Category: UN

    In a new report, ISHR analyses China’s tactics to restrict access for independent civil society actors in UN human rights bodies. The report provides an analysis of China’s membership of the UN Committee on NGOs, the growing presence of Chinese Government-Organised NGOs (GONGOs), and patterns of intimidation and reprisals by the Chinese government.

    In the report, published on 28 April 2025 the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) uncovers the tactics deployed by the Chinese government to restrict access to UN human rights bodies to independent civil society actors and human rights defenders, and intimidate and retaliate against those who do so.  

    These tactics include using its membership of the UN Committee on NGOs to systematically defer NGO applications, increasing the presence of GONGOs to limit space for independent NGOs and advance pro-government narratives, systematically committing acts of intimidation and reprisals against those seeking to cooperate with the UN, weaponising procedural tactics to silence NGO speakers and threatening diplomats not to meet with them, and opposing reform initiatives and efforts at norm-setting on safe and unhindered civil society participation at the Human Rights Council. 

    These tactics strongly contrast China’s stated commitment to being a reliable multilateral leader. They stem from the Chinese Party-State’s primary foreign policy objective of shielding itself from human rights criticism and enhancing its international image by restricting and deterring critical civil society voices, crowding out civil society space with GONGOs, and stalling and diverting reform initiatives. 

    While China is the focus of this report, the issues addressed are systemic. Based on this report’s findings, ISHR puts forward a set of targeted recommendations to UN bodies and Member States, aimed at protecting civil society space from interference and restrictions. The recommendations are designed to strengthen UN processes and prevent any State from manipulating international mechanisms to suppress independent voices. These include: 

    • Reforming the Committee on NGOs to increase transparency, limit abuse of deferrals, and ensure fair access to UN bodies for independent NGOs;
    • Strengthening protection mechanisms against reprisals, including rapid response to incidents inside UN premises, public accountability for perpetrators, and consistent long-term follow-up on unresolved cases; 
    • Curbing the influence of GONGOs by distinguishing clearly between independent and State-organised NGOs, and better documenting their presence and impact; and, 
    • Strengthening measures at the Human Rights Council and other UN bodies to make civil society participation safer, more inclusive, and less vulnerable to obstruction

    The report has been featured prominently in a global investigation by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) launched on 28 April 2025.

    See also the earlier report in February 2023: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2023/02/08/ngo-report-on-chinas-influencing-of-un-human-rights-bodies/

    https://ishr.ch/defenders-toolbox/resources/un-access-china-report

  • The 58th regular session of the UN Human Rights Council ran from February 24 to April 4, 2025, resulting in 32 Resolutions and 14 Universal Period Review adoptions.

    The session included a high-level segment attended by over 100 dignitaries, thematic panels addressing the rights of specific vulnerable groups, interactive dialogues, and debates on country-specific reports. This session also marked key anniversaries of the Beijing Declaration and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The Human Rights Council plays a crucial role in addressing global violations and continues to serve as a platform for activists and victims of violations. In the face of multiple intersecting crises and conflicts, democracy erosion, and authoritarianism on the rise, Council decisions continue to wield considerable power to improve civil society conditions, particularly in fragile contexts where civic actors are particularly affected by widespread human rights violations and abuses, while offering unique opportunities for the negotiation of higher human rights standards.

    I have on the past used other such reports by the ISHR and the UHRG (see below) but thought that this time I should highlight other NGOs:

    https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/hrc58-civil-society-presents-key-takeaways-from-the-session/

    CIVICUS contributed to the outcomes of the Council session through engagement on key Resolutions, delivery of statements, and organisation of events. We sounded the alarm on the global erosion of civic space and the growing repression of civil society across multiple regions. 

    Regional Developments: Africa

    A strong Resolution on South Sudan was adopted, extending the mandate of the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan (CHRSS).

    Regional Developments: Asia Pacific

    A Resolution on Myanmar’s human rights situation was adopted by consensus amid escalating violence and widespread impunity.

    Regional Developments: Americas

    The Resolution on Nicaragua renewed the mandate of the Group of Human Rights Experts (GHREN) on Nicaragua.

    Regional Developments: Europe

    Key resolutions were adopted on Ukraine and Belarus, continuing international monitoring mechanisms.

    Regional Developments: Middle East

    Resolutions on Iran and Syria were adopted, with mixed results on addressing severe human rights concerns.

    Several important thematic resolutions were adopted during the session.

    Civil Society Challenges

    Ahead of the 58th session, CIVICUS raised attention on the increasing restrictions imposed on civil society. CIVICUS engaged in key side events during HRC58, spotlighting democracy, child human rights defenders, and intersectional approaches to civic space.

     A detailed post-session report is available via this link.

    The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ):

    The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), together with partner organizations, participated actively in the 58th session. Civil society’s critical engagement is essential in calling on the Council and its member States to respond to the plight of victims of human rights violations. In this regard, the ICJ was pleased to ensure that our partner from the African Albinism Network delivered our joint statement on the tenth anniversary of the mandate of the Independent Expert on the enjoyment of human rights by persons with Albinism. Maintaining effective access to the UN in Geneva for civil society is key to ensure that people can themselves participate or be represented in the discussions at the Council that concern them directly. With regard to this, the ICJ denounces all attempts to undermine civil society participation, including the intimidation of human rights defenders during side events, observed again at this HRC session.

    At the outset, the ICJ welcomes the adoption of a number of important resolutions renewing, extending or creating mandates under the HRC purview, among which the following were adopted without a vote:

    • a resolution extending the mandate of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic for a period of one year;
    • a resolution establishing an open-ended intergovernmental working group for the elaboration of a legally-binding instrument on the promotion and protection of the human rights of older persons;
    • a resolution renewing the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism for a period of three years;
    • a resolution renewing the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food for a period of three years;
    • a resolution extending the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar for a period of one year;
    • a resolution renewing the presence of the Office of the High Commissioner in Seoul, for a period of two years with the same resources and extending the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea(DPRK) for a period of one year.

    While regretting the failure to adopt them by consensus, the ICJ also welcomes the adoption of other important resolutions by a majority of the votes:

    • a resolution extending the mandate of the Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine for a period of one year;
    • a resolution renewing the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus for a period of one year and extending the mandate of the Group of Independent Experts on the Situation of Human Rights in Belarus for a period of one year;
    • a resolution renewing the mandate of the Group of Human Rights Experts on Nicaragua for a period of two years;
    • a resolution extending the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran for a period of one year and deciding that the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran should continue for one year with an updated mandate to address the recent and ongoing violations of human rights; and
    • a resolution extending the mandate of the independent human rights expert tasked with undertaking the monitoring of the human rights situation in Haiti, for a renewable period of one year.

    This session discussed armed conflicts whose intensity had continued to increase, including in Gaza, Ukraine, the DRC and Myanmar.

    ……Unsurprisingly, the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory was one of the most-discussed throughout the 58th session. Many countries voiced strong support for the Palestinian people and their human rights, with many calling for a two-State solution based on Israel’s withdrawal to its pre-1967 borders and with East Jerusalem as Palestine’s capital. The ICJ commends the many States who intervened during the negotiations and adoption of the resolutions on the situation in the OPT to emphasize the need for accountability, and who voiced their support for the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice and their respective recent decisions on Israel/Palestine. The resolution adopted at this session titled “the human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the obligation to ensure accountability and justice” invited the General Assembly to consider establishing an ongoing international, impartial and independent mechanism to assist in the investigation and prosecution of persons responsible for the most serious crimes under international law committed by all parties in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel since 2014.

    Earlier in the year, on 7 February 2025, the Council had already held a special session to discuss the human rights situation in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where armed clashes between Congolese forces and the Rwanda-backed M23 movement had been ongoing, and had escalated since January 2025. The special session had resulted in the adoption of a resolution requesting the High Commissioner to urgently establish a fact-finding mission to report on events since January 2022. The resolution had also established an independent COI composed of three experts appointed by the HRC President to continue the work of the fact-finding mission. At the 58th session, the ICJ and many countries expressed grave concern about the human rights situation in the DRC, and during the Enhanced Interactive Dialogue with the High Commissioner and the Team of Experts at the end of the session many of the same themes and concerns heard during the special session were raised again.

    Threats to Multilateralism

    This 58th session took place in the context of increasing threats against multilateralism. In particular, this session started in the aftermath of the United States and Israel announcing that they would boycott the Council by not engaging with it. In addition, on 27 February – the day before the interactive dialogue with the Group of Human Rights Experts on Nicaragua, when the HRC was scheduled to discuss the serious human rights violations committed by the State apparatus, including executions, torture and arbitrary detentions – Nicaragua announced its decision to withdraw from the Council.

    Accountability

    The ICJ regrets the attempts by some countries at this session to undermine accountability mechanisms by presenting them as political tools purportedly interfering in the internal affairs of the States concerned and encroaching upon their sovereignty. The human rights organization recalls that such spurious arguments contradict the international human rights law obligations freely agreed upon and undertaken by States and disregard the fact that, as the 1993 Vienna Declaration states, “the promotion and protection of all human rights is a legitimate concern of the international community”.

    With regards to the situation in Syria following the fall of the Assad regime, the need for accountability was high on the HRC’s agenda throughout the 58th session. ….In this regard, the ICJ particularly welcomes the adoption of the resolution on the situation in Syria, which encouraged the interim authorities to grant the COI necessary access throughout the country and to cooperate closely with the Commission. The ICJ also notes the authorities’ declared commitment to investigating the recent spate of violations and abuses, including through the newly established fact-finding committee to investigate the events in the west of the Syrian Arab Republic in March 2025. In this connection, the human rights organization called for investigations to be demonstrably independent, prompt, transparent and impartial…

    As usual, a number of country situations were not on the agenda of the Council but would actually require much greater scrutiny. At the 58th session, the ICJ expressed particular concern on the situation in Tunisia and Eswatini among others, where attacks on independent judges and lawyers are a key manifestation of deepening authoritarianism in these countries…

    The impact of the liquidity crisis and the withdrawal of critical support was also discussed during informal negotiations on the resolution renewing the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism. While in the end the resolution is short, there was much debate about specific phrasing concerning the resources provided to the mandate. The ICJ participated in the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur, stressing the need for coordination and cooperation between civil society and regional systems to address counterterrorism laws that violate human rights and fundamental freedoms of civil society actors, highlighting in particular the situations in Venezuela and Eswatini. The ICJ reiterated the importance of the Special Rapporteur being adequately resourced in order to fully address these challenges.

    Oral Statements

    General Debate, Item 2: HRC58: ICJ Statement on the situation of human rights in Tunisia, Sri Lanka, and Guatemala

    General Debate, Item 4: HRC58: ICJ statement on the human rights situation in Eswatini, Myanmar and Afghanistan

    Belarus: HRC58: ICJ statement on human rights situation in Belarus 

    Albinism: HRC58: ICJ statement on persons with albinism during Interactive Dialogue with the Independent Expert 

    Venezuela: HRC58: ICJ statement on civil society repression and ongoing human rights violations in Venezuela

    Counterterrorism: HRC58: ICJ statement on the use of counterterrorism laws to suppress dissent in Venezuela and Eswatini

    Transitional Justice: HRC58: ICJ statement on OHCHR report, urging progress in transitional justice for Libya and Nepal

    General Debate, Item 10: HRC58: The ICJ calls for urgent action on escalating human rights violations in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the impact of the U.S. foreign aid pause

    Side events

    ICJ International Advocacy Director, Sandra Epal-Ratjen, spoke at a high-level event on the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment

    The ICJ organized a joint side-event on the situation in Tunisia

    https://www.civicus.org/index.php/media-resources/news/united-nations/geneva/7609-58th-regular-session-of-the-human-rights-council-post-session-assessment-and-key-outcomes

    https://www.icj.org/hrc58-the-un-human-rights-council-ends-a-six-week-intense-session-in-perilous-times-for-multilateralism/

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • A new report from human rights experts urges the United Nations to condemn the “evaporation of fundamental rights” in the United States, where the Trump administration is using high-tech surveillance tools and a nebulous “anti-terrorism” legal framework that has ballooned since 9/11 to weaponize law enforcement against social movements that challenge state power. While the legally dubious…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • The UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) has raised significant concerns regarding Canada’s assisted dying/suicide laws, specifically the Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) scheme, which permits individuals experiencing “intolerable physical or psychological suffering” due to serious and incurable disabilities to seek assisted death.

    The UNCRPD has called for the Canadian government to cease what it describes as the euthanisation of patients based on “negative, ableist perceptions” that undervalue the lives of disabled people.

    UNCRPD slams Canada’s assisted suicide laws

    The committee’s objections centre around the proposal to extend MAID to those whose only underlying medical condition is a mental illness by 2027. They assert that the current legislation perpetuates a harmful narrative that equates disability with suffering, ignoring the systemic issues such as inequality and discrimination that exacerbate the experiences of disabled people.

    The UNCRPD’s statement highlights that the notion of “choice” posited by the government creates a misleading dynamic, effectively suggesting that ending one’s life can be a valid option for those facing disability-related challenges, rather than enhancing support systems that could alleviate suffering.

    Evidence presented by the Ontario Office of the Chief Coroner indicates a troubling increase in the number of disabled people who are coerced into assisted suicide, prompting the UNCRPD to call for a reassessment of how the government addresses “systemic failures” in essential services such as accessible housing, healthcare, and employment support.

    Krista Carr, CEO of Inclusion Canada, echoed these concerns during a recent conference, emphasising that the narrative around assisted suicide as a “choice” overlooks the desperation faced by many disabled people in obtaining necessary support.

    Carr remarked that assisted suicide is currently being positioned as a preferable option for those trapped in challenging circumstances, where adequate care is unavailable, asserting that it is indeed “not a choice” for those truly in distress.

    Implications in the UK

    In the UK, the implications of similar legislation are being scrutinised ahead of the progression of Kim Leadbeater’s Assisted Suicide Bill, which seeks to allow patients in England and Wales deemed terminally ill with a prognosis of six months or less to seek assisted suicide.

    Paralympian Tanni Grey-Thompson has voiced her strong disapproval of this bill, warning that it could lead to the devaluation of disabled lives and create an environment where people feel coerced into viewing death as their “best” option – much like has happened in Canada.

    During a session in October 2024, Grey-Thompson articulated her growing concerns as she examined the issue, particularly highlighting the rapid erosion of safeguards in other jurisdictions where similar laws have been enacted.

