United States military veterans in the Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia and Palau received increased attention during the Biden Administration after years of neglect by the US Veterans Administration.
That progress came to a halt with the incoming Trump Administration in Washington in January, when the new Veterans Administration put many programmes on hold.
Marshall Islands Foreign Minister and US military veteran Kalani Kaneko said he is hopeful of resuming the momentum for veterans living in the freely associated states.
Two key actions during the Biden administration helped to elevate interest in veterans living in the freely associated states:
The administration’s appointment of a Compact of Free Association (COFA) Committee that included the ambassadors to Washington from the three nations, including Marshall Islands Ambassador Charles Paul, and US Cabinet-level officials.
The US Congress passed legislation establishing an advisory committee for the Veterans Administration for Compact veterans.
Kalani Kaneko was appointed as chairman to a three-year term, which expires in September.
Kaneko said he submitted a report to the Veterans Administration recently on its activities and needs.
The Foreign Minister said it is now up to the current administration of the Veterans Administration to take next steps to reappoint members of the advisory committee or to name a new group.
Virtually non-existent
Kaneko pointed out that in contrast to its virtually non-existent programme in the Marshall Islands, FSM and Palau, the VA’s programme for veterans is “robust” in Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands.
Citizens of the three compact nations enlist in the US military at higher rates per capita than Americans.
But when they leave the service and return home to their islands, they have historically received none of the benefits accorded to US veterans living in the United States.
Kaneko and island leaders have been trying to change this by getting the Veterans Administration to provide on-island services and to pay for medical referrals of veterans when locally available medical services are not available.
Kaneko said the 134-page report submitted in June contained five major recommendations for improved services for veterans from the US-affiliated islands:
Establish a VA clinic in Majuro with an accredited doctor and nurse.
Authorise use of the Marshall Islands zip code for US pharmacies to mail medicines to veterans here (a practice that is currently prohibited).
If the level of healthcare in Marshall Islands cannot provide a service needed by a veteran, they should be able to be referred to hospitals in other countries.
Due to the delays in obtaining appointments at VA hospitals in the US, the report recommends allowing veterans to use the Marshall Islands referral system to the Philippines to access the US Veterans Administration clinic in Manila.
Support and prioritise the access of veterans to US Department of Agriculture Rural Development housing loans and grants.
Kaneko said he is hopeful of engagement by high-level Veterans Administration officials at an upcoming meeting to review the report and other reports related to services for Compact nation veterans.
But, he cautioned, because there was nothing about compact veterans in President Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” passed recently by the US Congress, it means fiscal year 2027 — starting October 1, 2026 — would be the earliest to see any developments for veterans in the islands.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
No New Zealanders were on board the Handala in the latest arrest and abductions of Freedom Flotilla crew on humanitarian siege-busting missions to Gaza. However, two Australians were and one talks to The New Arab just before the attack on Saturday.
INTERVIEW:By Sebastian Shehadi
The Handala, a 1968 Norwegian trawler repurposed by the Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC), set sail for Gaza from southern Italy on July 20, carrying around 21 people and a cargo of food, medical kits, baby formula, water desalination units and more.
The ship is named after the iconic Palestinian cartoon figure, Handala, who symbolises Palestinian identity, resilience and the ongoing struggle against displacement and occupation.
Just hours before departure, the crew uncovered deliberate sabotage: a rope tightly bound around the propeller and a sulfuric acid swap mistaken for water, leading to chemical burns in two people.
Despite this alarming start, the mission continued, echoing the defiance of past flotilla efforts such as the interception of the Madleen in June and the Israeli drone strike on the Conscience in May.
However, contact with the vessel was reported lost on July 24, with coalition officials warning that communications have been jammed and drones have been seen near the ship, raising concerns about interception or further hostile action.
The mission resumed following the brief two-hour communications blackout. “Connection has now been re-established. ‘Handala’ is continuing its mission and is currently less than 349 nautical miles from Gaza,” the Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC) announced on Telegram on July 25.
Then on Saturday, the Israeli military attacked the ship and violently detained and “abducted” the entire crew and issued a statement saying they were “safe” and on their way to Israel.
‘Handala’ was illegally boarded by Israel military in international waters, around 40 nautical miles off the coast of Gaza.
Before interception the 21 crew made this statement: if attacked they will join the global hunger strike for Gaza.
— Freedom Flotilla Coalition (@GazaFFlotilla) July 27, 2025
The New Arab spoke to one of Handala’s crew, Lebanese-Australian filmmaker, human rights activist and journalist Tan Safi, before the arrest to find out more about the mission and why she chose to be on board this mission:
The New Arab: How’s the mood on the ship at the moment? Tan Safi: The morale of everyone at the moment is high, as everyone is happy to be here. Of course, different emotions come up, and we talk them out, but as a collective, we’re all looking out for one another. Everyone is very caring and kind.
We are a group of 21 people from 10 different countries. We have a very proud grandmother, as well as MPs, nurses, a human rights lawyer, a comedian, an actor, human rights activists and more. We’re from many different walks of life, and we pose absolutely no threat to anyone.
We’re simply trying to challenge something illegal. Like previous Freedom Flotilla actions, we will be sailing through international waters into Palestinian territorial waters.
Australian Handala crew member Tan Safi . . . “Back in 2010, we sent a flotilla that was caught in a deadly raid. The Israelis came in a helicopter, boarded the ship and killed nine people instantaneously, while another person died from a coma years later.” Image: FFC
How are you preparing for the very real threat of Israeli violence? Back in 2010, we sent a flotilla that was caught in a deadly raid. The Israelis came in a helicopter, boarded the ship and killed nine people instantaneously, while another person died from a coma years later.
So we know very well that Israel poses a real threat.
More importantly, we’ve seen what they’re capable of over the last two years. The most horrific things imaginable. Israeli soldiers are committing endless crimes against Gazan children, and then going into the homes of the Palestinians they’ve murdered and taking selfies in women’s lingerie. We know what they’re capable of.
Any interception of our vessel would violate international maritime law. The ICJ [International Court of Justice] itself ordered Israel not to interfere with any delivery of international aid. Of course, we know that Israel gets to exist in this world by hopping over international law, without any accountability, without any real sanctions.
In terms of processing, what might happen to me? I’ve had to do it time and time again whenever I’ve joined FFC missions over the last two years. I’ve had to say goodbye to my friends and family, but also try to keep them reassured.
Sometimes I feel like I’m lying, to be honest. I tell them that “everything will be okay”. But it’s psychologically impossible to explain.
Are you worried that Handala is less protected than the last ship, Madleen, which had the global media attention (and protection) of having Greta Thunberg on board?
A Gaza Freedom Flotilla Instagram poster. Image: Instagram/@loremresists
No matter how many Instagram followers you have, your life is just as important as the next person’s. We have people on this boat who have Instagram. We have people who do.
The lives of all these people are as valuable as everyone else’s. I would just try to focus on the fact that we’re all human beings, just as every Palestinian in Gaza is. I’m more worried that Israel’s violence will expand until it’s too late, and people wish that they had done more. The time is now.
What is your message to global or Australian leaders? I’m Lebanese, but I grew up in so-called Australia, a country that has such a dark history. What our politicians forget is that so-called Australia was not theirs to begin with. Australia was, and will always be, Aboriginal land. They can try to hide their dark truths, just like Israel used to as well. But the truth will become exposed in time.
To this day, Aboriginal people are abused and discriminated against by the state. My message to Australia’s leadership is: how can you watch tens of thousands of men, women and children being slaughtered and still be enabling Israel’s siege and genocide?
The Australian embassy in Israel sent me a message urging me to “please reconsider your decision to join a humanitarian aid trip to Gaza”. If they’re so concerned about the two Australians on this boat, I would urge them to be more concerned with the millions of Palestinians who are suffering daily.
The Palestinian cartoon character Handala . . . reimagined with deliberate starvation by the Israeli military forces. Image: X/@RimaHas
Can you tell us more about daily life and organisation on the ship? We all put our hands up to volunteer for various tasks throughout the day. Some of us are more skilled in certain areas than others. For example, we have someone here from France who is a nurse, and they’re helping anyone who is feeling sick.
We have the proud grandmother, Vigdis from Norway, who loves to cook. And then someone will put their hand up to do the dishes. No one is too good to clean the toilets.
We’re all helping out to keep this ship organised. We also do shifts, helping out with the crew when needed. No one is sitting around. And if someone is, it’s because it’s really hot or the seas are rough.
What do you hope Handala will achieve, beyond potentially breaking the siege? I hope this action will encourage all forms of solidarity and, more importantly, inspire direct action. I know that protests and non-direct actions serve a purpose, but we have talked and talked and talked at length. I don’t know how people are finding the strength.
Sometimes when I’m asked to talk at events, I just don’t know what to say, because if you need me to explain this, maybe you will never understand.
But what we clearly need to do is disrupt the financial flow that enables and fuels this genocide. The BDS movement is huge. People used to look down on it and question its efficacy. But now we’re able to quantify that it’s actually affecting real, big business.
I’ve always been advocating for that and asking people to be aware of the companies they consume from, such as Unilever, Nestle and Coke. This is having a real impact on these companies that are profiteering from unethical practices to begin with, that extends far beyond the genocide in Gaza.
Direct action could also involve blockading shipments of weapons from ports and docks, as seen in Greece. It’s amazing to see more countries step up. However, we often see a lot of lip service as well. It takes everyday people to actually stand up and say: “I’m able-bodied. I’m sick to my stomach. I’m gonna listen to my instinct and explore other options”.
If protesting is not working, explore other options. If there is no direct action group, create one. All it takes is one person to begin.
Are there any final or other messages you’d like to convey? The Handala ship is the 37th boat from the FFC to travel to Gaza. There are thousands of people behind each of these journeys who make these voyages happen.
The FFC has existed for as many years as Israel’s siege on Gaza has. The FFC exists only because of Israel’s illegal siege.
We are people from around the world who are united in our shared consciousness and care for Palestine. We pose no threat. I’m looking at a bunch of toys and baby formula. We have as much food as we can carry, but our main goal is to break Israel’s illegal siege of Gaza because you need to fix a problem at the root of the cause.
Sebastian Shehadi is a freelance journalist and a contributing writer at the New Statesman. This article was first published by The New Arab. Follow Shehadi on X: @seblebanon
Muslims, and the global community, must rally around the Palestinian people’s inalienable rights: to exist, to return home, and to live free from occupation.
