next »

[The Facilitatrix]

My disgust about this knows no bounds:

Robert Mugabe puts rival Morgan Tsvangirai back in custody

ZIMBABWE opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai was forced last night to halt his campaign to topple Robert Mugabe at a runoff poll this month after being detained by police for the second time in three days.

The detention of Mr Tsvangirai came before US ambassador James McGee said late last night the regime was distributing international food aid only to supporters of the ruling ZANU-PF party.

The UN warned the implementation of its programs would be hit by the regime's ban on activities by non-governmental organisations. Elisabeth Byrs, spokeswoman of the UN humanitarian affairs bureau OCHA, said it would be the "population that suffers" from any disruption in humanitarian aid delivery.

The regime said earlier that all NGOs wishing to operate in the country would have to reapply for accreditation and promise not to interfere in domestic politics.

The move to curtail NGO work in the lead-up to the June 27 runoff between Mugabe and Mr Tsvangirai has been sharply criticised, with the EU calling yesterday for the ban to be lifted.

Movement for Democratic Change officials travelling with Mr Tsvangirai in the south of the country said he was initially turned back at a police checkpoint on his way to address mineworkers near Bulawayo and told he did not have permission to campaign in the area.

After circumventing the checkpoint and making a couple of unscheduled campaign stops, his entourage was again halted and this time escorted by officers armed with assault rifles to Esigodini police station. He and his top aides were held there for about two hours of questioning. ...

Mr Tsvangirai fell just two percentage points short of winning an outright majority in the presidential poll. "This is a sign of desperation," said MDC chief spokesman Nelson Chamisa.

"It was the people of Zimbabwe who voted for the MDC. NGOs do not vote. It's condescending to think that the people of Zimbabwe voted on the basis of influence by NGOs."

It's diabolically brilliant for Mugabe to bring the NGOs into this, because if they comply in order to feed and care for MDC supporters, they're tacitly accepting Mugabe's legitimacy.  If they don't comply, people starve and die.  And it's a terrible position to put Tsvangirai and the MDC into.  I don't use the word "evil" often and never lightly, but Mugabe?  Evil.

I'm kicking myself for not noting which news broadcast it was on (it could have been BBC or Radio Netherlands), but I heard someone from the US Embassy in Zimbabwe (maybe James McGee himself) comment yesterday that the best thing that could happen right then would be for the Italian authorities to hold Mugabe at the Rome airport and not let him leave, pending indictment by the international court.

Boy, would that have something.  It likely would have involved some sort of shootout between Italian carabinieri and Mugabe's bodythugs, but the loss of life might have been worth it, either to get Mugabe into custody or the have him escape back to Zimbabwe with a lot of press attention and maybe some international action.

[Devon]

I'm kicking myself for not noting which news broadcast it was on (it could have been BBC or Radio Netherlands), but I heard someone from the US Embassy in Zimbabwe (maybe James McGee himself) comment yesterday that the best thing that could happen right then would be for the Italian authorities to hold Mugabe at the Rome airport and not let him leave, pending indictment by the international court.

I don't know that you really can detain someone pending indictment - when you think of it, the shabby indictments coming down in Guantanamo Bay indicate that the past six years have been a form of pre-indictment detention.  But there's no reason to wait: Italy could, if it wanted to, indict Mugabe under the Italian law for, say, the torture of Tsvangirai, under the doctrine of universal jurisdiction.  This is more or less what happened when Pinochet went to Britain - Spain issued an indictment, citing violations of international law, and the UK held him for extradition (until they let him go).  The judge - superstar jurist Bathazar Garzon - cited a U.S. case on the applicability of international law to torturers and others whose actions make them the "enemy of all mankind."

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy....

[The Facilitatrix]

I don't know that you really can detain someone pending indictment - when you think of it, the shabby indictments coming down in Guantanamo Bay indicate that the past six years have been a form of pre-indictment detention.

Well, I was really indulging in some wishful thinking, and I admit that I likely didn't get the details about what this Embassy representative said.  What stuck with me was the image of Italians keeping Mugabe from going back to Zimbabwe and making him face up to his crimes.  I don't know if that will ever happen to him in Zimbabwe.  Anyone who has power does so because they've aligned themselves with him.  If they don't toe the line, they'll lose what they have.  And those who don't have power fear Mugabe's retribution, and that's all-too-valid a fear.

