On the occasion of World Press Freedom Day (May 2026), the Freedom Cartoonists Foundation, in partnership with the City of Geneva, paid tribute to the talent and courage of cartoonists working under difficult circumstances.
The Kofi Annan Courage in Cartooning Award 2026, honouring their exceptional contribution to human rights and freedom of expression, was presented at the Geneva Graduate Institute, in the presence of Joseph Stiglitz, 2001 Nobel Prize laureate in Economics, former Chief Economist of the World Bank and Professor at Columbia University.
More on the Kofi Annan Courage in Cartooning Award, see: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/awards/f60cb3d4-c79a-43aa-9b5c-351c56c02ae1. It is awarded every two years by the Freedom Cartoonists Foundation and the City of Geneva. In alternating years, the Prize is presented by partner organisation Cartoonists Rights in the United States.
Chaired by Kenneth Roth, former Executive Director of Human Rights Watch, the international jury has chosen to share the 2026 Prize between two laureates: Safaa Odah (Palestine) and Jimmy “Spire” Ssentongo (Uganda).
The Laureates [film portraits made by True Heroes Films]
Safaa Odah is a Palestinian cartoonist living in Gaza. Before the escalation of the war in 2023, she produced drawings, comic strips and posters on women’s empowerment and for young audiences. Since October 2023, her drawings have depicted the terrible daily life of Gazans during the war. Her simple, almost naive line stands firm against the din of bombs. Safaa Odah’s favourite themes are universal – family love, grief, hunger and poverty, peace – and offer a poignant perspective on the occupation and displacement of Gaza’s population. Her drawings express what words fail to convey and bear witness to a horror that the world tolerates. She continues to draw cartoons under extremely difficult conditions, using whatever materials she can gather – for instance drawing on the plastic tarpaulin that serves as her family’s tent – and publishing them on social media.Amid extreme violence and utter destitution, the Palestinian artist has been documenting the harrowing situation of Gaza’s population for two and a half years. The family home was destroyed in a bombing two years ago, and Safaa Odah and her family now live in the Khan Younis camp.
Jimmy “Spire” Ssentongo is a Ugandan academic, columnist, portraitist, author and award-winning self-taught cartoonist. He has worked, among others, for the Ugandan newspaper The Observer since 2006. Holding a PhD in Philosophy, he served as Associate Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences at Uganda Martyrs University. Frequently harassed, Spire has been in the crosshairs of the authorities since the 2020 pandemic. In March 2024, he received death threats after launching an anti-corruption campaign on X – #UgandaParliamentExhibition – calling on parliament to be held accountable. Spire’s humour and critical analytical mind amplify the reach of his cartoons, which have become popular and viral. The Ugandan intellectual uses them to denounce corruption, institutional abuses and the excesses of power. A victim of cyberbullying, he long kept a low profile. In January 2026, he temporarily took refuge in Belgium to escape growing pressure ahead of the presidential election.
Today was the funeral of one my best friends and, more importantly, one of the most significant architects of the international human rights system as it developed in the last 50 years. Theo (Theodoor Cornelis) van Boven, was born in Voorburg on 26 mei 1934 and died peacefully in Maastricht on 9 mei 2026.
I have had the honor to work with him for many years [our lives intertwined over a long period of time and on different locations] and wrote about him several times. Most recently “Courageous Leaders and NGO Initiatives” in Ramcharan and others (ed), The Protection Roles of Human Rights NGOs, Essays in honour of Adrien-Claude Zoller, Brill Nijhoff, Leiden, 2023 (ISBN 978-90-04-51677-9), pp 614-636.
So, here a large part of the section on this great man: This section is about a man who was crucial in getting the United Nations and NGO partners to deal with human rights protection. Much has been written about his work and the enormous contribution Theo van Boven made to the UN human rights machinery as we now know it. .. Nowadays the United Nations has an elaborate machinery to deal with human rights violations. The system is far from perfect and still too often subject to political pressures and selectivity but there are now a great many thematic and country mandates, emergency sessions and there is an International Criminal Court against impunity. Wind back 40 years and none of this existed. The violations were there for all to see but not for the United Nations, which preferred to consider this part of the ‘internal affairs of sovereign states’. The man who would make it his life’s mission to change this, Theo van Boven, got in 1977 the position from where to do it: Director of Human Rights in the UN.
