My reflections on NGOs and not only

[یاسمینه]

Many times I thought about the various organizations that were intended to help people in Afghanistan or in onther countries. And I have to admit not always I can uderstand what they do.
Because for me it is difficult to understand that so much money is spent on infrastructure to organize aid. I mean offices, cars, equipment, transportation, life insurance and ensuring safety of workers and organizations on the spot. I feel that functioning of organizations absorbs much money than the the value of actually provided aid. For sure there is some data about it but I don't know details.

The money spent on the NATO troops and their equipment it's simply a disgrace for a so-called civilized world.

I've have just watched a documentary that reveals the unknown face of the Grameen Bank and other microfinance banking institutions in Bangladesh, India and Mexico. Shame.

I wonder if it is possible to help and not to participate in embezzlement and wasting money.

[retro]

The money spent on the NATO troops and their equipment it's simply a disgrace for a so-called civilized world.

NATO is an Army, not a international development agency and war is a racket. What Afghanistan, needs far greater investment and better governance, not charity.

[tor_khan]

Yasmeenah - it is fairly widely acknowledged that there is 'wastage' in terms of money spent on NGOs. In some respects it's a Catch 22 situation where without aid workers on the ground (with their layers of protection), aid money would be swallowed by corrupt local officials and never even reach the intended targets.

Since 2001 US invasion, the sudden rise of Afghans with beach front properties in Dubai has occasionally picked up some media attention, though mostly it is accepted, and whilst it is true that NGOs sometimes behave questionably, they often have to work through governments and officials on who themselves lack accountability.

[Admin Khan]

Yasmeenah - it is fairly widely acknowledged that there is 'wastage' in terms of money spent on NGOs. In some respects it's a Catch 22 situation where without aid workers on the ground (with their layers of protection), aid money would be swallowed by corrupt local officials and never even reach the intended targets.

Since 2001 US invasion, the sudden rise of Afghans with beach front properties in Dubai has occasionally picked up some media attention, though mostly it is accepted, and whilst it is true that NGOs sometimes behave questionably, they often have to work through governments and officials on who themselves lack accountability.

Tor_Khan,
It seems like corruption runs in the blood of these Masoods. Seriously, how can the brother of the so-called "national hero of Afghanistan"[Ahmad Shah Masood] rob the nation for $52million?

As far as NGOs go, there are some terrific organizations that have done work which is amazing. Most however, are behind the very corruption that we all speak bad of. The problem is sub-contractors. A project gets destroyed in terms of quality when you have a handful of subcontractors.

[Alchemist]

NGO's are in service of western Imperialism.

colin Powell, in 2001, described NGO's as " a force multiplier ...an important part of the combat team".

It is a part of their counter insurgency strategy - leverage the coercive...establish a safe and secure environment then fund the NGOs and and private contractors to do the stabilization work.

The NGO's deflect the discontent of the people from the macro economical power structures towards the micro socio political level projects such as popular education. It becomes a vehicle for upward social mobility for the ambitious educated classes of the populace.

Even though they claim to be apolitical their own orientation is neo-liberal and with a dash of feminism. They mostly act as a vent for popular uprising and social transformation towards self -help projects. They take away the intellectuals who would use their rhetorical and organizational skills in the service of the NGOs and get sent over seas to multinational conferences to give testimonials. Then they encourage the locals to adapt to the reality of neo-liberalism - Kabul is a prime example of this. The perks and higher pay that the NGO's give ..who could resist?

In the old days the Empires used to fund the churches to preach their own dogmas, now it is the so called - non governmental organizations..and they are hardly "non governmental"... most of those working in NGOs end up working for government and vice versa. Their organization is hierarchical and elitists and to secure the funds they have to shape their proposals according to their Western Donor's needs, who will then evaluate their "progress". They compete with local radical political movements over the same disenfranchised lot. Their ideology and method sets it out such that the problems of the poor is that they lack initiative and not that their country is being exploited by international banksters. Most of these NGO's are set up to only deal with the crises, because that is when the donations start to pour in. They are based on corporate managerial systems so they focus on the big waves of charity that pour when a famine hits but they can't prevent one from happening in the first place or even predict when crises would happen.

Most of their polemics weighs heavily on Political identity...patriarchy, domestic violence, divorce, family planning ...but they are blind to their own male white dominated IMF funders and their exploitation of sweatshop workers. It's a dog and pony show for the haves about the have nots...