The courts in Zimbabwe today upheld Tsvangirai's supporters' right to hold rallies without police interference.  This is great in theory, but how likely is it that the police are going to pay attention to this?

I've got too much of a Star Trek mentality, I think.  The Earth they paint for our future has some great things going for it, but the one that resonates strongest with me is global governance.  Each country retains its identity and autonomy akin to states' rights, but there is a UN-like structure that actually has influence.  And every country is responsible for its actions not only to its own people but also to the rest of the world.

This is what frustrates me about Mugabe, Myanmar, and other despots or their regimes who not only are not prevented from abusing their people but are essentially facilitated by other governments who either stay silent about the abuses or may denounce the actions but affirm a country's right to rule without interference, giving these regimes tacit approval because it's a "government" perpetrating the abuses.  I see it as a CYA mentality.  If world leaders were to take action (not war, but economic ostracism with teeth), they'd be opening themselves up to challenges on their own treatment of their own people and the rest of the world.

So it's one of those Pollyanna-like things with me that I think every country and every leader should be held to account for their actions.  But as long as power=money/money=power and the most venal of humans often ends up a country's ruler (and believe me, I'm not exempting the US in any of this), it ain't gonna happen.

[The Facilitatrix]

Now Mugabe's government has charged Morgan Tsvangirai's representative in emergency talks with Zimbabwean ruling party representatives, Tendai Biti, with treason.  A conviction would mean a death sentence. 

From The Independent:

Zimbabwe opposition negotiator is accused of treason

By Alex Duval Smith in Cape Town
Friday, 13 June 2008

In the strongest indication yet that the Zimbabwean regime intends to fight to the bitter end, the opposition's chief negotiator was arrested yesterday and charged with treason.

Tendai Biti, who until this week had led the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) delegation at emergency talks with Zimbabwe's ruling party, left South Africa and was arrested at Harare airport before he could be met by his lawyers. Fellow passengers said he was handcuffed and taken away in an unmarked car. His whereabouts were still unclear last night.

... A national police spokesman, Wayne Bvudzijena, suggested that it was in his capacity as negotiator that Mr Biti had made himself guilty of treason: "He will be charged with contravening section 20 of the criminal law codification for publishing a document that was explaining a transitional strategy around 26 March which in its case is a treasonous charge," he said.

State television reported in April that Mr Biti was suspected of being the author of a plot to rig the outcome of the disputed 29 March election in which the MDC won a majority of seats. In the presidential poll, according to the official results, Mr Tsvangirai failed to secure an all-out majority, prompting a run-off against President Robert Mugabe scheduled for 27 June.

... Mr Biti had predicted his arrest. Before boarding his plane in Johannesburg yesterday, he said efforts to negotiate a unity government had collapsed. He said the MDC had been prepared to consider a coalition agreement but only with Mr Tsvangirai as president. "Mugabe would have no place in it,'' he said.

Can anyone or anything stop Mugabe?

[The Facilitatrix]

Morgan Tsvangirai withdrew from Zimbabwe's election, so that no more of his supporters would die.  Robert Mugabe's militias have killed at least 86 people and injured many more in the weeks leading to the presidential election run-off.

Mugabe's spokesman said Tsvangirai withdrew to spare himself the humiliation of defeat in the run-off.  Tsvangirai's majority win in the presidential election wasn't enough to put him in office.

I've felt all along that there was no way Mugabe would leave the presidency.  It's tragic that so many had to die because Mugabe and his clique would do anything to retain power.

From the BBC:

Tsvangirai seeks embassy refuge
Morgan Tsvangirai feared for supporters' safety at the polls

Zimbabwe's opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai has taken refuge in the Dutch embassy in the capital, Harare.

A Dutch foreign ministry spokesman said Mr Tsvangirai had spent the night at the embassy as he feared for his safety but had not requested asylum.

On Sunday, he announced he was withdrawing from a presidential election run-off in the face of violence from ruling party militias.

Zimbabwean officials have said the second round will still go ahead.

