Washington, D.C., July 3, 2025— The Committee to Protect Journalists condemns the June 18 arrest of journalist Muzahim Bajaber in central Yemen’s Hadramout Governorate on unspecified charges.
The warrant, reviewed by CPJ, was issued by a Specialized Criminal Court and violates Article 13 of Yemen’s Press and Publications Law, which protects journalists from punishment for publishing their opinions unless they violate the law.
“Bajaber’s arrest is the latest example of the deteriorating press freedom situation in areas controlled by the Internationally Recognized Government (IRG),” said CPJ Regional Director Sara Qudah. “We call on the IRG to immediately release Bajaber and to allow journalists to do their job without fear of reprisal.”
Yemen has been mired in civil war since 2014, when Houthi rebels seized the capital, Sanaa, and ousted the government. The Saudi-backed IRG intervened in 2015 in an effort to restore the government to power.
Journalists face grave threats in areas controlled by the Houthi, IRG, and Southern Transitional Council (STC). Violations—including arbitrary detention, enforced disappearance, and unfair trials—are carried out with near-total impunity.
Bajaber, publisher and editor-in-chief of the independent, Hadramout-based media outlet, Al-Ahqaf Media Platform, was arrested by security forces in the IRG-controlled city of Al-Mukalla.
In a separate incident, journalist Ahmed Maher—who was detained in August 2022 by security forces affiliated with the STC and released in January 2025—has recently over the last month been subjected to online incitement and threats, according to Yemeni press freedom and human rights organizations, as well as messages sent directly from the journalist to CPJ.
CPJ emailed the Ministry of Human Rights in the IRG for comment on the arrest of Bajaber, but did not receive an immediate response.
New York, July 2, 2025—The Committee to Protect Journalists urges Kyrgyzstan President Sadyr Japarov to veto a new mass media law that would require all publications to register with the state and heavily restricts any foreign legal entities from founding or owning media outlets.
Parliament passed the bill, which would allow an authorized state body to decide which media outlets can operate, on June 25, rejecting a compromise draft of the bill that had been the product of two years of negotiations with a working group that included journalists.
“Considering Kyrgyzstan’s unprecedented media crackdown, Parliament’s last-minute reintroduction of repressive clauses into the new media law bill is dangerous and rightly sparks deep concern for the press,” said Gulnoza Said, CPJ’s Europe and Central Asia program coordinator. “We call on President Japarov to give substance to his verbal commitments to press freedom by vetoing this version of the bill and returning it to Parliament so it can pass a version supported by the country’s journalists.”
The compromise draft was passed in a first reading by parliament in April; in mid-June, deputies reintroduced the disputed clauses before rushing the bill through in two readings on June 25.
Several journalists and media experts who worked on the compromise draft have asked the government to revert to a version based on the draft.
If the current version is ratified, “those who will print any criticism or alternative views, will simply not be registered and won’t be able to publish,” Semetey Amanbekov, a member of local advocacy group Media Action Platform, told RFE/RL, adding that it will mean journalism in Kyrgyzstan will come to an end.
The budget bill just passed by the Senate provides more than $170 billion in new funding for immigration enforcement and detention. Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, who worked on an analysis published by the American Immigration Council, says the new budget would make ICE “the single largest federal law enforcement agency in the history of the nation.”
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
The budget bill just passed by the Senate provides more than $170 billion in new funding for immigration enforcement and detention. Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, who worked on an analysis published by the American Immigration Council, says the new budget would make ICE “the single largest federal law enforcement agency in the history of the nation.”
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
A photojournalist for news agency Agence France-Presse was struck with crowd-control munitions by law enforcement officers while documenting a protest against the Trump administration in Los Angeles, California, on June 14, 2025.
The protest in downtown Los Angeles was one of hundreds of “No Kings” demonstrations held nationwide to counter a military parade attended by President Donald Trump in Washington, D.C., marking the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army. It also followed days of protests in the city and nearby towns against recent federal raids, part of the Trump administration’s larger immigration crackdown.
The photojournalist, who asked to remain anonymous, told France 24 that he was wearing two cameras, a helmet with AFP stickers and a patch on his chest that said “Press.”
He said he was about 90 feet away from law enforcement officers when they advanced on the protesters and began firing rubber bullets. Two struck him in the face and right arm.
The photojournalist told the news network that he went to the hospital to be treated for his injuries from the shots.
France 24 asked both the Los Angeles Police Department and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department about the shooting; neither agency claimed responsibility.