ANALYSIS:By Shadee ElMasry
In our world today, one would be hard-pressed to find a reputable, well-known scholar or group of scholars who support Israel. Of course, the keywords here are “well-known” and “reputable”, after a “misguided” delegation of European Imams travelled to Israel to placate the Israeli occupation and sponsor the genocide of the Palestinian people.
It is increasingly common to find these figures, Muslim apologists for Israel, who have breached the Islamic tenet of standing against injustice, laundering their authority to provide cover for Israel’s crimes against humanity against their brothers and sisters in Palestine and across the wider Arab world.
We live in a world of shameless opportunism, where the poisoned fruit of “normalising” relations with the Israeli occupation is weighed against moral conviction and our duty to stand with the afflicted Palestinians.
A few weeks ago, this tradeoff played out across our screens.
The delegation’s visit, which included 15 European Imams, was led by the controversial Hassen Chalghoumi (known for supporting Nicolas Sarkozy’s burqa ban) and involved meetings with Israeli President Isaac Herzog, who has been accused of inciting genocide.
Clearly, their consciences weren’t troubled by the catastrophic famine now gripping Gaza, a “hell on earth” where women and children are killed for scrambling to get flour, and men are killed without rhyme or reason.
I, like many companions across mosques and online feeds, was dumbfounded by the delegation’s complicity. This visit happened at a time when we as Muslims, and the global community, must rally around the Palestinian people’s inalienable rights: to exist, to return home, and to live free from occupation, especially as they face an existential threat.
Delegation swiftly denounced
The delegation was swiftly denounced. Al-Azhar University stressed that they “do not represent Islam and Muslims.” Worshippers walked out of UK mosques. A Dutch Imam was suspended.
But this isn’t just about them. We need to ask how this happened and ensure it does not repeat with us. As one scholar said, if an Imam sees the community fall into usury, then gives his Friday sermon on adultery, the Imam has betrayed his congregation.
The same is the case with Muslim apologists for Israel.
To understand their motives, we must examine three theological “traps” these figures use to justify their support for Israel, or at least the very least, their silence over Palestine. The first of which is the “Greater Good Trap”.
They claim that “speaking up against Israel will result in more harm than good”. But only the Prophet Muhammad’s silence constitutes tacit approval. Their reasoning doesn’t hold up.
A weak-willed person will always accept this reasoning because it allows them to have their proverbial cake and eat it: they gain spiritual cover for remaining silent. As we’ve seen, the scholar will say: “Yes, I can speak, but then our school will get shut down, or we’ll lose funding. For the sake of the greater good, I must remain silent.”
Israel, I’m sure, is delighted by this self-censorship. But we should also ask how it is that so many non-scholars, non-Muslims, and non-Arabs are speaking the truth about the Gaza genocide, while Islamic scholars remain silent.
It raises eyebrows, at the very least.
‘Pure theology’ trap
The second trap is the “Pure Theology” trap. Here, the scholar says: “Sound belief is the most important thing. How can we support the Palestinians when they resort to armed conflict? Their theology is flawed. I prioritise the truth, what’s wrong with that?”
But what they overlook is that falsehood has degrees. It is foolish to denounce one error while ignoring a greater one.
To attack a people’s doctrinal shortcomings while staying silent on their oppression is not principled; it is a failure to understand the fiqh of priorities.
This trap lies in misplacing truths: loudly condemning the religious mistakes of Israel’s victims while conveniently forgetting the far graver injustice of Israel itself and the violent context that brought it into being.
The final, and most sophisticated, trap that Muslim apologists for Israel use is metaphysical: they attempt to misdirect Muslims to a higher order of spiritual thought about the Divine will.
They ask what sounds like a noble question: “Why is Allah doing this to us? It must be because of our sins. Israel is merely a tool God is using to punish us or purify us.”
But the catch here is that the spiritual angle often (but not always) becomes a cover for pacifism. These figures that travelled to Israel, for instance, actively promote inaction. They showed no emotion, no voice, when witnessing the oppression of their own; only when it came to their sponsors did they find something to say.
Suffer in silence
The idea here is to suffer in silence, to clothe disengagement in the language of spiritual endurance.
In the end, this is precisely what Israel and its supporters want: to keep the spotlight off themselves. Any diversion, theological or otherwise, is welcome. As we know, the oppressor laughs at those who fixate on what is bad while ignoring what is worse. And that is the danger behind all three traps.
Yet despite these efforts, something far more powerful holds. The drive within the hearts and minds of Muslims to carry the burden of the Palestinian people, to speak their truth and fight for their freedom has not been extinguished.
It is sustained by faith, shared memory, and the belief that justice is not a slogan but a sacred duty. We ask Allah for continued guidance and protection, and the strength to continue this noble and just cause. Ameen.
Dr Shadee Elmasry has taught at several universities in the United States. Currently, he serves as scholar in residence at the New Brunswick Islamic Center in New Jersey. He is also the founder and head of Safina Society, an institution dedicated to the cause of traditional Islamic education in the West. This article was first published by The New Arab.
The Gaza Government Media Office has condemned “in the strongest terms” Israel’s storming of the Handala aid ship, calling it an act of “maritime piracy”, reports Al Jazeera.
“This blatant aggression represents a flagrant violation of international law and maritime navigation rules,” the office said in a statement.
“It reaffirms once again that the [illegal Israeli] occupation acts as a thuggish force outside the law, targeting every humanitarian initiative seeking to rescue more than 2.4 million besieged and starving Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.”
The office also called on the international community, including the United Nations and rights groups, “to take an urgent and firm stance against this aggression and to work to secure international protection for the convoys”.
Israel’s Foreign Ministry confirmed in a statement today that the Israeli navy had intercepted the Gaza-bound Handala, and it was now heading towards Israel.
“The Israeli navy has stopped the vessel Navarn from illegally entering the maritime zone of the coast of Gaza,” said the statement, using the aid ship’s original name.
“The vessel is safely making its way to the shores of Israel,” it added. “All passengers are safe.”
Freedom Flotilla slams ‘abductions’
A statement by the Freedom Flotilla Coalition accused Israel military of “abducting” the 21 crew members of the Handala, saying the ship had been “violently intercepted by the Israeli military in international waters about 40 nautical miles from Gaza.
“At 23:43 EEST Palestine time, the Occupation cut the cameras on board Handala and we have lost all communication with our ship.
“The unarmed boat was carrying life-saving supplies when it was boarded by Israeli forces, its passengers abducted, and its cargo seized.
“The interception occurred in international waters outside Palestinian territorial waters off Gaza, in violation of international maritime law.”
The Handala carried a shipment of critical humanitarian aid for Palestinians in Gaza, including baby formula, diapers, food, and medicine, the statement said.
“All cargo was non-military, civilian, and intended for direct distribution to a population facing deliberate starvation and medical collapse under Israel’s illegal blockade.”
The Handala carried 21 civilians representing 12 countries, including parliamentarians, lawyers, journalists, labour organisers, environmentalists, and other human rights defenders.
Seized crew members, journalists
The seized crew includes:
United States: Christian Smalls — Amazon Labor Union founder; Huwaida Arraf — Human rights attorney (Palestine/US); Jacob Berger — Jewish-American activist; Bob Suberi — Jewish US war veteran; Braedon Peluso — sailor and direct action activist; Dr Frank Romano — International lawyer and actor (France/US).
France: Emma Fourreau — MEP and activist (France/Sweden); Gabrielle Cathala — Parliamentarian and former humanitarian worker; Justine Kempf — nurse, Médecins du Monde; Ange Sahuquet — engineer and human rights activist.
Italy: Antonio Mazzeo — teacher, peace researcher, journalist; Antonio “Tony” La Picirella — climate and social justice organiser.
Spain: Santiago González Vallejo — economist and activist; Sergio Toribio — engineer and environmentalist.
Australia: Robert Martin — human rights activist; Tania “Tan” Safi — Journalist and organiser of Lebanese descent.
United Kingdom/France: Chloé Fiona Ludden — former UN staff and scientist.
Tunisia: Hatem Aouini — Trade unionist and internationalist activist.
The two journalists on board:
Morocco: Mohamed El Bakkali — senior journalist with Al Jazeera (based in Paris).
Iraq/United States: Waad Al Musa — cameraman and field reporter with Al Jazeera.
The attack on Handala is the third violent act by Israeli forces against Freedom Flotilla missions this year alone, said the statement.
“It follows the drone bombing of the civilian aid ship Conscience in European waters in May, which injured four people and disabled the vessel, and the illegal seizure of the Madleen in June, where Israeli forces abducted 12 civilians, including a Member of the European Parliament.
“Shortly before their abduction, the Handala‘s crew affirmed that they would be hunger-striking if detained by Israeli forces and not accepting any food from the Israeli Occupation Forces.”
Israeli officials have ignored the International Court of Justice’s binding orders that require the facilitation of humanitarian access to Gaza.
The continued attacks on peaceful civilian missions represent a grave violation of international law, said the Freedom Flotilla Coalition.
“Kia Ora Gaza is a longtime member of the Freedom Flotilla Coalition and supports the current Handala civil mission to break Israel’s illegal siege of Gaza and end Israel’s campaign to wipe out the Palestinian population.
“All governments must urgently take strong effective action to stop the genocide and occupation and end all complicity with Israel. There are no Kiwis on the Handala which was intercepted under an enforced communications blackout today.”
Activists on board the Handala aid ship before leaving Italy’s Gallipoli Port on July 20, 2025. Image: Valeria Ferraro/Anadolu
This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.
An activist on board the Handala, a Gaza Freedom Flotilla ship carrying aid to the besieged enclave in a bid to break Israel’s blockade, says the crew are preparing themselves for the possibility of Israeli forces storming the vessel.
Jacob Berger, an actor from the US, made the comments to Al Jazeera Arabic from on board the Handala, which set sail from Gallipoli, Italy last Sunday.
The ship is currently off the coast of Egypt in international waters on its route to Gaza.
The Handala is the latest ship sent by the Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC) in its mission to break Israel’s Gaza blockade amid the devastating starvation regime imposed on the terrotory by Israeli forces.
The FFC’s previous mission ended when its ship, the Madleen, was intercepted by the Israeli military, who boarded the vessel and arrested the activists on board illegally in international waters on June 9.