But Botswana's Foreign Minister Pando Skelemani said leaders of the Southern African Development Community (Sadc) would have to decide whether Zimbabwe could have a legitimate president in the current political climate.

"If in fact the atmosphere for an election is not free and fair you then can't have someone having won," he told the BBC.

"It would be the same as if you had been through the election and they are declared not free and fair, then you are back at square one."

Ahead of a UN Security Council discussion about Zimbabwe, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said President Robert Mugabe's regime "cannot be considered legitimate in the absence of a run-off".

Mr Tsvangirai says pressure from the UN and Sadc could force Mr Mugabe to give up power.

"My assessment is that if there is a collective position by all Sadc leaders, that would be sufficient pressure - that voice is essential," he told US National Public Radio.

"The conditions of the Security Council on Zimbabwe has one outcome that we will expect... to appoint a mission to investigate the level of abuses that have taken place - rape, torture, murder - and the various human rights abuse that has taken place."

Former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan told the BBC that he believed the elections should be postponed:

"Honestly, given what has happened, I doubt that anyone would accept the results, so they should put off the elections. But I think it is important that we all realise that Zimbabwe needs our help."

Zimbabwe's Justice Minister Patrick Chinamasa said Mr Tsvangirai's announcement of his withdrawal was a ruse as he had not sent a formal notice yet.

Arrests

The BBC's Peter Biles in Johannesburg says Mr Tsvangirai is now considering his next move, but he remains in the Dutch compound.

Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen said that if Mr Tsvangirai was looking for safety at the diplomatic mission, he was welcome.

"We've seen the last weeks a new low in the tortured history of Zimbabwe and I think that Mr Mugabe no longer has any moral legitimacy in the eyes of the people of Zimbabwe," she told the BBC.

Mr Tsvangirai blames supporters of President Mugabe and the ruling Zanu-PF party for the death of 86 of his supporters in the run-up to the second-round, due to be held on Friday.

On Monday, more than 60 supporters of Mr Tsvangirai's Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) party were arrested at its Harare headquarters.

MDC spokesman Nelson Chamisa said those arrested were women and children who had fled political violence.

Zimbabwean police told AFP news agency they had only moved 39 people from the building for "hygiene reasons".

President Mugabe and Zanu-PF blame the opposition for political violence across the country.

The MDC won the parliamentary vote in March, and claims to have won the first round of the presidential contest outright.

In the official results, Mr Tsvangirai led but failed to gain enough votes to avoid a run-off.

ZIMBABWE AND ITS NEIGHBOURS

Zimbabwe's opposition is hoping neighbouring countries will put pressure on President Robert Mugabe to step down. In the past they supported him. How are relations now?

• South Africa's President Thabo Mbeki is the key Zimbabwe mediator. He has refused to criticise Robert Mugabe but the ruling ANC and trade unions have urged him to take a stronger line.

• Zambian President Levy Mwanawasa has taken the region's strongest line on Zimbabwe. He says Zimbabwe is a regional "embarrassment".

• Angola's President Jose Eduardo dos Santos is one of Robert Mugabe's closest allies - they fought colonialism together in the 1970s. He has urged Mr Mugabe to stop the violence.

• Botswana has summoned a Zimbabwean envoy to complain about the political violence. It has been supportive of Zimbabwe's opposition.

• Namibia is a close ally of Zimbabwe - it, too, is planning to redistribute white-owned farms to black villagers. It has not criticised the election violence.

• Mozambique has hosted some white farmers forced from Zimbabwe and is seen as relatively sympathetic to Zimbabwe's opposition.

• Tanzania's ruling party has a long history of close ties to Robert Mugabe's Zanu-PF party and its foreign minister has condemned the violence.

• DR Congo's President Joseph Kabila is an ally of Robert Mugabe, who sent troops to help his father, Laurent Kabila, fight rebels.

• Malawi is seen as neutral. But some 3m people of Malawian origin are in Zimbabwe, mostly farmworkers who have lost their jobs and were often assaulted during farm invasions.

