positive effect on productivity.” Rather than where work happens being of significance next year, how work gets done will become the “key cultural touchpoint.”
Dean’s held this line for over a decade, even before the pandemic forced everyone to be a remote work proponent, if only temporarily. Another leader featured in the report, Cara Allamano, who heads up people operations at management software firm Lattice—which, like Atlassian, is remote-first—agreed with her.
Return to office mandates will not provide a “quick fix” to productivity and engagement issues, Allamano wrote, despite how badly bosses want that to be true. Amid continued uncertainty in the larger economy and workforce, she added, company leaders will remain focused on productivity and performance next year. To that end, many bosses will, as they did in 2023, continue to default to dragging employees back into the office to “solve” what they see as engagement problems.
It will be a wasted effort. “RTO will not solve challenges in engagement,” Allamano wrote plainly. Instead, companies should extend that effort diving deep into their business needs, evaluating their overall approach to gauging performance and engagement, and then come to an agreement on the strategies that will align those two. Their RTO policy, she advised, “should follow from there.”
Innovative organizations are defined by how their people work—and what, if anything, keeps them from succeeding. Dean posited that efficient processes, leaders who are willing to disrupt the norms with new tools and AI, and well-run meetings will define companies instead. Leaders who actively seek out more effective tech will undoubtedly attract and retain the best talent. Any other way will be a non-starter.
Who needs an office anyway?
As in Dean’s prediction, Allamano said the real draw for workers will be companies who clearly prioritize flexibility wherever it’s possible. “Organizations with best-in-class management practices, led by HR teams who have centered their programs around what’s best for the business and managed towards that, will be able to navigate flexible work changes just fine,” she said.
She also noted that a recent Lattice report found that nearly half (48%) of employees said they’d consider quitting an otherwise great job if it doesn’t offer a satisfying flexible work policy. That dovetails with recent FlexJobs data finding that most companies would even take a pay cut to work a remote job.
For his part, Sadow doesn’t expect mandates to totally disappear among those big, insistently pro-office companies in 2024. Rather, he anticipates that they’ll give workers more flexibility on how to implement mandates. That may mean shifting away from requiring specific days or weeks to be in-person in favor of outlining a minimum amount of in-person time which each team can decide how to use for themselves. (Which experts say is the best approach to hybrid plans anyway.)
“It’s like bumpers on a bowling lane,” Sadow says. “Big companies may set bumpers, but they’ll let teams decide where they want to deliver the ball.”
Alexei Navalny says he is ‘doing fine’ in special regime Arctic prison
Euronews – December 26, 2023
The imprisoned Russian opposition figure Alexei Navalny, whose fate is causing concern in the West, said on Tuesday that he was “doing well” after a long and “tiring” transfer to a remote prison colony in the Russian Arctic.
His family, who had had no news of him for nearly three weeks, announced on Monday that they had traced him to a penal colony in Kharp, in the Yamalo-Nenets region, beyond the Arctic Circle.
They claim that the Russian authorities are seeking to isolate him even further, a few months before the March 2024 presidential election in which Vladimir Putin‘s victory appears to be a foregone conclusion.
In his first message on social networks since his disappearance, Alexei Navalny said that the 20-day journey to his new place of detention had been “quite tiring”.
“But I’m in good spirits, like Father Christmas”, he added, referring to his “beard” which had grown during the long journey and his new winter clothes suitable for polar temperatures.
“Whatever happens, don’t worry about me. I’m fine. I’m relieved to have finally arrived”, he said.
Alexei Navalny, 47, a charismatic anti-corruption campaigner and Vladimir Putin’s number one enemy, is serving a 19-year prison sentence for “extremism”.
He was arrested in January 2021 on his return from convalescing in Germany for poisoning, which he blames on the Kremlin.
He disappeared at the beginning of December from the prison colony in the Vladimir region, 250 kilometers east of Moscow, where he had been held until then, which meant that he was likely to be transferred to another establishment.
‘Special regime’ colony
According to the verdict for “extremism” against Mr Navalny, the opponent must serve his sentence in a “special regime” colony, the category of establishments where conditions of detention are the harshest and which are usually reserved for lifers and the most dangerous prisoners.
He said he had arrived at his new prison colony on Saturday evening, after a discreet journey and “such a strange itinerary” that he did not expect to be found by his family until mid-January.
“That’s why I was surprised when the cell door opened yesterday and I was told: ‘A lawyer is here for you'”, he said, expressing his gratitude for the “support” he had received.
One of his close associates, Ivan Jdanov, accused the Russian authorities of trying to “isolate” him in the run-up to the presidential election.
a group of officers walk inside a prison colony in the town of Kharp, in the Yamalo-Nenetsk region. – AP/Human rights ombudsman of Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous District
According to him, Alexei Navalny is being held in “one of the northernmost and most remote settlements” in Russia, where conditions are “difficult”.
In the West, his disappearance caused concern that was not entirely allayed by his reappearance in a very remote region.
On Monday, the United States said it was “deeply concerned” about Alexei Navalny’s “conditions of detention” and demanded his release.
Mr Navalny’s movement has been methodically eradicated by the authorities in recent years, driving his collaborators and allies into exile or prison.
In early December, the Russian authorities brought new charges of “vandalism” against the anti-corruption activist, which could add another three years to his sentence.
Vladimir Putin is aiming for a new six-year term in the Kremlin in the March presidential election, a term that would take him until 2030, when he turns 78.
Russia’s Navalny describes harsh reality at ‘Polar Wolf’ Arctic prison
Andrew Osborn and Olzhas Auyezov – December 26, 2023
FILE PHOTO: Jailed Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny at a court hearing via video link
MOSCOW (Reuters) -Jailed Russian opposition politician Alexei Navalny on Tuesday confirmed his arrival at what he described as a snow-swept prison above the Arctic Circle and said he was in excellent spirits despite a tiring 20-day journey to get there.
Navalny posted an update on X via his lawyers after his allies lost touch with him for more than two weeks while he was in transit with no information about where he was being taken, prompting expressions of concern from Western politicians.
His spokeswoman said on Monday that Navalny, 47, had been tracked down to the IK-3 penal colony north of the Arctic Circle located in Kharp in the Yamal-Nenets region about 1,900 km (1200 miles) northeast of Moscow.
“I am your new Father Frost,” Navalny wrote jokingly in his first post from his new prison, a reference to the harsh weather conditions there.
“Well, I now have a sheepskin coat, an ushanka hat (a fur hat with ear-covering flaps), and soon I will get valenki (traditional Russian winter footwear).
“The 20 days of the transfer were quite tiring, but I’m still in an excellent mood, as Father Frost should be.”
Navalny’s new home, known as “the Polar Wolf” colony, is considered to be one of the toughest prisons in Russia. Most prisoners there have been convicted of grave crimes. Winters are harsh – and temperatures are due to drop to around minus 28 Celsius (minus 18.4 Fahrenheit) there over the next week.
About 60 km (40 miles) north of the Arctic Circle, the prison was founded in the 1960s as part of what was once the GULAG system of forced Soviet labour camps, according to the Moskovsky Komsomolets newspaper.
Kira Yarmysh, his spokeswoman, has said she believes the decision to move him to such a remote and inhospitable location was designed to isolate him, make his life harder, and render it more difficult for his lawyers and allies to access him.
Navalny, who thanked his supporters for their concern about his welfare during his long transfer, said he had seen guards with machineguns and guard dogs and had gone for a walk in the exercise yard which he said was located in a neighbouring cell, the floor of which he said was covered with snow.
Otherwise, he said he had just seen the perimeter fence out of a cell window. He said he had also seen one of his lawyers.
Navalny, who denies all the charges he has been convicted of, says he has been imprisoned because he is viewed as a threat by the Russian political elite.
The Kremlin says he is a convicted criminal and has portrayed him and his supporters as extremists with links to the CIA intelligence agency who they say is seeking to destabilise Russia.
Navalny earned admiration from Russia’s disparate opposition for voluntarily returning to Russia in 2021 from Germany, where he had been treated for what Western laboratory tests showed was an attempt to poison him with a nerve agent.
In his social media post, he told supporters he was unfazed by what he was facing.
“Anyway, don’t worry about me. I’m fine. I’m awfully glad I finally made it here,” said Navalny.
(Reporting by Andrew Osborn and Olzhas AuyezovEditing by Angus MacSwan, William Maclean)
