GH¢52m Judgment Debt: MartinAmidu drags A-G, Woyome et al to court



Apparently disgruntled by the lethargic performance of the prosecution in the Woyome judgement debt case pending in court, former Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Mr. Martin Amidu has climbed a step further in his avowed quest to help the State to retrieve the GH¢52million which he contends was wrongfully paid to businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome.
The former A-G who hitherto relied on series of press statements to fight his case, has now dragged his successor, Mr Benjamin Kunbuor, Waterville Holdings (BVI) Limited, Austro- Invest Management Limited and Mr. Woyome to the Supreme Court to seek some reliefs.
Mr. Amidu is seeking a declaration that the conduct of President Mills implying in an interview with Radio Gold on 23rd December 2011 that the
two international Business Agreements of 26th April 2006 between the Republic of Ghana and Waterville Holdings (BVI) Limited incidental to it created liabilities for the Republic of Ghana for which the Government of Ghana had to pay Mr. Woyome judgment debts are inconsistent with and in contravention of Article 181 of the 1992 Constitution and undermine efforts to defend the Constitution.
He argued that on a true and proper interpretation of Article 181(3), (4), (5), and (6) and the spirit of the 1992 Constitution, the Republic of Ghana cannot incur liability for any foreign or
international loan or expenses incidental to such foreign or international loan transactions without Parliamentary approval of the transaction for it to be operative and binding on the Republic of Ghana.
In a writ to invoke the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, as enshrined in the Constitution,
Mr. Amidu explained that his action was purely based on public interest -pursuant to Articles 2 and 130 (1) and 181 of the 1992 Constitution and not a personal action for which the requirement of a “controversy” or “dispute” or “personal interest” is required to ground a cause of action.
On this grounds he prayed the court to make a declaration that the manner in which the AG paid
sums of money in Euros to Waterville in purported pursuance of claims arising out of the said two agreements each dated 26h April 2006 is inconsistent with and in contravention of the letter and spirit of the 1992 Constitution, “particularly Article 181(5) thereof and is each accordingly null, void, and without effect whatsoever”.
Mr. Amidu contested the AG’s decision to order the payment of claims demanded by Waterville
and Austro- Invest premised upon a purported foreign or international financial engineering
agreement arising out of the two agreements of 26th April 2006 and/or any other international Business Agreement with the Government of Ghana which were never laid before or approved by Parliament, saying that it was inconsistent with
and in contravention of the letter and spirit of the Constitution, particularly Articles 181(3), (4), (5),
and (6) of the 1992 Constitution thereof and are according null, void and without effect whatsoever.
He also sought from the court, an order directed at Mr. Woyome, Waterville and Austro- Invest to
refund to the Republic of Ghana all sums of money paid to them severally or jointly upon or as a result of the unconstitutional conduct of the AG in purported pursuance of the two inoperative
agreements of 26th April 2006 or “nay other unconstitutional agreement as having been made
and received by them in violation of Article 181 of the Constitution”.
The former AG also took on the High Court which purportedly assumed jurisdiction in an action
commenced by Mr. Woyome on 19th April 2010 in Suit No. RPC/152/10 against the State, claiming damages for breach of contract in an international business transaction contrary to Article 181 of the 1992 Constitution and entered judgment in default of defence against the AG.
He contended that in spite of the fact that Mr Woyome and Austro-Invest did not have any locus
standi or cause of action to have commenced an action in the High court against the State, the then
AG (Madam Betty Mould Iddrisu), stood by and also the court upon glaring facts entered a default
judgement against the Republic of Ghana of the two (Mr Woyome and Austro-Invest) without any jurisdiction whatsoever.
He argued that the court acted without jurisdiction, therefore seeking a declaration that
“those proceedings and others consequent thereupon of the said High Court are null, void, and without effect whatsoever”.
He recalled that when almost all the foregoing matters came to his attention on 23rd December 2011 as the then the Attorney-General, he made
every effort in his official capacity including amending a pending suit at the High Court to ensure compliance with the provisions of 181 of the Constitution but could not achieve his objective before the he vacated the office on 19th
January 2012.
He argued that by virtue of the actions and conduct of each of Mr. Woyome, Waterville and others persons joined in the suit,resources have been and are being misappropriated and
misapplied without any constitutional authority whatsoever.
He stated that if the Supreme Court did not intervene to restore compliance with the provisions of the Constitution as pleaded, the defendants will continue to engage in their
unconstitutional conduct of demanding and paying interests and other cost and cause the Republic of Ghana further unauthorized loss of resources.