[tlees2]

<quote> I'm kicking myself for not noting which news broadcast it was on (it could have been BBC or Radio Netherlands), but I heard someone from the US Embassy in Zimbabwe (maybe James McGee himself) comment yesterday that the best thing that could happen right then would be for the Italian authorities to hold Mugabe at the Rome airport and not let him leave, pending indictment by the international court.</quote>

I don't know that you really can detain someone pending indictment - when you think of it, the shabby indictments coming down in Guantanamo Bay indicate that the past six years have been a form of pre-indictment detention.  But there's no reason to wait: Italy could, if it wanted to, indict Mugabe under the Italian law for, say, the torture of Tsvangirai, under the doctrine of universal jurisdiction.  This is more or less what happened when Pinochet went to Britain - Spain issued an indictment, citing violations of international law, and the UK held him for extradition (until they let him go).  The judge - superstar jurist Bathazar Garzon - cited a U.S. case on the applicability of international law to torturers and others whose actions make them the "enemy of all mankind."

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy....

Hear! Hear!

[The Facilitatrix]

I can't even imagine what kind of courage it took for former prison guard Shepherd Yuda to wear a secreted camera and get footage inside the prison where he worked.  Unexpectedly, Yuda ended up documenting one way in which Mugabe's Zanu-PF people rigged last week's presidential runoff in Zimbabwe, when he and fellow prison guards were called into an office to fill in their ballots in front of a Zanu-PF war veteran and other guards.

I'm not too fond of the over-the-top musical score The Guardian put onto their story about Yuda that includes his footage, but it's stunning nonetheless.

Take a look.

Some excerpts from the story:

A film that graphically shows how Robert Mugabe's supporters rigged Zimbabwe's election has been smuggled out of the country by a prison officer. It is believed to be the first footage of actual ballot-rigging and comes as Zimbabwe's president faces growing international pressure.

Shepherd Yuda, 36, fled the country this week with his wife and children. He said that he hoped the film, which was made for the Guardian, would help draw further attention to the violence and corruption in Zimbabwe.

Much of the footage was shot inside the country's notorious jail system. Yuda, who has worked in the prison service for 13 years, was motivated by the intensifying violence directed towards the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) and the murder, two months ago, of his uncle, a MDC activist.

The film, made for Guardian Films, shows how Yuda and his colleagues at Harare central jail had to fill in their ballots in front of Zanu-PF activists.

Yuda also obtained footage of Zanu-PF rallies where voters were told they should pretend to be illiterate so that an official could fill in their ballot for them on behalf of Mugabe.

He was able to film the MDC's general secretary, Tendai Biti, in leg irons in jail. Biti, now on bail, faces treason charges which carry the death penalty.

Having completed filming, Yuda left Zimbabwe with his family for a new life and is now at a secret destination.

[Devon]

I can't even imagine what kind of courage it took for former prison guard Shepherd Yuda to wear a secreted camera and get footage inside the prison where he worked.  Unexpectedly, Yuda ended up documenting one way in which Mugabe's Zanu-PF people rigged last week's presidential runoff in Zimbabwe, when he and fellow prison guards were called into an office to fill in their ballots in front of a Zanu-PF war veteran and other guards.

I'm not too fond of the over-the-top musical score The Guardian put onto their story about Yuda that includes his footage, but it's stunning nonetheless.

I saw this too.  At the same time, it seems the African Union is taking a tepid approach to the issuehttp://www.nytimes.com/20...ef=africa&oref=slogin, with calls for talks and possible power-sharing between Zanu PF and MDC.  Doesn't bode so well, and given that this footage only confirms what was known less conclusively, I don't see what might change there.

[The Facilitatrix]

At the same time, it seems the African Union is taking a tepid approach to the issue, with calls for talks and possible power-sharing between Zanu PF and MDC. 

I have the same frustration in this situation that I did/do about Burma.  The sovereignty of a nation receives more value than the people who live under these regimes do, and it makes me crazy.

And it would take a miracle to convince me that the primary reason for this is the fear that if the African Union, the UN, or the US were to act against Mynamar's junta or Mugabe, the door would be open for the world not only to pass judgment on how a country's government treats its people but also to intervene when it's gone too far.  And what's the point of making it up to the pinnacle of leading your country—with all the power and wealth that come with it—if you're going to be held to account by the world because you're a complete and utter evil bastard?

The words to Imagine frequently come to mind these days:

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

It's not going to happen in my lifetime . . .

[Devon]

It's not going to happen in my lifetime . . .