    She recounted troubling comments she has received, such as, “If my life was like yours, I’d end it,” reflecting a societal undercurrent that could place further pressure on disabled people. This raised questions about the perceptions of disability and the future trajectory of support for those who may be struggling with their circumstances.

    As the UK’s Assisted Suicide Bill moves towards Report Stage and Third Reading, it will present MPs with additional opportunities to reconsider the implications and moral ramifications of such legislation on the disabled community and the broader societal values it endorses.

    With ongoing discussions surrounding assisted suicide and disability rights, the critical voice of those within the chronically ill and disabled community continues to advocate for a system prioritising support and equality over coercing people into death.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • COMMENTARY: By John Hobbs

    In the absence of any measures taken by the New Zealand government to respond to the genocide being committed by Israel in Gaza, Green Party co-leader Chloe Swarbrick is doing the principled thing by trying to apply countervailing pressure on Israel to stop its brutal actions in Gaza and the Occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem.

    New Zealand is a state party to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948).

    As a contracting party New Zealand has a clear obligation to respond to a genocide when it is indicated and which it must “undertake to prevent and to punish”.

    The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in January 2024, deemed that a “plausible genocide” is occurring in Gaza. That was a year ago. Thousands of Palestinians have died since the ICJ’s determination.

    The New Zealand government has failed its responsibilities under the Genocide Convention by applying no pressure to influence Israel’s military actions in Gaza. There are a number of interventions New Zealand could have chosen to take.

    For example, a United Nations resolution which New Zealand co-sponsored (UNSC 2334) when it was a non-permanent member of the Security Council in 2015-16 required states to distinguish in their trading arrangements between Israeli settlements in the Occupied West Bank and the rest of Israel.

    New Zealand could have extended this to all trading arrangements with Israel.

    Diplomatic pressure needed
    Diplomatic pressure could have been put on Israel by expelling the Israeli ambassador to New Zealand. Finally, New Zealand could have shown well-needed solidarity with Palestine by conferring statehood recognition.

    In contrast, Swarbrick is looking to bring her member’s Bill to Parliament to apply sanctions against Israel for its ongoing illegal presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza).

    The context is the UN General Assembly’s support for the ICJ’s recent report which requires that Israel’s illegal occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem comes to an end.

    New Zealand, along with 123 other general assembly members, supported the ICJ decision. It is now up to UN states to live up to what they voted for.

    Swarbrick’s Bill, the Unlawful Occupation of Palestine Sanctions Bill, responds to this request, in the absence of any intervention by the New Zealand government. The Bill is based on the Russian Sanctions Act (2022), brought forward by then Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta, to apply pressure on Russia to cease its military invasion of Ukraine.

    While Swarbrick’s Bill has the full support of the opposition MPs from Labour and Te Pāti Māori she needs six government MPs to support the Bill going forward for its first reading.

    Andrea Vance, in a recent article in the Sunday Star-Times, called Swarbrick’s Bill “grandstanding”. Vance argues that the Greens’ Bill adopts “simplistic moral assumptions about the righteousness of the oppressed [but] ignores the complexity of the conflict.”

    ‘Confict complexity’ not complicated
    The “complexity of the conflict” is a recurring theme which dresses up a brutal and illegal occupation by Israel over the Palestinians, as complicated.

    It is hardly complicated. The history tells us so. In 1947, the UN supported the partition of Palestine, against the will of the indigenous Palestinian people, who comprised 70 perent of the population and owned 94 percent of the land.

    Palestine's historical land shrinking from Zionist colonisation
    Palestine’s historical land shrinking from Zionist colonisation . . . From 1947 until 2025. Map: Geodesic/Mura Assoud 2021

    In 1948, Jewish paramilitary groups drove more than 700,000 Palestinian people out of their homeland into bordering countries (Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Syria, the UAE) and beyond, where they remain as refugees.

    Finally, the 1967 illegal occupation by Israel of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza. This occupation, which multiple UN resolutions has termed illegal, is now over 58 years old.

    This is not “complicated”. One nation state, Israel, exercises total power over a people who have been dispossessed from their land and who simply have no power.

    It is the unwillingness of countries like New Zealand and its Anglosphere/Five-Eyes allies (United States, United Kingdom, Canada and Australia) and the inability of the UN to enforce its resolutions on Israel, which makes it “complicated”.

    Historian on Gaza genocide
    One of Israel’s most distinguished historians, Emeritus Professor Avi Shlaim at Oxford University, in his recently published book Genocide in Gaza: Israel’s Long War on Palestine, now chooses to call the situation in Gaza “genocide”.

    In arriving at this position, he points to the language and narratives being adopted by Israeli politicians:

    “Israeli President Isaac Herzog proclaimed that there are no innocents in Gaza. No innocents among the 50,000 people who were killed and nearly 20,000 children.

    “There are quotes from [Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu] that are genocidal, as well as from his former Minister of Defence, Yoav Gallant, who said we are up against ‘human animals’.

    “I hesitated to call things genocide before October 2023, but what tipped the balance for me was when Israel stopped all humanitarian aid into Gaza. They are using starvation as a weapon of war. That’s genocide.”

    There is growing concern among commentators about the ability of international rules-based order to function and hold individuals and states to account.

    Institutions such as the UN, the ICJ and the ICC are simply unable to enforce their decisions. This should not come as a surprise, however, as the structure of the UN system, established at the end of the Second World War was designed to be weak by the victors, with regard to its enforcement ability.

    Time NZ supports determinations
    It is time that New Zealand supported these same institutions by honouring and looking to enforce their determinations.

    Accordingly, New Zealand needs to play its part in holding Israel to account for the atrocities it is inflicting on the Palestinian people and stand behind and support the Palestinian right to self-determination.

    Swarbrick is absolutely right to introduce her Bill.

    At the very least it says that New Zealand does care about the plight of the Palestinian people and is willing to stand behind them. It is the morally correct thing to do and incumbent on the government to provide support to Swarbrick’s Bill — and not just six of its members.

    John Hobbs is a doctoral candidate at the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (NCPACS) at the University of Otago. This article was first published by the Otago Daily Times and is republished with the author’s permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • A legal non-profit in the US has sent damning evidence of US border force officials appalling persisting record of human rights abuses at open air detention sites, to the United Nations.

    US border force reported to the UN for human rights abuse

    On Monday 7 April, the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law (CHRCL) and the Southern Border Communities Coalition (SBCC) submitted a report to the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) on US Customs and Border Protection (CBP)’s continued human rights abuses at open air detention sites.

    The CHRCL is a legal non-profit that protects and advances the rights of migrants. SBCC is a coalition of organisations from San Diego, California, to Brownsville, Texas that seeks to hold US border force accountable and ensure they respect migrants’ human rights.

    Every five years, members of the UN HRC review all member countries’ human rights records in a unique process known as Universal Periodic Review. Therefore, SBCC and CHRCL submitted a joint report to the UN as part of this process. It’s to urge the council to hold the US accountable for CBP’s continued human rights abuses, including open air detention along the southern border.

    As part of this process, SBCC and CHRCL also joined a coalition of two dozen migrants’ rights groups urging action on the deteriorating human rights situation for migrants in the US.

    Trump expanding human rights violating detention

    On March 19 2025, media announced that the Trump administration may expand open air detention along the border in New Mexico, Arizona, and California.

    Reportedly, the government would do so by having the military:

    take control of a buffer zone along a sprawling stretch of the southern border and empower[ing] active-duty U.S. troops to temporarily hold migrants who cross into the United States

    This would be alongside the Roosevelt Reservation, a narrow 60-foot stretch of land that the federal government controls. Historically, the Department of the Interior has managed it.

    Since 2023, SBCC has documented, and members have provided aid at, and advocated against open air detention sites at the US-Mexico border.

    In 2024, CHRCL conducted multiple monitoring visits to the sites in its capacity as co-counsel in the Flores Settlement Agreement.  This governs conditions for children in US government custody.

    The visits led Flores Counsel to successfully file for enforcement of the Agreement with respect to open air detention sites in February of 2024.

    Migrants subjected to ‘inhumane conditions’ by US border force

    Border Policy Counsel for the Southern Border Communities Coalition Ricky Garza said:

    We reject military occupation and the Administration’s attempts to normalize open air detention.

    Human rights law is clear that all people must be treated with dignity and respect regardless of immigration status.

    Executive director of the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law Sergio Perez echoed this:

    The cruelty of forcing asylum-seekers – many of whom have fled unimaginable horrors – into squalid, virtually unsheltered sites along the border is self-evident.

    No human being, least of all pregnant persons and vulnerable children, should be subjected to these inhumane conditions. There is no possible justification for such deplorable treatment, and we call on the United Nations to hold the U.S. accountable for violating its human rights treaty obligations and failing to properly care for people seeking a better life.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Watan News on 30 March 2025 came with a rather remarkable story about the UAE’s covert efforts to damage Qatar and Saudi Arabia’s reputations through paid campaigns using African NGOs Human rights sources in Geneva. Whether this is all true or not I cannot say, but it is worth reporting on.

    Watan writes that “human rights circles in Geneva’ have revealed the United Arab Emirates’ involvement in leading coordinated incitement campaigns against its adversaries, using African organizations in exchange for financial bribes to attack Abu Dhabi’s opponents and whitewash its own dire human rights record. According to the source, Abu Dhabi’s campaign aims to bring in so-called “victims,” such as migrant workers, to testify before the UN Human Rights Council in an effort to damage Qatar’s international reputation.

    Reliable reports indicate that the UAE has continuously funded this campaign over the past three years. Several human rights organizations and active institutions in Geneva have reportedly received large sums of money to support anti-Qatar activities. The funds are reportedly channeled through the UAE Embassy in Geneva and a key intermediary, Issa Al-Arabi, a Bahraini national who acts as a liaison for the UAE in supporting various rights groups at the UN.

    According to the source, the campaign is being executed by the Rencontre Africaine pour la Défense des Droits de l’Homme (African Meeting for the Defense of Human Rights) under the leadership of Nishkarsh Singh, along with the Tomoko Development and Cultural Union (TACUDU) led by Fazal-ur-Rehman, and the International Network for Human Rights (INHR).

    Another UN source said that the UAE’s campaign is coordinated by key figures within the diplomatic and human rights community in Geneva and Washington, primarily operating within the INHR network.

    This organization plays a major role in organizing human rights events at the UN, with a team of participating legal and diplomatic experts.

    Notable individuals involved include:

    • Biro Diawara – A veteran human rights activist in Geneva for over 20 years, representing African civil society including journalists, parliamentarians, religious leaders, and human rights defenders. He has strong ties to African delegations in New York, Geneva, and the continent, with a focus on Sudan, West Africa, and his native Guinea.
    • Clément N. Voule – Former UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association. After completing his term in the summer of 2024, he joined the Geneva Human Rights Institute in September. A Togolese international lawyer, he specializes in human rights and security sector reform and holds multiple roles within Geneva’s human rights community.
    • Jane Galvão – Director of Resource Mobilization at INHR and Global Health Advisor. With over 20 years of experience managing health programs, she has worked on infectious diseases and women’s and children’s health, managing over $750 million in funding for organizations like UNITAID and WHO.
    • Eric N. Richardson – Founding President of INHR. A former U.S. diplomat and attorney, he led the U.S. team at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva from 2013 to 2016. With experience in countries like China, North Korea, Libya, Tunisia, New Zealand, and Israel, he now focuses on mediation efforts with Amnesty International and teaches law at the University of Michigan and UC Berkeley.
    • John Shyamana – Expert in Social and Economic Rights, New York. With over 30 years of experience, he specializes in child policy, labor rights, and social welfare, having worked with the U.S. Congress and state legislatures on legislative and advocacy efforts.
    • Kumar – Senior Human Rights Advisor, Washington D.C. Former Advocacy Director for Amnesty International USA. With more than two decades of experience, he has championed human rights and humanitarian causes worldwide, particularly in Asia, Afghanistan, and Myanmar.
    • Jeff Landsman – Managing Director and Treasurer at INHR. A certified financial planner and seasoned international buyer, he oversees the institute’s financial operations and strategic planning.
    • Asel Alimbayeva – Program Officer and Director, INHR Geneva. Fluent in English, French, Russian, and Kazakh. She has worked at the UN Office in Geneva and Kazakhstan’s Permanent Mission, leading social media and HR operations at the institute.
    • Pedro Cherinos Terrones – Legal Advisor, Lima. A Peruvian lawyer specializing in international trade, business law, human rights, and compliance with international law.
    • Sean Wessing – AI and Innovation Specialist, Bologna. Holds dual Master’s degrees from SAIS–Johns Hopkins and Bologna Business School. Leads fundraising and AI governance projects at INHR.
    • Zaf Haseem – Videographer and Reconciliation Specialist, Asia. A conflict mediator who has worked in Sri Lanka, Burma, Indonesia, and the Central African Republic, using film as a training tool for peacebuilding.

    UAE’s Smear Campaign Targeting Qatar and Saudi Arabia

    Diplomatic sources indicate that the UAE is recruiting African civil society organizations to conduct media and human rights attacks against Qatar. These efforts are expected to intensify during the UN Human Rights Council sessions in June and September 2025, with a major campaign planned for the September session. Additionally, the UAE is reportedly preparing similar activities within the African Union Commission, targeting both Qatar and Saudi Arabia as part of its escalating geopolitical rivalry in Africa.

    These developments underscore rising regional tensions in Africa, where the UAE is leveraging human rights tools and diplomatic influence to advance its political agenda.

    They also raise serious concerns about the independence of some Geneva-based human rights organizations, which are increasingly being used as instruments of political influence rather than neutral advocacy.

    https://www.watanserb.com/en/2025/03/30/uae-accused-of-funding-smear-campaigns-through-african-ngos/?amp=1

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • In a rare bit of good news for the climate crisis front, multiple countries are ramping up their renewable energy ambition ahead of 2035.

    Ramping up renewable ambitions

    This is according to a new report by 350.org, produced in collaboration with Zero Carbon Analytics. It found that 15 of the 19 countries that have submitted updated national climate plans, or Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), are increasing goals for renewable energy. Signatories to the Paris Agreement submit these NDCs at regular intervals to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

    The report shows that 15 countries included specific targets or outlined clear ambitions to expand renewable energy in their new national climate plans.

    Additionally, seven countries have either introduced new renewable energy targets or strengthened existing ones, signaling growing commitment to the clean energy transition.

    Meanwhile, over 80% of countries with new plans have pledged support for the COP28 goal of tripling renewable energy capacity by 2030. The analysis is based on submissions as of 10 March 2025.

    Countries leading the way on renewables

    The report show that there’s growing renewable ambition. Some countries in particular are leading the way on renewables.