The police department told AFP that “less-lethal munitions were used to clear the area of those who refused to comply and leave the area.” The Sheriff’s Department said that it “does not condone any actions that intentionally target members of the press.”
UN experts and hundreds of lawyers warn that proscribing group would conflate protest and terrorism
The home secretary is coming under increasing pressure to abandon plans to ban Palestine Action, as UN experts and hundreds of lawyers warned that proscribing the group would conflate protest and terrorism.
In two separate letters to Yvette Cooper, the Network for Police Monitoring (Netpol) lawyers’ group and the Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers said that proscribing the group would set a dangerous precedent.
New York, June 30, 2025—Hong Kong, an international financial hub and once a beacon of free media, is now in the grip of a rapid decline in press freedom that threatens the city’s status as a global financial information center.
Three journalists told CPJ that investigative reporting on major economic events, a cornerstone of Hong Kong’s financial transparency, has nearly disappeared amid government pressure and the departure of major outlets.
The sharp decline in press freedom, the journalists said, is a direct result of the National Security Law. This law, enacted on June 30, 2020, was imposed directly by Beijing, bypassing Hong Kong’s local legislature, and included offenses for secession, subversion, terrorist activities, and collusion with foreign forces, with penalties ranging from a three years to life imprisonment.
In the five years since it was enacted, authorities have shut down media outlets and arrested several journalists, including Jimmy Lai, the founder of one of Hong Kong’s largest newspapers, the pro-democracy Apple Daily. Several major international news organizations have either relocated or downsized their operations in Hong Kong, leading to a decline in reporting on the city and its financial hub.
“Hong Kong’s economic boom happened because journalists could work without interference,” said a veteran reporter with 11 years’ experience in television, newspapers, and digital platforms in Hong Kong, who spoke to CPJ on condition of anonymity due to security concerns.
While markets still function, at least three media professionals told CPJ that the erosion of press freedom — often overlooked — is a key factor behind Hong Kong’s fading financial appeal to market participants. One reporter described the media as “paralyzed.”
Another hastily passed security law enacted in March 2024 in Hong Kong further deepened fears that it would be used to suppress press freedom and prosecute journalists.
Jimmy Lai walks through the Stanley prison in Hong Kong in 2023. (Photo: AP/Louise Delmotte)
“There has never been an international financial center in history that operates with restrictions on information,” Simon Lee, an economic commentator and former assistant CEO of Next Digital Group, the parent company of Apple Daily, told CPJ.
Hong Kong long served as a base for reporting on China’s economy and power structures, said a former financial journalist on the condition of anonymity, citing safety concerns.
“Most Hong Kong-listed companies come from the mainland [China]. Foreign media used Hong Kong to observe China’s economic operations or wealth transfers,” the former financial journalist told CPJ. “Now the risks feel similar to reporting from inside China.”
Crackdowns, shutdowns, and an exodus of major media
Since the introduction of the National Security Law in 2020, at least eight media outlets have shut. These included Apple Daily, news and lifestyle magazine Next Magazine, both published by Lai’s Next Digital group, and the online outlet Stand News, after they were raided by authorities.
At least four other media organizations —Post852,DB channel,Citizen News, andFactWire — ceased operations voluntarily, citing concerns over the deteriorating political environment.
China had the world’shighest number of imprisoned journalists in CPJ’s latest prison census — 50 in total, including eight in Hong Kong.
The New York Timesmoved part of its newsroom to Seoul in 2020. In March 2024, Radio Free Asiaclosed its Hong Kong office, and in May, The Wall Street Journalrelocated its Asia headquarters to Singapore.
“With fewer foreign correspondents based in the city, there’s simply less reporting on Hong Kong,” the former financial journalist told CPJ. “As a result, the city’s economy may receive less objective attention on the global stage.”
The former financial journalist said that one of the biggest losses after the security law was the disappearance of Apple Daily. Unlike most local media, which focused on routine market updates, Apple Daily connected business to politics and mapped interest networks — an increasingly rare practice.
Copies of the last issue of Apple Daily arrive at a newspaper booth in Hong Kong on June 24, 2021. (Photo: AP/Vincent Yu)
Next Digital, through Apple Daily, built a reputation for investigative financial reporting. A former staff member told the BBC that the company once spent over 100,000 yuan (US$14,000) tracing dozens of property owners to uncover a developer’s hidden ties with a bank.
“From a financial news perspective, one of our biggest problems is losing Apple Daily,” the former financial journalist told CPJ.
Local business reporting also fades away
As Hong Kong’s financial hub reputation comes under question, stories on high unemployment rates, struggling small businesses, and store closures are increasingly out of sight.
