Two media outlets reported on states’ abuses of Interpol red notices to target political dissidents and human rights defenders on Monday. Amnesty International urged Interpol to address this “grave institutional failure” and improve its transparency.
Disclose, a French investigative media outlet, reported that Interpol has disclosed to the public less than 10 percent of the 86,000 active red notices. As of September 2024, Russia (4,817), Peru (4,457), and Tajikistan (3,493) are the countries with the most active red notices. The report also revealed that Interpol’s Commission for the Control of Files (CCF) removed at least 322 notices in 2024 alone after deeming them unjustified. In March 2024 an HRW report also highlights cases of governments misusing Interpol, see https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2024/03/19/transnational-repression-human-rights-watch-and-other-reports/
At the same time, the BBC revealed that Interpol quietly dropped some initial measures that prevented Russia from abusing the red notices in 2025. The BBC also reported the phenomenon of countries using Interpol’s messaging systems to trace people abroad instead of issuing a notice that can be challenged by the target.
The BBC’s report also outlined how the abuse of the red notice system impacted the life of an exiled Russian dissident, Igor Pestrikov. He fled the country with his family after he refused to supply metal products to government-designated buyers in 2022. During the two years when a red diffusion against him was active, he was unable to rent an apartment, and his bank accounts were frozen. CCF removed his case after he challenged that Russia’s case against him was politically motivated.
Interpol is an intergovernmental organization that coordinates law enforcement of over 196 member countries. When a member state issues a red notice, law enforcement in other member states will assist in locating and arresting the wanted persons. However, Article 3 of Interpol’s constitution prohibits it from participating in any political interventions.
Reacting to the reports, Senior Director for Research, Advocacy, Policy and Campaigns of Amnesty International, Erika Guevara Rosas, questioned Interpol’s credibility since it failed repeatedly to challenge whether the states use red notices legitimately. She urged Interpol to improve its transparency and “stop serving states’ political interest.” Conversely, Interpol told the BBC that some accusations misunderstood how Interpol and its CCF system work, or are based on factual errors.
Relatedly, in November 2025, UN experts also flagged El Salvador’s misuse of the red notices to target two exiled Salvadoran human rights defenders, denouncing the country’s use of red notices as a means “to pursue its political agenda to harass and persecute human rights defenders beyond its borders.” According to international lawyer Kate McInnes, this marks the first time that UN Special Rapporteurs have issued a communication to Interpol. The communication warned that the red notices against the human rights offenders constituted transnational repression, violating Interpol’s constitution to uphold the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and to maintain political neutrality.
The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) office in Brussels represents FIDH before the institutions of the European Union (Council, Commission, European Parliament, and other associated bodies), as well as to the representations of its member states. It ensures the visibility of FIDH’s actions and those of its member organisations to the European Union and develops advocacy strategies to effectively mobilise the EU on human rights issues worldwide, while identifying ways to strengthen its lever.
FIDH is recruiting a : REPRESENTATIVE TO THE EUROPEAN UNION IN BRUSSELS – FULL-TIME PERMANENT CONTRACT
MAIN RESPONSIBILITIES Under the responsibility of the Advocacy Director based in Paris, your main responsibilities will be :
A / Define EU advocacy strategies in consultation with internal stakeholders, to support the implementation and strengthening of EU human rights policies, including :
Supporting FIDH member organisations and the FIDH Operations Directorate teams in defining and guiding FIDH recommendations targeting EU institutions;
Developing advocacy directions, the annual activity program, and implementing specific action programs led by FIDH offices, in coordination with the Operations Directorate and member organizations, and monitoring their progress;
Analysing the effectiveness and impact of EU human rights policies and proposing ways to strengthen them;
Developing the delegation’s communication strategy towards the EU, in collaboration with the Communications Directorate.