    COP26 host the UK has pledged that at least 95% of its electricity will come from onshore wind, solar, offshore wind, and nuclear by 2030.

    Meanwhile, COP28 host the United Arab Emirates (UAE) aims to increase its renewable energy capacity by more than 500%, from 3.7 GW to 19.8 GW by 2030.

    The US has set a goal of 100% clean electricity by 2035, including renewables and nuclear.

    The Marshall Islands aims to reach a 66% renewable energy share by 2030, with a long-term goal of achieving net-zero energy systems by 2050.

    Other countries are already surpassing targets.

    Brazil has already exceeded its 2030 target, generating 89% of its electricity from renewables in 2023 – well above its previous goal of 84%.

    Several countries, including Japan, the UK, and Switzerland, are deploying renewable energy faster than necessary to meet their 2030 targets. Of the 19 countries analyzed, seven already have ambitious targets of achieving over 90% renewable electricity by 2030 or 2035.

    Ambition alone is not enough: accountability and action is vital

    While the report highlights growing ambition, ambition alone is not enough. Countries must translate their targets into concrete action, including rapid policy implementation, significant public and private investment, and clear accountability measures.

    Moreover, many of these countries are also wedded to, or also increasing fossil fuel output at the same time. For instance, UAE’s state fossil fuel company has plans to scale up its oil production by 25% until 2030. The UK has also yet to officially scrap the gargantuan Rosebank oilfield. And over in the US, Trump has declared his government’s “drill, baby, drill” agenda.

    Associate director of policy and campaigns at 350.org Andreas Sieber said:

    The latest climate plan submissions reveal that countries are stepping up on renewables – beneath shifting political winds the trajectory is clear and more positive than many might have expected. The momentum for renewables continues and is building. But we need more. With the world facing devastating climate impacts and rising energy prices from fossil fuels, we can’t afford half-measures. Countries must now back their renewable energy pledges with robust policies, and the European Union, China, and others yet to submit their targets must harness this momentum.

    She continued:

    Tripling renewable energy by 2030 is not just a goal—it’s a necessity. We can’t allow these pledges to be empty promises. Governments must deliver real action that puts people and the planet first, not the profits of fossil fuel giants.”Countries that have yet to submit their updated national climate plans to the UN must do so by September. This deadline is critical for ensuring their commitments are factored into the final assessment of whether the world is on track to meet its climate goals, as nations set new emissions reduction targets for 2035.

    Research associate at Zero Carbon Analytics and lead analyst of the brief Victoria Kalyvas added:

    An initial analysis of national climate plans shows that an increasing number of countries see renewables as a fundamental part of their energy future, with a few emerging as leaders in the rapidly accelerating clean energy transition. The momentum behind renewables—including commitments to COP28 goals—reflects recognition of the economic, security, and affordability benefits of renewable energy sources.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • On Tuesday 18 March, an environmental and legal rights charity called on the UN to intervene against a key arm of the Scottish legal system for breaching the public’s right to participation in environmental decision-making. Crucially, this right is enshrined in the UN Aarhus Convention.

    Scottish Civil Justice Council: breaching the UN Aarhus Convention

    The Aarhus Convention guarantees people’s rights to access information, participate in decision-making and access justice on environmental matters. The UK ratified this in 2005, so Scotland is legally obliged to comply with it.

    In October 2021, the governing institutions of the Convention required the Scottish government to act ‘as a matter of urgency’ to ensure access to justice is no longer ‘prohibitively expensive’. Moreover, it stipulated that the Scottish government would need to address its breach of the Convention’s Article 9 Access to Justice requirements.

    In response, the Scottish government asked the SCJC – a public body comprising senior judges responsible for keeping the civil justice system under review – to review rules on legal expenses called Protective Expenses Orders.

    Now, the Environmental Rights Centre for Scotland (ECRS) has issued a formal complaint. The ECRS is an environmental law charity. It assists the public and civil society to understand and exercise their rights in environmental law and to protect the environment.

    It sent this to the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee, and argues that the SCJC’s review has breached Article 8 of the Convention.  This requires public bodies to consult the public when making certain laws that can significantly affect the environment.

    Environmental court cases: unaffordable to most people in Scotland

    Following correspondence with ERCS, the SCJC initially agreed to hold a public consultation in 2023. However, it later said that the consultation had been cancelled to “avoid undue resource impacts for potential respondents”, implying that having a say in decision-making is too demanding for the public.

    Going to court over the environment remains unaffordable for most people in Scotland. Environmental charities including ERCS and the RSPB have repeatedly called out the Scottish government’s failure to deliver reforms.

    The SCJC’s revised rules on Protective Expenses Orders, published in June 2024, are still non-compliant with the Aarhus Convention.

    A matter of environmental democracy

    Ben Christman, ERCS Legal Director, said:

    We have submitted this complaint to the Compliance Committee today to hold the Scottish Civil Justice Council to account and to draw attention to the continued failure of the state to respect Aarhus rights.

    The rules on protective expenses orders (PEOs) are a tool used to ensure that it is affordable to go to court over the environment. The flaws of the PEO rules are well-known – they need overhauled. The Scottish Civil Justice Council was tasked with reviewing them.

    Despite initially telling us that they would consult the public, the Scottish Civil Justice Council carried out their review behind closed doors. This appears to be a clear breach of Article 8 of the Aarhus Convention, which requires ‘effective public participation’ during law-making processes such as this. This was not effective public participation – there was no public participation.

    In addition to the issues raised in our complaint today, we expect the Compliance Committee will find the content of the newly revised PEO rules to be non-compliant later this year. Carrying out the review behind closed doors failed to produce Aarhus-compliant rules – this demonstrates the need for public scrutiny.

    Dan Paris, Director of Policy & Engagement at Scottish Environment LINK, said:

    The Scottish Civil Justice Council’s failure to consult the public is a disappointing development which further damages accountability and the quality of environmental decision-making in Scotland.

    Scotland is in breach of the Aarhus Convention’s access to justice requirements and this was a critical opportunity to review protective expenses orders to make them affordable.

    Organisations like Scottish Environment LINK regularly participate in public consultations and have decades of experience to support decision-making – we are disappointed that the Scottish Civil Justice Council chose not to give organisations like ours the opportunity to input this expertise and improve environmental democracy.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Ultra-nationalist group Betar has targeted UN expert Francesca Albanese as part of its ongoing intimidation of critics of Israel’s genocide in Gaza. The Zionist extremists have been harrassing anti-genocide voices using beepers, in a clearly threatening reference to last year’s Israeli terrorist attacks in Lebanon. And they claim to have ensured the cancellation of an event hosting Albanese.

    Francesca Albanese has been the UN’s ‘special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967′ since 2022. At the end of October, she released her latest report on Israel’s “settler colonial genocide” in Gaza. Because of her firm condemnation of Israeli crimes in occupied Palestine, Albanese has long been the target of a vile smear campaign. Dozens of Jewish organisations have rejected attempts to smear her as antisemitic

    Betar’s threatening behaviour

    Betar has advocated for ethnic cleansing of Palestine and opposed the Gaza ceasefire. It also insists that its “enemies” include Jewish voices and organisations that criticise Israeli war crimes, and it has targeted them openly.

    Zionist extremism against Francesca Albanese

    Betar is “one of the oldest and most impactful Zionist movements in history”, which expresses its “unwavering commitment to the land of Israel” and seeks to “advocate boldly for Zionism”. As Jewish Voice for Peace explains:

    Zionism is a form of Jewish nationalism, and is the primary ideology that drove the establishment of Israel.

    It adds that:

    While it had many strains historically, the Zionism that took hold and stands today is a settler-colonial movement, establishing an apartheid state where Jews have more rights than others.

    Betar has been openly harassing anti-genocide protesters in recent months, and has apparently targeted some anti-Zionist websites too. It also expresses anti-immigrant views and claims to be documenting any foreign citizens (particularly students) in the US who have opposed Israel’s genocide in Palestine.

    They’re clearly fans of Donald Trump’s ethnic cleansing rhetoric regarding Gaza. And unfortunately, they have received the support of high-profile celebrities like musician Matisyahu.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Ed Sykes

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • This article contains graphic and distressing depictions of rape, sexual violence, and abuse. 

    A devastating new report on Israel from UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory demonstrates widespread Israeli sexual, reproductive, and gender-based violence. The report features the results of investigations since 7 October 2023, and compiles verified digital material, as well as victim and witness testimonies.

    Navi Pillay, Chair of the Commission, said:

    There is no escape from the conclusion that Israel has employed sexual and gender-based violence against Palestinians to terrorise them and perpetuate a system of oppression that undermines their right to self-determination.

    The report did not receive any response from Israeli authorities after requesting information. And, they found that of the deplorable gender-based violence they uncovered, there exists a culture of impunity amongst Israeli forces and settlers as inaction from authorities:

    send[s] a clear message to members of the Israeli Security Forces that they can continue committing such acts without fear of accountability.

    UN report on Israel: collective punishment

    The commission collected testimony from an obstetrician in Gaza who explained:

    This is a war against women. Thousands of women have been killed and hundreds of thousands are living in extremely precarious conditions.

    The commission also examined how men have been treated by the Israeli Security Forces (ISF), and more precisely, how they have been targeted:

    The ISF claimed in October 2024 that it had killed about 17,000 Hamas operatives and members of other armed groups.

    However:

    Given that the number of adult male fatalities since 7 October 2023 has been around 16,735, this would mean that the ISF considers all adult male Palestinians in Gaza to be members of armed groups and so legitimate targets.

    This analysis from the commission reveals what many have already suspected. Namely, that the ISF have been treating everybody as indiscriminate targets. And, as the commission found, this extended to:

    intentionally destroying and causing suffering to the civilian population has been an increased impact on women and children. Entire families in Gaza have been killed together in their homes in unprecedented numbers.

    Even by the ISF’s own demented logic, it’s simply not possible that every single person is a member of Hamas. Thus, the commission concludes that:

    specific gendered harms have been suffered as a result of starvation as a method of warfare, forcible transfer, extermination and collective punishment.

    They explicitly state:

    Statements documented by the Commission asserted that everyone in Gaza should be considered responsible for the attack on 7 October 2023. Palestinians in Gaza are considered complicit, despite age, gender or civilian status, and should be exterminated.

    This is the very definition of collective punishment, and goes some way to formally establishing the intention to destroy Palestinian life without discernment between militants or civilians. Again, this is something that has informally been evidenced on social media, but the evidenced documentation in this report lays out a stark assessment of Israeli tactics.

    Destruction of medical infrastructure

    The report goes into great detail about the impact deliberate Israeli destruction of medical infrastructure has on gendered violence:

    The ISF’s destruction of healthcare infrastructure and facilities, including those providing necessary maternal, sexual and reproductive health services, violates the special protections under international humanitarian law provided to medical units and personnel.

    They further detail how women and girls seeking out medical treatment by walking to hospitals were shot and killed by the ISF. The commission quote Eliyahu Yosian a commentator from the Misgav Institute for National Security speaking on a right-wing television show:

    The woman is an enemy, the baby is an enemy, and the pregnant woman is an enemy.

    As of April 2024, only two partially functioning hospitals out of a previous twelve were able to provide sexual and reproductive healthcare. The Al-Basma IVF Centre was bombed by Israelis in 2023:

    destroying around 4,000 embryos, as well as 1,000 sperm samples and unfertilized eggs.

    This was in spite of the fact that the commission didn’t find any information indicating that the building was used for any military purposes. Therefore, the commission found that:

    the destruction of the Basma IVF clinic was a measure intended to prevent births among Palestinians in Gaza, which is a genocidal act under the Rome Statute and Genocide Convention.

    Similarly to the IVF centre bombing,

    The report also describes how:

    the ISF controlled the entry, the content and the amounts of humanitarian assistance allowed into Gaza and that the ISF deliberately stopped humanitarian assistance which included items essential for pregnant women, new mothers and newborns from reaching Gaza, both through direct attacks and through the imposition of a total siege.

    Their investigations paint a catastrophic picture for reproductive health in Gaza. The near-total destruction of medical facilities along with the purposeful throttling of aid has meant that the orchestrated lack of basic equipment for childbirth, menstruation products, and painkillers are resulting in avoidable illnesses and deaths. There has been a 300% increase in miscarriages since 7 October 2023. Many pregnant people are starving, and unable to breastfeed. Very limited access to water and menstruation products means that infections have been able to take hold and cause “miscarriage, loss of fertility, and in worse case, death.”

    Sexual violence

    A significant section of the UN report on Israel focuses on sexual violence against women, men, girls, and boys. The commission writes:

    Women’s bodies and sexuality are often perceived as linked with the dignity of the nation and other negative gender stereotyping, such as the collective’s honour and emasculation. Several experts have noted that allegations of sexual violence against Israeli women on 7 October 2023 have resulted in attempts to rebuild Israeli national masculinity through aggression and in retaliation for the attacks carried out by the military wing of Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups.

    The commission paints a picture of depraved and persistent sexual violence against Palestinian men and women, both at checkpoints and in detention. And, they also note that whilst “sexual and gender-based violence is by no means a new element of the Israeli occupation” they documented a noted increase of aggression and violence since 7 October 2023. They note the existence of many videos and photos recorded and posted by Israeli soldiers of them:

    searching homes in the Gaza Strip, deliberately humiliating and mocking Palestinian women based on their gender and ethnicity…The Commission notes that the videos and photos show a clear gender and racial bias by the perpetrators, who intentionally target Palestinian women and attempt to humiliate and degrade them publicly.

    Both female and male detainees are often ordered to strip naked by Israeli soldiers, whilst:

    hundreds of Palestinian men and boys have been photographed and filmed in humiliating and degrading circumstances while subjected to acts of a sexual nature, including forced public nudity and stripping, full or partial.

    The commission details many instances where groups of men and boys were rounded up, ordered to strip naked, and then marched to a checkpoint or held naked in public. In one particular instance:

    They were told to hold their identity documents high in the air and continue walking while undressed. The ISF said that anyone who did not follow orders would be shot. The men were completely naked while walking and the women were in their underwear.

    Women were regularly forced to remove their veils, and the commission noted the culturally specific psychological torture this amounted to. Palestinian men were often forced to strip in front of Palestinian woman, and vice versa, in depraved humiliation rituals. They detail one instance where a 14 year old girl was forcibly strip searched and groped by two soldiers.