Think about it... despite the thousands of NGOs that have been established why hasn't the situation of third world countries changed for the better? Instead for the worse!

NGOs have always backed "Humanitarian Intervention"...coincidently when their donor countries had their navy and army at the shores and boarders of that particular country - libya.

[faye]

the grameen bank did a lot of good work helping people start small businesses. mostly women, as they were found, over time, to be the most reliable in repayments and working to take care of the whole family.
there might be a list as to the best charities as far as spending the least on the officework.
there is a lot in what you say too, alchemist. i think we read the same 'conspiracy theorist' websites, lol.

[emkhan]

NGO's are in service of western Imperialism.

colin Powell, in 2001, described NGO's as " a force multiplier ...an important part of the combat team".

It is a part of their counter insurgency strategy - leverage the coercive...establish a safe and secure environment then fund the NGOs and and private contractors to do the stabilization work.

The NGO's deflect the discontent of the people from the macro economical power structures towards the micro socio political level projects such as popular education. It becomes a vehicle for upward social mobility for the ambitious educated classes of the populace.

Even though they claim to be apolitical their own orientation is neo-liberal and with a dash of feminism. They mostly act as a vent for popular uprising and social transformation towards self -help projects. They take away the intellectuals who would use their rhetorical and organizational skills in the service of the NGOs and get sent over seas to multinational conferences to give testimonials. Then they encourage the locals to adapt to the reality of neo-liberalism - Kabul is a prime example of this. The perks and higher pay that the NGO's give ..who could resist?

In the old days the Empires used to fund the churches to preach their own dogmas, now it is the so called - non governmental organizations..and they are hardly "non governmental"... most of those working in NGOs end up working for government and vice versa. Their organization is hierarchical and elitists and to secure the funds they have to shape their proposals according to their Western Donor's needs, who will then evaluate their "progress". They compete with local radical political movements over the same disenfranchised lot. Their ideology and method sets it out such that the problems of the poor is that they lack initiative and not that their country is being exploited by international banksters. Most of these NGO's are set up to only deal with the crises, because that is when the donations start to pour in. They are based on corporate managerial systems so they focus on the big waves of charity that pour when a famine hits but they can't prevent one from happening in the first place or even predict when crises would happen.

Most of their polemics weighs heavily on Political identity...patriarchy, domestic violence, divorce, family planning ...but they are blind to their own male white dominated IMF funders and their exploitation of sweatshop workers. It's a dog and pony show for the haves about the have nots...

Think about it... despite the thousands of NGOs that have been established why hasn't the situation of third world countries changed for the better? Instead for the worse!

NGOs have always backed "Humanitarian Intervention"...coincidently when their donor countries had their navy and army at the shores and boarders of that particular country - libya.

I appreciate you far sight vision. NGOs have their hidden agendas which they propagate in our societies through special techniques and different ways.

[Alchemist]

the grameen bank did a lot of good work helping people start small businesses. mostly women, as they were found, over time, to be the most reliable in repayments and working to take care of the whole family.
there might be a list as to the best charities as far as spending the least on the officework.
there is a lot in what you say too, alchemist. i think we read the same 'conspiracy theorist' websites, lol.

Published in the journal of Cultural Dynamics - a scholary journal ...not like you would know what that is:

D E M Y S T I F Y I N G M I C R O - C R E D I T

The Grameen Bank, NGOs, and Neoliberalism in Bangladesh
LAMIA KARIM
University of Oregon, USA

....




The grassroots globalization I studied in Bangladesh is contrary to
Appadurai’s model. It works through and not against corporate capital,
donors, state, NGOs, and members of civil society, and creates complex
new maps of social interdependencies that are laden with the fi nancial
investments of multiple actors at the local, national, and global levels. Grassroots globalization weakens the sovereignty of the patriarchal home family,
and replaces it with the sovereignty of the market through NGOs, contracts,
courts, juridical subjects, and the remaking of subjects as a community police
to safeguard their investments. The developmental NGO is the purveyor
of this new economic sovereignty that is represented by corporate capital
interests and local institutional interests (NGOs), and is an architect of
neoliberalism within a modernist developmental discourse of poor women’s
empowerment through the market.
Neoliberalism as an ideology rests on the idea that human welfare is best
served by the withdrawal of the state from welfarist policies (Harvey, 2005: 64).