The Handala’s live location tracker shows it is nearing the area where the Madleen was intercepted by Israel.
Earlier, Al Jazeera reported that 16 Israeli military drones had been spotted flying near the vessel overnight.
In a message via Instagram, another crew member, Thiago Avila, said that the Handala mission was about to cross the location — around 110 nautical miles — “where we were intercepted one month ago with the Madleen trying to break the siege of Gaza and create a humanitarian sea corridor that could stop famine”.
Avila added that Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz had already warned that he intended to “commit another war crime tonight [by] kidnapping our participants and illegally stopping a humanitarian mission heading to Gaza despite the strict prohibition from the International Court of Justice on its provisional rulings.”
The Freedom Flotilla ship Handala . . . reports 16 drones – some in pairs – flying over the aid vessel as it nears Gaza. Image: @yenisafakenglish screenshot APR
The International Press Institute (IPI) has joined calls for urgent action to halt the unfolding humanitarian crisis in Gaza as global news organisations warn that their journalists there are experiencing starvation.
Israel must immediately allow life-saving food aid to reach journalists and other civilians in Gaza, IPI said in a statement today.
“The international community must also put effective pressure on Israel to allow all journalists to enter and exit the territory and to document the ongoing catastrophe,”it said.
In an unprecedented joint statement this week, the Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, BBC News, and Reuters — four of the world’s leading news agencies — said their journalists on the ground “are increasingly unable to feed themselves and their families”.
The news outlets added: “Journalists endure many deprivations and hardships in warzones. We are deeply alarmed that the threat of starvation is now one of them.”
Separately, Al Jazeera Media Network said in a statement that journalists on the ground “now find themselves fighting for their own survival” due to mass starvation.
Harrowing accounts
AFP and Al Jazeera journalists shared harrowing accounts of conditions on the ground.
One AFP photographer was quoted as saying, “I no longer have the strength to work for the media. My body is thin and I can’t work anymore.”
Al Jazeera Arabic’s Gaza correspondent said he was “drowning in hunger”.
In an interview with NPR, AFP global news director Phil Chetwynd said that the news agency had been working to evacuate its remaining contributors from Gaza, which requires Israeli permission.
The dramatic warnings come as more than 100 international humanitarian organisations said that mass starvation in Gaza was now threatening the lives of humanitarian aid workers themselves, while the civilian death toll continues to rise.
Gaza under siege — a journalist reports on daily survival Video: Al Jazeera
Meanwhile, Israel continues to refuse to allow international reporters into Gaza to report and cover the war and humanitarian situation independently, obstructing the free flow of news and limiting coverage of the humanitarian crisis.
The ongoing conflict has taken a devastating toll on journalists and media outlets in Gaza.
Highest media death toll
Since October 2023, at least 186 journalists and media workers have been killed in Gaza — Al Jazeera puts the figure as at least 230 — the West Bank, Israel, and Lebanon, according to monitoring by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).
This is the largest number of journalists to be killed in any armed conflict in this span of time.
Independent investigations such as those conducted by Forbidden Stories have found more than a dozen cases in which journalists were intentionally targeted and killed by the Israeli military — which constitutes a war crime under international law.
IPI has made repeated calls, in conjunction with its partners, urging the international community to take immediate measures to protect journalists and allow unimpeded access to the strip from international media.
Today, IPI has strongly and urgently reiterated these calls, as humanitarian conditions in Gaza rapidly deteriorate and as journalists and other civilians face man-made starvation.
The international community must use all diplomatic means at its disposal to pressure Israel to ensure the safe flow of food aid to journalists and other civilians, said IPI in a statement.
“The response by the international community in this critical moment could be the difference between life and death. There is no more time to lose,” IPI said.
Jamie Wiseman is a journalist of the Vienna-based International Press Institute.
In a landmark finding, the United Nations’ top court on Wednesday issued an advisory opinion stating that a “clean, healthy and sustainable environment” is a human right.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling supports the obligation of UN member states to tackle the climate crisis and outlines the consequences they could face if they fail to do so.
“The consequences of climate change are severe and far-reaching: they affect both natural ecosystems and human populations. These consequences underscore the urgent and existential threat posed by climate change,” said ICJ president Yuji Iwasawa, as The Guardian reported.
Judges rule document invalid as former Syrian leader had immunity as head of state
France’s highest court has cancelled an arrest warrant for the former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad for complicity in war crimes and crimes against humanity during the country’s civil war.
The Cour de cassation declared the warrant invalid under international law, which gives heads of state personal immunity from prosecution in foreign courts while they are in office.
Volker Türk says the Home Office proscription restricts right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly
The UK government’s ban on Palestine Action limits the rights and freedoms of people in the UK and is at odds with international law, the UN human rights chief has said.
Volker Türk, the UN human rights commissioner, said ministers’ decision to designate the group a terrorist organisation was “disproportionate and unnecessary” and called on them to rescind it.
A leaked document has revealed secretive plans to revise terror laws in New Zealand so that people can be charged over statements deemed to constitute material support for a proscribed organisation.
It shows the government also wants to widen the criteria for proscribing organisations to include groups that are judged to “facilitate” or “promote and encourage” terrorist acts.
The changes would see the South Pacific nation falling in line with increasingly repressive Western countries like the UK, where scores of independent journalists and anti-genocide protesters have been arrested and charged under terrorism laws in recent months.
The consultation document, handed over to the New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties (NZCCL), reveals the government has been in contact with a small number of unnamed groups this year over plans to legally redefine what material support involves, so that public statements or gestures involving insignia like flags can lead to charges if construed as support for proscribed groups.
As part of a proposal to revise the Terrorism Suppression Act, the document suggests the process for designating organisations as terror groups should be changed by “expanding the threshold to enable more modern types of entities to be designated, such as those that ‘facilitate’ or ‘promote and encourage’ terrorist acts”.
The Ministry of Justice has been contacted in an attempt to ascertain which groups it has been consulting with and why it believed the changes were necessary.
NZCCL chairman Thomas Beagle told Mick Hall In Context his group was concerned the proposed changes were a further attempt to limit the rights of New Zealanders to engage in political protest.
‘What’s going on?’
“When you look at the proposal to expand the Terrorism Suppression Act, alongside the Police and IPCA conspiring to propose a law change to ban political protest without government permission, you really have to wonder what’s going on,” he said.
A report by the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) in February proposed to give police the right to ban protests if they believed there was a high chance of public disorder and threats to public safety.
That would potentially mean bans on Palestinian solidarity protests if far right counter protestErs posed a threat of violent confrontation.
The stand-alone legislation would put New Zealand in line with other Five Eyes and NATO-aligned security jurisdictions such as Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada.
Beagle points out proposed changes to terror laws would suppress freedom of speech and further undermine freedom of assembly and the right to protest.
“We’ve seen what’s happening with the state’s abuse of terrorism suppression laws in the UK and are horrified that they have sunk so far and so quickly,” he said.
More than 100 people were arrested across the UK on suspicion of supporting Palestine Action, a non-violent protest group proscribed as a terrorist organisation by the British government earlier this month.
Arrests in social media clips
Social media clips showed pensioners aggressively arrested while attending rallies in Liverpool, London, Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol and Truro over the weekend.
Independent journalists and academics have also faced state repression under the UK’s Terrorism Act.
Among those targeted was Electronic Intifada journalist Asa Winstanley, who had his home raided and devices seized in October last year as part of the opaque counter-terror drive “Operation Incessantness”.
Independent journalist Asa Winstanley . . . his home was raided and devices seized in October last year as part of “Operation Incessantness”. Image: R Witts Photography/mickhall.substack.com
Journalist Richard Medhurst has had a terror investigation hanging over his head since being detained at Heathrow Airport in August last year and charged under section 8 of the Terrorism Act. Activist and independent journalist Sarah Wilkinson had her house raided in the same month.
Others have faced similar intimidation and threats of jail. In November 2024, Jewish academic Haim Bresheeth was charged after police alleged he had expressed support for a “proscribed organisation” during a speech outside the London residence of the Israeli ambassador to the UK.
Meanwhile, dozens of members of Palestine Action are in jail facing terror charges. The vast majority are being held on remand where they may wait two years before going to trial — a common state tactic to take activists off the street and incarcerate them, knowing the chances of conviction are slim when they eventually go to court.
‘Targeted amendments’
The document says the New Zealand government wants to progress “targeted amendments” to the Act, creating or amending offences “to capture contemporary behaviours and activities of concern” like “public expressions of support for a terrorist act or designated entities, for example by showing insignia or distributing propaganda or instructional material.”
Protesters highlight the proscription of Palestine Action outside the British Embassy at The Hague on July 20. No arrests were made following 80 arrests by Dutch police the week before. Image: Defend Our Juries/mickhall.substack.com
It suggests that the existing process for proscribing an organisation is slow and cumbersome, noting that: “Specific provisions need to be followed to designate entities not on a UN list, but the decision-making process is lengthy and the designation period is short. This impacts timely decision-making and the usefulness of designation as a tool to prevent terrorism.”
It proposes to improve “the timeliness of the process, by considering changes to who the decision-maker is” and extending the renewal period from three to five years.
The document suggests consulting the Attorney-General over designation-related decisions to ensure legal requirements are met may not be required and questions whether the designation process requiring the Prime Minister to review decisions twice is necessary. It asks whether others, like the Foreign Minister, should be involved in the decision-making process.
Beagle believes the secretive proposals pose a threat to New Zealand’s liberal democracy.
“Political protest is an important part of New Zealand’s history,” he said.
“Whether it’s the environment, worker’s rights, feminism, Māori issues, homosexual law reform or any number of other issues, political protest has had a big part in forming what Aotearoa New Zealand is today.
Protected under Bill of Rights
“It’s a right protected by New Zealand’s Bill of Rights and is a critical part of being a functioning democracy.”
The terror laws revision forms part of a wider trend of legislating to close down dissent over New Zealand’s foreign policy, now closely aligned with NATO and US interests.
The government is also widening the definition of foreign interference in a way that could see people who “should have known” that they were being used by a foreign state to undermine New Zealand’s interests prosecuted.
The Crimes (Countering Foreign Interference) Amendment Bill, which passed its first reading in Parliament on November 19, would criminalise the act of foreign interference, while also increasing powers of unwarranted searches by authorities.