    Rape as a weapon of war

    The report also finds that:

    Acts of sexual violence documented by the Commission appear to have been motivated by extreme hatred towards the Palestinian people and a desire to dehumanize and punish them. Sexual and reproductive violence in detention has also been reported by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, B’Tselem, Addameer, Amnesty and Healthcare Workers Watch.

    The commission documents the detail they uncovered:

    The Commission documented cases of rape and sexual assault of male detainees, including the use of an electrical probe to cause burns to the anus, and the insertion of objects, such as fingers, sticks, broomsticks and vegetables, into the anus and rectum.

    One victim told the commission:

    They took me into an interrogation room and suspended me by my arms behind my back. My toes barely touched the floor. A male guard inserted a metal stick in my penis on several occasions, about twenty times in total. I started bleeding. The pain was excruciating but the humiliation was worse.

    In at least two cases, the investigators found that victims “needed medical treatment and/or surgery due to the injuries caused by rape.”

    They further detail well-known rape at Sde Teiman prison:

    In one case, a detained Palestinian man was raped after he was transferred from Ofer prison to Sde Teiman detention facility. According to an indictment submitted to an Israeli military court, the man was physically abused by five soldiers, reservists in Unit 100, during a search at Sde Teiman prison.

    The man was so violently raped that:

    The assault resulted in the fracture of several of the victim’s ribs and a punctured lung. The victim was also stabbed in the rectum with a sharp object. The victim’s rectum was raptured due to the assault, and he required surgery to the rectum. Following the assault, the victim was required to use a stoma bag due to the gravity of the injuries. A video filming the assailants were taken by a soldier.

    With many of the rape cases the commission describes, they were able to geo-locate the locations via Israeli soldiers recording and posting the sexual assaults.

    UN report on Israel: a culture of impunity

    The report concludes that:

    The Commission finds that there is a clear culture of impunity within the ISF and soldiers believe that they will never be held accountable for the crimes they have committed. This results in an implicit or tacit encouragement by the top civilian and military leadership to the soldiers who commit these crimes.

    They explain how in July 2024 when ten Israeli soldiers were arrested for raping a Palestinian detainee at the Sde Teiman facility:

    Knesset members from the coalition, right-wing activists and soldiers participated in demonstrations to protest the soldiers’ arrest, showing them support and legitimizing their actions. They attacked the Sde Teiman camp, including soldiers of the military police tasked with investigating the rape case, and occupied part of it.

    This goes beyond a culture of impunity and is instead a culture of active facilitation and celebration of Israeli soldiers and settlers raping Palestinian men. The commission itself finds that the Israeli justice system:

    cannot ensure fair trial guarantees as it is inherently discriminatory in its application of the law; domestic legislation continues to be used to persecute Palestinians and exculpate perpetrators who violate the rights of Palestinians. The Israeli justice system should not be relied upon to deal with accountability for Israeli civilian and military personnel in relation to Palestinians.

    The report is a meticulous evidencing of reproductive violence, sexual harassment and violence, rape, and sexual humiliation rituals.

    Women and girls in Palestine have been, and are continuing to suffer disproportionately with “outrages upon personal dignity.”

    Palestinian men and boys are sexually harassed, raped, and tortured by the ISF. Repeatedly, the commission concludes that these acts meet the legal threshold for crimes against humanity based on gender, inhuman and degrading treatment, and severe deprivation of fundamental rights.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Maryam Jameela

  • The humanitarian crisis in Sudan continues to worsen, with the UN and various humanitarian organisations issuing urgent warnings regarding the deteriorating conditions in the country. They report startling statistics indicating a rapid increase in hunger, disease, and a shortage of essential services for the Sudanese people.

    Sudan: 30 million people need help

    The UN has stated that there is a staggering 96% shortfall in humanitarian response efforts required to address the crisis. It has estimated that $6 billion is necessary to support those in need, yet only $252.6 million has been raised to date, representing merely 4.2% of the target.

    The ramifications of these figures are felt across a nation where over 30 million people are in urgent need of assistance.

    Among these, 24.6 million individuals are at significant risk of food insecurity, including 3.7 million children under five, as well as pregnant and nursing mothers who require treatment for severe malnutrition.

    Mouhamed Abdullah, who works with a youth group helping those in West Omdurman, emphasised the deepening hunger crisis

    The sight of long lines of empty pots is very alarming as charitable kitchens struggle to cover the increasing number of those in need day by day.

    He noted that four out of five families are dependent on daily meals from these kitchens, which have slashed their meal offerings by over 70% due to funding shortages. As food prices surged by 40% since the beginning of Ramadan, the situation has become increasingly dire, following a rise of more than 300% since the conflict erupted in mid-April 2023.

    A worsening situation

    The health situation is equally critical, with a sharp rise in mortality rates attributed to various diseases.

    The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) has reported over 5,000 malaria cases recorded between January and February alone in Khartoum, while cholera has claimed more than 100 lives in the city of Kosti over the past two weeks. The ongoing conflict has severely hampered access to medical care, with 80% of healthcare facilities reported to have ceased operations.

    Ali Hassan, a health worker in Khartoum North, described the challenges faced by older people who struggle to obtain vital medications. “They are facing a real problem accessing medications and treatment aids,” he stated. Young individuals often embark on perilous journeys to find essential supplies, only to return empty-handed amid widespread shortages.

    The Sudan Doctors’ Syndicate has accused security forces of obstructing medical services, stating that numerous doctors and healthcare workers have been arrested, further complicating the dire healthcare scenario and contributing to the collapse of medical infrastructures in conflict-affected areas.

    In addition to the humanitarian and health crises, the rise in human rights violations aggravates the plight of Sudanese civilians.

    Sudan: turning a blind eye

    By early March, over 1,890 violations were documented, including extrajudicial killings, mass killings due to military actions, enforced disappearances, and arrests of civilians.

    Rahab Mubarak, a member of the Emergency Lawyers and the Sudanese Human Rights Network, reported that civilians are continuously facing violence, particularly in urban areas. She stated:

    Civilians are facing continuous assaults, as shelling continues in residential areas… Moreover, residential neighborhoods in several areas are witnessing looting and significant violations against residents.

    As the conflict persists, the combination of humanitarian disaster, disease, and rampant violations of human rights presents a severe challenge for the people of Sudan, highlighting the urgent need for comprehensive and effective intervention to alleviate their suffering.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • One in four countries report backlash on women’s rights in 2024

    Women’s and girls’ rights are facing unprecedented growing threats worldwide, from higher levels of discrimination to weaker legal protections, and less funding for programmes and institutions that support and protect women.

    UN Women’s latest report “Women’s Rights in Review 30 Years After Beijing”, published ahead of the UN 50th International Women’s Day on 8 March, shows that in 2024 nearly a quarter of governments worldwide reported a backlash on women’s rights. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/international-womens-day/]

    Despite important progress, only 87 countries have ever been led by a woman, and a woman or girl is killed every 10 minutes by a partner or member of her own family.  Digital technology and artificial intelligence spread harmful stereotypes, while the digital gender gap limits women’s opportunities.

    In the past decade, the world registered a disturbing 50 percent increase in the number of women and girls living in conflict, and women’s rights defenders confront daily harassment, personal attacks and even death. Recent global crises—like COVID-19, the climate emergency, soaring food and fuel prices—are only increasing the urgency to respond.  

    “UN Women is committed to ensuring that ALL Women and Girls, everywhere, can fully enjoy their rights and freedoms,” affirmed UN Women Executive Director Sima Bahous. “Complex challenges stand in the way of gender equality and women’s empowerment, but we remain steadfast, pushing forward with ambition and resolve. Women and girls are demanding change—and they deserve nothing less.”…

    Today’s report also features the new Beijing+30 Action Agenda, a courageous roadmap to complete our unfinished business by focusing on:

    1. A digital revolution for all women and girls: We must ensure equal access to technology, equip women and girls to lead in AI and digital innovation, and guarantee their online safety and privacy.
    2. Freedom from poverty: Investments in comprehensive social protection, universal health coverage, education, and robust care services are needed for women and girls to thrive and can create millions of green and decent jobs.
    3. Zero violence: Countries must adopt and implement legislation to end violence against women and girls, in all its forms, with well-resourced plans that include support for community-based organizations on the front lines of response and prevention.
    4. Full and equal decision-making power: Temporary special measures like gender quotas have proven their effectiveness in rapidly increasing women’s participation.
    5. Peace and security: Fully finance national plans on women, peace and security and gender-responsive humanitarian aid are essential. Frontline women’s organizations, so often the first responders to crisis, must receive dedicated, sustained funding to build lasting peace.
    6. Climate justice: We must prioritize women’s and girls’ rights in climate adaptation, center their leadership and knowledge, and ensure they benefit from new green jobs.

    Across these six Actions, putting young women and girls at the heart of our efforts is the best way to guarantee success, both today and tomorrow. These six plus one actions have the potential to unleash progress on women’s rights and put us back on track for 2030.

    The Beijing+30 commemoration and the forthcoming UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW69) are clear opportunities to enshrine this Action Agenda into national policies, regional strategies, and global agreements.

    In a pivotal year for women and girls, that is also a year of pushback and crises like no other, let us push women’s rights forward to create a world where all women and girls enjoy equal rights and equal opportunities. We can be the first generation that can live in an equal world.

    Ahead of International Women’s Day, Amnesty International’s Secretary General, Agnès Callamard, said:

    “The significance of International Women’s Day 2025 cannot be overstated. It is no longer a case of addressing unfinished business on the gender justice front, but one of bracing ourselves to resist active regression and a mounting assault on our rights.

    “Thirty years ago, 189 governments came together at the Fourth World Conference on Women to adopt the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, a groundbreaking blueprint for strengthening women’s rights endorsed by thousands of activists. Despite significant progress since then, the world has failed to fully deliver on all the promises. From rape and femicide to coercion, control and assaults on our reproductive rights, violence against women and girls still threatens their safety, happiness and very existence in a multitude of ways.

    “And crucially, we are now going backwards. The aggressive patriarchal crusade led by President Trump and other powerful leaders against the rights and bodily autonomy of women and gender-diverse people has already had devasting consequences not just in the United States but all over the world. By dismantling domestic efforts to tackle gender-based, racial and other forms of discrimination, erasing recognition of transgender identity, and ending international funding for abortion counselling or referrals, the US administration is shamefully erasing years of hard-fought gains.

    “Let us be clear, this trend has deeper roots than President Trump’s recent election. For several years now, brazen anti-rights movements have conspired to turn back the clock to an age when patriarchal oppression was the norm. We cannot afford to be complacent in the face of this gathering storm, for women, girls and LGBTQI+ people are under attack the world over.

    “Amnesty International calls on states and non-state actors who believe in universal values and a rule-based international order to resist this accelerated and well-resourced attack against women’s rights. We call on them to strengthen protections of women, girls, LGBTQI+ people and other marginalized groups against gender-based violence. We urge them to recognize and support the vital work of all women human rights defenders and all those on the frontlines of the fight for sexual and reproductive rights, and to implement concrete measures to protect and empower them.

    “We appeal to all to respect sexual and reproductive rights and prevent rollbacks, including by revoking any laws that criminalize or punish people for exercising these rights, as well as fully decriminalizing, providing and funding universal access to abortion.

    “Finally, this International Women’s Day, Amnesty International reiterates its call on states to recognize gender apartheid under international law as a crime against humanity. Doing so would fill a major gap in the global legal framework and help to combat institutionalized and systematic domination and oppression on the basis of gender, no matter where it occurs.

    “Despite suffering setbacks and facing countless attempts to block, divide and undermine us throughout history, feminist, LGBTI+ and grassroots movements keep marching forward. We may be walking a rocky path, but we will never stop fighting for a world where women, girls and gender-diverse people are free to enjoy the full range of human rights without discrimination or fear of reprisal.”

    On 7 March 2025 SaferWorld carried a post “Still standing: The resilience of women peacebuilders in a time of crisis”Still standing: The resilience of women peacebuilders in a time of crisis

    As we mark International Women’s Day 2025, women’s rights organisations (WROs) and frontline activists in crisis and conflict settings are standing strong despite immense challenges. ..Yet, while their work is more critical than ever, the harsh reality is that many are being forced to operate with dwindling resources, due to global funding cuts and shifting donor priorities towards militarisation, over a genuine investment in long-term peace, security and gender justice. 

    At a time when conflict, displacement and violence against women are escalating, and misogyny is a core pillar of the far-right agenda, these cuts will only deepen existing inequalities and undermine efforts to build sustainable peace and security globally. The reduction in funding for gender equality and Women, Peace and Security (WPS) initiatives threatens to reverse decades of progress and compounds the global rollback on women’s equality, safety and security. For example, cuts to the UK official development assistance (ODA) budget in 2021 led to a 30 per cent reduction in funding to programming with a focus on gender equality and to a 66% reduction in funding to WROs compared to 2017. WROs and women-led organisations – many of which are small community groups – often struggle to access direct, flexible and long-term funding, despite being the first responders in humanitarian crises and leading conflict prevention and peace efforts. When funding disappears, so do vital services, safe spaces for survivors of gender-based violence and conflict-related sexual violence, safe spaces for women peacebuilders to re-mobilise, legal aid for women and girls who have been displaced, and advocacy that ensures women’s voices are central in peace processes.  But despite these constraints, WROs and women peacebuilders are still standing. Their resilience is evident in their ability to adapt, mobilise local resources and continue working in the most difficult circumstances. But resilience alone is not enough – they need meaningful and sustained support. 

    As the world commemorates International Women’s Day and gathers at the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) to discuss gender equality and sustainable development, we reaffirm our commitment to ensuring that women and girls play a central role in peacebuilding and conflict prevention efforts around the world.  

    The international community, donors, funders and philanthropists will need to act urgently to ensure that WROs are not just surviving but thriving. This means:  

    1. Increasing direct, flexible and long-term funding and shifting power to local women-led organisations, women activists and women’s groups – we have seen the value in our work of providing sustained core funding to WROs, moving beyond short-term, project-based grants to ensure continuity of their critical efforts in conflict prevention, peacebuilding and humanitarian response. To make this shift meaningful, international organisations and donors should prioritise direct and flexible funding to frontline WROs rather than channelling resources through large intermediaries. This will ensure that funding reaches those who are best placed to drive lasting change within their communities. 
    2. Ensuring women’s leadership in conflict prevention, peace and humanitarian processes – women from all backgrounds and marginalised communities must have a seat at decision-making tables, not just as implementers but as equal partners in shaping policies and solutions that affect their lives. 
    3. Standing up for gender equality and women’s rights – urgently pushing back against reversals in women’s rights and gender equality, especially in fragile and conflict-affected contexts, where regressive policies and shrinking civic space are eroding hard-won gains. Women peacebuilders, human rights defenders and frontline activists are already standing up to these challenges, demanding that women’s voices remain central. Their leadership must be protected, amplified and meaningfully supported to sustain progress and counteract the global rollback on gender equality. 
    4. Protecting and supporting women human rights defenders and peacebuilding organisations – governments and international actors must recognise and safeguard the work of women human rights defenders and peacebuilding organisations in conflict zones, ensuring they can operate without fear of reprisals. 
    5. Strengthening accountability mechanisms – governments and multilateral bodies must hold themselves accountable to their commitments to the WPS agenda and support localisation of the UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on WPS. 