“One direct effect is feeling increasingly unable to grasp what’s happening in the city; important information no longer seems easy to access,” Lee said. “Previously, competition among professional outlets encouraged source sharing and helped maintain a power balance. Now, one-way government-controlled information faces little resistance.”
Lee told CPJ that changes in Hong Kong’s media landscape are particularly evident in major financial events, pointing to the coverage of the 2024 sale of Li Ka-shing’s port assets, in which local outlets failed to question the deal’s structure, rationale, or political implications.
“Beijing called it a national security matter, and the other side of the story disappeared,” Lee told CPJ. “Many focus on the judicial system when discussing fairness, but true fairness also depends on the free flow of information … Without information freedom, public oversight fades, and the market’s system of checks and balances collapses.”
Lee also cited the case of Alvin Chau, a casino tycoon in Macao who was sentenced in 2023 to 18 years for illegal gambling. While foreign media uncovered his alleged links to oil smuggling operations to North Korea, local media offered little follow-up.
“These investigations and reports simply no longer exist,” Lee said.
Sources can’t speak freely
Two journalists told CPJ they have noticed increasing reluctance from interviewees.
During previous years of the Annual Budget Speech, Hong Kong’s yearly announcement of its public spending and economic plans, the media would host analysis shows with economists debating government spending and policies.
“We would ask about the fiscal surplus, support for the poor, and whether measures were targeted,” the veteran reporter told CPJ, adding that now, “only one professor is willing to speak openly.”
Lee told CPJ that the atmosphere of “not being allowed to criticize” the broader structure or government policy has also extended to the reporting on how financial markets operate.
Market participants should be free to take either optimistic or pessimistic views of the economic outlook, Lee told CPJ, adding that today in Hong Kong, it is discouraged to express pessimism, and even silently shifting toward defensive investment strategies or risk-averse behavior may be interpreted as making a political statement.
“It’s hard for any place with such high information costs to remain a global financial hub,” Lee said. “Because even pulling back on investment can send a signal. If investors are accused of intentionally dragging down the market just because they try to hedge or take a cautious view, they may decide it’s safer to avoid the market altogether.”
In response to CPJ’s request for comment, a Hong Kong government spokesperson referred CPJ to a statement that said the security law has enabled the city to “make a major transition from chaos to order” and “the business environment has continuously improved,” while press freedom is protected under the law.
Two hours after Keira Alexandra Kronvold gave birth, her daughter was taken from her – the third child to be removed from her care following a now-banned assessment that disproportionately targets Inuit women in Denmark. Will she win the fight to get Zammi back?
‘Now your two hours begin.” The countdown started when Keira Alexandra Kronvold had just given birth in the early hours of 7 November 2024. Keira, 38, was originally granted just one hour with her daughter, Zammi, before her baby was to be removed from her and taken to foster parents – but the midwife begged authorities to give them more time. Before Zammi’s arrival, the midwife asked if Keira had any wishes. “I said, ‘I want hand and footprints. I want to grab her, I don’t want you to catch her when she is born. I want to catch her myself.’”
During labour – which lasted just an hour and a half – Keira kept checking whether her 20-year-old daughter, Zoe, who had never seen a birth before, was OK; and she was determined not to scream, to avoid waking up the other mothers and babies on the ward. But when Zammi arrived, everything else – the months of stress, worry and pressure – gave way to pure joy. “I just laid back,” she says, arms cradled and slowly reclining on her sofa, as she re-enacts the moment at home in the town of Thisted, northern Denmark, “because I had to keep her warm. She was so beautiful. That emotional feeling is indescribable. Right there: unconditional love, pure happiness, all that joy.” She wished Zammi a happy birthday and told her how much she loved her. She cried tears of joy, counted Zammi’s tiny fingers.
Haitian Lourda Jean Pierre died shortly after giving birth at home after seeing images of pregnant women and new mothers being rounded up in hospitals by immigration agents
About an hour after giving birth on the floor of her one-room shack in the Dominican Republic, Lourdia Jean Pierre, 32, started gasping for breath.
Her husband, Ronald Jean, knew something was seriously wrong, and shouted for help from the neighbours.
The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) called on Bahrain’s Shura Council to reject the government’s proposed amendments to the Law on Press, Printing, and Publishing (Decree-Law No. 47 of 2002) in a joint statement led by CPJ, Access Now, and seven other press freedom and human rights groups.