The Bill is effectively a reintroduction of the country’s old colonial sedition laws inherited from Britain, the broadness of the law having allowed it to be used against communists, trade unionists and indigenous rights activists.
Vanuatu’s Minister of Climate Change Adaptation, Ralph Regenvanu, has welcomed the historic International Court of Justice (ICJ) climate ruling, calling it a “milestone in the fight for climate justice”.
The ICJ has delivered a landmark advisory opinion on states’ obligations under international law to act on climate change.
The ruling marks a major shift in the global push for climate justice.
Vanuatu — one of the nations behind the campaign — has pledged to take the decision back to the UN General Assembly (UNGA) to seek a resolution supporting its full implementation.
Climate Change Minister Regenvanu said in a statement: “We now have a common foundation based on the rule of law, releasing us from the limitations of individual nations’ political interests that have dominated climate action.
“This moment will drive stronger action and accountability to protect our planet and peoples.”
The ICJ confirmed that state responsibilities extend beyond voluntary commitments under the UNFCCC and Paris Agreement.
It ruled that customary international law also requires states to prevent environmental and transboundary harm, protect human rights, and cooperate to address climate change impacts.
Duties apply to all states
These duties apply to all states, whether or not they have ratified specific climate treaties.
Violations of these obligations carry legal consequences. The ICJ clarified that climate damage can be scientifically traced to specific polluter states whose actions or inaction cause harm.
As a result, those states could be required to stop harmful activities, regulate private sector emissions, end fossil fuel subsidies, and provide reparations to affected states and individuals.
“The implementation of this decision will set a new status quo and the structural change required to give our current and future generations hope for a healthy planet and sustainable future,” Minister Regenvanu added.
He said high-emitting nations, especially those with a history of emissions, must be held accountable.
Despite continued fossil fuel expansion and weakening global ambition — compounded by the United States’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement — Regenvanu said the ICJ ruling was a powerful tool for campaigners, lawyers, and governments.
“Vanuatu is proud and honoured to have spearheaded this initiative,” he said.
‘Powerful testament’
“The number of states and civil society actors that have joined this cause is a powerful testament to the leadership of Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and youth activists.”
The court’s decision follows a resolution adopted by consensus at the UNGA on 29 March 2023. That campaign was initiated by the Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change and backed by the Vanuatu government, calling for greater accountability from high-emitting countries.
The ruling will now be taken to the UNGA in September and is expected to be a central topic at COP30 in Brazil this November.
Vanuatu has committed to working with other nations to turn this legal outcome into coordinated action through diplomacy, policy, litigation, and international cooperation.<
“This is just the beginning,” Regenvanu said. “Success will depend on what happens next. We look forward to working with global partners to ensure this becomes a true turning point for climate justice.”
Republished from the Vanuatu Daily Post with permission.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivers its historic climate ruling in The Hague on Tuesday. Image: VDP
The boss of Australia’s human rights commission has questioned Labor’s moves to make Asio’s powers for compulsory questioning permanent, warning a planned expansion of the 9/11-era laws must include robust safeguards for individuals.
The home affairs minister, Tony Burke, introduced two pieces of legislation this week designed to remove so-called sunset provisions on the domestic spy agencies’ powers to compel cooperation. The rules act as effective expiry dates on the powers and require parliament to reconsider their reach on a regular basis.
Sixteen activists completed the 2025 Human Rights Defender Advocacy Programme in Geneva to strengthen their advocacy skills. During the programme, they called for reforms to the UN human rights system, and helped secure the renewal of the expert mandate on sexual orientation and gender identity.
Held from 9 to 20 June 2025, the on-site part of HRDAP25 took place during the 59th session of the UN Human Rights Council. The programme blended online learning with face-to-face sessions in Geneva. Defenders explored UN human rights mechanisms such as the Human Rights Council, Special Procedures, Universal Periodic Review, and Treaty Bodies. They practiced advocacy techniques, developed strategic roadmaps, and engaged directly with mechanisms to push for real change at home.
It was intensive but very good. The platform is so user friendly, everyone can learn and take time to revisit, consult, see examples, and ask questions. The possibility to have online sessions and work in groups was very useful for me. Elena Petrovska, LGBTI Equal Rights Association for Western Balkans and Turkey, North Macedonia
Participants came from a wide range of regions and contexts, including Colombia, Guatemala, Nigeria, Indonesia, Tunisia, Lebanon, Nepal, India, Uganda, Cameroon, Syria, North Macedonia, Tibet and Sierra Leone. Their work focuses on LGBTIQ+ rights, environmental justice, transitional justice, gender equality, protection of migrants, business and human rights, and the protection of communities at risk.
Each day was filled with learning opportunities, advocacy and reflection. In April and May, the group enjoyed online training and coaching sessions which were then built upon with a packed in-person programme that gave participants the background preparation needed to engage with the various mechanisms and relevant stakeholders while in Geneva. They applied and practiced the knowledge and skills gained in a few different ways, which included: an NGO breakfast with the High Commissioner for Human Rights, where participants could ask very detailed and pertinent questions about the current situation; a brown bag lunch with experts from the Committee on Civil and Political Rights, where the group received first person tips on how to submit information and engage with Treaty Bodies; and meetings with UN Special Procedures (Business and human rights, Climate Change, Enforced Disappearances, Extreme Poverty) and their staff, were participants could start personal relationships with those experts and share their advocacy journey and plans.
Photo: ISHR
Defenders also participated in a powerful public side event about the reform of the UN human rights system. They shared lived experiences and challenges with over 30 States, calling for deeper access, stronger accountability, and genuine inclusion in the ongoing UN80 reform process. Laura Restrepo from Colombia reflected: ‘The UN must look inward and acknowledge its own colonial legacies — in who speaks, who decides, and whose knowledge counts. It must shift power toward grassroots and frontline communities.’
Throughout the programme, defenders stood up for key causes. Several participants joined the global campaign to #RenewIESOGI, advocating for the continuation of the UN mandate on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity. Their voices contributed to a successful outcome: the Human Rights Council renewed the mandate for three more years, reaffirming its importance as a tool to combat discrimination and protect LGBTIQ+ communities.
Photo: ISHR
The sense of care and community ran deep. HRDAP helped participants’ work grounded in the values of solidarity and justice, and built their confidence to keep advocating at all levels. HRDAP25 not only provided skills and relevant exposure but also created a space for collaboration and resilience. Speaking during the public side event on UN reform, Pooja Patel, ISHR’s Deputy Executive Director, reminded States: ‘Human rights defenders are not only on the front lines of crises, they are on the front lines of solutions.’
No-one will have missed the recent media hype surrounding the opposite candidacies of US President Trump and UN rapporteur Francesca Albanese for this year’s Nobel Peace Prize. This blog with its focus on human rights defenders and their awards would be amiss in not taking note, even if the Nobel Prize is foremost a peace prize not necessarly a human rights award. [see also my piece of 2012 https://global.comminit.com/content/nobel-prize-peace-not-necessarily-human-rights]
So, it is not excluded that the ‘making peace at any cost’ considerations will prevail, but my bet is that the Peace Prize Committee will be careful in ignoring the massive support from the world’s human rights community who have massively come out against the Trump administration’s sanctions against Albanese. Human rights should trump ‘peace’ on this occasion.
Nominations for a Nobel Peace Prize for Francesca Albanese are gathering steam. See the links below:
On Tuesday, a federal appeals court ruled that New Jersey’s ban on private prisons is unconstitutional. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that the state law “interferes with the federal government’s core power to enforce immigration laws.” In a dissenting opinion, Senior U.S. Circuit Judge Thomas Lee Ambro wrote that it is up to Congress, not the courts, “to determine which federal…
The messy scrap between the Trump administration and Harvard University was always more than a touch bizarre. On June 4, President Donald Trump issued a proclamation claiming that the university was “no longer a trustworthy steward of international student and exchange visitor programs.” It had not pursued the Student Exchange Visa Program (SEVP) in good faith and with transparency, nor adhered “to the relevant regulatory frameworks.” The university had failed to furnish the government with sufficient information “to identify and address misconduct”, thereby presenting “an unacceptable risk to our Nation’s security”.
The nature of that misconduct lay in foreign students supposedly engaged in any number of scurrilous acts vaguely described as “known illegal activity”, “known dangerous and violent activity”, “known threats to other students or university personnel”, “known deprivation of rights of other classmates or university personnel”, and whether those activities “occurred on campus”. Harvard had failed to provide any useful data on the “disciplinary records” of such students. (The information on the three miscreants supplied in the lists was not just inadequate but useless.) Just to make Trump foam further, Harvard had “also developed extensive entanglements with foreign countries, including our adversaries” and flouted “the civil rights of students and faculty, triggering multiple Federal investigations.” While the proclamation avoids explicitly mentioning it, the throbbing subtext here is the caricatured concern that the university has not adequately addressed antisemitism.
In various splenetic statements, the President has made no secret of his views on the university. On Truth Social, we find him berating the institution for “hiring almost all woke, Radical left, idiots and ‘birdbrains’”. The university was also hectored through April by the multi-agency Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism to alter its governance processes, admissions and hiring policies, and academic programs. The administration demanded via an April 11 letter to Harvard’s president that a third party be hired to “audit” the views of students, faculty, and staff to satisfy government notions of “viewpoint diversity” that would also include the expulsion of specific students and the review of “faculty hires”. Extraordinarily, the administration demanded that the audit “proceed on a department-by-department, field-by-field, or teaching-unit-by-teaching-unit basis as appropriate.” Harvard’s refusal to accede to such demands led to a freezing of over $2.2 billion in federal funding.
On May 22, the Department of Homeland Security cancelled Harvard’s means of enrolling students through the SEVP program or employing J-1 non-immigrants under the Exchange Visitor Program (EVP). In its May 23 filing in the US District Court for Massachusetts, the university contended that such actions violated the First Amendment, the Due Process Clause, and the Administrative Procedure Act. They were “in clear retaliation for Harvard exercising its First Amendment rights to reject the government’s demands to control Harvard’s governance, curriculum, and the ‘ideology’ of its faculty and students.”