His teenage years were eaten up by the second world war. His memories of that period, his strict protestant background and his law studies in Leiden led him to enter an area that was not so obvious at the time: international human rights. He studied in the USA, wrote there a thesis on freedom of religion and soon afterwards, around 1960, he found himself as a young diplomat shaping the human rights policy of the Netherlands. A decade later the protest against the Vietnam war, the violations by the Greek colonels, the coup d’état in Chile and President Carter’s new policy on human rights pushed human rights suddenly higher on the political agenda. Theo had become an expert member of the UN Sub-commission on Human Rights and was one of the engineers of the first UN effort to investigate large-scale human rights violations, namely Chile. I myself met him when he was still a young professor lecturing on human rights in Amsterdam. Then – in the summer of 1977, the same month I started at the ICJ – he was appointed Director of the small human rights secretariat of the UN in Geneva. Here he started his work to bring dictators to accountability and to give the UN a capacity to deal with gross and systematic violations of human rights. Something that is now taken for granted but it would cost Theo his job.
Unlike his predecessors, Theo van Boven did not put all his faith in quiet diplomacy and he regularly talked about the need for the UN to address gross and systematic violations, about the mobilisation of shame and stated that the UN should care about victims. He also started to receive the victims – and the NGOs who represent them – in his office. This led to an incident that would be comic if it was not for the consequences. J. Matarollo was an Argentinean exile lobbying against the generals in his homeland who were killing left-wing opponents by the thousands. Theo agreed to hear him and told his secretary (inherited from his predecessor) to call Matarollo to give him an appointment in the early of hours of the next day. She faithfully called the Argentinean embassy assuming that he was a diplomat as these were the kind of people that normally met with the Director. The next day there was no Matarollo but an angry Note Verbale from Argentinean Ambassador Martinez accusing Theo of meeting with terrorists.
In the UN he did not conform to the image of the traditional diplomat, e.g. by pinning an anti-apartheid button on his suit, but even more so by publicly stating that NGO reports about dead bodies floating down a river in Guatemala were true, or by denouncing disappearances in Chile and Argentina. When in 1980 the government in the USA changed and Ronald Reagan and his team decided to play down violations by right-wing regimes, especially in Latin America, Theo did not flinch and openly criticised their support to these dictatorships. “Naming and shaming” by a UN official was unusual and not easily accepted by the diplomatic community. The Latin American regimes – led by Argentina and silently encouraged by the US – started a campaign to oust Van Boven as Director of Human Rights.
To complicate matters for van Boven, the new UN Secretary-General must have felt little sympathy for this particular Director, as J. Perez de Cuellar had earlier, in 1980, been appointed as Special Representative by the previous Secretary General to go to Uruguay and look into the human rights situation. His report was such a whitewash that it was heavily criticized in the Commission on Human Rights. How correct this reaction had been was shown when the famous pianist Estrella – whom de Cuellar claimed to have visited in the Libertad prison – came to Geneva and told the I.C.J and others that there had been no such visit.
In the meantime in 1980 Theo had put great energy – together with some key NGOs in creating a Working Group on Enforced Disappearances. As a mechanism focusing only on Argentina was politically not feasible, the new idea was to create a thematic mandate on the phenomenon of disappearances in the knowledge that Argentina was going to be the main target. At the decisive session the tension was enormous as the outcome of the vote was very uncertain. The Jordanian Chairman of that session had to deal with endless procedural issues, many of them proposed by Uruguay (egged on by Argentina which was only an observer). Finally, late at night the Chair felt that the resolution creating the mandate could be passed without a vote and moved to do so, but the Uruguayan Ambassador again started to put up his name plate as a sign that he wanted the floor. The Chairman quite unusually interrupting, looked directly at the Uruguayan Ambassador and said: “I URGE my brother from Uruguay NOT to do this..” The name plate slowly turned downwards again and the Chair immediately declared the resolution adopted. The NGOs and tens of Mothers and Grandmothers of the Plaza de Mayo in the public galleries started a spontaneous applause and quite a tear was shed. ..
In early 1982 the issue of Theo van Boven’s tenure as Director came to the fore. His contract had to be renewed which normally was a routine matter, but not this time. The issue came to an explosion when Theo’s opening speech to the Human Rights Commission was sent on a Friday evening to the UN Secretariat in NY for information and at the same time given to the UN Office of Information in Geneva for distribution at the time of delivery the next Monday morning. The UN Office of Information decided to make the statement available to the media that very Friday evening (with the usual proviso: “check against delivery”). The Representative of Guatemala in Geneva obtained a copy of the statement and vehemently objected to the statement. The SG’s office demanded that Theo should refrain from mentioning countries by name – which Theo refused not only out of principle but also because the press would notice the difference on Monday and assume that there had been pressure to remove the names.
As a family friend bringing the kids back from a ski outing, I happened to overhear Theo on the phone to New York agreeing to a ‘compromise’: he would mention at the beginning of his speech that certain passages were done in his ‘personal capacity’. A few days later Theo was suddenly informed that his contract would anyway not be prolonged. His announcement at a dramatic session of the Human Rights Commission grew quickly into an international diplomatic incident.
As I was on the verge of leaving the ICJ, I had some time on my hands. So I got the idea – warmly supported by Niall McDermot – to publish a book with a selection of Theo’s major speeches from the last five years. One of his Special assistants, Bertie Ramcharan, who had written a good part of them, was very helpful and we managed to get a book out within only 6 weeks. The first copy was flown in to Geneva by the publisher and presented to Theo at a public farewell which the ICJ had organised for him. NGOs, some UN staff and students showed up in such large numbers at the university hall that the fire brigade had to refuse access to late comers. Speech after speech – including by Saddrudin Aga Khan – cantered on Theo role in getting the UN machinery on human rights to deal with violations more concretely and on his support for human rights NGOs…
With Ian Guest and many others, I remain convinced that Theo’s dismissal from the UN was the result of pressure by Latin American dictatorships with support from the Reagan administration. As stated in People Matter, he was “hired and fired for the same reason: his deep commitment to human rights”.
After his dismissal Theo and his family returned to the Netherlands where many were very disappointed that there was no real interest in giving him an equivalent position in the foreign affairs department and he ‘ended up’ in the new University of Maastricht as professor of international law, where together with others such as Cees Flinterman he bent the research programme into his favourite direction: human rights. He continued his involvement in international activism in a variety of functions: with NGOs (e.g. European Human Rights Foundation, IMADR, International Alert), and with the UN (e,g. the Sub-commission on Human Rights, Special Rapporteur on Compensation 1990 -1993, Special Rapporteur on Torture 2001-2005, first Registrar of the UN Yugoslavia Tribunal). In 1998 he became the Head of the Dutch Delegation to the Rome Conference which created the International Criminal Court (ICC).
In 1985 he was called to Buenos Aires as a witness to testify against the nine military leaders (including Videla) for their human rights violations in the period 1976 en 1983. The UN had advised him not to go but he felt that he should do anything to end the impunity of these perpetrators. Theo’s testimony – he was called already on the 2nd day – was seen as crucial in establishing that the leaders of the Junta must have known about the massive violations. Theo took the same position with regard to the father of princess Maxima Zorreguieta (the wife of the king of the Netherlands). As Minister of Agriculture Jorge Zorreguieta must have known about the atrocities and should at least have taken distance instead of denying any knowledge. A position which Theo took in 2001 and was still heard defending in 2012.
In the light of Theo van Boven’s recurring clashes with Argentina it must have given him great moral satisfaction when on 26 November 2009 he received a degree honoris causa from the University of Buenos Aires as well as the highest decoration from the Government.
ICTJ stated: “Van Boven’s commitment to the pursuit of justice was relentless. He spoke up about impunity and accountability in contexts of repression such as the military dictatorships in Argentina and Chile, where he also championed the cause of the disappeared, even when political pressure limited others from doing so. Today, ICTJ honors his voice, his perspective, and his deep-rooted legacy. Inspired by his resolve, we will continue our commitment to uphold human dignity above all else in the pursuit of justice and lasting peace all over the world, however long it takes.“
On 18 May 2026 UN experts and Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International expressed serious concern about the yearlong pre-trial detention of lawyer and woman human rights defender Ruth Eleonora López Alfaro in El Salvador.
“As time passes without the trial beginning, the presumption that detention is necessary is weakened,” the experts said.
López has been held in pre-trial detention for a year, officially authorised since 4 June 2025. During this time, she has been denied regular visits, despite precautionary measures ordered on 22 September 2025 by the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights. “This increases Ms. López’s vulnerability and puts her physical and psychological integrity at risk,” the experts said.
In maintaining judicial secrecy, the public is prevented access to hearings and the defence’s access to the criminal file is limited, thereby threatening the principle of equality of arms and the right to an adequate defence. The right to legal assistance of a lawyer of one’s choice is a cornerstone of the right to defence as established in Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
“The circumstances of detention and the irregularities in the proceedings, point towards López being subject to reprisals because of her legitimate activities as a human rights defender and lawyer,” they said.
The experts underscored that there are elements suggesting that the criminalisation and prolonged pre-trial detention of Ruth López not only stem from her work exposing corruption and human rights violations, but also appear to reinforce patterns of social control designed to silence women leaders in the public sphere, while also seriously undermining the work of their organisations.
The experts urged the State to release Ruth López Alfaro immediately and consider alternative measures instead of keeping her in custody. They also called for the removal of the judicial secrecy imposed in the criminal proceedings, the cessation of all acts of harassment against her, and guarantees that she may carry out her human rights work without fear of reprisals. The experts are in contact with the Government of El Salvador on this matter.
In 2025, the Business and Human Rights Centre documented nearly 800 attacks (790) against defenders in 80 countries raising concerns about business. This is more than two attacks on average every day and more than we’ve tracked in a single year since 2020. Nearly one third of attacks (30%) were against Indigenous Peoples, who comprise just 6% of the world’s population.
BHRC invited TotalEnergies, TotalEnergies EP Uganda, EACOP, Uganda National Oil Company, Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation, China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC), Stanbic Bank, Kenya Commercial Bank, First Quantum Minerals, Korea Mine Rehabilitation and Mineral Resources Corporation (KOMIR), Dinant, Leonardo, Freeport McMoRan, PT Freeport Indonesia, PT Mineral Industri Indonesia, Silvercorp Metals, Salazar Resources, Curimining, Dutch Development Bank (FMO), Central American Bank for Economic Integration (CABEI), Exxon Mobil, Energy Transfer, Gibson Dunn and TigerSwan to respond.
The responses from TotalEnergies, TotalEnergies EP Uganda, EACOP, Uganda National Oil Company, First Quantum Minerals, Korea Mine Rehabilitation and Mineral Resources Corporation (KOMIR), Dinant, Freeport McMoRan, PT Freeport Indonesia, Silvercorp Metals, Curimining, Dutch Development Bank (FMO) can be found here.
The other companies did not respond.
Explore the data and read the analysis on attacks against human rights defenders who raised concerns about business in 2025
The late Honduran environmentalist Juan Lopez sits on a rock on the outskirts of Tocoa, Honduras, on September 28, 2021 [AFP]
On 12 May 2026 Al Jazeera reported that the Honduran authorities have arrested three people, including a powerful politician, accused of plotting the 2024 assassination of an environmental leader, an incident that became a symbol of government corruption. Adan Funez, former mayor of the city of Tocoa, was captured at his home on Tuesday on suspicion of masterminding the killing of Juan Lopez, following years of accusations by religious and environmental leaders.end of list
Lopez was an anti-corruption crusader who led a community effort against an iron oxide mining project in Colon, a rural region of northwestern Honduras, which activists said endangered the area’s dense jungles and crystalline waters, including protected reserve areas.
Accusations also emerged against Funez, a power-broker in the region’s decades-long bloody agrarian conflict. The death brought back stark memories of the global outcry over the 2016 murder of Honduran environmentalist Berta Caceres.
Funez’s arrest on Tuesday comes more than a year after Lopez’s assassination.
The Daphne Caruana Galizia Prize for Journalism honours high-quality investigative and in-depth journalism that defends and promotes the foundational values of the European Union. It was established to support press freedom and recognize journalists who contribute to democratic accountability and human rights protection. The prize is named after Maltese investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, who was known for her work exposing corruption and abuses of power. It is a European Parliament award.
The Ginetta Sagan Award honors women who are courageously defending the liberty, safety, and human rights of women and children in regions affected by serious abuses. The award provides $20,000 directly to the recipient, with unrestricted use. It recognizes women leaders who have created meaningful impact, often at great personal risk, and helps increase international visibility and protection for their work.
The award celebrates leadership, courage, and effective non-violent activism in difficult or dangerous environments
On 12 May 2026 PEN America sounded the alarm on a deepening global crackdown on free expression, reporting in its Freedom to Write Index that more than 400 writers are behind bars for the first time since the Index launched in 2019.
In 2025, a total of 401 writers were jailed across 44 countries – up from 375 writers in 40 countries the year before. Over the past seven years, the number of jailed writers worldwide has risen by 68 percent, underscoring a steady and alarming escalation in the suppression of dissent.
China remains the world’s leading jailer of writers, with 119 cases – making it the only country to exceed 100 writers held behind bars. The sharpest increase came from Iran, where authorities carried out 17 new arrests, driving numbers back toward the peak levels seen during the 2022 ‘Woman, Life, Freedom’ protests. The spike signals a renewed and aggressive campaign to silence critical voices. The escalating suppression in Iran intensified in the aftermath of the June 2025 war with Israel, sweeping up both newly targeted writers and long-persecuted dissident voices. Among those arrested were online commentator Hossein Ronaghi, who was detained in June; a group of scholars and translators detained in November, including economists Parviz Sedaghat and Mohammad Maljoo, sociologist Mahsa Asadollanejad, and writer and translator Shirin Karimi; and human rights defenders and authors Narges Mohammadi and Sepideh Gholian, who were violently re-arrested while speaking at a memorial service in December.
Iran was one of three countries among the top 10 jailers of writers that were simultaneously engaged in armed conflict in 2025, along with Russia and Israel/Occupied Palestinian Territory. Authorities in these three countries repeatedly targeted writers who used anti-war language or themes in their poetry, music, scripts, commentaries, articles, or literary output, a key pattern that emerged in the 2025 data.
In Israel/Occupied Palestinian Territory, six writers have been detained by the Israeli government over anti-war statements. Palestinian writers and commentators Mohamed Al-Atrash, Nawaf El-Amer, Radwan Qatanani, Rula Hassanein,and scholar Anwar Rostom were detained on charges of incitement or with no charges at all, in addition to Jewish-Israeli journalist and commentator Israel Frey who was investigated for terrorism, because of their commentary on the war, the genocide, and the occupation.
In Russia the government held 18 writers in prison or detention in 2025, most targeted for their anti-war expression or suspected involvement in anti-war activity. In March, a Russian military court sentenced historian and columnist Alexander Skobov to 16 years in prison for his anti-war posts on social media. Other writers opposed to the war have fled into exile to avoid prosecution or jailing for their dissenting viewpoints.Overall, the top 10 top jailers of writers are China and its autonomous regions, including Xinjiang, Tibet, and Hong Kong (119); Iran (53); Saudi Arabia (27); Vietnam (24); Türkiye (22); Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory (21); Russia (18); Belarus (17); Egypt (13); and Myanmar (10). [https://iranfocus.com/human-rights/57848-record-number-of-imprisoned-writers-worldwide-iran-ranks-second-with-53-jailed-writers/]
Several countries appeared in this year’s Index for the first time including Togo, Mozambique, and the United States. The U.S. case centers on the weeks-long detention of Sami Hamdi, a British opinion writer and columnist, who was detained in what PEN America views as part of the U.S. government’s weaponization of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Hamdi, an outspoken critic of Israel, was on a speaking tour and had just attended a conference when ICE officers stopped him at San Francisco International Airport and held him in custody for two weeks.
“The fact that the United States is in our Freedom to Write Index for the first time should be a sharp wake-up call for everyone in the country who claims to value free expression,” said Liesl Gerntholtz, managing director of the Freedom To Write Center. “No government can misuse its own detention and immigration systems to silence or intimidate independent voices and call itself a democracy.”
The First European Forum on Environmental Human Rights Defenders (EHRDs) invites individuals and organizations committed to the promotion, protection, and respect of environmental and human rights across Europe to express their interest in participation. This landmark Forum represents a significant opportunity for Environmental Human Rights Defenders, civil society organizations, institutions, policymakers, and advocates to engage in meaningful dialogue, collaboration, and knowledge exchange on pressing environmental and human rights challenges affecting the European region.
The Forum will be held on 3–4 June 2026 at the headquarters of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg. The event is jointly organized by the Council of Europe, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, and the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders under the Aarhus Convention. Additional collaboration is provided by the UNECE Aarhus Convention Secretariat, several Human Rights Council Special Procedure mandate holders, and a range of civil society organizations actively working throughout Europe.
Purpose of the Forum
The Forum aims to strengthen networks among Environmental Human Rights Defenders and supporting organizations while fostering regional cooperation and advocacy. Participants will have the opportunity to:
Share experiences and best practices
Discuss emerging environmental and human rights issues
Explore strategies for protection and advocacy
Build partnerships across sectors and countries
Contribute to discussions on policy and accountability mechanisms
The gathering is expected to attract a diverse range of participants from across the Council of Europe member states, including grassroots defenders, activists, indigenous representatives, youth leaders, academics, legal experts, international organizations, and civil society actors.
Event Format and Languages
The Forum will be conducted exclusively as an in-person event. Online participation or virtual attendance options will not be available. Participants are therefore encouraged to prepare for travel and related logistical arrangements should their participation be approved.
Registration and Selection Process
Submitting an Expression of Interest does not automatically guarantee participation in the Forum. All applications will undergo a comprehensive review and selection process conducted by the organizers. Applicants whose participation is approved will receive an official registration confirmation letter. The review process will take place on a rolling basis to allow selected participants sufficient time to make necessary arrangements, including:
Visa applications
Travel planning
Accommodation bookings
Administrative preparations
Interested individuals are therefore strongly encouraged to submit their applications as early as possible.
Funding and Financial Support
Due to limited available resources, the organizers will only be able to provide financial support to a select number of Environmental Human Rights Defenders. Funding decisions will be based on several factors, including:
Resource availability
Geographic diversity
Gender balance
Inclusion and representation criteria
Nature of environmental and human rights work
Applicants who meet the general participation criteria but are not selected for financial support may still receive an invitation to attend the Forum through self-funded participation.
The organizers anticipate that the majority of participants will need to finance their own attendance. Institutions, donor organizations, and networks that support Environmental Human Rights Defenders are encouraged to assist participants financially where possible.
On 2 May 2026, several newspapers reported on plans to vet human rights defenders in Indonesia :
The government’s plan to screen and determine who qualifies as a human rights activist to decide who receives legal safeguards has met with backlash from civil society groups, who warn the move risks state interference in rights protections.
The plan came as the Human Rights Ministry is seeking to introduce changes to the 1999 Human Rights Law and issue a new ministerial regulation to strengthen legal protections for human rights activists, citing concerns over criminalisation against those involved in advocacy works.
To ensure legal safeguards can be provided for activists, Human Rights Minister Natalius Pigai said his ministry would form an assessor team to evaluate whether detained individuals meet the criteria as human rights defenders.
The assessment will be based on strict criteria focusing on the individual’s actions at the time of the incident rather than self-declared status or public recognition. The team will review each case individually to ensure decisions are made based on the context of ongoing legal cases.
Legal protection, the minister stressed, would only be extended to those defending public interests, particularly vulnerable or marginalised groups. Those who are proven to have acted with personal or financial motives would be excluded.
“It’s possible that someone widely known as a human rights activist, at a certain moment, may be found by the assessor team to be acting for (financial gain). In such cases, they can’t be considered a human rights activist,” Mr Pigai said on April 29, as quoted by Antara.
He added those meeting the criteria would be shielded from prosecution from the earliest stages of legal proceedings.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 