The idea has definitely seen a set back, with the quagmire in Iraq and the sheer impossibility of intervention in Darfur giving the lie to the reach of the American military or the international community.  But I think that mechanisms will evolve that may not be perfectly effective, but will strike a balance between justifiable fear of the results of humanitarian intervention and doing nothing.

[The Facilitatrix]

But I think that mechanisms will evolve that may not be perfectly effective, but will strike a balance between justifiable fear of the results of humanitarian intervention and doing nothing.

Are you seeing these mechanisms in development anywhere?  I'm only seeing an unwarranted respect for sovereignty.

[Devon]

<quote>Are you seeing these mechanisms in development anywhere?  I'm only seeing an unwarranted respect for sovereignty.</quote>

Perhaps idiosyncratically (aka stupidly), I think that international trade agreements are where absolutist sovereignty will meet its maker.  I started writing an article a few years ago on Canadian complaints before the WTO that posed an interesting challenge to US sovereignty, that if I recall correctly had some human rights elements, protecting indigenous peoples rights, perhaps (this was a long time ago, and a scan of my hard drive indicates that they got lost in the new computer shuffle over the past eight years). 

From there, I think it's a matter of time before politics follows economics - there are already chips in the wall, from tort litigation using international law, to the resurrection of the idea of universal jurisdiction, to the rise of the ICC.  Eventually, I think the two trends will converge, either because trade litigation in the WTO breaks down opposition and leads to a reconceptualization of the nation state that can be exploited to champion human rights, or because human rights advocates find novel ways to exploit the system of international trade-agreements to their own ends.

[The Facilitatrix]

From there, I think it's a matter of time before politics follows economics - there are already chips in the wall, from tort litigation using international law, to the resurrection of the idea of universal jurisdiction, to the rise of the ICC. 

I wish I could feel any confidence in this occurring.

Today's news: 

Mugabe is glad that the African Union is seeing reason and not bowing to the conspiracy against him by the US and UK.

The African Union is worried about charges being filed against Omar Hassan al-Bashir, the Sudanese President, by the ICC.  They say, "such a move could jeopardise peace efforts in the region."  A BBC report says, "Government spokesman Mahjoub Fadul Badry said an indictment would violate Sudan's sovereignty."

Another BBC article, regarding the failed vote for sanctions agaist Zimbabwe, says,

Zimbabwe's Information Minister Sikhanyiso Ndlovu described the resolution as an attempt to make the people of Zimbabwe suffer so they would turn against their government.

Britain, he said, "wanted to divert attention by bringing unfounded allegations against Zimbabwe, against the people of Zimbabwe, trying to make the people of Zimbabwe suffer more with the economic sanctions... so that they can turn against their own government".

It's a CYA mentality for these guys, I think.  A lot of them seem only baby steps away from ICC charges themselves.  It's a pretty ruthless place for politics, by and large.  If the ruthlessness only involved challengers to those leaders, that would be bad enough, but everyone else pays for their leaders' greed for power and wealth.

[Devon]

My wife just got back from a conference on the increase in regulation for NGOs worldwide that was held in Uganda.  There is decidedly a global chill, as documented in this report that I think you might want to have a look at - http://www.icnl.org/knowledge/news/2008/3-21.htm "Defending Civil Society."

Things in Uganda are, I guess, worse than they appear from a distance.  The government has a very tight rein on freedom of association, and recently passed a blatantly unconstitutional NGO regulation law.  This is justified - and it sounds like the justification is not just by the government - by the desire to enforce harmony in a country that currently has two regional civil wars and has in the past been torn apart by more widespread conflict.  I guess Uganda is fairly interesting in that, though the government is prone to strong-arm tactics, people have a lot of freedom of expression, and speak critically of the government fairly openly.  But that freedom stops in the gap between what you say and what you do.  There was a discussion at the conference of some members of the political opposition who were detained on terrorism charges and freed without bail pending trial, for lack of evidence.  The government immediately re-arrested them and charged them under the military system, but the equivalent of the Supreme Court ruled (it's a ruling some of our district and appellate courts could look to) that the system of military law is subordinate to the civilian courts, and ordered the case sent back to the court where it began.  The defendants were again released without bail, and masked military personnel broke in and kidnapped them in the courtroom - there was blood on the floor of the chief justice.  In response, lawyers went on strike, and judges soon followed them.  The President personally had to meet with the head of the judiciary to work out a settlement.