The June 4 proclamation proved to be another sledgehammer wielded by the executive, barring non-immigrants from pursuing “a course of study at Harvard University [under the SEVP program] or to participate in an exchange visitor program hosted by Harvard University”. The university successfully secured a temporary restraining order on June 5, preventing the revocation from taking effect. On June 23, US District Judge Allison D. Burroughs granted the university’s request for a preliminary injunction, extending the temporary order. “The case,” wrote Burroughs, “is about core constitutional rights that must be safeguarded: freedom of thought, freedom of expression, and freedom of speech, each of which is a pillar of a functioning democracy and an essential hedge against authoritarianism.” The “misplaced efforts” by the government “to control a reputable academic institution and squelch diverse viewpoints seemingly because they are, in some instances, opposed to this Administration’s own views, threaten these rights.”
On July 21, the parties again clashed, this time over the issue of restoring the funds frozen in federal research grants. Burroughs made no immediate decision on the matter but barely hid her scepticism about the government’s actions and inclinations. “If you can make decisions for reasons oriented around free speech,” she put to Justice Department senior attorney Michael Velchik, “the consequences are staggering to me.”
Harvard’s attorney Steve Lehotsky also argued that the demands of the government impaired the university’s autonomy, going beyond even that of dealing with antisemitism. These included audits of viewpoint diversity among faculty and students, as well as changes to the admissions and hiring processes. The demands constituted “a blatant, unrepentant violation of the First Amendment.” The issue of withdrawing funding was also argued to be a violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which requires an investigation, the holding of a hearing, and the release of findings before such a decision is made.
Velchik, very much in the mood for sophistry, made less of the antisemitism issue than that of contractual interpretation. Under government contracts with institutions, language always existed that permitted the withdrawal of funding at any time.
If Trump were serious about the MAGA brand, then attacking universities, notably those like Harvard, must count as an act of monumental self-harm. Such institutions are joined hip and all to the military-industrial-education complex, keeping America gorged with its complement of engineers, scientists, and imperial propagandists.
Harvard has also shown itself willing to march to the music of the Israel lobby, which happily provides funds for the institution. The extent of that influence was made clear by a decision by the university’s own Kennedy School to deny a fellowship to Kenneth Roth, the former head of Human Rights Watch, in early 2023. While the decision by the morally flabby dean, Douglas Elmendorf, was reversed following much outrage, the School had displayed its gaudy colours. Little wonder, given the presence of the Wexner Foundation, which is responsible for sponsoring the attendance of top-ranked Israeli generals and national security experts in a Master’s Degree program in public administration at the university.
Trump is partially right to claim that universities and their governance structures are in need of a severe dusting down. But he has shown no interest in identifying the actual problem. How wonderful, yet unlikely, it would be to see actual reforms in university policies that demilitarize funding in favor of an enlightened curriculum that abhors war.
More than 100 humanitarian groups are demanding action to end Israel’s siege of Gaza, warning mass starvation is spreading across the Palestinian territory.
The NGOs, including Amnesty International, Oxfam, Doctors Without Borders, warn, “illnesses like acute watery diarrhea are spreading, markets are empty, waste is piling up, and adults are collapsing on the streets from hunger and dehydration.”
Their warning came as the Palestinian Ministry of Health said the number of starvation-related deaths has climbed to at least 111 people.
This is Ghada al-Fayoumi, a displaced Palestinian mother of seven in Gaza City.
GHADA AL-FAYOUMI: “[translated] My children wake up sick every day. What do I do? I get saline solution for them. What can I do?
“There’s no food, no bread, no drinks, no rice, no sugar, no cooking oil, no bulgur, nothing. There is no kind of any food available to us at all.”
AMY GOODMAN: Thousands of antiwar protesters marched on Tuesday in Tel Aviv outside Israel’s military headquarters, demanding an end to Israel’s assault and a lifting of the Gaza siege. This is Israeli peace activist Alon-Lee Green with the group Standing Together.
ALON-LEE GREEN: “We are marching now in Tel Aviv, holding bags of flour and the pictures of these children that have been starved to death by our government and our army.
“We demand to stop the starvation in Gaza. We demand to stop the annihilation of Gaza. We demand to stop the daily killing of children and innocent people in Gaza.
“This cannot go on. We are Israelis, and this does not serve us. This only serves the Messianic people that lead us.”
AMY GOODMAN: This comes as the World Health Organisation has released a video showing the Israeli military attacking WHO facilities in central Gaza’s Deir al-Balah. A WHO spokesperson condemned the attack, called for the immediate release of a staff member abducted by Israeli forces.
TARIK JAŠAREVIĆ: “Male staff and family members were handcuffed, stripped, interrogated on the spot and screened at gunpoint.
“Two WHO staff and two family members were detained.”
AMY GOODMAN: Meanwhile, health officials in Gaza say Israeli attacks over the past day killed more than 70 people, including five more people seeking food at militarised aid sites. Amid growing outrage worldwide, UN Secretary-General António Guterres said on Tuesday the situation in Gaza right now is a “horror show”.
UN SECRETARY-GENERAL ANTÓNIO GUTERRES: “We need look no further than the horror show in Gaza, with a level of death and destruction without parallel in recent times.
“Malnourishment is soaring. Starvation is knocking on every door.”
AMY GOODMAN: For more, we’re joined by Michael Fakhri, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food. He is a professor of law at University of Oregon, where he leads the Food Resiliency Project.
Israel waging ‘fastest starvation campaign’ in modern history Video: Democracy Now!
Dr Michael Fakhri, welcome back to Democracy Now! If you can respond to what’s happening right now, the images of dying infants starving to death, the numbers now at over 100, people dropping in the streets, reporters saying they can’t go on?
Agence France-Presse’s union talked about they have had reporters killed in conflict, they have had reporters disappeared, injured, but they have not had this situation before with their reporters starving to death.
DR MICHAEL FAKHRI: Amy, the word “horror” — I mean, we’re running out of words of what to say. And the reason it’s horrific is it was preventable. We saw this coming. We’ve seen this coming for 20 months.
Israel announced its starvation campaign back in October 2023. And then again, Prime Minister Netanyahu announced on March 1 that nothing was to enter Gaza. And that’s what happened for 78 days. No food, no water, no fuel, no medicine entered Gaza.
And then they built these militarised aid sites that are used to humiliate, weaken and kill the Palestinians. So, what makes this horrific is it has been preventable, it was predictable. And again, this is the fastest famine we’ve seen, the fastest starvation campaign we’ve seen in modern history.
AMY GOODMAN: So, can you talk about what needs to be done at this point and the responsibility of the occupying power? Israel is occupying Gaza right now. What it means to have to protect the population it occupies?
DR FAKHRI: The International Court of Justice outlined Israel’s duties in its decisions over the last year. So, what Israel has an obligation to do is, first, end its illegal occupation immediately. This came from the court itself.
Second, it must allow humanitarian relief to enter with no restrictions. And this hasn’t been happening. So, usually, we would turn to the Security Council to authorise peacekeepers or something similar to assist.
But predictably, again, the United States keeps vetoing anything to do with a ceasefire. When the Security Council is in a deadlock because of a veto, the General Assembly, the UN General Assembly, has the authority to call for peacekeepers to accompany humanitarian convoys to enter into Gaza and to end Israel’s starvation campaign against the Palestinian people.
AMY GOODMAN: People actually protested outside the house of UN Secretary-General António Guterres yesterday. People protested all over the world yesterday against the Palestinians being starved and bombed to death. Those in front of the UN Secretary-General’s house said they don’t dispute that he has raised this issue almost every day, but they say he can do more.
Finally, Michael Fakhri, what does the UN need to do — the US, Israel, the world?
DR FAKHRI: So, as I mentioned, first and foremost, they can authorise peacekeepers to enter to stop the starvation. But, second, they need to create consequences.
The world has a duty to prevent this starvation. The world has a duty to prevent and end this genocide. And as a result, then, what the world can do is impose sanctions.
And again, this is supported by the International Court of Justice. The world needs to impose wide-scale sanctions against the state of Israel to force it to end the starvation and genocide of civilians, of Palestinian civilians in Gaza today.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you so much for being with us, Michael Fakhri, UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, speaking to us from Eugene, Oregon.
The United Nations’ highest court has found that countries can be held legally responsible for their greenhouse gas emissions, in a ruling highly anticipated by Pacific countries long frustrated with the pace of global action to address climate change.
In a landmark opinion delivered yesterday in The Hague, the president of the International Court of Justice, Yuji Iwasawa, said climate change was an “urgent and existential threat” that was “unequivocally” caused by human activity with consequences and effects that crossed borders.
They were frustrated at what they saw was a lack of action to address the climate crisis, and saw current mechanisms to address it as woefully inadequate.
Their idea was backed by the government of Vanuatu, which convinced the UN General Assembly to seek the court’s advisory opinion on what countries’ obligations are under international law.
The court’s 15 judges were asked to provide an opinion on two questions: What are countries obliged to do under existing international law to protect the climate and environment, and, second, what are the legal consequences for governments when their acts — or lack of action — have significantly harmed the climate and environment?
The International Court of Justice in The Hague yesterday . . . landmark non-binding rulings on the climate crisis. Image: X/@CIJ_ICJ
Overnight, reading a summary that took nearly two hours to deliver, Iwasawa said states had clear obligations under international law, and that countries — and, by extension, individuals and companies within those countries — were required to curb emissions.
Iwasawa said the environment and human rights obligations set out in international law did indeed apply to climate change.
‘Precondition for human rights’
“The protection of the environment is a precondition for the enjoyment of human rights,” he said, adding that sea-level rise, desertification, drought and natural disasters “may significantly impair certain human rights, including the right to life”.
To reach its conclusion, judges waded through tens of thousands of pages of written submissions and heard two weeks of oral arguments in what the court said was the ICJ’s largest-ever case, with more than 100 countries and international organisations providing testimony.
They also examined the entire corpus of international law — including human rights conventions, the law of the sea, the Paris climate agreement and many others — to determine whether countries have a human rights obligation to address climate change.
The president of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Yuji Iwasawa, delivering the landmark rulings on climate change. Image: X/@CIJ_ICJ
Major powers and emitters, like the United States and China, had argued in their testimonies that existing UN agreements, such as the Paris climate accord, were sufficient to address climate change.
But the court found that states’ obligations extended beyond climate treaties, instead to many other areas of international law, such as human rights law, environmental law, and laws around restricting cross-border harm.
Significantly for many Pacific countries, the court also provided an opinion on what would happen if sea levels rose to such a level that some states were lost altogether.
“Once a state is established, the disappearance of one of its constituent elements would not necessarily entail the loss of its statehood.”