The statement warned that the Bahraini government’s claim of abolishing prison sentences for journalists is misleading when other repressive laws—such as the Penal Code and Anti-Terrorism Law—still allow for their prosecution. This dual legal system enables authorities to arbitrarily impose fines or prison terms based on an individual’s political profile, seriously undermining press freedom, said the statement’s signatories.
The statement also raised concerns about the government’s proposed licensing requirements for online and “media-related” activities, warning that broad definitions under Article 3 could have a chilling effect on online expression, including by bloggers and content creators. While Article 67 claims there will be no prior censorship, the licensing system could be used to restrict media through delays or denials—effectively enabling censorship and violating international standards on freedom of expression.
Elected in 2019 as El Salvador’s 81st president, Nayib Bukele campaigned on a promise to make the country safer. In this article, Elizabeth García examines how his efforts to deliver on that promise have led to severe human rights violations and reshaped security policy across Latin America.
“Today, we won in the first round and we made history. We’ve turned the page on power.” Nayib Bukele’s win marked the collapse of El Salvador’s two dominant political parties: the conservative Nationalist Republican Alliance (ARENA) and the leftist Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (FMLN), both of which had lost public trust amid decades of corruption and failure to curb rising gang violence. Bukele’s election in 2019 was seen by many in the country and across Latin America as the dawn of a new political era. One that promised anti-corruption, investment in education, infrastructure and, most urgently, a safer nation.
Now, six years and a second term later, the era ushered in by Bukele has delivered more security—but at a cost that is increasingly drawing international scrutiny. The establishment of the Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo (CECOT), a mega-prison with the capacity to hold 40,000 inmates, has become a symbol of Bukele’s iron-fisted approach to crime. Under his “state of emergency,” which suspends certain constitutional rights, more than 75,000 people have been arrested, many without due process. While homicide rates have plummeted and public spaces once controlled by gangs are now accessible, human rights organisations warn that the price of peace has been mass incarceration, arbitrary detentions and the erosion of democratic norms.
From murder capital to mandate for change
Before Bukele, El Salvador was known as the “murder capital of the world,” with the country recording an average of 103 homicides per 100,000 people in 2015. This staggering rate of violence was largely driven by powerful street gangs, particularly MS-13 and Barrio 18. The state, weakened by years of civil war and institutional corruption, struggled to assert control, leaving many Salvadorans at the mercy of extortion, forced displacement and extrajudicial killings.
Previous administrations implemented a mix of hardline crackdowns, known as mano dura policies, and short-lived truces with gang leaders. While these approaches occasionally led to temporary declines in violence, they often backfired, strengthening the gangs’ internal structures and giving them more leverage over communities. Prisons became recruitment hubs, and the public grew increasingly disillusioned with the state’s inability to restore order.
By the time Bukele came into office in 2019, trust in traditional political parties had eroded. His rise represented not just a generational shift but a broader desire for a clean break from the status quo. Campaigning on promises to restore security and take back control of the streets, Bukele capitalised on a public mandate for change—setting the stage for drastic measures.
CECOT: symbol of power or repression?
CECOT is not an isolated initiative; it’s the culmination of Bukele’s seven-phaseTerritorial Control Plan, which he launched within his first year in office, focused on reclaiming gang-occupied areas. Marketed as a fortress of law and order, CECOT was unveiled in a highly publicised media campaign that broadcast images of tattooed inmates lined up with their heads bowed and shaved, effectively stripped of their identity and autonomy. Inmates are held in overcrowded cells, sleep on metal bunks without mattresses and have 0.6 square meters of space each. There are no educational programs, family visits, or outdoor access. These conditions highlight the state’s prioritisation of security over basic human rights. For supporters, it represents the long-awaited triumph of the state over criminal organisations that had terrorised the country for decades.
Exporting authoritarianism and the spread of populism
As crime surges across Latin America, regional leaders are increasingly looking to Bukele and CECOT as a blueprint for security policy. The prison’s scale and symbolism have drawn attention from politicians across Latin America seeking to replicate Bukele’s perceived success. In Ecuador, President Daniel Noboa has unveiled plans to construct similar “ultra-secure” facilities, citing Bukele’s strategy as a model. In Honduras, President Xiomara Castro has announced plans to build a similar CECOT-style mega-prison. In Lima, Peru’s capital, Mayor Rafael López Aliaga has called Bukele’s crime crackdown a “miracle,” while Costa Rica’s Security Minister, Jorge Torres, has expressed interest in adopting similar methods. Bukele’s brand of authoritarian securitisation is quickly emerging as Latin America’s most influential model for public safety policy.