So I guess my point isn't that things are really bad, and that they won't get worse (and of course, it's become a truism that the actions of the Bush Administration have given cover to these things - Counter-Terrorism laws are popping up all over the place where governments want to crack down on dissent).  It's that even amidst an often bad and increasingly worse situation, there are trends that bode well for long-term change. 

In the long-run, we are all still dead.  But nonetheless.

[The Facilitatrix]

and of course, it's become a truism that the actions of the Bush Administration have given cover to these things ...

Thanks for an insider's perspective on this.  I've been going from reading between the lines and looking at history.  Idi Amin, I'm sure, is decried in public, but I get the feeling that the other leaders feel as if they're in his shadow and his is the dictatorship to match and beat.

I have so often thought that if the names and countries weren't included in the news reports, many of the stories about the abuses of these leaders around the world would be hard to attribute to the correct one.  And I have long included Bush in that.  I've seen him in Putin and vice versa.  And his bizarre relationship with Musharref has been just creepy.  But so many of the tactics are the same, even if they have differing results.

I see them all after the same thing, all these Suhartos and Sukarnos and Mugabes and Mubareks—and Bush—they want unlimited power and lifetime rule.  And what it does to anyone else in the process can be rationalized away by their belief that they know what's best for their people.  It's the bullshit excuse of the egotistical bully.

What I am waiting to see in this country (and I think I should not hold my breath) is for the lawyers and judiciary to rise up here they way they do in other countries.  I am still very impressed by the image of all those suits marching against what Musharref has done to Pakistan's constitution.  Jeez, if anyone should know just how deep Bush's abuses go, it should be the legal community?  But where are they?  No, seriously, where are they?

[Devon]

What I am waiting to see in this country (and I think I should not hold my breath) is for the lawyers and judiciary to rise up here they way they do in other countries.  I am still very impressed by the image of all those suits marching against what Musharref has done to Pakistan's constitution.  Jeez, if anyone should know just how deep Bush's abuses go, it should be the legal community?  But where are they?  No, seriously, where are they?

Back in early 2002, after Gitmo had been opened and the first prisoners transferred, there weren't many known individuals in the camp, and hence, nobody to sue on behalf of.  One of the few was David Hicks, the Australian delinquent who ended up a semi-Islamic semi-militant.  The Center for Constitutional Rights figured this out (there were, I think, two others) and prepared to file suit.  They asked the ACLU if they wanted to be on the case, and the ACLU refused (I worked at CCR at the time). 

But times have changed.  In the wake of the 2002 Supreme Court ruling in Rasul v. Bush (the original case brought by CCR), tons of attorneys jumped in.  Big firms started taking cases.  And military lawyers assigned to represent Gitmo detainees have in many cases done truly heroic work, work that in at least one case ended a promising career.  I'm not willing to say that the legal community as a whole has done all that it should - certainly, it's nothing like what the Pakistani lawyers did a few months ago.  But there has been some work done that should make that profession proud.

[The Facilitatrix]

I know, they're doing some good things.  And one of the best things they could do would be to get all the tools in this Administration disbarred.  That would be a gift to the legal profession and the entire country.

[nascardaughter]

I have so often thought that if the names and countries weren't included in the news reports, many of the stories about the abuses of these leaders around the world would be hard to attribute to the correct one.

There's an idea for a study.

[Devon]

I have so often thought that if the names and countries weren't included in the news reports, many of the stories about the abuses of these leaders around the world would be hard to attribute to the correct one.

There's an idea for a study.

It's fair to say, I suppose, that such leaders are making a careful study of their peers on a regular basis!

[Hcberkowitz]

I have so often thought that if the names and countries weren't included in the news reports, many of the stories about the abuses of these leaders around the world would be hard to attribute to the correct one.

There's an idea for a study.

It's fair to say, I suppose, that such leaders are making a careful study of their peers on a regular basis!

Slobodan Milosevic, Ratko Mladic, and  Radovan Karadzic did not always agree on much, besides Bush and Clinton having very strange-sounding names.