    Women’s rights organisations are the backbone of peace and resilience in crisis and conflict settings. This International Women’s Day, we celebrate their unwavering commitment – but celebration is not enough. The global community must act with urgency to fund, support and protect these organisations so they can continue to drive meaningful change. 

    https://www.unwomen.org/en/news-stories/press-release/2025/03/one-in-four-countries-report-backlash-on-womens-rights-in-2024

    Read UN Women’s full report

    https://www.saferworld-global.org/resources/news-and-analysis/post/1071-still-standing-the-resilience-of-women-peacebuilders-in-a-time-of-crisis

    https://www.odisharay.com/pages/single_page.php?id=47565

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • The United Nations (UN) has called on the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to scrap the contentious two-child benefit cap and to immediately end the five-week waiting period for Universal Credit. This plea comes amid an alarming poverty crisis that has left many vulnerable families struggling to make ends meet.

    The UN: intervening over the DWP

    The UN’s recommendations were part of a broader report on tackling poverty in the UK. They have raised significant concerns about the state of human rights, with Jess McQuail, director of Just Fair—a charity advocating for economic, social, and cultural rights—highlighting the disparity between the UK’s self-described reputation as a leader in human rights and the reality faced by its citizens.

    In her remarks, McQuail stated:

    The UK government presents itself as a global leader in human rights, but these findings tell a different story.

    She further emphasised that the current government’s decisions are perpetuating a cycle of poverty that undermines citizens’ rights and called for immediate action to ensure a decent standard of living for everyone.

    The five-week wait for Universal Credit has been a longstanding issue affecting countless disabled people and families who depend on timely financial support. Critics argue that this delay exacerbates hardship for those in most need, pushing them further into poverty

    In response to the UN’s intervention, a DWP spokesperson stated:

    No one should be living in poverty – that’s why our ministerial taskforce is exploring all available levers across government to give every child the best start in life as part of our Plan for Change.

    While the DWP claims to be actively addressing these issues, people with lived experience tell a different story.

    Furthermore, the DWP outlined the government’s alleged commitment to increasing the Living Wage, uprating benefits, and implementing a “fair repayment rate” on Universal Credit deductions for some of the UK’s poorest families.

    However, many are questioning whether these measures will be sufficient to truly alleviate poverty or whether they simply serve as a façade to cover up more systemic inadequacies.

    Universal Credit: not fit for purpose

    The UN report has prompted various advocates, including Lord John Bird, the founder of the Big Issue and a crossbench peer, to respond with urgency. Bird stated:

    This UN report is another indication that the government must take poverty seriously.

    He argued for a cohesive approach to address the root causes of poverty rather than only treating its symptoms. Bird highlighted that public services, such as the NHS and schools, are presently overwhelmed by the consequences of poverty, often unable to provide preventative solutions that could help lift individuals out of their circumstances.

    The stark reality is that without a substantial DWP policy shift, the long-term effects of continued inaction could be catastrophic, not just for the wellbeing of families, but also for the functioning of vital public services that many depend upon.

    No teacher, doctor, police officer, or prison staff is adequately trained to combat the complexities of poverty; they find themselves addressing the detrimental consequences instead.

    As this dialogue continues, it remains clear that the situation is dire for many in the UK, especially for jobseekers and families reliant on social welfare. The UN’s appeals for change, coupled with that of campaign groups, suggest a significant disconnect between government assurances and the lived experiences of those struggling with poverty.

    The DWP: being watched

    Of course, this is not the first time the UN has intervened over the DWP. The UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) has for nearly a decade been a vocal critic of how UK society treats disabled people. At it’s worst, the UNCRPD accused successive governments of ‘grave’ and ‘systematic’ violations of disabled people’s human rights.

    So, as Starmer and the Labour Party government weigh their options moving forward, the eyes of the nation—and indeed the UN—are firmly fixed on their next steps. The responsibility now lies with the government to align its actions with its promises and address the pressing concerns of its most vulnerable citizens.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Amy Braunschweiger speaks with Human Rights Watch’s US Program Director Tanya Greene, who leads research within the United States, as well as Washington Director Sarah Yager, who advocates with the US government on global issues, about the slew of executive orders President Trump has issued, the damage to human rights his administration’s policies have already done, and where we go from here.The text – reproduced in full below, was published on 3 March 2025.

    See also: https://youtu.be/N_hCOCVuJsA?si=t2lUEb3Fw8XWH7Vo where UN human rights chief Volker Türk has voiced deep concerns for hostilities happening across the globe, including a “fundamental shift in direction” of the US. He expressed concern over a peace deal in the Russia-Ukraine war that did not involve Kyiv.

    President Trump has been governing by executive orders. Could you give us some quick background on executive orders and what they do?

    TG: An executive order is a presidential directive regarding federal government operations and policies. Their reach and power can be extraordinary, including because they often impact federally funded non-governmental entities, like universities and housing providers. Executive orders should be based on existing law, and are often operationalized through agency action, such as the departments of labor, homeland security, or education.

    Many of Trump’s executive orders are facing court challenges arguing that they are unconstitutional or otherwise illegal. For example, his executive order denying citizenship to children of undocumented people born in the United States has been stayed by the courts pending a legal challenge. It is widely seen as a clear violation of the 14th amendment to the Constitution.

    Although the implementation of executive orders is not always automatic, widespread responses have been preemptive, anticipatory, and fearful, which is likely what Trump intended in this blitz of actions.

    SY: These executive orders show how split the United States is. In 2016, Trump’s executive orders reversed former President Barack Obama’s. Then Joe Biden reversed Trump’s orders. And today, Trump reverses Biden’s. But this isn’t typical. It shows the divisive nature of US politics.

    It’s also not typical that so many of these current orders are harmful to human rights.

    Many of Trump’s executive orders harm human rights, both in the United States and around the world. Meanwhile, billionaire Elon Musk’s “Department of Government Efficiency,” or DOGE, is laying off masses of federal employees at various agencies. What are we most concerned about inside the US?

    TG:  Whatever its supposed intentions, DOGE is slashing and burning to the point that a growing number of federal agencies are crippled by lack of resources, staff, and competent leadership. DOGE is also taking down websites and data that we rely on, both as human rights defenders and as the general public seeks information. For instance, hospitals across the country can no longer obtain important public health data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    Human Rights Watch is investigating the treatment of immigrant children, racial justice impacts, environmental concerns, healthcare access, rights of lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, and transgender people, and reproductive freedoms. You have a president that says diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) is “dangerous, demeaning and immoral” but offers no ways to fight racial injustice, and yet one of his executive orders allows for resettling certain supposedly-persecuted white South Africans in the US, just after an earlier order closed the refugee admissions door on all other refugees worldwide.

    Immigration enforcement raids and other enforcement activities in the last month have targeted all immigrant communities, disproportionately those of color. Enforcement has targeted immigrants regardless of how long they have been in the United States and without considering their contributions to their communities, as well as people in the process of an immigration proceeding, where a judge decides if they can stay in the US.  As a result, there are communities in which many people are terrified and some avoid going to church or the hospital, and many children don’t go to school.

    There is also an order now in place defunding reproductive justice and abortion access both in the US and around the world.

    The stock value of GEO Group, a company the US government has long contracted with to run private immigration detention facilities, went up immediately after Trump’s election, presumably in anticipation of ramped-up immigration detention in private facilities. Human Rights Watch has long called for investment in community-based public safety solutions rather than more prisons.

    What are we worried about in terms of US foreign policy?

    SY: The foreign aid freeze and termination of thousands of State Department grants is a key focus for us right now, though of course there are new concerns that rise up every day. The aid being stopped has had awful consequences around the world. People will die needlessly because of this one policy decision.

    There is also an impact on civil and political rights abroad. Russian independent media outlets, which have been doing an amazing job exposing the Kremlin’s repression and debunking the official propaganda, received significant US-funding. Terminating aid will severely undercut that work. The same thing with Belarusian independent media.

    Many human rights defenders targeted by their governments lived in US-funded safe houses, which are now closed.

    Small human rights groups, some the only ones in their country, are on the verge of closing. We’re going to see the ripple effects and deaths in populations unable to stand up for their freedoms without this funding and the political support the United States gave.

    Aside from the aid freeze, Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth fired the military’s top lawyers. Military lawyers are supposed to ensure US military operations abide by international law, the laws of war.  This could mean far more harm to civilians, who are supposed to be protected, when the US military is in an armed conflict. In fact, Trump also just lifted limits on US commanders authorizing airstrikes and special operations raids outside of war zones, which rolls back 20 years of work to ensure only combatants are targeted and only in recognized armed conflicts.

    These kinds of actions will have long-term ramifications on how people around the world view the United States.

    When there’s so much happening in a short period of time, how does Human Rights Watch approach its work?

    TG: We remember our priorities and how we can make a difference. There’s a lot of noise and distraction so we have to be thoughtful about putting limited resources into efforts that have impact. Our research on immigration raids or deportation flights might be used in partner litigation; our interviews with witnesses to abuses help support policymakers advocating in support of human rights.

    As an organization with colleagues who deal with repressive states and authoritarian regimes globally, those of us working in the US are informed of effective strategies and lessons learned as we encounter them here. And we can share this information with partners on the ground and policymakers, too.

    SY: We were not caught off guard by this. We were able to plan. I do think the speed, the apparent vindictiveness, and the level of chaos of Trump’s first month in office shocked many people. But we planned for this. We had a strategy that we are now implementing. We are going to engage with every policymaker that we can. We know for a fact many on both sides of the aisle don’t agree with what is happening. We are going to document the Trump administration’s impact on human rights around the world, and we’re going to try and block or end those policies. We are working together with our partners, some of whom focus on strategic litigation – litigation designed to advance respect for and protection of rights.

    How is Human Rights Watch responding to this? What is our work inside the US focusing on?

    TG: All the areas of work I mentioned are under attack by the new administration.

    The immigration space is fraught with misinformation that stokes fears and prejudices, but we counter that with fact-finding and with the stories of the real people who are harmed by dehumanizing rhetoric and policies.  We will build on our track record of careful research on problematic immigration policies from previous administrations, including the first Trump administration, exposing harmful policies such as inhuman and degrading immigration detention and the separation of migrant children from their parents. We are continuing this work, documenting what’s happening to people and using it to advocate for change.

    We’ve seen US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deporting Iranian families with children to Panama with an agreement that the US will pay for Panama to deport them to Iran. A country cannot lawfully send Iranian asylum seekers to Panama without hearing their claims and just be done with it – sending them back to a country to face persecution violates international refugee law. The administration is also preparing to deport unaccompanied immigrant children – not just cruel and terrifyingly dangerous, but a human rights violation.

    In the democracy space, some US voters seem ready to trade freedoms away for supposed gains that are ultimately long-term losses, like increased surveillance, that will embolden and enable bad actors in government.

    In the racial equality space, we’ve been working on education, and that is a battle zone. We are doing research to expose state-level policies that censor and distort school curricula in ways that are inconsistent with human rights norms—measures that target the histories and experiences of Black, Indigenous and LGBT people in particular. If those efforts succeed they will be exported to other states.

    How is our work responding to changes in the foreign policy space?

    SY: The Trump executive order putting in place a sanctions program targeting the International Criminal Court has already done damage. We are working to convince the Senate not to legislate more sanctions, and to make sure other governments step up to defend the court from US pressure.

    We continue to focus on some of the conflicts where we think the Trump administration could play a valuable role. When it comes to Sudan, where the US government itself said a genocide took place, the US could pressure allies like the United Arab Emirates to stop supplying weapons to the Rapid Support Forces, one of the abusive warring parties there.

    President Trump says he wants to be a peacemaker. There are ways he could do that, but so far we are seeing very worrying foreign policy proposals. For example, Ukraine’s future is being discussed by the United States and Russia without Ukraine, and in Gaza, Trump has proposed permanently and forcibly displacing the Palestinian population, which would amount to crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing.

    Some people would say there is no way to engage with this administration on human rights.

    SY: Engaging is certainly more challenging. But we don’t want to just walk away from our advocacy with US officials. Then you give up the power of the human rights movement, and any opportunity to change the minds of policymakers. There are still people in this administration who care about human rights. They may talk about it differently, they may be focused on particular places or issues. We’ll start there and make our case for the US role in lessening suffering and protecting rights around the world, not only because it’s good but because it’s smart and it’s in the US interest.

    And there’s Congress, which needs to step up as a check on the power of the White House. We will continue to work with House representatives and Senators on both sides of the aisle.

    TG:  The fear that the administration is cultivating among the public is dangerous, and information is so critical in response. That’s why we respond with research, arming people with facts. We know there are members of congress and state leadership like governors that support human rights. They are also empowered by our work.

    What can people in the US do in this situation?

    SY: If we want to see rights on the agenda, we need to see people in the United States reaching out to their representatives in Congress. They were elected to bring to Washington the needs and desires of their people.

    Also, if you see a person acting with courage in these difficult times, thank them. We’re going so fast, and we push and yell and scream, and then when a policymaker, a celebrity, or the head of a local food bank steps out and does the right thing, we move on. Stop for a minute and recognize the people doing the right thing. Make the space for them to keep doing that important work of holding the line.

    TG: Also, you too can be that person. Share the information. Have the conversations with your friends and family, provide what you know, encourage exchange of real information. It’s about building community. One of the strongest weapons we have is our unity, and we can each do something to build that.

    Religious communities and school groups and community centers, there are many places we can plug in to make a difference. Support your local homeless shelter or food pantry. Sponsor or reach out to refugees and immigrants living in your localities. I think the big risk is feeling powerless and unplugging. I know the temptation is great. We each don’t have to do everything. But if we all do something, that’s more than nothing. And don’t be afraid to hear “no” or lose on your first try. No is the first step to yes.