Significant legal weight
The ICJ’s opinion is legally non-binding. But even so, advocates say it carries significant legal and political weight that cannot be ignored, potentially opening the floodgates for climate litigation and claims for compensation or reparations for climate-related loss and damage.
Individuals and groups could bring lawsuits against their own countries for failing to comply with the court’s opinion, and states could also return to the International Court of Justice to hold each other to account.
The opinion would also be a powerful precedent for legislators and judges to call on as they tackle questions related to the climate crisis, and give small countries greater weight in negotiations over future COP agreements and other climate mechanisms.
Outside the court, several dozen climate activists, from both the Netherlands and abroad, had gathered on a square as cyclists and trams rumbled by on the summer afternoon. Among them was Siaosi Vaikune, a Tongan who was among those original students to hatch the idea for the challenge.
“Everyone has been waiting for this moment,” he said. “It’s been six years of campaigning.
“Frontline communities have demanded justice again and again,” Vaikune said. “And this is another step towards that justice.”
Vanuatu’s Climate Change Minister Ralph Regenvanu (cenbtre) speaks to the media after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) rulings on climate change in The Hague yesterday. Image: X/CIJ_ICJ
‘It gives hope’ Vanuatu’s Climate Minister Ralph Regenvanu said the ruling was better than he expected and he was emotional about the result.
“The most pleasing aspect is [the ruling] was so strong in the current context where climate action and policy seems to be going backwards,” Regenvanu told RNZ Pacific.
“It gives such hope to the youth, because they were the ones who pushed this.
“I think it will regenerate an entire new generation of youth activists to push their governments for a better future for themselves.”
Regenvanu said the result showed the power of multilateralism.
“There was a point in time where everyone could compromise to agree to have this case heard here, and then here again, we see the court with the judges from all different countries of the world all unanimously agreeing on such a strong opinion, it gives you hope for multilateralism.”
He said the Pacific now has more leverage in climate negotiations.
“Communities on the ground, who are suffering from sea level rise, losing territory and so on, they know what they want, and we have to provide that,” Regenvanu said.
“Now we know that we can rely on international cooperation because of the obligations that have been declared here to assist them.”
The director of climate change at the Pacific Community (SPC), Coral Pasisi, also said the decision was a strong outcome for Pacific Island nations.
“The acknowledgement that the science is very clear, there is a direct clause between greenhouse gas emissions, global warming and the harm that is causing, particularly the most vulnerable countries.”
She said the health of the environment is closely linked to the health of people, which was acknowledged by the court.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Condemnation is rightly growing. But until concrete action is taken, western allies will remain complicit with these horrifying crimes
July has been one of the deadliest months of the war in Gaza, with Israel killing one person every 12 minutes. The UN says more than 1,000 Palestinians have died trying to get food, mostly when they attempted to collect aid from hubs.
Behind these visible deaths lies the horror of systematic starvation: “minutely engineered, closely monitored, precisely designed”, in the words of Prof Alex de Waal, an expert on humanitarian crises. More than 100 aid groups warned that it is spreading fast. At least 10 people died of hunger and malnutrition on Tuesday alone, said Gaza’s health ministry. Parents watch their children wither. Adults collapse on the street.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
The Indonesian Military (TNI) is committed to supporting the completion of the Trans-Papua Highway during President Prabowo Subianto’s term in office.
While the military is not involved in construction, it plays a critical role in securing the project from threats posed by pro-independence Papuan resistance groups in “high-risk” regions.
Spanning a total length of 4330 km, the Trans-Papua road project has been under development since 2014.
However, only 3446 km of the national road network has been connected after more than a decade of construction.
“Don’t compare Papua with Jakarta, where there are no armed groups. Papua is five times the size of Java, and not all areas are secure,” TNI spokesman Major-General Kristomei Sianturi told a media conference at the Ministry of Public Works on Monday.
One of the currently active segments is the Jayapura–Wamena route — specifically the Mamberamo–Elim section, which stretches 50 km.
The project is being carried out through a public-private partnership and was awarded to PT Hutama Karya, with an investment of Rp3.3 trillion (about US$202 million) and a 15-year concession. The segment is expected to be completed within two years, targeting finalisation next year.
Security an obstacle
General Kristomei said that one of the main obstacles was security in the vicinity of construction sites.
Out of 50 regencies/cities in Papua, at least seven are considered high-risk zones. Since its inception, the Trans-Papua road project has claimed 17 lives, due to clashes in the region.
In addition to security challenges, the delivery of construction materials remains difficult due to limited infrastructure.
“Transporting goods from one point to another in Papua is extremely difficult because there are no connecting roads. We’re essentially building from scratch,” General Kristomei said.
In May 2024, President Joko Widodo convened a limited cabinet meeting at the Merdeka Palace to discuss accelerating development in Papua. The government agreed on the urgent need to improve education, healthcare, and security in the region.
The Minister of National Development Planning, Suharso Monoarfa, announced that the government would ramp up social welfare programmes in Papua in coordination with then Vice-President Ma’ruf Amin, who chairs the Agency for the Acceleration of Special Autonomy in Papua (BP3OKP).
‘Welfare based approaches’
“We are gradually implementing welfare-based approaches, including improvements in education and health, with budgets already allocated to the relevant ministries and agencies,” Suharso said in May last year.
As of March 2023, the Indonesian government has disbursed Rp 1,036 trillion for Papua’s development.
This funding has supported major infrastructure initiatives such as the 3462 km Trans-Papua Highway, 1098 km of border roads, the construction of the 1.3 km Youtefa Bridge in Jayapura, and the renovation of Domine Eduard Osok Airport in Sorong.
Exclusive: Tony Burke also introduced legislation to add sabotage, promotion of communal violence and serious threats to Australia’s border security to the rules
Labor will make domestic spy agency Asio’s powers for compulsory questioning permanent and expand offences covered by the rules, ignoring warnings from human rights advocates about the need for ongoing parliamentary scrutiny.
The home affairs minister, Tony Burke, introduced legislation on the first full day of parliamentary sittings to add sabotage, promotion of communal violence, attacks on the defence system, and serious threats to Australia’s border security to the rules for compulsory questioning.
In 2019, a group of law students at the University of the South Pacific, frustrated at the slow pace with which the world’s governments were moving to address the climate crisis, had an idea — they would take the world’s governments to court.
They arranged a meeting with government ministers in Vanuatu and convinced them to take a case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the United Nations’ top court, where they would seek an opinion to clarify countries’ legal obligations under international law.
Six years after that idea was hatched in a classroom in Port Vila, the court will today (early Thursday morning NZT) deliver its verdict in the Dutch city of The Hague.
More than 100 countries – including New Zealand, Australia and all the countries of the Pacific – have testified before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), alongside civil society and intergovernmental organisations. Image: UN Web TV/screengrab
If successful — and those involved are quietly confident they will be — it could have major ramifications for international law, how climate change disputes are litigated, and it could give small Pacific countries greater leverage in arguments around loss and damage.
Most significantly, the claimants argue, it could establish legal consequences for countries that have driven climate change and what they owe to people harmed.
“Six long years of campaigning have led us to this moment,” said Vishal Prasad, the president of Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change, the organisation formed out of those original students.
“For too long, international responses have fallen short. We expect a clear and authoritative declaration,” he said.
“[That] climate inaction is not just a failure of policy, but a breach of international law.”
More than 100 countries — including New Zealand, Australia and all the countries of the Pacific — have testified before the court, alongside civil society and intergovernmental organisations.
And now today they will gather in the brick palace that sits in ornate gardens in this canal-ringed city to hear if the judges of the world’s top court agree.
What is the case? The ICJ adjudicates disputes between nations and issues advisory opinions on big international legal issues.
In this case, Vanuatu asked the UN General Assembly to request the judges to weigh what exactly international law requires states to do about climate change, and what the consequences should be for states that harm the climate through actions or omissions.
That has included the governments of low-lying islands and atolls in the Pacific, which say they are paying the steepest price for a crisis they had little role in creating.
These nations have long been frustrated with the current mechanisms for addressing climate change, like the UN COP conferences, and are hoping that, ultimately, the court will provide a yardstick by which to measure other countries’ actions.
Vanuatu’s Minister of Climate Change Ralph Regenvanu . . . “This may well be the most consequential case in the history of humanity.” Image: IISD-ENB
“I choose my words carefully when I say that this may well be the most consequential case in the history of humanity,” Vanuatu’s Minister for Climate Change Ralph Regenvanu said in his statement to the court last year.
“Let us not allow future generations to look back and wonder why the cause of their doom was condoned.”
But major powers and emitters, like the United States and China, have argued in their testimonies that existing UN agreements, such as the Paris climate accord, are sufficient to address climate change.
“We expect this landmark climate ruling, grounded in binding international law, to reflect the critical legal flashpoints raised during the proceedings,” said Joie Chowdhury, a senior attorney at the US-based Centre for International Environmental Law (which has been involved with the case).
“Among them: whether States’ climate obligations are anchored in multiple legal sources, extending far beyond the Paris Agreement; whether there is a right to remedy for climate harm; and how human rights and the precautionary principle define States’ climate obligations.”
Pacific youth climate activist at a demonstration at COP27 in November 2022 . . . “We are not drowning. We are fighting.” Image: Facebook/Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change
What could this mean? Rulings from the ICJ are non-binding, and there are myriad cases of international law being flouted by countries the world over.
Still, the court’s opinion — if it falls in Vanuatu’s favour — could still have major ramifications, bolstering the case for linking human rights and climate change in legal proceedings — both international and domestic — and potentially opening the floodgates for climate litigation, where individuals, groups, Indigenous Peoples, and even countries, sue governments or private companies for climate harm.
An advisory opinion would also be a powerful precedent for legislators and judges to call on as they tackle questions related to the climate crisis, and give small countries a powerful cudgel in negotiations over future COP agreements and other climate mechanisms.
“This would empower vulnerable nations and communities to demand accountability, strengthen legal arguments and negotiations and litigation and push for policies that prioritise prevention and redress over delay and denial,” Prasad said.
In essence, those who have taken the case have asked the court to issue an opinion on whether governments have “legal obligations” to protect people from climate hazards, but also whether a failure to meet those obligations could bring “legal consequences”.
At the Peace Palace today, they will find out from the court’s 15 judges.