This influence goes beyond infrastructure; it signals a shift in how governments across the region approach public safety. Rather than focusing on long-term social reform or institutional rebuilding, many are turning toward hardline containment strategies that project immediate control. However, copying Bukele’s model risks normalising security-driven populism, a framework that exchanges civil liberties for public order without addressing the structural roots of violence. In this model, poverty, lack of opportunity and state neglect are treated not as causes of crime but as conditions for criminality.
Rethinking safety from the ground up
Building lasting security requires more than mass incarceration and militarised crackdowns; it requires rebuilding trust between communities and institutions. Instead of relying on surveillance and fear, countries can invest in violence prevention through education, social services and local economic development. Programs such as Operación Convivencia in Medellín, Colombia, have shown that community-based interventions, such as youth mentorship, conflict resolution guidance, job training and urban renewal, can dramatically reduce crime while empowering citizens, not silencing them. Strengthening judicial independence, reforming police forces and ensuring that justice is fair and accessible are also essential steps toward sustainable peace. These approaches offer a human rights-based approach to the issue of gang violence in El Salvador through security grounded in dignity, inclusion and long-term resilience
Nayib Bukele entered politics promising to rewrite history. In many ways, he has. However, CECOT is not just a prison; it is a political symbol. It represents the region’s growing acceptance of authoritarian shortcuts in exchange for public safety. As other Latin American leaders begin to follow his blueprint, the region faces a pivotal question: Will lasting security come from fear and force—or from justice, accountability and the rebuilding of trust between people and the state? The answer may define the future of democracy in Latin America.
All articles posted on this blog give the views of the author(s), and not the position of the Department of Sociology, LSE Human Rights, nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Anay Mehrotra examines how the famine in Gaza, resulting from Israel’s blockade and aid obstruction, may amount to a war crime under international law and argues for reparations as a step toward justice and structural redress
In December 2023, the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (“IPC”) assessment found that 93 per cent of Gaza’s population was in a state of crisis, emergency, or catastrophe. By March 2024, the number in “catastrophe” nearly doubled, and famine was projected as imminent without immediate cessation of hostilities and access to aid. The Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET) similarly reported that famine likely began in northern Gaza in April 2024 and will persist without significant intervention. These dire conditions stem from the “complete siege” imposed on Gaza after the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, with aid delivery disrupted and over 1.1 million Palestinians facing catastrophic living conditions.
The conflict-induced famine in Gaza may constitute a war crime under International Law, specifically given its potential violations of the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute. Israeli forces have reportedly obstructed the delivery of food, water and fuel, destroyed agricultural land, and impeded humanitarian aid—actions that deprive civilians of essential means of survival.
David Marcus, one of the first scholars to conceptualise famine as a crime under International Law, categorises famine crimes into two degrees: first-degree (when individuals knowingly create conditions leading to starvation) and second-degree (when individuals recklessly continue to pursue policies after learning they lead to starvation). Depending on intent, these actions may constitute war crimes or crimes against humanity. International law prohibits such acts in war under the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute, and they are condemned in UN Security Council Resolution 2417.
Given these legal frameworks, the deliberate or reckless deprivation of food and humanitarian aid in Gaza may not only violate international norms but also rise to the level of prosecutable war crimes. While the immediate priority is to end the violence and alleviate suffering, a longer-term response must include legal accountability and reparations to uphold humanitarian law, deliver justice to victims, and deter future violations.
The need for reparations in Gaza has become increasingly urgent due to the unprecedented destruction caused by the conflict. The Israeli blockade and military actions have decimated Gaza’s food supply and infrastructure. Agricultural devastation has led to the damage or destruction of 75 per cent of fields once used to grow crops. Over two-thirds of agricultural wells are no longer functional, crippling irrigation. Livestock losses exceed 70 per cent and over 40 per cent of croplands have been damaged, with some areas permanently affected by seawater flooding. The healthcare system, vital for mitigating diseases such as diarrhoea and cholera, is operating at only 16 of 36 hospitals, with their collective capacity merely above 1,800 beds.
Even before the recent escalation on October 23, food insecurity in Gaza was severe but not catastrophic. By early 2024, as per the IPC the entire Gaza Strip had reached Phase 4 of the hunger scale, with some households already at Phase 5 of acute food insecurity—55 per cent in the north, 25 per cent in central Gaza, and 25 per cent in the south. This marks a significant shift from pre-conflict conditions.