B / Implement the delegation’s activities:
Coordinate and supervise the participation of FIDH member NGOs or partners in various EU institutions;
Coordinate and supervise the provision of information to EU institutions based on inputs from FIDH, its members, and partners;
Represent FIDH before EU institutions, member state representations, and other stakeholders (funders, NGOs, media), ensuring strong relationships;
Oversee the strategy for promoting FIDH’s activities to the public;
Ensure reporting and evaluation of delegation activities, including advocacy actions and other reporting requirements (internal monthly and annual reports, narrative reports for other funders).
C / Foster and strengthen interaction with internal and external actors, ensuring quality support for FIDH member organisations during interfaces, sharing information on delegation strategies and activities, and developing partnerships with other NGOs.
D / Manage a team (currently one staff member + one intern).
E / Oversee the delegation’s day-to-day logistical and administrative management, with the support of delegation staff.
SKILLS REQUIRED
Education & Experience:
Master’s degree in law, political science, or international relations, with at least 5 years of professional experience in a similar role, including 3 years in human rights advocacy;
Excellent knowledge of EU human rights policies, allowing you to identify and mobilise the most effective levers to achieve concrete results;
Strong understanding of international human rights standards and mechanisms.
TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT :
Full-time permanent contract – 39 hours/week
Based in Brussels – FIDH recognises the importance of flexible working arrangements for work-life balance and offers remote work options after the probationary period.
Salary: €57,000 gross per year
FIDH contribution to health insurance: €80/month; public transport subscription reimbursement in Brussels; meal vouchers of €8/meal (employee contribution: €1.09)
Leave and RTT: 25 days of paid leave per year, 24 compensatory rest days per year
Position to be filled : As soon as possible
How to apply
Send your CV AND cover letter to recrutement@fidh.org quoting reference DOIG-UE-0126 in the subject line no later than Friday, February 6, 2026.
Interviews will take place as applications are received.
FIDH reserves the right to close the recruitment process before the deadline for applications.
Today, 24 January 2026, marks the International Day of the Endangered Lawyer. In recognition of endangered lawyers around the world, the undersigned NGOs, express deep alarm at the growing repression of lawyers worldwide for the legitimate exercise of their professional duties. Attacks on lawyers strike at the very heart of the rule of law, deny victims meaningful access to justice, and enable wider assaults on human rights and democratic institutions.
In Russia, the regime of Vladimir Putin has moved to punish not only opponents but also those who defend them. One year ago this month, to cite just one example, lawyers Vadim Kobzev, Alexei Liptser, and Igor Sergunin, members of the defense team of the late opposition leader Alexei Navalny, were sentenced to an average of four and a half years in prison on fabricated extremism charges simply for carrying out their ordinary professional duties. Since then, Russia has intensified its harassment of lawyers, most recently arresting human rights attorney Maria Bontsler in May 2025.
In Afghanistan, the Taliban’s seizure of the Afghanistan Independent Bar Association and the transfer of licensing to the Ministry of Justice effectively stripped thousands of lawyers of their right to practise, with women lawyers almost entirely excluded from the profession.
In Iran, recent reports show a pattern of state capture of bar associations, politically motivated prosecutions, and gender specific persecution of women lawyers, which together erode fair trial guarantees for all.
In Tanzania, legal advocates have faced systemic oppression from the government, including oppression under the Advocates Act, which gives the executive branch power to manage the legal profession and control over disciplinary measures against lawyers.
In China, the regime systematically cracks down on human rights lawyers, using vague national security laws and administrative controls to dismantle the independent legal profession.
These examples are a part of a wider and well-documented trend. Lawyers are disbarred, disciplined, arbitrarily detained, prosecuted, forced into exile, subjected to surveillance and harassment, and in some cases killed, precisely because they seek to uphold the rights of their clients, including human rights defenders, opposition leaders, journalists, women, minorities, and other marginalized communities.