....
The Economy of Shame
The use of shaming as an instrument of social control of the poor, particularly of poor women, has a long history in rural Bangladesh. Women are
the traditional custodians of family honor. The shaming of men through
their women (mothers, wives, daughters) is a pre-existing social practice.
In a face-to-face society, one’s ability to maintain honor (the protection of
one’s good name, the honor of the womenfolk, and the patriline) structures
one’s social acceptability. To lose face is the ultimate mark of dishonor.
Rural discourse is structured around notions of honor, and any trespassing
behavior (a woman seen talking to a non-kin man, for example) is spoken
of in terms of the protection of the honor code, i.e. our women do not do X
because we are honorable people. For the poor, the discourse of honor is a
symbolic covenant with God. It is a moral resource through which they view
themselves as morally superior to rich and urban people.
As I illustrate in this article, the economy of shame refers to the appropriation of pre-existing forms of shaming by a modern institution, the NGO, which
instrumentally deploys various forms of shaming in its own capitalist welfare,
i.e. the recovery of loans. Shaming takes many forms in Bangladeshi rural
society, from rude language to regulation of women’s sexuality to disciplining
of poor people through accusations of sexual infi delities resulting from
public fl oggings, pouring pitch over bodies, tonsuring women’s hair, hanging
a garland of shoes around one’s neck, to isolating one’s family in the village,
to publicly spitting on the person every time s/he walks by, to making adults
hold their ears as a sign of their guilt in a public forum, to breaking apart a
person’s house to recover money, and so on. In this context, Grameen Bank’s
insistence of a no-collateral loan and repayment of loans at 98 percent takes on
a different meaning (see Amartya Sen for a celebratory reading of Grameen
Bank, 1999: 201). The honor and shame codes act as the collateral of these loans.
It is the honor of the family that is at stake, and which the woman represents.
If the woman gets publicly shamed, the family is dishonored.

You think this is special??

A buddy of mine works as a debt collector for Capital One.
His job is to call every single person that knows who the person that owes money is. He constantly harasses the persons kin, friends, co workers until that person is forced to call him, out of shame, and arrange a payment plan.
Debt collection is big business since 2008. The company buys the debts at discounted prices from major credit card companies and collects on it. The people he chases are exclusively in the US.
He also thinks that women are more "reliable" at bringing the one's with debt to the phone...

There is a world of difference between us faye...you should just stick to your usual programming ... blues clues and leave the adult talk to me.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

NGO's are in service of western Imperialism.

colin Powell, in 2001, described NGO's as " a force multiplier ...an important part of the combat team".

It is a part of their counter insurgency strategy - leverage the coercive...establish a safe and secure environment then fund the NGOs and and private contractors to do the stabilization work.

The NGO's deflect the discontent of the people from the macro economical power structures towards the micro socio political level projects such as popular education. It becomes a vehicle for upward social mobility for the ambitious educated classes of the populace.

Even though they claim to be apolitical their own orientation is neo-liberal and with a dash of feminism. They mostly act as a vent for popular uprising and social transformation towards self -help projects. They take away the intellectuals who would use their rhetorical and organizational skills in the service of the NGOs and get sent over seas to multinational conferences to give testimonials. Then they encourage the locals to adapt to the reality of neo-liberalism - Kabul is a prime example of this. The perks and higher pay that the NGO's give ..who could resist?

In the old days the Empires used to fund the churches to preach their own dogmas, now it is the so called - non governmental organizations..and they are hardly "non governmental"... most of those working in NGOs end up working for government and vice versa. Their organization is hierarchical and elitists and to secure the funds they have to shape their proposals according to their Western Donor's needs, who will then evaluate their "progress". They compete with local radical political movements over the same disenfranchised lot. Their ideology and method sets it out such that the problems of the poor is that they lack initiative and not that their country is being exploited by international banksters. Most of these NGO's are set up to only deal with the crises, because that is when the donations start to pour in. They are based on corporate managerial systems so they focus on the big waves of charity that pour when a famine hits but they can't prevent one from happening in the first place or even predict when crises would happen.