The International Court of Justice established reparations as a legal obligation in the 1928 judgement in the Factory at Chorzów case. This case established modern reparations principles under International Law, emphasising the need to fully address harm through both prosecuting offenders and compensating victims to uphold justice and accountability. This framework is crucial for Gaza as prosecutions of offenders offer significant symbolic justice to victims by transforming their suffering into a recognised crime, sending a message that such actions will not go unpunished and compelling the Israeli government to reassess its policies and acknowledge its role.
Under International Law, during an ongoing conflict, states may be obligated to provide compensation for wrongful acts, particularly when such compensation is specifically requested by the injured party. This principle is rooted in customary international law and outlined in the 1907 Hague Convention and Additional Protocol I. It also appears in ARSIWA, which stresses that compensation should be provided when restoring the original situation is not possible. This responsibility has been reinforced by numerous United Nations resolutions. ARSIWA also permits individuals to seek reparations through either unilateral state acts or national courts.
In Gaza, however, seeking reparations through national courts or direct negotiations is largely unfeasible. Israel has consistently rejected legal responsibility for the humanitarian crisis, and affected individuals lack effective legal avenues to claim compensation due to restrictions on access to international courts and Israel’s broad assertion of sovereign immunity. Given these barriers, the obligation to provide compensation must be upheld through international mechanisms, such as UN-led restitution programs, international tribunals, or third-party state intervention. In the absence of voluntary compliance, enforcement through sanctions or diplomatic measures may be necessary to ensure accountability and redress for the victims of the famine in Gaza.
Reparations by Israel would serve a dual purpose: first, to provide a legal and moral acknowledgement of the harm inflicted, in line with IL; and second, to address the long-term consequences of the conflict. Compensation could help rebuild Gaza’s agricultural sector, healthcare system, and critical infrastructure.
The famine in Gaza, and the international community’s response to it, highlights the urgent need to bridge the gap between established legal norms and their enforcement. Holding Israel accountable under International Law for its role in this humanitarian catastrophe is not only a legal obligation but also a moral imperative. Reparations must go beyond a mere acknowledgement of harm—they must aim for systemic transformation to prevent future atrocities.
To move from condemnation to accountability, specific actions are necessary. International legal mechanisms, such as the ICC, should prioritise investigations into the deliberate denial of humanitarian aid as a potential war crime. Governments must exert diplomatic pressure to lift the siege and ensure unfettered access for aid organisations. Advocacy groups and civil society must amplify the voices of affected populations, lobbying for policy changes that address the use of famine as a weapon of war.
As we witness the consequences of inaction, we must ask: How can the world move from condemnation to accountability? Can legal systems rise to protect the vulnerable? The path forward demands collective effort — advocating for justice, amplifying voices, and making accountability real. The time to act is now.
All articles posted on this blog give the views of the author(s), and not the position of the Department of Sociology, LSE Human Rights, nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Office for Students guidance urges ‘very strong’ approach to permitting lawful speech on campus
Universities in England will no longer be able to enforce blanket bans on student protests under sweeping new guidance that urges a “very strong” approach to permitting lawful speech on campus.
The detailed regulations set out for the first time how universities should deal with inflammatory disputes, such as those between the University of Cambridge and students over the war in Gaza, and rows over academics who hold controversial but legal opinions, such as the gender-critical professor Kathleen Stock.
The guidance issued by the Office for Students (OfS) will make it harder for universities to penalise students and staff for anything other than unlawful speech or harassment.
Academics should not be pressed to support particular views.
Protests should not be restricted for supporting legal viewpoints.
Students or staff should not be “encouraged to report others” for lawful speech.
Universities must “secure freedom of speech” for visiting speakers.
The justice secretary, Shabana Mahmood, has said Britain will pursue reform of the European convention on human rights (ECHR), both at home and in Strasbourg, saying “public confidence in the rule of law is fraying”.
Mahmood’s warning in her speech at the Council of Europe came as the home secretary, Yvette Cooper, said she would undertake an examination of how the courts were applying the right to freedom from degrading treatment.
Parliament votes on biggest shake-up to reproductive rights in England and Wales in 60 years
Casey says in the past government has talked relentlessly about the need for better data sharing between departments.
But she says there is a need to consider making this mandatory.
I was there when the tragedy of Soham happened. We knew at that point that if we had had better data sharing there’s a possibility that we might have saved those girls’ lives. There’s certaintly an absolute clarity that intelligence would have been much faster in either avoiding it or or actually finding that dreadful human being earlier.