Despite this, lawyers continue to perform a crucial function. Even in countries without an independent and impartial judiciary, where judicial outcomes are largely predetermined, lawyers document abuses, create records of testimonies and verdicts, and preserve evidence that can one day support accountability. Their efforts also enable recourse to international and regional mechanisms once domestic remedies have been exhausted or shown to be ineffective. As the UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers recognized in her 2024 report, “justice systems play an essential role in safeguarding democracy, and the work of those justice systems is carried out by people. To protect the rule of law and democracy, we must protect those people.”
Justice is never won easily. But it cannot be won at all if those who defend it are left defenseless.
On May 13, 2025, the Council of Europe (CoE) Convention on the Protection of the Profession of Lawyer opened for signature. This is the first international treaty specifically designed to safeguard lawyers from threats, harassment, and undue interference in their work. This is a historic breakthrough, but it will mean little if governments fail to give it real force. We call on all CoE member states to sign and ratify the Convention without delay and to implement it fully. We encourage states in other regions to develop complementary binding standards so that protection of the legal profession becomes a universal norm…
No lawyer should be punished for defending a client. We honour the courage of all endangered lawyers working under threat, and we reaffirm our collective commitment to protect them and to uphold the right of every person to an independent defense and a fair trial.
Respectfully,
Human Rights Foundation
The Anti-Corruption Foundation
The Arrested Lawyers Initiative
Free Russia Foundation
Freedom House
Freedom Now
George W. Bush Institute
Global Magnitsky Justice Campaign
Human Rights First
Lantos Foundation for Human Rights and Justice
Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights
Elisa Massimino, Human Rights Institute, Georgetown Law
FIFA president Gianni Infantino presents President Donald Trump with the FIFA Peace Prize during the FIFA World Cup 2026 Final Draw at John F. Kennedy IMAGES via Reuters Connect…Show more
This blog has a special interest in human rights awards, so it should not fail to mention the big surprise which occurred when FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association), the worldwide governing body of soccer, gave President Donald Trump its first-ever prize for global peace. An investigation by the Times of London has revealed that the White House not only knew well in advance the honor was coming but also made demands about its size and style of presentation.
“FIFA’s so-called peace prize is being awarded against a backdrop of violent detentions of immigrants, national guard deployments in US cities, and the obsequious cancellation of FIFA’s own anti-racism and anti-discrimination campaigns,” said Minky Worden, who oversees sport for Human Rights Watch. “There is still time to honor FIFA’s promises for a World Cup not tainted by human rights abuses, but the clock is ticking.”
Trump’s message to Jonas Gahr Støre appears to ratchet up a standoff between Washington and its closest allies over his threats to take over Greenland, a self-governing territory of NATO member Denmark. On Saturday, Trump announced a 10% import tax starting in February on goods from eight nations that have rallied around Denmark and Greenland, including Norway.
At the end of 2025 the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), one of the world’s oldest human rights movements and Human Rights Watch were declared “undesirable” by the Russian Federation. For FIDH the designation was made by the Prosecutor General of Russia on 13 November, and on 1 December, Russia’s Ministry of Justice included FIDH in its register of “undesirable organizations“, which currently contains 281 entities, including several FIDH members, such as the Center for Civil Liberties (CCL), the Norwegian Helsinki Committee (NHC), the Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights (HFHR), and Truth Hounds.
“This ignoble move not only further threatens and endangers our Russian members, partners, their staff, and ordinary Russian citizens supporting our human rights work. It also sends a clear message that Russia is no friend of the global human rights movement“, said Alexis Deswaef, FIDH President. “This designation of FIDH as an ‘undesirable organisation’ demonstrates the importance of our commitment to supporting those who defend human rights, whether in Russia or in exile. FIDH will continue to pursue this commitment more than ever.”
Under the “undesirable organisations” law, adopted in 2015 and further tightened in 2021 and 2024, the Prosecutor General’s Office has the power to declare as “undesirable” any foreign or international organisation that is deemed “a threat to the foundations of the constitutional order of the Russian Federation, the defense capability of the country or the security of the state“.