“[The advisory opinion] is not just a legal milestone, it is a defining moment in the global climate justice movement and a beacon of hope for present and future generations,” said Vanuatu Prime Minister Jotham Napat in a statement ahead of the decision.
“I am hopeful for a powerful opinion from the ICJ. It could set the world on a meaningful path to accountability and action.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
There was a time when New Zealanders stood up for what was morally right. There are memorials around our country for those who died fighting fascism, we wrote parts of the UN Charter of Human Rights, we took an anti-nuclear stance in 1984, and three years prior to that, many of us stood against apartheid in South Africa by boycotting South African products and actively protesting against the 1981 Springbok Rugby Tour.
To call out the Israeli government for genocide and ethnic cleansing in Gaza is not to be antisemitic. Nor is it to be pro- Hamas. It is to simply to be pro-human.
While acknowledging the peace and humanitarian initiatives on the Foreign Affairs website, I note there is no calling out of the genocide and ethnic cleansing that cannot be denied is happening in Gaza.
The Israeli government is systematically demolishing whole towns and cities — including churches, mosques, even removing trees and vegetation — to deprive the Palestinian people the opportunity to return to their homeland; and there have been constant blocks to humanitarian aid as part of a policy forced starvation.
There is no doubt crimes against international law have been committed, which is why the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague has issued warrants for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defence minister, for alleged crimes against humanity.
So, my question to you is: why are you not pictured standing in this photograph (below) alongside the representatives from 33 nations at the July 16 2025 Gaza emergency conference in Bogotá?
The nations that took part in the Gaza emergency summit in were:
Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, Colombia, South Africa, Bolivia, Cuba, Honduras, Malaysia, Namibia, Algeria, Bangladesh, Botswana, Brazil, Chile, China, Djibouti, Indonesia, Iraq, Ireland, Lebanon, Libya, Mexico, Nicaragua, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Qatar, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Uruguay and Venezuela.
Representatives from 33 nations at the July 16 2025 Gaza emergency conference in Bogotá. Image: bryanbruce.substack.com
Is your policy simply to fall in behind the USA denying there is genocide and ethnic cleansing happening in Gaza?
If not, are you prepared to endorse the six coordinated diplomatic, legal and economic measures already signed up to by 12 of the participating countries in the Bogetà summit, to restrain Israel’s assault on the Occupied Palestinian Territories and defend international law at large?
Remaining countries, which could still include New Zealand, have a deadline of September 20, to coincide with the 80th UN General Assembly, for additional states to join them.
The 6 agreed measures are: Prevent the provision or transfer of arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel.
Prevent the transit, docking, and servicing of vessels at any port in all cases where there is a clear risk of the vessel being used to carry arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel
Prevent the carriage of arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel on vessels bearing our flag . . . and ensure full accountability, including de-flagging, for non-compliance with this prohibition.
Commence an urgent review of all public contracts, to prevent public institutions and funds from supporting Israel’s illegal occupation of the Palestinian Territory and entrenching its unlawful presence.
Comply with obligations to ensure accountability for the most serious crimes under international law, through robust, impartial and independent investigations and prosecutions at national or international levels, to ensure justice for all victims and the prevention of future crimes.
Support universal jurisdiction mandates, as and where applicable in national legal frameworks and judiciaries, to ensure justice for victims of international crimes committed in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
In addition, are you prepared to specifically support the enforcement of the International Criminal Court arrest warrants issued last year for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defence minister, for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza including murder and forced starvation, in a war that has left more than 211,000 Palestinians, including many children, dead, maimed, or missing since October 2023, according to the Gaza Health Ministry? (That’s a figure that is approximately the entire population of Hamiton and Rotorua).
What then is the NZ government’s policy? Are we going to support International Law and call out the Israeli government’s acts of genocide in Gaza, or not?
Yours sincerely,
Bryan Bruce Investigative documentary maker, journalist and podcaster. Auckland.
He held the regional seat in the PNG national Parliament for 10 years before resigning to contest the presidency in the 2020 election.
This time around, Lera is campaigning on what he sees as faults in the approach of the Ishmael Toroama administration and told RNZ Pacific he is offering a different tack.
JOE LERA: This time, people have seen that the current government is the most corrupt. They have addressed only one side of independence, which is the political side, the other two sides, They have not done it very well.
DON WISEMAN: What do we mean by that? We can’t bandy around words like corruption. What do you mean by corruption?
JL:What they have done is huge. They are putting public funds into personal members’ accounts, like the constituency grant – 360,000 kina a year.
DW: As someone who has operated in the national parliament, you know that that is done there as well. So it’s not corrupt necessarily, is it?
JL:Well, when they go into their personal account, they use it for their own family goods, and that development, it should be development funds. The people are not seeing the tangible outcomes in the number two side, which is the development side.
All the roads are bad. The hospitals are now running out of drugs. Doctors are checking the patients, sending them to pharmaceutical shops to buy the medicine, because the hospitals have run out.
DW: These are problems that are affecting the entire country, aren’t they, and there’s a shortage of money. So how would you solve it? What would you do differently?
JL: We will try to make big changes in addressing sustainable development, in agriculture, fishing, forestry, so we can create jobs for the small people.
Instead of talking about big, billion dollar mining projects, which will take a long time, we should start with what we already have, and develop and create opportunities for the people to be engaged in nation building through sustainable development first, then we progress into the higher billion dollar projects.
Now we are going talking about mining when the people don’t have opportunity and they are getting poorer and poorer. That’s one area, the other area, to create change we will try to fix the government structure, from ABG to community governments to village assemblies, down to the chiefs.
At the moment, the policies they have have fragmented the conduit of getting the services from the top government down to to the village people.
DW: In the past, you’ve spoken out against the push for independence, suggesting I think, that Bougainville is not ready yet, and it should take its time. Where do you stand at the moment on the independence question?
JL: The independence question? We are all for it. I’m not against it, but I’m against the process. How they are going about it. I think the answer has been already given in the Bougainville Peace Agreement, which is a joint creation between the PNG and ABG government, and the process is very clear.
Now, what the current government is doing is they are going outside of the Peace Agreement, and they are trying to shortcut based on the [referendum] result.
But the Peace Agreement doe not say independence will be given to us based on the result. What it says is, after we know the result, the two governments must continue to dialogue, consult each other and find ways of how to improve the economy, the law and order issues, the development issues.
When we fix those, the nation building pillars, we can then apply for the ratification to take place.
DW: So you’re talking about something that would be quite a way further down the line than what this current government is talking about?
JL:The issue is timing. They are putting deadlines themselves, and they are trying to push the PNG government to swallow it. The PNG government is a sovereign nation already.
We should respect and honestly, in a family room situation, negotiate, talk with them, as the Peace Agreement says, and reach understanding on the timing and other related issues, but not to even take a confrontational approach, which is what they are doing now, but take a family room approach, where we sit and negotiate in the spirit of the Peace Agreement.
This transcript has been edited for brevity and clarity. Don Wiseman is a senior journalist with RNZ Pacific. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Venezuelan Attorney General Tarek William Saab reported that the 252 Venezuelans previously held at the CECOT in El Salvador were systematically subjected to cruel human rights violations, including unlawful deprivation of liberty, daily torture, prolonged isolation without sunlight or ventilation, being shot with pellets, receiving rotten food and unsafe water, being denied medical care, and numerous due process violations.
During a media appearance on Monday, July 21, the head of the Public Ministry announced the opening of a formal investigation, through three designated prosecutors, into Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele, Salvadoran Minister of Justice and Public Security Héctor Gustavo Villatoro, and Director General of Penitentiary Centers and Deputy Minister of Justice and Public Security Osiris Luna Mesa.
On 3 July 2025, the undersigned 22 organizations, expressed their deep concern over the increasing use of criminal law without due process guarantees, the harassment, the stigmatization, and the persecution by Salvadoran authorities against human rights defenders, community leaders, environmental activists, university professors, lawyers, journalists, and other voices critical of the government.
Prominent journalists, activists, and lawyers, such as former prosecutor and defenderRuth López and professor and constitutional lawyerEnrique Anaya, have been arbitrarily detained in retaliation for their work documenting and denouncing corruption, human rights violations, and attacks on the rule of law in El Salvador. Both are in prolonged pretrial detention and face spurious and unfounded charges of embezzlement and money laundering, respectively. These detentions send an intimidating message to the rest of civil society and further erode public confidence in the impartiality and independence of the Salvadoran judicial system.
The Salvadoran state has intensified its attacks on civil society and the independent press through coordinated strategies in the legal, institutional, and media spheres to silence their work. It is extremely alarming that they are being persecuted under a prolonged state of exception that suspends fundamental rights and freedoms, a measure whose objective is to control organized crime gangs.
In a context of high concentration of power, the Foreign Agents Law was enacted, imposing severe restrictions on non-governmental organizations, including onerous registration requirements, a 30 percent tax on foreign funding, and broad powers to suspend their activities based on vague allegations of political activity. Together with the hostile rhetoric from senior officials led by President Bukele, these measures aim to delegitimize independent voices and restrict the legitimate activities of civil society organizations.
The persecution of defenders such as Ruth López and Enrique Anaya reflects a broader strategy to dismantle civic oversight and the rule of law, and to criminalize criticism and the defense of human rights. Other examples of criminalization include community leaders from La Floresta and the El Bosque cooperative, among them Fidel Zavala, Alejandro Henríquez, and Ángel Pérez, who have been detained during peaceful protests over land and evictions.
It is important to note that, throughout Nayib Bukele’s administration, dozens of human rights defenders, journalists, lawyers, former public officials, members of the political opposition, and businesspeople have been forced into exile outside the country. This trend, which is worrying in itself, has significantly increased in the last month, reflecting a growing climate of repression and persecution that severely restricts civic and democratic space in El Salvador.
The repression of civic space in El Salvador is taking place within a broader context of erosion of democratic institutions and the rule of law. As a result of the state of exception, more than 85,000 people have been detained without respect for basic due process guarantees, including the presumption of innocence and access to a fair and impartial trial, and in inhumane conditions of deprivation of liberty. Local organizations have documented at least 400 deaths of people in custody since the beginning of the exception regime.
We therefore call on the Salvadoran State to:
Immediately release lawyers Ruth López and Enrique Anaya, as well as all human rights defenders and community leaders who have been arbitrarily detained for political reasons; and respect due process guarantees, including the right to a public trial, in any proceedings against them.