Most of their polemics weighs heavily on Political identity...patriarchy, domestic violence, divorce, family planning ...but they are blind to their own male white dominated IMF funders and their exploitation of sweatshop workers. It's a dog and pony show for the haves about the have nots...

Think about it... despite the thousands of NGOs that have been established why hasn't the situation of third world countries changed for the better? Instead for the worse!

NGOs have always backed "Humanitarian Intervention"...coincidently when their donor countries had their navy and army at the shores and boarders of that particular country - libya.

This is a very astute post Alchemist. Assange's released Red Cell Memo that Petreus supposedly put together 100% backs your commentary.

In war there is a moral imperitive and, as you point out, propaganda has the purpose of forcing the moral imperitive.

If the denizens of the American Empire were permitted to weigh the the options of fighting protracted war against guerillas in a war of attrition versus coming home... the best option is clear. If, on the other hand, the option was availabe to do a single hit huge punitive operation and not get embedded in Afghanistan, the populace would probably back that. The last option would rile up humans rights folks across the world... so although may injustice and atrocities are perpetrated, the full force and fury of the arsenal is not unleashed.

So as a result, Hilary Clinton and these acolytes choose to ignore the well written histories of their own secular societies and instead they trumpet the claim that

1. If the US leaves, women gains are in danger of being damaged by a Taliban resurgence

2. If the US leaves, minorities in Afghanistan will suffer from ethnic strife.

3. Certain enemy organizations will have the ability to resecure a base.

Perhaps the only one that matters to national security at all is number 3. Folks in these circles you speak of try to spin the other 2 in the following way: if 1 and 2 fall by the wayside, you create 3. Its absurd and a complete ignorance of their own history (that of the Americas and Europe).

[faye]

Published in the journal of Cultural Dynamics - a scholary journal ...not like you would know what that is:
You think this is special??

A buddy of mine works as a debt collector for Capital One.
His job is to call every single person that knows who the person that owes money is. He constantly harasses the persons kin, friends, co workers until that person is forced to call him, out of shame, and arrange a payment plan.
Debt collection is big business since 2008. The company buys the debts at discounted prices from major credit card companies and collects on it. The people he chases are exclusively in the US.
He also thinks that women are more "reliable" at bringing the one's with debt to the phone...

There is a world of difference between us faye...you should just stick to your usual programming ... blues clues and leave the adult talk to me.

lol, alchemist, you are so cruel to me
you might actually do better by reading 'banker to the poor' by the founder of the grameen bank, mahammad yunas. a muslim chap from bangladesh. like i did.
yes, big difference between us. i don't have any friends that do such crappy jobs, as harassing the poor.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

lol, alchemist, you are so cruel to me
you might actually do better by reading 'banker to the poor' by the founder of the grameen bank, mahammad yunas. a muslim chap from bangladesh. like i did.
yes, big difference between us. i don't have any friends that do such crappy jobs, as harassing the poor.

I think the difference, Faye, is that Yunus was Bengali by birth and as far as I understand it.. never took refuge in the West... nor was he driven out of his homeland. His time in the US was spent as a Fulbright scholar who would return to his nation. He did not make much of a profit. Also the comparison is hard to make because we dont know what Yunus would have said and done if say the British declared war on Bengladesh and occupied it and then wanted to use Yunus to serve in a puppet government that would supposedly grant it legitimacy.

As an example... one NGO run by the Americans in Baghdad tied a dog to a pole and stole an X ray machine from a local hospital and wrote that into their defense department grant as Baghdad airport security protocols they had innovated. For such an approach they received millions in Pentagon funds that basically were just doled out into this new war economy.

[faye]

the grameen bank was mentioned in the thread starter. what would have/could have been, is neither here nor there.
barakzai, i am well aware of what has been happening with the ngos etc and the great iraqi heist, contrary to alchemists dismissal of my capacity to indulge in cultural knowledge, lol.

[Alchemist]

Their history ...

You would think that among the elite of this world. The supposed best of the best that sit at these multinational conferences set up by these multinational foundations and organizations like the U.N...some one would have the audacity to stand up to these liberal hippies and remind them who they are.

Why on earth did they fight world war 1 and 2?

If you ask any of them...they still don't know!

Here they wear the poppies as a "reminder". Reminder to what? That they fought for freedom. Was Hitler opening up slave factories? He was funded by Bush seniors father!
There is no difference between USSR or USA or China when it boils down to it...they are all about the money - materialism.