    And remember that there have been people in this country who have been targeted for abuse and destruction by the government their entire time in this country. Us as Black people, Indigenous people. And we’ve not only survived but thrived, and there are lessons to be learned from those struggles. And for the rest of the US population, we are a nation of mostly immigrants who came here to escape ills like human rights abuses or poverty. So gain strength from that.

    We’re doing this work for the next generation as well as the present. Not only are we trying to protect rights for them, we are also modeling what to do when you have problems and face difficulties.

    https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/03/03/interview-snapshot-rights-under-trump-administration

  • Francesca Albanese, the United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, recently expressed concerns about freedom of expression during a visit to Germany.

    Francesca Albanese: ‘lacking oxygen’ in Germany

    During her stay, Albanese spoke at events that were initially scheduled at Munich’s Ludwig Maximilian University and Berlin’s Free University but were subsequently cancelled under intense pressure from various authorities, including police and local government.

    In remarks made to a small audience in a Berlin newspaper office, Albanese said:

    I have to admit that about 75 hours in this country have made me pretty nervous… The situation is bad for freedom of expression pretty much everywhere. And still, I’ve never felt this sense of lacking oxygen as I do here.

    Her lecture on “Colonialism, Human Rights and International Law” did not take place as planned; a backup venue was also forced to withdraw after facing vandalism and intimidation.

    As the Morning Star reported:

    Riot police lined the walls of the Morning Star’s German sister paper Junge Welt’s Berlin HQ on Tuesday as it hosted a talk by UN special rapporteur on Palestine Francesca Albanese.

    Police vans queued outside and officers muscled in against the wishes of the paper’s management, saying they were there to “prevent danger” as the Italian lawyer spoke on “legal perspectives on the genocide in Gaza.”

    The actions against Albanese come amidst heightened tensions in Germany regarding expressions of solidarity with Palestine, particularly during Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza.

    Germany: clamping down on pro-Palestinian voices

    Authorities have launched investigations and conducted raids against activism perceived as “left-wing extremist antisemitism”, while police in Berlin have taken measures to suppress the speaking of Arabic at protests.

    Germany’s political climate regarding Israel has become increasingly fraught in recent weeks. The government has maintained a staunchly pro-Israel stance, viewing support for Israel as a national obligation, a point rooted in the country’s historical context regarding its treatment of Jewish communities.

    In this context, Germany has continued arms exports to Israel and opposed international efforts to hold Israel accountable at various courts.

    The recent federal elections have seen the Christian Democrats, under new leadership by Friedrich Merz, gaining significant traction. In their election campaign, they focused on an unwavering commitment to Israel, which includes a push for laws that would criminalise the denial of Israel’s right to exist and proposed measures that could further restrict residency rights based on accusations of antisemitism.

    Merz has asserted that he will ensure Israeli leaders can travel to Germany unimpeded, a clear indication of the conservative party’s agenda as it returns to a position of influence.

    Despite public opposition to the Israeli actions in Gaza, as evidenced by polls indicating that many Germans wish to halt arms shipments, political discourse in the Bundestag has largely avoided addressing the humanitarian implications of the conflict.

    Public opinion versus politicians

    Francesca Albanese’s visit comes amid a backdrop of increasing political polarisation on Israel.

    The leadership of the Social Democrats, Greens, and the right-leaning Free Democrats has maintained a relatively consistent approach to foreign policy, advocating for traditional support for Israel without acknowledging the broader issues at stake.

    The atmospheric tensions are notably manifest in academic and cultural spaces, as illustrated by Berlin’s current mayor, Kai Wegner, who has called for universities to engage police to quell pro-Palestinian dissent on campuses. This environment has led to an overall chilling of free speech, particularly surrounding discourse on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    Political discourse has morphed into a terrain filled with polarised views, whereby even mentioning words such as “genocide” in reference to the events in Gaza has faced derision from prominent political figures. Chancellor Olaf Scholz has dismissed allegations of genocide as “absurd” during a pre-election interview, showcasing a considerable distance between political elites and segments of the populace who seek a more compassionate and reflective engagement with both the historical and current plight of Palestinians.

    As the Christian Democrats reposition themselves as a force likely to influence future German policies, the political landscape appears set for heightened scrutiny and potential suppression of pro-Palestinian movements and voices, leaving many observers and activists wondering about the future of freedom of expression and solidarity concerning Palestine in Germany.

    The developments hint at a continuity of policies that align closely with the hardline stances against dissent and the prioritisation of Israel’s security narrative over the voices advocating for Palestinian rights.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By The Canary

  • International governments are set to resume the COP16 biodiversity summit, where they will agree on key aspects of a flagship global action plan to tackle the biodiversity crisis.

    However, Indigenous rights campaign group Survival International has called out the “deeply flawed” basis of the fund underpinning its work. Crucially, this is because the framework could result in the serious violation of Indigenous peoples’ human rights.

    COP16 biodiversity summit: systemic failures all round

    Between 25 to 27 February, international parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) will reconvene for the UN Biodiversity Conference (COP16) in Rome.

    It follows a first round of November 2024 negotiations in Cali, Colombia. Top of the agenda will be to agree on the implementation and monitoring of the flagship Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF).

    Countries adopted this at the 2022 COP15 in Canada. In a nutshell, its a global set of goals to curb biodiversity loss. It committed parties to setting national targets to reverse ecological decline. And crucially, as the CBD itself describes:

    sets out an ambitious pathway to reach the global vision of a world living in harmony with nature by 2050. Among the Framework’s key elements are 4 goals for 2050 and 23 targets for 2030.

    So, representatives at COP16 will now negotiate a key aspect of this – the delivery of the fund which finances action on these targets.

    Global South countries had argued for a new dedicated fund, separate from existing development aid apparatus. However, Global North countries rejected this in favour of a fund under the existing Global Environment Facility (GEF). The World Bank, UN agencies, and various governments oversee this. The Global Biodiversity Framework Fund (GBFF) is the GEF-led financing mechanism that parties established instead.

    By February 2025, governments around the world had committed around $383m to the fund. Canada ($146m), Germany ($98m), the UK ($69m), Denmark ($14.5m), Norway ($14m) and New Zealand ($12m) have contributed the vast majority of this. However, the figure pales in comparison to scale of finance that’s needed.

    And already, the GBFF is failing in one vital aspect in particular: respecting Indigenous Peoples’ rights.

    Red flags on Indigenous rights

    Ahead of the Cali talks, campaign group Survival International had raised a significant number of red flags with the fund.

    It rebranded the financing mechanism the ‘Grievous Biodiversity Failure Fund’ for its severe lack of protections for Indigenous people.

    In a briefing, Survival highlighted that:

    The choice of the Global Environment Facility to run the GBFF was already deeply unacceptable in terms of Indigenous rights. Crucially, the organisation does not universally require that Indigenous people have the right to Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) over any projects it funds which may affect their lives, lands and rights. Such requirement for consent is only covered by the GEF’s ‘Principles and Guidelines for Engagement with
    Indigenous Peoples’ where the recipient country has ratified ILO Convention 1698. This is only the case for 24 countries worldwide (six of which are in Europe). Even then, the GEF stipulates that for its purposes, FPIC can be demonstrated through “(i) the mutually accepted consultation process between the project proponent and affected indigenous communities and (ii) evidence of agreement between the parties as the outcome of the
    consultations” (emphasis added).

    In other words, in most countries where GEF might fund projects through the GBFF, FPIC would not be required. Even in the few where it applies, the critical concept of consent (i.e, Indigenous people having the right to decline a project that affects them), is downgraded merely to project proponents having to demonstrate that consultation has been carried out.

    In short, the fund will not require projects to show that they have consulted with Indigenous groups. It means the fund will invariably finance projects that violate Indigenous communities’ human and territorial rights.

    Notably, there are a number of issues which will only make these abuses hugely likely. Crucially, the GBFF facilitates the following:

    • Biodiversity Credits – a scheme based on the discredited carbon credit model. These pose a serious new threat to Indigenous peoples and their rights.
    • The 30×30 pledge to put 30% of the world’s land and seas under some protection for biodiversity. This will almost certainly result in evictions of Indigenous peoples from their lands, as has been the case to date through Western-backed colonial fortress conservation projects all over the planet.
    • The structure and operation of the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund is fundamentally flawed. It  promotes a top-down approach to conservation projects. What’s needed is a rights-based plan for biodiversity protection.

    The UN and WWF: colonial conservation

    Now, the group has expanded its research, and found the picture for Indigenous people under the GBFF is even worse than it originally warned.

    For a start, the GBFF is already falling woefully short of a key promise on Indigenous inclusion.

    The fund states that it is “expected to support the human rights-based” implementation of the KMGBF. And in 2023, the GEF also set an “aspirational target” that it would direct 20% of GBFF disbursements to Indigenous People and Local Communities (IPLCs). Of course, this was already a pitiful target to begin with given Indigenous communities safeguard much of the world’s biodiversity.

    That is, while they make up less than 5% of the global human population, Indigenous Peoples’ territories hold as much as 80% of the world’s forest biodiversity.

    To date, the GBFF is disgracefully failing to live up to this pledge. As Survival’s updated briefing underscores:

    Only one of the forty projects so far approved – the very first proposed, by the government of Brazil – will likely be of benefit to Indigenous people and is clearly directed to them. Following a project application template, all the projects make a ‘tick-box’ claim to have an allocation to IPLCs. If true, these would total more than thirty percent of the $201 million for approved projects and concepts (and project preparation grants) to date. But our analysis reveals that only one of the other thirty-nine programmes contains any budgetary provision for work with Indigenous people.

    Instead, it depicts a funding landscape where “top-down, colonial conservation”, such as National Parks and reserves, dominate. UN agencies and largely US-based conservation organisations have co-opted the vast majority of the project portfolio so far. This is despite a shameful history of this ‘protected area’ model fomenting violent evictions, and horrific human rights abuses.

    For instance, the Canary previously found 16 UNESCO World Heritage Site protected areas (PAs) spanning 11 countries with reports of land dispossessions and abuses. Obviously, this is just the tip of the iceberg – there are vast numbers more PAs where states and organisations have done the same.

    One international conservation organisation  notorious for said violations is the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). Predictably then, one of its projects that the GBFF is financing has a history of doing just that. Specifically, it will fund WWF militarised PAs in Africa with a legacy of dispossession and brutality from so-called eco-guards.

    COP16: business-as-usual on biodiversity isn’t going to cut it

    So, it’s also with no small amount of irony that it happens to be one the conservation charities massively benefitting from the GBFF. As Survival noted:

    In terms of funding, the one project involving Indigenous lands in Brazil represents about 4% ($8 million) of the total so far approved or provisionally committed by the GBFF. This is less than the ‘proposer agency’ fees being paid to mostly UN agencies and international conservation organisations such as WWF simply for submitting proposals. Together, these fees alone come to more than 8% ($17 million) of the total funds currently committed

    Overall, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), WWF, the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation, and US-based Conservation International have captured the bulk of the funds. Together, these agencies have taken $138m – more than two-thirds – of the total funding countries have committed so far.

    Ultimately, carrying on the same model of colonial conservation that criminalises Indigenous communities in their own lands, while opening ecological areas up to extractive capitalism is doomed to fail.

    A 2024 study found that biodiversity rates were declining at a rapid rate inside PAs.

    Therefore, continuing this business-as-usual violent fortress model through the GBFF will only spell disaster for the world’s biodiversity. As ever though, its Indigenous people who’ll bear the brunt of the the Global North’s flawed solution to the planetary crisis.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • UN special rapporteur Francesca Albanese has called for accountability over the British government’s participation in Israel’s genocide in Gaza. But because of the impunity Western allies have given Israel, she said:

    This is a situation in which everyone loses. Because we are embracing or we have entered a lawless world.

    And especially for us in the West, it’s going to bring incredibly negative consequences. Because we are those who have benefited the most from the international legal system that was created in the aftermath of the Second World War.

    Francesca Albanese: UK politicians “should be investigated” over complicity in war crimes

    Speaking to Declassified UK co-founder Mark Curtis, Francesca Albanese stressed that:

    Western politicians have taken the violation of international law lightheartedly. And they are very wrong. So now, it’s time for them to face the consequences.

    There have been many international critiques and legal calls for the prevention of Israel’s genocide in Gaza. But because Britain has disregarded these and continued to support Israel, she insisted:

    I believe that the UK has violated its obligations under international law.

    The reason, she asserted, is that the UK:

    is aiding and assisting Israel in the commission of… a series of international wrongdoing. Hence it should be held accountable.

    The responsibility of British politicians, she emphasised, “should be investigated by UK authorities” because:

    there is individual liability – there’s criminal liability for complicity with international crimes

    British participation in Israel’s genocide

    Declassified UK has been at the forefront of revealing the British government’s participation in Israel’s genocide. In particular, it has highlighted how both the current Labour Party government and the previous Conservative Party government have used RAF Akrotiri (the unique colonial relic on occupied Cypriot land which is part of the “largest Royal Air Force base outside the United Kingdom”) to aid Israeli war criminals. In fact, the British Palestinian Committee (BPC) recently released a report calling RAF Akrotiri “a foundational asset for genocide”.

    During Israel’s genocide in Gaza, RAF Akrotiri has sent bombers to Yemen, supported covert US flights to occupied Palestine, sent dozens of British warplanes to both Israel and Lebanon, and facilitated British spy flights and the passing of intelligence from officers on the ground to Israel. And as Declassified‘s Matt Kennard has insisted, these are the actions of “a country which is participating” in Israel’s genocide – “a direct participant”. Declassified has also called out the continuation of flights despite the current ceasefire in Gaza.

    RAF Akrotiri’s behaviour since 2023 demonstrates Britain’s role as a junior partner to the destructive US imperialist project, alongside Israel. Kennard has even asserted that “the UK bases on Cyprus double (unofficially) as US bases”.

    Imperialism is alive and well today. And it’s actively attacking international law, with the US now imposing sanctions on the International Criminal Court over its arrest warrant for Israeli war criminals. The world desperately needs to resist that assault because, as Albanese says, “this is a situation in which everyone loses”.

    Featured image via screengrab

    By Ed Sykes

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • A new report into the state of disabled people’s rights in Iran has recently been released. It paints a torrid picture of the lives of millions of people in the country. However, while Iran has got a long way to go before its disabled citizens even begin to have any form of equal rights – is life in the UK for disabled people any better?

    Iran and life for disabled people

    Volunteer Activists (VA) has released detailed report examining the state of disability rights in Iran from 2020 to 2024. This report provides valuable insights into the challenges faced by disabled individuals and the ongoing protests advocating for their rights.

    Despite the government’s legislative commitments, such as the 2004 Law for Persons with Disabilities and its accession to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), the reality for many disabled Iranians remains fraught with barriers and systemic neglect.

    The report highlights the continued rise in disability rights protests, driven by rampant inflation and inadequate support services.

    Drawing from firsthand accounts, media reports, and social media analysis, VA’s research uncovers the severe social isolation, economic hardship, and abuse experienced by disabled individuals in Iran. The report also shows how the ‘Women, Life, Freedom’ movement has inspired disabled activists to persist in their demonstrations despite government crackdowns.

    The report found:

    Prevalence of Disability: Official data places disability prevalence in Iran at 115 per 1,000 people (approximately 11.5%), though other sources argue this figure underrepresents the reality, particularly since the state welfare database lists just 1.6 million disabled individuals out of a population of 85 million​.

    Economic Challenges: An estimated 60% of disabled Iranians are unemployed, with many living well below the poverty line. The government stipend, ostensibly tied to the minimum wage, remains grossly insufficient at around 1 million tomans ($15) per month​.

    Education Barriers: Out of 1.5 million school-aged children with disabilities, only 150,000 were enrolled in school during the 2018-2019 year. Most were in segregated settings​.

    Healthcare Access: Iranians with disabilities face severe healthcare shortages. For example, only two mammogram machines are available for visually impaired women in Tehran, and medication shortages for conditions like thalassemia and hemophilia have led to thousands of deaths​.

    The lived reality

    More broadly:

    • Due to a lack of adaptations in public infrastructure and insufficient aid at home, many disabled Iranians experience social isolation.
    • The lack of government support often leaves family members of disabled individuals overstretched.
    • There have been various instances of (deadly) abuse in government homes for disabled people, and disabled Iranians sometimes also face verbal or physical abuse from family members.
    • Due to their often difficult life circumstances, many disabled Iranians experience trauma and psychological stress. However, specialised help is rarely available or is only accessible to the wealthy.
    • Families of children with rare conditions, like epidermolysis bullosa, have been forced to seek asylum abroad due to the unavailability of critical treatments​.

    The report integrates personal stories that highlight the daily struggles of disabled Iranians.

    Kamran Doplurei, a wheelchair user, undertook a 115-kilometer journey to protest inadequate government support. He lamented that “we face not only physical pain but also anxiety over meeting our basic needs, especially with soaring inflation”​:

    No one chooses to be disabled… Although the law provides for various rights and services, in practice, less than five percent of these commitments are fulfilled.

    Meanwhile, Samaneh Shabani, a blind activist, described the heightened challenges during the Covid-19 pandemic, noting how deserted streets disrupted her navigation and left her feeling isolated. The report noted:

    This combination of factors not only complicated safe navigation but also increased anxiety during an already challenging time. In addition to highlighting barriers faced by blind individuals, Shabani raised awareness of obstacles affecting all disabled people, as well as domestic violence against disabled women.

    So, on the face of it seems that life for disabled people in Iran is in no way comparable with that for disabled people in the Global North.

    However, is that really the case?

    The UNCRPD

    For example, the UNCRPD has criticised both Iran and the UK, though the nature of the violations differs.

    Iran’s violations include, for example, non-Implementation of Laws. While Iran has enacted the Comprehensive Law on the Protection of Persons with Disabilities, only 5% of its provisions are realised in practice. Key policies like Article 27, which guarantees a stipend matching the minimum wage, are largely ignored​. There is also systemic stigma towards disabled people in Iranian society. Conservative and religious beliefs perpetuate the notion that disabilities are a form of divine punishment, leading to widespread discrimination​.

    Iran’s government demonstrates a pattern of tokenism, as seen in its announcement of job quotas and housing programs that fail to account for logistical barriers faced by disabled citizens. Protests by the disabled community, like those demanding the implementation of Article 27, are often met with police suppression, with activists like Behrouz Morvati being detained​.

    Moreover, government responses such as the Seventh Development Plan have slashed social support provisions, further alienating disabled Iranians. The report’s evidence of abuse in state-run care homes underscores the lack of accountability and oversight​.

    The UK is not any better – relatively speaking

    However, in the UK the UNCRPD made similar and damning criticisms of successive British governments.

    Overall, in 2016 the UN accused the UK of “grave and systematic violations” following austerity measures that cut disability benefits and support services. Disabled people in the UK have reported increased poverty, social exclusion, and worsening mental health. Specifically, the UNCRPD lamented that UK social security was not enough for disabled people to live on. Crucially, the chair of the UNCRPD also highlighted that, as the Canary previously reported:

    the UK government and the media “have some responsibility” for society seeing disabled people as “parasites, living on social benefits… and [living on] the taxes of other people”. And she said these “very, very dangerous” attitudes could “lead to violence… and if not, to killings and euthanasia”

    The point being, while disabled people in Iran are systemically marginalised in a way that their peers in the UK may not experience, the situation is relative. Iran is in the Global South. The UK is supposed to be a world leader in disabled people’s rights – yet the UNCRPD shamed it.

    Comparatively, therefore, for countries in the Global North to take the moral high ground over disabled people’s rights in Iran without addressing the persecution and discrimination on their doorsteps reeks of colonialism and white supremacy.

    A way forward for disabled people in Iran?

    To address the challenges for disabled people in Iran, the report suggests:

    • Domestic Reforms: Strengthening accountability mechanisms for law enforcement and enhancing disability rights in development plans.
    • International Support: Leveraging international alliances to pressure Iran into compliance with the UNCRPD.
    • Activist Collaboration: Encouraging grassroots advocacy and improving organisational structures​.

    VA calls on the international community to enhance their support for disability rights activists in Iran. By fostering stronger connections between foreign and Iranian disability rights organisations and prioritising socio-economic rights, global donors can help amplify the voices of disabled individuals and advance their rights.

    While both Iran and the UK face criticism for their treatment of disabled citizens, the systemic issues in Iran – rooted in cultural stigma, economic neglect, and political repression – present more severe barriers to equality.

    To ensure progress, the Iranian government must move beyond superficial measures and address the structural inequities that perpetuate marginalisation. The voices of activists and international advocacy remain critical in achieving this transformation.

    Featured image supplied

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The United Nations (UN) has formally intervened in the case of the Palestine Action ‘Filton 18‘ – currently on remand over their action at a UK-based Israel-supplying arms factory owned by Elbit Systems. The UN letter, while polite, does not pull any punches – and exposes the misuse of counter-terror laws and blatant state-sanctioned mistreatment of the activists. However, the UK government has…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Posted on 6 January 2025 – Closing date 15 January 2025

    The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) is an international non-governmental organisation (NGO) composed of nearly 200 national human rights organisations from more than 115 countries. FIDH is a nonpartisan, non-sectarian, apolitical, and not for profit organisation. Since 1922, FIDH has been defending all human rights – civil, political, economic, social, and cultural – as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

    https://www.fidh.org/en

    FIDH are now recruiting : A Delegate to the United Nations (F∕M) – Indefinite-term contract based in FIDH Geneva office

    The FIDH’s Delegation in Geneva

    • Represents FIDH before Geneva-based international organizations and institutions, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR); in particular, the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) and the UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies;
    • Organizes the participation of FIDH’s member and partner organizations in the work of UN human rights bodies and mechanisms (support and assistance with regard to the submission of “parallel” or “alternative” reports, lobbying and advocacy, communication, etc.): mainly the UN Human Rights Council (including the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) mechanism), treaty monitoring bodies, and special procedures;
    • Prepares and implements the interventions of lobbying and advocacy at the Human Rights Council, and defines advocacy strategies;Feeds UN human rights protection bodies and mechanisms, in particular UN special procedures and OHCHR’s sections and branches, based on information from FIDH member and partner organizations and develops the strategic analysis of institutional developments and advocacy opportunities;

    Relays and reports on activities and events to FIDH’s International Secretariat based in Paris.

    Direct superviser : The representative, Head of the FIDH Delegation to the United Nations in Geneva

    Applicants should send their CV and a brief cover letter (in English) by email recrutement@fidh.org quoting reference FIDH DELEGATE in the subject line.

    https://reliefweb.int/job/4122938/delegate-united-nations-indefinite-term-contract-based-fidh-geneva-office

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • The first World Congress on Enforced Disappearances will convene from 15 – 16 January in Geneva, marking a pivotal step in the global fight to prevent and eradicate this egregious human rights violation.

    This event will bring together governments, victims, civil society organisations, and international bodies to foster dialogue and chart a collective path forward to end enforced disappearances worldwide. Over the course of the two-day event, panel discussions will be held on topics such as international responsibility for the forcibly disappeared, strengthening search procedures, and protecting victims, rights defenders, lawyers and journalists.

    See also https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/5E526725-F43B-83FB-3B7E-2B3C56D01F60

    and https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/81468931-79AA-24FF-58F7-10351638AFE3

    The Congress, open to the press and the public, is co-organised by the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED), the UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (WGEID), the UN Human Rights Office, and the Convention Against Enforced Disappearances Initiative (CEDI).

    Details of the programme are available online. The event will take place at the Geneva International Conference Centre (CICG). Onsite registration is open at the venue.

    The Committee on Enforced Disappearances monitors States parties’ adherence to the International Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance, which as of to date, has been ratified by 77 States parties. The Committee is made up of 10 members who are independent human rights experts drawn from around the world, who serve in their personal capacity and not as representatives of States parties.

    The Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances comprises five independent experts from all regions of the world. The Chair-Rapporteur is Ms. Gabriella Citroni (Italy); and the Vice-Chair is Ms. Grażyna Baranowska (Poland); other members are Aua Balde (Guinea-Bissau); Ms. Ana Lorena Delgadillo Perez (Mexico); and Mr. Mohammed Al-Obaidi (Iraq).

    https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/01/first-world-congress-enforced-disappearances-chart-course-collective-action

    https://www.icj.org/wced-1st-world-congress-on-enforced-disappearances/

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • on 31 December 2024 the UN Human Rights Podcast showcases the stories of five of the members of the  Youth Advisory Board. The board is made up of young people who work on issues that mobilize and empower others to stand up for human rights. The Board is in partnership with Education Above All and Silatech, to empower young people, especially those in conflict and vulnerable situations.

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Radio Free Asia.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Here a few highlights for this year from UN and NGOs sources:

    While commemorating the 76th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said that “human rights are under assault”. “Whether economic, social, civic, cultural or political, when one right is undermined, all rights are undermined,” Guterres said in a post on X. “Let’s protect, defend and uphold all human rights for all people,” he added. In a video message, The UN secretary-general said “we must stand up for all rights — always.

    Achim Steiner UNDP Administrator added his voice:

    ..As we mark Human Rights Day 2024, we are reminded that human rights are not abstract ideals. They are vital tools for addressing these pressing challenges and advancing dignity and justice for all. 

    … the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) works to support human rights solutions that strengthen accountability, protect communities and foster peace, recovery, and stability. This includes partnering with National Human Rights Institutions, which often represent the frontline defenders of human rights. … Local initiatives also remain key. That includes women in Somalia who are being supported to lead peace efforts including assisting those facing violence, discrimination, and injustice. “I have resolved numerous local disputes…I feel motivated when I see I have been able to change people’s lives positively,” says Fatuma who led a local Peace Working Group.

    As the accelerating climate emergency threatens the ability of current and future generations to enjoy their right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment, UNDP is focusing on access to justice, working with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and OHCHR to help communities claim their rights. …The private sector also has a pivotal role to play. UNDP supports the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights including to advance sustainable practices that protect the environment. Indeed, technology offers both risks and opportunities to advance human rights. The Global Digital Compact aims to create an inclusive, open, safe, and secure digital space that respects, protects and promotes human rights. Tech-enabled UNDP tools like iVerify and eMonitor+ deployed in over 25 countries to monitor and address false narratives and hate speech show the potential. It is now crucial to adopt a rights-based approach to technologies like A.I., addressing ethical challenges, protecting data, and tackling biases to mitigate risks today and unlock immense benefits for the generations to come. [https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2024/09/27/united-nations-adopts-ground-breaking-pact-for-the-future-to-transform-global-governance/]

    ——

    The NGO Index on Censorship spotlights four people standing up for human rights around the world:

    Despite the declaration, all around the world human rights are being challenged, degraded and attacked. That is why this year, on Human Rights Day, we pay tribute to five human rights defenders who have worked tirelessly to defend people’s rights and have been persecuted as a result. 

    Jemimah Steinfeld, CEO at Index on Censorship said:  “In this increasingly polarised and authoritarian world these people stand out as beacons of hope and light. It’s depressing to think that over 75 years since the Declaration, we still need a day like this but that should not detract from the bravery and fortitude of these people. May their example show us all how we can all better fight injustice.” 

    Marfa Rabkova (Belarus) Marfa Rabkova is a human rights defender who has been behind bars since 17 September 2020. She has long been targeted by the Belarusian authorities as a result of her civic activism. Marfa became head of the volunteer service at the Human Rights Centre Viasna in 2019. During the 2020 presidential election, she joined the “Human Rights Defenders for Free Elections” campaign, which registered over 1,500 election observers. When peaceful protests began to take place after the election, she helped document evidence of torture and violence against demonstrators.  Marfa was indicted on a long list of charges, including inciting social hostility to the government and leading a criminal organisation. She was sentenced to 14 years and 9 months in prison in September 2022, after nearly two years of pre-trial detention. Index on Censorship calls for her immediate and unconditional release.  See also:
    https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2021/03/22/belarus-end-reprisals-against-human-rights-defenders/

    https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2024/12/human-rights-day-2024-a-tribute-to-human-rights-defenders/

    https://www.undp.org/speeches/administrators-statement-human-rights-day-10-december-2024

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • It’s emerged that the UN is investigating how private sector companies and institutions have been complicit in Israel’s apartheid and ethnic cleansing in Palestine and Gaza.

    So, the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians has answered a call for evidence from the UN Special Rapporteur for the Occupied Palestinian Territories, ahead of a report to the UN Human Rights Council on how the private sector has contributed to establishing and maintain Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

    The UN: investigating the private sector’s role in Israel’s apartheid

    The UN says the report will:

    be part of a broader investigation into the involvement of business enterprises, including financial institutions such as banks, pension funds, insurance companies, universites, as well as private military and security companies (PMSC) and weapons manufacturers (WM) (hereinafter all together referred to as “private sector”), in the commission of international crimes connected to Israel’s unlawful occupation, racial segregation and apartheid regime

    The deadline for the call for submissions was 30 November 2024, ahead of a report by the Special Rapporteur that will be sent to the 58th Session of the Human Rights Council in March 2025. The thematic report will form part of a broader investigation into the involvement of business enterprises in the commission of international crimes related to Israel’s unlawful occupation, racial segregation and apartheid regime in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

    The report will focus on business enterprises including financial institutions such as banks, pension funds, insurance companies, universities, as well as private military and security companies and weapon manufacturers.