And we’ve known that forever onwards. And so I think there is also an issue that the Home Office can’t drag their feet on, looking at police intelligence systems, given we’ve living in the 21st century. Probably everbody in this room can connect within seconds. Yet we had Befordshire police finding a young boy that was being, in my mind trafficked to London. But the data intelligence system did not make it easy for them to find that he was in Deptford and being circled and dealt with by predators.
I feel very strongly on issues that are as searing as people’s race, when we know the prejudice and racism that people of colour experience in this country, to not get how you treat that data right is a different level of public irresponsibility.
Sorry, to put it so bluntly, I didn’t put it that bluntly yesterday, but I think it’s particularly important if you are collecting those sorts of issues to get them 100% right.
When we asked the good people of Greater Manchester Police to help us look at the data we also collected – I think it’s in the report – what was happening with child abuse more generally, and of course … if you look at the data on child sexual exploitation, suspects and offenders, it’s disproportionately Asian heritage. If you look at the data for child abuse, it is not disproportionate, and it is white men.
So again, just note to everybody, really outside here rather than in here. Let’s just keep calm here about how you interrogate data and what you draw from it.
Who is Alaa Abd el-Fattah and why are British diplomats trying to obtain his release? Patrick Wintour reports
Laila Soueif, 69, has been on hunger strike in London for more than 250 days in an effort to secure the release of her son, the activist Alaa Abd el-Fattah, from jail in Egypt. As diplomatic pressure mounts, she is now in a critical condition.
Alaa’s sister Mona Seif describes to Michael Safi the toll that imprisonment has taken on her brother, her mother’s determination to do whatever she can to secure his release, and the difficulty of coming to terms with her mother’s decision to risk her life.
Labour dismisses Kemi Badenoch speech on European convention on human rights as an attempt to appease Reform UK and Robert Jenrick. This live blog is closed
As Jessica Elgot and Amelia Gentleman report, Downing Street is exploring new proposals for a digital ID card to crack down on illegal migration, rogue landlords and exploitative work, set out in a policy paper authored by a centre-left thinktank.
Steve Reed, the environment secretary, was the government voice on the media this morning and he confirmed that the government is interested in this idea. He told Times Radio:
It’s absolutely something that we are looking at, and that we should be looking at.
We know we need to look at all the actions we can take to stop the levels of illegal migration that we were seeing particularly under the last government.
Akua Reindorf said law never permitted self-ID, but trans campaigners call remarks ‘profoundly unhelpful’
Transgender people must accept a reduction in their rights after the supreme court decision on gender because they “have been lied to over many years” about what their rights actually were, one of the commissioners drawing up the official post-ruling guidance has said.
Alain Berset acknowledged growing criticism of the 75-year-old treaty, but said any changes must also respect ‘our core values’
The European convention on human rights (ECHR) must adapt while continuing to uphold its core values, the head of a European rights council has said.
Alain Berset, the secretary general of the Council of Europe (CoE), acknowledged growing criticism of the 75-year-old treaty, but said reform should be approached with care and rooted in shared democratic principles.
A Hungarian law banning content about LGBTQ+ people from schools and primetime TV has been found to violate basic human rights and freedom of expression by a senior legal scholar at the European court of justice.
The non-binding opinion from the court’s advocate general, Tamara Ćapeta, issued on Thursday, represents a comprehensive demolition of the arguments made by the Hungarian government defending its so-called childprotection law, passed in 2021.
The UK government should impose sanctions on key figures in the Egyptian government in response to its refusal to release the British-Egyptian human rights activist Alaa Abd el-Fattah, Labour’s most prominent human rights lawyer has proposed.
Writing in the Guardian, Helena Kennedy called for the UK to take the case to the international court of justice, as France has recently done in the case of a national held by Iran.
Low respect for international law and human rights set worrying precedent, international development minister says
Israel is setting a dangerous precedent for international human rights law violations in Gaza that is making the whole world more dangerous, Norway’s international development minister has warned.
Norway has played a historical role in the region, including by facilitating the Oslo peace accords between Israel and the Palestinians that led to a celebrated breakthrough deal in 1993. Last year it recognised the Palestinian state, one of a minority of European countries to do so.
The Committee to Protect Journalists joined 21 other international and local press freedom organizations in a joint statement Friday rejecting laws approved in El Salvador and Nicaragua that could severely affect press freedom, freedom of expression, and access to information in those countries.
On May 16, Nicaraguan lawmakers approved a constitutional amendment that allows the government to strip Nicaraguan nationality fromcitizens who opt for a second nationality.
On May 20, El Salvador’s Legislative Assembly approved a “foreign agents” law mandating that any person or organization receiving funds from abroad register with the Ministry of Interior as a foreign agent.