This is how I see it -

Social emancipation in the west is a 450 year old story. Up until 100 years ago their women couldn't even file a divorce!
And now they want to teach us about divorce? When we have western witness from 100 years ago writing that women in Afghanistan could own property and had a right to divorce even before them!
So they took their women out of the homes and put them in the factories to work on missiles and bombs because their men were drafted into fighting a pointless war.
Then their economy crashed ...so they fought a second world war. After all ...destruction leads to construction. And construction equals contracts.
So they say the market "adapted" to two income families. Both mother and father working diligently. And now mothers are divorcing fathers, but they can't meet the financial needs for raising a child in the current economy. Oh poor single mom raising a child all on her own. Now 1 in 5 American child is living in poverty.
They didn't even have child labour laws until 70 years ago...

Talk about ethnic strife? Let's talk about all those latinos working in us restaurants for low wages and getting treated like dirt? Heck ... a freakin presidential nominee goes on record saying that the language of barbarians (latin) should be displaced with english! Ethnic strife ... like how they represent their blacks and their browns as thieves and loiterers. Yet it baffles me ... the majority of the us army is comprised of blacks and hispanics! They really want to prove their worth to their masters.

Really ...they are the masters at reality distortions. Wizards of an elite class that catch you in an illusion so strong, that you want to lick their booths for them even after they kick your ass with it. Like how we have Afghan intellectuals, common folk alike, all living from afar...touting the same thing - "We need them. We need the NGOs. We need the US....or else...or else..."

Or else nothing!

[faye]

so who are the liberal hippies alchemist? did the muslims not also have slaves?

[Alchemist]

Read this

Jahanara’s Story


Moneylending is prevalent in villages that are close to markets, for the
obvious reason that traders seek out the women borrowers for loans. In
my research area, this village was Krishnonagar, which was located next
to the main market of the town. In an informal survey of Krishnonagar,
100 households out of 230 NGO benefi ciary households were engaged in
moneylending.

As a result of the proximity to the market, the women of this village were
visible in public spaces. Compared to women living in the interior villages,
these women possessed a higher degree of physical mobility. Women in
Krishnonagar had more access to non-kin men because of the location of
their village, and it was acceptable for them to talk to non-kin men. NGOrelated activities had added to that mobility and had created some new
pathways for these women to interact with the larger community. Grameen
Bank, BRAC, Proshika, and ASA offi ces were spread through the town, and
access to these offi ces meant a trek through town. The women of Krishnonagar
told me that they had access to the market prior to joining these NGOs. Many
of them had to walk through the market to get to other places. As they pointed
out, NGO membership did not necessarily make them into more ‘mobile
subjects’, but it did give them more reasons to be seen around town without
people necessarily casting aspersions on their moral character.
One morning in December 1998, I went with my research assistant
in search of female petty moneylenders in Krishnonagar. I was told that
Jahanara Begum was the most famous moneylender in this area. She had
over 350,000 takas ($7446) invested in moneylending.
28

What did it mean,
I had wondered, for a woman to have amassed so much money? How did she
get to become such a successful moneylender?
Jahanara’s husband operated a tea-shop with her money. Her husband
was considered a ‘weak’ man by villagers because his wife was so successful.
Jahanara had two sons and two daughters. Her eldest daughter had studied
up to grade seven and she was training to be a moneylender. However, none
of the younger children was enrolled in school. In her words, ‘What can they
do with an education? Better to learn moneylending at a young age.’
When we arrived, Jahanara came forward to meet us. She was dressed in
a red sari and wore substantial amounts of gold on her person (nose ring,
bangles, and a chain) for a rural person. A striking woman, Jahanara looked
confi dent and well fed. She had already notifi ed several of her neighbors
that an elder sister from abroad was going to write about her in a book that
would be read by many people, and soon a group of women gathered around
us. They all look up to Jahanara, and soon it was clear that they were all in
debt to her.
Jahanara invested her money in four categories: short-term business,
small businesses in the market, middle-level farmers, and NGO borrowers.
Of this, the majority of the money was invested in short-term business, usually
the profi ts were repaid after three to six months. The money was lent to traders
who would buy local produce such as paddy, betel leaves, jute, timber, and
take them by boat to other parts of the country where they fetched higher
prices. Then they returned with produce from other parts of the country to
sell it in their local market. People consider it a safe form of investment. They
do not lose the money unless the boat capsizes with the goods, which, from
what I was told, was a rare event.
Jahanara’s day was not typical for a rural woman. She did not stay at home
to do housework. Most of her time was spent collecting money from traders.
She also spent considerable time going to NGO meetings to pay her dues or
to collect new loans. When I asked Jahanara about her success, she began to
share this with me:
I have also taken out loans in my daughter’s name and in the names of other people. I
am teaching my daughter my trade. I take loans out by proxy. I pay these women Tk. 100
(approx. $2) each for letting me take the loan. Now all the NGOs give me the highest
loans possible. If they do not want to give me the kind of loan I want, I say to them,
I will cross out my name and go elsewhere. There are so many NGOs, another NGO will
give me money. (Here she pauses and laughs.) They need me more than I need them.
They do not want me to leave. I am a good investment. I have money so I always pay my
installments on time . . .
This is how Jahanara described her success:
One has to run. If you sit around, nothing will happen. I go with the members to the
NGO offi ce when we have to get the loan. I get the money and leave. I don’t stay in their
offi ce long. When I give money to NGO women borrowers, I have to be careful. These
women are so needy. You cannot give them too much money; Tk. 1000 or 2000 [between
$21 and $43] is about the maximum amount. If I give them too much money, then I have
to walk around empty-handed later. They will not be able to pay back. I give them loans
when they cannot pay their kistis or when there is an emergency . . .
At the end of our conversation, Jahanara said that she didn’t think that other
women could become like her. According to her,
They do not understand anything except their husbands. If I gave my earnings to my
husband, he would use it all up. And I just invest my money in business. In the beginning,
I never thought of getting food, clothes for my children. I was very careful with my
money. If you go to the homes of these women on the day they get a loan from an
NGO, you will fi nd that for the next seven days they spend the money on fi sh and meat.
My husband is also not like other men. He lets me have my way . . .

The following week, we met Jahanara at the Grameen Bank meeting. She
was the Center leader of the Grameen Group in that village. Grameen Bank
offi cers only collect the installments after everyone has assembled and paid up
every single penny owed to Grameen. If any woman was missing (as usually
happened when she did not have the money), then all the other women in the
group had to wait. This coercive technique deployed by bank offi cers creates a
lot of friction among the women as they were forced to remain at the Center
instead of returning home and doing their housework.
At this meeting one woman called Kashai Bou (butcher’s wife) was not
present. Kashai Bou lived several villages away and the Grameen Bank
offi cer took Jahanara as Center leader with him to collect the money from
her. We went along with them. On the way to Kashai Bou’s house, Jahanara
proudly told us that she had broken many houses when members could not
pay. ‘We know when they cannot pay, so we take a carpenter with us to break
the house.’
When I asked Jahanara, ‘Why do you break the houses of kin?’ Jahanara
became indignant at fi rst. Her initial comment was ‘Why shouldn’t we? They
have breached their trust with us. If they cannot pay, then we will have to pay.
Why should I pay for them?’ Then she became quiet and said after a while:
It is not good to break someone’s house, but we are forced to do it. This is how we get
loans from Grameen Bank and other NGOs. They put pressure on us to recover the
money, then we all get together and force the defaulting member to give us the money.
We don’t care how we do it.


Neutralizing Dissent: Power/Knowledge in Development

“The texts of development have always been avowedly strategic and tactical—
promoting, licensing, and justifying certain interventions and practices, delegitimizing
others . . . What do the texts of development not say? What do they suppress? Who do
they silence—and why?” (Crush, 1995: 5).

Why is it that what I have written in these pages is not legible as a public
discourse? The answer to that question is that the critiques are silenced in
NGO-dominated research spaces. Knowledge is power, but power also legitimizes what counts as knowledge, and NGOs are powerful institutions in
Bangladesh. The hagiographic transcripts of the Grameen Bank have to be
apprehended at the crux of power/knowledge in the context of Bangladesh.
In Bangladesh, there is only one academic English publishing house, called
University Press Limited (UPL). The editor of UPL declined to publish Aminur
Rahman’s critical assessment of the Grameen Bank, Women and Micro-Credit
in Bangladesh (1999), stating that a prominent economist had advised against
its publication.
29