Source: The New Crusading Guide

Published with Blogger-droid v2.0.6

The 15 Smartest and Dumbest Presidents of the United States

Universally and instantly recognizable, the President of the United States – the heads of state and government of the world’s largest superpower, the commander–in-chief of the US Armed Forces, the omnipotent and oft-termed “Leader of the Free World” – requires no long-winded or flowery introduction. What does require clarification, however, are the notions of “smartness” and “dumbness”. What makes someone smart or dumb? Is it their level of education? Their talents? Their actions? Their achievements? Their IQ? Their intellectualism?

Apart from the obvious answer (that it is one’s ability to ask a string of rhetorical questions) “smartness” is a concept that is open to a range of interpretations, so it is conceded that the assessments made in this article are open to debate. However, to stifle Internet debate (a.k.a. “flame wars”) this article will not base its assessment on policy decisions made by the respective presidents, and, furthermore, accepts that the act of holding the presidential office in itself demonstrates some inkling of intelligence.

The Smartest

This section of the article deals with the most interesting of the presidents that can be deemed intelligent. Whilst some might bemoan the lack of Obama or Kennedy, who are undeniably intelligent, the presidents here either have madder skillz or achievements that outshine them.
 

Thomas Jefferson (3rd President, from 1801-1809)

No matter how one interprets “smartness”, Thomas Jefferson would unequivocally qualify. The principal author of The Declaration of Independence, Jefferson’s talents could constitute a book; the following catalog barely does them justice. During his teenage years at the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, VA, Jefferson became incredibly proficient in philosophy, mathematics, history, French, Latin and Greek. “Pfft-“, some hipster reader will undoubtedly say, “-Wikipedia knows all of those things- and Jefferson couldn’t Wikipedia like I Wikipedia!” In this obtuse and poorly articulated response lies a valid criticism – the ability to merely retain knowledge from books may not constitute smartness. But Jefferson was more than just book-smart: a polymath – which is a person distinguished in many varied fields, and not an obnoxious exponential equation – he was also an accomplished archeologist, author, inventor, lawyer, musician (talented in the cello, clavichord and violin) ornithologist, paleontologist, poet and speechmaker. And before you interrupt with some obscure insult, hipster, his architectural and horticultural prowess was such that he designed the University of Virginia (which he himself founded) and the Poplar Forest. This ridonkulous amount of talent was recognized by later president John F. Kennedy when he addressed 49 Nobel Laureates, “I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent and of human knowledge that has ever been gathered together at the White House – with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."

John Adams (2nd President, from 1797-1801)

Another Founding Father was John Adams, whose dinners with Jefferson (amongst others) resulted in the American Declaration of Independence, the screenplay to the 1996 blockbuster smash hit starring Will Smith, the document where the American colonies announced and justified their secession from the British Empire. With his polymathic fingers in every pie, it is unsurprising that it was Jefferson’s hand that predominantly penned the Declaration, but it was John Adams who championed it in Congressional debates. Adams’ oratory was so dedicated and effective thatJefferson wrote in a letter , “No man better merited, than Mr. John Adams to hold a most conspicuous place in the design. He was the pillar of it’s [sic] support on the floor of Congress, it’s [sic] ablest advocate and defender against the multifarious assaults it encountered.”  

James Madison (4th President, from 1809-1817)

Often included with the Declaration of Independence, in terms of historical and societal significance, are The Constitution and The Bill of Rights.  Another close friend of Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, was largely responsible for these two fundamental documents.  He was a major proponent behind the drafting and ratification of The Constitution, and he codified Jefferson’s belief of the primacy of liberty by tabling The Bill of Rights before Congress.  Similar to Jefferson, he was broadly educated from a young age, learning Latin, Greek, French, Italian, Spanish as well as mathematics, history and science. In 1769, he continued his tertiary education at the College of New Jersey (which was later to become Princeton), and his study of the philosophies of Aristotle and John Locke no doubt shaped his thoughts on constitutionalism and liberty. Despite slight dabbling in law, he never made the bar, which makes his drafting of the two most fundamental legal instruments even more noteworthy. As a result of his education and his contributions to the legal sphere, James Madison was ranked as the second most intelligent president in a study conducted by political scholars at the Siena Institute (Jefferson obviously came first). 

Thomas Woodrow Wilson (28th President, from 1913-1921)

Exactly 110 years after James Madison first set foot in the hallowed halls of the College of New Jersey, a young man named Woodrow Wilson graduated from there. This same man would return a few short years later, in 1890, to join the professorial faculty and shortly after that, in 1902, assume the position of President of Princeton. He must have liked the title “President”, for in 1912 he stood and won the presidential election. Wilson remains the most academically qualified president, being the only one thus far to receive a doctorate. His 1885 PhD treatise titled, "Congressional Government: A Study in American Politics" no doubt prepared him well for his life in politics, and in 1919, Woodrow Wilson was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for his leadership during World War I. It therefore seems…(puts on sunglasses)…that WWI really needed its WW. YEAAAAAAAAAAAAH! 

Theodore Roosevelt (26th President, from 1901-1909)

Woodrow Wilson’s ascendancy to the presidential office was as a result of his rivals William Taft and Theodore Roosevelt splitting the Republican vote . Similar to Wilson, Roosevelt, after whom the teddy bear is named, was also a published academic, writing several acclaimed histories. He was also a keen hunter and naturalist, journeying to Africa and South America where he stuffed and mounted many queer beasts (taxidermically speaking, ye of dirty mind). Roosevelt’s interests stemmed from his primary homeschooling, which resulted in a strange and varied academic aptitude: he was strong in history and biology, French and German, but not in mathematics, Latin or Greek. Apart from these academic qualities, Roosevelt had an incredible mind: he was said to have an eidetic (photographic) memory and could memorize entire books. He had a phenomenal ability to carry out several tasks at once, apparently able to dictate a letter to one secretary, a memorandum to another, and casually read a book, all simultaneously.  

James Garfield(20th President, from March- September  1881) 

Another president with talents so phenomenal that they are barely credible is James Garfield. He was not only the first ambidextrous president, but also multi-lingual: unlike Roosevelt, he excelled at Greek and Latin. That in itself is nothing to crow about – all the other presidents previously mentioned were proficient in multiple languages – but what was incredible was that he could write in both languages simultaneously – Greek with one hand and Latin with the other! Garfield’s freakishly awesome talent can only be described as pen-omenal.  

The Hybrids

As raised before, the notion of smartness is very subjective; depending on which criterion one uses, one can reach very different assessments. This section considers presidents who exhibited both smartness and dumbness depending on different criteria.   

Richard Nixon (37th President, from 1969-1974)

If one uses the Intelligence Quotient test as a determinant of smartness, then Richard Nixon is the smartest , with his IQ of 143 least ability to avoid making crucial mistakes. This is finding was evidenced by Nixon being the only president forced to resign from office.

Bill Clinton (42nd President, from 1993-2001)

Another president whose scandalous actions lead to their public humiliation was Bill Clinton, whose affair with Monica Lewinski and later perjury about the matter rocked, shocked and rolled the country. Whilst Clinton finished his term with the highest approval rating of any president since Eisenhower, it was put forward that the scandal derailed the election campaign of Al Gore, and in any case, the perjury resulted in the revocation of his license to practice law in Arkansas. However, whilst the affair may have been a dumb decision, or as Clinton describes it, “a terrible moral error”, Clinton is anything but dumb, when one considers his education. The recipient of many scholarships, the most prestigious being Oxford University’s Rhodes Scholarship, Clinton is an alumnus of the august Georgetown, Oxford and Yale universities. He graduated from the latter with a Juris Doctorate, and assumed a professorial role at the University of Arkansas before entering politics.  

Abraham Lincoln (16th President, from 1861-1865)

Unlike Bill Clinton, Abraham Lincoln had very little schooling – only having formal tuition for 18 months. By this criterion, one might judge him as dumb, but that would be jumping the gun. An avid reader, Lincoln educated himself, a process that he described as “stud[ying]with nobody.” Through his study, he managed to master law and was admitted to the bar in 1837. Giant in stature, he became a giant in statute: he soon developed a reputation for being a ferocious and formidable cross-examiner. This legal success indicates a man of prodigious natural talent, and it is arguable whether this makes him smarter than one who is formally taught. What may further inform one’s view on the matter is that Lincoln is the only president to have registered a patent: a buoyancy device to right ships in rough weather.

The Dumbest

This is the section you have no doubt been waiting for - the one that deals with the comparatively less talented presidents. Like tequila shots, the judgments proclaimed in this section should be enjoyed liberally and with a pinch of salt – and one should savor, rather than revile, the burn and the acerbity. 

Warren G. Harding (29th President, from 1921-1923)

Perhaps not a household name, Warren Harding is the worst of the first men; he has the ignominy of being ranked America’s least intelligent president.  Although the Siena study does not specify how it reaches its conclusions, a consideration of Harding’s conduct during his term yields much insight into this Nein-stein. His presidential term was rocked by scandals greater than either Lewinsky or Watergate: nepotism ran free and many of his friends thus appointed (known as “The Ohio Gang”) were involved in bribery and embezzlement scandals. Although the White House was not subject to the same scrutiny and transparency of today, the shady dealings were so brazen and gormless that they quickly came to light. However, the only thing dumber than these peccadilloes (and it’s not his middle name, Gamaliel) is Harding’s barely hidden consumption of alcohol at private parties in the White House. Why is this dumb? Well, Harding’s presidency coincided with the Prohibition. Also, being apparently handsome, Harding was nominated to try to secure the vote of women in the 1920 election (the first time women voted in America). When it became apparent that his wife was treated as a waitress at these parties, and that he engaged in multiple extra-marital affairs, he disenfranchised and isolated his key demographic.  

Calvin Coolidge (30th President, from 1923-1929)

With the sudden death of Harding in 1923, his Vice-President Calvin Coolidge ascended to the presidency. Despite such insightful statements as, “When a great many people are unable to find work, unemployment results”, Coolidge qualifies as one of the dumbest presidents in a very different capacity: although well educated, Coolidge was a shy and taciturn president, and in this sense could be considered the dumbest of all. There are many anecdotes that are testament to his silent nature, the best of which being an exchange between him and a Washington socialite. The socialite said that she had bet her friends that she could extract three words from him; Calvin replied coolly, “You lose.”  

Ronald Reagan (40th President, from 1981-1989)

Ronald Reagan had the complete opposite personality to the reserved Coolidge. A jovial, showy celebrity, Reagan acted in well over fifty films before entering politics. However, he features in this section for more conventional reasons than Coolidge – he demonstrated none of the characteristics that are traditionally ascribed to smartness. Talented neither academically nor musically, his spheres were the dramatic and the athletic. He could not be considered an intellectual, nor an author of any merit (his diaries, although wildly popular, are neither literary nor academic) and his only invention was this side-splittingly savage satirical joke. The most convincing evidence of Reagan’s dumbness ironically comes from the words of his supporters.Wrote Martin Anderson, one of Reagan’s longstanding advisors, “his drafts contain thousands of facts and figures. Sometimes he lists his sources in accompanying documents. In one case, for an essay on oil, he appended them. At times he cites his sources in the text.” Great Scott! The man used facts and citations: that should wipe the disbelieving smile off Doctor Emmett Brown’s face.  

Andrew Johnson(17th President, from 1865-1869)

Andrew Johnson became president after the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, and though those were both literally and metaphorically large shoes to fill, he did a particularly poor job of it: the Siena study ranks him as the third dumbest and all time worst president. Like Lincoln, he had no formal education, and like Reagan, his vocation (a tailor) is not one that is traditionally associated with smartness. Unlike either of them, he had no redeeming characteristics. Despite supporting Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War, he was the South’s most dogmatic and most bigoted proponent of slavery. Whether or not he was aware of the inherent contradiction, there was an ulterior motive for this union: the devious Johnson was trying to worm his way into the Oval Office (nothing to see here, ye dirty minds, move along). This motive was realized when he was announced as Vice-President in Lincoln’s successful 1864 presidential campaign. However, in dumbness par excellence, he appeared at the inauguration drunk, and his inaugural speech was cut short after he made abusive and inappropriate comments. His later presidency fared little better - stubborn and uncompromising, he alienated both parties and was eventually impeached. 

Gerald Ford (38th President, from 1974-1977)

A Yale Law School graduate, Gerald Ford was also an accomplished football player. Unfortunately, his smartness is closer to that of a jock than a judge. This was noted by his rival Lyndon B. Johnson, who accused him of “playing too much football without a helmet” and claimed, "Jerry Ford is so dumb he can't fart and chew gum at the same time." Moreover, it has been suggested that Ford’s honesty, in contrast to the Agnew-Nixon lack of integrity, made him the ideal presidential candidate. Perhaps, but it also makes him an ideal candidate for this section. An honest politician? That’s either plain naïve or an elaborate Cretan paradox. And for those unconvinced by this watertight line of argumentation, consider some of Ford’s words of wisdom: “If Lincoln were alive today, he’d roll over in his grave”, and, “I watch a lot of baseball on the radio.” 

George W. Bush (42nd President, from 2001-2009)

Of course we saved the best for last. It isn’t really necessary to justify Dubya’s appearance in this section –and nor do we have the space – but it’s good fun to reminisce nostalgically over his well documented failings. Like Ford, Bush graduated from Yale (although he only managed a C-grade average ) and also like Ford, perplexing, contradictory or painfully banal self-evident observations (yep, they are a real pain in the ass) emerge, unchecked, from his mouth. But unlike Ford, the sheer rate and frequency of these mistakes were so incredible that recording them went beyond cheap political points-scoring: they demanded cataloging for posterity’s sake, lest future generations forget or disbelieve their existence. A neologism had to be coined to describe them, and so “Bushism” entered the American vernacular. The Complete Bushisms, all 13 pages of them, are available here. As a result, the Siena study found him to be the second dumbest president of all time. And perhaps worse still, not even Google can save him from being considered just a tad slimy.

10 Most "Evil" Dictators in the World

“Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it” - William Pitt the Elder, British Prime Minister from 1766 to 1768.

Our nations’ leaders are supposed to be paragons of virtue and strength, ever striving to better the populace’s lot in life and aid their country’s economic and social progress. The reality, however, can be very different to this ideal. Below is a list of ten of the most evil dictators still alive today.

10. King Mswati III, Swaziland

Even though over 25% (some sources say the figure is perhaps as high as 40%) of his 1.3 million subjects are HIV positive, the highest per capita in the world, King Mswati III is seemingly unsympathetic, remarking that all HIV-positive people should be “sterilized and branded.”

In a slightly more moderate approach to the AIDS epidemic, he passed a law in 2001 which prohibits girls from having sex until they reach 21 and even forces them to wear tassels to highlight their virginity. A fine of one cow is punishment for any man who breaks this law. When Mswati himself broke his own law after selecting an under-age wife (his eighth), he simply fined himself a single cow and married her anyway.

Mswati’s incompetence as a ruler doesn’t stop there: political parties are banned, the death penalty can be issued for any crime, debtors’ prisons are extant, and ‘Royal Decree Number 2 of 2001’ allowed him to ban any newspaper that criticized his reign and overturn any court ruling he wished. Of this decree, Mswati said: “I must admit that when I signed this decree I did not read it at all. I just signed it.” The decree was later repealed following international pressure.

Life expectancy in Swaziland has plummeted significantly over the last two decades and now stands at a shocking 31 years, according to Medecins Sans Frontieres. In 2004, 1 in 10 households were headed by children. In a country where 25% of the population depend upon food aid, and where the health budget is a mere $15 million, Mswati III – a “dictator with few checks and balances” – still manages to have a string of luxury properties and expensive cars (the photography of which is banned).

9. Hu Jintao, China

The Paramount Leader of the People's Republic of China has presided over a decade of steady economic resurgence in China. Hu Jintao’s hardline approach has ensured that the country has blossomed into a major player on the world stage. But some of this progress has come on the backs of less fortunate people.

Hu Jintao’s leadership has an abysmal human rights record; total control of all media, the employment of a massive 40,000 ‘internet security agents’ to monitor web users and block news sites and search engines; 200,000 detainees undergoing ‘re-educative sentences’ in forced labor camps; thousands of executions every year (a figure which is more than the rest of the world combined); and arrests dissidents like Hu Jia (who was sentenced to 3 years in prison in April 2008) for calling for democratic reforms.

Hundreds of Tibetans have died and thousands more (including Uighurs) have been arrested, never to be seen again, many of whom face torture and “extrajudicial executions” once within China’s prisons.

8. King Abdullah bin Abdul-Aziz, Saudi Arabia

As leader of Saudi Arabia, King Abdullah bin Abdul-Aziz (pictured above with George W. Bush) is not only one of the world’s oldest reigning monarchs, but also one of the wealthiest, with a fortune estimated at $21 billion. His philanthropy is well known and he is seen by some as incorruptible.

But reports of the religious persecution of the Ahmadi (an Islamic religious movement founded in India) and accusations of human rights violations such as punishment amputations for criminals and substantial discrimination against women are well documented. Trade unions and political parties are prohibited, as are demonstrations, and dissenters can be imprisoned in solitary confinement without charge.

The internet is “comprehensively filtered” with blocks on hundreds of thousands of websites, such as those that discuss political, social or religious issues. No criticism of the government is tolerated.

7. Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, Equatorial Guinea

One of the smallest countries in continental Africa, Equatorial Guinea is also one of the richest. Following the discovery of large offshore oil reserves, the US has injected billions of dollars into the country, giving it the second highest income per head in the world. Not that any of the money reaches the population - 70% of whom exist under the United Nations Poverty Threshold of $2 per day.

A “great survivor among Africa's leaders,” Teodoro Obiang has been described as making “Robert Mugabe seem stable and benign.” He is believed to be a cannibal (or at least he perpetuates this rumor himself), eating his opponents livers and testicles. He is a “bizarre and brutal dictator” who has placed his relatives in the government’s key jobs and won the last three presidential elections with over 97% of the vote. The country's notorious Black Beach prison houses his opponents, and fictional coups are fabricated in order to justify Obiang’s foot soldiers cutting off ears and torturing citizens.

Despite these crimes, Equatorial Guinea’s oil allows the violent regime to remain in place. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice even welcomed Obiang to the US in 2004 and called him a “good friend.”

6. Islam Karimov, Uzbekistan

With an abysmal record of human rights abuses, stark lack of press freedom and an “institutionalized, systematic and rampant” use of torture in the judicial system (according to UN reports), Uzbekistan has one of the world’s most repressive regimes. Preserving many characteristics of its Soviet past, Karimov’s government maintains a tight control on the media, meaning criticism of those in power is strictly forbidden. Opposition groups have been outlawed (particularly Islamic ones), human rights activists have been thrown in prison and hundreds of protester killed during crackdowns.

Evidence of financial corruption was documented by Craig Murray, the British Ambassador to Uzbekistan from 2002 to 2004. He also revealed rather grisly reports of people being boiled to death.

Despite having already enjoyed the maximum of two terms as leader, in 2007 Karimov won a third term. Critics have called the election a sham - unsurprising when his opponents were unknown candidates who did not even ask to be voted for and began their campaign speeches by complimenting Karimov.

5. Muammar al-Gaddafi, Libya

Colonel Gaddafi, the self-named “Brotherly Leader and Guide of the First of September Great Revolution of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya” heads a “brutal dictatorship” which maintains an iron grip over many aspects of daily Libyan life. His regime dominates the press with censorship; possesses a Byzantine network of many thousands of informants and spies; publicly broadcasts the executions of dissidents; has established a variety of chemical weapons programs (even trying on several occasions to buy nuclear arms); has removed the studying of foreign languages from the school curriculum; imprisons anyone who is discovered talking to a foreign national about politics; oppresses political parties; sponsors international terrorism; assassinates anti-Gaddafi critics (providing bounties); and indulges in nepotism and the widespread embezzlement of state funds. The list seems endless.

In early 2011, large-scale political uprisings have taken place in Libya with the intention of deposing Gaddafi, and it was reported that the dictator had lost control of large swathes of the country. As of writing (mid-March 2011), the rebellion seems to have lost much of its momentum, and fears of a drawn-out conflict have arisen, as government force bombs and rebel-held settlements.

4. Than Shwe, Burma

Than Shwe’s Union of Myanmar is one of the world’s most repressive and abusive regimes. Forced labor, human trafficking, abuse of children, frequent rapes committed by the military and the suppression of any form of independent journalism mean it comes as no surprise that Shwe was ranked at number 4 on Parade Magazine’s 2009 “World’s Worst Dictators” list.

The kidnapping of children for use in the military is a common occurrence, with an estimated 70,000 of the country’s 350,000 to 400,000 soldiers being under the age of 18.

After working as a postman, Shwe enlisted in the Burmese army and steadily rose through the hierarchy, eventually becoming his country’s leader in 1992. His vast personal expenditure stands out starkly amid a country whose people endure an enforced poverty. Shwe even refused entry to foreign aid workers during the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis in 2008.

3. Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe

Mugabe rose to power in 1980 and has dominated Zimbabwean politics ever since. Although making much of his devout Christianity, he has been widely condemned from both inside his nation and the international stage. Described as conducting a “reign of terror” and being an “extremely poor role model” for the African continent, whose “transgressions are unpardonable,” Mugabe and his Zanu-PF party have always been able to snuff out opposition through mass intimidation and the use of violence.

In a country of twelve million people, some six million are impoverished and rely upon food aid. Violent land seizures, persecution of homosexuality, massive rates of unemployment (approximately 70%) and the lack of fuel all mean a desperately poor quality of life for many of his people, and with three-digit inflation, the World Bank has described Zimbabwe’s economic status as “unprecedented for a country not at war.”

All the while, corrupt government officials are alleged to pocket much of the income from the country’s rich mineral deposits.

Mugabe rebuffs his critics by calling them “born again colonialists” and affirming his nationalist zeal with quotes such as this one from the British newspaper The Daily Telegraph: “Hitler [had] only one objective: justice for his people, sovereignty for his people, recognition of the independence of his people and their rights over their resources. If that is Hitler, then let me be a Hitler tenfold.”

2. Omar al-Bashir, Sudan

Al-Bashir’s crimes are considerable. In 1993 he disbanded the military junta that had brought him to dominance and installed himself as Sudan’s president. His government oversaw the end of the bloody Second Sudanese Civil War but then started a new conflict in the Darfur region in 2003, acting with “specific intent” to ethnically cleanse the non-Arabs.

The mass killings by the government-backed Janjaweed militia, as well as widespread rape and the expulsion of millions of indigenous tribal people from their traditional lands, have resulted in an estimated 200,000 to 400,000 deaths so far.

Aside from being responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of people, there is further evidence that the Sudanese president has indulged in embezzlement of government funds on a massive scale (perhaps as high as $9 billion).

1. Kim Jong-Il, North Korea

Thanks to Kim Jong-Il's policy of ‘juche’ (self-reliance) North Korea is cut off from virtually all external trade, media and immigration. The entire country is swaddled in a clandestine shroud, hidden away from foreign eyes. North Korea’s human rights record is just as secretive, but some details of the nature of Kim Jong-Il’s infamous totalitarian dictatorship are known by the outside world. According to the UN’s Human Rights Resolution 2005/11, women are trafficked for prostitution or forced marriage; there are “ethnically motivated” mandatory abortions; torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishments; widespread malnourishment; public executions; the extensive use of forced labor in prison camps; and sanctions on citizens who have been repatriated from abroad, such as considering them traitors, interring, torturing or murdering them and their children.

The US Committee for Human Rights estimates that there are 150,000 North Koreans acting as forced labor in prison camps.

During the 1990s, an “immense famine” claimed between 900,000 and 3,500,000 people’s lives. Lack of arable land, major flooding and severe droughts all combined with the refusal of the government to accept vital trade and humanitarian aid to create a disaster on a massive scale.

Overseeing these atrocities is Kim Jong-Il. He is the Supreme Commander of the Korean People’s Army, the Chairman of the National Defense Commission and the General Secretary of the Workers’ Party of Korea (the nation’s ruling party since 1949). Also know as the ‘Dear Leader’ or the ‘Supreme Leader,’ he is an effective total manipulator of his citizens: there are tightly controlled with severe restrictions on religion, travel and even opinions and thought. To prove this point, many North Koreans actually believe that Kim Jong-Il and his father Kim II-Sung created the earth and can control its weather.

Political rights and civil liberties are almost non-existent. The North Korean people are propagandized and repressed more than any other populace in the world – perhaps more than any other nation in history.

Credit: brainz.org