Mexico City, May 30, 2025—The Committee to Protect Journalists on Friday called on El Salvador to repeal a newly enacted “foreign agents” law that poses a serious threat to press freedom by targeting media outlets, nonprofit organizations, and individual journalists who receive international funding.
“President Nayib Bukele’s foreign agents law is a blatant move to silence dissent and dismantle what remains of El Salvador’s independent press,” said Cristina Zahar, CPJ’s Latin America program coordinator, in São Paulo. “By forcing journalists and civil society organizations to register as foreign agents and taxing foreign support, the government is adopting the repressive tactics of authoritarian regimes like Nicaragua and Russia. This law must be repealed.”
Approved May 20 by Bukele’s Nuevas Ideas party-controlled legislature, the law mandates that any person or organization receiving funds from abroad register with the Ministry of Interior as a foreign agent. Those designated must pay a 30% tax on all foreign income and submit to extensive oversight, including sworn declarations. Violations of the law carry fines ranging from US$1,000 to US$150,000.
While the government claims the law is meant to promote transparency and protect national sovereignty, press freedom and human rights advocates warn it is intended to intimidate critics and financially cripple the independent press.
Óscar Martínez, editor-in-chief of El Faro, told CPJ the law’s vague language grants authorities sweeping discretion. It applies not only to organizations, but also to individuals, so freelance journalists, academics, and trainers who receive honoraria or stipends from abroad could be labeled foreign agents.
“This law is designed to suffocate the press,” said Martínez. “We rely on international donors because local advertisers are too afraid of government retaliation. Now the government wants to criminalize that support.”
Angélica Cárcamo, director of the Central American Journalists Network, called the measure “a tool of persecution.” She told CPJ the law is “intended to shut down NGOs, silence critical journalism, and tighten the government’s control over public discourse.”
CPJ emailed the office of the Salvadoran president for comment but did not immediately receive a response.
Nairobi, May 30, 2025—The Committee to Protect Journalists is dismayed by an Ethiopian regional court’s decision to sentence Jigjiga Television Network founder Ahmed Awga to two years in jail on charges of disseminating hateful information via a Facebook post he did not author.
On May 22, the Fafen Zone High Court in Jigjiga, the capital of Ethiopia’s eastern Somali Region, sentenced Ahmed, whose legal name is Ahmed Abdi Omar, to two years in prison. He had been detained since his April 23 arrest on incitement charges related to an interview he conducted with a man whose son died following an alleged police beating, as well as for commentary on Ahmed’s Facebook page. The charge was later changed to “propagation of disinformation and public incitement,” under the 2020 anti-hate speech law, according to the charge sheet, which was reviewed by CPJ.
“Ahmed Awga’s conviction and two-year prison sentence, based on a Facebook post he didn’t write, is outrageous and a stark illustration of Ethiopia’s escalating assault on press freedom,” said Angela Quintal, CPJ’s Africa regional director, from Durban. “Ethiopian authorities must cease using the legal system to silence critical voices.”
The charge sheet alleges that on April 17, Ahmed posted statements on his Facebook page, describing a regional election as a “so-called election,” accusing regional government officials of holding the population hostage, and claiming specific districts were seized by certain individuals. He was also accused of inciting residents by allegedly stating, “we have no justice — only killing and death.”
A CPJ review of the prosecution’s evidence, corroborated by an analysis by VOSS TV, an online media outlet, shows his conviction was primarily based on a post he didn’t write. His account was merely tagged in an April 20 post, which clearly originated from another Facebook page, not Ahmed’s. None of Ahmed’s April 17 posts appeared to reference the allegations in the charge sheet, according to CPJ’s review.
Ahmed’s conviction is part of a broader crackdown on media in Ethiopia. At least six other journalists were arrested in the month of April alone, as the government tightened its control over the media regulator, the Ethiopian Media Authority (EMA).
In a May 27 interview with BBC’s Somali service, Somali Region President Mustafa Mohammed Omar rejected suggestions that people were being jailed simply for what they posted online. The four people currently in custody — “a journalist, a former official, and two activists” — face charges of “harming the reputation of security agencies, spreading false information about jail conditions, and exploiting the death of an inmate to incite the public,” he said, adding that the regional judiciary is independent.
Badenoch and Farage seize on Richard Hermer’s ‘clumsy’ remark in speech made in defence of international law
The attorney general has apologised for a “clumsy” remark that compared Conservative and Reform calls to disregard international treaties and quit the European convention of human rights (ECHR) with the early days of Nazi Germany.