Concretely, “undesirable organisations” are banned from engaging in any activities inside Russia, including the publication or dissemination of any information, carrying out financial transactions, and providing financial or other assistance to local organisations and individuals. The “participation in the activities” of an “undesirable organisation” is subject to administrative and criminal liability, including up to four years of imprisonment. Any Russian citizen or organisation cooperating with an “undesirable organisation“, even if residing outside Russia, faces administrative penalties and, in the case of individuals, criminal liability. In practice, the vague wording of the law has led to the punishment of individuals simply for reposting information disseminated by an “undesirable organisation” on social media platforms, even if the original posts predated the organisation’s designation as “undesirable“.
“For over three decades, Human Rights Watch’s work on post-Soviet Russia has pressed the government to uphold human rights and freedoms,” said Philippe Bolopion, executive director at Human Rights Watch. “Our work hasn’t changed, but what’s changed, dramatically, is the government’s full-throttled embrace of dictatorial policies, its staggering rise in repression, and the scope of the war crimes its forces are committing in Ukraine.”
The Prosecutor General’s Office made the decision to ban Human Rights Watch on November 10, as follows from the Ministry of Justice’s register of “undesirable” organizations updated today. The official reasons for the designation are not known.
This is a reminder that nominations for the 2026 Right Livelihood Award are open, and the deadline is January 16, 2026 . They are seeking new nominees for the Award who are leading change-makers in their field. Nominations are fully open to the public; therefore, anyone can nominate an individual or organisation creating change through their innovative and life-changing work. To nominate a candidate (preferably in English, but French and Spanish are also accepted), please submit nominations through our online nominations form. Read more about the Award https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/awards/97238E26-A05A-4A7C-8A98-0D267FDDAD59.
The Right Livelihood Award recognizes and supports outstanding individuals and organizations driving social, environmental, and human rights change. Winners receive financial or honorary awards, lifelong access to a global network, and international recognition to amplify their impact and protect their work.
Transnational repression (TNR), the cross-border targeting, intimidation, and harassment of journalists and human rights defenders, is increasingly undermining press freedom and human rights in Europe and beyond. Journalists in exile often remain subjects of sustained threats, surveillance, cyber-attacks, psychological pressure, and harassment long after reaching presumed safety. These tactics are used by authoritarian states to silence dissent, extend their reach beyond borders, and weaken the role of independent media globally. This is demonstrrated in the 18 December 2025 Position Paper written by Katrin Schatz, Journalists-in-Exile Programme Manager,
The European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF) stands firmly against any form of repression that endangers journalists in exile and undermines fundamental freedoms. As a Europe-focused organisation, our mandate centres on strengthening press freedom across the continent. Much of our documented experience with transnational repression comes from our support work in Germany, particularly through the Journalists in Exile (JiE) programme, which gives us direct insight into how these threats continue even after relocation. Our analysis, monitoring and advocacy consistently show that current policy frameworks are insufficiently equipped to address the reality of transnational repression.
Transnational Repression targets journalists in exile
Many Journalists in exile remain at risk. ECPMF’s research on transnational repression in Germany from 2025 finds that journalists who fled authoritarian contexts continue to experience threats, intimidation, surveillance and psychological pressure in their host countries. These tactics are part of a broader strategy by autocratising states to control dissent.
ECPMF’s Mapping Media Freedom (MapMF) platform shows exactly this – through the recently initiated category documenting threats against journalists in exile, ongoing surveillance, digital harassment and family members being targeted are reported. However, cases of transnational repression are rarely documented, not because they don’t exist, but because of the extreme sensitivity of the issue: publicity can endanger journalists’ families at home, expose those in exile to additional targeting, and many affected journalists choose or are advised to remain discreet for safety reasons.
Transnational repression threatens press freedom and democratic space
Transnational repression is not only an attack on individual journalists, it is a direct assault on press freedom and democratic spaces globally. However, acknowledging the personal strains of those affected is essential: many journalists in exile face isolation, trauma, financial precarity, and the constant fear that reprisals could reach them or their families, friends, and colleagues.
TNR tactics take place across multiple contexts: through digital harassment, spyware, coordinated smear campaigns, threats to family members, diplomatic pressure, misuse of international legal instruments, or using diaspora networks to intimidate critics abroad. Together, they form a pattern: a systematic effort by authoritarian and autocratising states to suppress independent journalism far beyond their borders. Coupled with the EU’s lack of reaction, this perpetuates cycles of violence and silencing.
By creating a climate of fear among critical voices and disrupting professional and personal safety TNR systematically undermines freedom of expression, independent journalism and the safety of journalists. Journalists in exile play an indispensable role in informing the public through international reporting, providing independent coverage from authoritarian contexts where local journalism is heavily restricted or impossible.
Gaps in policy and protection in the EU
Increasingly restrictive migration and return policies
The EU’s use of “safe country of origin/ third country” frameworks and streamlined return mechanisms risk exposing journalists to environments where they continue facing repression. Recent decisions by the European Council, endorsed by 39 MEPs , including the designation of countries with documented human rights violations, including press freedom violations as “safe” contradicts the very essence of protection that asylum and refugee policies are meant to provide.
The EU-wide list of safe countries will include: Bangladesh, Colombia, Egypt, Kosovo, India, Morocco and Tunisia. ECPMF is highly concerned about the dangerous implications of this policy for journalists and human rights defenders.
Lack of comprehensive frameworks
Current EU instruments still do not provide a systemic approach to TNR. There is no binding definition, no integrated action plan, and no framework that aligns migration policies, human rights obligations, digital safety, and cross-border policing responses to transnational repression. Existing mechanisms remain fragmented, leaving journalists without coherent pathways to protection.
Fragmented national responses
At the EU member state level, responses to TNR are inconsistent. Few governments started to formally acknowledge the threat and explore legal or policy measures, while others lack official recognition and structured responses. Even when awareness exists, protection mechanisms remain fragmented, under-resourced, or inaccessible. Journalists, just as any other person seeking refuge, also face racial discrimination within domestic systems, which can influence how their cases are treated.
Civil society has often stepped in where states have not taken responsibility. In Germany, the Coalition Against Transnational Repression has emerged as a key actor, bringing together human rights and diaspora organisations to push for stronger national policies. At the same time, many institutions and law enforcement bodies lack sufficient knowledge or training to identify transnational repression patterns, assess cross-border threats, or understand the jurisdictional complexities involved. Limited cooperation between migration authorities, police, prosecutors, and security services further weakens effective responses. As a result, national responses remain predominantly reactive rather than preventive, leaving journalists in exile exposed to ongoing risks.
ECPMF’s position and demands
Transnational repression is pervasive and increasingly dangerous. Journalists who have fled oppression continue to face coordinated pressure, digital harassment, legal threats, and physical intimidation across borders. As seen through the experiences of fellows in ECPMF’s Journalists-in-Exile programme, exile does not guarantee safety. Threats often follow them into Europe, leaving them vulnerable even in countries that are supposed to offer protection.
Current human rights and migration policies fall short of addressing the lived realities of journalists in exile and, in some cases, may even increase the risks they face. EU migration policies could force journalists back into the very environments from which they fled, thereby further jeopardizing their safety. This reflects the wider gap in the protection of journalists, where national and EU responses to transnational repression remain inconsistent, under-resourced, and fragmented.
ECPMF calls on the European Union, its member states and international bodies to take the following actions to better protect journalists in exile and combat transnational repression:
Develop and implement comprehensive legal frameworks that recognise the specific cross-border threats faced by journalists in exile, including digital harassment, surveillance, physical attacks, and threats to family members.
Ensure the protection of journalists within migration systems, with clear safeguards against forced returns to countries where they face repression, in line with the international principles of non-refoulement.
Develop and support national and EU-level mechanisms to monitor and respond to transnational repression, including dedicated hotlines, coordinated support services, and legal aid for affected journalists.
Include transnational repression in the EU’s strategic documents and policies for safeguarding democracies and combating disinformation and malicious interference, including the European Democracy Shield and similar documents, to ensure that the protection of those fighting repression is part of a comprehensive approach to preserving our democracies.
Incorporate transnational repression explicitly into EU foreign policy, ensuring that the EU’s human rights policies hold countries accountable for using repressive tactics against journalists in exile, as well as creating a system of sanctions and diplomatic pressure to address perpetrators.
Strengthen cooperation between member states, creating a coherent and coordinated EU response to transnational repression, with particular attention to the intersectional risks faced by journalists, including race, gender, and migration status.
Engage civil society and human rights organisations in the design and implementation of policies related to journalists in exile, ensuring that those who are most affected have a direct role in shaping the response.
This position paper was written by Katrin Schatz, Journalists-in-Exile Programme Manager, with contributions by Basma Mostafa, Journalists-in-Exile Fellow, Edith Bohl, Journalists-in-Exile Programme Officer, and Ena Bavčić, Senior Advocacy and Policy Advisor.
“Art was my existence, my life. Without it, maybe I wouldn’t have survived,” said Kheder Abdulkarim, a Kurdish-Syrian artist based in Germany and former political prisoner, whose work is inspired by his experience of persecution and erasure. He received an honourable mention at the 4th edition of the International Contest for Minority Artists.
The Contest is an initiative organized jointly by UN Human Rights, Freemuse, Minority Rights Group and the City of Geneva. Since 2024, the contest is also supported by the Centre des Arts of the International School of Geneva, the Loterie Romande, as well as by other donors who prefer to remain anonymous.
Each year, the Contest celebrates minority artists whose work bears witness to struggles for dignity, justice and visibility, forming a cornerstone of UN Human Rights’ efforts to uplift artists as human rights defenders.
The 2025 theme — Belonging, Place and Loss — resonated profoundly with artists around the world whose identities have been shaped by displacement, environmental devastation, structural racism, and generational trauma, generating more than 240 submissions this year.
At the award ceremony, UN Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, Nada Al-Nashif, reminded the audience of what minority artists reveal to societies.
“Tonight, we celebrate eight minority artists honoured in this edition, the power of art and the vital contribution that minority artists make as they shine a light on human rights struggles across the globe, stories and images that unite and anchor us in a shared humanity,” she said.
Art can be a human rights language, and a catalyst for positive change in societies which may seek to silence minority voices. Claude Cahn, human rights officer at UN Human Rights’ Indigenous Peoples and Minorities Section
For many laureates, art is the only archive that survives war, the only place where memory can remain intact.
Alia Al-Saadi is a Palestinian Syrian dancer and choreographer born a third-generation refugee in Yarmouk Camp, and one of the laureates of the contest’s 4th edition.
Her performances turn the body into an “archive of destruction,” she said, and “a state of psychological numbness, where prolonged exposure to violence renders shock ineffective.”
Abubakar Moaz, a Sudanese visual artist based in Kenya, won honourable mention and said his visual language emerged from conflict in the Blue Nile and exile in Nairobi.
Abdulkarim, imprisoned for nearly six years in the infamous Saydnaya Prison in Damascus, began sculpting there with scraps of vegetable crates. “I lost seven years of my life,” he said. “But I try to produce something from those years, to rebuild them and more.”
Emanoel Saravá, an Afro-Indigenous Brazilian visual and photo-performance artist, winner of an honourable mention, treats water as an archive of Black and peripheral suffering through their project Águas Marginais.
“The waters carry the memory of Black and peripheral communities, but they also bear the scars of environmental racism, climate change and neglect,” Saravá said.
Sead Kazanxhiu, a Roma political artist from Albania and laureate of the 4th edition, rejects narratives that reduce Roma communities to victimhood.
On 5 January 2026 the International Commission of Jurists and many other NGOs issued a joint statement calling on the authorities to immediately terminate the abusive criminal proceedings and drop charges ahead of the 26 Istanbul Heavy Penal Court’s expected final hearing scheduled for 5 to 9 January 2026.
The continued prosecution of the president and 10 executive board members of the Istanbul Bar Association, and the prosecutor’s request for their conviction on terrorism charges are a damning reflection of the troubled state of the rule of law and democratic norms in Turkey.
The prosecutor seeks the criminal conviction of all eleven members of the Bar’s elected leadership – President Prof. İbrahim Özden Kaboğlu, Ahmet Ergin, Bengisu Kadı Çavdar, Ekim Bilen Selimoğlu, Ezgi Şahin Yalvarici, Fırat Epözdemir, Hürrem Sönmez, Mehmedali Barış Beşli, Metin İriz, Rukiye Leyla Süren, and Yelde Koçak Urfa – on the charge of “spreading terrorist propaganda” under Article 7/2 of the Anti-Terrorism Law, solely for issuing a public statement on 21 December 2024 concerning the killing of two journalists in northern Syria and the arrest of journalists and lawyers at a related peaceful protest in Istanbul the day before.
The trial prosecutor’s final opinion confirms and deepens the concerns raised by 56 international organisations in the joint statement of January 2025, condemning the initiation of criminal and civil proceedings against the Bar’s leadership, and in the April 2025 joint statement, which deplored the removal of the elected board and the escalating attacks on lawyers across Turkey. A group of the organisations also submitted a joint amicus curiae brief in which they concluded that the proceedings violate Turkey’s obligations under international human rights law and constitute an unjustified interference with the independence of the legal profession.
A clear misuse of criminal law
In his final opinion, the prosecutor alleges that by referring to the two individuals killed in Syria as journalists and by citing international humanitarian law applicable to the protection of civilians and media workers in conflict zones, the Bar leadership “treated as a war crime” an operation carried out by security forces, thereby intentionally legitimising and disseminating the ultimate separatist aims of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). The prosecutor further asserts that describing those killed as journalists “encouraged” membership of the PKK and “made its methods appear legitimate”, amounting to “press and media–based terrorist propaganda” under Article 7/2 of the Anti-Terrorism Law. These allegations, which claim that a lawful, rights-based statement consciously advanced the objectives of an armed organisation, are wholly unfounded and legally unsustainable.
As emphasised in both joint statements in January and April 2025 and the amicus curiae brief in September 2025, the Istanbul Bar Association has a statutory and ethical duty to speak out on violations of human rights and the rule of law. The prosecutor’s position effectively criminalises the Bar Association’s discharge of this duty protected under both domestic law and international human rights law and standards. The prosecutor’s construal of a legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of expression as a terrorism offence amounts to a misuse of criminal law and judicial harassment.
Violations of international standards and the Bar’s statutory mandate
International and regional human rights standards, including the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of the Profession of Lawyer, and consistent jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, affirm that lawyers and their associations must be able to engage in public debate on matters of justice and human rights without fear of reprisals.
Criminalising their exercise of the rights to freedom of expression and association contravenes the provisions of these instruments safeguarding the rights and role of lawyers and their professional organisations, as well as Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Articles 19 and 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and Articles 26, 27 and 33 of the Constitution of Türkiye.
The criminal proceedings strike at the heart of the independence of the legal profession and amount to a misuse of counter-terrorism laws to silence criticism, suppress human rights monitoring, and undermine self-governance of bar associations.
Signatories (in alphabetical order):
Amnesty International
Center of Elaboration and Research on Democracy (CRED)
Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (Le Conseil des barreaux européens, CCBE)
Defense Commission of the Barcelona Bar Association (Spain)
Deutscher Anwaltverein (German Bar Association, Germany)
Eşit Haklar İçin İzleme Derneği (Association for Monitoring Equal Rights, Türkiye)
European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights (ELDH)
The European Criminal Bar Association (ECBA)
Fédération des Barreaux d’Europe (European Bars Federation, FBE)
Foundation Day of the Endangered Lawyer
Hak İnsiyatifi Derneği (Rights Initiative Association, Türkiye)
Hakikat Adalet Hafıza Merkezi (Truth Justice Memory Center, Türkiye)
Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers (UK)
Human Rights Institute of the Brussels Bar (Belgium)
Human Rights Watch
İnsan Hakları Derneği (Human Rights Association, Türkiye)
The International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL)
International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI)
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders
Kaos GL Derneği (Kaos GL Association, Türkiye)
The Law Society of England and Wales (LSEW, UK)
Lawyers for Lawyers (Netherlands)
Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada (LRWC, Canada)
Lyon Bar Association (France)
National Union of Peoples Lawyers (NUPL, Philippines)
PEN Norway (Norway)
Turkey Litigation Support Project (TLSP, UK)
Türkiye İnsan Hakları Vakfı (Human Rights Foundation of Turkey, Türkiye)
Vereinigung Demokratischer Jurist:innen VDJ (Association of Democratic Jurists, Germany)
World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders
then on 9 January 2026 Amnesty stated “The decision to acquit the Istanbul Bar Association leadership of these unfounded charges is welcome news. This case was a clear misuse of criminal law and should never have been brought in the first place.” https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/
Sarah Bireete was arrested on December 30, 2025, after police and military personnel surrounded her home in Kampala. Shortly before her arrest, she posted on X, “My house is under siege by police and army”. As reported by East and Horn of Africa Election Observation Network (E-HORN) on 2 January 2026
The Police Reforms Working Group (PRWG) Kenya has called for the immediate release of Uganda’s human rights lawyer and civil society leader, Dr Sarah Bireete, warning that her detention ahead of the January elections threatens civic space and undermines democratic processes.
The Uganda Police confirmed her arrest in a brief social media post, stating she would be produced in court “in due course”. Police spokesperson Rachel Kawaala described the detention as part of “ongoing operations” but offered no further details.
“Dr Bireete is widely recognised for her unwavering passion for the protection of civil liberties, her lifelong quest for justice, and her steadfast commitment to democracy, a clarion call that has consistently advanced accountable governance across the region,” the Group said.
Bireete currently serves as Executive Director of the Centre for Constitutional Governance (CCG), Chairperson of the East Africa Civil Society Forum (EACSOF), and Chairperson of the Horn of Africa Election Observers Network (E-HORN).
PRWG Kenya described these roles as reflective of her integrity, credibility and long-standing contributions to human rights, electoral integrity and democratic governance.
The group urged Ugandan authorities to respect civil liberties, the rule of law and democratic processes.
“Respect for civil liberties, rule of law and democratic processes is fundamental to ensuring free, fair, and transparent elections,” PRWG Kenya said.
The statement also highlighted that Uganda’s constitution, under Article 23, guarantees that anyone arrested must be promptly informed of the reasons for their detention, a step that has not been followed in Dr Bireete’s case.
Bireete’s arrest follows her recent advocacy for Starlink, a satellite internet service operated by SpaceX, as a safeguard against potential internet shutdowns during the elections.
In a post dated December 23, 2025, she wrote, “Dear Ugandans, are you thinking of ways to navigate internet shutdown during elections? Starlink got you covered.”
As the country approaches general elections on 15 January 2026, UN experts* today warned that the pervasive climate of fear in Uganda, marked by allegations of enforced disappearance, the use of disproportionate force against political opposition supporters, and the intensified suppression of civil society and independent media, is not conducive to peaceful elections.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 