    ICJP’s submission particularly focuses on the complicity of universities and the third sector. The submission refers to UK case studies including some of ICJP’s longstanding experience working to hold UK-based universities and other UK-registered charities to account.

    In particular, the submission explains the case studies of Trinity College Cambridge and three other UK based charities: UK Toremet, JNF UK, and Achisomoch Aid Company. The submission details how these groups may be aiding and abetting international crimes against Palestinians, violating Palestinians’ fundamental human rights and disregarding human rights due diligence requirements.

    The submission also details the obligations of Member States, following the landmark Advisory Opinion by the International Court of Justice in July 2024, and makes recommendations on opportunities for international mechanisms to fill the accountability gap that exists in this space.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • It’s emerged that the UN is investigating how private sector companies and institutions have been complicit in Israel’s apartheid and ethnic cleansing in Palestine and Gaza.

    So, the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians has answered a call for evidence from the UN Special Rapporteur for the Occupied Palestinian Territories, ahead of a report to the UN Human Rights Council on how the private sector has contributed to establishing and maintain Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

    The UN: investigating the private sector’s role in Israel’s apartheid

    The UN says the report will:

    be part of a broader investigation into the involvement of business enterprises, including financial institutions such as banks, pension funds, insurance companies, universites, as well as private military and security companies (PMSC) and weapons manufacturers (WM) (hereinafter all together referred to as “private sector”), in the commission of international crimes connected to Israel’s unlawful occupation, racial segregation and apartheid regime

    The deadline for the call for submissions was 30 November 2024, ahead of a report by the Special Rapporteur that will be sent to the 58th Session of the Human Rights Council in March 2025. The thematic report will form part of a broader investigation into the involvement of business enterprises in the commission of international crimes related to Israel’s unlawful occupation, racial segregation and apartheid regime in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

    The report will focus on business enterprises including financial institutions such as banks, pension funds, insurance companies, universities, as well as private military and security companies and weapon manufacturers.

    ICJP’s submission particularly focuses on the complicity of universities and the third sector. The submission refers to UK case studies including some of ICJP’s longstanding experience working to hold UK-based universities and other UK-registered charities to account.

    In particular, the submission explains the case studies of Trinity College Cambridge and three other UK based charities: UK Toremet, JNF UK, and Achisomoch Aid Company. The submission details how these groups may be aiding and abetting international crimes against Palestinians, violating Palestinians’ fundamental human rights and disregarding human rights due diligence requirements.

    The submission also details the obligations of Member States, following the landmark Advisory Opinion by the International Court of Justice in July 2024, and makes recommendations on opportunities for international mechanisms to fill the accountability gap that exists in this space.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • In her latest report to the UN General Assembly, the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association , Gina Romero, underscored the effects of a growing negative rhetoric directed at civil society and activists.

    The Special Rapporteur presented her report ‘Protecting the Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association from Stigmatization’ in an interactive dialogue with States at the UN General Assembly’s Third Committee.

    The report highlights the growing number of harmful narratives that stigmatise civil society groups and activists engaged in association and peaceful assemblies, labeling them as ‘enemies or threats to security and values.’

    The Special Rapporteur highlighted an alarming trend of harmful narratives that undermine the legitimacy of peaceful activism and target human rights defenders and the public for exercising their rights to freedom of assembly and association. She discussed how activists and organisations face stigmatising labels and accusations for organising peaceful protests, forming associations, and bringing urgent issues to the attention of authorities and the international community. Her report listed specific narratives and language used in various countries to stigmatise the work of civil society organisations and activists.

    Particularly vulnerable to these harmful attacks are advocates for ethnic and religious minorities, women, children, young activists, LGBTIQ+ people, environmental and Indigenous activists, and defenders of democracy, transparency, and fair elections, with trade unions and labor rights groups also being targeted frequently.

    These narratives result in the restriction of human rights. While most States participating in the interactive dialogue welcomed the report, some rejected  the references to  their country in the report, including China, India, Iran, and Russia. Several States asked the Rapporteur about best practices and concrete examples to support and protect the right to peaceful assembly and association.

    Gina Romero responded that States should avoid stigmatising protesters and civil society, facilitate peaceful assembly and association, and ensure any restrictions are evidence-based and meet the requirements of legality, necessity and proportionality. She also responded to criticism from China, India, Iran and Russia by emphasising the challenges faced when there are no responses from States to inquiries, denial of requests for country visits, or lack of clear information about state actions and called on states to engage more openly with her mandate. 

    The Special Rapporteur also noted that harmful narratives from both State and non-State actors restrict access to freedoms of assembly and association, leading to rights violations and shrinking civic space. She called on States to detect, monitor, and counter such cases to ‘prevent undue legal restrictions and repression of these freedoms, which create a cycle of repression and stigmatization’ and implement legal and policy reforms.

    https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/unga79-special-rapporteur-reports-alarming-rise-in-harmful-narratives-restricting-freedom-of-peaceful-assembly-and-association

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • outside the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office in Westminster, UK, 3 July 2023. Jordan Pettitt/PA Images via Getty ImagesON

    On 12 November 2024, IFEX joined 26 rights groups urging the UN to act on the case of the British-Egyptian activist, who remains detained despite completing his sentence. This statement was originally published on englishpen.org on 12 November 2024. [see also :https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2013/12/06/mona-seif-reports-on-crackdown-in-egypt-including-her-brothers-case/]

    also:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/27/egypt-alaa-abd-el-fattah-jail-free-hunger-strike-laila-soueif

    Dear Dr. Gillett, Dr. Yudkivska, Ms. Gopalan, Dr. Estrada-Castillo, and Dr. Malila,

    We are writing, as a coalition of human rights organisations, regarding the urgent submission made to you, as members of the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD), on behalf of Alaa Abd el-Fattah, the award-winning British-Egyptian writer and activist. Alaa Abd el-Fattah remains arbitrarily detained in Egypt and we strongly urge you to announce your opinion on his case at the earliest opportunity.

    An international counsel team, led by barrister Can Yeğinsu, filed an urgent appeal with the UNWGAD on behalf of Mr. Abd el-Fattah and his family one year ago, on 14 November 2023, submitting that his continued detention is arbitrary and violates international law. Shortly afterwards, on 23 November 2023, 34 freedom of expression and human rights organisations sent a letter to the UNWGAD supporting that submission and urging the UNWGAD promptly to issue its opinion on this matter. On 17 April 2024, 27 freedom of expression and human rights organisations sent a follow up letter to the UNWGAD, enquiring whether there was any update in respect of this urgent appeal.

    Alaa Abd el-Fattah’s case remains of significant concern to our organisations. He has spent much of the past decade imprisoned in Egypt due to charges related to his writing and activism. He was most recently arrested in September 2019 and was sentenced in December 2021 to five years’ imprisonment, having already spent two years in pre-trial detention. Despite completing his unjust and arbitrary five-year sentence on 29 September 2024, the Egyptian authorities have refused to release him, ignoring the time he spent in pre-trial detention. This defies international legal norms and contradicts Egyptian law. Alaa Abd el-Fattah is currently being held at Wadi al-Natrun prison near Cairo and continues to be denied consular visits, despite his British citizenship. His mother, Laila Soueif, has been on hunger strike since 29 September 2024 in protest against her son’s unjust and prolonged detention.

    In November 2022, UN Experts joined the increasing number of human rights voices demanding Alaa Abd el-Fattah’s immediate release. Yet two years later, having fully served his five-year sentence, he remains in prison.

    Despite his ongoing incarceration, Alaa Abd el-Fattah’s writing and activism continue to be recognised worldwide: most recently, in October 2024, he was announced as the joint winner of the 2024 PEN Pinter Prize with Arundhati Roy, and recognised as the 2024 Writer of Courage, eliciting the following encomium from Naomi Klein at the ceremony:

    Alaa Abd El-Fattah embodies the relentless courage and intellectual depth that Arundhati Roy herself so powerfully represents, making her selection of him as the Writer of Courage profoundly fitting. Despite enduring a series of unjust sentences that robbed him of over a decade of freedom, his liberation continues to be denied. This prize, shared between two vital voices, reminds us of the urgent need to continue to raise our own in a call to ’Free Alaa’ at long last.

    Our organisations continue to call for Alaa Abd el-Fattah’s immediate and unconditional release and we request that the UNWGAD urgently announce its opinion on his case.

    Yours sincerely,

    Alejandro Mayoral Baños, Executive Director, Access Now

    Ahmed Samih Farag, General Director, Andalus Institute for Tolerance and Anti-Violence Studies

    Quinn McKew, Executive Director, ARTICLE 19

    Neil Hicks, Senior Director for Advocacy, Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS)

    Gypsy Guillén Kaiser, Advocacy and Communications Director, Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)

    Chris Doyle, Director, Council for Arab-British Understanding (CAABU)

    Jillian C. York, Director for International Freedom of Expression, Electronic Frontier Foundation

    Ahmed Attalla, Executive Director, Egyptian Front for Human Rights

    Samar Elhussieny, Programs Officer, Egyptian Human Rights Forum (EHRF)

    Daniel Gorman, Director, English PEN

    Rasmus Alenius Boserup, Executive Director, EuroMed Rights

    James Lynch, Co-Director, FairSquare

    Khalid Ibrahim, Executive Director, Gulf Centre for Human Rights

    Mostafa Fouad, Head of Programs, HuMENA for Human Rights and Civic Engagement

    Matt Redding, Head of Advocacy, IFEX

    Baroness Helena Kennedy LT KC, Director, International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI)

    Alice Mogwe, President, International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders

    Liesl Gerntholtz, Managing Director, PEN/Barbey Freedom To Write Center, PEN America

    Mark Allen Klenk, Writers at Risk Committee Chair, PEN Austria

    Grace Westcott, President, PEN Canada

    Romana Cacchioli, Executive Director, PEN International

    Rupert Skilbeck, Director, REDRESS

    Antoine Bernard, Director of Advocacy and Assistance, Reporters Sans Frontières

    Ricky Monahan Brown, President, Scottish PEN

    Ahmed Salem, Executive Director, Sinai Foundation for Human Rights (SFHR)

    Menna Elfyn, President, Wales PEN Cymru

    Gerald Staberock, Secretary General, World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • By Kate Green , RNZ News reporter

    A new carbon credit trading deal reached in the final hours of COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, has been criticised as a free pass for countries to slack off on efforts to reduce emissions at home.

    The deal, sealed at the annual UN climate talks nearly a decade after it was first put forward, will allow countries to buy carbon credits from others to bring down their own balance sheet.

    New Zealand had set its targets under the Paris Agreement on the assumption that it would be able to meet some of it through international cooperation — “so getting this up and running is really important”, Compass Climate head Christina Hood said.

    COP29 BAKU, 11-22 November 2024
    COP29 BAKU, 11-22 November 2024

    “It’s a tool, it’s neither good nor bad, but there’s going to have to be a lot of scrutiny on whether the government is taking a high-ambition, high-integrity path, or just trying to do the minimum possible.”

    The plan had taken nine years to go through because countries determined to do it right had been holding out for a process with the right checks and balances in place, she said.

    As it stood, countries would have to report yearly to the UN on their trading activities, but it was up to society and other countries to scrutinise behaviour.

    Cindy Baxter, a COP veteran who has been at all but seven of the conferences, said it was in-line with the way Aotearoa New Zealand wanted to go about reducing its emissions.

    ‘We’re not alone, but . . .’
    “We’re not alone, Switzerland is similar and Japan as well, but certainly New Zealand is aiming to meet by far the largest proportion of our climate target, [out of] anywhere in the OECD, through carbon trading.”

    The new scheme fell under Article six of the Paris Agreement, and a statement from COP29 said it was expected to reduce the cost of implementing countries’ national climate plans by up to US$250 billion (NZ$428.5b) per year.

    COP29 president Mukhtar Babayev said “climate change is a transnational challenge and Article six will enable transnational solutions. Because the atmosphere does not care where emissions savings are made.”

    But Baxter said there was not enough transparency in the scheme, and plenty of loopholes. One of the issues was ensuring projects resulting in carbon credits continued to reduce emissions after the credits were traded.

    “For example, if you’re trying to save some mangroves in Fiji, you give Fiji a whole bunch of money and say this is going to offset this amount of carbon, but what if those mangroves are destroyed by a drought, or a great big cyclone?”

    Countries should be cutting emissions at home, she said.

    “And that is something New Zealand is not very good at doing, has a really bad reputation for doing. We’ve either planted trees, or now we’re trying to throw money at offset.”

    Greenpeace spokesperson Amanda Larsson said she, too, was concerned it would take the onus off big polluters to make reductions at home, calling it a “get out of jail free card”.

    ‘Lot of junk credits’
    “Ultimately, we really need to see significant cuts in climate pollution,” she said. “And there’s no such thing as high-integrity voluntary carbon markets, and a history of a lot of junk credits being sold.”

    Countries with the means to make meaningful change at home should not be relying on other countries stepping up, she said

    The Green Party foreign affairs spokesperson Teanau Tuiono said there was strong potential in the proposal, but it was “imperative to ensure the framework is robust, and protects the rights of indigenous peoples at the same time as incentivising carbon sequestration”.

    It should be a wake-up call to change New Zealand’s over-reliance on risky pine plantations and instead support permanent native afforestation, he said.

    “This proposal emphasises how solving the climate crisis requires global collaboration on the most difficult issues. That requires building trust and confidence, by meeting commitments countries make to each other.

    “Backing out of these by, for instance, restarting oil and gas exploration directly against the wishes of our Pacific relatives, is not the way do to that.”

    Conference overall ‘disappointing and frustrating’
    Baxter said it had been “very difficult being forced to have another COP in a petro-state”, where the host state did not have much to gain by making big progress.

    “What that means is that there is not that impetus to bang heads together and get really strong agreement,” she said.

    But the blame could not be placed entirely on the leadership.

    “The COP process is set up to work if governments bring their A-games, and they don’t,” she said.

    “People should be bringing their really strong new climate targets [and] very few are doing that.”

    Another deal was clinched in overtime of the two-week conference, promising US$300 billion (NZ$514 billion) each year by 2035 for developing nations to tackle climate emissions.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.