Refrain from using pretrial detention as a form of advance punishment against human rights defenders and others detained for political reasons, in clear violation of due process guarantees and international human rights standards.
Protect human rights defenders from reprisals, harassment, torture, and threats, and ensure accountability for abuses committed.
Restore conditions that allow freedom of expression, association, and assembly, and harmonize national laws with El Salvador’s international obligations, including by repealing the Foreign Agents Law.
End the misuse and abuse of emergency measures and, in all cases, guarantee the right to a fair trial.
We also call on the international community, including the Organization of American States and the United Nations, to:
Urge the government of El Salvador to immediately cease the instrumentalization of the criminal justice system against human rights defenders or those who express criticism of the government.
Take urgent action, through diplomatic channels, assistance, and conditional cooperation, among other means, to protect civic space, the rule of law, democracy, and human rights in El Salvador.
Abogadas y Abogados para la Justicia y los Derechos Humanos (México)
Alianza Regional por la Libre Expresión e Información
Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos -APRODEH, Perú
Center for Gender & Refugee Studies (CGRS)
Centro de Documentación en Derechos Humanos “Segundo Montes Mozo SJ” (CSMM) / Ecuador
Centro por la Justicia y el Derecho Internacional (CEJIL)
Consultora Solidaria (Mexico)
Consultoría para los Derechos Humanos y el Desplazamiento – CODHES (Colombia).
Convergencia por los Derechos Humanos (CDH), Guatemala
Comité de Familiares de Víctimas de los Sucesos de Febrero y Marzo de 1989 (COFAVIC), Venezuela.
Due Process of Law Foundation (DPLF)
Equipo de Reflexión, Investigación y Comunicación (ERIC-SJ). Honduras
Global Strategic Litigation Council for Refugee Rights
Instituto de Defensa Legal (IDL), Peru
Latin America Working Group (LAWG)
Movimiento Autónomo de Mujeres
Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights
Synergía, iniciativas para los derechos humanos
Tejiendo Redes Infancia en América Latina y el Caribe
Groups that have declined to join the government-sponsored “harmony accord” signed yesterday by some Muslim and Jewish groups, say that the proposed new council is “misaligned” with its aims.
The signed accord was presented at Government House in Auckland.
About 70 people attended, including representatives of the New Zealand Jewish Council, His Highness the Aga Khan Council for Australia and New Zealand and the Jewish Community Security Group, reports RNZ News.
The initiative originated with government recognition that the consequences of Israel’s actions in Gaza are impacting on Jewish and Muslim communities in Aotearoa, as well as the wider community.
While agreeing with that statement of purpose, other Muslim and Jewish groups have chosen to decline the invitation, said some of the disagreeing groups in a joint statement.
They believe that the council, as formulated, is misaligned with its aims.
“Gaza is not a religious issue, and this has never been a conflict between our faiths,” Dr Abdul Monem, a co-founder of ICONZ said.
‘Horrifying humanitarian consequences’
“In Gaza we see a massive violation of international law with horrifying humanitarian consequences.
“We place Israel’s annihilating campaign against Gaza, the complicity of states and economies at the centre of our understanding — not religion.
“The first action to address the suffering in Gaza and ameliorate its effects here in Aotearoa must be government action. Our government needs to comply with international courts and act on this humanitarian calamity.
“That does not require a new council.”
The impetus for this initiative clearly linked international events with their local impacts, but the document does not mention Gaza among the council’s priorities, said the statement.
“Signatories are not required to acknowledge universal human rights, nor the courts which have ruled so decisively and created obligations for the New Zealand government. Social distress is disconnected from its immediate cause.”
The council was open to parties which did not recognise the role of international humanitarian law in Palestine, nor the full human and political rights of their fellow New Zealanders.
‘Overlooks humanitarian law’
Marilyn Garson, co-founder of Alternative Jewish Voices said: “It has broad implications to overlook our rights and international humanitarian law.
“As currently formulated, the council includes no direct Palestinian representation. That’s not good enough.
“How can there be credible discussion of Aotearoa’s ethnic safety — let alone advocacy for international action — without Palestinians?
“Law, human rights and the dignity of every person’s life are not opinions. They are human entitlements and global agreements to which Aotearoa has bound itself.
“No person in Aotearoa should have to enter a room — especially a council created under government auspices — knowing that their fundamental rights will not be upheld. No one should have to begin by asking for that which is theirs.”
The groups outside this new council said they wished to live in a harmonious society, but for them it was unclear why a new council of Jews and Muslims should represent the path to harmony.
“Advocacy that comes from faith can be a powerful force. We already work with numerous interfaith community initiatives, some formed at government initiative and waiting to really find their purpose,” said Dr Muhammad Sajjad Naqvi, president of ICONZ.
Addressing local threats
“Those existing channels include more of the parties needed to address local threats, including Christian nationalism like that of Destiny Church.
“Perhaps government should resource those rather than starting something new.”
The groups who declined to join the council said they had “warm and enduring relationships” with FIANZ and Dayenu, which would take seats at this council table.
“All of the groups share common goals, but not this path,” the statement said.
ICONZ is a national umbrella organisation for New Zealand Shia Muslims for a unified voice. It was established by Muslims who have been born in New Zealand or born to migrants who chose New Zealand to be their home.
Alternative Jewish Voices is a collective of Aotearoa Jews working for Jewish pluralism and anti-racism. It supports the work of Palestinians who seek liberation grounded in law and our equal human rights.
In a joint statement, more than two dozen Western countries, including New Zealand, have called for an immediate end to the war on Gaza. But the statement is merely empty rhetoric that declines to take any concrete action against Israel, and which Israel will duly ignore.
AGAINST THE CURRENT:By Steven Cowan
The New Zealand government has joined 27 other countries calling for an “immediate end” to the war in Gaza. The joint statement says “the suffering of civilians in Gaza has reached new depths”.
It goes on to say that the drip feeding of aid and the inhumane killing of civilians, including children, seeking to meet their most basic needs of water and food.
But many of the countries that have signed this statement stand condemned for actively enabling Israel to pursue its genocidal assault on Gaza. Countries like Britain, Canada and Australia, continue to supply Israel with arms, have continued to trade with Israel, and have turned a blind eye to the atrocities and war crimes Israel continues to commit in Gaza.
It’s more than ironic that while Western countries like Britain and New Zealand are calling for an end to the war in Gaza, they continue to be hostile toward the anti-war protest movements in their own countries.
The British government recently classified the protest group Palestine Action as a “terrorist” group.
In New Zealand, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Winston Peters, has denounced pro-Palestine protesters as “left wing fascists” and “communist, fascist and anti-democratic losers”. He has pushed back against the growing demands that the New Zealand government take direct action against Israel, including the cutting of all diplomatic ties.
The New Zealand government, which contains a number of Zionists within its cabinet, including Act leader David Seymour and co-leader Brooke van Velden, will be more than comfortable with a statement that proposes to do nothing.
‘Statement lacks leadership’
Its call for an end to the war is empty rhetoric, and which Israel will duly ignore — as it has ignored other calls for its genocidal war to end. As Amnesty International has said, ‘the statement lacks any resolve, leadership, or action to help end the genocide in Gaza.’
“This is cruelty – this is not a war,” says this young girl’s placard quoting the late Pope Francis in an Auckland march last Saturday . . . this featured in an earlier report. Image: Asia Pacific Report
New Zealand has declined to join The Hague Group alliance of countries that recently met in Colombia.
It announced six immediate steps it would be taking against Israel. But since The Hague Group has already been attacked by the United States, it’s never been likely that New Zealand would join it.
The National-led coalition government has surrendered New Zealand’s independent foreign policy in favour of supporting the interests of a declining American Empire.
New Zealand has joined 24 other countries in calling for an end to the war in Gaza, and criticising what they call the inhumane killing of Palestinians.
“We condemn the drip feeding of aid and the inhumane killing of civilians, including children, seeking to meet their most basic needs of water and food.”
They said it was “horrifying” that more than 800 civilians had been killed while seeking aid, the majority at food distribution sites run by a US- and Israeli-backed foundation.
“We call on the Israeli government to immediately lift restrictions on the flow of aid and to urgently enable the UN and humanitarian NGOs to do their life saving work safely and effectively,” it said.
Foreign Minister Winston Peters . . . “The tipping point was some time ago . . . it’s gotten to the stage where we’ve just lost our patience.” Image: RN/Mark Papalii
“Proposals to remove the Palestinian population into a ‘humanitarian city’ are completely unacceptable. Permanent forced displacement is a violation of international humanitarian law.”
The statement said the countries were “prepared to take further action” to support an immediate ceasefire.
Reuters reported Israel’s foreign ministry said the statement was “disconnected from reality” and it would send the wrong message to Hamas.
“The statement fails to focus the pressure on Hamas and fails to recognise Hamas’s role and responsibility for the situation,” the Israeli statement said.
Having NZ voice heard
Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters told RNZ Morning Report, New Zealand had chosen to be part of the statement as a way to have its voice heard on the “dire” humanitarian situation in Gaza.
“The tipping point was some time ago . . . it’s gotten to the stage where we’ve just lost our patience . . . ”
Peters said he wanted to see what the response to the condemnation was.
“The conflict in the Middle East goes on and on . . . It’s gone from a situation where it was excusable, due to the October 7 conflict, to inexcusable as innocent people are being swept into it,” he said.
“I do think there has to be change. It must happen now.”
The war in Gaza was triggered when Hamas-led militants attacked Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1200 people and taking 251 hostages, according to Israeli tallies.
Israel’s subsequent air and ground war in Gaza has killed more than 59,000 Palestinians — including at least 17,400 children, according to the enclave’s Health Ministry, while displacing almost the entire population of more than 2 million and spreading a hunger crisis.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Israel has rejected a statement by 25 countries calling for an end to the war on Gaza as a move “disconnected from reality and sends the wrong message to Hamas.”
Donald Trump has the “greatest chance of any political leader” to broker a ceasefire deal in Gaza, Penny Wong says, after Australia on Tuesday joined with 27 other countries to condemn Israel for the “drip feeding of aid” and the “inhumane killing” of Palestinians.
Wong acknowledged the key role the US – a strong supporter of Israel – plays in the peace process as domestic pressure on the Albanese government to play a more pivotal role in addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza mounts.
LIVE updates: